F James Hagens - Boston College, NCAA (2025 Draft) Part 2

[Juxtaposer]

Time to rant.

I really don't get what Brown's doing with Hagens in general and I think it's hurt his draft stock. I don't think Hagens' draft stock really matters that much to his long term development (and it'll probably be in his best interest if he's not picked by say Chicago), but it is still tough to watch.

The Perreault-Hagens-Leonard line never clicked. They could still be productive, but that's because they're all ridiculously talented and smart. And yet, it took over half the season to break them up.

I like the Perreault-Hagens-Stiga line well enough. It would not have been my first choice, as I'd try Stiga-Hagens-Leonard, but that's nitpicking. The Berard-Hagens-Stiga line is beyond dumb. Berard is not a top 6 forward. Vote is clearly the best option for a top 6 forward with Jellvik injured. I'd do Vote-Gasseau-Leonard and keep the Perreault-Hagens-Stiga line together, but there are plenty of other combos worth trying.

I haven't seen the past couple of games, so I haven't seen Hagens on PP2. But to my eye, he is not the issue. I think PP1's issues largely stem from their PPQB. I want to see them try Michael Hagens or Minnetian on PP1.

All of this has limited Hagens both from a production standpoint and from a performance standpoint which has people questioning his abilities.

And none of this gets into what I think Brown's biggest weakness which his inability to make in-game adjustments. But that's not really for this thread.

Fully agree on Brown, no question. I don't think the situation at BC ended up as good a fit in reality as it did on paper. And I've been griping about BC not having a good PPQB since last year (Eamon Powell is Not It and Gustafsson isn't much better).

Still, you'd want to see a #1 overall caliber prospect overcome that.

 

[clevelandcane]

I think he meant the NCAA, which is better than the OHL. USHL doesn't come close but the U18's do play a lot of college teams.

The guy clearly is a Hagens homer regardless.

Or he just thinks Hagens is 1 overall.

 

[wickedwitch]

BC had the second best powerplay percentage in the country last year, so that would challenge the idea that Brown's system can't work.

But that is with different players. This system isn't fatally flawed, but it clearly doesn't work with these players. A good coach would adapt their system to their current players.

 

[Wieters]

But that is with different players. This system isn't fatally flawed, but it clearly doesn't work with these players. A good coach would adapt their system to their current players.

Obviously Greg Brown is not beyond reproach, but I think it's overzealous to say he's not a good coach. All of your critiques are about his deployment of forwards and the offensive special teams and neglect to treat the defensive side of the ice. Laser focusing on the offense only is pretty common for fans to do in any sport, but it is an incomplete treatment when discussing a coach or a team as a whole. BC is an elite team in terms of shots allowed, goals, and penalty kills. Brown himself was a defenseman, so it would make sense that the identity of his teams is going to be defensive rather than offensive. He's in his third season as the coach at BC and fourth season as a head coach at any level, so maybe he is still figuring things out on the offensive side. But Brown has led the best team in the country for the majority of his tenure as head coach, and that isn't simply due to recruiting.

Personally, I think much ado is being made about Hagens as a result of the subjective/idiosyncratic expectations people have as to what a "1OA" is supposed to look like, which people almost entirely base on box score production. This in turn leads to scapegoating of the coach or his teammates or Hagens himself. Add onto that the nationalistic dynamics and people are wringing their hands over concerns that probably don't exist outside the confines of hfboards. Hagens is a productive, pivotal, and trusted player on the best team in the country as one of the youngest players in the country. The advanced metrics--which are more reliable than the "eye test" that many here trip over themselves to declare Hagens has failed--seem to corroborate that Hagens is performing the way you would want to see a 1C perform. Warping that into a lamentation about Hagens and how the coaching staff has let him down is getting lost in the sauce. Not addressing any one poster specifically, just a general comment on the discourse around Hagens.

 

[wickedwitch]

Obviously Greg Brown is not beyond reproach, but I think it's overzealous to say he's not a good coach. All of your critiques are about his deployment of forwards and the offensive special teams and neglect to treat the defensive side of the ice. Laser focusing on the offense only is pretty common for fans to do in any sport, but it is an incomplete treatment when discussing a coach or a team as a whole. BC is an elite team in terms of shots allowed, goals, and penalty kills. Brown himself was a defenseman, so it would make sense that the identity of his teams is going to be defensive rather than offensive. He's in his third season as the coach at BC and fourth season as a head coach at any level, so maybe he is still figuring things out on the offensive side. But Brown has led the best team in the country for the majority of his tenure as head coach, and that isn't simply due to recruiting.

