Makar vs Hughes

[Evergreen]

It's too close to call for me. I think Hughes is slightly better, but went with Makar because I think him being a RHD makes him slightly more valuable. I love watching both of these guys, though.

 

[avsfan9]

Love how Avs fans brush off a year like it no big deal. 1 year especially early in development is huge. No one is comparing Dach to Byfield are they?

No but they didn’t enter the nhl and compete for the Calder at the same time either. If they did people would be comparing the two. No doubt about it

 

[Cousin Eddie]

Love how Avs fans brush off a year like it no big deal. 1 year especially early in development is huge. No one is comparing Dach to Byfield are they?

Nobody brushes off the one year thing. It just has absolutely nothing to do with how good they are right now.

If you’re considering future you can absolutely consider the age gap. It’s an important variable. But when debating their ability in playing hockey at this point in time it means nothing.

 

[Szechwan]

Not really development isn’t linear. Especially for defensemen

Every time some rattled off the age thing, they way as well be saying he’s worse but “maybe some day” he’ll be better

It’s a silly excuse, ultimately

Honestly for each of these guys, development has looked closer to exponential than linear - Makar is gonna be and even bigger beast next year, Hughes likely will too.

 

[Szechwan]

Nobody brushes off the one year thing. It just has absolutely nothing to do with how good they are right now.

If you’re considering future you can absolutely consider the age gap. It’s an important variable. But when debating their ability in playing hockey at this point in time it means nothing.

What does a year younger have to do with anything, it’s not like there’s 3 or 4 years difference. So Makar is going to stop developing at 21 and Hughes is all of a sudden going to be way better than him in his development from age 20 to 21? Makes no sense

Not really development isn’t linear. Especially for defensemen

Every time some rattled off the age thing, they way as well be saying he’s worse but “maybe some day” he’ll be better

It’s a silly excuse, ultimately

Oh i see

 

[Northern Avs Fan]

I think Hughes has looked slightly more impressive in the playoffs. Not really surprising considering the Avs rolled all four lines and three defence pairs against a mismatched Arizona club. Makar’s been very good when he’s been on the ice.

The Avs will face a better team in the second round and I think they’ll be forced to lean on their top players more.

 

[Svencouver]

I think it's totally possible that Hughes is standing out more on the Canucks because he's being leaned on a lot more to be one of the centerpieces of that team. Colorado is a much deeper, stronger team all around.

 

[CherryToke]

Hughes stands out because he's a possession monster. I wouldn't expect that to change if he was on a better team

 

[Cousin Eddie]

Oh i see

Way to read my post.

 

[Mac Attack]

I really hope Colorado and Vancouver play the next round against each other. Would be fun. (and yes Colorado has a better team around Makar, I'm not trying to base who is better on the series winner.) We just deserve to see them on the ice at the same time for a whole series after all these debates.

 

[Ace of Hades]

I will take Hughes for sure.

 

[Hockeyholic]

Hughes because he doesn't have as muchbtalent around him defensively. He is the engine from the back end. I'll go a step further and say he will be as goodcas prime Hedman.

 

[majormajor]

Every take on this thread that compares the value of these players by looking at who plays around them is just plain dumb. That has nothing to do with which player is better. Unless you want to dig into the stats and look at how they play without their star centers ('Nucks fans won't like the results), don't bother with it.

 

[Disappointed EP40]

Hughes stands out because he's a possession monster. I wouldn't expect that to change if he was on a better team

This. If Hughes was on a team with more depth, he'd be racking up a ton more points. Based on his possession, zone exits, etc. Simply put, Hughes puts anyone who's on the ice with him in a position to score. If the Canucks had better scorers, like the Avs, I couldn't guess how many more points he'd have. If the Canucks didn't have Hughes, their scoring would disappear like a fart in the wind.

Their GF/GP went from 25th in the league to 8th. (2.67 to 3.25)

 

[Disappointed EP40]

Every take on this thread that compares the value of these players by looking at who plays around them is just plain dumb. That has nothing to do with which player is better. Unless you want to dig into the stats and look at how they play without their star centers ('Nucks fans won't like the results), don't bother with it.

Hahaha... What are you talking about?

When quantifying two players in a point based system, you certainly have to look at the context to which those points accumulate.

Hughes makes the Canucks much better than Makar makes the Avs. If that doesn't factor into who the better player is, ya may as well just rank them based on total points and call it a day.

 

[majormajor]

Hahaha... What are you talking about?

When quantifying two players in a point based system, you certainly have to look at the context to which those points accumulate.

Hughes makes the Canucks much better than Makar makes the Avs. If that doesn't factor into who the better player is, ya may as well just rank them based on total points and call it a day.

Look at the GF% with and without their star centers:

Hughes w/ Petey	Hughes w/0 Petey
68.89	40.30
Makar w/ Mack	Makar w/0 Mack
61.11	61.54

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Then knock it off with this crap about Makar being a product of his team. If anything it runs in the other direction.

You can also break it down by individual scoring rate. Makar scores at a higher rate himself when he's with the Avs middle six centers than he does when he is with Mackinnon. Hughes is lower across the board and more dependent on Pettersson.

P/60s at 5v5:

Hughes w/ Petey	1.67
Hughes w/ Horvat	1.11
Hughes w/ Gaudette	1.43
Makar w/ Mackinnon	1.86
Makar w/ Kadri	3.08
Makar w/ Compher	2.98

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

All stats courtesy natural stat trick.

 

[John Mandalorian]

Once you reach a certain level of elite this discussion becomes redundant. It's like jordan vs kobe.

You can build around hughes or makar. They are both franchise dman.

Except whatever level that is for Kobe, Jordan is on another level (maybe 2).

 

[Regal]

Every take on this thread that compares the value of these players by looking at who plays around them is just plain dumb. That has nothing to do with which player is better. Unless you want to dig into the stats and look at how they play without their star centers ('Nucks fans won't like the results), don't bother with it.

People are mistaking MacKinnon for being the benefiting, when he isn't the issue, as Pettersson does a lot of the same thing for helping Hughes even if he's not as good. But what does help is the fact that the Avs have been good up and down their lineup. They were one of the best teams in the league without MacKinnon on the ice this season. Hughes gets to play with guys like Jay Beagle and Loui Eriksson when Pettersson isn't on the ice. So no, looking at them away from their star centers isn't the answer.

 

[Regal]

Look at the GF% with and without their star centers:

Hughes w/ Petey	Hughes w/0 Petey
68.89	40.30
Makar w/ Mack	Makar w/0 Mack
61.11	61.54

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Then knock it off with this crap about Makar being a product of his team. If anything it runs in the other direction.

You can also break it down by individual scoring rate. Makar scores at a higher rate himself when he's with the Avs middle six centers than he does when he is with Mackinnon. Hughes is lower across the board and more dependent on Pettersson.

P/60s at 5v5:

Hughes w/ Petey	1.67
Hughes w/ Horvat	1.11
Hughes w/ Gaudette	1.43
Makar w/ Mackinnon	1.86
Makar w/ Kadri	3.08
Makar w/ Compher	2.98

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

All stats courtesy natural stat trick.

The Avs without both MacKinnon or Makar on the ice had a 55.65 GF%. The Canucks without both Hughes and Pettersson had a 43.44 GF%. The Avs were an elite team without their stars. The Canucks might have the worst bottom 6 in the league. Comparing how they are away from their star centers is completely irrelevant.

Also there's a lot of variance in goals. Hughes without Pettersson had a .974 PDO. He had a 49.89 xGF% without Pettersson while Pettersson had a 51.98 xGF% without Hughes. Not a huge difference. And Pettersson always has good linemates.

Meanwhile MacKinnon without Makar had a 55.44 xGF%, which is actually higher than MacKinnon with Makar (54.59), and Makar was lower than MacKinnon than Hughes was than Pettersson (52.06 xGF% for Makar without MacKinnon).

 

[majormajor]

The Avs without both MacKinnon or Makar on the ice had a 55.65 GF%. The Canucks without both Hughes and Pettersson had a 43.44 GF%. The Avs were an elite team without their stars. The Canucks might have the worst bottom 6 in the league. Comparing how they are away from their star centers is completely irrelevant.

