Prospect Info: Luke Hughes - part IV (final)

[Devils731]

Well isn't this thread just a ball of sunshine. If you couldn't see the reads/touch passes he was executing all night I'm not sure what to tell you. You would think after seeing icing after icing or chips off the glass thru 9 games might give a little perspective.

It’s similar to his brother in year 2 with people focused on what he wasn’t great at and missing all the good he was doing.

 

[Poppy Whoa Sonnet]

I think 11/7 works better much better than 12/6 for this series and it's not even close. You have some backup for Luke should he need it and the team is super young and can handle additional minutes with ease.

The key moving forward is having Luke, Timo, and Jack out there at the same time. 34 year old Jordan Staal can only do so much.

I'd be interested in Mikey, Jack, Luke, Timo, and Damon on offensive zone starts, all game long as much as possible.

I know McLeod has been great this playoffs but he's not someone you can necessarily expect to generate offense reliably given his career. Maybe he's fast enough against Carolina that 11/7 is the best option and just going with 3 centers over say playing one of Haula/Mercer/Lazar at C as well for a 4th line is the way to go. Just one of these games is gonna go to OT and I know these guys are young but it's a long slog of the playoffs and I'd like to keep up with Carolina at 5v5 and not have any lines seem gassed, seems like that would be an issue with Carolina's speed.

Another option to go 12/6 would be to play Smith at forward and move him to D if Luke Hughes needs to sit on the bench a while, if you think a 7th dman absolutely has to be in the lineup as Luke Hughes is too young insurance. Ultimately I'd like him to get the trust to play more minutes v. have them tightly controlled. In case it wasn't clear I think Luke needs to be in the lineup against Carolina, I'm just pushing back on the idea that the FO/Ruff were being fools for keeping him out.

FYI the shift chart last game:

ShiftChart - Hockey Shift Data Visualization

 

[AfroThunder396]

“Luke Hughes sucks defensively” he said, ignoring Dougie f***ing Hamilton, Ryan f***ing Graves, Damon f***ing Severson, and Brendan f***ing Smith.

 

[Captain3rdLine]

Not hardly. He's not ready and as someone mentioned above, his lackadaisical approach to defending will be costly in tight games.

His lackadaisical defending was significantly better than any defense Graves or Smith have given us so far in the playoffs. Had he provided way more offensively.

 

[Triumph]

The worry about playing Hughes isn't just his warts but the fact that the Devils' D zone system seems more complicated than most teams. He played against Buffalo who were one of the worst defensive teams in the league and Washington who had fully given up on the season. I think the tune is a bit different if the Devils won 4-2 and he still made that play on the PP.

 

[Captain3rdLine]

The worry about playing Hughes isn't just his warts but the fact that the Devils' D zone system seems more complicated than most teams. He played against Buffalo who were one of the worst defensive teams in the league and Washington who had fully given up on the season. I think the tune is a bit different if the Devils won 4-2 and he still made that play on the PP.

Despite that mistake and some other smaller ones he was far better defensively and in every other aspect than Graves has been. Graves has been a steaming pile of shit all playoffs and keeps getting put out there. Smith hasn’t been much better either.

 

[Ripshot 43]

 

[MasterofGrond]

Love to stick with something I know is bad versus something that only may be bad.

 

[Bleedred]

L. Hughes looks like he may be a pretty nice player in the next 10 years, but he’s no Adam Fox, that’s for sure. He’s also no Makar, who we could have taken first overall in 2017.

Thanks again RayCastron

 

[NjdevilfanJim]

Don't see how anyone is not impressed with how he played and for minutes played he played more than I thought they would give him and played good given his experience....Will he make mistakes yes but doesn't every dman...I thank the marketing department no matter what the outcome of this series this is great experience for him....

 

[Guttersniped]

The worry about playing Hughes isn't just his warts but the fact that the Devils' D zone system seems more complicated than most teams. He played against Buffalo who were one of the worst defensive teams in the league and Washington who had fully given up on the season. I think the tune is a bit different if the Devils won 4-2 and he still made that play on the PP.

Pretty sure Severson made that exact sort of pass this season so my tune wouldn’t be that different.

 

[Blackjack]

Posted this in April:
Makar was 20 during the 2018-19 Playoffs, almost a whole year older…

See, to me, the difference between Luke and the other guys (Makar et al.) is that they went first. They showed that guys that dominated two years in college could be expected to step right into the league and contribute. The idea that a defenseman can’t possibly handle the speed and intensity of the NHL unless they spend a decade in the minors, forge their own stick and forswear all impure thoughts of offensive contribution is now outdated.

