Skip to main content

Another Luke Hughes ranking shows he's incredibly underrated going into the 2026-27 season

Luke Hughes has taken a ton of pot shots this offseason with many analysts acting like they are giving up on his progression. With his first training camp under Sheldon Keefe upcoming, don't listen to those downplaying his 2026-27 impacts.
New Jersey Devils defenseman Luke Hughes (43): Thomas Salus-Imagn Images
New Jersey Devils defenseman Luke Hughes (43): Thomas Salus-Imagn Images | IMAGN IMAGES via Reuters Connect

The New Jersey Devils have an interest level of expectations going into the 2026-27 season. Almost nobody expects them to compete for anything significant. A history of bad luck and bad execution has this team falling under the radar. But it’s not like analysts call them “underrated.” They are finally seeing them as a team that’s on the fringes after years of giving them more credit than they deserve because of Nico Hischier and Jack Hughes.

While that might sound harsh, it’s true. The Devils have been chosen as the second-best team in the Metropolitan Division, with a chance to compete for the Stanley Cup if everything goes right for years. Now, they are seen as a team that’s between third place in the Metro and the Wild Card if the Metro is able to take a spot from the Atlantic Division this season. 

Seeing the expectations for the Devils, a few things are true. The Jack Hughes injury is become an expectation, not an exception, and there’s basically no progression expected from the young players still on the Devils. Dawson Mercer is what he is in these analysts’ eyes, Timo Meier is no longer a 30-goal scorer, let alone a 40-goal scorer, and players like Arseny Gritsyuk, Lenni Hameenaho, and Nico Daws are not expected to make big jumps in production to lead this team to a new level. 

That’s especially true for Luke Hughes. Coming off a dreadful first season under his new $9 million-per-season contract, many are losing faith in the youngest Hughes brother. Nobody is saying he’s a bad player, per se, but they are losing faith that he’s a true number one in the NHL. 

Hughes is still a dynamic offensive option, but an early history of shoulder injuries has taken a lot of his production away. He has also missed two straight training camps, which happen to be the first two training camps under head coach Sheldon Keefe. Keefe’s system puts a lot of pressure on a player like Hughes. He seemed to bounce back well in 2024-25, when he missed the first month of the season after a shoulder injury during training. Last season, he wasn’t injured but missed training camp while negotiating his new contract. He never seemed to recover.

This season, he should be fully healthy and ready to go in training camp. That matters a lot.

But that doesn’t matter to some of these algorithmic prediction models. One in particular that caught our eye is the one recently released by Benchrates. 

According to the “model,” Benchrates believes that next season, Luke Hughes will play like a $5 million defenseman. To be exact, they believe he is overpaid by $3.9 million, which they call “massively overpaid” in their analysis. 

We reached out to Benchrates for a better understanding of their model, but this is what is listed on their website:

"BenchRates measures performance through a standardized, dollar-based value called Contribution. Contribution combines official statistical production with performance metrics, including situations weighting, expected goals models, and on-ice impact indicators. This framework enables direct comparison across players, positions, and teams without relying solely on traditional statistics."
BenchRates

This… doesn’t explain how they are projecting “future value.” It appears they are relying on past value to determine future value, which just isn’t how players are being paid right now. Was Luke Hughes a $5 million defenseman last season? Probably. He was really good at times and maddeningly inconsistent at others.

Thinking that will repeat this season is a fool’s errand. 

Add us as a preferred source on Google

Loading recommendations... Please wait while we load personalized content recommendations