NHL Combine

[Unfriendly Ghost]

Short and stocky is okay for a defenseman, but short and skinny? That's a lot more worrying. And I don't think Custance would just invent this stuff, either.

Oh man. On that podcast, Custance is interviewing Dahlin and it comes up that Hughes isn't doing any testing at the combine. That would make me really nervous: potentially he's very small AND you can't see how strong he is.

 

[Frk It]

Short and stocky is okay for a defenseman, but short and skinny? That's a lot more worrying. And I don't think Custance would just invent this stuff, either.

Oh man. On that podcast, Custance is interviewing Dahlin and it comes up that Hughes isn't doing any testing at the combine. That would make me really nervous: potentially he's very small AND you can't see how strong he is.

Does how strong he is right now really matter?

I just care what he can get up to. If he can get to 185-190 lbs, he’ll be alright. I think Datsyuk was 5’9” and 150 something lbs at his age and he got up to that. But if he’s maxes out at 175 lbs, I can’t see how he is ever going to log big minutes.

It’s pretty surprising to me that 2 out of the 3 brothers chose to play defense, to be honest with you. It’s a bold gamble even if they think the game exceptionally and skate as well as they do.

 

[Unfriendly Ghost]

Does how strong he is right now really matter?

I think when a guy is that small, you want to be sure he's strong for his size because you aren't sure he's going to get a ton bigger. You want to know if he'll be okay if he doesn't get up to 190 or something. And of course, to some extent playing defense is about overpowering forwards. If you don't have the strength for that, you're a real long shot. Even Lidstrom made a living lifting people's sticks when they didn't want them lifted.

 

[Unfriendly Ghost]

Wow. Listening to Custance's podcast, Hughes comes off... interestingly. Very terse kid.

Edit: yikes, he definitely says it. "Hughes said he was like 163."

 

[TatarTangle]

Wow. Listening to Custance's podcast, Hughes comes off... interestingly. Very terse kid.

Edit: yikes, he definitely says it. "Hughes said he was like 163."

It's gotta be a no from me dawg.

Unless he can gain 30 pounds he will be eaten alive in his own zone

 

[Hen Kolland]

Wow. Listening to Custance's podcast, Hughes comes off... interestingly. Very terse kid.

Edit: yikes, he definitely says it. "Hughes said he was like 163."

Glad to know I wasn't just hearing things when I listened passively at work. It's definitely worth being concerned about, but if he's as talented as he is. He will be an NHL player, it just depends how his playing weight will impact his ceiling, if at all.

 

[Ezekial]

It’s pretty surprising to me that 2 out of the 3 brothers chose to play defense, to be honest with you. It’s a bold gamble even if they think the game exceptionally and skate as well as they do.

Their dad played D. Might be why they chose the position.

 

[Rzombo4 prez]

It's gotta be a no from me dawg.

Unless he can gain 30 pounds he will be eaten alive in his own zone

He won't get eaten alive in his own zone because he won't spend much time in his own zone because he is a one-man break out.

 

[TatarTangle]

He won't get eaten alive in his own zone because he won't spend much time in his own zone because he is a one-man break out.

I'll put money on that

 

[Pavels Dog]

He won't get eaten alive in his own zone because he won't spend much time in his own zone because he is a one-man break out.

I don’t think you realize how much skill is required to make that a consistant truth. Especially come playoffs time. Does Hughes go up against Dahlin and not spend time defensively? Does he ”one man breakout” against those crazy forechecking teams like Vegas? What happens when Tom Wilson lines him up?

I like Hughes, but his size and lack of strength will be a problem. Just a question of how much of a problem.

 

[WesNichols14]

How would everyone feel if we traded back (between 9 and 12) and grabbed him plus a late first or early second?

 

[Shaman464]

How would everyone feel if we traded back (between 9 and 12) and grabbed him plus a late first or early second?

Robbed of a better player for the return of a player unlikely to be that good. As I said on the other thread the team would have to receive a world burning offer.

 

[turkleton85]

Age can play a big role in that, I think. For one, players develop physically a lot between 18 and 22. You're drafting at 17/18 for the NHL. As a consequence, we don't prize the physical tests nearly as much. In football you're mostly selecting players with college experience at age 22. For most guys, the times they run at 22 is their career peak. The 1st overall this year was 23-years-old. That 1st overall pick (Mayfield) was a walk-on for his college team. If Mayfield was in a draft at age 18, nobody would have taken him.

There are always a handful of players that can succeed immediately at the NHL level, sometimes I do wish the average draft age was older. Not only would the road to the NHL be 1-2 years instead of 4-5, but it would increase the certainty teams were getting the right player.

yes, age is the obvious factor, and the physical demands of the sports differ a lot. The NFL combine has become a televised spectacle, while NBA and NHL combines are happening without anyone really taking notice

 

[Rzombo4 prez]

I don’t think you realize how much skill is required to make that a consistant truth. Especially come playoffs time. Does Hughes go up against Dahlin and not spend time defensively? Does he ”one man breakout” against those crazy forechecking teams like Vegas? What happens when Tom Wilson lines him up?

I like Hughes, but his size and lack of strength will be a problem. Just a question of how much of a problem.

While largely made for dramatic effect, the core still holds a lot of truth. There is no question that there will be times when Hughes' size (or lack thereof) will be an issue in the defensive zone (just like there will be times that Bouchard's lack of intensity will be an issue) and will lead to goals against. It is absolutely destine to happen. His lack of size, however, is only one component of his overall impact on the team's defensive play. I personally consider elite puck movement to be a higher order, more valuable skill than one-on-one, defensive zone defending. After 60 minutes it has a far greater impact on the overall game (both offensively and defensively) than your ability to separate a forward from the puck in an isolated situation. There will be times when his lack of size will be liability, but there will also be times when his intelligence, vision, mobility and puck-moving abilities (both passing and skating) relieve defensive pressure in situations where others fail. Perhaps it depends upon how much faith you really have in the impact of puck possession hockey. Long story short, his overall impact on defensive play is a far more complicated calculation than "he is 5' 10" 163 lbs at 18."

 

[Frk It]

While largely made for dramatic effect, the core still holds a lot of truth. There is no question that there will be times when Hughes' size (or lack thereof) will be an issue in the defensive zone (just like there will be times that Bouchard's lack of intensity will be an issue) and will lead to goals against. It is absolutely destine to happen. His lack of size, however, is only one component of his overall impact on the team's defensive play. I personally consider elite puck movement to be a higher order, more valuable skill than one-on-one, defensive zone defending. After 60 minutes it has a far greater impact on the overall game (both offensively and defensively) than your ability to separate a forward from the puck in an isolated situation. There will be times when his lack of size will be liability, but there will also be times when his intelligence, vision, mobility and puck-moving abilities (both passing and skating) relieve defensive pressure in situations where others fail. Perhaps it depends upon how much faith you really have in the impact of puck possession hockey. Long story short, his overall impact on defensive play is a far more complicated calculation than "he is 5' 10" 163 lbs at 18."

Get yourself someone who can do both.

 

[Hen Kolland]

While largely made for dramatic effect, the core still holds a lot of truth. There is no question that there will be times when Hughes' size (or lack thereof) will be an issue in the defensive zone (just like there will be times that Bouchard's lack of intensity will be an issue) and will lead to goals against. It is absolutely destine to happen. His lack of size, however, is only one component of his overall impact on the team's defensive play. I personally consider elite puck movement to be a higher order, more valuable skill than one-on-one, defensive zone defending. After 60 minutes it has a far greater impact on the overall game (both offensively and defensively) than your ability to separate a forward from the puck in an isolated situation. There will be times when his lack of size will be liability, but there will also be times when his intelligence, vision, mobility and puck-moving abilities (both passing and skating) relieve defensive pressure in situations where others fail. Perhaps it depends upon how much faith you really have in the impact of puck possession hockey. Long story short, his overall impact on defensive play is a far more complicated calculation than "he is 5' 10" 163 lbs at 18."

What's the tipping point for you though? How many times can a player like Hughes allow the defensive structure to get caved in by a power forward net front presence before his high IQ and puck moving ability can't make up for it?

