Regarding Makar and Hughes, I think that the voters might be suffering from a bit of primacy bias, which is kind of the opposite of recency bias. They're judging the two players more on the past rather than the present.
Hughes is on top this season in every major category with the exception of points per games played, where he is virtually dead-even with Makar at 1.22 points per game. So, the offensive output for the two players is identical, but on defence, Hughes now has the edge. Just three years ago someone even hinting at this notion would have been referred to as someone who's in need of a wellness check. Not so anymore.
This began three years ago with Hughes recognizing his weaknesses on defence. He then said in the off-season that he was going to address those weaknesses, and he then went out and did exactly that, and then some. His improvement went far beyond what even the most optimistic of Canucks fans thought possible. Then, the next off-season after that, Hughes said that he needed to improve on offence, and again he went out and did exactly that. Now, with his vastly improved points and goal production this season, he is tops in the league.
Jesus, just how high is this guy's ceiling? He's only 24 years old.
The caveat though is that just using the eye test and hard stats, these two elite defencemen are so close in skill level that no one's opinion, be it in favour of Hughes or in favour of Makar, is really wrong. People from both camps have a strong case. It's like trying to choose between a beautifully marbled ribeye, or a bacon-wrapped filet mignon smothered in Béarnaise sauce.
People, this is a rare thing. Normally, when it comes to elite NHL defencemen you'd have one who is a clear cut above everyone else. Not so anymore. I get why Avs fans think Cale Makar is the best in the league, because like Quinn Hughes, he kind of is.