This isn’t directed at you (although I realize that it seems like it is) I’m just aggravated that our Jack Adams nominee doesn’t seem to have been paying attention to the league for the last six years.

It should be obvious to anyone, anyone, that a Luke Hughes playing to his potential is a better option than at least four of our five left handed defensemen. The only thing you don’t know before you play him is if he can handle the moment, if he’s “ready”.

I personally think 11-7 is unnecessarily conservative. If you trust the first five guys it’s really not that hard to shelter the sixth. But if that’s the duty that must be surrendered to olde tyme hokee wisdom to get Luke on the ice, so be it. There is simply no reasonable argument to be made that a 12th forward offers more potential upside tha Luke Hughes.

again, not directed at you but quoted your post because I wanted to highlight what I think the difference is between Luke and the guys that came before him.

 

[Guttersniped]

See, to me, the difference between Luke and the other guys (Makar et al.) is that they went first. They showed that guys that dominated two years in college could be expected to step right into the league and contribute. The idea that a defenseman can’t possibly handle the speed and intensity of the NHL unless they spend a decade in the minors, forge their own stick and forswear all impure thoughts of offensive contribution is now outdated.

This isn’t directed at you (although I realize that it seems like it is) I’m just aggravated that our Jack Adams nominee doesn’t seem to have been paying attention to the league for the last six years.

It should be obvious to anyone, anyone, that a Luke Hughes playing to his potential is a better option than at least four of our five left handed defensemen. The only thing you don’t know before you play him is if he can handle the moment, if he’s “ready”.

I personally think 11-7 is unnecessarily conservative. If you trust the first five guys it’s really not that hard to shelter the sixth. But if that’s the duty that must be surrendered to olde tyme hokee wisdom to get Luke on the ice, so be it. There is simply no reasonable argument to be made that a 12th forward offers more potential upside tha Luke Hughes.

again, not directed at you but quoted your post because I wanted to highlight what I think the difference is between Luke and the guys that came before him.

PK duty, and Luke not playing on that, is a factor here.

They aren’t using Severson on the PK unless a PK defenseman is in the box. Hamilton hadn’t PKed until Game 2 vs CAR, when Bahl went into the box while Graves was out.

Smith took Graves minutes, both on 5v5 and on the PK. Luke can take Bahl’s 5v5 with Severson, but that’s complicated by Bahl’s role on the PK, plus he’s one of the few truly physical players we have.

Now Severson was fine on the PK in the past so I don’t see why he couldn’t do it again, though I’m not going to complain about the PK since it’s been stellar after the first two Rangers games.

This is a very complicated way to say it’s tough to replace defensemen because you have to think of them in terms of pairings, both 5v5 and PK.

We were taking a shit ton of penalties vs the Rangers and the PK was critical in that series. Ruff might have been wary of adding Luke while playing Carolina when they controlled the match-ups. Should it have happened in Game 2? Maybe? Probably? It doesn’t matter now.

 

[RNCDevil]

I don't have the stats to back this up ..But I think every PP QB has made a boneheaded blue line pass. Skilled players make risky plays. The best ones have fewer failures, but NOT none...

 

[MasterofGrond]

“Luke Hughes sucks defensively” he said, ignoring Dougie f***ing Hamilton, Ryan f***ing Graves, Damon f***ing Severson, and Brendan f***ing Smith.

to be fair, Severson is actually really solid 95% of the time (for some of the same reasons Luke is)

Anyways, let Luke cook. If we have to run 7 to do it, fine, but I'd rather just bench Smith or Bahl

 

[FooteBahl]

I don't have the stats to back this up ..But I think every PP QB has made a boneheaded blue line pass. Skilled players make risky plays. The best ones have fewer failures, but NOT none...

I’ll chalk that mistake up to him getting away with that kind of stuff in college. He’ll learn his lesson.

 

[JimEIV]

Interesting bit of information.

Luke at 19 played just about the same amount of time as Makar did at 20 in his first playoff game.

Makar had a goal and 2 shots in 14:19 in a 6-2 win versus Calgary.

Luke had 2 assist and 0 shots in 14:28 in 8-4 win versus Carolina.

Very similar playoff debuts...of course Makar was a year older....

another interesting bit, Makar's 2nd playoff game would see him play 20:06

 

[TheNeutralZone]

Ahhh. But those are veteran players. If those players screw up, it's not on Lindy. But if LHughes screws up, it's Lindy's fault. He didn't have to play Luke.

It's completely illogical and insane on it's face. Risk averse, but only thinking a certain set of moves is risky.

 

[Jersey Fan 12]

Despite that mistake and some other smaller ones he was far better defensively and in every other aspect than Graves has been. Graves has been a steaming pile of shit all playoffs and keeps getting put out there. Smith hasn’t been much better either.

