Quinn Hughes | #43 | D

[Warhippy]

2 hours ago, wildcam said:

Will be interesting to see how many games he plays in Vancouver.. Expansion protection list will come into affect..Canuck will have to think about this with Seattle coming into the league...

 

Players with less then 2 years NHL experience don't have to be protected..

 

Vancouver will have some big decisions to make in 2 years...

Actually, when you look at our roster, who will be on ELC's and safe under the CBA rules vs who will have to be protected Benning has maneuvered this team marvellously towards the expansion draft.

 

Again.

 

Believe it or not, Motte, Ericsson, Sutter, Pouliot, Stecher are names that could go.  Petersson, Horvat, Demko, Woo, Boeser, All actually safe/protected under the rules.

 

Our future core and most valuable pieces will be essentially safe heading in to the expansion draft

[Noble 6]

I was at the USA vs. Sweden game and got a chance to look at Hughes. Sorry for the late post, I got busy with family stuff.

 

First of all, Sweden controlled play for 50 minutes of that game. USA had the puck more often, but they were skating into a wall and not accomplishing anything. Brannstrom, Sandin and Lundqvist controlled the game from the back end. Sweden's forwards outworked the American defense in their own zone and the whole team stuck to their system. Sweden has looked like the best team in the group so far as everyone works hard and sticks to the system and their defense is probably the best in the group as well. 

 

Hughes played a pretty good game overall. He created a lot of offense and made a lot of good decisions with the puck. He makes a lot of sly little passes into space for his teammates and his overall vision is very good. His vision is noticeable. He ran the standard Hughes breakout most of the night: beat the first man, hit the open teammate and then explode into open ice. He was probably USA's most influential player. Of course, he also caused the 3rd goal against for his team, so it works both ways. 

 

As expected, his skating and edgework blew me away. He completely left his man in the dust on his first two shifts. It's exceptional because he never really looks like a threat to get by you, until he's by you. He's also quick and strong enough to cut back on a dime, so if you cheat one way he has the ability to change direction normally when most players can't. 

 

There was one play in the 3rd period when the USA was pushing back where Hughes picked up a loose puck just outside the Swedish blue line. He and Madden then went in 2 on 4. Hughes made a shifty stutterstep at the blue line to shake the first player and caused everyone to collapse on him. He then bumped it out to Madden, who completely beat his man with a toe drag to the inside and almost scored far side. It was one play that showcased a lot of skill between two of our prospects. 

 

Hughes' main comparable Boqvist also had a good game. He jumped into the rush multiple times with his skating and created opportunities for himself. His first rush he dangled around the American defender and got a shot off, which looked really nice. He also showed good speed in overtime to get himself a breakaway and also join Oloffson to create a 2 on 1, which he scored on. However, the difference between Hughes and Boqvist shows itself when they're in the offensive zone. Hughes is able to hold on to the puck and create space for himself and/or his teammates and his very unpredictable in his movements, making him extremely dynamic. Boqvist on the other hand seems to always either shoot or try to drive by his man on the right side. There seems to be a cap on what Boqvist would think to do, but not on what Hughes would do. 

 

One thing that I noticed with Hughes was that when he's on the ice, everyone on every team has to be able to adapt. The opposition needs to be ready to have an extra player near them on th forecheck, and his teammates all need to be aware to cover them as best they can. He normally just comes back to the point with the puck, so his defense partner needs to always be ready to switch sides. The forwards also need to always be aware of covering back as well. There just seems to be a lot of room for potential miscues and breakdowns with how often Hughes plays his own game. At the end of the day, he forces everyone to play his game, both good and bad. 

 

The other thing that I noticed as the game went on was that Hughes seemed to be trying to do it himself a bit more than he should. For example, in overtime he had the puck at the offensive blue line and Sweden wasn't giving anything. Instead of passing down to the open man, he tried a cut back move, lost the handle and gave up possession. It seems like he just needs to learn that not every play needs to involve him outsmarting his man and that simple plays aren't that bad. Brannstrom is someone who understands that and he's been the best defenseman in the tournament probably. 

