C Jack Hughes - USNTDP (2019 Draft) Part III

Status
Not open for further replies.

rt

The Kinder, Gentler Version
May 13, 2004
97,551
46,598
A Rockwellian Pleasantville
My team drafted Jack's brother. One of the team's brightest and most likeable stars, Brock Boeser, is American. To accuse someone of having a bias against any player on the basis of their nationality is downright ignorant, and any person who downplays a player's abilities on the basis of anything other than hockey-related issues is a person without credibility. Always take the best player available, whether that player is from a hockey powerhouse or a small hockey nation.

It would not matter to me where Jack is from; if he was the best player in this draft, I would want my team to select him with the first-overall pick. However, I do not think as highly of him game as you do and have simply expressed an analysis of his game; the fact that you, @Rabid Ranger, and @AmericanDream all take offense to a perspective that is disagreeable with yours is a sign that this is personal to you.

If I thought Jack was as good as you think he is, I would endorse him for first overall. Does it make sense to unite the Hughes brothers? Yes. Do I think that this would be the smartest decision for my team with the first-overall pick? Certainly not. I think his game has far too many faults and his risks as a player make him a gamble with the top pick.

You do not respect this point of view and have tried to slander me.

If you want to address dishonesty, how about your lack of consistency in applying your values to the scouting of players?

In 2017, you stated that you valued Mittelstadt over every European player because he had greater size; you considered him to be more NHL-ready.

In 2015, you said that Eichel was a better pro prospect than McDavid on the basis of his greater size and the notion that he would take less time to adapt to the NHL -- in other words, more NHL-ready.

In 2018, you chose Svechnikov over Dahlin because you deemed him was more NHL-ready.

The Draft Analyst | 2018 NHL Draft Rankings: The Preseason 500


"Remember, a team picking first or second overall usually is in bad shape both on the ice and at the box office. Goals win games. Wins fill seats. In our opinion, the shortest path to success begins with Svechnikov."

You vouched for Svechnikov over Dahlin based on the argument that Dahlin would take more time to develop. Of course, this was a complete misreading of Dahlin's game by you, but nevertheless, you have been very consistent with your belief that the most NHL-ready player should be selected first.

However, with regards to Mittelstadt and Hischier, you betrayed your own values. Hischier was the more NHL-ready player with his two-way game; Mittelstadt was much more raw. You did not recognize Hischier's much-publicized two-way game. You also did not consider hockey IQ, as one would easily have told you that Hischier is the smarter player of the two. While Mittelstadt had size, he was less NHL-ready than Hischier.

Now, with two players whose pucks skills are similar, you prefer the player with a plethora of faults -- Hughes -- rather than the more complete, pro-ready player -- Kakko. Hughes possesses issues in the areas that you have expressed concern about before with other top prospects: size and pro-readiness.

Indeed, I have questions about your method of scouting, as contradictions exist between your evaluation of various players.

You have accused me of "cherry-picking video," but I have merely highlighted plays where certain deficiencies can be identified very obviously. I am surprised that you can not identify the problems are in those clips; if it is not bias, then maybe you just do not recognize those issues with his game.

There are several full games available for anyone to view online, and I have shared them on several occasions here. The feedback from those games is the same as that of viewers who watched him at the 2019 World Juniors.

Again, you previously have accused an entire industry of being dishonest for disagreeing with your opinion. With regards to accusing others of bias, you have zero credibility.



"Nobody is being honest about what separates McDavid from Eichel."

Your checklist identifies some of the same problems that I have highlighted in my evaluation of Hughes.

All of his strengths are skill set-related, and the majority of attributes that require improvement are decision-based. The fact that you protest my assessment despite, in your own words, defining his strengths as his skill and his weaknesses as his decision-making with the puck is the point of contention here.

