C Jack Hughes - USNTDP (2019 Draft) Part III

[Rabid Ranger]

Ah, so it's "second tier" now. Who is in your first tier?

 

[Vagrant]

the thing about scouting is that when it comes to certain things, you can be right but still be wrong. yakupov is a perfect example. undeniable puck skills, shooting ability, and dominance relative to his peers. the thing that prevented yakupov from being a success in the league was his inability to believe that any parts of his game were problematic and needed work. his lack of success, to him, was a matter of circumstance. when you're in junior getting 30 minutes of time on ice per night, the coach's suggestions are just noise. when you go pro, you have to condense a whole night's worth of work into the 11 minutes you get and if you want more, you have to produce. no half effort, no defensive mistakes, no missed assignments. scouts can't measure how much you want it. there are even kids that know they have to act like they want it even if they don't because everyone around them wants it for them. there are so many layers to why players don't end up being great even if they have the talent to be. that's why risers and fallers happen in the draft after interviews. zadina this past draft is an example. this isn't to say he won't be successful, but teams must have really disliked what they heard from him during that round of the process to drop him from consideration as the first forward taken to end up drafted 6th by a team that had no idea he would be there.

to bring this back to hughes, one would have to be entirely ignorant of what makes an offensive hockey player great to not recognize those attributes are present in him. he has that undeniable ability that makes your eyes go to him and makes him stand out among his peers. it's unquestionable. what you can, and should, question is if these traits are covering up deficiencies in his game that are going to make it difficult for him to translate that offensive skill into production. does he have the mentality to handle the pressure of being a professional is a question that comes to mind for me about hughes. it seems like his draft season is a little too big for him and he's trying too hard to impress scouts and isn't playing his game enough. is he going to lose part of what makes him special in his attempt to transition his game to a more pro friendly style? that's a real concern to me. as far as his skill is concerned, there's nothing to fear.

 

[wetcoast]

the thing about scouting is that when it comes to certain things, you can be right but still be wrong. yakupov is a perfect example. undeniable puck skills, shooting ability, and dominance relative to his peers. the thing that prevented yakupov from being a success in the league was his inability to believe that any parts of his game were problematic and needed work. his lack of success, to him, was a matter of circumstance. when you're in junior getting 30 minutes of time on ice per night, the coach's suggestions are just noise. when you go pro, you have to condense a whole night's worth of work into the 11 minutes you get and if you want more, you have to produce. no half effort, no defensive mistakes, no missed assignments. scouts can't measure how much you want it. there are even kids that know they have to act like they want it even if they don't because everyone around them wants it for them. there are so many layers to why players don't end up being great even if they have the talent to be. that's why risers and fallers happen in the draft after interviews. zadina this past draft is an example. this isn't to say he won't be successful, but teams must have really disliked what they heard from him during that round of the process to drop him from consideration as the first forward taken to end up drafted 6th by a team that had no idea he would be there.

to bring this back to hughes, one would have to be entirely ignorant of what makes an offensive hockey player great to not recognize those attributes are present in him. he has that undeniable ability that makes your eyes go to him and makes him stand out among his peers. it's unquestionable. what you can, and should, question is if these traits are covering up deficiencies in his game that are going to make it difficult for him to translate that offensive skill into production. does he have the mentality to handle the pressure of being a professional is a question that comes to mind for me about hughes. it seems like his draft season is a little too big for him and he's trying too hard to impress scouts and isn't playing his game enough. is he going to lose part of what makes him special in his attempt to transition his game to a more pro friendly style? that's a real concern to me. as far as his skill is concerned, there's nothing to fear.

great post but I don't think that there was ever serious consideration that Zadina was the top forward and Svechnikov was viewed as 2nd.

 

[Vagrant]

great post but I don't think that there was ever serious consideration that Zadina was the top forward and Svechnikov was viewed as 2nd.

there were some scouts that flipped the two after the world juniors last season. the fact that he didn't officially pass svechnikov is a reasonable point, but the mere consideration that he could was the larger one for me. just a simple illustration to show that scouts aren't done making evaluation when the games end.

 

[93LEAFS]

great post but I don't think that there was ever serious consideration that Zadina was the top forward and Svechnikov was viewed as 2nd.

He was at the midpoint according to some. Although, I think his slip was due to factors outside of how he interviewed. I didn't hear anything about him interviewing poorly. I think a couple things happened. One, Svechnikov clearly passed him once the shine of the WJC wore off. 1st forward off the board was never really under debate from about April on. Montreal and Arizona wanted a center, and factored that into their decision. There was never really a gap between him and Tkachuk in Zadina's favor, no matter how many people on the board tried to play up there being one.

 

[Blade Paradigm]

great post but I don't think that there was ever serious consideration that Zadina was the top forward and Svechnikov was viewed as 2nd.

