Prospect Info: Lane Hutson Part 2

[admiralcadillac]

This board can go into endless argumentation. The older you get, the less likely it is you will grow, and the older you get, if you grow, it is at a much lower rate. I grew half an inch from 20 to 21, to 6'03.5. One inch from 19 to 20, two inches from 18 to 19 and four inches from 17 to 18. It's just my personnal example, but that's the way it goes.

You've just ignored what I mentioned though - why would you do that?

 

[tooji]

He’s also not joining the NHLthis year - or probably even next - and will continue to develop.

As for Roy he was killing it but is on a horrible team so that likely has something to do with it. I see no reason not to be at least a little excited about him too. Even if he’s just a second liner, he’s got great hands and vision.

He will almost certainly suit up in some NHL games when his season ends.

 

[Captain Mountain]

How anyone can even take issue with this statement is beyond me. This is just a factual, objective statement that isn't even saying that he can't be effective 5 vs 5 but that there are legitimate concerns that require more evidence of development.

When I was first mentioning the backskating issue shortly after we selected him I was attacked by an enormous, unrelenting horde who to a person said that I was f.o.s. They came at me with arguments like "It is not possible to be on the USNTDP if you can't backskate", "My twelve year old son can do back crossovers so obviously Lane can do them" and they would send video of him gliding backwards but not actually skating. All baseless claims entirely devoid of evidence but dripping with tribal bias as they had already positioned themselves into an Us vs Them defensive stance.

I think that you and I would agree that we both would love for Lane to be all the things that his overzealous supporters claim that he already is but we are not letting our hearts do the thinking for our brains.

He is currently a terrible defender but hopefully he can fix his skating enough to at least give himself a chance because he has the will and the mind to defend but lacks the physical tools to do so in the NHL at this point in time imo.

I'm a little tired of tribal bias claims that are themselves "dripping with tribal bias". Lets not pretend that there weren't those who overstated Hutson's defensive issues and there weren't examples which raised doubts to how serious his back skating issue is.

Hutson also isn't a "terrible defender". He's definitely below average, but from both scouting and data we've seen improvement and its pretty hard to substaniate that he's terrible defensively.

Its not unreasonable to have questions as to how Hutson's game would translate to the NHL (particularly defensively), but not everyone who thinks there's a good chance that he'll be able to translate his game are just thinking with their hearts.

It needs to be pointed out that there was no guarantee that he would grow at all or if he did just how much he could grow. The only thing that was actually posited is that growth was still possible. This was also just a single report from a single physician on an extremely inexact science. Typically you would collect multiple reports and look for consensus but these things are not free an Lane Hutson is not a heavily funded scientific study lol.

The fact is that he did not grow much last year and he is unlikely to grow much more and perhaps not at all. The odds are overwhelmingly in favor of him being at a significant size/strength disadvantage as a professional and debating over the possibility of insignificant gains is a waste of everyone's time and energy.

Speaking of gaining size.....time to inhale some of those holiday calories!!

What exaclty are you trying to say? Not to judge as I haven't read any opinion and didn't see a report. I don't see that any of that is "typical" in the context we're discussing it, because the purposes are vastly different. Hutson sought a medical opinion. you don't publish a study on that basis, but medical opinions are informed by medical research, including studies.

And I don't know what "he did not grow much last year" means. He's grown almost 2 inches since the 2022 NHL draft combine.

 

[Kobe Armstrong]

You've just ignored what I mentioned though - why would you do that?

Your argument is mostly semantics. A doctor said it is possible he continues to grow, but the expectation now needs to be that he is done growing, if he grows any more that is just a bonus.

And neither you or I are doctors to my knowledge, but my understanding of growth plates being open is that growth is not guaranteed, but could possibly happen, it doesn't mean it is likely to happen.

 

[Andrei79]

Your argument is mostly semantics. A doctor said it is possible he continues to grow, but the expectation now needs to be that he is done growing, if he grows any more that is just a bonus.

And neither you or I are doctors to my knowledge, buy my understanding of growth plates being open is that growth is not guaranteed, but could possibly happen, it doesn't mean it is likely to happen.

We have very little to go by, outside of that he likely had constitutional growth delay at the time of his draft and so did his brother at some point. His brother grew to 5'11" at around 19-20 if I recall. For Hutson, we don't know what that growth will be. We'll see.

