GDT: 2019 IIHF World Championship III (OP Warning)

[MadDevil]

My issue is you seem to be taking the same attitude on Kakko that you accuse people of taking on Hughes. I don't think either player is "head and shoulders" above the other at this point. I would say both have impressive bodies of work as a whole. Has Kakko been more impressive in this particular tournament? Without a doubt. But isn't Hughes coming off a similarly impressive U18s? Or does that not count because it wasn't against men?

 

[Devils731]

Would you call this "generally getting it right"? Out of 25 players 11 of the top producers are from outside of the top 10 selections. Seems shaky at best to me?

Why is “scouts getting it right” just talking about top 5 point getters? Why not, does the first round outscore the fifth? Does the first round outscore every other round every time? If the answer is yes, then scouts do a generally good job of figuring out who the best players are.

For your original idea that scout group think causes frequent failures then we should see 5th round picks as good as 1st round picks commonly. We don’t, we see exceptions.

What we see is that the earlier you’re drafted the more likely you are to be good. Why are players drafted early? Because scouts liked that player.

It’s such an obvious point that players drafted earlier tend to be better than those drafted later you don’t even need any lists. Look at any draft year, the players with NHL numbers come early in draft and the players late in drafts hade less.

In your world of “scouts aren’t perfect so we can safely ignore them when we don’t agree”, the Devils should trade their 1st and 2nd round picks for like ten 5, 6, and 7 round picks so that they can get all those failure by scouts if they happen so frequently.

 

[NJDevs26]

To me the only way you can rate Kakko head and shoulders above Hughes is if you're solely taking the group stage of this tournament into account. Because before it they were close at best.

 

[JimEIV]

My issue is you seem to be taking the same attitude on Kakko that you accuse people of taking on Hughes. I don't think either player is "head and shoulders" above the other at this point. I would say both have impressive bodies of work as a whole. Has Kakko been more impressive in this particular tournament? Without a doubt. But isn't Hughes coming off a similarly impressive U18s? Or does that not count because it wasn't against men?

You won't like my opinion...but I don't think his 2nd U18 was all that impressive. He had 2 points more than than his next closest teammate at the U18....it was a stacked team - "head and shoulders" better than any team in the tournament and they took home bronze...

Now consider this for a moment...

He had 2 more points than his next closest teammate at his 2nd U18,
he had 2 more points than his next closest teammate this year in the NTDP (in 14 fewer games which is significant) and he had 2 more points than his next closest teammate at the U17 tournament 2 years ago....all the same person with 2 fewer points Cole Caufield...

Now maybe you want to make the claim that Jack made it possible for Cole to essentially have the same exact numbers as he did over the portion of multiple years and that is a reasonable argument...I don't think I would even disagree all that much...but his "body of work" has a peer that has similar numbers over the course of this year and parts of others...

If the "body of work" is the driving factor here and Jack has a peer with with a similar "body of work" over the course of this year, how ground breaking is that "body of work"? Should Cole be the number 2 pick? What factor did the guy with almost exact point totals have on Jack's totals? They seem to be very connected.

Cole's success doesn't take away from Jack at all.... but there seems to definitely be a synergy there...there seems to be a larger team factor in Hughes numbers than Kakko's. And I think we are seeing that in this tournament also.

 

[devilsblood]

In your world of “scouts aren’t perfect so we can safely ignore them when we don’t agree”, the Devils should trade their 1st and 2nd round picks for like ten 5, 6, and 7 round picks so that they can get all those failure by scouts if they happen so frequently.

Well the pro Hughes crowd has used the "there is a scout consensus" argument in favor of Hughes. But if there are exceptions then that argument is not lock tight, so it should not be ridiculed to want to go against that consensus.

And Jim's argument stems from preferring Kakko, the guy scouts, as a consensus, have ranked #2 in the draft. That argument has ballooned a bit, but we all know he is not advocating trading our first rounders for large bundles of late rounders. Jim actually is in line with scouts to a large degree.

