GDT: 2019 Prospects Challenge Weekend

[Hockey Man]

Honest question, have you ever played open hockey or some meaningless scrimmage where the play is essentially chaos, and you never really know where the puck is going from one moment to the next? It's much harder than you think it is to go hard on every shift and play effectively when that is going on

yes i played hockey for close to 14 years, in that time i definitely had meaningless games.

this is a prime example if the bias fans are showing. you are saying that these games mean nothing because you are starting with the conclusion that jack hughes WILL be on the nhl roster. you are fitting these events into a pre determined conclusion. i am not assuming that jack hughes will make the nhl team. i am evaluating his play game by game. these prospect tournaments are nothing but games for evaluation purposes.

ty smith is an example of a player who i am not worried about in regards to his performance in the prospect tourney as he has proven what he is capable of last year in main camp and preseason. jack hughes has not proven close to what smith has.

i never said jack hughes wasnt a better prospect than other prospects, i said he is a prospect just like every other player in that tournament. i said that he has proved absolutely nothing at the NHL level which is not debatable in any way whatsoever. this necessarily places him with other prospects who have not played in the NHL. i do not believe that just because jack hughes is viewed as a superior prospect that he should have relaxed expectations, if anything we should expect more from a prospect of his caliber.

not to name other players, but it would seem as though someone on the rangers had no issue lighting up the scoresheet in his first game back from illness. the expectations on that player are not being eased, nor should they be. these players are both elite prospects and should be treated as such. im not interested in creating an unjust hierarchy when 99% of the players in that tournament have proven nothing in the nhl. im not giving them preferential treatment over one another when it comes to evaluation. jack hughes was bad, and thats okay because he has multiple opportunities to redeem himself.

you do not evaluate a player as though they have already made the team. you evaluate them to decide whether or not they should be on the team.

 

[Edmonton East]

Some people on this board seriously need to get over their insecurity regarding Hughes. The guy could literally shoot the puck into his own net and some of you would attack/mock/be condescending towards a poster for pointing it out.

It's childish.

You all understand he's a kid and his game isn't perfect, right? It's okay to critique him. No one in here is saying "OMG BUST", so stop acting like it.

 

[Blackjack]

yes i played hockey for close to 14 years, in that time i definitely had meaningless games.

this is a prime example if the bias fans are showing. you are saying that these games mean nothing because you are starting with the conclusion that jack hughes WILL be on the nhl roster. you are fitting these events into a pre determined conclusion. i am not assuming that jack hughes will make the nhl team. i am evaluating his play game by game. these prospect tournaments are nothing but games for evaluation purposes.

You kind of ignored the point of my question, which was not so much about the meaninglessness of the game (although I did say that), but more about the chaotic nature of the game, which is why I specifically said open hockey. You're evaluating Jack's performance in this game as if it should be representative of how he'll perform in the preseason, or in the regular season. I'm saying it's not because it was very obvious to me that the games lacked any kind of flow or organization.

i never said jack hughes wasnt a better prospect than other prospects, i said he is a prospect just like every other player in that tournament. i said that he has proved absolutely nothing at the NHL level which is not debatable in any way whatsoever. this necessarily places him with other prospects who have not played in the NHL. i do not believe that just because jack hughes is viewed as a superior prospect that he should have relaxed expectations, if anything we should expect more from a prospect of his caliber.

And that's fine. If you want to look at this prospect tournament as an indication of the quality of our prospects outside of Hughes, you can throw Pronman's rankings in the garbage and put us at #31 in the league because they looked absolutely awful out there.

not to name other players, but it would seem as though someone on the rangers had no issue lighting up the scoresheet in his first game back from illness. the expectations on that player are not being eased, nor should they be. these players are both elite prospects and should be treated as such. im not interested in creating an unjust hierarchy when 99% of the players in that tournament have proven nothing in the nhl. im not giving them preferential treatment over one another when it comes to evaluation. jack hughes was bad, and thats okay because he has multiple opportunities to redeem himself.

I really don't give a f*** what Kakko did in his prospect tournament. As far as 99% of the players having proven nothing in the NHL, we had Joey Anderson, Colton White, Mike McLeod, and Nathan Bastian with NHL games under their belt, and Ty Smith played NHL preseason last year. And they all looked worse in this tournament than they did in the NHL, I think that pretty much says it all.

 

[Hockey Man]

You kind of ignored the point of my question, which was not so much about the meaninglessness of the game (although I did say that), but more about the chaotic nature of the game, which is why I specifically said open hockey. You're evaluating Jack's performance in this game as if it should be representative of how he'll perform in the preseason, or in the regular season. I'm saying it's not because it was very obvious to me that the games lacked any kind of flow or organization.