I'll re-post your checklist below with your bullet points placed into four categories:

1. Blue - Skill Set
2. Red - Hockey IQ
3. Green - Physical Attributes
4. Pink - Concentration/Miscellaneous

---------------------------

Kournianos' Assessment of Hughes:

Elite/Excellent:

1. Vision
2. Creativity/playmaking

3. Edges
4. Pass accuracy
5. Hands/Touch
6. Stickhandling/puck control

7. Work ethic
8. Straight-line speed
9. Decision making under pressure
10. First-step quickness
10. Elusiveness/agility
11. Acceleration

12. Consistency
13. Teammate
14. Compete level


Average

1. Shot power
2. Shot accuracy

3. Balance
4. Release
5. Faceoffs

6. Backchecking

Needs improvement:

1. Physical play
2. Defensive positioning
3. Shot selection
4. Puck distribution

5. Strength below circles

---------------------------


Jack Hughes' strongest attributes are his puck skills and skating; his weaknesses revolve around his decision-making. I do not dispute that nor do you.

The major difference between our assessments is that you have no concerns about the issues on your own "needs improvement" list. Those attributes play a crucial role in determining a player's hockey IQ: knowing when to shoot the puck, knowing when to pass the puck, and knowing where to be defensively. A player with above-average hockey IQ relative to his peers would not lag behind his peers in these areas, thus it is illogical that he would be considered of "high IQ" and not simply of "average IQ." There are quite a few smart two-way players at his level already. If his overall game is not already up to par against junior-level competition, then it is far from acceptable by NHL standards. That makes him a project.

Instead of calling someone "anti-American," why not discuss the lack of consistency between your "high IQ" argument here and your own checklist?

Are you ever going to say which players in this draft you like more than Hughes?
 

Steve Kournianos

@thedraftanalyst
Nothing wrong with being wrong.

There isn’t one draft analyst who hasn’t been wrong.

The dumbest thing about digging up my old tweets about McDavid and Mittelstadt is that I was in disagreement with some scouts.

This year with Hughes, I am not.

Have no idea what my previous rankings — right or wrong — have to do with ranking Hughes.

Ask all the Canadian scouts and Canadian analysts why they are unanimous in ranking Hughes No. 1

OP needs to make a draft list and rank Hughes. He keeps ignoring that request.
 

ijuka

Registered User
May 14, 2016
22,454
15,106
I’d like to know if his criticism is this intense for a kid he sees as the 2nd best in the draft. I would better understand this poster if he shared which players he likes more in this draft.
Well, before he said that Hughes is #2 after Kakko but perhaps his opinion's changed.
 

Genu

Registered User
Mar 19, 2011
130
108
Finland
I honestly don't have an opinion regarding Hughes vs. Kakko, mostly because i haven't seen enough of Hughes to make a real judgement about him. I've really liked him when i've seen him though.

But these threads are rather unreadable (for me anyway, i'm sure some enjoy this). It's disappointing to see what these draft threads devolve to every time we have a finnish top prospect. (haven't read this thread aside last page, which gives me no reason to think anything is changed)

I wonder if i'm only one hoping that neither of them get picked first? :sarcasm: Podkolzin all the way! (Seen him even less)

Since this post is rather pointless and kinda off-topic, i'll ask what people think about his defensive game and how it will translate to NHL. I'm sure people have discussed this to death but i'd rather not read this thread or the previous ones.
 

kroypuck

Registered User
Mar 23, 2018
360
280
I’d like to know if his criticism is this intense for a kid he sees as the 2nd best in the draft. I would better understand this poster if he shared which players he likes more in this draft.

It's just anti-Hughes propaganda from a poster with a very clear bias against him. And it's not only on here. If you want a chuckle read his reddit posts.
 

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,140
11,172
Murica
It's just anti-Hughes propaganda from a poster with a very clear bias against him. And it's not only on here. If you want a chuckle read his reddit posts.

Well, that explains why he keeps posting the same wall of text over here as he's getting pilloried on Reddit. Lol.
 

Ivan13

Not posting anymore
May 3, 2011
26,141
7,095
Zagreb, Croatia
If you are going to dissect a player’s game you should make an objective assertion of his pros and cons, not just rabble on about the negatives. Is the kid perfect? Far from it. Do his positives far outweigh negatives? Most assuredly, he will be picked #1 and it will be a great get for any team lucky enough to get him.
 