Personally, I can't help myself but be cautious. The guy is tiny. He looked like a teenager physically this summer at the rookie camp. The skills and IQ are there and then some, but strength and size are still determining factors, especially in the post-season, while the league has become very fast too. He has neither, so while I'm excited, it's difficult to project exactly how that will translate. He's pretty much a boom or bust player.

 

[Sherwoo9]

I do see him as a can’t miss prospect at this stage but in the sense of can’t miss Gotisbehere type of 2nd/3rd 5v5 pairing defender that can put up 50-60 point with o-zone starts and pp specialist. I REALLY wish he develops into more than that, but if we’re being honest, it’s already huge for a 60th overall. Just unsure if that can be a key piece to win it all, but sure as hell can be entertaining.
But again I find it perfectly legitimate to wish he continues beating the odds as it seems like it’s what he’s been doing all his life.

 

[admiralcadillac]

Your argument is mostly semantics. A doctor said it is possible he continues to grow, but the expectation now needs to be that he is done growing, if he grows any more that is just a bonus.

And neither you or I are doctors to my knowledge, but my understanding of growth plates being open is that growth is not guaranteed, but could possibly happen, it doesn't mean it is likely to happen.

How is that a semantic argument? I asked the poster to provide support of any kind to their claims which they posited as facts. I never said Hutson was likely to grow - I don't know, but it's not an irrelevant factor.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

I'm surprised you were at the combine and knew firsthand that Hutson only contacted one physician. Your post makes the following assertions:

1. Single Report;
2. Single Physician;
3. Extremely Inexact Science;
4. He didn't collect multiple reports;
5. NHL teams didn't collect reports.

Are you able to back up the above at all in order to proceed to your conclusion that the he is unlikely to grow much more or at all, in addition to the fact that he didn't grow much last year? He did, in fact, grow.

Jesus....

Go look it up yourself, he named the doctor and it is common knowledge that there is no accurate way to forecast exactly how much anyone will grow based on their growth plates.

Do you really need evidence that NHL teams don't have reports on prospects growth plates lol...

We already know how much he grew from the combine until his measurements in Montreal this summer, and it wasn't close to what most of the fisherman tales from his ravenous fan base were claiming. There were all sorts of posters claiming that he was easily over 5'10" and some who were claiming that he was closer to 5'11" lol. The same ones who lost their collective marbles when I called BU's generous listing false and I was proven to be correct the following summer and even Hutson was forced to admit it at a press conference at rookie camp.

I am the only one in this conversation that is trying to navigate through the bs and trying to stay close to objective truth. I would love it if he grows a ton but there is a reason that his doctor did not list an exact height that Lane will finish at....because it is an inexact science and there is no way to accurately project these things.

Hutson was measured at 5'8.25" and 158 lbs at the draft combine and 1 year later he was measured at 5'9" and 158 lbs at the prospect development camp one year later. He grew 0.75" and did not gain any weight over that year. These are hard facts and it is getting annoying having to dig them up for people who prefer to invent their own narrative. This is the empirical evidence that I use to suggest that it is unlikely that he grows much more or reaches a height that is significantly different that will put him in a category other than that of being a small defenceman. Citing that I am not an Endocrinologist would be correct but pretending that Hutson's Endocrinologist (that's correct just one) knows exactly how much he will grow is laughable and just a bias driven opinion. Show me where the report states exactly how much he will grow....you won't find it because all the doctor can do is determine if growth is still possible and the rest is much a mystery as it is to you and I.

How is that a semantic argument? I asked the poster to provide support of any kind to their claims which they posited as facts. I never said Hutson was likely to grow - I don't know, but it's not an irrelevant factor.

You absolutely are hiding behind semantics.

 

[jfm133]

Hutson himself said they added him one inch on the university website. He was meseared at development camp. And again, Hughes and Fox are 20 pounds heavier and Hutson is unlikely to ever reach that weight. He is very thin, he is not like Francis Bouillon or Torey Krug.

FWIW, we need to be careful where we get info from, as there are a range of heights and weights provided for players and its not easy to find the source or . Looking at the BU website (which is probably a pretty decent source), Quinn Hughes is 5'11" and 176lbs. and Lane Hutson is 5'10" 162 lbs. So I'm not sure you have the information to draw those kind of conclusions.

And is there a particular reason why you're pushing this +20/ reach 180 lbs narrative? If Hutson is successful or not at the NHL is going to be based on how his unique play translates, not his weight. That's the case with Spurgeon, Hughes, Fox, etc. He needs to add more muscle for other reasons, but there's not a magic number that will mean he can or can't be effective.

