Zach Werenski should be considered for the Norris?

[Rowlet]

Stats are weird, so is the reverse true?

Hypothetical
If Werenski gets injured, no big deal.
If Hughes gets injured, guarantee 32nd.

I wouldn't say it's exactly like this, Werenski being injured would be a massive blow to the Blue Jackets, however in the chart below, you can see the monumental difference between Quinn Hughes and the rest of his team, where "Quinn Hughes the team" would be a top cup contender, and "Canucks no Hughes" would be a lottery team.

 

[Regal]

You're right about controlling possession, and that is our best guess about how goal results will end up in the long run. But all of these players are elite scorers too, and at the end of the season they should be judged on their goals results, so GF - GA not xGF - xGA.

I agree that results matter more than potential results for an individual season, but I think we always need to look for factors outside a players control. For instance, while it’s not relevant so much for Hughes, Makar and Werenski this season, goals against can be heavily impacted by goalies

 

[SillyRabbit]

The Canucks without Hughes made me spit out my drink lol, they're so bad they're literally off the charts.

 

[GoJackets1]

Who knew players could be so propped up playing with… *checks notes* elite forward Sean Monahan.

My takeaway from this thread at the moment is that I need to watch more Quinn Hughes.

 

[CBJx614]

 

[SallyBalls]

Definitely a finalist along with Makar and Hutson.

I think Hutson takes it though.

 

[Rowlet]

Who knew players could be so propped up playing with… *checks notes* elite forward Sean Monahan.

My takeaway from this thread at the moment is that I need to watch more Quinn Hughes.

Yep, the Monahan line has been extremely good.

 

[Cowumbus]

Give me some numbers to show how he's been better than Hughes outside of just points and I'll listen, I'm not interested in attention seeking blowhards on a podcast.

Poor Quinn Hughes has to carry Peterson, Miller, Boeser, DeBrusk, Garland alongside Hronek. Canucks finished with 109 points last year.

CBJ finished with 66 points last year, and their best player died. Currently in a playoff spot. Werenski isn’t just in Norris talks, but talks for the Hart Trophy.

All Strengths
10-23-86 with ZW: xGF 20.7 xGA 6.19 xGF% 77
10-23-86 w/o ZW: xGF 7.18 xGA 5.23 xGF% 57.8
5v5
10-23-86 with ZW: xGF 7.91 xGA 4.13 xGF% 65.7
10-23-86 w/o ZW: xGF 6.09 xGA 5.21 xGF% 53.89

All Strengths
74-9-6 with QH: xGF 6.61 xGA 2.7 xGF% 71
74-9-6 w/o QH: xGF 4.08 xGA 3.86 xGF% 51.35
5v5
74-9-6 with QH: xGF 3.42 xGA 0.96 xGF% 78
74-9-6 w/o QH: xGF 2.56 xGA 1.7 xGF% 60.12

Looks like DeBrusk-Miller-Boeser do just fine on their own too no?

 

[Rowlet]

Poor Quinn Hughes has to carry Peterson, Miller, Boeser, Garland alongside Hronek. Canucks finished with 109 points last year.

CBJ finished with 66 points last year, and their best player died. Currently in a playoff spot. Werenski isn’t just in Norris talks, but talks for the Hart Trophy.

10-23-86 with ZW: xGF 20.7 xGA 6.19 xGF% 77
10-23-86 w/o ZW: xGF 7.18 xGA 5.23 xGF% 57.8

Hughes is leading team scoring by 17 points while having no forward line be a net positive on their own.

The post you just quoted shows that none of those lines are capable of playing decent 5v5 hockey unless Hughes is on the ice.

Yes, I agree, the Blue Jackets' #1 line is better with Werenski on it, but I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers from, did you isolate the numbers to 5v5? If you did all strengths, it would include PP but not PK, all strengths give a number roughly 77%, so I think you did this.