93LEAFS

Registered User
Nov 7, 2009
33,964
21,043
Toronto
History is full of visionary people being pilloried by numbnuts. It proves nothing.
And history is also filled with people claiming to have insight they don't. How many false prophets have we seen throughout history?
 

TheGoldenJet

Registered User
Apr 2, 2008
9,485
4,594
Coquitlam, BC
In order to provide some additional weight to my observations, I have compiled examples from the 2019 U20 World Juniors into a 7-minute video. I have also included footage from the U18 USNTDP team's game against Dartmouth on October 22, 2018.



For those who are unaware of the issue at hand, there is a growing amount of evidence that the previous favorite candidate to be selected first overall in the 2019 NHL Draft, Jack Hughes, should no longer be considered the best selection with the first pick. Instead, the more favorable option should be Finnish forward Kaapo Kakko.

To the general public, there may have been a high level of mystique about these players prior to this season and an expectation, based on previous seasons, that Jack Hughes would a player of exceptional caliber. Media and casual fans alike crowned Hughes the next elite superstar, comparing him to Connor McDavid, Auston Matthews, Jack Eichel, Mitch Marner, and Patrick Kane among others. Some of the hype was not unfounded during Hughes' pre-draft seasons, as in those early years, it is far more difficult to gauge whether a player's game is suitable for the NHL -- instead, players are judged based on their own unique abilities relative to their peers. Not every player at the age of 13, 14, or 15 is as developed as others are, and so the strongest players, fastest players, and most crafty players at those ages stand out among the rest.

At the age of 15, Jack Hughes, after his final year in the GTHL, was predicted by some to be the next Connor McDavid, owing to his speed with the puck. After his 16-year-old season in the US National Development Team program, recording numbers comparable to those of Auston Matthews against other 16 and 17-year-old US development league players, Hughes was deemed the next great star.

However, as the age group increases and players as well as systems continue to develop, those who rely primarily on raw attributes can sometimes begin to reach greater parity with their peers -- such is the case, I believe, with Jack Hughes. I will elaborate, basing my case on my observations of this player over an extended number of viewings; this includes several games from his 2017-18 USNTDP season, his entire 2018 U18 World Championship performance, several matches from his 2018-19 USNTDP season so far, as well as his entire 2018 World Junior Summer Showcase and 2019 U20 World Junior Championship performances.

Jack Hughes' game can be defined with the following summary of his style of play:

He is a rush-centric playmaker who utilizes speed through the neutral zone with the puck to overwhelm the opposition. His greatest strength is his ability to carry the puck and, if unimpeded, maintain control of it at top speed. At lower levels, this allows him to exploit the opposing defenders and put them on their heels, creating space for his teammates to receive the puck upon the team's offensive zone entry, or to take the puck wide of the defenders, towards the goal crease.
This is a strength of his that often results in the superficial comparison of his game to that of Connor McDavid. The reason that this may be considered a superficial comparison stems from various deficiencies in his game that McDavid does not possess -- such deficiencies alter and limit Hughes' game. I will explain these deficiencies below.

Some of Jack Hughes' deficiencies stem, inevitably, from his body type: he stands at 5 feet, 10 inches tall and currently weighs 168 lbs.

One particular focus is the potential for Hughes not to be elusive enough to easily outweigh his strength disadvantage. Unlike Patrick Kane, the player he is sometimes compared to, Jack Hughes is not shifty or particularly agile so much as he is fast in a straight line. He has the ability to change directions sufficiently at full flight, but he does not effortlessly pivot in various directions a la Patrick Kane or, if one seeks another example, Elias Pettersson. Both Kane and Pettersson can change their direction with ease, pivoting and altering their east-west movement along the ice from a standstill and thus catching their opponent off guard. Jack Hughes' evasiveness is founded heavily on his momentum along the ice once he has built up speed from two or three strides.

The ability of smaller and lighter players a la Johnny Gaudreau, Mitch Marner, Patrick Kane, and Elias Pettersson to maneuver in tight spaces and avoid being contained in spite of their strength disadvantage is the result of effortless agility, which Hughes does not possess. Hughes' evasiveness on the ice centers around speed and the ability to cut sharply at high speeds.

