Maybe in the abstract of reading a profile as a "tenacious forechecker" who "scores around the net". But they are very very different players in actuality.
DeBrusk is bigger and significantly faster among other things. But the most important thing is, DeBrusk is a player who has shown that he
can actually play with smart, skilled players effectively.
Hoglander is great at what he does, but he plays a super disjointed game that always seems totalyl out of sync with guys like Pettersson/Miller/Boeser. It's all about broken plays and turnovers with him. DeBrusk is a guy who forechecks well, can free the puck up to more creative linemates...and has more of a knack for reading off them to jump into soft areas around the net or just mash pucks in (a lot like Burrows used to excel at).
DeBrusks speed also gives him the ability to be much more of a factor through the neutral zone. Which is something this team really needed.
Last year he played a lot with Coyle/Marchand, or Zacha/Pasta. Year before that he was mostly with Bergeron/Marchand. I it that speaks positively to his ability to play effectively with good, smart, "top line" type players.
As for the Powerplay thing...well...if there's
any real margin for a lot of potential "surplus value" in this contract, it's probably in seeing what he can do with a bigger Powerplay role. He's just never really been a big powerplay guy. More of a "2nd afterthought unit" guy for the most part.
Some of that is personnel and opportunity ahead of him in priority in Boston. The real question is going to be...how much of that is just an "ability" or "aptitude" thing? For all the things DeBrusk does well...he is absolutely
not a very creative player. North-South directness can be really effective and is much needed here at even strength, but can become a liability on the powerplay.
But to me, it's something that i think is at least worth giving a bigger look here. He's got all the attributes for it to work on paper. But there are plenty of good players who just don't have the natural "creativity" offensively to thrive on the Powerplay. Never know 'til you put it to the test.
Whether he works out as a potential component of that top Powerplay Unit though, is basically the difference between being a 20-30G - 40-50Pt predominantly ES scoring winger...and more of a 30G+ 65Pts sort of winger.
Exactly. Similar vein to Mikheyev in what they're trying to add here...but Mikheyev was a
far bigger reach. Both bigger, speedy two-way guys who can add that dimension. Neither is going to give you much in the way of creative playmaking (and that's reflected in Goal-skewed lower point totals overall). But DeBrusk is a noticeably more physically involved, and a far more natural goal-scorer. Better shooter, way better hands around the net, and just far better instincts for it.
There's a reason DeBrusk in a "down year" as a goal scorer (with a gimpy hand for part of the season) still potted 20G which is more or less the fluky "high water mark" for Mikheyev's career. It's why in a "good year" DeBrusk has multiple seasons under his belt with 27G, pacing at a 30G+ rate. It's basically the difference between a "20-30 Goal Scorer" in DeBrusk...vs a "10-20 Goal Scorer" in Mikheyev. They might slightly overlap sometimes, but the upper and lower bounds are
very different. Even before he busted up his knee, ain't nobody would've ever dreamed of any scenario where Mikky would manage to score 27G in a season.
That's not a pipe dream with DeBrusk...it's something he's
actually done. Multiple times.
And the Playoff goals thing is not something to dismiss either. It's not leaning on one of those Sean Bergenheim type runs or whatever, of lucky, unsustainable performance. With DeBrusk, it's a bigger track record for one thing. But more importantly, it's the
way that he tends to score his goals. He can and does score off the rush...but more importantly, he thrives in getting to the inside and scoring from there. Which is the area that especially against Nashville...the Canucks struggled mightily to break into. Those are the "playoff goals".
You me, and everyone else too. Problem is exactly that though. Everyone would love to just add "true goal scorers" all over the place. So they almost never really come available. Best you're gonna find is deeply, sometimes catastrophically flawed ones. Very old ones. Traded for ones (with what capital?). Or you draft and develop them, and then try to trade them away ones (like Boeser).
Or you settle for the next best thing...which is a guy like DeBrusk who has demonstrated the ability to reach from that "20G echelon" into the territory of that "30G range".
The biggest thing really missing from DeBrusk's arsenal is a boatload of PP One Timers ripped from the circle or whatever. To put it in context, i think most would call Stamkos a "Actual True Goal Scorer" of the first order. Yet...at even strength over the last couple years:
Stamkos = 41 EVG in 160 Games.
DeBrusk = 36 EVG in 144 Games.
*
and DeBrusk has also started to add a shorthanded scoring trick to his bag.
So if what we really need is a guy to stand on the dot and rip powerplay onetimers...well, maybe he ain't our guy. But at even strength over the last 2-4 years...DeBrusk has been one of the top70-80ish "real actual
even strength goal scorers" in the entire league. Which isn't perfect, but it's a pretty decent start imo.