Natural Stat Trick has them at 65.72% together, and 53.89% without Werenski, however Werenski drops to 45.35% xGF without them, so they are actually impacting Werenski's game more than the other way around.

And as I showed in this chart yesterday, both Miller and Pettersson's lines are completely dependent on Hughes being on the ice.

 

[Cowumbus]

The post you just quoted shows that none of those lines are capable of playing decent 5v5 hockey unless Hughes is on the ice.

Check again.

Natural Stat Trick has them at 65.72% together, and 53.89% without Werenski, however Werenski drops to 45.35% xGF without them, so they are actually impacting Werenski's game more than the other way around.

Thats not how that works, anyway, without them his actual GF% is 51%….

And as I showed in this chart yesterday, both Miller and Pettersson's lines are completely dependent on Hughes being on the ice.

Bro. A 10% increase? Or are you really trying to use the stats with <7 mins total ice time lmao.

 

[Rowlet]

Check again.


Bro. A 10% increase? Or are you really trying to use the stats with <7 mins total ice time lmao.

No, dude. Learn how to read stats, none of that is good 5v5 hockey, only Pettersson is barely passing 50% xGF while getting destroyed in other metrics.

Pettersson and Miller play on different lines, they don't play together. Hughes without either of them, only playing with the 3rd and 4th lines, have a corsi, fenwick, and xG% of 60%.

Miller, without Hughes, has corsi, fenwick, and xGF of 45, 43, and 47

Pettersson, without Hughes, has corsi, fenwick, and xGF at a rate of 44.4, 45.85, and 50.71

I'm not talking about how much Werenski improves the Blue Jackets top line, he does a lot, however when you isolate the players AWAY from their top guys, it's the Blue Jackets forwards that are improving Werenski's stats MORE than Werenski improves the Monahan line.

As per the charts you replied to, Werenski improves the Monahan line's numbers from 53% to 65%, but the inverse is true too, that the Monahan line improves Werenski's numbers from 45% to 65%.

Hughes on the other hand does what the Monahan line does for Werenski, but for everybody.

 

[CBJx614]

No, dude. Learn how to read stats, none of that is good 5v5 hockey, only Pettersson is barely passing 50% xGF while getting destroyed in other metrics.

Pettersson and Miller play on different lines, they don't play together. Hughes without either of them, only playing with the 3rd and 4th lines, have a corsi, fenwick, and xG% of 60%.

Miller, without Hughes, has corsi, fenwick, and xGF of 45, 43, and 47

Pettersson, without Hughes, has corsi, fenwick, and xGF at a rate of 44.4, 45.85, and 50.71

I'm not talking about how much Werenski improves the Blue Jackets top line, he does a lot, however when you isolate the players AWAY from their top guys, it's the Blue Jackets forwards that are improving Werenski's stats MORE than Werenski improves the Monahan line.

Hughes on the other hand does what the Monahan line does for Werenski, but for everybody.

All these advanced stats are meaningless when it comes to the voting.

Bucci is a voter, do you think he and every other voter breaks down all the advanced stats and makes his decision based on the numbers alone? You might not care about what the preseason outlooks of the teams were or what happened in the off-season, but that type of shit without a doubt plays a role into the final voting.

It's going to come down to final production and whose the hot commodity at the end of the season.

 

[Cowumbus]

No, dude. Learn how to read stats, none of that is good 5v5 hockey, only Pettersson is barely passing 50% xGF while getting destroyed in other metrics.

You keep pushing Werenski being carried by one line despite two forwards (Sillinger, Fantilli) having more 5v5 TOI with Werenski than Voronkov.

 

[tfwnogf]

He definitely should be a finalist, and he could win if the voters are tired of hearing about Hughes vs Makar. I know I am.

 

[Rowlet]

All these advanced stats are meaningless when it comes to the voting.