Personally, I think much ado is being made about Hagens as a result of the subjective/idiosyncratic expectations people have as to what a "1OA" is supposed to look like, which people almost entirely base on box score production. This in turn leads to scapegoating of the coach or his teammates or Hagens himself. Add onto that the nationalistic dynamics and people are wringing their hands over concerns that probably don't exist outside the confines of hfboards. Hagens is a productive, pivotal, and trusted player on the best team in the country as one of the youngest players in the country. The advanced metrics--which are more reliable than the "eye test" that many here trip over themselves to declare Hagens has failed--seem to corroborate that Hagens is performing the way you would want to see a 1C perform. Warping that into a lamentation about Hagens and how the coaching staff has let him down is getting lost in the sauce.

Oh, I love what he's doing with the defense. And I have noticed it. It's incredibly impressive. And he deserves a ton of credit for it. But the defense needs to be balanced with the offense. And the PP is obviously completely separate.

I still think Hagens will be a 1C. I've never written otherwise. But I think his strengths are being hidden less because of a defensive system, but because of poor offensive deployment. The good defensive system is helping BC win. The mediocre offense and terrible PP is not helping BC win and not helping Hagens.

And I'm not saying Brown is doomed as a coach, just that he has very real issues now. Like anybody in his situation, there are going to be struggles. It's about how he responds to those struggles that will determine if he can be a successful college coach. But unfortunately, that response is not likely to be on a timescale that helps Hagens draft position.

 

[Wieters]

Oh, I love what he's doing with the defense. And I have noticed it. It's incredibly impressive. And he deserves a ton of credit for it. But the defense needs to be balanced with the offense. And the PP is obviously completely separate.

I still think Hagens will be a 1C. I've never written otherwise. But I think his strengths are being hidden less because of a defensive system, but because of poor offensive deployment. The good defensive system is helping BC win. The mediocre offense and terrible PP is not helping BC win and not helping Hagens.

And I'm not saying Brown is doomed as a coach, just that he has very real issues now. Like anybody in his situation, there are going to be struggles. It's about how he responds to those struggles that will determine if he can be a successful college coach. But unfortunately, that response is not likely to be on a timescale that helps Hagens draft position.

That's all fair enough. Just wanted to give a complete picture of Brown and Hagens. For what it's worth, I have been impressed with Hagens' 200-foot game and feel it is underrated in the discussion surrounding him, so maybe BC's defensive focus isn't all for naught if it rubs off on Hagens.

I would imagine Hagens' floor is third overall with a perfectly good shot that he regains the top spot if he and the team have a big NCAA tournament. And going into this season, it was pretty well accepted that there was competition for the first overall spot. So despite a lot of the discussion on here, how much has really changed? Hagens remains an elite prospect who still has a chance at being the top overall prospect of his draft class. There might be small machinations that have changed, but his general trajectory remains pretty steady.

 

[Favin]

Thanks! In case it wasn't noted already, everyone there is listed in their draft year except Smith who was D+1 in 2024.

Yes...all first-year players in NCAA

 

[Favin]

Fully agree on Brown, no question. I don't think the situation at BC ended up as good a fit in reality as it did on paper. And I've been griping about BC not having a good PPQB since last year (Eamon Powell is Not It and Gustafsson isn't much better).

Still, you'd want to see a #1 overall caliber prospect overcome that.

I think there is something to this.

Celebrini had Hutson. Fantilli had Luke Hughes. Eichel had Grzelcyk. Cooley had one of the best NCAA bluelines ever. BC is a real top-heavy team...but not a ton of offense from blue line. And their power play is anemic.

On paper, Wisconsin 2020-21 was built similarly (great top-6, no offensive dmen). They used five forwards on power play, which was #1 in the nation.

Hagens may need a Caufield-esque run from mid-February onward. And to do that, BC may need to take a page from Granato's playbook.