 

[themilosh]

Hutson himself said they added him one inch on the university website. He was meseared at development camp. And again, Hughes and Fox are 20 pounds heavier and Hutson is unlikely to ever reach that weight. He is very thin, he is not like Francis Bouillon or Torey Krug.

Why not just turn him into a winger?

 

[salbutera]

I do see him as a can’t miss prospect at this stage but in the sense of can’t miss Gotisbehere type of 2nd/3rd 5v5 pairing defender that can put up 50-60 point with o-zone starts and pp specialist. I REALLY wish he develops into more than that, but if we’re being honest, it’s already huge for a 60th overall. Just unsure if that can be a key piece to win it all, but sure as hell can be entertaining.
But again I find it perfectly legitimate to wish he continues beating the odds as it seems like it’s what he’s been doing all his life.

I don’t know how ANYONE can predict what Hutson will be at NHL.

What will be fascinating to watch play out is Hughes & MSLs full court press on redefining positionless hockey using Hutson as “patient zero”

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

I'm a little tired of tribal bias claims that are themselves "dripping with tribal bias". Lets not pretend that there weren't those who overstated Hutson's defensive issues and there weren't examples which raised doubts to how serious his back skating issue is.

Hutson also isn't a "terrible defender". He's definitely below average, but from both scouting and data we've seen improvement and its pretty hard to substaniate that he's terrible defensively.

Its not unreasonable to have questions as to how Hutson's game would translate to the NHL (particularly defensively), but not everyone who thinks there's a good chance that he'll be able to translate his game are just thinking with their hearts.



What exaclty are you trying to say? Not to judge as I haven't read any opinion and didn't see a report. I don't see that any of that is "typical" in the context we're discussing it, because the purposes are vastly different. Hutson sought a medical opinion. you don't publish a study on that basis, but medical opinions are informed by medical research, including studies.

And I don't know what "he did not grow much last year" means. He's grown almost 2 inches since the 2022 NHL draft combine.

He has grown exactly 0.75" since the combine......stop looking at the bs that he and BU have put out there. They were caught lying about it this summer and just reposted the same crap again this fall.

Tribal bias has entirely fuelled his false height reports that kept on growing as well as the enormous backlash that I originally received when I reported that he could not do back crossovers which has now been proven beyond any reasonable doubt. They have no interest in the truth but would rather parrot the tribal mantra until it feels true to them. I am only interested in what is actually true despite whether or not that truth is a desirable one.

He absolutely is a terrible defender as he still can not defend from a back skating posture as he still turns his back to compensate due to his inability to complete back crossovers. This results in him being incapable of defending against faster forwards on the rush and he is way too weak to have any effect in front of his net or at killing plays virtually anywhere in the dzone. So yes when a defender is poor at defending off of the rush, poor at killing plays in the dzone, poor at taking the puck away from opponents in the dzone, referring to him as a terrible defender at this point in his development is completely justified. This is not a death knoll being sounded for his career, it is simply an observation about where this aspect of his game currently residing on a continuum of terrible to great.

Referring to my opinion as "tribal bias" is nonsensical as I am a Habs fan and want him to succeed. You just can't go around calling people who are doing their best to remain objective even when it goes against the bias of their tribe biased just because you disagree.

Anyways.....this discussion is just being dragged into the gutter like it usually is and I am not wasting any more of my day on it

 

[admiralcadillac]

He has grown exactly 0.75" since the combine......stop looking at the bs that he and BU have put out there. They were caught lying about it this summer and just reposted the same crap again this fall.

Tribal bias has entirely fuelled his false height reports that kept on growing as well as the enormous backlash that I originally received when I reported that he could not do back crossovers which has now been proven beyond any reasonable doubt. They have no interest in the truth but would rather parrot the tribal mantra until it feels true to them. I am only interested in what is actually true despite whether or not that truth is a desirable one.

He absolutely is a terrible defender as he still can not defend from a back skating posture as he still turns his back to compensate due to his inability to complete back crossovers. This results in him being incapable of defending against faster forwards on the rush and he is way too weak to have any effect in front of his net or at killing plays virtually anywhere in the dzone. So yes when a defender is poor at defending off of the rush, poor at killing plays in the dzone, poor at taking the puck away from opponents in the dzone, referring to him as a terrible defender at this point in his development is completely justified. This is not a death knoll being sounded for his career, it is simply an observation about where this aspect of his game currently residing on a continuum of terrible to great.

