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

[Kennerback]

Yes I guess the better word would be underhyped. You are right in that it was largely due to the overwhelming Bedard hype a year earlier.

Celebrini has a pattern. First, he skates the puck from blue line to blue line himself, enters the zone and immediately passes (and never misses) his winger. He then tricks the coverage getting himself open. He’ll shoot on reception. His shot is deadly. NHL Defences have not adapted.

For Bedard they have adapted on some of his patterns. On zone entry, instead of Celebrini’s give-and-go Bedard took the high slot and shot. NHL Ds now stuff him high and unlike Juniors it’s much harder to go around the Ds.

To do the same to Celebrini, they need to either trap him between the two blue lines, or not fall for his tricks shaking coverage on the reception of the give and go. Will Celebrini continue fooling defenses? Will Bedard adjust to the Ds adjustements like Gretzky and other generational players? I think time will tell if the level of Bedard hype was justified.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Flash-forward to the NHL, Fantilli is struggling to hit .5PPG for a pretty decent CBJ team this year (all I heard last year were complaints about the team). Eichel has had a career that I think maybe isn’t impossible for Fantilli to replicate, but it’ll be hard and I personally have never seen that level of upside in his game. The PPG differences didn’t matter that much to me. It was clear to me using my eyes that Fantilli was not Eichel level, if you used the context of their scoring.

Fantilli has great physical tools but needs to improve on the mental side of things. I'm not saying he won't get there, but it's probably the biggest barrier that is currently preventing him from making an impact right now.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

The WJC means very little. He is playing with guys he has played with all year. The others aren't.

Are you kidding? So because a player plays well with some linemates he’s played with for 10-15 games in the past it means that the performance is invalid? And you realize they haven’t played together all year for BC. It’s been most, but not all. Probably like 65% of the time. You should only speak on topics you know about.

What about the players on like literally every team at the WJC that have experience playing with linemates in the past? You can probably find someone on every single team that has more than 10-15 games prior playing with a linemate or two.

 

[Hale The Villain]

Oh brother, not this again.

James Hagens and Macklin Celebrini were born in the same year. Macklin Celebrini is a little over four months older than James Hagens. Internationally, they are the same age. Draft year is not relevant when it comes to international, NTDP, and NCAA play. Birth year is.

At the 2023 U18, Macklin Celebrini put up 15 points in 7 games. At the same tournament, James Hagens put up 5 points in 7 games.

At the 2024 WJC, 17 year old Macklin Celebrini put up 8 points in 5 games. James Hagens didn't play.

In 2023-2024, Macklin Celebrini scored 64 points in 38 NCAA games (1.68 PPG) as a 17 year old. James Hagens scored 102 points in 58 NTDP games (1.76 PPG) as a 17 year old. Hagens destroyed the U18, but Celebrini had graduated out already even though he was eligible to play.

In 2024-2025, 18-year-old Macklin Celebrini has 29 points in 33 NHL games. 18 year old James Hagens has 20 points in 18 NCAA games and had 9 points in 7 WJC games.

Macklin Celebrini has been better than James Hagens every step of the way. If James Hagens were born two months earlier or Macklin Celebrini three months later, there would be no debate that Celebrini would go 1st overall amongst reasonable people.

I'm sure there will be some draft year truthers who disagree, but frankly, I'm tired of arguing with them. I'm more than happy to let their NHL careers play out and do the arguing for me.

From my experience I've found it's almost impossible to explain this to some people.

Even if they start to catch on they eventually revert back to thinking differences in number of days alive is far more important to development than number of hockey seasons played prior to being drafted, which is asinine.

 

[montreal]

I respect your opinion. I was just saying I disagreed. Didn't want to start a fight, but I was responding to @Frank Drebin's post, and he asked about the differences, so I was merely saying I see it differently from you in that respect.

I agree with you about Hage. I said in May before he was drafted that I can see how it happens. I don't want to take too much credit for that idea. I heard it elsewhere, and it made sense to me. I initially on my own just thought of him as a guy who'll be an offensive center, but after some reflection on the idea I've come around to the idea that a scoring winger may just be a cleaner fit for him.