And that's fine. If you want to look at this prospect tournament as an indication of the quality of our prospects outside of Hughes, you can throw Pronman's rankings in the garbage and put us at #31 in the league because they looked absolutely awful out there.



I really don't give a **** what Kakko did in his prospect tournament. As far as 99% of the players having proven nothing in the NHL, we had Joey Anderson, Colton White, Mike McLeod, and Nathan Bastian with NHL games under their belt, and Ty Smith played NHL preseason last year. And they all looked worse in this tournament than they did in the NHL, I think that pretty much says it all.

i never said this was a definitive indication of how jack hughes would perform in the regular season or preseason. i said IF this is an indication, it will not be pretty.

and no our prospect pool is not the worst in the league but they certainly played like one of the worst.

and yea i agree the games were chaotic. that has no bearing on the fact the games were for evaluation. whether or not they were chaotic does not cover up poor play by elite prospects. they are expected to do better than average prospects. when jack hughes was on the ice he was contributing to the chaos by repeatedly turning the puck over, flopping passes, losing the puck, blowing defensive coverage, and trying to do too much individually, not creating a better flow. this is something that jack hughes needs to work on: understanding when to simplify his game and make sure there is a cohesion between the players on the ice instead of being a one man army.

 

[Spoiled Bratt]

Here's something that's "realistically honest" :

Wait until after the Regular season starts (and Hughes plays several games) before passing Judgement on whether Hughes is ready to play in the NHL or not.

Snap judgements cannot be made when Jack hasn't played alongside the likes of Nico, Hall, Bratt, and the others as of yet.

Besides, this Prospect challenge was more of an evaluation toward the OTHER players *not* named Hughes, imo. #LetsNotKidOurselves

Hughes will be in the starting lineup come opening night.

What line he would be on is up to Hynes but he will be starting.

Hughes will be playing in the NHL, that's not even up for debate, so I have no idea why you're bringing it up.

The prospect challenge was to evaluate everyone but Hughes? If so, why even bring him there? If he was supposed to be head and shoulders above everyone else, he didn't show it in those 2 games. True, it's just 2 games and you can't tell much from 120 minutes of hockey but let's not act like he was dominant, because he wasn't.

If I'm going to wait to see how good Hughes is only when paired with guys like Hall, Hischier, Bratt, Palmieri, etc... then we don't have the same assessment of a game breaking player. He should be making other rookies look good and that's something Boqvist did more so then Hughes IMO. I know Hughes is a special talent but your arguments are weak because when you're labeled as a special talent, you're the go-to-guy on your team. You're not waiting for others to do your job.

Btw, what's up with you using these dumb memes or whatever they're called when trying to make a point? Is it because you think it's funny?

 

[Hockey Man]

Hughes will be playing in the NHL, that's not even up for debate, so I have no idea why you're bringing it up.

The prospect challenge was to evaluate everyone but Hughes? If so, why even bring him there? If he was supposed to be head and shoulders above everyone else, he didn't show it in those 2 games. True, it's just 2 games and you can't tell much from 120 minutes of hockey but let's not act like he was dominant, because he wasn't.

If I'm going to wait to see how good Hughes is only when paired with guys like Hall, Hischier, Bratt, Palmieri, etc... then we don't have the same assessment of a game breaking player. He should be making other rookies look good and that's something Boqvist did more so then Hughes IMO. I know Hughes is a special talent but your arguments are weak because when you're labeled as a special talent, you're the go-to-guy on your team. You're not waiting for others to do your job.

Btw, what's up with you using these dumb memes or whatever they're called when trying to make a point? Is it because you think it's funny?

thank you for making cohesive replies and being consistent.

 

[Triumph]

Some people on this board seriously need to get over their insecurity regarding Hughes. The guy could literally shoot the puck into his own net and some of you would attack/mock/be condescending towards a poster for pointing it out.

It's childish.

You all understand he's a kid and his game isn't perfect, right? It's okay to critique him. No one in here is saying "OMG BUST", so stop acting like it.

Somebody - someone who is still arguing the general point - said he should be playing college hockey this year. That is a ridiculous claim. Hughes would dominate college hockey.

 

[Hockey Man]

Somebody - someone who is still arguing the general point - said he should be playing college hockey this year. That is a ridiculous claim. Hughes would dominate college hockey.

i absolutely did suggest that. i also stated that he would be able to put up points without fail in college hockey. the reason i said that was so that he could play against more physically developed players and play a more structured game. you should put more effort into your replies if you are trying to discredit someone.

 

[Triumph]

i absolutely did suggest that. i also stated that he would be able to put up points without fail in college hockey. the reason i said that was so that he could play against more physically developed players and play a more structured game. you should put more effort into your replies if you are trying to discredit someone.