Referring to my opinion as "tribal bias" is nonsensical as I am a Habs fan and want him to succeed. You just can't go around calling people who are doing their best to remain objective even when it goes against the bias of their tribe biased just because you disagree.

Anyways.....this discussion is just being dragged into the gutter like it usually is and I am not wasting any more of my day on it

 

[admiralcadillac]

Jesus....

Go look it up yourself, he named the doctor and it is common knowledge that there is no accurate way to forecast exactly how much anyone will grow based on their growth plates.

Do you really need evidence that NHL teams don't have reports on prospects growth plates lol...

We already know how much he grew from the combine until his measurements in Montreal this summer, and it wasn't close to what most of the fisherman tales from his ravenous fan base were claiming. There were all sorts of posters claiming that he was easily over 5'10" and some who were claiming that he was closer to 5'11" lol. The same ones who lost their collective marbles when I called BU's generous listing false and I was proven to be correct the following summer and even Hutson was forced to admit it at a press conference at rookie camp.

I am the only one in this conversation that is trying to navigate through the bs and trying to stay close to objective truth. I would love it if he grows a ton but there is a reason that his doctor did not list an exact height that Lane will finish at....because it is an inexact science and there is no way to accurately project these things.

Hutson was measured at 5'8.25" and 158 lbs at the draft combine and 1 year later he was measured at 5'9" and 158 lbs at the prospect development camp one year later. He grew 0.75" and did not gain any weight over that year. These are hard facts and it is getting annoying having to dig them up for people who prefer to invent their own narrative. This is the empirical evidence that I use to suggest that it is unlikely that he grows much more or reaches a height that is significantly different that will put him in a category other than that of being a small defenceman. Citing that I am not an Endocrinologist would be correct but pretending that Hutson's Endocrinologist (that's correct just one) knows exactly how much he will grow is laughable and just a bias driven opinion. Show me where the report states exactly how much he will grow....you won't find it because all the doctor can do is determine if growth is still possible and the rest is much a mystery as it is to you and I.



You absolutely are hiding behind semantics.

How am I hiding behind semantics? Are trying to define something a different way? Am I trying to pin a variable in place? Seriously.

I ask someone to back up their statements and unsurprisingly they don’t and instead ask me to google it.

I can google a whole bunch of shit but if you’re going to make a statement here back it up.

 

[Kobe Armstrong]

How is that a semantic argument? I asked the poster to provide support of any kind to their claims which they posited as facts. I never said Hutson was likely to grow - I don't know, but it's not an irrelevant factor.

You are asking for specific evidence that he won't grow. Of course nobody can prove for a fact that he is done growing or will continue to grow, but until he does grow we can't count our chickens before they hatch.

If you aren't saying that he is likely to grow, what are you saying? You literally said it was likely he would continue growing until 21 or 22. When others respond that growth may be minimal or far from a guarantee, you muddy the waters. Seems like semantics to me, or at least bad faith arguing.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

How am I hiding behind semantics? Are trying to define something a different way? Am I trying to pin a variable in place? Seriously.

I ask someone to back up their statements and unsurprisingly they don’t and instead ask me to google it.

I can google a whole bunch of shit but if you’re going to make a statement here back it up.

I already backed it up with the height/weight listings.

You are basically going down the Flying Spaghetti Monster road and nobody has to acquiesce to ridiculous demands for proof of things that obviously don't require it. You want me to prove that the NHL does not hire multiple Endocrinologists to perform testing for bone age on prospects? Common sense would dictate that they do not, therefore the exceptional claim that they might is on yourself to back up. Lane referred multiple times to having visited an Endocrinologist (which is implying a singular physician) and also implies that you are hiding behind semantics. It is your claim that he might have visited multiple Endocrinologists at his own expense which is also an exceptional claim where the burden of proof lies with the person making said claim.

I am at worst only following Occam's Razor whereas you are being contrarian for the sake of protecting a withering claim

Sometimes you make sense other times your opinions run afoul.....can we please get back to the former because that is a much more enjoyable experience for all of us.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

FWIW, we need to be careful where we get info from, as there are a range of heights and weights provided for players and its not easy to find the source or . Looking at the BU website (which is probably a pretty decent source), Quinn Hughes is 5'11" and 176lbs. and Lane Hutson is 5'10" 162 lbs. So I'm not sure you have the information to draw those kind of conclusions.

