2022 NHL Draft Rankings - April, Mid-U18 edition.
Draft Rankings Pt 2: Electric Boogaloo
Back once again, with another set of rankings. This time it’s the.. mid-U18 edition?
I was debating whether or not to release a pre-U18 ranking as a sort of “midpoint release” in between the first edition and the final that will be posted a week or two before the draft. The fact that this list didn’t come out Friday means that I initally decided against it. The fact that the list is coming out today means that I overruled that decision.
I’m still not really sure what I think of this class as a whole. I think most of the top prospects are a notch below those of recent years, and that this class is roughly equal in strength with the “weak” 2021 class (which was never as weak as people said it was). Shane Wright is likely the best prospect of the two classes, but the gap isn’t large -- Eklund and Beniers would be very close to challenging him for first, and I wouldn’t pound the table if my scouting team were insistent on taking one of them over Wright. There are three names this year that are roughly on that level as well.
The middle group this year is filled with a lot of potential, but a lot of risk. This continues the trend of being like last year, where there were a ton of players that could be excellent but had far less certainty than years prior. My 9-19 tier is filled with players who carry some risk, but I believe have the right combination of upside, floor, projectability and probability of working out. The 20-34 tier is similar, but players I believe carry more risk (and a few with upside as high in the draft). There are also safer, reliable options with less upside in this range -- a few of these players are a lot higher on other lists.
After that, it becomes a bit of a mess. I’m not overly convinced that this is a deep draft per se, even though there are still names in the next few tiers that I find very intriguing. It’s harder to rank these players using my “practical application of tools + strong game sense” philosophy given the range of outcomes for everyone here is massive. Normally, I would say you’re better off using a second round pick on a higher upside player. You might miss out on selecting a surefire third pairing defenceman, but those you can find without burning a draft pick in the process. Still, this scenario only exists if the majority of my first round is selected.. well, in the first round. For obvious reasons, I would select the players still on my board from the first round if they are available in the second.
All this being said, I’ve never noticed such a large disconnect with my own rankings and other lists out there. A big issue with following true to your philosophy is that differing from the majority feels like an inevitability, and while originality itself may not be an issue, it also looks like a bunch of “hot takes” for the sake of standing out. To avoid that being the case here, a disclaimer feels necessary: not a single name on this list is ranked for the sake of being “different”.
The reality is that I believe a few of the higher ranked players in this draft are being a bit overrated based on what I’ve seen. The opposite is also true, as there are a few players I’ve seen ranked low by larger outlets who I believe have shown an abundance of potential this year. They aren’t wrong for being lower on them, and I’m not right for being higher. It’s just the subjective nature of this business. What I do know, is that I would gladly take these players in my organization if I was involved in one.
I would like to take a moment and acknowledge just how much shit life has thrown at Ivan Miroshnichenko this year. I believe that just about everything we’ve seen this year can be discarded given the circumstances, especially since so many pondered “why isn’t Miro playing like we expected” before the reveal about his illness. Out of respect, I will not be ranking Ivan as it feels completely unfair to try and compare his status as a draft prospect to others that are not fighting what he is fighting. I hope for nothing but the best for Miro, and that he comes back and makes every single person who doubts his ability look like a dork.
The last major thing to point out is that even though this is another top 64 ranking (no honorable mentions this time), it is extremely likely that I wouldn’t use a second round pick on a single player I have in my second. It may be outdated by this point in the year but Bob McKenzie’s list, the most accurate portrayal of what NHL scouts are thinking, has numerous players in my first round stretching all the way to the mid third round. So while I do not necessarily think this draft is as elite as others, I believe that there will be an excessive amount of value to be had in the mid-rounds this year. It may not be a draft full of franchise changing players, but if it plays out the way I expect, you can certainly change your franchise with some convenient picks and some luck.
No more rambling, it’s list time.
Tier 7: 64-50
Last year, I was.. a little too high on Marcus Almquist, and after seeing how his D+1 played out I think it’s pretty easy to admit I was wrong on that one. Lesson learned, and I’m applying that lesson towards the next super small, highly skilled European forward in Joel Jonsson. The major difference is that Jonsson far better encompasses what I’m looking for in these players with regards to driving macro-play with their micro-skills. I wouldn’t take him until much later (I’d be shocked if he went in the first four rounds) but there are very few players beyond this range that are at his level of dynamism or skill. Credit goes to Mikael Holm for bringing him up to me, and then more credit to Scouch for bringing him up to Mikael.