 

Overall, he was probably the most influential American player and his skating and vision stood out on every shift. He just needs to dial it back a bit in general and not try and make a beautiful play every time. 

 

 

[gameburn]

19 minutes ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

I was at the USA vs. Sweden game and got a chance to look at Hughes. Sorry for the late post, I got busy with family stuff.

 

First of all, Sweden controlled play for 50 minutes of that game. USA had the puck more often, but they were skating into a wall and not accomplishing anything. Brannstrom, Sandin and Lundqvist controlled the game from the back end. Sweden's forwards outworked the American defense in their own zone and the whole team stuck to their system. Sweden has looked like the best team in the group so far as everyone works hard and sticks to the system and their defense is probably the best in the group as well. 

 

Hughes played a pretty good game overall. He created a lot of offense and made a lot of good decisions with the puck. He makes a lot of sly little passes into space for his teammates and his overall vision is very good. His vision is noticeable. He ran the standard Hughes breakout most of the night: beat the first man, hit the open teammate and then explode into open ice. He was probably USA's most influential player. Of course, he also caused the 3rd goal against for his team, so it works both ways. 

 

As expected, his skating and edgework blew me away. He completely left his man in the dust on his first two shifts. It's exceptional because he never really looks like a threat to get by you, until he's by you. He's also quick and strong enough to cut back on a dime, so if you cheat one way he has the ability to change direction normally when most players can't. 

 

There was one play in the 3rd period when the USA was pushing back where Hughes picked up a loose puck just outside the Swedish blue line. He and Madden then went in 2 on 4. Hughes made a shifty stutterstep at the blue line to shake the first player and caused everyone to collapse on him. He then bumped it out to Madden, who completely beat his man with a toe drag to the inside and almost scored far side. It was one play that showcased a lot of skill between two of our prospects. 

 

Hughes' main comparable Boqvist also had a good game. He jumped into the rush multiple times with his skating and created opportunities for himself. His first rush he dangled around the American defender and got a shot off, which looked really nice. He also showed good speed in overtime to get himself a breakaway and also join Oloffson to create a 2 on 1, which he scored on. However, the difference between Hughes and Boqvist shows itself when they're in the offensive zone. Hughes is able to hold on to the puck and create space for himself and/or his teammates and his very unpredictable in his movements, making him extremely dynamic. Boqvist on the other hand seems to always either shoot or try to drive by his man on the right side. There seems to be a cap on what Boqvist would think to do, but not on what Hughes would do. 

 

One thing that I noticed with Hughes was that when he's on the ice, everyone on every team has to be able to adapt. The opposition needs to be ready to have an extra player near them on th forecheck, and his teammates all need to be aware to cover them as best they can. He normally just comes back to the point with the puck, so his defense partner needs to always be ready to switch sides. The forwards also need to always be aware of covering back as well. There just seems to be a lot of room for potential miscues and breakdowns with how often Hughes plays his own game. At the end of the day, he forces everyone to play his game, both good and bad. 

 

The other thing that I noticed as the game went on was that Hughes seemed to be trying to do it himself a bit more than he should. For example, in overtime he had the puck at the offensive blue line and Sweden wasn't giving anything. Instead of passing down to the open man, he tried a cut back move, lost the handle and gave up possession. It seems like he just needs to learn that not every play needs to involve him outsmarting his man and that simple plays aren't that bad. Brannstrom is someone who understands that and he's been the best defenseman in the tournament probably. 

 

Overall, he was probably the most influential American player and his skating and vision stood out on every shift. He just needs to dial it back a bit in general and not try and make a beautiful play every time. 

 

 

Wonderful synopsis.  Loved it.

One thing I noticed that we've all been interested in: he does seem to be able to defend.  Not a one-dimensional player.  Of course he doesn't defend like Gudbranson or an Edler type.

Having a D-man that other players have to adapt to is interesting.  Virtanen and Granlund, maybe Sutter and a few others are already pretty good at backing up the D; but it sounds like the whole team has to think about it.

[Phat Fingers]

12 hours ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

I was at the USA vs. Sweden game and got a chance to look at Hughes. Sorry for the late post, I got busy with family stuff.

 

First of all, Sweden controlled play for 50 minutes of that game. USA had the puck more often, but they were skating into a wall and not accomplishing anything. Brannstrom, Sandin and Lundqvist controlled the game from the back end. Sweden's forwards outworked the American defense in their own zone and the whole team stuck to their system. Sweden has looked like the best team in the group so far as everyone works hard and sticks to the system and their defense is probably the best in the group as well. 

 

Hughes played a pretty good game overall. He created a lot of offense and made a lot of good decisions with the puck. He makes a lot of sly little passes into space for his teammates and his overall vision is very good. His vision is noticeable. He ran the standard Hughes breakout most of the night: beat the first man, hit the open teammate and then explode into open ice. He was probably USA's most influential player. Of course, he also caused the 3rd goal against for his team, so it works both ways. 

 

As expected, his skating and edgework blew me away. He completely left his man in the dust on his first two shifts. It's exceptional because he never really looks like a threat to get by you, until he's by you. He's also quick and strong enough to cut back on a dime, so if you cheat one way he has the ability to change direction normally when most players can't. 

 

There was one play in the 3rd period when the USA was pushing back where Hughes picked up a loose puck just outside the Swedish blue line. He and Madden then went in 2 on 4. Hughes made a shifty stutterstep at the blue line to shake the first player and caused everyone to collapse on him. He then bumped it out to Madden, who completely beat his man with a toe drag to the inside and almost scored far side. It was one play that showcased a lot of skill between two of our prospects. 

 

Hughes' main comparable Boqvist also had a good game. He jumped into the rush multiple times with his skating and created opportunities for himself. His first rush he dangled around the American defender and got a shot off, which looked really nice. He also showed good speed in overtime to get himself a breakaway and also join Oloffson to create a 2 on 1, which he scored on. However, the difference between Hughes and Boqvist shows itself when they're in the offensive zone. Hughes is able to hold on to the puck and create space for himself and/or his teammates and his very unpredictable in his movements, making him extremely dynamic. Boqvist on the other hand seems to always either shoot or try to drive by his man on the right side. There seems to be a cap on what Boqvist would think to do, but not on what Hughes would do. 

 

One thing that I noticed with Hughes was that when he's on the ice, everyone on every team has to be able to adapt. The opposition needs to be ready to have an extra player near them on th forecheck, and his teammates all need to be aware to cover them as best they can. He normally just comes back to the point with the puck, so his defense partner needs to always be ready to switch sides. The forwards also need to always be aware of covering back as well. There just seems to be a lot of room for potential miscues and breakdowns with how often Hughes plays his own game. At the end of the day, he forces everyone to play his game, both good and bad. 

 

The other thing that I noticed as the game went on was that Hughes seemed to be trying to do it himself a bit more than he should. For example, in overtime he had the puck at the offensive blue line and Sweden wasn't giving anything. Instead of passing down to the open man, he tried a cut back move, lost the handle and gave up possession. It seems like he just needs to learn that not every play needs to involve him outsmarting his man and that simple plays aren't that bad. Brannstrom is someone who understands that and he's been the best defenseman in the tournament probably. 

 

Overall, he was probably the most influential American player and his skating and vision stood out on every shift. He just needs to dial it back a bit in general and not try and make a beautiful play every time. 

 

 

Most of Hughes's bad habits are the type of plays that will get coaches out of him at the next level.  

 

Hughes is taking too much on.  But the US team isnt playing great hockey either.  