Now I'm still in the Hughes camp, center over winger is still the clear delineation mark for me. But having watched these guys against similar competition in this tourney, I can certainly see an argument for Kakko. Especially if we are talking right now.

 

[Scooooooooooooot]

You won't like my opinion...but I don't think his 2nd U18 was all that impressive. He had 2 points more than than his next closest teammate at the U18....it was a stacked team - "head and shoulders" better than any team in the tournament and they took home bronze...

Now consider this for a moment...

He had 2 more points than his next closest teammate at his 2nd U18,
he had 2 more points than his next closest teammate this year in the NTDP (in 14 fewer games which is significant) and he had 2 more points than his next closest teammate at the U17 tournament 2 years ago....all the same person with 2 fewer points Cole Caufield...

Now maybe you want to make the claim that Jack made it possible for Cole to essentially have the same exact numbers as he did over the portion of multiple years and that is a reasonable argument...I don't think I would even disagree all that much...but his "body of work" has a peer that has similar numbers over the course of this year and parts of others...

If the "body of work" is the driving factor here and Jack has a peer with with a similar "body of work" over the course of this year, how ground breaking is that "body of work"? Should Cole be the number 2 pick? What factor did the guy with almost exact point totals have on Jack's totals? They seem to be very connected.

Cole's success doesn't take away from Jack at all.... but there seems to definitely be a synergy there...there seems to be a larger team factor in Hughes numbers than Kakko's. And I think we are seeing that in this tournament also.

Usually playmakers depend on their teammates yes. Also mentioning total points instead of PPG seems like a way to portray numbers in a way that supports your argument. Caufield could go anywhere from 5-10 in this draft and if he had hughes height and dynamic skating ability then he would be in the conversation for #2. Hughes set records and so did Cole because of their chemistry and skill sets they both have. If you have a play driving center like Hughes and a top quality goal scorer in Caufield, that's going to lead to both players getting great numbers. I feel like at this point you are talking in cricles and constantly changing the conversation to something else to try and prove your point. You like Kakko more than Hughes because he is physically mature and is a player than plays into contact and Hughes will need to time to adjust to the contact due to his smaller frame. That's completely fair, but the way you go over the top about the games in this tournament and speak in absolutes when we realistically have no way of knowing which player will have a better rookie year or transition, is annoying. Keep pounding Kakko's chest because he's your guy, but don't act like we have all the answers based on this tournament when it is not 1 to 1 going to translate to the NHL in October.

 

[Mike27Devils]

Usually playmakers depend on their teammates yes. Also mentioning total points instead of PPG seems like a way to portray numbers in a way that supports your argument. Caufield could go anywhere from 5-10 in this draft and if he had hughes height and dynamic skating ability then he would be in the conversation for #2. Hughes set records and so did Cole because of their chemistry and skill sets they both have. If you have a play driving center like Hughes and a top quality goal scorer in Caufield, that's going to lead to both players getting great numbers. I feel like at this point you are talking in cricles and constantly changing the conversation to something else to try and prove your point. You like Kakko more than Hughes because he is physically mature and is a player than plays into contact and Hughes will need to time to adjust to the contact due to his smaller frame. That's completely fair, but the way you go over the top about the games in this tournament and speak in absolutes when we realistically have no way of knowing which player will have a better rookie year or transition, is annoying. Keep pounding Kakko's chest because he's your guy, but don't act like we have all the answers based on this tournament when it is not 1 to 1 going to translate to the NHL in October.

It’s not just going to take time to adjust for his smaller frame. He’s likely going to have to really tweak and adapt his game to be successful in the NHL He plays a very immature game at this time. Even in the U18s he tried to force way too many passes and turned over the puck way to often always trying to make high risk plays with sometimes little reward. He’s smart and he will learn it will just take sometime. Kakko on the other hand, regardless of his frame, plays a more mature game that’s going to translate more seamlessly to the NHL. I would even say his hockey IQ is higher than hughes. So to reiterate, it’s not just their frames that will dictate how successful they will be in the NHL, but also the way they see and play the game. It’s not as simple as Hughes is smaller Kakko is bigger as your post seems to imply. Anyway, pretty sure Hughes is our pick, but if people have the opinion that Kakko will be the better NHLer than that’s fine, because he very well may end up being the better player. No one has a crystal ball here and Castron and crew will be doing their due dilligance to the very end. Kakko is very much in the mix.

