Jack Hughes vs Quinn Hughes

[EdJovanovski]

Who’s better?
Edit: Overall so like now and future

Click to read more...

 

[CanadienShark]

Now it's Quinn. Long term, likely Jack.

 

[amnesiac]

now Quinn, later Jack

 

[OviGreat8]

I think in the long run it will be Jack Hughes. For right now it is Quinn Hughes who's game is a bit more advanced. They also play two totally different positions.

 

[Icebreakers]

Quinn now and future. Hes going to be a 60-70+ point dman. Jack would have to hit 90 points every year to be more valuable as hes a purely offensive player anyways.

 

[Trap Jesus]

I'd take Quinn for now and future

 

[Clint Eastwood]

Quinn now, Jack future

 

[MackAttack26]

Quinn now and future.

Will be a top-10 D.

Not confident in saying same for Jack as a top-10 C.

 

[Ace of Hades]

Quinn now and future.

 

[Tony Stacks]

Quinn now and future without a doubt

 

[tapi]

It is way too early to call. Jack is still very much a little boy, we have no idea of his abilities once he grows into a decent frame and gets settled into the NHL game. However, were I a betting man, all things considered, I would say Jack is going to be by and far the favorite to be the superior player going forward.

 

[nowhereman]

Right now, Quinn by a mile. Not sure about the future, since Jack has crazy upside. But Quinn is looking like one of the best rookie defensemen of all time...

 

[Kcb12345]

Right now it's very easily Q. Hughes. Long term I'll take my chances with Jack Hughes' potential...

 

[tony d]

Quinn

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Luke
Jack

Quinn

 

[wetcoast]

Luke
Jack

Quinn

Interesting take but Jack is going to be more than just a 85 point scoring winger in order for that to happen (the gap between him and Quinn by you).

Can't comment on Luke as it's too early for me to project.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Interesting take but Jack is going to be more than just a 85 point scoring winger in order for that to happen (the gap between him and Quinn by you).

Can't comment on Luke as it's too early for me to project.

I think you bring up an interesting topic. I think Jack and Quinn are going to lose their team a lot of value outside of the points they score, but I think there’s less value to lose upfront than on the backend. Luke’s offensive talent isn’t as good as his brothers, but I think he’ll gain his team value in a lot of parts of the game, while Jack and Quinn’s value is driven entirely by the points they score. Just my opinion though.

I’m low on Jack and Quinn. They play the game exactly like the “new NHL” trope, but I don’t buy into this trope. The game requires almost exactly what it required 10 years ago. It’s a little softer, faster and more skilled. Not a drastic shift, like some think.

 

[wetcoast]

I think you bring up an interesting topic. I think Jack and Quinn are going to lose their team a lot of value outside of the points they score, but I think there’s less value to lose upfront than on the backend. Luke’s offensive talent isn’t as good as his brothers, but I think he’ll gain his team value in a lot of parts of the game.

I can't wait for the "which Hughes of the 3 is the better NHL player going forward" in 3 years.

 

[Regal]

I think you bring up an interesting topic. I think Jack and Quinn are going to lose their team a lot of value outside of the points they score, but I think there’s less value to lose upfront than on the backend. Luke’s offensive talent isn’t as good as his brothers, but I think he’ll gain his team value in a lot of parts of the game, while Jack and Quinn’s value is driven entirely by the points they score. Just my opinion though.

I’m low on Jack and Quinn. They play the game exactly like the “new NHL” trope, but I don’t buy into this trope. The game requires almost exactly what it required 10 years ago. It’s a little softer, faster and more skilled. Not a drastic shift, like some think.

If you're saying that you don't think a defensemen like Quinn will ever have the in-zone defense to be that true top 10 defensemen you want to build a contender around, whereas a potential scorer like Jack could be that type of player with more of a one-way game just due to position, then I think you might be right. But I think saying Quinn "loses value outside of points" isn't fair. I'd say he brings a fair amount of value outside of points because of his transition game and his speed to the puck means teams don't put up a lot of offense against him. He's certainly not a negative defensively.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

If you're saying that you don't think a defensemen like Quinn will ever have the in-zone defense to be that true top 10 defensemen you want to build a contender around, whereas a potential scorer like Jack could be that type of player with more of a one-way game just due to position, then I think you might be right. But I think saying Quinn "loses value outside of points" isn't fair. I'd say he brings a fair amount of value outside of points because of his transition game and his speed to the puck means teams don't put up a lot of offense against him. He's certainly not a negative defensively.

I think often times fans speak incorrectly in terms of value. A #5 defensemen or 9th forward likely isn't adding much value to a team. If anything, they are losing value. If you compare them to the rest of the league, they are objectively in the bottom half of NHL'ers. Each team is competing to have enough players on their roster that add value, and if your players aren't in the top half of value in the league, they aren't going to be adding value compared to the players they play against. Fans speak about anyone who isn't a terrible contract or AHL goon in good terms, but a number of them that are spoken about in good terms are hurting NHL teams.