[stawns]

18 hours ago, gameburn said:

Hughes could play a safe 18 minutes a game, a third of it on the power play.  Gradually work his way in.

Or, he could be as good as he looks and play 20 plus minutes a game from the get go, lol.  Great players have a way of changing a coach's plans.  Look at EP lol.  They started out worrying if he could "handle" center ice duties lol. 

I don't see that in the Quinn Hughes at the wjhc.  I wouldn't say he's having a strong showing........ flashes, for sure, but his defense doesn't look anywhere strong enough to be an NHL regular.

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, stawns said:

I don't see that in the Quinn Hughes at the wjhc.  I wouldn't say he's having a strong showing........ flashes, for sure, but his defense doesn't look anywhere strong enough to be an NHL regular.

Hughes is a friggin’ phenom all over the ice.  He will instantly be our best Dman.  He will be playing 23 plus minutes a night for us within his first 10 games.  

[westcoastsniper]

Based on watching, Hughes defensive style is strong when he's defending an odd man rush. He cuts the puck carriers space fast and usually gets his stick on the puck, preventing a zone entry or the opposing team set up. 

[MoneypuckOverlord]

15 hours ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

I was at the USA vs. Sweden game and got a chance to look at Hughes. Sorry for the late post, I got busy with family stuff.

 

First of all, Sweden controlled play for 50 minutes of that game. USA had the puck more often, but they were skating into a wall and not accomplishing anything. Brannstrom, Sandin and Lundqvist controlled the game from the back end. Sweden's forwards outworked the American defense in their own zone and the whole team stuck to their system. Sweden has looked like the best team in the group so far as everyone works hard and sticks to the system and their defense is probably the best in the group as well. 

 

Hughes played a pretty good game overall. He created a lot of offense and made a lot of good decisions with the puck. He makes a lot of sly little passes into space for his teammates and his overall vision is very good. His vision is noticeable. He ran the standard Hughes breakout most of the night: beat the first man, hit the open teammate and then explode into open ice. He was probably USA's most influential player. Of course, he also caused the 3rd goal against for his team, so it works both ways. 

 

As expected, his skating and edgework blew me away. He completely left his man in the dust on his first two shifts. It's exceptional because he never really looks like a threat to get by you, until he's by you. He's also quick and strong enough to cut back on a dime, so if you cheat one way he has the ability to change direction normally when most players can't. 

 

There was one play in the 3rd period when the USA was pushing back where Hughes picked up a loose puck just outside the Swedish blue line. He and Madden then went in 2 on 4. Hughes made a shifty stutterstep at the blue line to shake the first player and caused everyone to collapse on him. He then bumped it out to Madden, who completely beat his man with a toe drag to the inside and almost scored far side. It was one play that showcased a lot of skill between two of our prospects. 

 

Hughes' main comparable Boqvist also had a good game. He jumped into the rush multiple times with his skating and created opportunities for himself. His first rush he dangled around the American defender and got a shot off, which looked really nice. He also showed good speed in overtime to get himself a breakaway and also join Oloffson to create a 2 on 1, which he scored on. However, the difference between Hughes and Boqvist shows itself when they're in the offensive zone. Hughes is able to hold on to the puck and create space for himself and/or his teammates and his very unpredictable in his movements, making him extremely dynamic. Boqvist on the other hand seems to always either shoot or try to drive by his man on the right side. There seems to be a cap on what Boqvist would think to do, but not on what Hughes would do. 

 

One thing that I noticed with Hughes was that when he's on the ice, everyone on every team has to be able to adapt. The opposition needs to be ready to have an extra player near them on th forecheck, and his teammates all need to be aware to cover them as best they can. He normally just comes back to the point with the puck, so his defense partner needs to always be ready to switch sides. The forwards also need to always be aware of covering back as well. There just seems to be a lot of room for potential miscues and breakdowns with how often Hughes plays his own game. At the end of the day, he forces everyone to play his game, both good and bad. 

