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

[Discussion] A player Hughes could emulate


Recommended Posts

Disclaimer ( Mods move this to arm chair GMing if you feel it should be there but I didn't view this as purely a signing thread)

 

He costs the team nothing in assets and only costs in cap hit. 

 

He is only  27 years old so on a 4 year term the contract ends when he is 30 years old 5 year 31 years old or a 6 year contract he would only be 32 years old. 

 

he consistently averages 30 plus points per full 82 game season. 

 

He is listed as a LD/RD defenseman but shots right. 

 

Last year his cap hit was only 3.85mill he is most likely do for a raise but I can't see him getting more than 4.5 mill on a longer term deal. 

 

His Name Brandon Montour.  What do you guys think could he fit the role of of RD for Hughes. 

 

The only downside I see is he isn't as defensive as Tanev and doesn't have the physicality as Hamonic. However, I think his big upside is he understands the offensive game better than those other 2. I think he would be able to read Hughes better and understand when to pull back when Hughes is pinching or when it is time for him to join the rush.

 

With Tanev he never joined the rush because that's not his game. That's why he was able to make Hughes look so good Tanev was always there to bail Hughes out. 

 

With Hamonic and Benn they are better suited to play with guys that don't take as many risks as Hughes. They themselves are not what you would call stellar Defensive defenseman and they both lack the understanding of the offensive game. With Benn and Hamonic just like Tanev you almost loss a guy on an offensive rush. I would call Tanev a solid #3 and belongs on a shut down pair. Hamonic IMO is a 4-5 defenseman depending on how deep a teams defense is. Benn IMO is a 3rd pair defenseman who can fill in on a 2nd pair during injuries.

 

I see Hughes as a player like Montour with a far superior offensive game but with the same type of defensive skills. Hughes will never have Tanev's sense of defensiveness or Hamonics physical presence and I don't expect him to have either that's not the type of defenseman he is ever going to be like. However, Montour is some one Hughes could emulate and even surpass in defensive awareness. Montour, is good at understanding when to pinch and when not to. His game isn't based on toughest but on positional play. IMO, With Hughes speed no one should be able to get around him as long as he maintains the proper position on the opposition.  Hughes isn't going to clear the net for his goalie but with his offensive awareness he has the hockey IQ to know where the puck is going and get his stick in the way of passes or where to be when the puck is shot wide.

 

In conclusion, my theory is why should Hughes best defensive partner be his opposite. IMHO it should be someone that is a veteran who has learned the game and can teach Hughes to play the game the right way not specifically the right way but the right way that fits Hughes game. I believe that it is counter productive to find Hughes a defensive partner that covers up his mistakes and never allows him to have to improve his defensive game. Furthermore, I must ask how many Tanev's are their in the league and what would it cost to the team if they could even find one. I will give you a Canuck example, Burrows complemented the Sedin's game he was the opposite of they way they played. In this example the Key words are Sedin's and they meaning their was already 2 of them. The Sedin's where similar players they both understood the offensive game. One was slightly a better playmaker and one was slightly a better goal scorer but they both could be both. Same is true for Morrison and Naslund and Bertuzzi complemented the pair. You might already know where this example is headed. Forward lines are made up of 3s but defensive pairings are made up of 2s. So, I am questioning what type of pairing is best. Opposites that complement each others or 2 guys similar who can read off of each other and are on the same page. 

Edited by Arrow 1983
  • RoughGame 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Arrow 1983 changed the title to [signing] A player Hughes could emulate

Between Hughes, Schmidt and Rathbone, we have enough of this player type already.

 

What we need is players to compliment/support them.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Between Hughes, Schmidt and Rathbone, we have enough of this player type already.

 

What we need is players to compliment/support them.

I think Schmidt and Rathbone would make a great pairing 

both have a balance of defensive and offensive awareness and would make it difficult on other teams to defend well coming out the defensive zone. Either one of them can carry it out or make the first pass so what side does the opposition defend against. This would be true for Hughes and Montour but more dangerous. 

Than the Canucks could have OJ and Myers on the 3rd pairing. OJ I see as a more Defensive minded player with offensive awareness with Myers who is a little more likely to take offensive risks. 

That is 3 pairings that would for sure keep every line on the opposition on their toes especially on the rush.   

Edited by Arrow 1983
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • -Vintage Canuck- changed the title to [Discussion] A player Hughes could emulate
4 hours ago, BigTramFan said:

By far the best pairing for both Rathbone and Myers was: Rathbone-Myers. Their stats indicate they have excellent chemistry. Much better than OJ-Myers. So I would have Rathbone Myers as our third pairing.

 

Hamonic was a very good fit with Hughes at even strength. The reason Hughes got such a bad +/- was playing with Myers trying to chase games (see below).

 

So what we really need is a 2-way top 4 Dman to pair with Schmidt (not Edler!). Given that we need some size and grit for in our D corps, I like the look of Oleksiak paired with Schmidt.

 

 

Rathbone Myers A.JPG

hughes hamonic.JPG

I actually think Schmidt-Hamonic could unleash the best in Schmidt like his Vegas days. Sign Adam Larsson to pair with Hughes and play Rathbone-Myers as a pair. Juolevi can be dangled along with the 9OA or other picks/prospects if needed to upgrade a forward position or even two. 3C and top 6 winger.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

I actually think Schmidt-Hamonic could unleash the best in Schmidt like his Vegas days. Sign Adam Larsson to pair with Hughes and play Rathbone-Myers as a pair. Juolevi can be dangled along with the 9OA or other picks/prospects if needed to upgrade a forward position or even two. 3C and top 6 winger.

It's not a big sample size...but Schmidt-Hamonic were about the worst pairing of possible combos on the Nucks this past season in terms of giving away shots (see below).

 

A key difference between Schmidt's last two seasons was that in Vegas he was deployed against top competition but with 50% Dzone starts. In VAN he had 66% Dzone starts. He was deployed as a shutdown defenseman in VAN - he is much more a two-way defenseman and should be deployed that way.

 

In addition, I think it is overlooked, but he was playing with a much better average quality of forwards in Vegas, which meant his GF/60 and GA/60 were much better than in VAN.

 

(Edit: The below is at even strength, SF is shots for, SA is shots against)

 

 

Schmidt pairings.JPG

Hamonic combos.JPG

Edited by BigTramFan
  • Hydration 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As for the OP, we all remember how tough it was to find a player to compliment and even push the Sedins to the next level.   It took years and at the time seemed like we'd never find the right guy.   Carter managed a career season and did it one year with the Sedins but at the time seemed like that might have been more of a fluke then anything, until this french canadian kid showed up from nowhere and got his crack at the can  (out of curiosity, wonder how many players had shifts with the twins overall before Burrows came in and cemented himself on their wing? A lot!).   You'd think with players that good that they'd make anyone better, case in point that for sure isn't always true. 

 

Sure hope that won't be the case for QHs.   Hamonic was the best of the bunch, but it's not like Schmidt or Myers are chopped liver either.    Myers playing better with both Rathbone and OJ (pre-covid, he wasn't ready when he came back  - OJ) should be a bit of an eye opener.     Tree isn't coming back so scratch that off the list of potentials.   If Hamonic won't re-sign with us, feel we could be in for a long ride.   Suggest going after Manson in ANA.   Sure he's ready for a change of scenery now that they are a terrible team, and their prospect group is two-three years behind ours at least so re-signing with ANA comes with more losing for awhile at least.     The upside is massive if QHs can develop his own game to compliment any player,  but i have serious concerns we could be chasing that with his partners for some time yet.   Hamonic works and for now would be a good placeholder, but the team needs to either get a home run pro scouting trade in the works or draft the guy at this point too.   Montour might be that guy, or he might not, same with Manson.  Like the twins could have a long list of names before we hit on the right one too.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, IBatch said:

As for the OP, we all remember how tough it was to find a player to compliment and even push the Sedins to the next level.   It took years and at the time seemed like we'd never find the right guy.   Carter managed a career season and did it one year with the Sedins but at the time seemed like that might have been more of a fluke then anything, until this french canadian kid showed up from nowhere and got his crack at the can  (out of curiosity, wonder how many players had shifts with the twins overall before Burrows came in and cemented himself on their wing? A lot!).   You'd think with players that good that they'd make anyone better, case in point that for sure isn't always true. 

 

Sure hope that won't be the case for QHs.   Hamonic was the best of the bunch, but it's not like Schmidt or Myers are chopped liver either.    Myers playing better with both Rathbone and OJ (pre-covid, he wasn't ready when he came back  - OJ) should be a bit of an eye opener.     Tree isn't coming back so scratch that off the list of potentials.   If Hamonic won't re-sign with us, feel we could be in for a long ride.   Suggest going after Manson in ANA.   Sure he's ready for a change of scenery now that they are a terrible team, and their prospect group is two-three years behind ours at least so re-signing with ANA comes with more losing for awhile at least.     The upside is massive if QHs can develop his own game to compliment any player,  but i have serious concerns we could be chasing that with his partners for some time yet.   Hamonic works and for now would be a good placeholder, but the team needs to either get a home run pro scouting trade in the works or draft the guy at this point too.   Montour might be that guy, or he might not, same with Manson.  Like the twins could have a long list of names before we hit on the right one too.

Manson is my second choice behind Parayko, both one year away from UFA in a year we have a ton of space.  I'm inclined to just roll with what we have this year unless we can get someone for one year.

Edited by King Heffy
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, IBatch said:

As for the OP, we all remember how tough it was to find a player to compliment and even push the Sedins to the next level.   It took years and at the time seemed like we'd never find the right guy.   Carter managed a career season and did it one year with the Sedins but at the time seemed like that might have been more of a fluke then anything, until this french canadian kid showed up from nowhere and got his crack at the can  (out of curiosity, wonder how many players had shifts with the twins overall before Burrows came in and cemented himself on their wing? A lot!).   You'd think with players that good that they'd make anyone better, case in point that for sure isn't always true. 

 

Sure hope that won't be the case for QHs.   Hamonic was the best of the bunch, but it's not like Schmidt or Myers are chopped liver either.    Myers playing better with both Rathbone and OJ (pre-covid, he wasn't ready when he came back  - OJ) should be a bit of an eye opener.     Tree isn't coming back so scratch that off the list of potentials.   If Hamonic won't re-sign with us, feel we could be in for a long ride.   Suggest going after Manson in ANA.   Sure he's ready for a change of scenery now that they are a terrible team, and their prospect group is two-three years behind ours at least so re-signing with ANA comes with more losing for awhile at least.     The upside is massive if QHs can develop his own game to compliment any player,  but i have serious concerns we could be chasing that with his partners for some time yet.   Hamonic works and for now would be a good placeholder, but the team needs to either get a home run pro scouting trade in the works or draft the guy at this point too.   Montour might be that guy, or he might not, same with Manson.  Like the twins could have a long list of names before we hit on the right one too.

I think Burrows was just right place right time.

 

The Sedin's had matured by then and began their prime years. I think many players would have had the same success as Burrows did. To be completely honest if MG could have found any one else with even more pure talent than Burrows the Sedin's would have had even greater success. To me Burrows made MG stagnate in his thinking in that position. Everyone views Burrows as the perfect partner for the Sedin's I see Burrows as the guy MG be came content with. It work why try and improve it attitude. MG IMO was a terrible GM. He couldn't find a line mate for Kesler he thought Burrows was good enough for the Sedin and he never could get an Offensive Defenseman to stay long enough. Worse of all he totally over valued Lack in the goalie position and Markstrom at the time was nowhere near read. I still wonder what he would have done to fill that position if he hadn't been fired the only saving grace of that goaltender mess was that we ended up with Horvat.

 

I'm happy tree isn't coming back, he is to much of an unknown to give any term or money to. 

 

Hamonic is a short term solution IMO and bad for Hughes. Hughes needs a stable partner someone he and the team can rely on for 4 plus years. I see Hamonic as a 2 year thing after that Hughes would than have to get use to another partner at the time the Canucks should be in their window.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Arrow 1983 said:

I think Burrows was just right place right time.

 

The Sedin's had matured by then and began their prime years. I think many players would have had the same success as Burrows did. To be completely honest if MG could have found any one else with even more pure talent than Burrows the Sedin's would have had even greater success. To me Burrows made MG stagnate in his thinking in that position. Everyone views Burrows as the perfect partner for the Sedin's I see Burrows as the guy MG be came content with. It work why try and improve it attitude. MG IMO was a terrible GM. He couldn't find a line mate for Kesler he thought Burrows was good enough for the Sedin and he never could get an Offensive Defenseman to stay long enough. Worse of all he totally over valued Lack in the goalie position and Markstrom at the time was nowhere near read. I still wonder what he would have done to fill that position if he hadn't been fired the only saving grace of that goaltender mess was that we ended up with Horvat.

 

I'm happy tree isn't coming back, he is to much of an unknown to give any term or money to. 

 

Hamonic is a short term solution IMO and bad for Hughes. Hughes needs a stable partner someone he and the team can rely on for 4 plus years. I see Hamonic as a 2 year thing after that Hughes would than have to get use to another partner at the time the Canucks should be in their window.

 

 

Sorry we won't see eye to eye on that one, Burrows was the perfect linemate for the twins, and in many ways actually made them better players because they actually used him as well.   Agreed on Kesler, but we were also a cap team and only had so many options to improve our top six with him and the Sedins taking up 30% of the cap at the time.  Samuelson was probably his best winger.   I did love how he put the finishing touches on the D though, being 7 top four D's deep was pretty awesome.   Didn't back Mitchell which was his only mistake but understandable at the time in that regard.    

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/20/2021 at 11:11 AM, IBatch said:

Sorry we won't see eye to eye on that one, Burrows was the perfect linemate for the twins, and in many ways actually made them better players because they actually used him as well.   Agreed on Kesler, but we were also a cap team and only had so many options to improve our top six with him and the Sedins taking up 30% of the cap at the time.  Samuelson was probably his best winger.   I did love how he put the finishing touches on the D though, being 7 top four D's deep was pretty awesome.   Didn't back Mitchell which was his only mistake but understandable at the time in that regard.    

People forget just how good defensively Burrows was in his prime.  It wasn't just Kesler, as good defensively that guy was.  That is what we seriously lack up front today.  You can't expect your goalie to bail you out every game.  Sometimes even the opposition has a great goalie.

 

He didn't need power play time to get 30+ goals.  In fact most or all of it was at even strength.

Edited by NewbieCanuckFan
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

People forget just how good defensively Burrows was in his prime.  It wasn't just Kesler, as good defensively that guy was.  That is what we seriously lack up front today.  You can't expect your goalie to bail you out every game.  Sometimes even the opposition has a great goalie.

 

He didn't need power play time to get 30+ goals.  In fact most or all of it was at even strength.

Personally, i felt Burrows was every bit as, if not more important to that team as Kesler was which says a lot.  Another guy that was important, was Bieksa.   Those two guys were heart and soul guys.   Without them we would have  never gelled and had that run.  In 2010 i thought Kesler was the US best forward ... that guy didn't know the meaning of quit.  Neither did Burrows .

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Personally, i felt Burrows was every bit as, if not more important to that team as Kesler was which says a lot.  Another guy that was important, was Bieksa.   Those two guys were heart and soul guys.   Without them we would have  never gelled and had that run.  In 2010 i thought Kesler was the US best forward ... that guy didn't know the meaning of quit.  Neither did Burrows .

Rarely would I ever say about a NHL player but I that wished Kesler actually work LESS hard during the season.  Guy never knew the word "pace himself".:lol:  Seriously, you often need that extra gear in the post-season.

 

But yeah, you need the unheralded guys that would do all the dirty work as well as the "stars".  That's why it was a pleasure to see Hogs work his ass off every shift.

Edited by NewbieCanuckFan
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

Rarely would I ever say about a NHL player but I that wished Kesler actually work LESS hard during the season.  Guy never knew the word "pace himself".:lol:  Seriously, you often need that extra gear in the post-season.

 

But yeah, you need the unheralded guys that would do all the dirty work as well as the "stars".  That's why it was a pleasure to see Hogs work his ass off every shift.

If a team works it's ass off every shift like Motte and Hogs they become champions.   Get the pacing as it is important.   Can't wait to see what Podz does.    We have some really cool parts. I don't think TG is a bad or a great coach, but do like that like Poile and Trotz,  the organization is fine with giving them a chance to become great together.  See next year as a pivotal one.   JB doesn't have to rely on an extra year or an extra 500k on his deals anymore.  Players want it play with good players.   We have some.   

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...