The question is how much value a player like Quinn Hughes gains or losses for your team. They are different players, but I look at someone like Kevin Shattenkirk as a comparable. Some claim he's a top pairing defensemen because of points and analytics, others say he's a bottom pairing PP specialist, others say somewhere in-between. If he's top pairing, he's going to gain you value. If he's a bottom pairing PP specialist, he's losing you value. Somewhere in-between and its a real debate whether he's losing or gaining value. I watched Shattenkirk for a few years on my team, and I thought he was more of a bottom pairing PP specialist. However, he struggled with injuries on the Rangers, so I can see in a different situation that he's a middle pairing defensemen. I think it's going to be somewhat similar with Hughes.

I personally think he's going to lose a lot of value at the other end of the rink. I think he's going to accumulate a lot of positive and a lot of negative value. He'll be a high activity player, but will that ever result in more than slightly below or above league average value for a defensemen? I don't think so. Considering most teams have 7 defensemen on their roster and a few have 8, that would make league average around a 3.5. I'd place his likely value somewhere between a high-end three in his best seasons and a low-end four in bad seasons.

Jack Hughes is going to also lose a lot of value because he's being used as a center. There's a lot of responsibilities for a center that there aren't for a winger. Face-offs, increased defensive zone responsibilities, increased puck battles in the corners, increased puck battles against bigger players and a lot more middle of the ice play required. I don't ever think Jack will be better than a player who is league average defensively as a winger. Even that might be a stretch. However, if you are putting a guy who is probably a net-negative in other areas of the game from the wing at center, you are going to lose a lot of value. And being realistic, he's probably going to be a bad defensive player at wing, so we might be talking about one of the worst centers in league when it comes to value lost outside of scoring.

I think Jack will be about 1PPG, give or take a few, for his career, but that'll come with a lot of lost value in other areas of the game, which is why I don't think he'll be one of the elite players in the league, despite scoring like most of them do. However, I still think a player with his style at center or wing will lose less value than a defensemen of that style will lose. Speaking again in terms of value, I don't know if Luke ever gains as much value as Jack or Quinn, but I'm near sure based on what I've seen so far that he will lose a lot less than they will.

 

[nowhereman]

I think often times fans speak incorrectly in terms of value. A #5 defensemen or 9th forward likely isn't adding much value to a team. If anything, they are losing value. If you compare them to the rest of the league, they are objectively in the bottom half of NHL'ers. Each team is competing to have enough players on their roster that add value, and if your players aren't in the top half of value in the league, they aren't going to be adding value compared to the players they play against. Fans speak about anyone who isn't a terrible contract or AHL goon in good terms, but a number of them that are spoken about in good terms are hurting NHL teams.

The question is how much value a player like Quinn Hughes gains or losses for your team. They are different players, but I look at someone like Kevin Shattenkirk as a comparable. Some claim he's a top pairing defensemen because of points and analytics, others say he's a bottom pairing PP specialist, others say somewhere in-between. If he's top pairing, he's going to gain you value. If he's a bottom pairing PP specialist, he's losing you value. Somewhere in-between and its a real debate whether he's losing or gaining value. I watched Shattenkirk for a few years on my team, and I thought he was more of a bottom pairing PP specialist. However, he struggled with injuries on the Rangers, so I can see in a different situation that he's a middle pairing defensemen. I think it's going to be somewhat similar with Hughes.

I personally think he's going to lose a lot of value at the other end of the rink. I think he's going to accumulate a lot of positive and a lot of negative value. He'll be a high activity player, but will that ever result in more than slightly below or above league average value for a defensemen? I don't think so. Considering most teams have 7 defensemen on their roster and a few have 8, that would make league average around a 3.5. I'd place his likely value somewhere between a high-end three in his best seasons and a low-end four in bad seasons.

Jack Hughes is going to also lose a lot of value because he's being used as a center. There's a lot of responsibilities for a center that there aren't for a winger. Face-offs, increased defensive zone responsibilities, increased puck battles in the corners, increased puck battles against bigger players and a lot more middle of the ice play required. I don't ever think Jack will be better than a player who is league average defensively as a winger. Even that might be a stretch. However, if you are putting a guy who is probably a net-negative in other areas of the game from the wing at center, you are going to lose a lot of value. And being realistic, he's probably going to be a bad defensive player at wing, so we might be talking about one of the worst centers in league when it comes to value lost outside of scoring.