Svechnikov was always ahead of Zadina. I did analyses of both of their games early in their draft seasons and assessed Svechnikov as the smarter, more complete player.

Oct. 27, 2017:

F Filip Zadina - Halifax Mooseheads, QMJHL (2018, 6th, DET)

I don't think Zadina will overtake Svechnikov's position in the Top 2, although placement in the Top 3 is not that far-fetched an idea.

Svechnikov is the smarter player of the two -- much more poised and intelligent with the puck, and better defensively than Zadina. Svechnikov tends to be more on-the-mark with his playmaking than Zadina, isn't as prone to making high-risk plays, and tends to position himself better to forecheck and backcheck. He also has an apparent reach advantage. He isn't as shifty as he is rangy with a big frame and a long reach to protect the puck. He isn't one to weave, twist, and pivot to the extent that Zadina is.

I see more risks with Zadina, although also a shiftier player. One thing I've noticed about Svechnikov is just how often he gets flattened by the position because he fails to avoid a body check. Svechnikov isn't as elusive with his edges and tends to like beating players wide off the rush rather than cut to the inside with as much sharpness as Zadina can. Both have a rather impressive straight-line burst when they want to attack.

Svechnikov seems to be around the puck much more than Zadina because he seems to better understand his positioning relative to the puck, tends to make successful plays on a higher basis, and is a smarter forechecker.

Of course, successful coaching over the course of the season might make Zadina a more polished player than he is now. He has high-end talent and shows flashes of the type of player he can be. His best play needs to be evident on a more consistent, shift-to-shift basis.

Svechnikov has much more polish at this point in time.

Several players jumped ahead of Zadina by the end of that draft season.

 

[Deficient Mode]

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.

I agree that scouts tend to underrate players who create off the cycle as opposed to the rush but this is an incorrect characterization of the NHL. The average forward carries in the puck with possession roughly as often as they dump it in, and most star players carry the puck in with possession over 60% of the time. An average controlled entry is over twice as likely to result in a shot as a dump in. Being able to carry the puck is extremely important. I think this aspect of Hughes' game will translate well to the NHL, too.

 

[Vagrant]

I agree that scouts tend to underrate players who create off the cycle as opposed to the rush but this is an incorrect characterization of the NHL. The average forward carries in the puck with possession roughly as often as they dump it in, and most star players carry the puck in with possession over 60% of the time. An average controlled entry is over twice as likely to result in a shot as a dump in. Being able to carry the puck is extremely important. I think this aspect of Hughes' game will translate well to the NHL, too.

that's an excellent point regarding entries and an accurate one. there's a subtle change that you might observe when watching games now that was ushered in by the analytics. it used to be that you'd see an offensive player in a delayed penalty situation give half an effort to maintain possession unless there was an imminent scoring chance. now, there are a ton of teams that are going as far as to take the puck back into their zone to start a breakout in those situations. that's an adjustment in the understanding of the importance of being in a situation where you opposition literally cannot score and how much offensive freedom that creates. having a player that can enter the zone well is critical to this iteration of the league. it's probably one of the biggest reasons we're seeing a spike in scoring is the understanding of possession. a lot of the beneficiaries are the skill players that are encouraged to green light themselves into the zone with attacking interest. it only seems logical that if possession is important, possession needs to be given to a player that can maintain it. systems weren't always built like that. it's something that favors hughes over kakko, in my estimation.

 

[Artorius Horus T]

He's a speed merchant but may look like Nail Yakulov or Angelo Esposito at the next level...or Mitch Mariner, you never know. It really does come down to his shiftiness and hockey intelligence.

Scouts lists differ more from the consensus than most people think. That's why when Button has Virtanen in the 2nd round, people say he's crazy but that's just the way each team's scouts see guys.

Which he doesn't have much.

 

[EscapedGoat]

I agree that scouts tend to underrate players who create off the cycle as opposed to the rush but this is an incorrect characterization of the NHL. The average forward carries in the puck with possession roughly as often as they dump it in, and most star players carry the puck in with possession over 60% of the time. An average controlled entry is over twice as likely to result in a shot as a dump in. Being able to carry the puck is extremely important. I think this aspect of Hughes' game will translate well to the NHL, too.

Good post. The game has really changed from the days when every zone entry was from a dump in and if you didnt have players who could dig out pucks and cycle, you were screwed.

I am the least knowledgeable person when it comes to advanced stats. I'm not doubting your numbers there but do you have a source? Those are interesting stats to look at.

 

[skuzzycuzz]

I, myself see a lot of things I don’t like in Hughes game, the more I watch the worse it gets. His speed and skill is undeniable but it remains to be see if he can translate it to the next level. I suspect maybe he can but I’m not sure I’d bet the house on it. It’s Kaako for me at 1.

 

[MichaelFarrell]

I would love to see him dominate the NCAA next year. I think he is the type of player that’s would be absolutely filthy on the power play in the NHL straight out the gate but will need a few years before he is a dominant player. He has all the tools you would want in a modern day player and the sky is the limit for him.

 

[Fenway]

STAY ON TOPIC AND DO NOT ATTACK OTHER POSTERS

 

[krutovsdonut]

so if i can summarize the doubters here, they think his game is not clearly translating when he plays overage opponents so he may not be able to elevate his game even at the ncaa level, let alone the nhl. the underlying criticisms are that he doesn't have a first class shot and may not be as elusive as he currently seems against kids his own age such that his lack of size will catch up with him and maybe even his iq is not all that.

first off, this seems like a classic wjc overreaction, in which unrealistic expectations were pinned on an underage kid to now create a boomerang effect. i realize the doubts were expressed before, but it is the wjc leading to these bold negative prognostications confidently going on blast.

second, let's just look at what his brother, who is two years older, is doing. there are obvious similarities in these too, and at every step of development, jack has exceeded quinn. i think its a reach to suddenly project jack to taper off his development now when quinn has not. if you want to project jack, look at quinn. quinn still doesn't have a shot, and he is playing a position where his lack of size is an even greater concern. yet two years later against ncaa and even adult opposition he still seems to be elusive as hell and fast as hell to the point he is still in the conversation to be an elite gamechanging player in the nhl in spite of those obvious abiding concerns. and nobody questions his iq. and he'd likely win a poll today as best dman prospect in that draft.

third, a lot of this relates to size bias and the assumption the nhl is still a place where small guys get stifled or killed, to which i say "modern hockey", "johnny hockey" and look at the close attention being paid to pettersson being allowed to play right now. for those who think hughes can't be an nhl centre how many of you said the same thing about pettersson as a rookie? the nhl desperately wants to get away from a style of game that generates concussions and they want to develop stars they can market. the hughes brothers are right out of central casting for that as american kids. the nhl wants players like that to be given the room to play their game and the refs are going to get that message loud and clear.

so the yakupov comparisons being thrown around here seem a tad ridiculous to me. jack hughes is going to be a top 6 centre or at worst a playmaking winger. he's as sure a bet for that as you will find in the last two drafts. if you are a gambler, you gamble that a bigger body like kaako will be a more complete player in the end, but if you take what is right there in front of you, then it's hughes.

 

[4Twenty]

The analysis of Jack Hughes from one poster in this thread feels like a guy who has made up his mind on the player and goes looking for clips to corroborate his story.

50-60 point max upside? In a league where Kucherov is on pace for 140 points right now, Jack Hughes has 50-60 point upside? That's nonsense.

 

[CLW]

so if i can summarize the doubters here, they think his game is not clearly translating when he plays overage opponents so he may not be able to elevate his game even at the ncaa level, let alone the nhl. the underlying criticisms are that he doesn't have a first class shot and may not be as elusive as he currently seems against kids his own age such that his lack of size will catch up with him and maybe even his iq is not all that.

first off, this seems like a classic wjc overreaction, in which unrealistic expectations were pinned on an underage kid to now create a boomerang effect. i realize the doubts were expressed before, but it is the wjc leading to these bold negative prognostications confidently going on blast.

second, let's just look at what his brother, who is two years older, is doing. there are obvious similarities in these too, and at every step of development, jack has exceeded quinn. i think its a reach to suddenly project jack to taper off his development now when quinn has not. if you want to project jack, look at quinn. quinn still doesn't have a shot, and he is playing a position where his lack of size is an even greater concern. yet two years later against ncaa and even adult opposition he still seems to be elusive as hell and fast as hell to the point he is still in the conversation to be an elite gamechanging player in the nhl in spite of those obvious abiding concerns. and nobody questions his iq. and he'd likely win a poll today as best dman prospect in that draft.

third, a lot of this relates to size bias and the assumption the nhl is still a place where small guys get stifled or killed, to which i say "modern hockey", "johnny hockey" and look at the close attention being paid to pettersson being allowed to play right now. for those who think hughes can't be an nhl centre how many of you said the same thing about pettersson as a rookie? the nhl desperately wants to get away from a style of game that generates concussions and they want to develop stars they can market. the hughes brothers are right out of central casting for that as american kids. the nhl wants players like that to be given the room to play their game and the refs are going to get that message loud and clear.

so the yakupov comparisons being thrown around here seem a tad ridiculous to me. jack hughes is going to be a top 6 centre or at worst a playmaking winger. he's as sure a bet for that as you will find in the last two drafts. if you are a gambler, you gamble that a bigger body like kaako will be a more complete player in the end, but if you take what is right there in front of you, then it's hughes.

