1. Defensive D men that can contribute offensively as well have more value than strictly just defensive D men.

2. He also played on Winnipeg's PP and Montreals in the playoffs last season which was near the top of the league in the playoffs so yeah, kind of does mean he is an all situations guy.

3. Right cause teams ALWAYS play their worst D man 20+ minutes a night. Come on, I know you like to troll Montreal but even you know how ridiculous of a statement that is.

Ah yes hits, that totally means something and isnt an arbitrary number that stat counters cant even agree on what is a hit or not.

You have a better way of measuring physicality? Or are you admitting that teams are intimidated by Chiarot?

Chiarot is not a good defenseman. They basically used him just to block shots because Montreal overall is not good defensively. Weber was hurt but was still better than Chiarot. Chiarot overall was the 3rd best defenseman in a weak defensive unit.

Yes, if a defender was effective enough physically or Intimidated players, they would avoid them on carry ins and not get a ton of close in shots or chances when they are on the ice.
Chariot is consistently targeted by forwards over his defensive partners when teams are entering the habs zone and he allows a mind blowing amount of shots and chances from the home playe area around the net where he apparently is super physical and intimidating. So players are either super brave around him league wide or he's just not scary

Hahaha. Chiarot is as intimidating as Dave Manson? Did you even watch Dave Manson play?

Weak defensive unit?! Did you even watch the playoffs? Montreal ranked 1st on the PK and completely shut down some of the league's top offensive players and teams! Sure Price played a big part of that but so did the D.

They are very defensively. Weber and Price being gone has exposed that.
Price and Weber were the biggest reasons for that.. Chiarot is a great shot blocker, but that's it.

1. They can contribute offensively but that doesn't mean you should measure them by how much they contribute when it's not their role. For example Chiarot had 7 points last year in 41 games, Manson also had 7 points but in 23 games, sounds like about double the production to me.

2. He played 7.82 minutes of PP time in the the playoffs last year in 21 games and was 13th in total PP minutes. That's 37 seconds per game, that is about average for the 3rd group that comes out after an unsuccessful powerplay as they prepare to go back to 5v5.

3. I troll Montreal? I thought I was the Leafs, Bruins, and Sabres troll? No I am just not blinded by bias. It's not at all a false statement to say his advanced stats are horrible and are worse than Manson's

they are pretty similar players. manson just played on a better team.

Manson's trade decreased Chiarot's value

1. LOL, being able to contribute offensively increases a players value no matter what role they play. For example, A 4th line energy player on any team who can put the puck in the let to the tune of 10-15 goals over an 82 game season has more value than a player of the same style on another team that only puts up 5-10 goals a year. It is simple logic.

2. PP time is still PP time no matter how you view it, did Chiarot play on the PP, PK and 5 on 5? yes he did there is not even an argument there, that quite literally means he plays all situations.

3. LMAO, you troll every team that is not the Flames and especially any trade involving the Flames!

4. Nice try, do you even know how to read this chart? yes this year Manson has higher GF/60, xGF/60, CF/60 (playing 383 less minutes or the equivalent of almost 17 games of ice time at 20 minutes a night (which btw is closer to Manson's (19.75) average than Chiarot's(23.56) average)). Also since you don't like comparing offensive stats for defensive D men, look at the defensive stats. xGA and CA/60. Negatives in these 2 categories are better since they are lower numbers than positive, that makes Chiarot the better defensive player and it is not even close. BTW you are also comparing different roles in the sense that Chiarot is playing a 1st pairing role with a partner with just 110 games of NHL experience (Romanov) vs Manson in a 2nd pairing role with a partner who has over 7 times many (Fowler).

1. Just because Chiarot has more points does not mean he contributes more offensively, it just means he's partook in more direct production. For example Manson has a GF/60 of 2.00 and Chiarot's is 2.02. Manson's xGF/60 is 2.40, Chiarot's is 2.44. in SF/60 Manson has 28.40 and Chiarot has 26.91. in CF/60 Manson has 50.85 to Chiarot's 47.37.
These numbers swing way in Manson's favor if we look at just 5v5 time.

2. I guess? He didn't play on any specific PP unit's though, he was just on the pair that goes out for the post PP shift. If there is a whistle with like 5-10 seconds on the man advantage left that unit is always sent out on every team.

3. Sure man, whatever helps you sleep at night, I guess when I called the Toffoli trade value 4 months ago I was trolling too.

4. LMAO. No you actually have no idea how to read those chart's, the defensive stats are inversed. These charts show how horrendous Chiarot has been defensively this year.
Maybe an example will help you understand? Chris Tanev was statistically the best shutdown defenseman in the entire league last year, here is his chart:

Charlie McAvoy was also won of the best all around dmen in the league last year, here is his charts:

1. Putting up more points quite literally does mean Chiarot is better offensively LMAO.
2. No comment cause you conceded the point.
3. Almost everyone called Toffoli's value months ago, other than those ridiculous fans that were saying 2 1st's +
4. You are correct, my bad I didn't realize they were inversed. I will concede this point

1. No it doesn't it mean's he was one of the last 3 people to touch the puck more often.
3. No I literally called almost the exact Toffoli trade back in December

Maybe these will give you a better idea?

These aren't that comparable since this uses data from Chiarot in a top pairing role compared to Manson in a 2nd pairing role. If you had a chart that shows Manson's data in a top pairing role or Chiarot in a 2nd pairing role the data would look much different.

That just states what their ice time represents on average. If you look at the QoT and QoC then you have a good idea of how comparable they are. Both play with similar quality teammates and manson plays against slightly more difficult competition on average

1. LMAO, one of the last 3 to touch the puck on the attack contributing to scoring goals. Literally means better offensively (well at least better at finishing offensively). I would rather have the defensive D man who helps get more goals since more goals means higher potential to win the games.
3. Almost everyone had him pegged at a 1st + 2nd + cap dump\offset. Anyone with a good understanding of the game knew this was his value (many wanted a prospect with 1st round value but it was still a similar package).

I don't agree with the bolded unless this is either over their careers or outdated data, since Fowler is much better than Romanov right now.

Fowler is perceived to be much better, he has started to age out a bit. This also takes in more than just their defense partner. Also Petry and Savard have played more 5v5 time with Chiarot this year than Romanov

Savard was his partner most often when DD was in charge and he definitely is not as good as Fowler. Really, I have not caught a lot of Ducks games this year, I wouldn't have thought Fowler was slowing down.

He still produces well enough but nearly 50% of his points have come on the man advantage. He's not the force he used to be

I see, well that certainly explains the QoT difference then lol

add to that the fact that Chiarot did this season without Edmundson, Weber and Price, and still get better stats than Manson in a stacked team ahahaha