Yes, and it's ludicrous. Eichel put up 71 points as an 18 year old and won the Hobey Baker going away. What did he learn in college, exactly? He could've played in the NHL, but he wasn't eligible to. Hughes is eligible to play in the NHL and is good enough so he should. He shouldn't be beating up on inferior competition anymore.

 

[captainscott]

Some people on this board seriously need to get over their insecurity regarding Hughes. The guy could literally shoot the puck into his own net and some of you would attack/mock/be condescending towards a poster for pointing it out.

It's childish.

You all understand he's a kid and his game isn't perfect, right? It's okay to critique him. No one in here is saying "OMG BUST", so stop acting like it.

he wasn't bad.. in the game I watched. some people just don't know the game as well as they think

 

[Hockey Man]

Yes, and it's ludicrous. Eichel put up 71 points as an 18 year old and won the Hobey Baker going away. What did he learn in college, exactly? He could've played in the NHL, but he wasn't eligible to. Hughes is eligible to play in the NHL and is good enough so he should. He shouldn't be beating up on inferior competition anymore.

jack eichel has also been a physically developed player prior to entering the NHL, and he also played a more mature style game than jack hughes does at the same age. i already gave my reasons for it. if jack hughes were to play college hockey i would fully expect him to post almost 2ppg if not more. the point of him playing college would be to play a more structured game and become more physically developed while also putting up points to maintain his confidence as a player. jack hughes needs to be putting up points to be a confident player. we saw it in his draft season, he got off to a rough start and looked kind of eh, he then starting picking it up thanks to a few huge games and he looked better ever since. jack hughes plays a junior style hockey game and is very underdeveloped physically. that is not a good combination for a player who is coming into a team that is allegedly supposed to compete for a playoff spot. he is inept defensively and gets knocked off the puck way way way too much for my liking. im not sure why i have to prove this, if you watch the games you will see it before your very eyes.

 

[Hockey Man]

he wasn't bad.. in the game I watched. some people just don't know the game as well as they think

if you are watching through rose colored lenses i suppose you could walk away looking at it like this. he was patently bad and so was the entire team. when you get destroyed by buffalo (average prospects), beat by pittsburgh (not a good prospect pool), and lose to boston (meh), the team played bad. there is no way to come out of this tournament and not be disappointed unless you are convincing yourself that these games dont matter at all to anybody. i disagree that these games dont matter and take issue with the idea that jack hughes believes he is better than this tournament therefore he didnt try. absurd.

 

[Triumph]

jack eichel has also been a physically developed player prior to entering the NHL, and he also played a more mature style game than jack hughes does at the same age. i already gave my reasons for it. if jack hughes were to play college hockey i would fully expect him to post almost 2ppg if not more. the point of him playing college would be to play a more structured game and become more physically developed while also putting up points to maintain his confidence as a player. jack hughes needs to be putting up points to be a confident player. we saw it in his draft season, he got off to a rough start and looked kind of eh, he then starting picking it up thanks to a few huge games and he looked better ever since. jack hughes plays a junior style hockey game and is very underdeveloped physically. that is not a good combination for a player who is coming into a team that is allegedly supposed to compete for a playoff spot. he is inept defensively and gets knocked off the puck way way way too much. im not sure why i have to prove this, if you watch the games you will see it before your very eyes.

Why would Jack Hughes be playing a more structured game in college when he can dominate college hockey without playing in a structure? What's the coach going to do, bench the best player in the league who can leave for the NHL at any time for not backchecking?

The thing about exceptional players is that they generally learn faster than other players. Hughes will struggle at times in the NHL for sure. But he belongs there. He is definitely good enough to play there.

 

[Hockey Man]

Why would Jack Hughes be playing a more structured game in college when he can dominate college hockey without playing in a structure? What's the coach going to do, bench the best player in the league who can leave for the NHL at any time for not backchecking?

The thing about exceptional players is that they generally learn faster than other players. Hughes will struggle at times in the NHL for sure. But he belongs there. He is definitely good enough to play there.

[mod]

he would absolutely be benched if he played college hockey the way that he played these prospect games. and he would have to play a more structured game because he is playing higher level hockey. the players are better, faster, stronger, more skilled, generally better at everything than a junior league. if you guys dont care about defensive play or responsibilities why dont you just want him at wing? he would be a perfectly fine winger and would be more prepared to play wing in the NHL than center.

 

[Spoiled Bratt]

he wasn't bad.. in the game I watched. some people just don't know the game as well as they think

If you think he wasn’t bad, you got that right... some people just don’t know the game as well as they think.

 

[Blackjack]

if you are watching through rose colored lenses i suppose you could walk away looking at it like this. he was patently bad and so was the entire team. when you get destroyed by buffalo (average prospects), beat by pittsburgh (not a good prospect pool), and lose to boston (meh), the team played bad. there is no way to come out of this tournament and not be disappointed unless you are convincing yourself that these games dont matter at all to anybody. i disagree that these games dont matter and take issue with the idea that jack hughes believes he is better than this tournament therefore he didnt try. absurd.

