Zach Werenski should be considered for the Norris?

[Longtime Local]

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.

I would say you aren't the one interpreting the data correctly or arguing in good faith. You keep cherrypicking stats to show how Hughes "elevates" everyone he plays with, and then use the fact that Werenski has worse numbers away from the top line to show how they are "carrying" him. All of this data really shows is two things that are pretty obvious given the construction of each roster:

1. The Canucks have a much deeper group of forwards than Columbus does. Columbus has had a good amount of injuries in the bottom six and most of the young guys aren't good defensively. That's why Werenski has his numbers drop away from the top line. He still boosts all of the other lines, almost every forward has better numbers with Werenski on the ice than without him. Vancouver on the other hand, has a much deeper forward group with proven players that can score. I would expect those players with Hughes to outscore the bottom 6 of the other team most of the time.

2. On the other hand, Vancouver has a horrific defense after Hughes, while Columbus has a very good one after Werenski. This is why Werenski doesn't boost the bottom 6 of Columbus as much as Hughes does for his, because when Werenski isn't on the ice, guys like Provorov, Mateychuk, Severson, Fabbro etc. are able to step in and play well. When EP40 and Miller don't have Hughes on the ice, they have to play with guys like Juulsen and Myers. Obviously they are going to see significant boosts because the gap between Hughes and the rest of the defensemen is so big.

 

[Rodgerwilco]

As a Penguins fan I've loved Werenski ever since he took a puck to the face in a playoff game and then came back in the 3rd period with a fish bowl to finish the game.

Glad to see his career continue upward and him getting some recognition.

 

[Rowlet]

I would say you aren't the one interpreting the data correctly or arguing in good faith. You keep cherrypicking stats to show how Hughes "elevates" everyone he plays with, and then use the fact that Werenski has worse numbers away from the top line to show how they are "carrying" him. All of this data really shows is two things that are pretty obvious given the construction of each roster:

1. The Canucks have a much deeper group of forwards than Columbus does. Columbus has had a good amount of injuries in the bottom six and most of the young guys aren't good defensively. That's why Werenski has his numbers drop away from the top line. He still boosts all of the other lines, almost every forward has better numbers with Werenski on the ice than without him. Vancouver on the other hand, has a much deeper forward group with proven players that can score. I would expect those players with Hughes to outscore the bottom 6 of the other team most of the time.

2. On the other hand, Vancouver has a horrific defense after Hughes, while Columbus has a very good one after Werenski. This is why Werenski doesn't boost the bottom 6 of Columbus as much as Hughes does for his, because when Werenski isn't on the ice, guys like Provorov, Mateychuk, Severson, Fabbro etc. are able to step in and play well. When EP40 and Miller don't have Hughes on the ice, they have to play with guys like Juulsen and Myers. Obviously they are going to see significant boosts because the gap between Hughes and the rest of the defensemen is so big.

All the Hughes numbers I quoted are when he ISN'T playing with the Miller or Pettersson lines, meaning the forwards he's playing with are some grouping of Danton Heinen, Pius Suter, Kiefer Sherwood (often on the Pettersson line), Nils Hoglander, Teddy Blueger, and whatever AHLers the Canucks are using on a given day, I'd say it's pretty fair.

As for teams that can score, the Blue Jackets are 7th in GF, while Canucks are 22nd, it's not like the Canucks are the Harlem Globetrotters.

 

[CBJx614]

All the Hughes numbers I quoted are when he ISN'T playing with the Miller or Pettersson lines, meaning the forwards he's playing with are some grouping of Danton Heinen, Pius Suter, Kiefer Sherwood (often on the Pettersson line), Nils Hoglander, Teddy Blueger, and whatever AHLers the Canucks are using on a given day, I'd say it's pretty fair.

As for teams that can score, the Blue Jackets are 7th in GF, while Canucks are 22nd, it's not like the Canucks are the Harlem Globetrotters.

Without diving into the numbers, I'd wager a good chunk of those numbers come from the CBJ 1st line, last I saw it was one of the top lines in the entire league.

As others have mentioned the bottom 9 of the CBJ consists of kids and waiver wire pickups and AHLers.

 

[Regal]

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.

So are they 100 point centres or are they playing like shit? Just feels very contradictory. Hughes is elevating everyone but he’s not a miracle worker and the other stars aren’t doing enough. While I agree that WOWY stats shouldn’t be the only factor and Hughes has a team setup which I think benefits him here (top lines underperforming, decent forward depth, terrible defensive depth, and the second pair taking more minutes when the team turtles) he’s been on the ice for 43 GF and 24 GA at 5v5, so it’s not just “advanced stats” that are impressive and focusing on the fact they aren’t a playoff team is a bit ridiculous.

 

[tfwnogf]

So are they 100 point centres or are they playing like shit? Just feels very contradictory. Hughes is elevating everyone but he’s not a miracle worker and the other stars aren’t doing enough. While I agree that WOWY stats shouldn’t be the only factor and Hughes has a team setup which I think benefits him here (top lines underperforming, decent forward depth, terrible defensive depth, and the second pair taking more minutes when the team turtles) he’s been on the ice for 43 GF and 24 GA at 5v5, so it’s not just “advanced stats” that are impressive and focusing on the fact they aren’t a playoff team is a bit ridiculous.

Precisely my point. They obviously aren't that bad considering they scored 100 points each last year, the team had 109 points, they made the second round of the playoffs, etc. Yes they regressed this year, yes they have injuries (as if no other team has that happen), yes they overachieved last year blah blah blah. Point is, Hughes isn't really elevating them to anything. He has great puck possession numbers, but what's the point of talking about it when they aren't winning games. And even more than that, what's the point of talking about it in Werenski's thread?

If Hughes really wants to elevate his teammates, why doesn't he take them to therapy and they can work out their differences. Maybe take them out for ice cream after. You can elevate all you want, but if you aren't making the playoffs, you aren't winning the Norris (except for Karlsson but he got 100 points for the first time in 30 years). End of story.

 

[Cowumbus]

All the Hughes numbers I quoted are when he ISN'T playing with the Miller or Pettersson lines, meaning the forwards he's playing with are some grouping of Danton Heinen, Pius Suter, Kiefer Sherwood (often on the Pettersson line), Nils Hoglander, Teddy Blueger, and whatever AHLers the Canucks are using on a given day, I'd say it's pretty fair.

Hughes top 6 highest TOI linemates 5v5 are:
Boeser, DeBrusk, Garland, Pettersson, Miller, Suter.

Werenski:
Marchenko, Monahan, Sillinger, Fantilli, Voronkov, Olivier.

Those guys have all proven they are good scoring and possession players. What am I missing here?

 

[SteelCityCannon]

Anybody else put 0 thought into advanced statistics? I can't wait till that whole fad dies off. It will, because the teams built on it never win anything.

There's no wrong answer with any of these guys. Let's just use our eyes and see.

 

[CBJx614]

Anybody else put 0 thought into advanced statistics? I can't wait till that whole fad dies off. It will, because the teams built on it never win anything.

There's no wrong answer with any of these guys. Let's just use our eyes and see.

I wouldn't say it's going to die off entirely, you might not be able to assemble a roster based on it, but you can evaluate individual players with it.