 

[Juxtaposer]

That's all fair enough. Just wanted to give a complete picture of Brown and Hagens. For what it's worth, I have been impressed with Hagens' 200-foot game and feel it is underrated in the discussion surrounding him, so maybe BC's defensive focus isn't all for naught if it rubs off on Hagens.

I would imagine Hagens' floor is third overall with a perfectly good shot that he regains the top spot if he and the team have a big NCAA tournament. And going into this season, it was pretty well accepted that there was competition for the first overall spot. So despite a lot of the discussion on here, how much has really changed? Hagens remains an elite prospect who still has a chance at being the top overall prospect of his draft class. There might be small machinations that have changed, but his general trajectory remains pretty steady.

See, this is a reasonable take. I think "3rd overall floor, but within shouting distance of 1st if he steps up for the remainder of the season" is where I'm at too.

I also think that "is Hagens a future #1C?" is one of those questions where the answer is "depends on your definition of #1C". Could he be a top-30 center in the league? Yes, absolutely I think he could. As I've said, my expectation for him is consistent 70 point player with good two-way and special teams utility, and that would put him as a top-30 center in the NHL. I do think the floor on Hagens is really high, because of the skating and smarts and two-way ability. I think he's a true center despite his size.

The question in my mind, and likely in scouts' minds, is upside.

In your opinion, how has Hagens improved since the beginning of the year, other than just adjusting to the collegiate-level pace of play? That's where I'm finding trouble; he looks like the same player to me that he did twelve months ago, and I want to see meaningful improvement. I remember watching Will Smith's first collegiate game and he frankly looked really bad. It wasn't til the second half that he really took off and took control of the ice. He had 23 points in 17 games pre-WJC, and 48 points in 24 games post-WJC. Thats the sort of jump in scoring I want to see from Hagens (meaning a >0.5 PPG jump, not that I expect him to score 2 PPG the rest of the way). Hagens adjusted to NCAA hockey way faster than Smith (and I anticipate Hagens adjusting to NHL hockey way faster than Smith), but where's the growth?

 

[Wieters]

See, this is a reasonable take. I think "3rd overall floor, but within shouting distance of 1st if he steps up for the remainder of the season" is where I'm at too.

I also think that "is Hagens a future #1C?" is one of those questions where the answer is "depends on your definition of #1C". Could he be a top-30 center in the league? Yes, absolutely I think he could. As I've said, my expectation for him is consistent 70 point player with good two-way and special teams utility, and that would put him as a top-30 center in the NHL. I do think the floor on Hagens is really high, because of the skating and smarts and two-way ability. I think he's a true center despite his size.

The question in my mind, and likely in scouts' minds, is upside.

In your opinion, how has Hagens improved since the beginning of the year, other than just adjusting to the collegiate-level pace of play? That's where I'm finding trouble; he looks like the same player to me that he did twelve months ago, and I want to see meaningful improvement. I remember watching Will Smith's first collegiate game and he frankly looked really bad. It wasn't til the second half that he really took off and took control of the ice. He had 23 points in 17 games pre-WJC, and 48 points in 24 games post-WJC. Thats the sort of jump in scoring I want to see from Hagens (meaning a >0.5 PPG jump, not that I expect him to score 2 PPG the rest of the way). Hagens adjusted to NCAA hockey way faster than Smith (and I anticipate Hagens adjusting to NHL hockey way faster than Smith), but where's the growth?

That is a perfectly fair question re. improvement. His box score statistics are actually down on average since the WJC compared to before then, so you can't really point to that. Although I will say that part of the reason why is simply because he hasn't been on the same line with Leonard since the break, which hurts a player who primarily racks up points through assists.

I think it's worth saying that part of the reason why Hagens might not be making leaps and bounds is because he came in as a very polished player. There really has never been much to dislike about his game. That's probably why he was the presumptive top prospect going into this season, and none of that has changed. He is decisive, responsible, willing, technical, and skilled. And he pretty much always has been.