I think Jack will be about 1PPG, give or take a few, for his career, but that'll come with a lot of lost value in other areas of the game, which is why I don't think he'll be one of the elite players in the league, despite scoring like most of them do. However, I still think a player with his style at center or wing will lose less value than a defensemen of that style will lose. Speaking again in terms of value, I don't know if Luke ever gains as much value as Jack or Quinn, but I'm near sure based on what I've seen so far that he will lose a lot less than they will.

So when do you plan on actually watching Quinn Hughes play? I would suggest watching a game or two, rather than judging a player's career value based on his height.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

Just insane that one family produces three such highly talented players.

 

[Tony Stacks]

I think often times fans speak incorrectly in terms of value. A #5 defensemen or 9th forward likely isn't adding much value to a team. If anything, they are losing value. If you compare them to the rest of the league, they are objectively in the bottom half of NHL'ers. Each team is competing to have enough players on their roster that add value, and if your players aren't in the top half of value in the league, they aren't going to be adding value compared to the players they play against. Fans speak about anyone who isn't a terrible contract or AHL goon in good terms, but a number of them that are spoken about in good terms are hurting NHL teams.

The question is how much value a player like Quinn Hughes gains or losses for your team. They are different players, but I look at someone like Kevin Shattenkirk as a comparable. Some claim he's a top pairing defensemen because of points and analytics, others say he's a bottom pairing PP specialist, others say somewhere in-between. If he's top pairing, he's going to gain you value. If he's a bottom pairing PP specialist, he's losing you value. Somewhere in-between and its a real debate whether he's losing or gaining value. I watched Shattenkirk for a few years on my team, and I thought he was more of a bottom pairing PP specialist. However, he struggled with injuries on the Rangers, so I can see in a different situation that he's a middle pairing defensemen. I think it's going to be somewhat similar with Hughes.

I personally think he's going to lose a lot of value at the other end of the rink. I think he's going to accumulate a lot of positive and a lot of negative value. He'll be a high activity player, but will that ever result in more than slightly below or above league average value for a defensemen? I don't think so. Considering most teams have 7 defensemen on their roster and a few have 8, that would make league average around a 3.5. I'd place his likely value somewhere between a high-end three in his best seasons and a low-end four in bad seasons.

Jack Hughes is going to also lose a lot of value because he's being used as a center. There's a lot of responsibilities for a center that there aren't for a winger. Face-offs, increased defensive zone responsibilities, increased puck battles in the corners, increased puck battles against bigger players and a lot more middle of the ice play required. I don't ever think Jack will be better than a player who is league average defensively as a winger. Even that might be a stretch. However, if you are putting a guy who is probably a net-negative in other areas of the game from the wing at center, you are going to lose a lot of value. And being realistic, he's probably going to be a bad defensive player at wing, so we might be talking about one of the worst centers in league when it comes to value lost outside of scoring.

I think Jack will be about 1PPG, give or take a few, for his career, but that'll come with a lot of lost value in other areas of the game, which is why I don't think he'll be one of the elite players in the league, despite scoring like most of them do. However, I still think a player with his style at center or wing will lose less value than a defensemen of that style will lose. Speaking again in terms of value, I don't know if Luke ever gains as much value as Jack or Quinn, but I'm near sure based on what I've seen so far that he will lose a lot less than they will.

I've never seen anybody write an essay about a player they've never seen play as you clearly haven't with Quinn Hughes. He has no value outside of scoring? lol...

 

[CheckingLineCenter]

In the long run it’s 1C vs 1D and I prefer forwards, so Jack. I think they’ll be in similar standing at their respective positions. In the short run it’s easily Quinn.

Just insane that one family produces three such highly talented players.

It’s so incredible to me. Dad and (especially) Mom must feel like studs haha

I think often times fans speak incorrectly in terms of value. A #5 defensemen or 9th forward likely isn't adding much value to a team. If anything, they are losing value. If you compare them to the rest of the league, they are objectively in the bottom half of NHL'ers. Each team is competing to have enough players on their roster that add value, and if your players aren't in the top half of value in the league, they aren't going to be adding value compared to the players they play against. Fans speak about anyone who isn't a terrible contract or AHL goon in good terms, but a number of them that are spoken about in good terms are hurting NHL teams.

The question is how much value a player like Quinn Hughes gains or losses for your team. They are different players, but I look at someone like Kevin Shattenkirk as a comparable. Some claim he's a top pairing defensemen because of points and analytics, others say he's a bottom pairing PP specialist, others say somewhere in-between. If he's top pairing, he's going to gain you value. If he's a bottom pairing PP specialist, he's losing you value. Somewhere in-between and its a real debate whether he's losing or gaining value. I watched Shattenkirk for a few years on my team, and I thought he was more of a bottom pairing PP specialist. However, he struggled with injuries on the Rangers, so I can see in a different situation that he's a middle pairing defensemen. I think it's going to be somewhat similar with Hughes.