For Hagens, I think for a sub 6'0 center (and he was 5'11 in the preseason measurements at age 17, so for all we know he's now not sub 6'0 anymore) he's pretty good defensively. He's better defensively at the same age than players like Hughes or Bedard, who lets face it are sticking at center in the NHL, whether good defensively or not. Hagens has also been pretty solid on face-offs in the NCAA, considering he's 47% as one of the youngest players in the NCAA (usually some of the youngest players in a league who are bad on draws are in the 30's). And he was a PK'er last year at the NTDP and led the Gold Medal Winning American WJC team this year in TOI/G for a forward, so he wasn't exactly getting sheltered.

Here's each game I have of him at BC and his FO's, in order from last game to start of season, which works out to 63/147 if my math checks out,

0/6 FO's,


7/15


8/16


7/9


7/12


3/9


3/16


6/12


2/8


1/9


5/13


8/12


6/10

 

[WarriorofTime]

From my experience I've found it's almost impossible to explain this to some people.

Even if they start to catch on they eventually revert back to thinking differences in number of days alive is far more important to development than number of hockey seasons played prior to being drafted, which is asinine.

It's been explained to you time and time again, but you insist on the silly opinion that some prospects need to be judged based on their prior season because of their number of world junior eligible years remaining. You'd get laughed out of a scouting room with that take.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Here's each game I have of him at BC and his FO's, in order from last game to start of season, which works out to 63/147 if my math checks out,

0/6 FO's,


7/15


8/16


7/9


7/12


3/9


3/16


6/12


2/8


1/9


5/13


8/12


6/10

This is from the BC website: James Hagens - Men's Hockey - Boston College Athletics

 

[coooldude]

Celebrini has a pattern. First, he skates the puck from blue line to blue line himself, enters the zone and immediately passes (and never misses) his winger. He then tricks the coverage getting himself open. He’ll shoot on reception. His shot is deadly. NHL Defences have not adapted.

For Bedard they have adapted on some of his patterns. On zone entry, instead of Celebrini’s give-and-go Bedard took the high slot and shot. NHL Ds now stuff him high and unlike Juniors it’s much harder to go around the Ds.

To do the same to Celebrini, they need to either trap him between the two blue lines, or not fall for his tricks shaking coverage on the reception of the give and go. Will Celebrini continue fooling defenses? Will Bedard adjust to the Ds adjustements like Gretzky and other generational players? I think time will tell if the level of Bedard hype was justified.

It's a good analysis, but I'll say this -- he's dropping off to the winger on the give-and-go because they've adapted already. Earlier in the season he was taking D on to the outside with speed, and still occasionally when they give him the space, he'll take them on straight up like McJesus. However, he's not quite as fast or skilled, so it's not always effective.

If there's any clear skill he has on zone entry, it's taking what the D gives him and that's why he's top 6 (or whatever) in controlled zone entries /60 in the league. And when they try to over-focus on him, we have about 2 other players who can make entries with speed/space (Eklund, Granlund) so he can act as a diversion and then drive the net, which he has done also. He's definitely adaptable, fun to watch.

The next thing to address is his tendency as an 18yo eager beaver to blindly force cross-ice passes after that entry, leading to team-worst passing% but team-highest danger-creation on successful passes. A little more care and he'll level up.

I can't speak to your thoughts on Bedard other than to say it seems correct that he has to adapt to hit his ceiling, but his last 10 or so games it sounds like he has made a step back.

Back to Hagens -- he seems to have a strength in hockey IQ, great edge work, and good speed. Don't have enough shifts watched to say if he has an adaptable game, but it sounds from what I read and what little I have watched that he should be able to adjust to the NHL game, assuming he's physically ready for it.

 

[JotAlan]

May be the case- but man imagine Celebrini and Hagens down the middle. Smith out on the wing.

As someone who absolutely loves Schaefer I don’t think I pass on the chance at having that level of a 2 headed monster down the middle.

I've been hitting this button for months and using exactly the same words as you lol. I really like Schaeffer, but you can't miss the chance to have a two-headed monster in the center. Celebrini-Hagens would potentially be the best center duo in the league for 10 years.

 

[montreal]

Hagens Assist 0:59
Hagens Chance 5:30
Hagens Robbed (Great Save) 6:58
Hagens Great Move 8:40

 

[montreal]

Wonder why they were using Hagens on the wing so much tonight, he is 2 for his last 14 in the dot in his last 2 games combined.

 

[Hammer Slammer]

Wonder why they were using Hagens on the wing so much tonight, he is 2 for his last 14 in the dot in his last 2 games combined.