The comparison to Will Smith is a good one because there are obvious parallels to the two given that they have followed almost the exact same trajectory. And though you're right that Smith did get better as his college season went along, that is because Smith had much more to improve upon than Hagens did. Let me be clear that I love Smith's game, and I think he has rare creativity that surpasses that of Hagens. But as I'm sure you know as a Sharks fan (I think?), he is prone to being overly ambitious, which results in mistakes. Plus he can get caught being floaty more often than you would like for a player you dream of being a 1C (in the abstract; not in the Sharks' case because of Celebrini). Hagens has not had those flaws to improve upon. He creates boring but high probability chances more than dazzling but risky ones, he is responsible with the puck and very rarely turns it over, and he is engaged in both zones. Those are all things that Smith needed to (and still needs to) get better at that Hagens didn't.

The other thing I will say about Hagens is that I think he is unfairly criticized for not being the driver on his line. He walked into a situation with Leonard/Perreault where he is the new guy alongside two of the best players in the world who aren't playing in the NHL. And those two guys have been playing with each other for years. If Hagens had tried to commandeer the line to fit his will, it would have been a red flag to me. I think it's a sign of maturity that he was willing to adapt to his circumstances. And I think adaptability will be a hallmark of Hagens' game for the long haul. Since he does everything well and there is no diva to him, he can fit in with pretty much any linemates. Again to draw the comparison to Smith, he is the type of player who needs certain linemates to maximize his talents; I don't think that's the case as much with Hagens.

Maybe this is a bit of an apologist's take, and I would probably argue this is why almost every prospect, including Hagens, would do well to come back for a second year of school. Hagens' biggest improvement will probably come from spending more time in the weight room, which a college schedule allows for. He would also be in the Leonard/Perreault role next year if he came back rather than being the guy who has to take a backseat as a freshman, and that allows prospects to assert their own will a bit more before returning to the pipsqueak role in the NHL.

If I had to name any one area in specific that Hagens has improved, I would say it's his compete/physicality. He punches above his weight class in the sense that you very rarely see him get bodied, and he is more than happy to get in the mix both to separate the other guy from the puck or else help his teammates on the boards. And that is something that I have noticed tick up as the year has gone on. Even in games in the second half where he has not put up any points on the scoresheet, I notice him getting involved consistently in a way that I didn't in the first half. And I think this underscores the floor with Hagens you're mentioning and that I agree with. He's just a very good player that any NHL team would be happy to have.

 

[Juxtaposer]

That is a perfectly fair question re. improvement. His box score statistics are actually down on average since the WJC compared to before then, so you can't really point to that. Although I will say that part of the reason why is simply because he hasn't been on the same line with Leonard since the break, which hurts a player who primarily racks up points through assists.

I think it's worth saying that part of the reason why Hagens might not be making leaps and bounds is because he came in as a very polished player. There really has never been much to dislike about his game. That's probably why he was the presumptive top prospect going into this season, and none of that has changed. He is decisive, responsible, willing, technical, and skilled. And he pretty much always has been.

The comparison to Will Smith is a good one because there are obvious parallels to the two given that they have followed almost the exact same trajectory. And though you're right that Smith did get better as his college season went along, that is because Smith had much more to improve upon than Hagens did. Let me be clear that I love Smith's game, and I think he has rare creativity that surpasses that of Hagens. But as I'm sure you know as a Sharks fan (I think?), he is prone to being overly ambitious, which results in mistakes. Plus he can get caught being floaty more often than you would like for a player you dream of being a 1C (in the abstract; not in the Sharks' case because of Celebrini). Hagens has not had those flaws to improve upon. He creates boring but high probability chances more than dazzling but risky ones, he is responsible with the puck and very rarely turns it over, and he is engaged in both zones. Those are all things that Smith needed to (and still needs to) get better at that Hagens didn't.

The other thing I will say about Hagens is that I think he is unfairly criticized for not being the driver on his line. He walked into a situation with Leonard/Perreault where he is the new guy alongside two of the best players in the world who aren't playing in the NHL. And those two guys have been playing with each other for years. If Hagens had tried to commandeer the line to fit his will, it would have been a red flag to me. I think it's a sign of maturity that he was willing to adapt to his circumstances. And I think adaptability will be a hallmark of Hagens' game for the long haul. Since he does everything well and there is no diva to him, he can fit in with pretty much any linemates. Again to draw the comparison to Smith, he is the type of player who needs certain linemates to maximize his talents; I don't think that's the case as much with Hagens.

Maybe this is a bit of an apologist's take, and I would probably argue this is why almost every prospect, including Hagens, would do well to come back for a second year of school. Hagens' biggest improvement will probably come from spending more time in the weight room, which a college schedule allows for. He would also be in the Leonard/Perreault role next year if he came back rather than being the guy who has to take a backseat as a freshman, and that allows prospects to assert their own will a bit more before returning to the pipsqueak role in the NHL.

If I had to name any one area in specific that Hagens has improved, I would say it's his compete/physicality. He punches above his weight class in the sense that you very rarely see him get bodied, and he is more than happy to get in the mix both to separate the other guy from the puck or else help his teammates on the boards. And that is something that I have noticed tick up as the year has gone on. Even in games in the second half where he has not put up any points on the scoresheet, I notice him getting involved consistently in a way that I didn't in the first half. And I think this underscores the floor with Hagens you're mentioning and that I agree with. He's just a very good player that any NHL team would be happy to have.

You definitely hit the nail on the head where it comes to areas for improvement for Smith and Hagens. Smith came in with certain elite attributes and a LOT of bad habits to fix. Hagens came in with basically no real flaws to his game, but maybe some work to do on developing elite attributes.

My point is more than I would like to see Hagens push the envelope a little more when it comes to flashing high-end skill. Smith has definitely had an up-and-down season in the NHL, but he's always flashed elite skill, whether it's quick and accurate wrist shots capable of deceiving NHL goaltenders, puck-handling moves that fool NHL defenders and create offensive opportunities, or crazy passes that you can't even see coming as a spectator from above. Hagens has the baseline of "definitely an NHL player" that Smith didn't and had to work through (and still has a ways to go on, honestly), but I don't see the high-end flashes from Hagens that I did and do see in Smith.

The question is then, to your point about Hagens' lack of ego, is why. Is it because Hagens doesn't have the high-end skill Smith does? Is it because he doesn't have the confidence to do it because he doesn't want to rock the boat with Perreault and Leonard? Is it because Brown will punish him if he tries something and fails? My instinct is towards the second of those three options, but the uncertainty of why is at the core of my uneasiness with Hagens' ultimate upside. It could very well be the latter and he is sacrificing his own draft stock for the sake of playing a team game. I wanted Hagens to be separated from Leonard specifically because I wanted Hagens to be the primary puck-carrier on his line and have the confidence to be the man. But it almost feels like Stiga carries the puck more than him. It's a bit confounding, honestly.

Either way, completely agree that Hagens needs another year at BC. Getting to be the guy in charge when Perreault and Leonard leave while still having a good running mate in Stiga will hopefully help him develop the elite attributes to be a dominate NHL 1C. I believe the skill is there, I just need to see it.

 

[rsteen]

You definitely hit the nail on the head where it comes to areas for improvement for Smith and Hagens. Smith came in with certain elite attributes and a LOT of bad habits to fix. Hagens came in with basically no real flaws to his game, but maybe some work to do on developing elite attributes.

My point is more than I would like to see Hagens push the envelope a little more when it comes to flashing high-end skill.

This is starting to remind me a little of the Shane Wright pre-draft discourse. Wright's had a few bumps inthe development pathway (which Hagen's shouldn't have) but is doing fine now. But not the ceiling you'd hope for at 1OA.

 

[Wieters]

You definitely hit the nail on the head where it comes to areas for improvement for Smith and Hagens. Smith came in with certain elite attributes and a LOT of bad habits to fix. Hagens came in with basically no real flaws to his game, but maybe some work to do on developing elite attributes.

My point is more than I would like to see Hagens push the envelope a little more when it comes to flashing high-end skill. Smith has definitely had an up-and-down season in the NHL, but he's always flashed elite skill, whether it's quick and accurate wrist shots capable of deceiving NHL goaltenders, puck-handling moves that fool NHL defenders and create offensive opportunities, or crazy passes that you can't even see coming as a spectator from above. Hagens has the baseline of "definitely an NHL player" that Smith didn't and had to work through (and still has a ways to go on, honestly), but I don't see the high-end flashes from Hagens that I did and do see in Smith.

