Prospect Info: Lane Hutson Part 2

[SlafySZN]

 

[Gustave]

It is well established that skilled hockey players score more in lesser leagues, there are always exceptions but they are extreme outliers. The scenario that you are describing is generally more applicable to less skilled players who don't drive offence on their own. You can also argue that skilled players going to better teams can result in less ice time, including less PP time.

To be clear, I think Lane would be great in the Big 10 as well but would see a decrease in production whereas the Hughes brothers would have scored more playing for a top team in Hockey East. Hockey East has some terrible teams with players that just can not play in the Big 10 that are easily exploited and we have certainly watched Lane embarrass some awful players this season.

Like I outlined earlier, the top division 1 teams around the country are very comparable but it is the bottom of each association that really separates them.

Interesting points all around.

Some seem to imply that the Hughes bros produced less, therefore Hutson is better offensively (I don’t recall anyone saying that Luke is inferior defensively than Hutson) others like to use the Big 10 quality to infer that it mitigates stats…

So without taking any position on this, I can point to a fair but smaller and obviously imperfect reference; they both (Luke and Lane, I can’t make any comp to Quinn H) just played on the same team at the WJC. Luke had 5 points, Lane had 4. TOI was favorable to Luke and age also.

They seem fairly equivalent… that should speak volumes to our advantage on a strictly asset based optic; it cost us a late 2nd to get him instead of an early 1st to the Devil’s. Again, only if we consider the offensive output.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Interesting points all around.

Some seem to imply that the Hughes bros produced less, therefore Hutson is better offensively (I don’t recall anyone saying that Luke is inferior defensively than Hutson) others like to use the Big 10 quality to infer that it mitigates stats…

So without taking any position on this, I can point to a fair but smaller and obviously imperfect reference; they both (Luke and Lane, I can’t make any comp to Quinn H) just played on the same team at the WJC. Luke had 5 points, Lane had 4. TOI was favorable to Luke and age also.

They seem fairly equivalent… that should speak volumes to our advantage on a strictly asset based optic; it cost us a late 2nd to get him instead of an early 1st to the Devil’s. Again, only if we consider the offensive output.

Luke is orders of magnitude better than Lane, watching the WJC only reinforced that.

 

[Runner77]

This is the thread for watching his height and weight. If you want to talk about his skill, go make a new thread. This one is infested already.

It’s infested cause Hutson himself made an issue of it by showing up at his pre-draft interviews with some specialist’s report about how he was projected to grow.

I don’t know whose idea it was to do that but clearly he either must have felt at an extreme disadvantage without addressing it or his agent must have urged him. He wasn’t wrong, it turns out, as he was still only selected 62nd but there may have been other factors at play at the same time.

It would be great if we could put his height on the back burner and just focus on his great season and other attributes but there is no extermination service for that kind of infestation.

 

[Scriptor]

He is closer to 5 11 than 5 8!

By a quarter inch? Really want to go there?

 

[Frank Drebin]

By a quarter inch? Really want to go there?

Has everyone lost their sense of humor in this thread? Chill T.F. out people.

 

[Corky]

Luke is orders of magnitude better than Lane, watching the WJC only reinforced that.

Luke H was given a more prominent role on the team mostly due to draft pedigree. I would not say he‘s orders of magnitude better. It will always be an uphill battle for Hutson to prove that he is as strong as defenders with lesser track records mostly due to height, weight and draft rank. This will be the case until he makes the NHL, where he might or might not become a superstar.

Basically, if Luke Hughes becomes a superstar in the NHL, it will be “as expected”. If Hutson makes it, it will be a “surprise”. Both to me have equal chances as it stands now but I’m starting to give the edge to Hutson.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Luke H was given a more prominent role on the team mostly due to draft pedigree. I would not say he‘s orders of magnitude better. It will always be an uphill battle for Hutson to prove that he is as strong as defenders with lesser track records mostly due to height, weight and draft rank. This will be the case until he makes the NHL, where he might or might not become a superstar.

Basically, if Luke Hughes becomes a superstar in the NHL, it will be “as expected”. If Hutson makes it, it will be a “surprise”. Both to me have equal chances as it stands now but I’m starting to give the edge to Hutson.

Come on....really?

Hughes was not given a more prominent role due to pedigree.......that is tin foil hat level nonsense. Hughes is much better than Hutson and it showed as Hutson was absolutely terrible in his own end. Hutson sat on the bench because he can't skate backwards and was being dominated down low in his own end....it was really ugly.

