Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Quinn Hughes | #43 | D


-Vintage Canuck-

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:

We put Hughes on the Right side and our RHD problem is over, in terms of an offensive player

From what I understand the right side isn't totally alien to Hughes either. Probably worth a shot to see how he does. 

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I know I will get hammered for saying this but I have some concerns about Quinn's defensive game.  Quinn played 56 games, got 3 goals and 38 assists and was a -23.  If he doesn't get stronger and better defensively, will he be the #1 dman we want him to be?  Jack Rathbone only played 8 games and had 1 goal, 2 assists and was +1.  If Jack turns into a better defensive player and puts up good stats (goals and assists) but a little less than Quinn, is Jack the better choice of dmen?  If we were able to trade Quinn in the next year or so, we could use the extra money else where.  Just curious about what others think.  B)

  • RoughGame 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, dpn1 said:

I know I will get hammered for saying this but I have some concerns about Quinn's defensive game.  Quinn played 56 games, got 3 goals and 38 assists and was a -23.  If he doesn't get stronger and better defensively, will he be the #1 dman we want him to be?  Jack Rathbone only played 8 games and had 1 goal, 2 assists and was +1.  If Jack turns into a better defensive player and puts up good stats (goals and assists) but a little less than Quinn, is Jack the better choice of dmen?  If we were able to trade Quinn in the next year or so, we could use the extra money else where.  Just curious about what others think.  B)

I don’t think much of it to be honest.

 

Quinn can improve aspects of his defensive game.  What he can do with the puck on his stick…let me just say the Canucks have been waiting for, let’s see, 51 YEARS for a player like that.

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, dpn1 said:

I know I will get hammered for saying this but I have some concerns about Quinn's defensive game.  Quinn played 56 games, got 3 goals and 38 assists and was a -23.  If he doesn't get stronger and better defensively, will he be the #1 dman we want him to be?  Jack Rathbone only played 8 games and had 1 goal, 2 assists and was +1.  If Jack turns into a better defensive player and puts up good stats (goals and assists) but a little less than Quinn, is Jack the better choice of dmen?  If we were able to trade Quinn in the next year or so, we could use the extra money else where.  Just curious about what others think.  B)

This is why it’s crucial to get a veteran defensive coach in here to help Quinn take the next step. He won’t develop into the complete player we want him to be under Baumgartner.


I really hope they take that into consideration when looking at their assistant coaches. His development is crucial for us. We better get it right.

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, dpn1 said:

I know I will get hammered for saying this but I have some concerns about Quinn's defensive game.  Quinn played 56 games, got 3 goals and 38 assists and was a -23.  If he doesn't get stronger and better defensively, will he be the #1 dman we want him to be?  Jack Rathbone only played 8 games and had 1 goal, 2 assists and was +1.  If Jack turns into a better defensive player and puts up good stats (goals and assists) but a little less than Quinn, is Jack the better choice of dmen?  If we were able to trade Quinn in the next year or so, we could use the extra money else where.  Just curious about what others think.  B)

Here's what I think...

 

Quinn Hughes had a tough season defensively.  So did Schmidt...so did Hamonic at the start of the season...so did Edler...etc.  For all intents and purposes, Hughes is a second year pro and his past two seasons have been stagnated, like everyone else. He took a giant leap forward from where everyone was expecting when he joined the team, and he took a step back this season.  It's something that happens to nearly ALL young players coming into the NHL (same can be said for Petey this season).  

 

From what I saw, Hughes' -23 was a function of trying to do too much offensively in the neutral zone and in the offensive zone.  It's also a number that's causing the usual over-reaction among the Canucks fan base.  Like all d-men (young and old), he's going to get beaten in his own zone from time to time. 

 

All of Hughes' elite skills are still intact, and he's only going to get better as he gets more acclimated and stronger with time and experience.  I get how some Canucks fans are "concerned" about this Hughes' -23, but IMHO, Hughes is going to be just fine as we go forward...and for the suggestion of how a better coach could make Hughes better, maybe the answer is someone like Larry Robinson.  Or Brad Berry from UND.

 

A coaching staff made up of Green, Brown, Doug Jarvis and Robinson would be my pick.

 

My prediction for the future: Hughes will be the next Phil Housley (20-22 minutes with a pile of points and running a top five PP)...Rathbone will be the next Ryan Suter (workhorse giving you 23-24 minutes)...they bring different attributes to the team.  Why wouldn't you want both on your roster for the next 10-12 years?  Makes me shake my head when I see suggestions that one be moved in favor of the other.

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, J-23 said:

 

Hard to be best D overall as an offensive D. Last offensive D considered the best D in the league was pre-injury Senators Karlsson when he literally was carrying them to and in the playoffs while hurt. 
 

Also a lot of good young D in today’s game. Will be interesting to see how they all pan out into their prime. Hughes definitely up there with all of them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

Hard to be best D overall as an offensive D. Last offensive D considered the best D in the league was pre-injury Senators Karlsson when he literally was carrying them to and in the playoffs while hurt. 
 

Also a lot of good young D in today’s game. Will be interesting to see how they all pan out into their prime. Hughes definitely up there with all of them. 

Hubby Bear holds the record for most points in the playoffs by a rookie D.  I would not at all be surprised to see him putting up a ppg for the next 10 years.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Hubby Bear holds the record for most points in the playoffs by a rookie D.  I would not at all be surprised to see him putting up a ppg for the next 10 years.  

Makar was right behind him though with 1 less point playing 2 less games. 
 

Heiskanen is 4th in most points by a D in a single playoffs all-time which happened in that same playoffs last year. 
 

Lots of guys will be competing for that #1 D in the league spot in the near future. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Junkyard Dog said:

Makar was right behind him though with 1 less point playing 2 less games. 
 

Heiskanen is 4th in most points by a D in a single playoffs all-time which happened in that same playoffs last year. 
 

Lots of guys will be competing for that #1 D in the league spot in the near future. 

And Quinn will be one of them.  We’ve never had “that guy” on D before. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, bigbadcanucks said:

Here's what I think...

 

Quinn Hughes had a tough season defensively.  So did Schmidt...so did Hamonic at the start of the season...so did Edler...etc.  For all intents and purposes, Hughes is a second year pro and his past two seasons have been stagnated, like everyone else. He took a giant leap forward from where everyone was expecting when he joined the team, and he took a step back this season.  It's something that happens to nearly ALL young players coming into the NHL (same can be said for Petey this season).  

 

From what I saw, Hughes' -23 was a function of trying to do too much offensively in the neutral zone and in the offensive zone.  It's also a number that's causing the usual over-reaction among the Canucks fan base.  Like all d-men (young and old), he's going to get beaten in his own zone from time to time. 

 

All of Hughes' elite skills are still intact, and he's only going to get better as he gets more acclimated and stronger with time and experience.  I get how some Canucks fans are "concerned" about this Hughes' -23, but IMHO, Hughes is going to be just fine as we go forward...and for the suggestion of how a better coach could make Hughes better, maybe the answer is someone like Larry Robinson.  Or Brad Berry from UND.

 

A coaching staff made up of Green, Brown, Doug Jarvis and Robinson would be my pick.

 

My prediction for the future: Hughes will be the next Phil Housley (20-22 minutes with a pile of points and running a top five PP)...Rathbone will be the next Ryan Suter (workhorse giving you 23-24 minutes)...they bring different attributes to the team.  Why wouldn't you want both on your roster for the next 10-12 years?  Makes me shake my head when I see suggestions that one be moved in favor of the other.

+/- is the most basic and flawed stat to evaluate the individual defensive play of any player. No one should care about his -23. He was on a crappy team that bleeds goals and chances.

 

What people SHOULD be concerned about is all the underlying issues with his defensive play. And part of the reason he can be basically a ppg dman with such a terrible minus rating in the first place.

 

Hughes is not good defensively at all. Can he get better? Of course. And he will. But realistically he is one of those players at this point who literally has to be producing points to be valuable to the team. Offensively his shot is a big weakness. Improving it would add a much needed element in a #1 guy. He needs a coach who can teach him how to use all the skills he has on the offensive side while playing without the puck defensively. He is never going to be a huge guy, or physical. He can be a good defensive player though if he learns to play within his ability. Using his speed, his mobility, and his puck movement ability to max effect defensively, not just offensively. He struggles with being too aggressive offensively too which means for the Canucks to get full value out of him I think they need to actually pair him with a true all around #1 RHD.

  • RoughGame 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

+/- is the most basic and flawed stat to evaluate the individual defensive play of any player. No one should care about his -23. He was on a crappy team that bleeds goals and chances.

 

What people SHOULD be concerned about is all the underlying issues with his defensive play. And part of the reason he can be basically a ppg dman with such a terrible minus rating in the first place.

 

Hughes is not good defensively at all. Can he get better? Of course. And he will. But realistically he is one of those players at this point who literally has to be producing points to be valuable to the team. Offensively his shot is a big weakness. Improving it would add a much needed element in a #1 guy. He needs a coach who can teach him how to use all the skills he has on the offensive side while playing without the puck defensively. He is never going to be a huge guy, or physical. He can be a good defensive player though if he learns to play within his ability. Using his speed, his mobility, and his puck movement ability to max effect defensively, not just offensively. He struggles with being too aggressive offensively too which means for the Canucks to get full value out of him I think they need to actually pair him with a true all around #1 RHD.

I'll take the words of Chris Tanev, who's very qualified to make assessments and prognostications on Quinn Hughes over anything you've got to say.  Thanks.

Edited by bigbadcanucks
Typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

First half of the year Hughes was taking way to many risks and found a better balance as the year went on.  +-!is a team stat and if we are a playoff team Hughes will be a + player.  I’m not sure he will be dominant enough in his own end to put up a lidstrom +40 though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...