And is there a particular reason why you're pushing this +20/ reach 180 lbs narrative? If Hutson is successful or not at the NHL is going to be based on how his unique play translates, not his weight. That's the case with Spurgeon, Hughes, Fox, etc. He needs to add more muscle for other reasons, but there's not a magic number that will mean he can or can't be effective.

You call BU a reliable source after they were just caught lying?

The only reliable sources are the draft combine and prospect camp where the players are measured and the results are posted. After that the player and his agent can have any height/weight posted that they want. Players are independent contractors and decide what personal information gets released and have been notoriously dishonest about their height and weight from the dawn of organized sports.

This board is like a whack-a-mole game today

Ok lol.....now I am done

 

[admiralcadillac]

You are asking for specific evidence that he won't grow. Of course nobody can prove for a fact that he is done growing or will continue to grow, but until he does grow we can't count our chickens before they hatch.

If you aren't saying that he is likely to grow, what are you saying? You literally said it was likely he would continue growing until 21 or 22. When others respond that growth may be minimal or far from a guarantee, you muddy the waters. Seems like semantics to me, or at least bad faith arguing.

You’ve restricted my whole post into the one variable involving whether he will grow or not when I asked several questions.

In reality, I never made the assertion he is not likely to grow anymore, you did and the other posters.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

You’ve restricted my whole post into the one variable involving whether he will grow or not when I asked several questions.

In reality, I never made the assertion he is not likely to grow anymore, you did and the other posters.

Most of your questions were not even worthy of a reply

Nobody said that he is not likely to grow anymore, but thanks for that strawman.

It was clearly stated that he is not likely to grow much more, if at all and that would seem to be a reasonable conclusion after growing 0.75" in a calendar year. This after his Endocrinologist prior to the '22 entry draft said that he could continue to grow for more than a full year and we are now closing in on two years since he was examined.

"Seeking to allay concerns with respect to his size, Hutson arrived at the NHL scouting combine with an endocrinologist report indicating "his bone age is delayed relative to his biological age, which means his frame still has more than a full year of additional bone growth to go."[1]

This is the quote that everyone here saw, likely including yourself and it clearly refers to a single physician with no reference to NHL supplied data on the matter. You made the outlandish suggestions that there might be more reports and that the NHL may have done their own reports so the onus is entirely on you to provide evidence that these statements are nothing more than bad faith arguments and semantics. In the absence of such evidence I will have no choice but to dismiss your claims as baseless and contrarian.

Should I go to visit Lane with my personal Endocrinologist to placate your demands lol or can you just please drop this silliness?

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

He will almost certainly suit up in some NHL games when his season ends.

I don’t think so. And I hope not.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Why not just turn him into a winger?

BU certainly aren't going to do that and there is no way Montreal would even dream of mentioning that to an unsigned NCAA star dman.

If that ever happens it will be well in the future but he may not be effective as a winger as his lack of size and speed are far from ideal. Lane relies on having open ice in front of him in a similar way that P.K. did as neither player was a strong north/south skater but look alot faster skating past stagnant forwards in the neutral zone where they can use their amazing stick skills, deception and elusiveness to gain the offensive zone with time and space. Wingers have to contend with defenders who are skating hard in the neutral zone where they will be caught and neutralized if they are not fast enough before they can gain the offensive zone. This is where he would really struggle as well as in board battles or fighting for loose pucks in front of the net. He also relies on traffic to make his shot dangerous but as a winger he will be of little threat off of the rush with his shot where goaltenders will get a good look at him.

His fans always focus on his size and if he is getting bigger but that is a waste of time imo because he will always be a small player. Gaining more speed and fixing his backskating are the real keys to his success. He may have the skinniest legs I have ever seen on a player so close to the NHL so he has alot of work to do on his lower body and his butt if he wants to realize his highest NHL ceiling.

 

[SlafySZN]

I don’t think so. And I hope not.

He will. Hughes said they’ll sign him at the end of his season.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

He will. Hughes said they’ll sign him at the end of his season.

Signing him and playing him are two different things.

 

[SlafySZN]

Signing him and playing him are two different things.

Not really. If there’s some game left when his season ends, they’ll sign him and play him like they did Harris and Farrell in the last 2 seasons.

 

[Kobe Armstrong]

You’ve restricted my whole post into the one variable involving whether he will grow or not when I asked several questions.

In reality, I never made the assertion he is not likely to grow anymore, you did and the other posters.

Bruv

He is likely to continue growing into his 21st or 22nd years. Just look it up.