Which teams would be the best for Kakko and Hughes?
- Thread starter MrThomas
- Start date
nickdawg95
scoutdawg
- Jan 7, 2016
- 3,286
- 1,770
vanarchy
⠀
- May 3, 2013
- 9,171
- 8,472
Anyone not cheering for the Hughes brothers to continue the Sedin legacy is a heathen.
Anyone not cheering for the Hughes brothers to continue the Sedin legacy is a heathen.
They’ve had enough high picks recently. Hughes to Detroit please.
HabsForHire
"Expect the unexpected"
Blade Paradigm
Registered User
- Oct 21, 2017
- 823
- 1,172
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.
Whichever team has the first-overall pick should take Kaapo Kakko.
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.
Whichever team has the first-overall pick should take Kaapo Kakko.
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.
Being a Leaf fan I want Colorado to get the first pick plus it will give them a legit 1-2. Let Hughes play with Rantanen.
Idc about the other pick.
Idc about the other pick.
Boulder Avalanche
Pull the Goalie
- Apr 9, 2013
- 1,094
- 462
Raccoon Jesus
Todd McLellan is an inside agent
RoyalDuder
Registered User
Pretty sure the NHL would be happier if the Rangers were relevant if we are going to use that logic. I'm sure they'd also be happy with Detroit, LA, or Philly. I'm pretty sure Gary Bettman dreams of a Washington/Pitt style rivalry between NYR and Philly considering what it could do for national ratings.
voyageur
Hockey fanatic
- Jul 10, 2011
- 9,467
- 8,157
Rangers can put out the dog's breakfast for players, and they will sell out.
There are 3 New York teams too, so the Rangers are just the big fish, but not the only one.
1 Chicago team, which covers Illinois and Wisconsin for a fan base. And attracts star power.
L.A. now lives under the shadow of LeBron. Hughes would not even make a dent in Lebron's impact.
Philly will turn it around. But they are behind the Sixers now.
They care about ratings. NYR, when they are good, are the biggest draw in the United States. League-wide, they don't care about individual attendance for a market. They care about getting ratings and popular enough in regions that it allows them to draw the most amount of television viewers with the hope of growing the national TV deal.
The New York metropolitan area has 24 million people. Chicagoland has 9 million. A disproportionate amount of that market is NYR fans over the Devils and NYI. Who knows what Chicago is like in a post contending world. They still have high-attendance this year despite being terrible. While being good previously helped them, who knows how much Rocky has changed stuff with the fanbase. Bill was a terrible owner and lost the fanbase due to that.
Every USA team is overshadowed by someone in their market if you are going to talk about Lebron in LA. Chicago would be overshadowed dramatically by the Bears and Cubs. Gretzky went to LA when the Showtime Lakers were around, and the Kings were easily behind the Lakers, it still helped grow the leagues brand.
voyageur
Hockey fanatic
- Jul 10, 2011
- 9,467
- 8,157
Baseball has almost no impact on the NHL. The MLB playoffs only affect the start of the season. Hockey playoffs can compete with April/May baseball for local ratings.
And NFL is once a week.
NBA in the 80s isn't like NBA now. Gretzky and Jordan were almost equal in impact. Now the NBA blows the NHL away, except in O6 markets, and Minnesota, which is a hockey state. It's closing the gap on football. The Kings are 2nd fiddle (look at why NBC broadcasts them less this year). The Rangers are a big deal, but Chicago is a big determinent of growth. And a staple market for NBC ratings.
NYR are a bigger deal for national ratings. Blackhawks are second fiddle behind the Bulls when the Bulls are good. Chicago while an important market, isn't viewed as the most important market in the league for the NHL. That is NYR.
Jordan and Gretzky weren't equal for impact. The Bird/Magic and then the rise of Jordan is the reason the NBA absolutely blew past the NHL during Gretzky's career. In a city the size of LA and New York, you don't worry about your placement in the hierarchy of regional teams. If you are good, you will drive ratings due to the population of those regions.
voyageur
Hockey fanatic
- Jul 10, 2011
- 9,467
- 8,157
I suggest you reference NBC's ratings see how Chicago impacts them. For instance who's in the 2 highest watchedStanley Cups in U.S. history?
In terms of wealth New York is number one. In terms of following Boston is #1, in a city competing with the NBA. Chicago #2.
But we're off topic.
In terms of wealth New York is number one. In terms of following Boston is #1, in a city competing with the NBA. Chicago #2.
But we're off topic.
crazyhawk
Registered User
This.
Kakko can be our Hossa replacement and play with Toews.
Hughes would obviously centre Kane to demolish possession stats.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
Game 2 Edmonton Oilers @ Vancouver Canucks - VAN leads 1-0Wagers: 9Staked: $8,485.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Series Winner Edmonton Oilers vs Vancouver CanucksWagers: 7Staked: $7,132.00Event closes
- Updated:
-
Game 4 Calgary Wranglers @ Coachella Valley Firebirds -. Coachella Valley Firebirds leads series 2-1Wagers: 6Staked: $76,511.00Event closes- Updated: