What long-term role is the best fit for Alex Vlasic’s skills?

Alex Vlasic’s 2025–26 season didn’t exactly follow the neat, upward curve that felt almost inevitable just a year and some change ago. After his breakout rookie season , the projection felt pretty straightforward: Vlasic was one of the best defensemen in the league at 5-on-5 and seemed to have a solid long-term projection as a No. 2 defenseman who could be the steady, defense-first anchor next to a more dynamic partner. Maybe even a top-pair piece, even if he wasn’t the one driving offense. That kind of player has real value, especially for a team like the Blackhawks that’s still trying to build something functional from the blue line out. However, while Vlasic was ultimately still one of the best defensemen on the team and defensively strong at an individual level, he hasn\'t matched the positive impact from that 2023-24 rookie performance in the last two seasons.

The question around Alex Vlasic right now isn’t whether he’s good -- he objectively is -- it’s what his best role is long-term.

This season didn’t kill the idea of him becoming a No. 2 defenseman, but it definitely made that projection feel a little less certain. If anything, it nudged the conversation toward a different outcome: that Vlasic might ultimately be better suited as a high-end, shut-down option on a second pair rather than a true top-pair staple.

The tricky part here is context. We’ve only really seen Vlasic on a bad Blackhawks team, and for much of this season -- and even parts of the prior one -- he’s been paired with defensemen who, frankly, aren’t top-pair caliber. That matters when you’re trying to evaluate whether someone who can be a top-pair player, because the environment isn’t exactly setting him up to look like one.

So while this article isn’t going to fully answer the “where does Vlasic ultimately fit?” question, it can at least frame it a bit better by looking at how his play this season aligns with each role.

Let\'s start with a high level overview, below is Vlasic\'s player card from HockeyStats:

As you can see, Vlasic is still in the top 70th percentile for overall WAR and 72nd percentile in terms of even strength defense, which are both nice quality and place him firmly in second-pairing company. However, this is a solid drop off from when he signed his contract last April , when he was ranked in the 88th and 94th percentile, respectively. Objectively, Vlasic was not as good overall this season compared to the last one, but there\'s definitely an argument to be made that quality of teammate -- or lack thereof -- played a major role as well.

As the chart shows, the quality of Vlasic\'s teammates this season ranked extremely low, with the defensive side being especially rough. That’s not surprising given how poor the Blackhawks were in their own zone this season and pairing that performance with a top forward line that was routinely getting caved in by the top line of their opponents from a defensive standpoint. It didn\'t help that that Vlasic and his most common partner, Louis Crevier, were heavily leaned on in defensive situations, starting just 32.14 percent of their shifts in the offensive zone while not consistently being paired with true checking forwards. Meanwhile, other defensemen -- most notably Artyom Levshunov -- were given more sheltered minutes due to their lower experience level, which meant players like Vlasic, Crevier, and Connor Murphy absorbed the hardest matchups. It was essentially shutdown-pair deployment without always having a full shutdown unit around them.

That context matters a lot when looking at Vlasic’s offensive output, too. The lack of production isn’t just about his individual limitations -- although those still existed this season -- but was also somewhat a byproduct of his role. He went from frequently playing alongside a puck-moving, production star partner like Seth Jones to spending most of his time with Crevier, who did see an uptick in his production this season but is clearly not an offensive defenseman. Combine that with the heavy defensive zone starts and there just weren’t as many opportunities for Vlasic to generate offense like he did in the last two seasons. He still managed to hit 21 points (2 G, 19 A), which is only eight fewer than last season, but the opportunities to see if he could improve in that area weren\'t readily available this season.

It feels like Vlasic was used in a way that was neither traditionally top-pair nor shutdown second-pair, and that lack of defined usage needs to be factored in before drawing any hard conclusions about this season\'s performance and long-term projections.

Beyond the teammate and deployment context, Vlasic’s overall results were also weighed down by some pretty sharp valleys. You can see it clearly in the rolling percentile chart below:

Defensively, though, the baseline was still strong: Vlasic spent the majority of the season above the 75th percentile, with some peaks and stretches pushing into the 90-95th percentile range, basically mirroring the level he hit during his peak stretch last year around the time of his extension. When Vlasic is at his best, he\'s still putting up some impressive defensive numbers at the individual level.

The issue, though, is that the dips in Vlasic\'s play were real bad. There’s a noticeable downswing in the middle of the season, particularly around mid-December, when both his overall and defensive impacts took a major hit. Some of that lines up with the team completely falling apart during that stretch, which didn’t help anyone’s numbers. But even accounting for that, Vlasic wasn’t particularly good: there were more missed reads, less control in his gaps, and a general drop in the steadiness that defines his game when he\'s at his best.

Still, the response matters just as much as the slump. Vlasic didn’t just level off -- he climbed back into that upper percentile range and finished the season on a much stronger note defensively. That rebound is probably one of the more encouraging takeaways from his year. It suggests that even when things go sideways -- whether individually or team-wide -- he has the ability to recalibrate and get back to playing at a high level. There were plenty of players on the team that just didn\'t make a similar rebound. And for a player being asked to handle top-pair minutes on a bad team, that ability to recover and re-establish his defensive impact is a pretty important box to check.

Now let\'s take a quick look at what Vlasic did at an individual levels compared to last season, with this season on the left and the 2024-25 season on the right:

At a surface level, Vlasic’s micro offensive contributions didn’t change much year over year as he’s still not driving shots at a high rate (he\'s in the 28th percentile when it comes to shot contributions) but those numbers stayed fairly steady. His individual chance generation per 60 actually ticked up slightly, ranked around the 63rd percentile (which is neat) but his in-zone offense was lackluster overall, landing in the 28th percentile. Again, that\'s not surprising: it\'s hard to rack up secondary touches or sustain offensive sequences when you’re starting most of your shifts 180 feet from the opposing net.

On another positive note, Vlasic was in some ways more effective as a distributor when in the offensive zone: he showed more willingness to facilitate plays like one-timers and deflections, getting pucks into dangerous areas rather than just keeping things along the perimeter. When Vlasic recorded assists, they tended to be meaningful ones: 11 of his 19 assists were primary, and his 0.39 primary assists per 60 rate ranked around the 64th percentile. This suggests that when Vlasic is part of the play in the offensive zone, he’s contributing directly rather than just being along for the ride, and that’s an important distinction when projecting forward.

While Vlasic’s overall zone-entry attempt rate dipped a bit, the quality of those entries improved slightly. He generated controlled entries at a higher rate and saw an uptick in entries that led directly to scoring chances, pushing him into roughly the 68th percentile in that area. In other words, he was a bit more selective and effective when choosing his transition spots.

Put all of this together, and it reinforces the idea that Vlasic’s offensive limitations are real, but maybe a bit overstated in this specific season’s context. More importantly, it keeps the door open on the bigger question: if Vlasic can maintain his higher level of defensive impact while providing competent, occasionally meaningful puck movement in the offensive zone, then the archetype of a No. 2 defenseman that complements a more offensive partner is still very much in play.

Speaking of Vlasic’s defensive impact, the “why” behind the fluctuation this season is a bit of a mixed bag. First, his numbers as they relate to defending the blue line were very similar from last year, and even better in some ways. He showed improvement in both the quantity and quality of denying zone entries for opposing players, with the quality metric landing in the 95th percentile (up from 93rd), an elite mark that reinforces just how effective he can be at breaking plays up before they really get going. Vlasic did have a bit more trouble against controlled entries this season, particularly with outright carry-ins (78th percentile). That showed up in his rate of preventing entries from turning into scoring chances, which dipped to around the 56th percentile, which is still solid but down from 69th last season.

Once play got into the defensive zone, the trend was similar: still good, just not quite as dominant. Vlasic remained strong in retrievals, finishing around the 74th percentile in DZ retrievals per 60 and the 86th percentile in retrieval success rate. Those are very good numbers on their own, but they’re a noticeable drop from the 93rd or higher percentile territory he lived in last season. His transition exits followed a similar pattern — effective, but not driving play out of the zone at quite the same level.

Perhaps the biggest knock on Vlasic\'s game this season was the lack of physicality implemented throughout the season. This isn’t really about hits -- although, for the record, Vlasic ranked just in the 14th percentile there -- but more about overall physical engagement. He’s always been a cerebral defender who relies on positioning, reach, and timing rather than brute force, and he’s been very successful with this method in the past. But this season, there were definitely stretches when you wanted just a bit more bite: more assertiveness on retrievals, more willingness to finish plays physically, more moments when he uses his size not just to contain, but to separate opponents from the puck. That edge felt less consistent than it did a year or two ago, and it likely played a role in some of the dip in his defensive zone metrics -- particularly on retrievals -- where a stronger physical presence can make a real difference. It’s not a fatal flaw by any means, but it’s something to watch.

Because if Vlasic is going to fully cement himself as a top-pair option -- or even maximize his value in that high-end shutdown role -- getting back to that slightly more assertive version of his game will be important.

So, what is Alex Vlasic long term?

The honest answer is: we still don’t really know.

We’ve seen flashes of both paths. There have been stretches when he’s looked comfortable in a top-pairing role, handling tough minutes and not looking out of place in the offensive zone, even if he\'s not necessarily racking up points himself. There have also been plenty of moments when he’s looked like the prototype of what you’d want out of a high-end, shut-down defenseman on a second pair: steady, reliable, and able to suppress play without needing to drive it.

What this season clarified isn’t the final answer, but the conditions needed to actually find it. The way Vlasic was used this year isn’t sustainable if the goal is to properly evaluate or maximize his role. You can’t stick him on a pseudo-top pair with Crevier, while giving them heavy defensive zone deployment and inconsistent forward support, then expect them to deliver top-pair results. That’s not a real test of whether he can be a No. 2 defenseman -- it’s more like survival mode.

If the Blackhawks want to learn whether or not Vlasic can truly be that steady top-pair presence, the setup has to change. That likely means more time with a partner who is meant to bring more offense, like the aforementioned Levshunov or even Sam Rinzel. Put Vlasic in a situation where he can focus on what he does best defensively while his partner pushes play the other direction, and then see what it looks like over a real sample.

On the flip side, if the plan is to keep him paired with Crevier, then the role needs to shift, too. That duo makes far more sense as a true shutdown pair: one that’s deployed with checking or defensive-minded forwards, takes on tough matchups by design, and isn’t expected to generate much offensively. Lean into what they are instead of stretching them into something they’re not.

So, yes, the question of whether Vlasic is a long-term top-pair defenseman or a high-end second-pair piece is still open -- but after this season, it’s a lot clearer what needs to happen to actually answer it.

Talking Points