Hughes is a stud and will be in the NHL next season on his way to eventually becoming a top pairing dman. Hutson is a project who could completely bust or become a star but he has a long ways to go.

Giving the edge to Hutson over Hughes is such grotesque bias that it just can't be part of a rational, evidence based discussion. It is lunacy like this that makes this fanbase a running joke on the main boards.

There is not a single scout or GM who would agree with your assertion, which of course you are entitled to express but also entitled to have it ridiculed.

I would love for you to be right but I will wait to actually see evidence before daring to mutter such heresy.

 

[Rob Sense]

Come on....really?

Hughes was not given a more prominent role due to pedigree.......that is tin foil hat level nonsense. Hughes is much better than Hutson and it showed as Hutson was absolutely terrible in his own end. Hutson sat on the bench because he can't skate backwards and was being dominated down low in his own end....it was really ugly.

Hughes is a stud and will be in the NHL next season on his way to eventually becoming a top pairing dman. Hutson is a project who could completely bust or become a star but he has a long ways to go.

Giving the edge to Hutson over Hughes is such grotesque bias that it just can't be part of a rational, evidence based discussion. It is lunacy like this that makes this fanbase a running joke on the main boards.

There is not a single scout or GM who would agree with your assertion, which of course you are entitled to express but also entitled to have it ridiculed.

I would love for you to be right but I will wait to actually see evidence before daring to mutter such heresy.

Did you just call the entire fanbase lunatics?

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

Did you just call the entire fanbase lunatics?

Reading comprehension is fun...you should try it.

I was clearly referring to a generalization of this fanbase that is common on the main boards. Everyone always trying to be first in line to be offended these days....

I am part of the fanbase as well as many others that I respect......but you read it in such a way to feel victimized?

 

[Twisted Sinister]

Luke is orders of magnitude better than Lane, watching the WJC only reinforced that.

Come on....really?

Hughes was not given a more prominent role due to pedigree.......that is tin foil hat level nonsense. Hughes is much better than Hutson and it showed as Hutson was absolutely terrible in his own end. Hutson sat on the bench because he can't skate backwards and was being dominated down low in his own end....it was really ugly.

Hughes is a stud and will be in the NHL next season on his way to eventually becoming a top pairing dman. Hutson is a project who could completely bust or become a star but he has a long ways to go.

Giving the edge to Hutson over Hughes is such grotesque bias that it just can't be part of a rational, evidence based discussion. It is lunacy like this that makes this fanbase a running joke on the main boards.

There is not a single scout or GM who would agree with your assertion, which of course you are entitled to express but also entitled to have it ridiculed.

I would love for you to be right but I will wait to actually see evidence before daring to mutter such heresy.

Man, you really seem to be on a mission to hate this player I know that's not exactly what you're saying, but you come at it with such vitriol that it comes off that way.

Here's my analysis.

From a technical perspective, Hughes has Hutson pretty beat. I'd even say "orders of magnitude" is actually accurate in this regard.

However, it's how Hutson uses the tools that he has that is rather shocking. He has the kind of creativity and IQ that, I'm going to be honest, I'm not quite sure I've seen from anyone lately. The way in which he manages to break ankles, open up passing lanes out of nowhere, and create plays in a phone booth from nothing is rather shocking, TBH. I know this might sound like hyperbole, but i don't know if I've ever seen anyone mess with opposing players as much.

As for the defensive game, I'm not seeing Lane get hemmed in his zone in more recent BU games. This is often due to the fact that he just seems to be making good decisions with the puck and getting it out before anyone can even forecheck. For that same reason, he doesn't seem to get hit much.

That said, his backwards skating and rush defense is definitely still pretty meh. We'll see how well he can correct that going forward, but the sky is honestly the limit with this kid, particularly if he's legit 5'10

 

[Corky]

Come on....really?

Hughes was not given a more prominent role due to pedigree.......that is tin foil hat level nonsense. Hughes is much better than Hutson and it showed as Hutson was absolutely terrible in his own end. Hutson sat on the bench because he can't skate backwards and was being dominated down low in his own end....it was really ugly.

Hughes is a stud and will be in the NHL next season on his way to eventually becoming a top pairing dman. Hutson is a project who could completely bust or become a star but he has a long ways to go.

Giving the edge to Hutson over Hughes is such grotesque bias that it just can't be part of a rational, evidence based discussion. It is lunacy like this that makes this fanbase a running joke on the main boards.

There is not a single scout or GM who would agree with your assertion, which of course you are entitled to express but also entitled to have it ridiculed.