One potential struggle that Hughes may face, as a result of his lack of strength and only above-average agility, rather than exceptional agility, is his inability to maintain possession of the puck while under pressure. While he had quite a lot of room at lower levels to maneuver with the puck at full speed, the amount of space for him to carry the puck decreases as his competition level increases. A high-quality example of this is whenever he faces competition above his previous comfort level of U18 opponents: against NCAA and U20 competition, most recently at the 2019 World Juniors, Jack Hughes was not effective at even strength. Rush chances were impeded by the opposing defense, who often could force pressure on him and push him off of the puck. In the offensive zone at even strength, he does not forecheck particularly well, with not enough strength along the boards to win board battles, and not enough evasiveness to knife through the opposition without being pushed off of the puck.

He was effective at maneuvering with additional space on the powerplay at the 2019 U20 World Juniors, but is limited by another factor when he has the puck: his lack of ability to shoot the puck with any great velocity or accuracy; his shot, like that of his brother Quinn, is below average for even the standard of his current level of play. His release has little power and goaltenders throughout the entire 2018-19 season have been able to stop most of Jack Hughes' shots on goal. At a level where sufficient goal scorers at the NHL level can score with abundance, Hughes has not thrived as a shooter. At the professional level, and especially at the NHL level, players are required to be exceptional shooters in order to score goals at a sufficient rate. With this lack of shooting ability, Hughes is more likely to be a pure playmaker at the NHL level than a balanced scorer.

This is where the comparison with Kane falls apart: Kane is effortless on his edges -- not the fastest straight-line player, but incredibly shifty even while knifing through center at a casual glide. Hughes is more speed-based than agility-based. Kane also has a blistering shot, while Jack does not. Hughes already struggles to find space at even strength at the U20 level. His boardwork is not adequate -- puck retention is poor as a result of his lack of strength on his skates --, and he lacks an NHL-level shot.

One must note that Jack Hughes' lack of strength is not the sole culprit of his struggle to forecheck in the offensive zone. His mediocre board work is impeded by the very rush-centric mentality that he possesses. Hughes is not the most aggressive forechecker; he does not attack players along the boards or battle relentlessly for pucks; understandably, he is not a strong player on his skates, but he does not compete along the boards with as much tenacity as a player with his speed should. His main method of attack is via rush offense at even strength. Reviews of his games against competition 18 years of age or over yield similar conclusions: lacklustre play at even strength.

This is a red flag, as I am very wary of players who rely heavily on rush offense at junior levels to score. The NHL is a cycle-based league: players chip the puck in, retrieve the puck, then generate chances via smart passes and puck movement as a unit. This is the majority of the offense at the NHL level, whereas rush offense is much more limited. NHL players understand how to contain players flying towards them at remarkable speeds and force them to set up in the offensive zone. Hughes' offensive zone play at even strength is too passive for NHL standards.

Some may accept the superficial comparison to Connor McDavid at face value, but the following is why he differs from McDavid and may struggle where McDavid does not: Connor McDavid, at this same level, was able to skate circles around everyone with his speed off the rush. Jack, meanwhile, can not find any space at even strength. In the NHL, not even Connor McDavid can skate circles around everyone off the rush. He is four inches taller, thirty pounds heavier, shoots better, and is more intelligent than Jack Hughes. McDavid had a knack at the junior level for seeing opportunities and processing the weaknesses of his opponent at a level that Jack can not. Despite all of these advantages that McDavid has over Hughes, NHL defenders can still limit Connor's speed to an extent. What is Jack without his speed, and how much of a struggle will it be to find space if U20 competition is already a tough task? Rush offense will be much more difficult for a player who does not possess the strength to escape from standard even-strength defensive pressure at the U20 level.

Another factor that should deter onlookers from preferring Jack Hughes over the other top player, Kaapo Kakko, is the risky nature of Hughes' play with the puck. In spite of his size, Hughes gambles quite often with the puck on his stick, believing that he can make end-to-end chances happen with regularity. He sometimes sacrifices defense because of his belief and overconfidence that he can skate the puck out of his own zone. This signals a spotty sense about his defensive responsibilities, which needs to be factored into any consideration of his hockey IQ. Jack Hughes is not very grounded defensively, often trying to do too much on his own with the puck and making mistakes. At this point, he is a very one-way, offensive player.