Same with the 11th, he was on the wing most of the time with Leonard taking faceoffs but then seemed to take over the center duties during the shift

 

[montreal]

Same with the 11th, he was on the wing most of the time with Leonard taking faceoffs but then seemed to take over the center duties during the shift

tonight they had him start the game on the wing but by late 1st he started taking some draws. For someone that can play 20 mins a night on the top line, it's interesting that he's only taken 6 and 8 faceoffs the last 2 games. I know they have been mixing up the lines at times but just thought it curious.

The other odd thing is how is BC's PP so shitty with likely the best line in the NCAA running it.

 

[Juxtaposer]

The other odd thing is how is BC's PP so shitty with likely the best line in the NCAA running it.

Coach refuses to make adjustments and Eamon Powell isn't even close to an acceptable PPQB. Only reason they scored at a reasonable level last season is because they had four of the best players in the nation on PP1.

 

[Ryan Van Horne]

You're getting really defensive.

I didn't say one bad thing about Celebrini. It's just a fact of the matter that unless you're like the best hockey player ever that certain stats and areas are going to be in your favor and others aren't.

Unfortunately for Celebrini, he simply hasn't fared as well as Hagens in international tournaments over the years. Worse WHC17, Worse WJC18, Worse WJC20. Again, that's not to say he's done bad or that's a criticism. Maybe there's a good explanation. Maybe it doesn't mean much. At the same time, he's also fared better than Hagens in certain situations.

When talking about players who are picked in the same range, it's virtually always a mystery who will end up better down the road. I'm more than willing to let the players prove it. I see no reason to die on a hill comparing the eventual careers of an NHL rookie (non-generational) 1OA to the career of an eventual 1OA or 2OA DY player. That's a situation that realistically could go either way down the road.

I think people are underestimating Hagens, but I think you are also underestimating Celebrini based on some head-to-head comparisons that require context.

Celebrini had the flu during world under-17s when Hagens lit the world on fire. I was disappointed because I wanted to see the two of them go head-to-head. Celebrini was so sick he couldn't play some games. Not a great time to be comparing players.

Celebrini didn't get a chance to play U18 in his 17yo season because he had already graduated to the world junior team. (Hockey Canada doesn't let players go back down a level, BTW). Hagens as most know, set the scoring record at U18s but we can't know what Celebrini would have done had he played. As a 16-year-old, he outproduced Hagens (15 points to 5 points in 7 games for both). Granted, given the heirarchy that is built in to the NTDP, it's tough for 16yo players to get lots of ice team on that squad, so maybe Hagens could have scored more in a meritocracy. We'll never know.

Hagens is a great prospect and I think he is the only player other than Schaefer who should be considered for No. 1. Porter Martone is a darkhorse because players like him are so rare, but I think it's either him or Schaefer.

As for the Hagens/Celebrini comparisons? The one thing that really sticks out for me is Celebrini's production as a freshman at Boston last year when he was 17 years old. Almost 2 ppg is amazing for any age, to do it as young as he was is amazing. Hagens, as good as he is, is 1 ppg as a freshman while being a year older.

It doesn't mean that Celebrini will be better in five years (my yardstick for making definitive evaluations on prospects) but it's sure looking to me right now like Celebrini has a solid edge.

 

[Tutu to]

Celebrini

View attachment 960746

Hagens

View attachment 960749

Hagens has the better WJC17, WJC18, and WJC20.

As I said, I’m not going to argue the semantical points. Some will be in favor of one player and others another. I’m not looking to get in the weeds to prop up one or another. I have no strong opinion and this will be proven out over time. It’s pretty much undisputed that Hagens has performed better in international settings over the years. Doesn’t mean Celebrini hasn’t performed well. Don’t know how this undisputed truth (or so I’d think) is criticizing Celebrini.

Hagens did not have a better u-20 and even the stats support this.

 

[Mjul Qvist]

Can´t we just enjoy how good Celebrini is and how good of a prospect Hagens is? It doesn´t take anything away from anyone if someone is or has played great. It is like you can´t have a conversation about players without trying to prove someone is or was better that time or this time. And tell me about news that 18years old player has flaws in his game. Wow!

 

[Star Platinum]

 

[hawksfan50]

Hagens is over-rated...Certainly a very good prospect but No GUARANTEE hexwillbe amkre inpactful pro than several other forwards ranked top 10.

HIS PPG AT B.C. is way below what Celebrini put up at B U. in his freshman sesson in nhe NCAA..this despite Hagens playing for a better team and playing with stud wingers Leonard and Perrault..

He also had worse ppg inthe recent WJC than Cekebrini did the WJC before this lsdtvone..


His numbers at B.C skew to the assists and not goals which indicate he is really benefitting from Leonard and Perrault's ability to score ...A lot of centers WOULD too.

He has always benefitted from a stud team situation...The USNTDP is in effect analk-star team of most of the top U.S. born players...He never was ina situation where as the solo star or one of just a few good players,the pressure to difference'make and carry a team on your back is higher...

An interesting thought exercise...plunk Hagens on a middle of the pack OHL team and do you think he would make any more difference than any other of the top 10 or15rNked forwards for that team?

Hagens really low goal scoring atB.C. for such a highly rated consensus #1or#2overall pick.

Add that he is not that great at faceoffs ...is a bit undersized in height (5'10.5) though ok in weight...but is not really that physical.

He he still a very good player.. but there arecenough items that are not ideal to suggest other forwards could impact more as a oro i the show or at least be onpar with him...
There is no real certainty basis to place him as high as #2o#2..several other forwards have just as much chance of starring i the NHL as he does.

Now if he goes to a situation where the team already has a few stud young guns and he has no solo pressure to be the only "stud" ,he will help that team..like maybe SJ.maybe adding to Celebrini and Smith and other forwards they have coming.. but you could also say SJ adding Martone or Misa or Eklund could help them just as much if SJ was targeting a forward should they not get the chance to draft stud dman Schaefer.

Hagens is very good but so are several other ranked forwards..
It may be as Dave Marr has said that there
really is no consensus top forward.. Several in what he calls a deep draft are candidates to emerge as the best forward in this draft class.. whereas with Schaefer you do get tge consensus best dnan prospect in this draft class...the next dman not even close.

As if (im my opinion)there are 2 top tiers..

Schaefer =tier one
Tier 2= 4 to 8 forwards any of who could emerge as the best NHL forward with greatest impact from this class...though sone will not hot the ceiling hoghtsctgeir ranking woukd suggest.

Given this situation,I think Hagens is over-rated though certainly in that top 4 to maybe as much as 8 forwards I this 2nd tier after tge Certain top level Schaefer is at forctge dmen of tius class.

So I have no qualms putting Schaeferxat #1overall..

After that it may be more team needs and fit and forward pisitjon(C or W) and type ofvpjayer,and size ,and details (ie. Faceoff prowess if a Cebter) ,or defensive considerations,or speed vs strength or a host of other preferences or needs as to how teNs will rank and have preferred targets among this group ofctge best ranked forwards.

I do not see Hagens being "the next jack hughes"as so many seem to compare him to..Ivdo notcsee hin as the solo saviour difference-make or tilt the ice guy..hisxshotvis not that soecial..Speed yes but hevis not as fastcas Misa...Hands =very good..Shot from distance average..Gets close in goals..can set up his wingers...very very good hockey I.Q abd Vision..knows where to go to be open forecheck..pretty good defending ..good compete..Lots to like..But he benefits from
being on good teans with other star players
Not sure he will be elite difference maker or best player on his nhl team .

So there is the matter of team fit::
I just cannot seethe Blackhawks adding hom to an already undersized talent pool of forwards coming ..Bedard,Nazar,Lardis,Kantserov and no way do you add anither shrimp ..besides Hageb is not a faceoff solution if he is 2C ...

Misa atc6'1 185 if hevis 2C is at 54.5% inthe OHL ...so possibly ok for helping get pissesion off the draw and is not a shrimp.
He would be a better fit.
He also scores a lot of hisxGIAJS on 5x5 ..which the Hawks need ..

I personally have Caleb Denoyers ranked much higher than the consensus..SIze with skil and lots of production.. 6'2 173 means he has runway to fill out that frame but to me he already looks bigger at this stage.. I think by
the combine before the draft he coud becan inch taller and 10-15 lbs heavier..

I do not know if Hagens has much to improve on in his game..he is already what he is..abd has been so for a while..

Denoyers has greatly improved his scoring fron his D-1 Q season to this season and has really accelerated his scoring pace in December and January so far..
On pace for a 45 goal 104 point season..but given the acceleration trend ,would not surprise me if the final total is higher maybexaroubd 120 points and 55 goals?
I think he justvkerkscgettong better as tgecsesdon has progressed..Who knows what his ceiling could be?
He is over63% onfaceoff wins..The Blackhawks coud use such s draw Master..
He is the best defensive forward among all the top N.A.rated group off of forwards and maybe among all the forwards in the draft including the top euros..
He exclsvon so many details of the game...He gets free of checkers both carrying the puck and off the puck..he gets to loose pucks ..he is good on the boards.. he uses his wingers well..give and goes..2 on1 rush transitions , breaks free from checkers easily...uses angles well..scores goals in such a variety of ways ...

Some reports claim he does not have explosive speed ...maybe this is why h is not ranked higher...or that his shot from distance is not that special...but he does score goals in a variety of ways..has a good one -timer..has quick hands to get in close goals or pouncing on loose pucks at the crease..deadly finish on 2 on1s and break-aways..Always seems to be in position OPEN away from checkers in good scoring position ..I just do not see any slowness at all ..Skating is good..can also change of soeed/slowdown to pass puck or fool goalies and release quickly ..but the criticism is or was that his shot is not like sone shooters where it goes through layers of defenders to beat goalies...doesn't have to be goidxat that because he gets to open space so much there are no layers between his shot lane and the opps goalie..

So considering all that he does including the fine details ,his production...accelerating scoringbpace,2 wayvgame,faceoff prowess,pace, constantly moving his,feet ,easily getting away from checkers for open looks , etc..so many good attributes coaches would love,I do not understand why he is not a top 3 overall rank or at least top 5 ... but only has a consolidated #10 ranking ...maybe 6-8 on sone lists.

In any case considering fit and need ,size and faceoff mastery plus production plus leadership ..and so much more, he brings morecto the table than Hagens if I were doing a ranking list of Bkackhawks targets...I am still debating in my mind that IF Hawks do not land at #2,for Schaefer,but only end up#2or#3 or#4:,I would be deciding between Misa or Denoyers asa Center targetor Martoneas a power winger target fortheirvpivk...NOT Hagens .

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Hagens is over-rated...Certainly a very good prospect but No GUARANTEE hexwillbe amkre inpactful pro than several other forwards ranked top 10.

HIS PPG AT B.C. is way below what Celebrini put up at B U. in his freshman sesson in nhe NCAA..this despite Hagens playing for a better team and playing with stud wingers Leonard and Perrault..

He also had worse ppg inthe recent WJC than Cekebrini did the WJC before this lsdtvone..


His numbers at B.C skew to the assists and not goals which indicate he is really benefitting from Leonard and Perrault's ability to score ...A lot of centers WOULD too.

He has always benefitted from a stud team situation...The USNTDP is in effect analk-star team of most of the top U.S. born players...He never was ina situation where as the solo star or one of just a few good players,the pressure to difference'make and carry a team on your back is higher...

An interesting thought exercise...plunk Hagens on a middle of the pack OHL team and do you think he would make any more difference than any other of the top 10 or15rNked forwards for that team?

Hagens really low goal scoring atB.C. for such a highly rated consensus #1or#2overall pick.

Add that he is not that great at faceoffs ...is a bit undersized in height (5'10.5) though ok in weight...but is not really that physical.

He he still a very good player.. but there arecenough items that are not ideal to suggest other forwards could impact more as a oro i the show or at least be onpar with him...
There is no real certainty basis to place him as high as #2o#2..several other forwards have just as much chance of starring i the NHL as he does.

Now if he goes to a situation where the team already has a few stud young guns and he has no solo pressure to be the only "stud" ,he will help that team..like maybe SJ.maybe adding to Celebrini and Smith and other forwards they have coming.. but you could also say SJ adding Martone or Misa or Eklund could help them just as much if SJ was targeting a forward should they not get the chance to draft stud dman Schaefer.

Hagens is very good but so are several other ranked forwards..
It may be as Dave Marr has said that there
really is no consensus top forward.. Several in what he calls a deep draft are candidates to emerge as the best forward in this draft class.. whereas with Schaefer you do get tge consensus best dnan prospect in this draft class...the next dman not even close.

As if (im my opinion)there are 2 top tiers..

Schaefer =tier one
Tier 2= 4 to 8 forwards any of who could emerge as the best NHL forward with greatest impact from this class...though sone will not hot the ceiling hoghtsctgeir ranking woukd suggest.