 

[Scooooooooooooot]

It’s not just going to take time to adjust for his smaller frame. He’s likely going to have to really tweak and adapt his game to be successful in the NHL He plays a very immature game at this time. Even in the U18s he tried to force way too many passes and turned over the puck way to often always trying to make high risk plays with sometimes little reward. He’s smart and he will learn it will just take sometime. Kakko on the other hand, regardless of his frame, plays a more mature game that’s going to translate more seamlessly to the NHL. I would even say his hockey IQ is higher than hughes. So to reiterate, it’s not just their frames that will dictate how successful they will be in the NHL, but also the way they see and play the game. It’s not as simple as Hughes is smaller Kakko is bigger as your post seems to imply. Anyway, pretty sure Hughes is our pick, but if people have the opinion that Kakko will be the better NHLer than that’s fine, because he very well may end up being the better player. No one has a crystal ball here and Castron and crew will be doing their due dilligance to the very end. Kakko is very much in the mix.

Even your first part of this isnt a fact, Hughes is very smart and I dont disagree he will have to adjust his game and see what works at a high level compared to what worked at a lower one. But Hughes has a very high hockey IQ, taking risks doesnt mean he has a low IQ. Kakko also will have to adjust to being on the smaller ice, so its not like hes going to have to make no adjustments. Every player being drafted and entering the NHL has to make adjustments. I just dont think we know yet how both player will make that leap, Kakko absolutely has an advantage in terms of his body and he wont need to deal with getting hit by bigger guys. But Hughes has such elite skating and skill that he may be able to adjust quickly. If you think Kakko is going to be better, then that's fine, I just dont think anyone should be speaking on absolutes based on this tournament.

 

[devilsblood]

You won't like my opinion...but I don't think his 2nd U18 was all that impressive. He had 2 points more than than his next closest teammate at the U18....it was a stacked team - "head and shoulders" better than any team in the tournament and they took home bronze...

Now consider this for a moment...

He had 2 more points than his next closest teammate at his 2nd U18,

Now maybe you want to make the claim that Jack made it possible for Cole to essentially have the same exact numbers as he did over the portion of multiple years and that is a reasonable argument...I don't think I would even disagree all that much...but his "body of work" has a peer that has similar numbers over the course of this year and parts of others...

If the "body of work" is the driving factor here and Jack has a peer with with a similar "body of work" over the course of this year, how ground breaking is that "body of work"? Should Cole be the number 2 pick? What factor did the guy with almost exact point totals have on Jack's totals? They seem to be very connected.

Cole's success doesn't take away from Jack at all.... but there seems to definitely be a synergy there...there seems to be a larger team factor in Hughes numbers than Kakko's. And I think we are seeing that in this tournament also.

A)I don't care how stacked team USA was, and they were definitely stacked, Hughes U-18's were ultra impressive.

B)This statement "he had 2 more points than his next closest teammate this year in the NTDP (in 14 fewer games which is significant)" appears incorrect. I'm seeing 12 more points in 14 less games. U.S. National U18 Team at eliteprospects.com

C)Go back a year and you will see Hughes with fantastic #'s that far exceed Caufield.

So Hughes has better #'s every step of the way. He's a better skater, he's a center, and unlike in the Kakko debate, Hughes actually has a physical edge over Caufield. Caufield himself looks like a high end prospect, but Hughes has a clear lead here. I think you went too far out on the limb on this one.

 

[Call Me Al]

we're still doing this eh?

 

[GameSeven]

we're still doing this eh?

