• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
Jonas Mahonas

Is Hughes > or = to Gudreau

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Id pass.   We don't need an undersized winger.   If he's as good as Gudreau then he's worth a lot in trade and I'd move back a few spots and pick up another high end prospect or pick.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

If he is, no way you pass on him.  

Hard to say, but I think there's a good chance Hughes will be as good or better than Gaudreau, and for that reason, "no way you pass on him"...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Wheelchairsuperhero said:

His skating and vision are game breaking. He seems an obvious choice to me. 

He's the total package. Sure, a small package, but he has all the tools to be an elite player in today's NHL. The ONLY thing he has going against him is size, but like I mentioned in another thread, size sure as hell hasn't hindered other young talents; including Gaudreau, Marner, Point, DeBrincat, Kane, Kucherov, Panarin, Ehlers, Aho, Hischier, etc...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

He's the total package. Sure, a small package, but he has all the tools to be an elite player in today's NHL. The ONLY thing he has going against him is size, but like I mentioned in another thread, size sure as hell hasn't hindered other young talents; including Gaudreau, Marner, Point, DeBrincat, Kane, Kucherov, Panarin, Ehlers, Aho, Hischier, etc...

Agreed. Size seems to be meaning less and less now a days. My guess is a combination of the physicality being taken out of the game and the crackdown over the past 10 years on hooking/holding etc. If you are an elite talent, size shouldn't hold you back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Mckinley25 said:

I haven’t seen any of the teams below us play save for against the Wings, are they as bad as Detroit?  Will there be a battle for the last spot?

Right now I'd say all the basement teams are on roughly the same footing. But with the Wings having probably the least talented roster in the league (which will likely be compounded by trade deadline moves), I think we have a really good shot at finishing 31st overall.

https://www.nhl.com/standings/2018/league

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Dabura said:

Right now I'd say all the basement teams are on roughly the same footing. But with the Wings having probably the least talented roster in the league (which will likely be compounded by trade deadline moves), I think we have a really good shot at finishing 31st overall.

https://www.nhl.com/standings/2018/league

I'm not sure I agree that we have the least talented roster in the league. Likely bottom 5, but I wouldn't say THE worst... I think injuries have affected this team in a big way. Not saying we'd be a playoff team if healthy, but I think we'd be on the bubble for sure. I mean Green alone, we've seen what a difference he makes with and without him in the lineup. He's missed almost half the games this season (19 of 42). Mantha missing 15 games, Helm missing 21, DeKeyser 22, Ericsson 18, Daley 11, etc. I guess these injuries have been a blessing in disguise for those that are team tank though. We'll see how we do over the next few weeks now that we should be getting some bodies back (Helm last game, Mantha tonight, Green and DeKeyser look to possibly be ready soon). But yeah, the trade deadline should see at least one key roster player (Nyquist) gone, which again, is a good thing for those that are team tank...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

I'm not sure I agree that we have the least talented roster in the league. Likely bottom 5, but I wouldn't say THE worst... I think injuries have affected this team in a big way. Not saying we'd be a playoff team if healthy, but I think we'd be on the bubble for sure. I mean Green alone, we've seen what a difference he makes with and without him in the lineup. He's missed almost half the games this season (19 of 42). Mantha missing 15 games, Helm missing 21, DeKeyser 22, Ericsson 18, Daley 11, etc. I guess these injuries have been a blessing in disguise for those that are team tank though. We'll see how we do over the next few weeks now that we should be getting some bodies back (Helm last game, Mantha tonight, Green and DeKeyser look to possibly be ready soon). But yeah, the trade deadline should see at least one key roster player (Nyquist) gone, which again, is a good thing for those that are team tank...

Fair enough.

Personally, I think we have pretty much the least talented roster in the league, even when we're fully healthy. And I don't think that's an especially controversial claim. Which of the rosters currently below us in the standings -- Chicago, St. Louis, Arizona, Philadelphia, Ottawa, Los Angeles -- is more underwhelming? You could make a case for two or three of those teams, but it would be close.

Anyway, the point is that I'd expect a team like Chicago or St. Louis or Philly to finish above us based on talent alone; those teams should at least be on the playoff bubble and they're not, which makes me think they've been underachieving and will come on a bit in the second half. The Wings? We're a few points behind last season's pace...and we all know how last season went. Granted, we've battled the injury bug this season. But, I mean, yeah. I'd say we have as good a shot at 31st overall as any other team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dabura said:

Fair enough.