Man, I have a feeling this thread will be getting bumped someday.

 

[Blackjack]

[mod]

he would absolutely be benched if he played college hockey the way that he played these prospect games. and he would have to play a more structured game because he is playing higher level hockey. the players are better, faster, stronger, more skilled, generally better at everything than a junior league. if you guys dont care about defensive play or responsibilities why dont you just want him at wing? he would be a perfectly fine winger and would be more prepared to play wing in the NHL than center.

If only Jack Hughes had already played against NCAA opponents so we could see what that would look like.

 

[My3Sons]

For those concerned with Hughes lack of structure and physical development - all of which could be legit issues - I think the difference between Jack and your ordinary first overall is that he isn’t going to be asked to do more than he is capable of. He’s walking into a much better environment than most first overall picks. He will play on the PP where his deficiencies will be minimized and presumably he will be shelterd as much as they can. If the team makes the playoffs it is probably because Hall rebounds Nico improves Subban is healthy MBW/Cory play at least a little above league average and at least one of Gusev or Bratt have a good season. Jack will be a weak link in all this but he can be. If the team fails to make the playoffs it’s probably not because he is small and defensively meh even though he is relatively small and almost certainly well under par as an NHL defensive center.

 

[Hockey Man]

Man, I have a feeling this thread will be getting bumped someday.

so have you read my other posts regarding jack hughes? i have said numerous times that he could live up to expectations or even exceed them come main camp. you guys either dont know how to read or youre trying to gaslight people who make vaild criticisms of a players game.

im inclined to go with the first one because the responses to fair and developed posts have been below average to say the least.

 

[Blackjack]

so have you read my other posts regarding jack hughes? i have said numerous times that he could live up to expectations or even exceed them come main camp. you guys either dont know how to read or youre trying to gaslight people who make vaild criticisms of a players game.

im inclined to go with the first one because the responses to fair and developed posts have been below average to say the least.

I think you're being as unfairly critical of us as you are of Mr. Hughes.

 

[Hockey Man]

For those concerned with Hughes lack of structure and physical development - all of which could be legit issues - I think the difference between Jack and your ordinary first overall is that he isn’t going to be asked to do more than he is capable of. He’s walking into a much better environment than most first overall picks. He will play on the PP where his deficiencies will be minimized and presumably he will be shelterd as much as they can. If the team makes the playoffs it is probably because Hall rebounds Nico improves Subban is healthy MBW/Cory play at least a little above league average and at least one of Gusev or Bratt have a good season. Jack will be a weak link in all this but he can be. If the team fails to make the playoffs it’s probably not because he is small and defensively meh even though he is relatively small and almost certainly well under par as an NHL defensive center.

centers are necessarily the most defensive forwards on the ice by nature of their position. the fantasy idea that his mistakes and shortcomings wont be exploited time and time and time again by seasoned pros and highly skilled players is ridiculous. you can shelter him as much as you want but hes going to have to play defense.

disclaimer because people dont seem interested in actual discussion or good faith disagreement: jack hughes could live up to expectations or exceed them come preseason or main camp.

 

[Hockey Man]

I think you're being as unfairly critical of us as you are of Mr. Hughes.

i think you should stop responding because you arent helping the reputation of other people in the thread.

 

[Blackjack]

i think you should stop responding because you arent helping the reputation of other people in the thread.

@My3Sons @Triumph Sorry guys.

 

[OmNomNom]

put it this way

if he doesn't look like he fits with the team in training camp, then ray will (probably) not have him play. but scouts all think he should be good to go (though they generally agree this year could be a feeling out kind of year).

it's not bad to want jack to get experience playing against older men in the NCAA, since it's a logical transition to the pro game, but its generally believed to not be necessary. we'll see though

 

[My3Sons]

centers are necessarily the most defensive forwards on the ice by nature of their position. the fantasy idea that his mistakes and shortcomings wont be exploited time and time and time again by seasoned pros and highly skilled players is ridiculous. you can shelter him as much as you want but hes going to have to play defense.

disclaimer because people dont seem interested in actual discussion or good faith disagreement: jack hughes could live up to expectations or exceed them come preseason or main camp.

You are probably right but I don’t see NHL bottom six types exploiting him as opposed to trying to bully him and keep him off the scoresheet. He can play some wing and obviously he shouldn’t be taking any big face offs or defensive zone starts. I’m presuming Hynes will watch his usage and matchups closely. If not then yes a tire fire will ensue at times. Again if they make the playoffs it’s probably because the vets and MBW carry the water. They don’t have to play HUGHES in important moments except maybe PP or empty net offensive situations.