Zach Werenski should be considered for the Norris?
- Thread starter FlyingPhi
- Start date
Werenski has been excellent this year and absolutely should be in norris conversations but
"% of shots attempts that hit the net", is not a meaningful statistic
"% of shots attempts that hit the net", is not a meaningful statistic
Crede777
Deputized
- Dec 16, 2009
- 14,910
- 4,637
I think he is in the conversation with Makar and Hughes at the moment. We will see how things shake out but if the season ended today I would expect he is a finalist but doesn't win.
Bear of Bad News
"The Worst Guy on the Site" - user feedback
- Sep 27, 2005
- 14,460
- 29,866
As someone who watched the Kraken attempt to do literally anything useful playing 6-on-5 last night, I disagree.
- Oct 13, 2018
- 4,718
- 5,659
He's my number 3/4 so far this year, but still not at the level of Hughes/Makar, he's placed himself in the Fox, Heiskanen, Dahlin tier, though.
That being said, the stats laid out in the article are not great.
That being said, the stats laid out in the article are not great.
a mangy Meowth
Ross Colton Fan
Yeah he's part of the small handful of Dmen leading the race so far. However, we're barely beyond the 1/3 mark of the season.
My unsolicited $0.02: I have concerns that he'll have enough offensive production by the end of the year to be in consideration. No insult to him though, he just doesn't have much of a supporting cast. On top of this, he's only ever played 82 games one time in his career. I'd love to see him do it though.
My unsolicited $0.02: I have concerns that he'll have enough offensive production by the end of the year to be in consideration. No insult to him though, he just doesn't have much of a supporting cast. On top of this, he's only ever played 82 games one time in his career. I'd love to see him do it though.
Fair enough.
Full disclosure though, the section on Werenski started talking about the leaders in goalposts hit. I had trimmed that part off, and probably screwed up the context by doing so. Here is what I trimmed off:
"Since the NHL started tracking hitting goal posts/crossbar the most iron hit in one season by a D-man was 13, set by Zach Werenski in 2022. Werenski has already hit 11 this season (7 posts and four crossbars). He only hit one crossbar in 2022"
- Oct 13, 2018
- 4,718
- 5,659
Honestly, that doesn't make it much better, I don't really care about crossbars hit.
For example, the quoted article discussed how Hughes and Makar have much better linemates, but even despite having better teammates, their numbers relative to their team is much higher, and Hughes in particular is impacting the game at a higher level than any skater I'm aware of, relative to their teams.
| Stats (5v5) | Werenski | Hughes |
| Corsi% Relative | +2.26% | +16.09% |
| Fenwick% Relative | +2.80% | +15.14% |
| xG% Relative | +0.57% | +13.19% |
| HDCF/HDGF% Relative | -1.13%/+22.90% | +10.79%/+33.33% |
It also mentioned that Werenski and Makar play roughly 2 minutes of PK per game, while Hughes doesn't play PK at all, however it fails to discuss whether or not those players are actually good in those roles. in the 23-24 season, Makar was in the bottom 8% of PKers.
edit:
The article also mentions that Sean Monahan is Werenski's most common linemate, however when Sean Monahan is on the ice and Werenski isn't, Monahan's advanced stats go up, but when Werenski is out there without Monahan they go down, which is concerning.
| Stat (5v5) | Werenski without Monahan | Monahan without Werenski |
| CF% | 49.25% | 53.86% |
| FF% | 48.57% | 56.23% |
| xGF% | 44.57% | 62.96% |
| HDCF%/HDGF% | 42.92%/47.62% | 53.57%/53.33% |
Last edited:
1989
Registered User
- Aug 3, 2010
- 10,548
- 4,214
Haven't followed Werenski but...
Can we give Crossbars Hit Per Shot Attempt / 60 another stupid stat name like Corsi and Fenwick and make sure it's included in the Deserve-To-Win metrics?
Can we give Crossbars Hit Per Shot Attempt / 60 another stupid stat name like Corsi and Fenwick and make sure it's included in the Deserve-To-Win metrics?
Werenski has been great for the Jackets this season. We're all very impressed by his play.
Just yesterday I commented in our GDT that I haven't been his biggest fan but he's made me a believer this year. So many smart decisions, good play with the puck and without the puck.
He's not as flashy as Makar, doesn't make those sudden movement dangles or anything like that. But Werenski is smooth and seems to do things with a purpose, and succeeds more often than not. He's been great.
Just yesterday I commented in our GDT that I haven't been his biggest fan but he's made me a believer this year. So many smart decisions, good play with the puck and without the puck.
He's not as flashy as Makar, doesn't make those sudden movement dangles or anything like that. But Werenski is smooth and seems to do things with a purpose, and succeeds more often than not. He's been great.
John Mandalorian
2022 Avs: The First Dance
- Nov 29, 2018
- 11,908
- 7,673
“Considered” is such a low substance word. And what does it mean really? To be talked about as a form of lip service? Or is someone pointing a gun to another’s head,”you better consider him!”
Corsi and Fenwick are literally just people's last names.
And the stats really aren't complicated.
1 corsi = 1 time attempted a shot
1 fenwick = 1 time attempting a shot that does not get blocked
I wonder if this is what it was like in the 1920s when someone came up with on base % instead of batting average for baseball and I'm sure people thought it was voodoo magic then to
Last edited:
1989
Registered User
- Aug 3, 2010
- 10,548
- 4,214
And naming statistical categories is stupid. Do you enjoy Sv%, Goals, Hits, or do you prefer Jennings, Richards, and Stevens?
Anyways, some of the stats in argument for Werenski in the article are quite bad which was the point.
The Gr8 Dane
L'harceleur
I wish they didn't name them.
It set back the statistics community at least a decade by convincing people something as simple as "how many shot attempts does a team get" was an advanced stat and therefore something something old boys club something something eye test
Bouboumaster
Registered User
- Jul 4, 2014
- 11,025
- 9,626
Relative stats are not "the context", they also have to be taken into context like every other stat.
In Quinn Hughes' case, not only does he get great talent to play with but there is a steep drop-off in talent when Myers, Soucy, and Desharnais are out there instead of Hughes. The Canucks are a one-pairing offense. It's not comparable to the drop off from Makar to Girard or Werenski to Severson.
As far as using xGF% goes, it can be a good hint for future regression, but at the end of the year these players should be judged on the goals results (goals for AND against). Special players are supposed to outperform their xGs.
SillyRabbit
Trix Are For Kids
- Jan 3, 2006
- 9,214
- 9,372
Hughes has had a much more impressive season than Makar.
Makar: 33GP, 38P
Hughes: 31GP, 37P
1 point back with 2 games in hand.
Hughes leads his team in scoring by 11 points. Makar is 12 points back of his teams leading scorer.
Makar's teammates are 1st and 3rd in NHL scoring.
Hughes' closest teammate is 58th in NHL scoring.
Hughes has been carrying Vancouver offensively while also being better defensively than Makar.
I genuinely do not see the argument for Makar over Hughes based on how they've played so far this season.
- Oct 26, 2019
- 2,151
- 3,367
I think its real unfair to Werenski to bring up Hughes and Makar a ton here which ends up being the entire conversation. Werenski is clearly a Norris finalist if it were held right now, tons of season left but he should be in the conversation which is the topic of the thread. Hes had an amazing year without much to work with, doesnt have advanced numbers that scream Norris WINNER but hes taken a step and could either get there by end of year or in a later season. In a popularity contest it does also hurt that hes in Columbus and most voters probably have seen very little of him, but that also hurts Hughes who plays after most of their bedtimes.