Also there's a lot of variance in goals. Hughes without Pettersson had a .974 PDO. He had a 49.89 xGF% without Pettersson while Pettersson had a 51.98 xGF% without Hughes. Not a huge difference. And Pettersson always has good linemates.

Meanwhile MacKinnon without Makar had a 55.44 xGF%, which is actually higher than MacKinnon with Makar (54.59), and Makar was lower than MacKinnon than Hughes was than Pettersson (52.06 xGF% for Makar without MacKinnon).

I don't think JT Compher is much better than Bo Horvat, actually he's worse! Same with their lines, although maybe I'm wrong on that and Pearson and Boeser are hidden liabilities.

With talent like Makar's, don't get too caught up in xGs. Yes there is variance in goals results, but elite talent can significantly outperform xGs year after year after year. We'll see if I'm wrong about that this year, but when I watch Makar he's not a lucky player, he's a great player.

 

[Northern Avs Fan]

This. If Hughes was on a team with more depth, he'd be racking up a ton more points. Based on his possession, zone exits, etc. Simply put, Hughes puts anyone who's on the ice with him in a position to score. If the Canucks had better scorers, like the Avs, I couldn't guess how many more points he'd have. If the Canucks didn't have Hughes, their scoring would disappear like a fart in the wind.

Their GF/GP went from 25th in the league to 8th. (2.67 to 3.25)

It seems as though you’re attempting to conclude that Hughes is significantly better than Makar. Is that the case?

This take that the Avalanche have an enormous amount of forward talent compared to the Canucks is silly. Vancouver only had 9 less goals than Colorado this season.

 

[Regal]

I don't think JT Compher is much better than Bo Horvat, actually he's worse! Same with their lines, although maybe I'm wrong on that and Pearson and Boeser are hidden liabilities.

With talent like Makar's, don't get too caught up in xGs. Yes there is variance in goals results, but elite talent can significantly outperform xGs year after year after year. We'll see if I'm wrong about that this year, but when I watch Makar he's not a lucky player, he's a great player.

The point is that the names don't matter. The Avs depth likely outperformed their abilities this year, but they still performed that well. If goals are going in while you're on the ice, and staying out of the other end, you're going to get points and have a high GF%. The Avs did that regardless of Makar being on the ice this year, so it's not surprising that he has good numbers across the board.

Meanwhile, Horvat wasn't that good 5v5 this year, and as mentioned, the Canucks bottom 6 is terrible. I don't think Makar is a lucky player, but I do think Hughes has been an unlucky player away from Pettersson. He regularly creates plays where no one there to finish, and I doubt Makar would have much more success.

 

[Regal]

It seems as though you’re attempting to conclude that Hughes is significantly better than Makar. Is that the case?

This take that the Avalanche have an enormous amount of forward talent compared to the Canucks is silly. Vancouver only had 9 less goals than Colorado this season.

The numbers being discussed were 5v5 though. At 5v5, the Avs had 20 more goals than the Canucks and a 58.5 GF% compared to a 49.5 GF%. And even without either MacKinnon or Makar had a 55 GF%. The Avs were an elite team 5v5 this year regardless of who was on the ice for the most part. That doesn't mean Hughes is better by any means, but it does likely explain a lot of the gap in numbers away from their star centers and in terms of 5v5 P/60 scoring. I think Makar's ability to finish when he pinches in will always make him a little more dangerous 5v5, but Hughes creates a ton of opportunities for his forwards that don't get converted.

 

[majormajor]

Meanwhile, Horvat wasn't that good 5v5 this year, and as mentioned, the Canucks bottom 6 is terrible. I don't think Makar is a lucky player, but I do think Hughes has been an unlucky player away from Pettersson. He regularly creates plays where no one there to finish, and I doubt Makar would have much more success.

Makar isn't a pure possession/playmaker type, he has outstanding scoring ability from the backend. He scores with everyone, those P/60 stats are his scoring.

 

[Regal]

Makar isn't a pure possession/playmaker type, he has outstanding scoring ability from the backend. He scores with everyone, those P/60 stats are his scoring.

He scores with everyone both because he's good and because they can also score without him. It's ridiculous to ignore the Avs ability to score without him and how that's going to affect his points. Makar isn't putting up nunbers with Brandon Sutter and Loui Eriksson on the ice either