Pettersson has already been injured twice this season. Hughes was injured during the WJC. Even if the NHL is transitioning towards less physical hockey and fewer tackles there will still be some, unless they slap a "no touch" label on Hughes, which would be boring as hell.

If Hughes fixes his shot and finishing ability one on one he will for certain make a mark offensively in the NHL. Even with weaknesses in his game I don't think Hughes will be a mere 60 point player at his peak if all goes well. It's the rest of the game that worries me. People say he will be fine but I am not sure he will be fine. He is not Kane, he is not Marner, he is not Gaudreau. Hughes reminds me more of Pat Lafontaine with his butter smooth skating. Pat Lafontaine had to stop playing because of concussions.

I think you are spot on with the central casting marketing comment, and ultimately that is why The Program Poster Boy #1 will go #1. Of this I have no doubt. The only thing that can challenge that is if some other prospect puts up monster numbers too massive to ignore for the rest of the season.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

I think concerns about Hughes' finishing ability are being overstated. He can score goals and is proven in that regard. He's more of a playmaker but that doesn't mean he can hit the back of the net. Not everyone has to have a laser.

 

[93LEAFS]

Oh god, we're going down the "He's only going 1st because of North America and marketing" rabbit hole again.

 

[stampedingviking]

At worst Hughes is a 2nd overall talent to some and that’s fine, but the way people are describing him makes it sound like he’s barely a first rounder. Kakko has flaws too but you don’t really hear him getting bashed like Hughes is.

Maybe kakko doesn't get "bashed" as much as Hughes because he's not hyped anywhere nearly as much.

 

[CLW]

Oh god, we're going down the "He's only going 1st because of North America and marketing" rabbit hole again.

Because marketing has absolutely nothing to do with professional sports.

In 1983 Detroit wanted to draft Pat Lafontaine for marketing reasons, but ended up with Steve Yzerman instead at #4 as the NYI took the American Lafontaine at #1.

Edit. Oops correction, Lafontaine was taken at #3 my bad.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

Because marketing has absolutely nothing to do with professional sports.

In 1983 Detroit wanted to draft Pat Lafontaine for marketing reasons, but ended up with Steve Yzerman instead at #4 as the NYI took the American Lafontaine at #1.

Edit. Oops correction, Lafontaine was taken at #3 my bad.

I think marketing plays a role on occasion but not generally with a top pick. Best player available-period.

 

[93LEAFS]

Because marketing has absolutely nothing to do with professional sports.

In 1983 Detroit wanted to draft Pat Lafontaine for marketing reasons, but ended up with Steve Yzerman instead at #4 as the NYI took the American Lafontaine at #1.

Edit. Oops correction, Lafontaine was taken at #3 my bad.

I heard this exact same crap with Matthews over Laine (except the Leafs are the last team that needed help selling tickets). NHL teams don't draft based on marketing. If they did, Florida would have taken Seth Jones over Alexander Barkov. Simply put, NHL draft prospects really aren't very marketable. The only thing that appears marketable in the NHL is winning, not some short term boost due to a first overall pick.

If Kakko is the better player, he's likely to sell more tickets and jerseys long-term than a short-term boost.

 

[krutovsdonut]

i think no team is going to draft that high on hype or marketing considerations. maybe the habs would preferentially take a french canadian on a very close call to finally atone for wickenheiser, but that is about it.

in 2018 detroit could have taken quinn hughes with his local connection (and after extensive speculation they would do so), but they instead grabbed zadina when he fell.

 

[member 157595]

Maybe kakko doesn't get "bashed" as much as Hughes because he's not hyped anywhere nearly as much.

Outside of the site, that's probably true. On this site, it's completely, thoroughly and violently false.

 

[CLW]

I think marketing plays a role on occasion but not generally with a top pick. Best player available-period.

I heard this exact same crap with Matthews over Laine (except the Leafs are the last team that needed help selling tickets). NHL teams don't draft based on marketing. If they did, Florida would have taken Seth Jones over Alexander Barkov. Simply put, NHL draft prospects really aren't very marketable. The only thing that appears marketable in the NHL is winning, not some short term boost due to a first overall pick.

If Kakko is the better player, he's likely to sell more tickets and jerseys long-term than a short-term boost.

I think you are both correct. But I still feel there is a lot of the hype aspect regarding Hughes. He is a special talent, in a similar same way Messi is a special talent in football. It's fun to see them skate/run circles, literally, around their opposition at the junior level. But is Hughes the best player overall in the draft with the best future in the NHL? I am simply not convinced he is. Hughes, to me, in this draft is the specialty player, like Laine in his draft year.