 

[Mike27Devils]

Even your first part of this isnt a fact, Hughes is very smart and I dont disagree he will have to adjust his game and see what works at a high level compared to what worked at a lower one. But Hughes has a very high hockey IQ, taking risks doesnt mean he has a low IQ. Kakko also will have to adjust to being on the smaller ice, so its not like hes going to have to make no adjustments. Every player being drafted and entering the NHL has to make adjustments. I just dont think we know yet how both player will make that leap, Kakko absolutely has an advantage in terms of his body and he wont need to deal with getting hit by bigger guys. But Hughes has such elite skating and skill that he may be able to adjust quickly. If you think Kakko is going to be better, then that's fine, I just dont think anyone should be speaking on absolutes based on this tournament.

I never said he had a low IQ and I said he was smart he will figure it out, but I do think Kakkos hockey IQ is better. This tournament, like others, is just another set of information for scouts to track and add to their overall evaluation of the player. The thing is like I’ve said before, many scouts have had Kakko and Hughes close, and for some scouts this tournament may make them lean Kakko.

 

[devilsblood]

I never said he had a low IQ and I said he was smart he will figure it out, but I do think Kakkos hockey IQ is better. This tournament, like others, is just another set of information for scouts to track and add to their overall evaluation of the player. The thing is like I’ve said before, many scouts have had Kakko and Hughes close, and for some scouts this tournament may make them lean Kakko.

This is another time I wonder about what we mean by hockey IQ. I think Kakko plays a safer game, while Hughes is more often trying to be creative.

Kind of like an accountant vs an artist.

I'm willing to give Kakko more polished, or as above, a more mature game, but I'm not sure a Higher IQ is correct.

 

[devilsblood]

we're still doing this eh?

You know darn well this is going to go on for a decade at least.

 

[JimEIV]

Usually playmakers depend on their teammates yes. Also mentioning total points instead of PPG seems like a way to portray numbers in a way that supports your argument. Caufield could go anywhere from 5-10 in this draft and if he had hughes height and dynamic skating ability then he would be in the conversation for #2. Hughes set records and so did Cole because of their chemistry and skill sets they both have. If you have a play driving center like Hughes and a top quality goal scorer in Caufield, that's going to lead to both players getting great numbers. I feel like at this point you are talking in cricles and constantly changing the conversation to something else to try and prove your point. You like Kakko more than Hughes because he is physically mature and is a player than plays into contact and Hughes will need to time to adjust to the contact due to his smaller frame. That's completely fair, but the way you go over the top about the games in this tournament and speak in absolutes when we realistically have no way of knowing which player will have a better rookie year or transition, is annoying. Keep pounding Kakko's chest because he's your guy, but don't act like we have all the answers based on this tournament when it is not 1 to 1 going to translate to the NHL in October.

Just for clarification...I have not made up my mind who I prefer at the moment.. I take exception with idea that Hughes is the clear #1 and firmly believe that that Kakko is well ahead of Hughes right now....

but I certainly don't dismiss that there is a lot more develop time and Hughes will get stronger and his game will refine...I don't dismiss that fact that Hughes is a play generator and that he can make things happen but I do question how much of what he does will translate to the next level...

I also take a bit of exception with idea that Kakko"s ceiling is more limited than Jack"s...If you are going by some sort of standard that a center is better than winger or a play driver is more valuable than a goal scorer I generally agree with overall axiom but I think Kakko is doing more to show his game can provide achievable results at the next level in my opinion...

Now if you say I haven't really said anything and that I haven't made any real statement of certainty...I would say I completely disagree...I am telling you why very specifically that I don't think that #1 spot is as clear cut as some are making it out to be...that was really the entire point of these discussions, "consensus", "group think", "scouting", wrong assessments...all was in response to the nonsensical appeal to authority arguements that I have a great distain for in general. If your only argument is to point to authority you don't really have an argument or an opinion.

 

[Tretyak 20]

You won't like my opinion...but I don't think his 2nd U18 was all that impressive. He had 2 points more than than his next closest teammate at the U18....it was a stacked team - "head and shoulders" better than any team in the tournament and they took home bronze...

Now consider this for a moment...

He had 2 more points than his next closest teammate at his 2nd U18,
he had 2 more points than his next closest teammate this year in the NTDP (in 14 fewer games which is significant) and he had 2 more points than his next closest teammate at the U17 tournament 2 years ago....all the same person with 2 fewer points Cole Caufield...