Given this situation,I think Hagens is over-rated though certainly in that top 4 to maybe as much as 8 forwards I this 2nd tier after tge Certain top level Schaefer is at forctge dmen of tius class.

So I have no qualms putting Schaeferxat #1overall..

After that it may be more team needs and fit and forward pisitjon(C or W) and type ofvpjayer,and size ,and details (ie. Faceoff prowess if a Cebter) ,or defensive considerations,or speed vs strength or a host of other preferences or needs as to how teNs will rank and have preferred targets among this group ofctge best ranked forwards.

I do not see Hagens being "the next jack hughes"as so many seem to compare him to..Ivdo notcsee hin as the solo saviour difference-make or tilt the ice guy..hisxshotvis not that soecial..Speed yes but hevis not as fastcas Misa...Hands =very good..Shot from distance average..Gets close in goals..can set up his wingers...very very good hockey I.Q abd Vision..knows where to go to be open forecheck..pretty good defending ..good compete..Lots to like..But he benefits from
being on good teans with other star players
Not sure he will be elite difference maker or best player on his nhl team .

So there is the matter of team fit::
I just cannot seethe Blackhawks adding hom to an already undersized talent pool of forwards coming ..Bedard,Nazar,Lardis,Kantserov and no way do you add anither shrimp ..besides Hageb is not a faceoff solution if he is 2C ...

Misa atc6'1 185 if hevis 2C is at 54.5% inthe OHL ...so possibly ok for helping get pissesion off the draw and is not a shrimp.
He would be a better fit.
He also scores a lot of hisxGIAJS on 5x5 ..which the Hawks need ..

I personally have Caleb Denoyers ranked much higher than the consensus..SIze with skil and lots of production.. 6'2 173 means he has runway to fill out that frame but to me he already looks bigger at this stage.. I think by
the combine before the draft he coud becan inch taller and 10-15 lbs heavier..

I do not know if Hagens has much to improve on in his game..he is already what he is..abd has been so for a while..

Denoyers has greatly improved his scoring fron his D-1 Q season to this season and has really accelerated his scoring pace in December and January so far..
On pace for a 45 goal 104 point season..but given the acceleration trend ,would not surprise me if the final total is higher maybexaroubd 120 points and 55 goals?
I think he justvkerkscgettong better as tgecsesdon has progressed..Who knows what his ceiling could be?
He is over63% onfaceoff wins..The Blackhawks coud use such s draw Master..
He is the best defensive forward among all the top N.A.rated group off of forwards and maybe among all the forwards in the draft including the top euros..
He exclsvon so many details of the game...He gets free of checkers both carrying the puck and off the puck..he gets to loose pucks ..he is good on the boards.. he uses his wingers well..give and goes..2 on1 rush transitions , breaks free from checkers easily...uses angles well..scores goals in such a variety of ways ...

Some reports claim he does not have explosive speed ...maybe this is why h is not ranked higher...or that his shot from distance is not that special...but he does score goals in a variety of ways..has a good one -timer..has quick hands to get in close goals or pouncing on loose pucks at the crease..deadly finish on 2 on1s and break-aways..Always seems to be in position OPEN away from checkers in good scoring position ..I just do not see any slowness at all ..Skating is good..can also change of soeed/slowdown to pass puck or fool goalies and release quickly ..but the criticism is or was that his shot is not like sone shooters where it goes through layers of defenders to beat goalies...doesn't have to be goidxat that because he gets to open space so much there are no layers between his shot lane and the opps goalie..

So considering all that he does including the fine details ,his production...accelerating scoringbpace,2 wayvgame,faceoff prowess,pace, constantly moving his,feet ,easily getting away from checkers for open looks , etc..so many good attributes coaches would love,I do not understand why he is not a top 3 overall rank or at least top 5 ... but only has a consolidated #10 ranking ...maybe 6-8 on sone lists.

In any case considering fit and need ,size and faceoff mastery plus production plus leadership ..and so much more, he brings morecto the table than Hagens if I were doing a ranking list of Bkackhawks targets...I am still debating in my mind that IF Hawks do not land at #2,for Schaefer,but only end up#2or#3 or#4:,I would be deciding between Misa or Denoyers asa Center targetor Martoneas a power winger target fortheirvpivk...NOT Hagens .

You’ve typed out 25 paragraphs and most of them are based on incorrect assumptions because you can’t interpret data you evidently believe you can. Why not actually watch him play and save yourself all the time being clouded with inaccuracies?