 

The other thing that I noticed as the game went on was that Hughes seemed to be trying to do it himself a bit more than he should. For example, in overtime he had the puck at the offensive blue line and Sweden wasn't giving anything. Instead of passing down to the open man, he tried a cut back move, lost the handle and gave up possession. It seems like he just needs to learn that not every play needs to involve him outsmarting his man and that simple plays aren't that bad. Brannstrom is someone who understands that and he's been the best defenseman in the tournament probably. 

 

Overall, he was probably the most influential American player and his skating and vision stood out on every shift. He just needs to dial it back a bit in general and not try and make a beautiful play every time. 

 

 

Sounds like more offensive zone time in the future for boeser, pettersson, bo, which results in more points for them.

[gameburn]

1 hour ago, westcoastsniper said:

Based on watching, Hughes defensive style is strong when he's defending an odd man rush. He cuts the puck carriers space fast and usually gets his stick on the puck, preventing a zone entry or the opposing team set up. 

Bobby Orr style, tbo.  Only really dominant skaters can develop this style of defending over the course of their career; that's because it takes a LOT of dominance to regularly play this way.  Not recommended, as a rule. 

[gameburn]

2 hours ago, Alflives said:

Hughes is a friggin’ phenom all over the ice.  He will instantly be our best Dman.  He will be playing 23 plus minutes a night for us within his first 10 games.  

A forum member (Horvat is a Boss -- see above) gave a beautiful long description of his play against Sweden.  Basically, Sweden is the superior team at all points, but Hughes is able to create chances in spite of it.  He said what sets Hughes apart from the best of the Swede D (Boqvist e.g.,) is that he is unpredictable, can do more when he gets the puck.  

 

I therefore see him as a Pettersson style D-man.  Not quite as good finish/shot yet, but everything else is pretty impressive.  Alf is right: he will change the Canucks next year.  Allow them to play a type of game we have never seen before.  Fluid, dynamic, incredibly strong on rushes and broken plays.  Hughes will like his new team, too.  Boeser, Horvat, Virtanen, Pettersson, the strong centers like Sutter and Beagle to provide structure... this team will FLY next year.  

[Bure_Pavel]

17 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Actually, when you look at our roster, who will be on ELC's and safe under the CBA rules vs who will have to be protected Benning has maneuvered this team marvellously towards the expansion draft.

 

Again.

 

Believe it or not, Motte, Ericsson, Sutter, Pouliot, Stecher are names that could go.  Petersson, Horvat, Demko, Woo, Boeser, All actually safe/protected under the rules.

 

Our future core and most valuable pieces will be essentially safe heading in to the expansion draft

The only player listed there that doesn't require protection is Woo. Petey Horvat, Demko and Boeser all require protection 

[Alflives]

1 hour ago, gameburn said:

A forum member (Horvat is a Boss -- see above) gave a beautiful long description of his play against Sweden.  Basically, Sweden is the superior team at all points, but Hughes is able to create chances in spite of it.  He said what sets Hughes apart from the best of the Swede D (Boqvist e.g.,) is that he is unpredictable, can do more when he gets the puck.  

 

I therefore see him as a Pettersson style D-man.  Not quite as good finish/shot yet, but everything else is pretty impressive.  Alf is right: he will change the Canucks next year.  Allow them to play a type of game we have never seen before.  Fluid, dynamic, incredibly strong on rushes and broken plays.  Hughes will like his new team, too.  Boeser, Horvat, Virtanen, Pettersson, the strong centers like Sutter and Beagle to provide structure... this team will FLY next year.  

And Hughes will come up into the play without the puck, by supporting our forwards.  He will be exactly like Pettersson - a serious game changer.  These elite guys, like Pettersson, Boeser, and Hughes have hockey IQs beyond the very good players.  That’s what really sets them apart.  We have an extremely bright next decade of Canuck’s hockey coming.  

[gameburn]

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

And Hughes will come up into the play without the puck, by supporting our forwards.  He will be exactly like Pettersson - a serious game changer.  These elite guys, like Pettersson, Boeser, and Hughes have hockey IQs beyond the very good players.  That’s what really sets them apart.  We have an extremely bright next decade of Canuck’s hockey coming.  

And Benning isn't done yet.  More hockey I.Q. guys in the works I'm guessing. 

[Alflives]

Just now, gameburn said:

And Benning isn't done yet.  More hockey I.Q. guys in the works I'm guessing. 

OJ is clearly one, and would be here now, if not for setbacks caused by injury.  I think Dahlen is another one, but he needs to physically mature more.  Woo looks like he thinks the game quickly too.

[gameburn]

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

OJ is clearly one, and would be here now, if not for setbacks caused by injury.  I think Dahlen is another one, but he needs to physically mature more.  Woo looks like he thinks the game quickly too.

Very promising.  Juolevi for sure... Woo is a bit more like Edler, but faster. I've seen replays of him getting shots through, and of following up on plays in the offensive zone. 

[Alflives]

Just now, gameburn said:

Very promising.  Juolevi for sure... Woo is a bit more like Edler, but faster. I've seen replays of him getting shots through, and of following up on plays in the offensive zone. 

I’m looking forward to the USA game tonight.  I love watching Hughes play.  Yes, he’s a phenomenal skater, like we’ve never seen before, but he’s super smart.  I like watching him when he doesn’t have the puck.  When his teammates have possession, Quinn's constantly Moving into space.  Often he doesn’t get the puck passed to him though, or it’s behind him.  And when the other team has the puck, Quinn always makes the corect read.  Without the puck, he’s simply too smart for the guys he’s playing with right now.  He’s going to love playing with Pettersson and Boeser.  

[gameburn]

2 hours ago, Alflives said:

I’m looking forward to the USA game tonight.  I love watching Hughes play.  Yes, he’s a phenomenal skater, like we’ve never seen before, but he’s super smart.  I like watching him when he doesn’t have the puck.  When his teammates have possession, Quinn's constantly Moving into space.  Often he doesn’t get the puck passed to him though, or it’s behind him.  And when the other team has the puck, Quinn always makes the corect read.  Without the puck, he’s simply too smart for the guys he’s playing with right now.  He’s going to love playing with Pettersson and Boeser.  

In the last couple of Canucks' games I've been listening to the commentary a little closer.  Guys like Garrett and some of the other teams' people: they've all been showing replays of Pettersson looking all over the ice (head on swivel) when carrying the puck.  I suspect there will be videos shown of him all over the hockey world.  The equivalent of the mandatory "shoulder checks" in driving school lol.   Yes, Hughes will like Pettersson.

Edited January 1, 2019 by gameburn

[Rollieo Del Fuego]

On 12/30/2018 at 11:51 AM, Treenanay said:

 

Quinn's stick handling and skating ability is going to look incredible along side Pettersson and Boeser. We will be a force to be reckoned with. 

 

Horvat and Baerstchi are going to get a lift from Quinn as well...It's like getting 2 skilled forwards ...one for each line...and all without even using up a forward spot.

 

If we make the playoffs this year...we are cup contenders next year....!

 

Even if we just miss the playoffs  this year I still think we can win a series or 2 next year...

[gameburn]

2 hours ago, Rollieo Del Fuego said:

Horvat and Baerstchi are going to get a lift from Quinn as well...It's like getting 2 skilled forwards ...one for each line...and all without even using up a forward spot.

 

If we make the playoffs this year...we are cup contenders next year....!

 

Even if we just miss the playoffs  this year I still think we can win a series or 2 next year...

Totally agree.  And you are right: Hughes adds a lot to every attack -- especially for players smart enough to watch for him.

[Dungass]

Wow, Quinn is playing a loosey-goosey game out there.  Can’t imagine that happening once he’s sitting on Travis Green’s bench.