Jack Hughes' lack of awareness about when he should defer the puck to his teammates, and when not to take gambles with the puck, may be troublesome, as it implies a degree of tunnel vision at the junior level. Players whose games are mostly about rush offense and who tend to make their primary impact via rush plays are likely to be easier to contain if the opposition knows that the player in question always wants the puck. Hughes forces attempts at plays that are sometimes not there, and that are sometimes very defensively risky. These are hockey IQ issues that must be considered.

Jack Hughes, if one is to summarize his style of play, can be described as an offensive-minded, rush-centric playmaker with a below-average shot, a lack of strength, a greater reliance on speed than stop-and-start agility, and a need to play with other high-end talent. He is not a player of individual ability at the U20 level, making him an even less likely to be a player of individual ability at the NHL level. He may still become a successful NHL player, but more along the lines of a Nikolaj Ehlers, Nico Hischier or Clayton Keller.

Those who have watched Jack Hughes, even if only at the recent World Juniors, may be inclined to agree. Those who will claim that Hughes' game at the World Juniors was affected by an injury, please consider this: his game did not look different from earlier games against league opponents. The only danger that he presented at even strength in many of these games was when he sped up the ice off the rush through the neutral zone, and on the powerplay when he had room to maneuver. He was contained more often than not because of the defensive positioning of the U20 players, who were an improvement over the U18 competition he has faced in the past. End-to-end rush chances were few and far between against players aged 18 and over, which does not bode well for his ability to consistently generate rush chances at the professional level. There is also the possibility that he plays wing at the NHL level, much like Clayton Keller and Mitch Marner, both smaller players who played center in junior and moved to wing.

Jack Hughes' game is limited to one dimension. This makes him a more risky candidate than my top candidate for first overall in 2019, Finnish forward Kaapo Kakko.

In my opinion, there is no contest as to which player should be taken first overall. I admit that I have been aggressive in my attempts to bring awareness, but my sole intention is to offer insight about the prowess of a player who had not been a major part of the first-overall discourse prior to this season. Hughes is not the best player available.






English translation via Google Translate:


"It is decided when the NHL draws which club will choose first in the draft. If it is a club that likes Europeans and has a European direction, Kakko can go first. Is it a club that likes North Americans, maybe the election falls on Hughes.

Personally, I think Kakko is better but I saw Hughes play four games in Kravare (Czech Republic) in November and he was absolutely phenomenal." - Goran Stubb, NHL Director of European Scouting, January 7, 2019




y8zGeQ9.jpg


Strange OP for a Jack Hughes thread.

Kid is going #1 overall, barring injuries, and deservedly so.
 

rt

The Kinder, Gentler Version
May 13, 2004
97,551
46,598
A Rockwellian Pleasantville
If you are going to dissect a player’s game you should make an objective assertion of his pros and cons, not just rabble on about the negatives. Is the kid perfect? Far from it. Do his positives far outweigh negatives? Most assuredly, he will be picked #1 and it will be a great get for any team lucky enough to get him.
Unless he’s still got him ranked #2 overall and think he’s a great prospect but is merely highlighting why he’s a sub-par 1st overall, or why he thinks Kakko is better. If he’s got 11 or 19 or 27 different kids above Hughes, that’s an interesting discussion, too. I’m very curious.
 

CLW

Registered User
Nov 11, 2018
6,845
6,443
And history is also filled with people claiming to have insight they don't. How many false prophets have we seen throughout history?

Yes, so we have to use our tools of logic and discernment, for which pillorying is a poor substitute.
 

ijuka

Registered User
May 14, 2016
22,454
15,106
If you are going to dissect a player’s game you should make an objective assertion of his pros and cons, not just rabble on about the negatives. Is the kid perfect? Far from it. Do his positives far outweigh negatives? Most assuredly, he will be picked #1 and it will be a great get for any team lucky enough to get him.
He's made some good points. I'd suggest reading all of:

And don't ask for an objective assertion and then be too lazy to read it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CLW

Ivan13

Not posting anymore
May 3, 2011
26,141
7,095
Zagreb, Croatia
He's made some good points. I'd suggest reading all of:

And don't ask for an objective assertion and then be too lazy to read it.


