Player Discussion: Ivan Provorov

[Cowumbus]

Voronkov’s also due for a massive raise as an RFA.

Massive as in what …?

I see some predictive models saying 4-5x3.

 

[majormajor]

love voronkov as a player, but his success has come 1) netfront on the power play and 2) at 5v5 with marchenko and monahan – two guys who have success with everyone. he's also due for a massive raise as an RFA.

they have other guys who can play that netfront role (monahan, jenner) and they've been connected to boeser, who is good netfront and in the bumper. kreider has also been reportedly available and he is a prolific netfront guy who brings a lot more pace.

I think this undersells Voronkov. Marchy and Monny are successful with anyone but they were the best line in the league with Ronny, at least for that time.

There is no netfront replacement for Ronny that can do what he does there - its a very big drop off to anyone else.

Massive as in what …?

I see some predictive models saying 4-5x3.

Show me these models so I can make sure never to use them. He'll be making much more than that.

 

[Cowumbus]

Show me these models so I can make sure never to use them. He'll be making much more than that.

CapWages - NHL Salary Cap Data

CapWages provides the latest NHL salary cap data and player contracts.

capwages.com

Lists comparable as Huberdeau, Marchenko, Vrana, Fiala.

 

[cbjthrowaway]

Massive as in what …?

I see some predictive models saying 4-5x3.

would be shocked if the number didn't start with a 6 at minimum, and that could go higher if they give him a long-term deal. the athletic's model has him worth $6.2m right now and that's after a long cold streak – he was at $8m+ when the cards first came out iirc.

I think this undersells Voronkov. Marchy and Monny are successful with anyone but they were the best line in the league with Ronny, at least for that time.

they were also the best line in the league with chinakhov before he got hurt.

not saying he's not a good player – he is – but he's the clear third banana on that line and has not looked good this season when away from marchenko. to put numbers to that claim:

	5v5 GF%	5v5 xGF%
Voronkov w/Marchenko	75%	52.76%
Voronkov w/o Marchenko	23.08%	44.17%
Marchenko w/o Voronkov	58.33%	49.26%

he has really struggled away from marchenko this year.

and, once again, I am not saying that they should or will trade him. just that he has the trifecta of things that can lead teams to cash out on asset value:

1. unsustainably high sh% (over 18%!!)
2. heavy dependency on linemates
3. older RFA (will be 25 on opening night next year)

too old to bridge. they basically have to bet on high sh% and linemate chemistry. those are not typically good business practices in the NHL.

on paper it's a risky investment and there's a case to be made for selling high instead to bring in a star player with less volatility. obviously my heart says to keep him (he's a very likable player) but my brain has to acknowledge that it's not a slam dunk.

There is no netfront replacement for Ronny that can do what he does there - it's a very big drop off to anyone else.

maybe in a vacuum. I'm still not convinced that there's a substantial enough drop-off from voronkov netfront / monahan bumper on PP1 to some of the other configurations they could trot out there to hand-wave away the potential impact of adding a star player. for example:

• jenner (or JVR) netfront, monahan bumper
• monahan netfront, fantilli bumper
• marchenko netfront, monahan bumper, fantilli on the flank

also worth noting that they've been connected to a pending UFA (boeser) who has been extremely good in netfront/bumper type roles throughout his career. they could also swing a (separate) trade for kreider, who is a prolific netfront scorer.

 

[majormajor]

CapWages - NHL Salary Cap Data

CapWages provides the latest NHL salary cap data and player contracts.

capwages.com

Lists comparable as Huberdeau, Marchenko, Vrana, Fiala.

Ok most of those contract projections are reasonable.

If we do like a two year deal that walks Voronkov to UFA, then perhaps with his lack of NHL experience, he'll accept a lower AAV like that as part of a prove-it-deal. But I don't think that's a good idea for the Blue Jackets. We make it really hard for us to keep a very special player long term, right when our cap demands are escalating.

 

[Cowumbus]

Ok most of those contract projections are reasonable.

If we do like a two year deal that walks Voronkov to UFA, then perhaps with his lack of NHL experience, he'll accept a lower AAV like that as part of a prove-it-deal. But I don't think that's a good idea for the Blue Jackets. We make it really hard for us to keep a very special player long term, right when our cap demands are escalating.

would be shocked if the number didn't start with a 6 at minimum, and that could go higher if they give him a long-term deal. the athletic's model has him worth $6.2m right now and that's after a long cold streak – he was at $8m+ when the cards first came out iirc.

I’d be fine with 6.2 but that doesn’t feel “massive” to me - I guess my point was that I don’t think he’s getting 10 million with his leverage. Aka, this isn’t going to be a Laine situation where the player is overpaid for their actual on-ice value and is taking up too much cap. Voronkov at 6.2 in your example, is valuable, and still gives room to improve the roster elsewhere.

EDIT: sorry this is not the roster thread

 

[majormajor]

they were also the best line in the league with chinakhov before he got hurt.

Maybe in xG terms, I can't remember. But they got even better with Ronny.

not saying he's not a good player – he is – but he's the clear third banana on that line and has not looked good this season when away from marchenko. to put numbers to that claim:

	5v5 GF%	5v5 xGF%
Voronkov w/Marchenko	75%	52.76%
Voronkov w/o Marchenko	23.08%	44.17%
Marchenko w/o Voronkov	58.33%	49.26%

he has really struggled away from marchenko this year.