I personally think he's going to lose a lot of value at the other end of the rink. I think he's going to accumulate a lot of positive and a lot of negative value. He'll be a high activity player, but will that ever result in more than slightly below or above league average value for a defensemen? I don't think so. Considering most teams have 7 defensemen on their roster and a few have 8, that would make league average around a 3.5. I'd place his likely value somewhere between a high-end three in his best seasons and a low-end four in bad seasons.

Jack Hughes is going to also lose a lot of value because he's being used as a center. There's a lot of responsibilities for a center that there aren't for a winger. Face-offs, increased defensive zone responsibilities, increased puck battles in the corners, increased puck battles against bigger players and a lot more middle of the ice play required. I don't ever think Jack will be better than a player who is league average defensively as a winger. Even that might be a stretch. However, if you are putting a guy who is probably a net-negative in other areas of the game from the wing at center, you are going to lose a lot of value. And being realistic, he's probably going to be a bad defensive player at wing, so we might be talking about one of the worst centers in league when it comes to value lost outside of scoring.

I think Jack will be about 1PPG, give or take a few, for his career, but that'll come with a lot of lost value in other areas of the game, which is why I don't think he'll be one of the elite players in the league, despite scoring like most of them do. However, I still think a player with his style at center or wing will lose less value than a defensemen of that style will lose. Speaking again in terms of value, I don't know if Luke ever gains as much value as Jack or Quinn, but I'm near sure based on what I've seen so far that he will lose a lot less than they will.

Shattenkirk never did or will have the breakout/exit/transition game like Quinn Hughes. Just not that level of skater. Defenseman have put up points before, but that’s the real dynamism in his game imo. I’m trying to be fair but that feels like a reallllly rough comparison, and Shattenkirk’s had a nice career too.

And watching him in the B1G, I honestly thought Quinn was going to have a much tougher transition. Even with the points jump, I didn’t think he had that great of a sophomore year. That said I think he’s been extremely good in the NHL, especially for his age.

 

[John Johnson]

I think often times fans speak incorrectly in terms of value. A #5 defensemen or 9th forward likely isn't adding much value to a team. If anything, they are losing value. If you compare them to the rest of the league, they are objectively in the bottom half of NHL'ers. Each team is competing to have enough players on their roster that add value, and if your players aren't in the top half of value in the league, they aren't going to be adding value compared to the players they play against. Fans speak about anyone who isn't a terrible contract or AHL goon in good terms, but a number of them that are spoken about in good terms are hurting NHL teams.

The question is how much value a player like Quinn Hughes gains or losses for your team. They are different players, but I look at someone like Kevin Shattenkirk as a comparable. Some claim he's a top pairing defensemen because of points and analytics, others say he's a bottom pairing PP specialist, others say somewhere in-between. If he's top pairing, he's going to gain you value. If he's a bottom pairing PP specialist, he's losing you value. Somewhere in-between and its a real debate whether he's losing or gaining value. I watched Shattenkirk for a few years on my team, and I thought he was more of a bottom pairing PP specialist. However, he struggled with injuries on the Rangers, so I can see in a different situation that he's a middle pairing defensemen. I think it's going to be somewhat similar with Hughes.

I personally think he's going to lose a lot of value at the other end of the rink. I think he's going to accumulate a lot of positive and a lot of negative value. He'll be a high activity player, but will that ever result in more than slightly below or above league average value for a defensemen? I don't think so. Considering most teams have 7 defensemen on their roster and a few have 8, that would make league average around a 3.5. I'd place his likely value somewhere between a high-end three in his best seasons and a low-end four in bad seasons.

Jack Hughes is going to also lose a lot of value because he's being used as a center. There's a lot of responsibilities for a center that there aren't for a winger. Face-offs, increased defensive zone responsibilities, increased puck battles in the corners, increased puck battles against bigger players and a lot more middle of the ice play required. I don't ever think Jack will be better than a player who is league average defensively as a winger. Even that might be a stretch. However, if you are putting a guy who is probably a net-negative in other areas of the game from the wing at center, you are going to lose a lot of value. And being realistic, he's probably going to be a bad defensive player at wing, so we might be talking about one of the worst centers in league when it comes to value lost outside of scoring.

I think Jack will be about 1PPG, give or take a few, for his career, but that'll come with a lot of lost value in other areas of the game, which is why I don't think he'll be one of the elite players in the league, despite scoring like most of them do. However, I still think a player with his style at center or wing will lose less value than a defensemen of that style will lose. Speaking again in terms of value, I don't know if Luke ever gains as much value as Jack or Quinn, but I'm near sure based on what I've seen so far that he will lose a lot less than they will.

Honestly man I think you wasted your time on this opinion piece essay.