Bucci is a voter, do you think he and every other voter breaks down all the advanced stats and makes his decision based on the numbers alone? You might not care about what the preseason outlooks of the teams were or what happened in the off-season, but that type of shit without a doubt plays a role into the final voting.

It's going to come down to final production and whose the hot commodity at the end of the season.

I don't care about the voting, I care about who has been better.

We can all agree that voters often don't know what they're talking about, so all of this conversation is meaningless and can be derailed by saying "you don't know what voters are going to vote on."

While that's true, there is a definitive answer of who has been better that we can discuss and that's much more interesting to talk about. If you want to disregard numbers because we can't read the voters minds or predict the future, you don't have to keep replying, but separate from what voters will think 4 or 5 months from now, there is a real answer as to who has been better so far, and that's Quinn Hughes.

You keep pushing Werenski being carried by one line despite two forwards (Sillinger, Fantilli) having more 5v5 TOI with Werenski than Voronkov.

Monahan's line still impacts Werenski's numbers the most, dropping by over 20% when the 1st line isn't on the ice.

 

[Cowumbus]

Monahan's line still impacts Werenski's numbers the most, dropping by 20% when the 1st line isn't on the ice.

So Hronek is carrying Hughes? Drops 37% when he’s not on the ice?

 

[Rowlet]

View attachment 961927
So Hronek is carrying Hughes?

Why did you change the stat we were discussing? Couldn't find anything to back up your claims? You're not arguing in good faith. You should know that GF% is highly influenced by lucky bounces and quality of goalie, while xGF isn't.

Hronek only played 21 games and was then injured for 20, and the numbers you're quoting are only from 80 minutes of play, while Hughes and Hronek together have played over 300 so far this season.

Hronek sans Hughes has a high GF%, but his xGF% is only 44.40%, while Hughes' is 54.76% sans Hronek. Hronek without Hughes also has an On-Ice Shooting % of 22.6% and an On Ice Save % of 97.50% so he's gotten extremely lucky in that regard.

 

[Cowumbus]

Why did you change the stat we were discussing? Couldn't find anything to back up your claims? You're not arguing in good faith. You should know that GF% is highly influenced by lucky bounces and quality of goalie, while xGF isn't.

Hronek only played 21 games and was then injured for 20, and the numbers you're quoting are only from 80 minutes of play, while Hughes and Hronek together have played over 300 so far this season.

Wrong. Quinn Hughes - Teammates - On Ice - Natural Stat Trick
5v5 Natural Stat trick has Hronek playing 110 mins away from Hughes. 318 together.

Hronek sans Hughes has a high GF%, but his xGF% is only 44.40%, while Hughes' is 54.76% sans Hronek. Hronek without Hughes also has an On-Ice Shooting % of 22.6% and an On Ice Save % of 97.50% so he's gotten extremely lucky in that regard.

View attachment 961929

Bc GF% matters. Actual GF/GA matter. Not “stats” influenced by weak shots from the point.

The point is, obviously Hronek isn’t carrying Hughes, but that “stats” that you say show Werenski is getting carried by 1 line show Hronek is carrying Hughes by even more! And that’s using a stat that is actually looking at pucks going into the net.

 

[Nikolajs Sillers]

Came here to read a bit about Werenski. Now I know everything about Q .Hughes

 

[Rowlet]

Bc GF% matters. Actual GF/GA matter. Not “stats” influenced by weak shots from the point.

The point is, obviously Hronek isn’t carrying Hughes, but that “stats” that you say show Werenski is getting carried by 1 line show Hronek is carrying Hughes by even more!

As I said in the post you replied to, Hronek without Hughes is a very small portion of their total ice time, while also having an extremely high OIS% and an extremely high OISV%.

As soon as it benefitted you, your argument changed from quoting xGF stats to saying that expected stats don't matter and that GF/GA do matter, despite being extremely volatile and not a good way to determine repeated outcomes. You're not arguing in good faith, so there's no reason to continue.

 

[ijuka]

I think Werenski deserves it. Makar has the same offensive production with a far better supportive group like MacKinnon and Rantanen, Werenski has nothing of the sort.

And I guess this isn't really a part of hockey but for some reason I feel like the sympathies should be on the side of CBJ due to what happened in the summer.

 

[Cowumbus]

As I said in the post you replied to, Hronek without Hughes is a very small portion of their total ice time, while also having an extremely high OIS% and an extremely high OISV%.

As soon as it benefitted you, your argument changed from quoting xGF stats to saying that expected stats don't matter and that GF/GA is more important. You're not arguing in good faith, so there's no reason to continue.

???

I’m gonna simplify it here, which number do you think reflects David Jiricek’s skill level more?

 

[tfwnogf]

I don't care about the voting, I care about who has been better.

We can all agree that voters often don't know what they're talking about, so all of this conversation is meaningless and can be derailed by saying "you don't know what voters are going to vote on."

While that's true, there is a definitive answer of who has been better that we can discuss and that's much more interesting to talk about. If you want to disregard numbers because we can't read the voters minds or predict the future, you don't have to keep replying, but separate from what voters will think 4 or 5 months from now, there is a real answer as to who has been better so far, and that's Quinn Hughes.



Monahan's line still impacts Werenski's numbers the most, dropping by over 20% when the 1st line isn't on the ice.

I don't get why that (to you) Monahan is some kind of cheat code for Werenski, but 100 point centres are supposedly hot garbage for Hughes. So much so that he supposedly has to drag around their bloated corpses on the ice with him. If Hughes is so much better at elevating players, why are they all playing like ass this year? If the Canucks are on his back, they would be a lottery team without him, etc, but with him they are still not even a playoff team, then what do your advanced stats matter?

We can all agree that voters often don't know what they're talking about

Maybe they do, maybe they don't, but it seems that to you, you are the only one who knows what you're talking about. The rest of us simpletons go based on stuff like point totals, and whether or not a team makes the playoffs. None of this other stuff matters to voters, and the thread is about whether or not Werenski should be considered for the Norris, not who "elevates teammates" the best.

 

[Rowlet]

View attachment 961937
???

Your schtick is getting pretty tired.

Hronek plays 80% of his 5v5 ice time with Hughes, but Hughes was forced to play with Tyler Myers for the past 20~ games. When you compare them directly, you can see that Hughes does all the heavy lifting.

 

[Rowlet]

I don't get why that (to you) Monahan is some kind of cheat code for Werenski, but 100 point centres are supposedly hot garbage for Hughes. So much so that he supposedly has to drag around their bloated corpses on the ice with him. If Hughes is so much better at elevating players, why are they all playing like ass this year? If the Canucks are on his back, they would be a lottery team without him, etc, but with him they are still not even a playoff team, then what do your advanced stats matter?



Maybe they do, maybe they don't, but it seems that to you, you are the only one who knows what you're talking about. The rest of us simpletons go based on stuff like point totals, and whether or not a team makes the playoffs. None of this other stuff matters to voters, and the thread is about whether or not Werenski should be considered for the Norris, not who "elevates teammates" the best.

The reason is because you can see it, the numbers are right in front of you, I even provided you the charts. Werenski's numbers go down way more than the Monahan line when they're separated. The Pettersson and Miller lines numbers go down way more than Hughes when they're separated, Hughes' actually goes up.

Hughes just can't elevate them enough because everyone else is playing like complete shit or injured all the time. Of all three lines, Monahan's is the only one playing passable 5v5 hockey.

As for your second point, no, many people know what they're talking about, however going solely off of point totals or whether or not a team will make the playoffs is not worth discussing, because we can't predict the future. Regardless of who wins, there's a different argument to be had about who SHOULD win, devoid of other biased factors. If all you care about is who will win, then just wait until June to find out, if you want to talk about why you think Werenski has a shot at winning the Norris based on actual numbers, I'll have that discussion with you.