Personally, I think we have pretty much the least talented roster in the league, even when we're fully healthy. And I don't think that's an especially controversial claim. Which of the rosters currently below us in the standings -- Chicago, St. Louis, Arizona, Philadelphia, Ottawa, Los Angeles -- is more underwhelming? You could make a case for two or three of those teams, but it would be close.

Anyway, the point is that I'd expect a team like Chicago or St. Louis or Philly to finish above us based on talent alone; those teams should at least be on the playoff bubble and they're not, which makes me think they've been underachieving and will come on a bit in the second half. The Wings? We're a few points behind last season's pace...and we all know how last season went. Granted, we've battled the injury bug this season. But, I mean, yeah. I'd say we have as good a shot at 31st overall as any other team.

Agreed.  What talent we have is so underdeveloped to boot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Dabura said:

Fair enough.

Personally, I think we have pretty much the least talented roster in the league, even when we're fully healthy. And I don't think that's an especially controversial claim. Which of the rosters currently below us in the standings -- Chicago, St. Louis, Arizona, Philadelphia, Ottawa, Los Angeles -- is more underwhelming? You could make a case for two or three of those teams, but it would be close.

Anyway, the point is that I'd expect a team like Chicago or St. Louis or Philly to finish above us based on talent alone; those teams should at least be on the playoff bubble and they're not, which makes me think they've been underachieving and will come on a bit in the second half. The Wings? We're a few points behind last season's pace...and we all know how last season went. Granted, we've battled the injury bug this season. But, I mean, yeah. I'd say we have as good a shot at 31st overall as any other team.

There are definitely a few teams that are under-performing and we may have been over-performing for a stretch there, but I still don't agree that we're the worst team in the league on paper. We may not have the star power as most teams, but I think we're deeper than a few at the bottom of the standings. I think we're better than Ottawa and Arizona for sure, and an argument could be made for another couple for sure.

Regardless, I agree with the bolded. I think we'll end up close to the bottom of the standings. I just think that will be due mostly to injuries and trade deadline departures, rather than the roster that was assembled at the start of the season.

Anyway, adding Zadina, Veleno, *Hughes*, and another high-end player or two in the next couple seasons would be HUGE for this organization. We have a lot of nice pieces, but no true game breakers yet. Larkin is emerging as one, hopefully Zadina will be, and hopefully we luck out in this year's draft the way we did last year, with Hughes, and another couple players that drop to us...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

There are definitely a few teams that are under-performing and we may have been over-performing for a stretch there, but I still don't agree that we're the worst team in the league on paper. We may not have the star power as most teams, but I think we're deeper than a few at the bottom of the standings. I think we're better than Ottawa and Arizona for sure, and an argument could be made for another couple for sure.

Regardless, I agree with the bolded. I think we'll end up close to the bottom of the standings. I just think that will be due mostly to injuries and trade deadline departures, rather than the roster that was assembled at the start of the season.

You forgot one thing: our LAS% (lazy and sucks) is the highest in the league. ;)

10 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

Anyway, adding Zadina, Veleno, *Hughes*, and another high-end player or two in the next couple seasons would be HUGE for this organization. We have a lot of nice pieces, but no true game breakers yet. Larkin is emerging as one, hopefully Zadina will be, and hopefully we luck out in this year's draft the way we did last year, with Hughes, and another couple players that drop to us...

Yup, this. 100%

Edited by Dabura

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Dabura said:

I'm glad the Wings aren't a bottom-basement team with needs at every position. Otherwise, passing on Jack Hughes because he's a "small winger" might be considered kinda stupid.

Between Zadina, Mantha, Bert, Rasmussen, AA, Berggren, and Svech I feel pretty comfortable about our wingers.  I agree we need game breaking talent, but we probably need it down the middle or on defense.  I feel pretty confident in the wingers on our roster and so I'd use that to our advantage if we were in a position to draft Hughes.  Look at what having uber talented Gudreau is doing for a Flames team that has no centers or quality defensemen right now.  Pretty mediocre.  I'd still feel WAY better with Cozens plus more high pics or prospects than I do adding a Gudreau level talent to a Wings team with no real center depth or high end defense. 

