LD Quinton Hughes - U of Michigan, Big Ten (2018, 7th, VAN)

[Favster]

In part 3 of the shift-by-shift against Ohio State, I thought Quinn was excellent.

His skating is something else.

Unbelievable game really. He's my pick at 3 for MTL.

The only issue I see with his game is he follows the play too closely, if that makes any sense. In the NCAA he can get away with it because his skating is just so good. I'm sure he will adapt at the pro level. He would like amazing with Weber.

 

[Favster]

How? Show me a consistent 50 point D man in the Nhl who can’t rifle the puck. It’s extremely rare for a top end Nhl D to

- Be as small as Hughes
- Shoot the puck like Hughes

Let alone both. He is an extremely skilled player but he is a long term project and a risky one at that.

Ryan Suter has 2 point seasons in the last 3 years. Duncan Keith definitely doesn't have a "rifle" and he consistently generated 50+ points per season over his career. A player like Hughes can rely on great lateral movement to create lanes from the point. That's what's important, getting the puck to the bet, not "rifling" it.

 

[MessierII]

Ryan Suter has 2 point seasons in the last 3 years. Duncan Keith definitely doesn't have a "rifle" and he consistently generated 50+ points per season over his career. A player like Hughes can rely on great lateral movement to create lanes from the point. That's what's important, getting the puck to the bet, not "rifling" it.

Well for one thing Suter has had just 2 50 point seasons in a long career. The problem I have with these two comparisons is both these guys are elite without the puck so they get those opportunities. Safe to say Hughs will never be elite without the puck. He’s also smaller than both guys.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

How? Show me a consistent 50 point D man in the Nhl who can’t rifle the puck. It’s extremely rare for a top end Nhl D to

- Be as small as Hughes
- Shoot the puck like Hughes

Let alone both. He is an extremely skilled player but he is a long term project and a risky one at that.

torey krug? he has a good slapshot but with strength and growing into his body i'm not sure hughes can't have a similar shot.

Gostisbehere for another small guy who can put up 50.

 

[MessierII]

torey krug? he has a good slapshot but with strength and growing into his body i'm not sure hughes can't have a similar shot.

I don’t see it. Krug has a cannon. Hughes will never shoot like that.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

I don’t see it. Krug has a cannon. Hughes will never shoot like that.

So he can "never" work on his shot or play away from the puck?

 

[MessierII]

So he can "never" work on his shot or play away from the puck?

It can improve but if it’s not dominant at the college level unlikeky it will be a strength at the nhl level. This is my skepticism of him as a prospect. You dont have to agree with it.

 

[Favster]

Well for one thing Suter has had just 2 50 point seasons in a long career. The problem I have with these two comparisons is both these guys are elite without the puck so they get those opportunities. Safe to say Hughs will never be elite without the puck. He’s also smaller than both guys.

You realize they have to touch the puck to get a point right? lol

You asked for D's who don't have great shots who scored 50, I provided you with examples and you reverted to "too small" or "not good without the puck".

Anyway, I get it, you don't like the player.

 

[CanaFan]

Scott Niedermayer didn’t have a bomb of a shot. Did all right with “just” elite skating and hockey IQ.

 

[MessierII]

Scott Niedermayer didn’t have a bomb of a shot. Did all right with “just” elite skating and hockey IQ.

My original point was it’s almost impossible to find a guy who’s both

-small
-doesn’t have a good shot

Who are consistent offensive D in the NHL. It’s rare. Add to it that Hughes is suspect defensively I just think he’s the riskiest pick at the top end of the draft this year. I’m not saying he won’t work out but I see a lot of bust potential here for the aforementioned reasons.

 

[Kevin Musto]

My original point was it’s almost impossible to find a guy who’s both

-small
-doesn’t have a good shot

Who are consistent offensive D in the NHL. It’s rare. Add to it that Hughes is suspect defensively I just think he’s the riskiest pick at the top end of the draft this year. I’m not saying he won’t work out but I see a lot of bust potential here for the aforementioned reasons.

Duncan Keith isn't much bigger than Hughes and is one of Chicago's worst shooters. 2 time Norris trophy winner, 3 Stanley Cups, 2 time Olympic Gold, 1 Conn Smythe. Hughes is way further along in development than Keith was at that age. Keith needed a lot of AHL time.

 

[CanaFan]

My original point was it’s almost impossible to find a guy who’s both

-small
-doesn’t have a good shot

Who are consistent offensive D in the NHL. It’s rare. Add to it that Hughes is suspect defensively I just think he’s the riskiest pick at the top end of the draft this year. I’m not saying he won’t work out but I see a lot of bust potential here for the aforementioned reasons.

So you’d discount Niedermayer because he was 6 feet rather than 5’10?

It’s possible, just not common I suppose. Also Hughes slapper in the US - Denmark game looked ok to me. Not a “bomb” but well placed for tips and deflections.

 

[Grantham]

I thought he looked great against Canada (with sheltered minutes mind you), and so-so in the second game against Denmark.

I thought he was trying a bit too hard, and had some careless overplay of the puck. I think that’s just the result of a young player getting a little overconfident against a weaker team after being so good against Canada.

And why is he being compared to Duncan Keith? Keith is a good/very good shooter from the point. Definitely not a muffin shooter like Hughes. And he’s 6’1”, not 5’9”. That’s 4 inches Keith has on him.

Still intrigued by him, and I really don’t see him being a boom-bust player. Pretty safe bet I think to carve out a long career.

 

[Kevin Musto]

I thought he looked great against Canada (with sheltered minutes mind you), and so-so in the second game against Denmark.

I thought he was trying a bit too hard, and had some careless overplay of the puck. I think that’s just the result of a young player getting a little overconfident against a weaker team after being so good against Canada.

And why is he being compared to Duncan Keith? Keith is a good/very good shooter from the point. Definitely not a muffin shooter like Hughes. And he’s 6’1”, not 5’9”. That’s 4 inches Keith has on him.

Still intrigued by him, and I really don’t see him being a boom-bust player. Pretty safe bet I think to carve out a long career.

Keith averages 7 goals a season. He has a heavy slapper from the point, but he very rarely scores.

 

[Canuck Luck]

I thought he looked great against Canada (with sheltered minutes mind you), and so-so in the second game against Denmark.

I thought he was trying a bit too hard, and had some careless overplay of the puck. I think that’s just the result of a young player getting a little overconfident against a weaker team after being so good against Canada.

And why is he being compared to Duncan Keith? Keith is a good/very good shooter from the point. Definitely not a muffin shooter like Hughes. And he’s 6’1”, not 5’9”. That’s 4 inches Keith has on him.

Still intrigued by him, and I really don’t see him being a boom-bust player. Pretty safe bet I think to carve out a long career.

Question why do half the people here say he is 5'9? He is listed as 5'10 on every source i've ever looked at

 

[AmericanDream]

I thought he looked great against Canada (with sheltered minutes mind you), and so-so in the second game against Denmark.

I thought he was trying a bit too hard, and had some careless overplay of the puck. I think that’s just the result of a young player getting a little overconfident against a weaker team after being so good against Canada.

And why is he being compared to Duncan Keith? Keith is a good/very good shooter from the point. Definitely not a muffin shooter like Hughes. And he’s 6’1”, not 5’9”. That’s 4 inches Keith has on him.

Still intrigued by him, and I really don’t see him being a boom-bust player. Pretty safe bet I think to carve out a long career.

Keith isn't 6'1....

 

[Grantham]

Question why do half the people here say he is 5'9? He is listed as 5'10 on every source i've ever looked at

Fair enough. So 5’10” then. I would say the combine will be really interesting to see the proper height of these players.

Keith isn't 6'1....

Based on what? That is his listed height on HockeyDB and other sites.

 

[AmericanDream]

Fair enough. So 5’10” then. I would say the combine will be really interesting to see the proper height of these players.



Based on what? That is his listed height on HockeyDB and other sites.

I understand what sites have him listed at...based off of watching him the past 10 plus years, meeting him in person, and seeing how he is the exact same height as Kane standing side by side in dozens of appearances. this has been discussed to death on the Hawks board, but Keith simply isn't 6'1...why on Earth he is listed as that is just another mystery of over listing a players height that none of us can understand. Keith is 5'11 1/2 and Hughes is not far off that.

 

[Grantham]

I understand what sites have him listed at...based off of watching him the past 10 plus years, meeting him in person, and seeing how he is the exact same height as Kane standing side by side in dozens of appearances. this has been discussed to death on the Hawks board, but Keith simply isn't 6'1...why on Earth he is listed as that is just another mystery of over listing a players height that none of us can understand. Keith is 5'11 1/2 and Hughes is not far off that.

Okay. I can’t argue with that. It seems the older players got away with fudging the data a bit. With the combine system now it seems like we get the straight truth with height and weight now.

 

[AmericanDream]

Okay. I can’t argue with that. It seems the older players got away with fudging the data a bit. With the combine system now it seems like we get the straight truth with height and weight now.

I think that is the case. For Keith when he was drafted, just seemed that some numbers were fudged as 6'0 dmen really weren't in the norm...maybe Michigan St helped him with this, I dont know, but it has been a running joke for years on our board. Keith isn't tiny, but when he looks almost eye to eye with Kaner, something is off a bit...either way I think Hughes will be a top player here.

I liken Hughes to Brian Rafalski and that type of player he can become. Needs some time to be that good away from the puck that Rafalski was, but on shot velocity and accuracy, they are very comparable. Rafalski was a great skater as well, Hughes has him there but IMO, very comparable players.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

I think that is the case. For Keith when he was drafted, just seemed that some numbers were fudged as 6'0 dmen really weren't in the norm...maybe Michigan St helped him with this, I dont know, but it has been a running joke for years on our board. Keith isn't tiny, but when he looks almost eye to eye with Kaner, something is off a bit...either way I think Hughes will be a top player here.

I liken Hughes to Brian Rafalski and that type of player he can become. Needs some time to be that good away from the puck that Rafalski was, but on shot velocity and accuracy, they are very comparable. Rafalski was a great skater as well, Hughes has him there but IMO, very comparable players.

They list him at 6', perhaps they were the first.

Duncan Keith Bio :: Michigan State :: Official Athletic Site

Duncan Keith has one of the stranger development stories really. So I am not sure any player is going to go through some of what he did and turn into the kind of star he did. That was really out of nowhere and a slow burn at points. He had a unique ascension to HHOFer. Hughes reminds me a lot of Rafalski as well, even better skating and at comparable developmental times a lot more rounded of a player. But he drives the play from the back-end in a way Rafalski often did. He is flat out miserable to forecheck at times for the opposition.

 

[Kaners PPGs]

And why is he being compared to Duncan Keith? Keith is a good/very good shooter from the point. Definitely not a muffin shooter like Hughes. And he’s 6’1”, not 5’9”. That’s 4 inches Keith has on him.

.

Keith IS NOT a good shooter from the point. He is extremely inaccurate and if there are a pair of shin guards to find, Keith will find them. Someone said a heavy shot? Keith doesn't have that either. Here's a little secret about Keith- he is awful at running a PP and one of the major reasons why the Hawks PP has been subpar over their run. He's not a PP QB, he is poor at entering the zone, and has a poor slapshot. Don't get me wrong- I have loved Keith as a Blackhawk but not because of his shot or his play on PP.

I don't have much to add about Hughes but from reading a lot about Hughes, I don't see their games having that much in common.

 

[Saxon]

My original point was it’s almost impossible to find a guy who’s both

-small
-doesn’t have a good shot

Who are consistent offensive D in the NHL. It’s rare. Add to it that Hughes is suspect defensively I just think he’s the riskiest pick at the top end of the draft this year. I’m not saying he won’t work out but I see a lot of bust potential here for the aforementioned reasons.

Hughes is not suspect defensively.

 

[Kevin Musto]

Keith IS NOT a good shooter from the point. He is extremely inaccurate and if there are a pair of shin guards to find, Keith will find them. Someone said a heavy shot? Keith doesn't have that either. Here's a little secret about Keith- he is awful at running a PP and one of the major reasons why the Hawks PP has been subpar over their run. He's not a PP QB, he is poor at entering the zone, and has a poor slapshot. Don't get me wrong- I have loved Keith as a Blackhawk but not because of his shot or his play on PP.

I don't have much to add about Hughes but from reading a lot about Hughes, I don't see their games having that much in common.

Their game is very different. The reason Keith got brought up is cause someone said to name a small D who sucks at shooting and is good. That's Duncan Keith. He's got only an inch or two on Hughes and he's awful at shooting. His shot is pretty strong, but as you noted, terribly inaccurate. Hughes actually has a way higher ceiling than Keith and be a proper PPQB.

 

[MessierII]

Hughes is not suspect defensively.

Yes he is. He’s a real rover. He plays defense like a forward back checking.