Quinn Hughes | #43 | D

[HorvatToBaertschi]

27 minutes ago, canuckistani said:

Guddy says hello. Guddy before clueless pilot or 'no defense Hutton'. Also needs someone to lay the beat-down and teach our man-child Jake how to be the future beat-down guy.

Very true, I say he’s almost a shoe-in at this point to be protected. Thanks for catching that

[Jester13]

8 minutes ago, therodigy said:

I think the real question shouldn't be who do we protect in the expansion draft, but rather who of our current players will still be on the roster by the 2020-2021 season? 

 

As it stands right now, the only D that we have signed for 2020-2021 are Gudbranson and Juolevi. For all intents and purposes, let's presume Hutton signs an extension. Assuming Hughes signs at the end of the current NCAA season and burns the first year of his ELC, which one of Gudbranson, Juolevi, Hutton, and Hughes do we leave unprotected? Will all four still be with the team by this point? What happens if we sign Myers or Gardiner or Gunnarson as UFAs during the upcoming free agency? Do we protect any of them?

 

The point I'm trying to make is that there are so many moving parts that making decisions now for an expansion draft taking place 2 seasons later is a bit premature. Our roster can be completely overhauled, or perhaps there will be a plan in place to ship Eriksson to Seattle that will cost us Juolevi or Hutton. I think it's best not to use the expansion draft as justfication to delay Hughes progression if he is indeed ready to play.

 

 

I think it's a worth the thought to ask Hughes, even if he's ready to play, to wait until next year for the sake of the team's asset management. There's no rush to his progression. Sure, he could step in like BB and EP have and rip it up, but QH's situation is slightly different with the timing of the expansion. 

 

Of course, this, to me, also hinges on where we are in the standings at the time. If we're close to making the playoffs then burn that year, but if it's meaningless games I say hold off and rest, Quinn.

[canuckistani]

28 minutes ago, therodigy said:

I think the real question shouldn't be who do we protect in the expansion draft, but rather who of our current players will still be on the roster by the 2020-2021 season? 

 

As it stands right now, the only D that we have signed for 2020-2021 are Gudbranson and Juolevi. For all intents and purposes, let's presume Hutton signs an extension. Assuming Hughes signs at the end of the current NCAA season and burns the first year of his ELC, which one of Gudbranson, Juolevi, Hutton, and Hughes do we leave unprotected? Will all four still be with the team by this point? What happens if we sign Myers or Gardiner or Gunnarson as UFAs during the upcoming free agency? Do we protect any of them?

 

The point I'm trying to make is that there are so many moving parts that making decisions now for an expansion draft taking place 2 seasons later is a bit premature. Our roster can be completely overhauled, or perhaps there will be a plan in place to ship Eriksson to Seattle that will cost us Juolevi or Hutton. I think it's best not to use the expansion draft as justfication to delay Hughes progression if he is indeed ready to play.

 

 

On current standing, Stecher has to be ahead of Hutton for any consideration.

While i agree with you that there are too many moving parts, i think the extremely few defense slots that can be protected (only 3!), combined with the paucity of good defensemen available through the free agency (compared to forwards), makes planning for defensemen a bit easier and more sensible in the long term approach.

 

[therodigy]

12 minutes ago, Jester13 said:

I think it's a worth the thought to ask Hughes, even if he's ready to play, to wait until next year for the sake of the team's asset management. There's no rush to his progression. Sure, he could step in like BB and EP have and rip it up, but QH's situation is slightly different with the timing of the expansion. 

 

Of course, this, to me, also hinges on where we are in the standings at the time. If we're close to making the playoffs then burn that year, but if it's meaningless games I say hold off and rest, Quinn.

That's fair. If Hughes signs at the beginning/end of his D+2 year, it certainly works to our advantage RE expansion, especially if he has something to prove in the NCAA, or doesn't feel ready for the NHL. I think the most ideal situation would be Hughes playing beyond the Canucks regular season. Success for Hughes in the NCAA, and one less headache with developing a protected list.

[therodigy]

7 minutes ago, canuckistani said:

On current standing, Stecher has to be ahead of Hutton for any consideration.

While i agree with you that there are too many moving parts, i think the extremely few defense slots that can be protected (only 3!), combined with the paucity of good defensemen available through the free agency (compared to forwards), makes planning for defensemen a bit easier and more sensible in the long term approach.

 

Didn't even consider Stecher. Oversight on my part. On current standing, Stecher definitely has an edge, especially considering our minimal depth on the right side (Woo, Chatfield, possibly Brassard...)

[J.I.A.H.N]

The advantage of having Boeser and Hughes come into the league for those 8 games at the end, is that they get to RFA 1 year earlier, which is 4 to 5 million dollars, otherwise

they one have one more year to free agency, so basically is a bribe for the player to sign with their draft club......this works for top end NCAA players and who wants to see a Hughes decide to stay in college another year, and loose him.

 

Look at Fox in Carolina....if he doesn't sign by the end of the year, he is a RFA in August...…….pretty big risk, to me.

[Fanuck]

34 minutes ago, Jester13 said:

I think it's a worth the thought to ask Hughes, even if he's ready to play, to wait until next year for the sake of the team's asset management. There's no rush to his progression. Sure, he could step in like BB and EP have and rip it up, but QH's situation is slightly different with the timing of the expansion. 

 

Of course, this, to me, also hinges on where we are in the standings at the time. If we're close to making the playoffs then burn that year, but if it's meaningless games I say hold off and rest, Quinn.

Good point about the expansion draft scenario. 

 

There's a lot of variables to consider with Hughes and the Seattle thing just makes things more clouded. 

 

Would asking him to wait to turn pro give him cause to just stay in Michigan and wait out his UFA status?  Hopefully by drafting a player of 'high moral character' you assume he would never do that. 

 

By all accounts, he's NHL ready or will be very, very close to that by the time his season ends in Michigan this year.  Look at a somewhat comparable player in Charlie McAvoy in Boston.  Hughes is, by all accounts, ahead of his development at the same age and McAvoy had no issues transitioning to the NHL (I know, physically McAvoy is ahead of Huges, but people thought Petey was physically underdeveloped as well.....) 

 

Likely scenario is that Hughes gets an automatic invitation to the Worlds at the end of his Michigan season and then proves to everyone he belongs in the NHL immediately. 

[canuckistani]

3 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

The advantage of having Boeser and Hughes come into the league for those 8 games at the end, is that they get to RFA 1 year earlier, which is 4 to 5 million dollars, otherwise

they one have one more year to free agency, so basically is a bribe for the player to sign with their draft club......this works for top end NCAA players and who wants to see a Hughes decide to stay in college another year, and loose him.

 

Look at Fox in Carolina....if he doesn't sign by the end of the year, he is a RFA in August...…….pretty big risk, to me.

Um i don't understand - players become UFAs if they turn 27 at June 1st of the year of the new season or have completed 7 years of NHL hockey (with 12 games min as benchmark per season) - whichever comes first. So isn't playing in the same draft year = burning a year off the ELC = more $$ for the player/more $$ paid for the club ? It makes sense if the player is ready and needed, i won't argue with that. But i am not seeing the 'trade-off' you are implying ?

[Alflives]

5 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

The advantage of having Boeser and Hughes come into the league for those 8 games at the end, is that they get to RFA 1 year earlier, which is 4 to 5 million dollars, otherwise

they one have one more year to free agency, so basically is a bribe for the player to sign with their draft club......this works for top end NCAA players and who wants to see a Hughes decide to stay in college another year, and loose him.

 

Look at Fox in Carolina....if he doesn't sign by the end of the year, he is a RFA in August...…….pretty big risk, to me.

Hughes will sign in the spring of 2019 for sure.  His whole life is hockey, and getting to the NHL.  

This Fox character's name keeps coming up.  I wonder if we could have a shot at him come August 16th?

[J.I.A.H.N]

3 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Hughes will sign in the spring of 2019 for sure.  His whole life is hockey, and getting to the NHL.  

This Fox character's name keeps coming up.  I wonder if we could have a shot at him come August 16th?

The rumour is he wants to go to the Rangers.....but with him waiting and going free agent, doesn't he go right to RFA?

 

With no ELC?

Edited December 11, 2018 by janisahockeynut

[JM_]

2 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Hughes will sign in the spring of 2019 for sure.  His whole life is hockey, and getting to the NHL.  

This Fox character's name keeps coming up.  I wonder if we could have a shot at him come August 16th?

could be, he's going to have a hard time breaking though the right side in Carolina. I suspect with his choice of many clubs he ends up somewhere like Chicago. 

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, canuckistani said:

Um i don't understand - players become UFAs if they turn 27 at June 1st of the year of the new season or have completed 7 years of NHL hockey (with 12 games min as benchmark per season) - whichever comes first. So isn't playing in the same draft year = burning a year off the ELC = more $$ for the player/more $$ paid for the club ? It makes sense if the player is ready and needed, i won't argue with that. But i am not seeing the 'trade-off' you are implying ?

It's a huge advantage for a player to come out of college early as possible.  Quinn coming out the spring would save him three years.  He's have two more years of college, and then (if he did go to another team) he would have to wait until August to sign.  That's three years!  He would be getting into his second contract, and (likely) for big dollars.  If he stayed to the end in college, he would only be starting his ELC.  There is always the risk of injury too.  The rewards/ risks are just too great for the top college guys to not come out early. 

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, janisahockeynut said:

The rumour is he wants to go to the Rangers.....but with him waiting and going free agent, doesn't he go right to RFA?

 

With no ELC?

I think the college kids  become a UFAs the middle of August of their graduating class year.  I don't think they get to skip the ELC years though.   

[canuckistani]

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

It's a huge advantage for a player to come out of college early as possible.  Quinn coming out the spring would save him three years.  He's have two more years of college, and then (if he did go to another team) he would have to wait until August to sign.  That's three years!  He would be getting into his second contract, and (likely) for big dollars.  If he stayed to the end in college, he would only be starting his ELC.  There is always the risk of injury too.  The rewards/ risks are just too great for the top college guys to not come out early. 

How does playing in March 2019, instead of playing in October 2019, save him THREE YEARS ?!

[Alflives]

2 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

could be, he's going to have a hard time breaking though the right side in Carolina. I suspect with his choice of many clubs he ends up somewhere like Chicago. 

Having Pettersson might lure a college kid like Fox.  Fox might realize he would get a lot more points here, playing with Petey, than elsewhere, and (therefore) get a much bigger dollar amount out of his ELC.  Points = dollars.  

[J.I.A.H.N]

4 minutes ago, canuckistani said:

Um i don't understand - players become UFAs if they turn 27 at June 1st of the year of the new season or have completed 7 years of NHL hockey (with 12 games min as benchmark per season) - whichever comes first. So isn't playing in the same draft year = burning a year off the ELC = more $$ for the player/more $$ paid for the club ? It makes sense if the player is ready and needed, i won't argue with that. But i am not seeing the 'trade-off' you are implying ?

I think it is always a gamble, but basically you want your first round picks happy...……….

so like Boeser, he is in his in his last year of his ELC now, because he signed the contract early......those 9 games he played are costing the Canucks 6.5 M, 1 year early...…..it is the risk, but a player only basically gets what he deserves, so if Hughes signs early and plays like $&!# for the 9 games, and then the next 2 years, he would only be offered the appropriate contract, but still he gets it one year early, because he plays that 9 games. Same for Gaudette. 

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, canuckistani said:

How does playing in March 2019, instead of playing in October 2019, save him THREE YEARS ?!

How could he come out in October of 2019?  He needs to make a choice in the Summer.  

[canuckistani]

Just now, Alflives said:

How could he come out in October of 2019?  He needs to make a choice in the Summer.  

Yes, if he makes a choice in summer, he plays in October 2019, as thats when the season starts

[Alflives]

Just now, janisahockeynut said:

I think it is always a gamble, but basically you want your first round picks happy...……….

so like Boeser, he is in his in his last year of his ELC now, because he signed the contract early......those 9 games he played are costing the Canucks 6.5 M, 1 year early...…..it is the risk, but a player only basically gets what he deserves, so if Hughes signs early and plays like $&!# for the 9 games, and then the next 2 years, he would only be offered the appropriate contract, but still he gets it one year early, because he plays that 9 games. Same for Gaudette. 

And Hughes is not going to be anything but fantastic.  And Hughes knows he is fantastic.  He will absolutely come out early.

[Boudrias]

Just now, Alflives said:

Having Pettersson might lure a college kid like Fox.  Fox might realize he would get a lot more points here, playing with Petey, than elsewhere, and (therefore) get a much bigger dollar amount out of his ELC.  Points = dollars.  

Good point Alf. UFA's all lobbying to joining McDavid or the Laffers as they could be a ticket to a CUP. No reason Vancouver will not be the same as the young core establish themselves. A great way to get the last pieces for a CUP run. Also unsigned collegiate players.