Edited by kipwinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Between Zadina, Mantha, Bert, Rasmussen, AA, Berggren, and Svech I feel pretty comfortable about our wingers.  I agree we need game breaking talent, but we probably need it down the middle or on defense.  I feel pretty confident in the wingers on our roster and so I'd use that to our advantage if we were in a position to draft Hughes.  Look at what having uber talented Gudreau is doing for a Flames team that has no centers or quality defensemen right now.  Pretty mediocre.  I'd still feel WAY better with Cozens and an extra

I'll feel better about our winger situation when we have a winger who's a proven lights-out assassin at the NHL level. As it stands, we have some merely-good players and one guy we're hoping can be that assassin (Zadina), and Hughes is more promising than that player. At least at center we have Larkin, who isn't a Nathan MacKinnon but is better than any of our wingers.

You go with the best player, the guy you think has the highest upside and the best shot at becoming a gamebreaker. I like a whole lot of players in this draft class and I think we'd be smart to trade back if our first pick isn't 1st or 2nd overall. But if we do pick 1st or 2nd? Then I think it has to be Hughes or Kaapo Kakko, respectively. I have genuine concerns about every player not named Hughes or Kakko.

Dylan Cozens reminds me of Athanasiou in some not-positive ways and we don't know that he's going to be a center. Alex Newhook's not much bigger than Hughes and isn't more talented and we don't know that he's going to be a center. Peyton Krebs, same deal. Kirby Dach, there are some red flags. (He's not even in my top five right now.) I think Alex Turcotte is a pure center, but I also think his ceiling is probably roughly the same as Larkin's. I could go on. Point is, if we're looking for a gamebreaking talent with obscene raw talent (including obscene skating ability), Hughes is our best bet. The Wings are beggars, not choosers.

Edited by Dabura

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not the NFL.  Having the worst record won't guarantee one of the top picks, let alone the #1 pick.  I don't know much about either of these players, but we'll be lucky to finish with either the #1 or #2 pick, especially if this team can get healthy and stay respectable.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, GMRwings1983 said:

This is not the NFL.  Having the worst record won't guarantee one of the top picks, let alone the #1 pick.  I don't know much about either of these players, but we'll be lucky to finish with either the #1 or #2 pick, especially if this team can get healthy and stay respectable.  

We'll be lucky to finish with the 1st or 2nd pick, even if we do finish 31st overall. This is true. I'm hoping for the best tho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kipwinger said:

Between Zadina, Mantha, Bert, Rasmussen, AA, Berggren, and Svech I feel pretty comfortable about our wingers.  I agree we need game breaking talent, but we probably need it down the middle or on defense.  I feel pretty confident in the wingers on our roster and so I'd use that to our advantage if we were in a position to draft Hughes.  Look at what having uber talented Gudreau is doing for a Flames team that has no centers or quality defensemen right now.  Pretty mediocre.  I'd still feel WAY better with Cozens plus more high pics or prospects than I do adding a Gudreau level talent to a Wings team with no real center depth or high end defense. 

Between Larkin, Veleno, Nielsen, along with a few others that are natural centers playing the wing, Rasmussen, Athanasiou, Helm, and Glendening and Turgeon, I feel somewhat comfortable with our center depth. I think Hughes may become a winger at the NHL level, but he is also a natural center. There aren't any defensemen I'd be comfortable taking in the top 5 as of right now, so it would be a forward regardless for me. Always take best player available, especially that high in the draft, and especially if you have a chance at an elite talent, the undisputed number one overall for the past couple years. Unless of course, a team offers something insane that you just can't refuse. If Vancouver really wants the brothers together and offers Brock Boeser and their 3rd overall pick, of course you take that deal and run. But if it's just for the 3rd overall and another late 1st / early 2nd, I wouldn't do it.

Calgary? You mean the 3rd overall team in the league with 54 points? The team with top center Sean Monahan with 22 goals, 51 points in 42 games?

I'd be thrilled with Cozens, but not in a trade back scenario where we could have had Hughes, unless like I said, another established elite player is coming with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aside from Patrick Kane, who's another tier better than Gaudreau, none of these little wingers are tipping the scales for Cup contenders.  And it's not even like Kane didn't have obscene amounts of talent surrounding him.  Mitch Marner is little and lighting the world on fire right now, but it's not a coincidence that he finally did so once Tavares was his center.  Point is, they're good players.  Really good in fact.  But when I look back at the last 10-15 years of Cup winners I see the same basic formula; great centers, great top four defense, and excellent coaching.  Hell, it took the addition of Kuznetsov to put Washington over the hump and they had arguable the greatest winger in history there for 14 years.  If Kakko can and does play center too (which I've heard) then I'd rather have him as well.  Point is, really great wingers tend not to matter that much at the playoff level without really great centers.  We don't have really great centers.  Larkin is very good, its a stretch to think Veleno will be even that good, and we've got nobody after that.  Put Patrick Laine on our team, with our current crop of centers and we'd still get smashed.  I just don't see Hughes making that big a difference. 

At the end of the day, I guess I think we're a better team two years from now with our current wingers and better centers than we are with our current centers and better wingers. If Hughes projects as a long term elite center than the point is moot.  If not, then I'd pass and take a guy who does. 

Edited by kipwinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed finishing 31st doesn't guarantee 1st pick but the furthest we can go down is 4th?

So 31st is a good guarantee of a decent pick. 

So go with that scenario that we are 31st but secure the 4th pick so do you grab the BPA or trade down for a 10 - 20 pick and a young defenseman that has potential 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is an aside:  But when people say "finishing last doesn't guarantee you a top pick" I want to kill them.  Nobody thinks finishing last GUARANTEES you anything.  But it does give you the best possible odds to get the top pick.  If someone offered to give you a lottery ticket with the best possible odds of winning, and your response was "well it doesn't guarantee anything" you'd be retarded.  So can we all agree that this is stupid and we shouldn't say it anymore?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, krsmith17 said:

Between Larkin, Veleno, Nielsen, along with a few others that are natural centers playing the wing, Rasmussen, Athanasiou, Helm, and Glendening and Turgeon, I feel somewhat comfortable with our center depth. I think Hughes may become a winger at the NHL level, but he is also a natural center. There aren't any defensemen I'd be comfortable taking in the top 5 as of right now, so it would be a forward regardless for me. Always take best player available, especially that high in the draft, and especially if you have a chance at an elite talent, the undisputed number one overall for the past couple years. Unless of course, a team offers something insane that you just can't refuse. If Vancouver really wants the brothers together and offers Brock Boeser and their 3rd overall pick, of course you take that deal and run. But if it's just for the 3rd overall and another late 1st / early 2nd, I wouldn't do it.

Calgary? You mean the 3rd overall team in the league with 54 points? The team with top center Sean Monahan with 22 goals, 51 points in 42 games?

I'd be thrilled with Cozens, but not in a trade back scenario where we could have had Hughes, unless like I said, another established elite player is coming with it.

I agree that you should take the person you assess to be the best player available, but "best" can be defined a lot of ways and it's not always so easy to pin down.  For instance, Miro Heiskenen is probably the "best" player to come out of the 2017 draft but nobody said so on draft day.  They were too busy gushing over Nolan Patrick and Nico Hischier.  It's not always clear cut who's the best. Secondly, people on hockey teams do different jobs.  So it's not always easy to compare.  Is an 80 point winger  better than a 70 point center?  I'd probably rather have the center to be honest.  He certainly will effect the game more. 

Maybe Jack Hughes is sooooooo good that it's all a moot point (though I'm skeptical).  Or maybe he'll play center and it won't matter.  But if Jack Hughes projects to be as good as Gaudreau (as in the OP) and Cozens projects to be as good as Jason Spezza or Ryan Getzlaf (just for example), I think I'd rather have Cozens. 

Edited by kipwinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

This is an aside:  But when people say "finishing last doesn't guarantee you a top pick" I want to kill them.  Nobody thinks finishing last GUARANTEES you anything.  But it does give you the best possible odds to get the top pick.  If someone offered to give you a lottery ticket with the best possible odds of winning, and your response was "well it doesn't guarantee anything" you'd be retarded.  So can we all agree that this is stupid and we shouldn't say it anymore?

Finishing last actually does guarantee you at least a top 4 pick cause you can only drop 3 spots down so they are already technically wrong in their statement that there is no guarantee of a top pick. 

It doesn't however guarantee you the FIRST pick but does increase your odds of getting a pick between 1 - 3 so if they are referring to STRICTLY the first pick they are technically correct.  Just because you have the best odds you still can lose. See my record at the casinos when the odds were in my favor till that last @#$@!$ card.

If you told me that those lottery tickets at a minimum are giving me the 4th prize of 500 and increase my odds to get the Mega/1 million/10K prizes I would grab that "guarantee" in a heartbeat at a minimum I have gotten a decent payoff. Also cause my momma didn't raise me to be stupid. 

So I pledge not to use guarantee till after the draft....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this