The question is then, to your point about Hagens' lack of ego, is why. Is it because Hagens doesn't have the high-end skill Smith does? Is it because he doesn't have the confidence to do it because he doesn't want to rock the boat with Perreault and Leonard? Is it because Brown will punish him if he tries something and fails? My instinct is towards the second of those three options, but the uncertainty of why is at the core of my uneasiness with Hagens' ultimate upside. It could very well be the latter and he is sacrificing his own draft stock for the sake of playing a team game. I wanted Hagens to be separated from Leonard specifically because I wanted Hagens to be the primary puck-carrier on his line and have the confidence to be the man. But it almost feels like Stiga carries the puck more than him. It's a bit confounding, honestly.

Either way, completely agree that Hagens needs another year at BC. Getting to be the guy in charge when Perreault and Leonard leave while still having a good running mate in Stiga will hopefully help him develop the elite attributes to be a dominate NHL 1C. I believe the skill is there, I just need to see it.

These are good questions that are much more productive than the commentariat who check in every now and then to regurgitate a box score or say that Hagens doesn’t have the “it” factor.

As a shooter, I think Hagens is more technical than skilled. His shooting form is picture perfect and reproducible, which results in consistently good puck placement on the net. But you don't see many shots come off of his stick that are unstoppable. So in that sense I think there’s a ceiling there.

But as to the main facet of his game, which is playmaking, I think there is another level to unlock there compared to what he has shown. This pass to Leonard stands out to me as a pass that is low probability given the velocity the pass required to get to Leonard in time to beat the goalie’s skate, but Hagens does have the vision and release to make it. He usually turns down those chances for ones that are safer, but he picked his spot here and it worked. One thing you really never see him doing is the spin-o-rama. Could he do that? I mean sure, why not? But it’s almost purposeful on his part that he doesn’t want to just throw the puck into the void and hope it turns out well. To me that says it’s his approach more than it is physical/psychological limitations.

Hopefully we get to see some high-end skill in the conference/national tournaments when the occasion will almost certainly call for it.

 

[wickedwitch]

The question is then, to your point about Hagens' lack of ego, is why. Is it because Hagens doesn't have the high-end skill Smith does? Is it because he doesn't have the confidence to do it because he doesn't want to rock the boat with Perreault and Leonard? Is it because Brown will punish him if he tries something and fails? My instinct is towards the second of those three options, but the uncertainty of why is at the core of my uneasiness with Hagens' ultimate upside. It could very well be the latter and he is sacrificing his own draft stock for the sake of playing a team game. I wanted Hagens to be separated from Leonard specifically because I wanted Hagens to be the primary puck-carrier on his line and have the confidence to be the man. But it almost feels like Stiga carries the puck more than him. It's a bit confounding, honestly.

Leonard mentioned in an interview (maybe during WJC) that he and Perreault wanted Hagens to be more vocal when playing with them.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

This is starting to remind me a little of the Shane Wright pre-draft discourse. Wright's had a few bumps inthe development pathway (which Hagen's shouldn't have) but is doing fine now. But not the ceiling you'd hope for at 1OA.

Shane Wright has more points this season than Slafkovsky playing 3+ minutes less per game. He’s a clear top 5 player from the 2022 draft, and you can probably argue all the way up to #2. Shane Wright would’ve been an absolutely fine pick at 1OA compared to what Montreal got, and what’s realistic to expect out of a 1OA.

Here are some of the 1OA’s since 2010 (14 drafts): Taylor Hall, RNH, Nail Yakupov, Aaron Ekblad, Nico Hischier, Alexis Lafreniere, Owen Power, Juraj Slafkovsky.

You realize the median outcome of a 1OA is like Hischier/Ekblad and not McDavid or Matthews? There’s nothing wrong with the level of Hagens for 1OA. He would not even be close to the worst 1OA in that stretch. Would probably be in the middle of that group of 14 pre-draft.

Being compared to Shane Wright has become a bad thing, and it’s such an unfair narrative to him (and whoever he’s compared to). Maybe if you thought he would be a generational player he’s a disappointment, but you could say the same about Bedard. Wasn’t a generational talent, got unfairly anointed as such, and now he’s looked at as a disappointment because he didn’t reach an unfair bar. You could say the same thing about most high picks. Very few actually become as good as their perceived ceiling.