Repeating your point twice in consecutive posts doesn't make it true.

Not sure where all the Graves hate originated but it reminds me a lot of the Haula and Woods bashing during the regular season. I don't understand why this fan base has the inability to judge their own players other than by numbers or fuzzy "analytics".

Nothing about Luke's game suggests he was better defensively than Graves or Brendan Smith.

He has a flash to his game but is still a long way from being an NHL caliber defender.

It's easy to overlook those flaws when a team scores eight goals. That is an anomaly.

 

[JimEIV]

Despite that mistake and some other smaller ones he was far better defensively and in every other aspect than Graves has been. Graves has been a steaming pile of shit all playoffs and keeps getting put out there. Smith hasn’t been much better either.

See this is what I'm talking about...

You can't say a guy who played 12:55 at even strength was "better defensively" than a guy who regularly plays 16 or 17 minutes at even strength...

Those two scenarios aren't the same. Those two players aren't doing the same thing. They're just not, it's not possible.

 

[Zajacs Bowl Cut]

Repeating your point twice in consecutive posts doesn't make it true.

Not sure where all the Graves hate originated but it reminds me a lot of the Haula and Woods bashing during the regular season. I don't understand why this fan base has the inability to judge their own players other than by numbers or fuzzy "analytics".

Nothing about Luke's game suggests he was better defensively than Graves or Brendan Smith.

He has a flash to his game but is still a long way from being an NHL caliber defender.

It's easy to overlook those flaws when a team scores eight goals. That is an anomaly.

Miles Wood was terrible all season. He has been a bit better during the playoffs, but overall he is still the same guy he always was. Just waiting for his crushing Offensive zone penalty to rear its ugly head...you know its coming.

Erik Haula was criticized heavily the first half of the year, yes. However, I think most would now admit that that was because the coach was adamant about stapling him to Hughes, coupled with the fact that he could not BUY a goal. Haula, when slated properly in his role, is an effective player.

Luke Hughes is NEVER going to become a stalwart defensively. Hell, if he did, he might become the best DMan in the league. That is not his game. His game is quick zone exits, speed, and transition play. That is what was lacking in the first two games in Carolina....guys like Graves (and others, it wasnt just him) were getting pinned in the zone and allowing Carolina to just attack at will. Luke's best "defense" is being about to move the puck up and out quickly.

and Brendan Smith sucks ass. I am confident in saying that Luke is already a better overall player than him.

See this is what I'm talking about...

You can't say a guy who played 12:55 at even strength was "better defensively" than a guy who regularly plays 16 or 17 minutes at even strength...

Those two scenarios aren't the same. Those two players aren't doing the same thing. They're just not, it's not possible.

this argument makes no freaking sense.

Again, I want to know what your barometer (in minutes of ES ice time) for when we are allowed to rate guys.

so what you're saying is a guy that plays more always played better? Do you understand how ridiculous that sounds?

 

[Triumph]

See this is what I'm talking about...

You can't say a guy who played 12:55 at even strength was "better defensively" than a guy who regularly plays 16 or 17 minutes at even strength...

Those two scenarios aren't the same. Those two players aren't doing the same thing. They're just not, it's not possible.

This is asinine even by your standards; you are comparing two different scenarios. Yes, when one player plays limited minutes habitually, it becomes more challenging to compare his results to a player who plays substantially more, habitually. When one player plays 14 minutes of a single game, his results are his results, and we can talk about the plays he did or did not make in that time. I'm sorry that this particular argument doesn't quite match an argument you love to make.

 

[Blackjack]

You're not the sharpest knife in the drawer I see?

A guy who makes 2 mistakes every 14 minutes played much, much worse than a guy who makes 1 mistake every 17 minutes....

Now to expand on that, as the minutes get higher the situations get more difficult...you can't avoid any situations playing 20+ minutes, it's not possible...you can avoid all unfavorable matchups and situations playing 12:55 a night. That's how it works.

So if Luke score 2 points in 14 minutes you’re assuming he’ll score 3 in 21?

Geez man, I think you need to cool it on the Luke hype. I thought he played well too, but I don’t know if he’s gonna put up three points per game.

 

[JimEIV]

So if Luke score 2 points in 14 minutes you’re assuming he’ll score 3 in 21?

Geez man, I think you need to cool it on the Luke hype. I thought he played well too, but I don’t know if he’s gonna put up three points per game.

They actually keep P/60. Is that surprising to you?

 

[MasterofGrond]

"This guy played more so his game was definitely better than night" is one of the least coherent opinions I've ever heard on this or any other board.