There’s absolutely nothing objective about that analysis. I’ve read it, and it’s absolute rubbish and highlights his inability to understand the game of hockey.
 

Ivan13

Not posting anymore
May 3, 2011
26,141
7,095
Zagreb, Croatia
Unless he’s still got him ranked #2 overall and think he’s a great prospect but is merely highlighting why he’s a sub-par 1st overall, or why he thinks Kakko is better. If he’s got 11 or 19 or 27 different kids above Hughes, that’s an interesting discussion, too. I’m very curious.

He won’t commit to a damn thing, just regurgitates the over-analysis while gleaning over all that makes him elite. Anyone who thinks Hughes exhibits poor hockey IQ and has watched him play regularly is a lost cause.
 

CLW

Registered User
Nov 11, 2018
6,845
6,443
There’s absolutely nothing objective about that analysis. I’ve read it, and it’s absolute rubbish and highlights his inability to understand the game of hockey.

Why is it rubbish?
 

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,140
11,172
Murica
He's made some good points. I'd suggest reading all of:

And don't ask for an objective assertion and then be too lazy to read it.


Have you read it? All you have been doing is coming in to these discussions like his wing man. If Kakko wasn't in this draft you would be nowhere to be seen.
 

The Crypto Guy

Registered User
Jun 26, 2017
26,570
33,814
Wow, I didnt realize how stacked this U18 team is...potentially they have 3 top 10 first rounders and 3 more top 20.
 

stampedingviking

Registered User
Jul 2, 2013
4,220
2,381
Basingstoke, England
https://www.tsn.ca/it-s-still-the-jack-hughes-draft-1.1246625

I guess these idiots don't know what they are talking about either lol...

It is the Jack Hughes Draft.
Still.
Amid speculation that perhaps the star American’s grip on No. 1 status for the 2019 NHL draft was in question after the World Junior Championship, the 5-foot-10-1/4, 168-pound centre remains the unanimous No. 1 on TSN’s Mid-Season NHL Draft Rankings.
Just as he was on TSN’s Pre-Season Rankings in September.
Each of the 10 NHL scouts surveyed by TSN this week had Hughes at No. 1 on their list. Ten for 10.
But that doesn’t mean there hasn’t been some closing of what started this season as a considerable gap between Hughes and the rest of the 2019 draft class.
“We still have Hughes at No. 1,” one NHL scout said, “but he’s No. 1 within
a group of five or six. At the start of the season, Hughes was in a group by himself. He has company now.”
Many of the scouts surveyed said the strong play of Finnish forward Kaapo Kakko, who scored the gold-medal winning goal at the WJC, and Russian forward Vasili Podkolzin, who played a prominent role in Russia’s bronze-medal performance at the WJC, represent a challenge of sorts to Hughes.
But not one of those scouts was prepared to put Hughes anywhere other than No. 1. And some of them said that while the strong play of Kakko and Podkolzin, who are Nos. 2 and 3 respectively on TSN’s mid-season list, has tightened the race somewhat, there’s no need to overthink things.

“Hughes was the clear No. 1 to start the season, he is, for me, the clear No. 1 right now and I strongly suspect he’ll be the clear No. 1 at the draft,” another scout added. “There have been times this season where [Hughes] hasn’t been as productive or dominant as we expected, but he’s still playing at a really high level and putting up points. He’s a special player. So have Kakko and Podkolzin closed the gap? Yes, they have. But does a gap still exist? I would say yes.”

I love the "no need to overthink things" lol...if only this could be said on here...
Of course scouts have never been proven to be wrong, have they?
 

93LEAFS

Registered User
Nov 7, 2009
33,964
21,043
Toronto
Of course scouts have never been proven to be wrong, have they?
and the people who constantly pick the 2nd best to be the best have been wrong. See the few people who picked Eichel to be better than McDavid or the Matthews/Laine situation. Some people just love to pick the 2nd best guy to be the best. It's "smartest guy in the room" syndrome. I see it here almost every year.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad