Player Discussion: Ivan Provorov

[CBJWerenski8]

 

[CBJWerenski8]

 

[EspenK]

Provorov seems like a god comparison for Pionk.

7mm for 6 years
7X7 or 7X8

I'm thinking that deal pretty much set a market for Provorov. I think the above are reasonable possibilities as a floor.

The ceiling probably 7X8

My guess is 7.5 for 8 years.

 

[majormajor]

Provorov seems like a god comparison for Pionk.

7mm for 6 years
7X7 or 7X8

I'm thinking that deal pretty much set a market for Provorov. I think the above are reasonable possibilities as a floor.

The ceiling probably 7X8

My guess is 7.5 for 8 years.

I think Pionk is the much better player. We shouldn't pay Provorov anywhere near that.

 

[Jovavic]

I think Pionk is the much better player. We shouldn't pay Provorov anywhere near that.

Can I like this post more than once?

 

[EspenK]

We'll see.

 

[stevo61]

Seems like a game of chicken between Waddell and Provorov. Waddell obviously knows the coach likes the player but probably has a number he'd like to get to.

Maybe less likely but he may be holding off to see if he can swing a trade too which may change his approach

 

[Iron Balls McGinty]

I didn't know this was a "thing"

 

[ViD]

I think Pionk is the much better player. We shouldn't pay Provorov anywhere near that.

Well, we’re already paying Severson almost the same

 

[Indy18]

Well, we’re already paying Severson almost the same

While Severson isn’t as bad as we make him out to be I rather have #9 contract right now than that. Atleast with Provorov his hand could get mangled in a wood chipper and he be out there next shift. Availability is quite a bonus.

I rather just throw him a high AAV deal and see if Luca is the real deal but damn Waddell is going to have a rough summer fixing that RHD2 issue

 

[majormajor]

While Severson isn’t as bad as we make him out to be I rather have #9 contract right now than that. Atleast with Provorov his hand could get mangled in a wood chipper and he be out there next shift. Availability is quite a bonus.

Not pissing off your coach also helps.

 

[3074326]

Can I like this post more than once?

I wasn't going to like it, but I liked it for you. So yes. You can!

 

[koteka]

I think Pionk is the much better player. We shouldn't pay Provorov anywhere near that.

Plus Pionk plays on the right side. I would have offered that contract to Pionk in a heart beat.

Mateychuk could very likely be a better than average 2LD by about 2027-2028. I don’t know why we would offer Provorov anything with term.

 

[Iron Balls McGinty]

Well, we’re already paying Severson almost the same

*for now.

With the late season scratches I see him getting moved out. They just need to deal with his NTC clause and somebody willing to take on this contract with some retention. Zero chance we buy him out and deal with his buyout cap hit for the next 12 years. He can't become the Bobby Bonilla or Ken Griffey Jr. of the NHL.

 

[cbjthrowaway]

provorov's actual on-ice results leave a ton to be desired (particularly in terms of NZ defense) but i cannot deny that he absolutely played his ass off this year.

there were stretches this year where he looked outstanding. those tended to be the stretches where the team did very well. and he developed some chemistry with mateychuk too.

i'd certainly prefer 1) to lose severson instead and 2) to have a higher-level defenseman on the roster instead of provorov – and they have the juice to go get one this summer – but i can't say i'm disappointed with this play this year overall.

to me this has "chicago uses its cap space to give him 8x8 and partner with levshunov" written all over it.

 

[Xoggz22]

*for now.

With the late season scratches I see him getting moved out. They just need to deal with his NTC clause and somebody willing to take on this contract with some retention. Zero chance we buy him out and deal with his buyout cap hit for the next 12 years. He can't become the Bobby Bonilla or Ken Griffey Jr. of the NHL.

It may be a stretch, but given we only have three retention slots, I wonder if this was a driving force behind moving Laine without retention. Not that it will happen, but I think there are two players that, while sunk costs, are candidates for moving out this off season and retention, rather than buyout, may be the best option. Elvis and Severson! If Laine was on retention, that could be a problem this year, especially if there is any thought of taking on salary from someone as a retention broker (less likely with the CAP increase, however, still some teams in tight spots). I would imagine any move with either Elvis or Severson will result in a bad contract coming back. Retention on Severson would be a harder pill to swallow given the remaining term, but retention on Elvis (with no bad contract coming back) is only two years and keeps two slots open.

Just something to think about as GMDW made those moves to shed players last off season. I don't think there is a lot of shedding this year, but we've talked about those two adnauseum. I have to believe something happens with both and we'll have bad contract and retention moreso than a buyout scenario, but not both.

 

[Iron Balls McGinty]

It may be a stretch, but given we only have three retention slots, I wonder if this was a driving force behind moving Laine without retention. Not that it will happen, but I think there are two players that, while sunk costs, are candidates for moving out this off season and retention, rather than buyout, may be the best option. Elvis and Severson! If Laine was on retention, that could be a problem this year, especially if there is any thought of taking on salary from someone as a retention broker (less likely with the CAP increase, however, still some teams in tight spots). I would imagine any move with either Elvis or Severson will result in a bad contract coming back. Retention on Severson would be a harder pill to swallow given the remaining term, but retention on Elvis (with no bad contract coming back) is only two years and keeps two slots open.

Just something to think about as GMDW made those moves to shed players last off season. I don't think there is a lot of shedding this year, but we've talked about those two adnauseum. I have to believe something happens with both and we'll have bad contract and retention moreso than a buyout scenario, but not both.

Buying out Severson should not be an option at all. 12 years of paying him will be a cap hinderance for the next decade. Some years are not helpful at all even with the cap going up. Jarmo really stuck us on this one. And all done to appease Babcock.

 

[Doggy]

It may be a stretch, but given we only have three retention slots, I wonder if this was a driving force behind moving Laine without retention. Not that it will happen, but I think there are two players that, while sunk costs, are candidates for moving out this off season and retention, rather than buyout, may be the best option. Elvis and Severson! If Laine was on retention, that could be a problem this year, especially if there is any thought of taking on salary from someone as a retention broker (less likely with the CAP increase, however, still some teams in tight spots). I would imagine any move with either Elvis or Severson will result in a bad contract coming back. Retention on Severson would be a harder pill to swallow given the remaining term, but retention on Elvis (with no bad contract coming back) is only two years and keeps two slots open.

Just something to think about as GMDW made those moves to shed players last off season. I don't think there is a lot of shedding this year, but we've talked about those two adnauseum. I have to believe something happens with both and we'll have bad contract and retention moreso than a buyout scenario, but not both.

Just so I understand, "retention" and "buyout" are treated the same in terms of slots. We have three slots regardless of why you are holding money?

CBJ still have two buried contracts on the books for next season: Wennberg and Boqvist. So in theory the team can only retain on one of either Elvis or Severson but not both. I don't think either one is tradable without retention taking a bad contract back which I am not sure we really wanna do.

I don't know if it could be done but if Elvis were amenable to it, could we loan him back to his Swiss club for $1M - $2M (just spitballing numbers). I don't know if that means we carry the full cap hit on the books (which we can afford right now). No idea how this works but thinking there must be something the CBA that allows for this scenario.

As for Severson, I think if it is known to him to expect more of the same in future years he would be willing to waive his NTC in order to not sit in the press box every night. Thinking we would need to retain close to half to get a deal done (which I still think is worth it). Can't imagine what his exit interview will be like.

 

[cbjthrowaway]

CBJ still have two buried contracts on the books for next season: Wennberg and Boqvist. So in theory the team can only retain on one of either Elvis or Severson but not both.

not accurate.

they have two buyouts still on the books. that's different than trade retention slots, which are limited to three (of which, CBJ has used zero).

afaik there's no limit on concurrent buyouts, it's just unwise to have too many. the boqvist and wennberg ones were both U26 buyouts, though, so they're super cheap.

I don't know if it could be done but if Elvis were amenable to it, could we loan him back to his Swiss club for $1M - $2M (just spitballing numbers). I don't know if that means we carry the full cap hit on the books (which we can afford right now).

the cap hit would stay on the books. the only ways the full cap hit goes off the books are:

1. if they terminate the contract (either by mutual decision or if he breaches the contract)
2. if someone trades for him without retention

for #1, he's not going to voluntarily give up the rest of his contract ($9.75m in real money). they could move to terminate if, say, they assigned him to the AHL and he refused to report. but that's not possible during the offseason anyway, and even if they did it next season he'd likely just take the assignment, cash his checks for two years, and go back to europe after his deal ends.

As for Severson, I think if it is known to him to expect more of the same in future years he would be willing to waive his NTC in order to not sit in the press box every night. Thinking we would need to retain close to half to get a deal done (which I still think is worth it).

i've said this before, but the best path forward for severson here is if the jackets sign gavrikov to be his partner. that would be a shutdown second pair that would tilt the ice in the NZ. they could then let mateychuk loose on the third pair (i'd love matt dumba as a partner for him there + PK vet) and have a very strong defensive group.

but that would require evason to trust severson to play big matchup minutes, which… won't happen.

imo it's a near certainty that severson waives his NTC this summer. even if he loves it here, players want to play. and there will be a market for him.

he's a RHD with great underlying numbers who does things contending teams want – he's great at killing rushes in the NZ, and in the OZ he's great at executing difficult passes + keeping the puck from getting out.

any analytically-inclined organization with a couple of shutdown LHD will probably view him as a viable target – he's a useful player in a market that lacks RHD, and could also be used to send bad money out.

 

[NotWendell]

You could always count on Jarmo swinging for the flashiest move. You can count on Don to do... not that.

 

[majormajor]

i've said this before, but the best path forward for severson here is if the jackets sign gavrikov to be his partner. that would be a shutdown second pair that would tilt the ice in the NZ.

I think you can also make the case that Pelech - Severson would function like that. Pelech has some gaudy xG% numbers but I presume that's from making it harder for opponents to set up the attack, he needs help with moving pucks and in the offensive zone. Severson has a lot of the bases covered, but the big base - does your coach trust you - is unfortunately an issue.

You might be interested in the discussion I had with Isles fans in the Pulock thread on the trade board. Long story short, they think Pelech's trade value is very low. They're looking for more of a return on Pulock, which initially struck me as odd given how badly Pulock's analytics look compared to Pelech. But the fans put more of a priority on puck movement and they are concerned about Pelech's injury history. It sounds like the cost of taking on Pelech is more about injury risk than it is return. They're open to moving both.

 

[cbjthrowaway]

I think you can also make the case that Pelech - Severson would function like that. Pelech has some gaudy xG% numbers but I presume that's from making it harder for opponents to set up the attack, he needs help with moving pucks and in the offensive zone. Severson has a lot of the bases covered, but the big base - does your coach trust you - is unfortunately an issue.

yeah definitely – and dean typically did a good job of having a fifth defenseman involved and playing about 18 or so minutes each night, while the #6 was stuck playing about 10-12.

everyone's expecting them to zig (get a second-pair RHD partner for mateychuk) but they could zag (get a second pair LHD partner for severson) and use mateychuk as that #5 guy. but the funny part is, that's basically the role severson thrived in when he was in new jersey. nominally on the third pair but averaging 20 a night and playing his own game.

NJD's roster construction (only having one legit puck mover at the time in their top four) opened that path for severson. hard to see that happening here even if evason would play him, but it's certainly worth considering for mateychuk.

You might be interested in the discussion I had with Isles fans in the Pulock thread on the trade board. Long story short, they think Pelech's trade value is very low. They're looking for more of a return on Pulock, which initially struck me as odd given how badly Pulock's analytics look compared to Pelech. But the fans put more of a priority on puck movement and they are concerned about Pelech's injury history. It sounds like the cost of taking on Pelech is more about injury risk than it is return. They're open to moving both.

definitely agree on pelech being a better defenseman, and a good potential partner for severson. but if evason won't play severson…

…maybe that pelech-severson pair could happen on long island, instead.

pulock and severson are the same age, play the same role, have near-identical AAVs, similar term left, and seem to be poor fits for their current teams. pulock fits what the jackets seem to need in a mateychuk partner, and severson brings puck-moving capabilities that the isles lack + has better underlying stats.

a severson/pulock swap (in some shape or form) seems like a good old fashioned hockey trade.

 

[SteelCityCannon]

I don't understand the Provorov hate at all. He played a big damn role for us. I always come to the same conclusions in these threads. You want him gone, fine. Who's taking that 22 minutes a night? Mateychuk? Probably one day but pretty early to say that. Christensen? Hunt? I don't think so.

A left side of 8-9-5 for the next 5-7 years is beautiful to me. Let Mateychuk mature, take over 2 pp duties. It'll be perfect.

The right side is still currently a dumpster fire though.

 

[Xoggz22]

I don't understand the Provorov hate at all. He played a big damn role for us. I always come to the same conclusions in these threads. You want him gone, fine. Who's taking that 22 minutes a night? Mateychuk? Probably one day but pretty early to say that. Christensen? Hunt? I don't think so.

A left side of 8-9-5 for the next 5-7 years is beautiful to me. Let Mateychuk mature, take over 2 pp duties. It'll be perfect.

The right side is still currently a dumpster fire though.

I haven't seen any hate for Provorov. In fact I think most of the discussion has been complimentary. The issue, to me, comes down to what the club feels Mateychuk will become. If they feel he's close to a top 4 d-man, it simply isn't wise to extend Provorov for term. I don't see them wanting to pay three LHD at top 4 prices and while you could bridge Mateychuk, He may fit the long term core and be extended long term. We won't know that this summer to the smart thing is to have a short term answer on the left side or allow Mateychuk to run as the 2nd pair LHD and fill the 3rd pair.

The improvement will come on the RHD side and I don't see Provorov being that answer. Could be, but I think GMDW and HCDE want left/right balance.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

I haven't seen any hate for Provorov. In fact I think most of the discussion has been complimentary. The issue, to me, comes down to what the club feels Mateychuk will become. If they feel he's close to a top 4 d-man, it simply isn't wise to extend Provorov for term. I don't see them wanting to pay three LHD at top 4 prices and while you could bridge Mateychuk, He may fit the long term core and be extended long term. We won't know that this summer to the smart thing is to have a short term answer on the left side or allow Mateychuk to run as the 2nd pair LHD and fill the 3rd pair.

The improvement will come on the RHD side and I don't see Provorov being that answer. Could be, but I think GMDW and HCDE want left/right balance.

It's some about Mateychuk but to me it's more about the overall makeup of the defense. Let me acknowledge first that Waddell seems not only open but maybe even advocating for Provorov's return. But as you all might be aware, my hang-up is that improvement has to come from somewhere, and to me Provy's spot is one that could stand improvement. And by that, in this specific case I mean a d-man with a different skill-set, a big, rangy guy who can move and who is focused on inhibiting scoring chances against. Yeah, there aren't that many obvious choices, but a handful have been named in here (mostly in the armchair GM thread).