Oof that's ugly.

and, once again, I am not saying that they should or will trade him. just that he has the trifecta of things that can lead teams to cash out on asset value:

1. unsustainably high sh% (over 18%!!)
2. heavy dependency on linemates
3. older RFA (will be 25 on opening night next year)

too old to bridge. they basically have to bet on high sh% and linemate chemistry. those are not typically good business practices in the NHL.

on paper it's a risky investment and there's a case to be made for selling high instead to bring in a star player with less volatility. obviously my heart says to keep him (he's a very likable player) but my brain has to acknowledge that it's not a slam dunk.

We've seen you be perfectly willing to take enormous risks in acquiring players from other clubs who are either struggling or injured or both, being very bold about how they would fit on our club and so on... And I think we both understand that you sometimes have to take big risks to build a true contender. So why wouldn't you extend that boldness to a player like Voronkov, who very well could be a star for us in the playoffs?

If we put him on the market then the top playoff contenders are all coming calling, for good reason. They think he can be that special player that puts them over the top. So why wouldn't we be the team to keep him for that same purpose? We actually understand how he fits with Marchy and how much he has helped elevate our PP this year.

 

[TingleBiscuit]

I hate to be the wet towel in this engaging hypothetical discussion of forward Dmitry Voronkov's soon-expiring ELC, but it seems to have strayed rather far from the thread topic (the pending UFA, defenseman Ivan Provorov).

 

[majormajor]

I’d be fine with 6.2 but that doesn’t feel “massive” to me - I guess my point was that I don’t think he’s getting 10 million with his leverage. Aka, this isn’t going to be a Laine situation where the player is overpaid for their actual on-ice value and is taking up too much cap. Voronkov at 6.2 in your example, is valuable, and still gives room to improve the roster elsewhere.

That number would be reasonable and I wonder if Voronkov would sign it now.

Last year when Protas was in a month long pointless drought, the Caps signed him to a four year deal.

The AAVs would be very different for Voronkov now, he already had a mini breakout on the top line and we're closer to a cap explosion. But it would be a similar situation to Protas in that he's slumping badly on a line that doesn't play his style. So I hope we take advantage of that to get him locked in. The number is going to go back up when he gets reunited with Monny and Marchy.

Wads says "I don't mind paying good players" - meaning he'd rather pay their value after they fully proved themselves than take a risk to get a deal. But we have a lot of good players coming up and he's not going to be able to pay them all their fair market value. That f***** better get some deals or we're going to be letting some great players go.

 

[Xoggz22]

Is a dependable-in-their-own-zone RD with size a "true #1"? Can you find someone who fits that description who's not a "true #1"? I think that would be the approach.

I've always had a vision of Erik Cernak on this team (well, the old team but think he'd be a great fit on this team moving forward). don't see any way TBL move him, but he could fit well with Zach or with Denton and keep Fabbro as the other top 4 RHD. Pushes Severson down and who knows with Gudbranson. That seems like an upgrade to me and woudl really solidify this group.

I think he meets your description above?

 

[TingleBiscuit]

I've always had a vision of Erik Cernak on this team (well, the old team but think he'd be a great fit on this team moving forward). don't see any way TBL move him, but he could fit well with Zach or with Denton and keep Fabbro as the other top 4 RHD. Pushes Severson down and who knows with Gudbranson. That seems like an upgrade to me and woudl really solidify this group.

I think he meets your description above?

Cernak would be a great get, although his durability is a bit of a question mark. Doubt we'll land him, but that's a different conversation. I think you picked a great example to fit DSL's description, though!

My concern with Provorov is solely that his hockey IQ doesn't seem high enough to fit this team's galaxy-brain playmaker complexion. It's nothing against the guy; I just don't think he processes the game fast enough to hang at the pricetag he'll command.

But that of course takes us into the old "Miss Right, versus Miss Right-Now" conversation.

 

[cbjthrowaway]

Oof that's ugly.

yeah, obviously voronkov is awesome and has been very fun to watch, but it's fair to question just how sustainable the production is moving forward.

on one hand, there are clear elements within his game where he has shown improvement and may continue to improve. on the other hand, the success has been highly situational and, if he follows traditional age curves (he may not!) this may already be the best version of him that we'll see.

We've seen you be perfectly willing to take enormous risks in acquiring players from other clubs who are either struggling or injured or both, being very bold about how they would fit on our club and so on... And I think we both understand that you sometimes have to take big risks to build a true contender.

we're talking about two different types of risks here.

1. betting on a distressed asset (pettersson) who has a five-year track record of being a top-15 player at his position (or better) to regain that form after leaving a toxic situation (as was the case with jack eichel)
2. committing money and term to a player whose statistical profile suggests an enormous amount of puck luck (18% shooting and a PDO when playing with marchenko of over 1.10)

both of those profiles suggest potential for regression: upward for the first, downward for the second. the views that the former is a bold move to capitalize on a rare opportunity and the latter's risk may be greater than the return they'd get in a trade are not incongruent.

So why wouldn't you extend that boldness to a player like Voronkov, who very well could be a star for us in the playoffs?

the vibes are off-the-charts good. the metrics aren't as encouraging.

where I get cold feet is if he asks to get paid like a star (meaning $7m+) on the basis of physicality + metrics that heavily suggest puck luck. that's how you end up with a david clarkson contract.

don't get me wrong – if he is "just" a big-bodied middle six forward who has chemistry with a legitimate top-line guy in marchenko, that's still an extremely good outcome for a fourth-round pick. I'm not convinced that gambling on him becoming more than that is better than parlaying his current asset value into an established star.

I'm not convinced that he isn't worth the gamble, either. again, he's a very likable player. all I'm saying is that the elements are there with him for one of those summer heartbreaker trades that is hard to swallow at the time, but makes the team better.