I would love for you to be right but I will wait to actually see evidence before daring to mutter such heresy.

Well, I guess we’ll just have to wait then…

 

[salbutera]

He just might not get to game 47. His team has to win in the playoffs in order for him to get there...



Being 5'9 isn't being a midget. It's the average height in the u.s.

It’s a dwarf in the hockey world

 

[Corky]

Man, you really seem to be on a mission to hate this player I know that's not exactly what you're saying, but you come at it with such vitriol that it comes off that way.

Here's my analysis.

From a technical perspective, Hughes has Hutson pretty beat. I'd even say "orders of magnitude" is actually accurate in this regard.

However, it's how Hutson uses the tools that he has that is rather shocking. He has the kind of creativity and IQ that, I'm going to be honest, I'm not quite sure I've seen from anyone lately. The way in which he manages to break ankles, open up passing lanes out of nowhere, and create plays in a phone booth from nothing is rather shocking, TBH. I know this might sound like hyperbole, but i don't know if I've ever seen anyone mess with opposing players as much.

As for the defensive game, I'm not seeing Lane get hemmed in his zone in more recent BU games. This is often due to the fact that he just seems to be making good decisions with the puck and getting it out before anyone can even forecheck. For that same reason, he doesn't seem to get hit much.

That said, his backwards skating and rush defense is definitely still pretty meh. We'll see how well he can correct that going forward, but the sky is honestly the limit with this kid, particularly if he's legit 5'10

Agreed with that, they are both good, they are just not good at the same things. Hugues is more of a prototypical defender in the mould of other ones we’ve seen dominate in the league for years, like Pietrangelo for example.

Hutson is more of an Adam Fox or a Quinn Hughes. Essentially, one has the potential to become an all around great number 1 defensemen, and the other has the potential to become an offensive dynamo.

I think you have a need for both in a team, but the Canadiens haven’t had a wizard in the offensive zone from the back end since Markov.

 

[domiwroze]

So,

Did Lane Hutson won all rookie of the month so far ? Sure seems like it

 

[Matthew McConaughay]

So,

Did Lane Hutson won all rookie of the month so far ? Sure seems like it

I guess Rookie of the year is in the bag.

 

[Whalers Fan]

Luke is orders of magnitude better than Lane, watching the WJC only reinforced that.

I watched both play for the NTDP for two years, and I agree. Luke Hughes is an absolute stud.

 

[Supersonic]

Edit

This thread is f***ing nauseating

 

[Scriptor]

Has everyone lost their sense of humor in this thread? Chill T.F. out people.

Do you know why a trade of Hutson, straight up, for Dubois, is bound to look bad?

By looking at Hutson, at first, you think you're getting three times a much back for him in Dubois, but when you find out Hutson is 19, Dubois starts looking 40.

 

[Wateredgarden]

It’s a dwarf in the hockey world

View attachment 664391

I once met Christian Thomas and Greg Pateryn in the Mile-End, i'm 5'10 and i was towering over Christian Thomas, Pateryn was taller than me by an inch and a half. Hockey heights are fake.

 

[SlafySZN]

Edit

This thread is f***ing nauseating

In what sense? lol

 

[Frank Drebin]

Do you know why a trade of Hutson, straight up, for Dubois, is bound to look bad?

By looking at Hutson, at first, you think you're getting three times a much back for him in Dubois, but when you find out Hutson is 19, Dubois stats looking 40.

I think I get it. Lol.

 

[Matthew McConaughay]

All i know, is that, when i see him play, he doesn't look that small on the ice, and there's taller guy playing.

 

[Scriptor]

I think I get it. Lol.

typo. It should read, starts looking 40 (because Hutson looks like he's 8)

All i know, is that, when i see him play, he doesn't look that small on the ice, and there's taller guy playing.

I think the whole drama about the doctor's report has simply stuck in everyone's head to make it sound like Mesar is a midget Pictures of him looking like he's Twelve don't help.

I think he looks fine on the highlights I see, not particularly small.

 

[Rob Sense]

Reading comprehension is fun...you should try it.

I was clearly referring to a generalization of this fanbase that is common on the main boards. Everyone always trying to be first in line to be offended these days....

I am part of the fanbase as well as many others that I respect......but you read it in such a way to feel victimized?

Not really...but it is this type of "generalization" that is not acceptable and should be called out. It is just as unacceptable to categorize other team's fans collectively because of one or two deviants. And if you want you and i can have a reading comprehension competition.