That's what the concern has to be, and quite frankly, none of us know what the full picture is. This is all speculation, and if anyone would know and have a legitimate concern with Hughes' ability to hold his own, it would be Blashill. If Hughes is on the board at 6, whatever decision the team makes will tell me all I need to know about the situation. Not working out at the combine actually helps Detroit more than anybody because our current head coach has worked with him on a daily basis and has had first hand exposure, albeit limited exposure. That's something that nobody can fall back on the way we can.

EDIT: The first part is not to say that Hughes will let the D get caved in, but rather a small, offensively focused defenseman that has shortcomings in his own zone. Hughes might turn into a fantastic own zone defenseman in addition to what he can do in transition and on offense.

 

[Ezekial]

How would everyone feel if we traded back (between 9 and 12) and grabbed him plus a late first or early second?

Between 9-12, absolutely not. Moving out of the top 10 isn't a good move.

 

[NickH8]

While largely made for dramatic effect, the core still holds a lot of truth. There is no question that there will be times when Hughes' size (or lack thereof) will be an issue in the defensive zone (just like there will be times that Bouchard's lack of intensity will be an issue) and will lead to goals against. It is absolutely destine to happen. His lack of size, however, is only one component of his overall impact on the team's defensive play. I personally consider elite puck movement to be a higher order, more valuable skill than one-on-one, defensive zone defending. After 60 minutes it has a far greater impact on the overall game (both offensively and defensively) than your ability to separate a forward from the puck in an isolated situation. There will be times when his lack of size will be liability, but there will also be times when his intelligence, vision, mobility and puck-moving abilities (both passing and skating) relieve defensive pressure in situations where others fail. Perhaps it depends upon how much faith you really have in the impact of puck possession hockey. Long story short, his overall impact on defensive play is a far more complicated calculation than "he is 5' 10" 163 lbs at 18."

Why sacrifice one-on-one defense completely for elite puck movement when you can get a guy like Dobson or Bouchard who are good at both?

 

[Rzombo4 prez]

Why sacrifice one-on-one defense completely for elite puck movement when you can get a guy like Dobson or Bouchard who are good at both?

Bouchard is actually a pretty sketchy defender when you really stop to watch him. Part of that could be usage, but I am not willing to chalk all of it up to usage. He obviously does not have physical limitations that would prevent him from defending effectively. This, however, is different than actually being a good defender. Just ask Ryan Sproul. To me it is also an issue of degree. I think both of those two are very good at moving the puck but will still be a notch below Hughes at the next level in that department. I also don't know if Bouchard and Dobson will be around at 6.

None of these guys are perfect, but all of them are good. We should be able to walk away with a good defender at 6.

 

[lhsgolf19]

Boqvist measured in at 5'11" 165

 

[lhsgolf19]

 

[jkutswings]

Wine and dine as many candidates for #6 as possible. Nothing wrong with maximizing your face time as part of due diligence.

 

[NickH8]

Boqvist measured in at 5'11" 165

Nice, if he bulks up to about 175-180 he won't be too undersized.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

Why sacrifice one-on-one defense completely for elite puck movement when you can get a guy like Dobson or Bouchard who are good at both?

Hughes is a lot better defensively than Bouchard in my opinion. He is very gifted at taking away time and space.

He uses his skating to jump cycles, to steer plays to different areas and he has a very good stick in terms of battles.

What his size limits massively is his wingspan in terms of taking out more passing lanes and territories and that is important, I totally understand his problems there, Rafalski had this problem. But he is tough to bully in a way that is being described. His hockey IQ keeps him pretty clean there and he wins a lot of one on one battles defensively as was just witnessed at the World Championships. He was dominant in the second half of the season with U of M. He was a better freshman than either Trouba or Werenski. He has a lot of ability.

 

[HisNoodliness]

Boqvist measured in at 5'11" 165

That's pretty much what we were hoping for. He's still young so he'll have tons of time to bulk up. 5'11 is definitely tall enough to make it as a 1D. I know everyone is scared of his concussion and that we all just watched Dobson and Hughes in the Memorial/World cup, but Boqvist remains #3 on my board and these measurements make me feel better about him.