Now maybe you want to make the claim that Jack made it possible for Cole to essentially have the same exact numbers as he did over the portion of multiple years and that is a reasonable argument...I don't think I would even disagree all that much...but his "body of work" has a peer that has similar numbers over the course of this year and parts of others...

If the "body of work" is the driving factor here and Jack has a peer with with a similar "body of work" over the course of this year, how ground breaking is that "body of work"? Should Cole be the number 2 pick? What factor did the guy with almost exact point totals have on Jack's totals? They seem to be very connected.

Cole's success doesn't take away from Jack at all.... but there seems to definitely be a synergy there...there seems to be a larger team factor in Hughes numbers than Kakko's. And I think we are seeing that in this tournament also.

For me, the eye test tells me that they are both exceptionally talented players, but Hughes is that rare player who makes those around him better. That's what puts him on a higher level, and that's what you're observation backs up.

 

[OmNomNom]

we're still doing this eh?

i feel like people type paragraphs, but they end up just getting skimmed

it feels like a philosophy class

 

[BenedictGomez]

A convenient cut-off date:

All this exercise proves is that they get the 1 and 2 picks correct most of the time. The general lack of No. 3 picks is funny. We will be fine either way.

He starts his "analysis" with 2008, a year when Four out of the top Five draft picks were defensemen, then uses that to bash scouting because they're not leading their draft year in points. Derp.

 

[devilsblood]

He starts his "analysis" with 2008, a year when Four out of the top Five draft picks were defensemen, then uses that to bash scouting because they're not leading their draft year in points. Derp.

Yeah, but Zach Bogosian? Luke Schenn? Those are a couple "Derp's" as well.

 

[Bleedred]

I'm already tired of the Hughes/Kakko war.

Can we talk about goaltending or something?

 

[mtnet]

At this point I'm thinking back on all the harsh goaltending skirmishes as the "good ol' days"

Main board Prospects threads for Hughes have been an unmitigated disaster since we won #1

 

[BenedictGomez]

Yeah, but Zach Bogosian? Luke Schenn? Those are a couple "Derp's" as well.

You need to keep in mind, it was a totally different time.

Those 2 would 100% both still be first rounders today, but probably #15 to #31.

The perceived value of a 6+ foot, 225 pound defenseman has simply plummeted.

 

[Missionhockey]

I agree his skating is awesome. But I don't think he created much...That maybe expectations...But I did expect to see him contribute more to the score sheet. Is that unreasonable expectations?

Maybe I expected a little more in terms of production but to expect him to light it up would be unreasonable IMO. Again, this is a team full of NHLers, probably the deepest team in the tournament talent wise (even though they pissed it away). Jack has never played a pro game before and up until recently he’s never had a “pro” life, I mean the freaking kid is still in high school! I didn’t expect him to get time over JvR, Larkin, Kane, etc. That’s unreasonable even from a coaching perspective.

I think in terms of development Kakko may be ahead in regards to a pro lifestyle, but Hughes is definitely going to reach that stage and more than likely take a big step in development.

 

[SteveCangialosi123]

Jack Hughes will be the best prospect we’ve ever had. Better scrutinize him to death and fearmonger about how scouts are wrong sometimes.

 

[JimEIV]

Yeah, but Zach Bogosian? Luke Schenn? Those are a couple "Derp's" as well.

I honestly just went back 7 years thinking that was enough time to begin to look at totals.

2012 was the starting point and I just selected the next 5 years. Yes 2008 was a bad example for what I did, but it doesn't erase the fact that best players come from from everywhere in any given draft class do it with any year...Some years goalies where taken high and that skews things too like 2003 with Fluery...But look at that draft class, one of the best in my opinion

2003 Scoring leaders --- #2 was a good pick...There is whole lotta wrong after that.
#2, #19, #45, #5, #28, #205, #17, #11, #20, #13

Actual first round went G, C, R, R, D, D, D, R, C, R - Top 10