Lukas Gustafsson continues to be the only overager in my top 64, for pretty much all the reasons I suggested last time. It’s a shame he isn’t being utilized more, because he’s a good hockey player with a real strong understanding of how high-level hockey is played as a team, as well as his role within that team. Shoutout to Mikey Milne and James Hardie though, they’re fun as hell.
Perevalov is the type of player you’d expect to see higher on my list, but he feels like the antithesis to my philosophy at times. I’ve seen Perevalov choose to carry the puck through traffic when wide open lanes that would generate the same results exist. The talent is undeniable, and maybe coaching and development can make this writeup look foolish, but I’m skeptical any time it feels like you have to re-wire someone’s approach to the game to this extent. To his credit, his event data shows higher levels of activity than I’d have expected based on the eye test, so there’s still a chance that he can raise when I circle back.
Christian Kyrou is hilariously creative, and is one of the best mid-to-late round upside picks that exist in this class. Still, like Perevalov, there is a ton of development needed to turn this creativity into NHL efficiency, and that rightfully scares off a ton of scouts.
Simon Forsmark is a player I actually like a lot more than this ranking indicates. He’s a solid, safe bet for a player that can just reliably play his role on the ice without requiring many puck touches or being a negative presence on the ice. Is there upside here? Not really. Is there safety? Yes.
Isaiah George is one of my toughest reads this year. There are times where George has me frustrated to all hell, and the Top Prospects Game personifies that better than any game this year. What is so frustrating is that I full heartedly believe in the talent of the player, and that game showed exactly why. He was able to make some amazing reads while weaponizing his skill, mobility and size to solve problems.. all before a catastrophic mistake that undoes all of the progress he made and hands the puck to the opposition on a silver platter. Normally, a player like that tends to fall by the wayside for me, but George’s solutions right before the mistake are really well thought out and the first half of the execution was brilliant. It’s just the final touch that destroys all the good he did beforehand. It’s complex, but George is the type of player who might just raise quite a bit if an interview with the player worked out well. I really want him to be a thing.
Tier 6: 49-35
I’m less sold on Tyler Duke than I was, but I still like him. There’s no denying he’s an extremely impactful player with the USNTDP. It’s simply a matter of whether or not he can continue this level of impact as he plays against better competition. He has the intelligence needed to do so, but whether or not the talent is there is the question. He needs ample skill and mobility to play his game at a higher level, and it may be trickier than usual to develop those traits with Tyler due to his current skating posture. It’s a risky pick, one of the riskiest in this range, but I’d still take him. Fortunately, Tyler is likely to slip in the mid rounds and then taking him becomes a much easier discussion.
While the sheer amount of professional hockey games played is impressive, I’m not entirely sure if I’ve come away impressed with Marco Kasper. I see a guy who will likely play in the NHL, but struggles to surpass the “replacement level player” barrier that entraps so many players of his likelihood. The drive, physicality and “compete level” are all there in spades, and it’s going to result in him going much earlier than I’d be willing to take him.
As risky a name as you can find in this range, Suzdalev offers none of the safety that Kasper provides. They’re pretty much complete opposites. What Suzdalev does offer is an elite set of hands and a semi-good understanding of how to open space around the ice with them. The mobility, specifically explosivity from a lull and sharp directional changes, must be improved for the hands to be an NHL weapon. A few scouts I’ve talked to really struggle to see the game sense required to make it to the NHL, and I see it to an extent, but I don’t believe he lacks intelligence -- he is simply applying it the wrong way. There’s a fine line between the two, and to some they are basically the same thing, but I think Suzdalev is the perfect example of a player who has shown he has what it takes to apply these skills in more practical ways. It’s a big risk regardless, but the payoff is enormous compared to other names in the range.
It’s taking a ton of time, but I’m slowly starting to see what people like in Owen Beck. My main point with him reigns true, as what he does well right now just does not feel projectable at all. I believe there is quite a bit to rework in order to get the Owen Beck you see today to drive the same level of results in the best league in the world. Still, if a player who carries more risk with a slightly higher reward like Suzdalev can be 42nd then it’s time to admit that I was too low on Owen Beck initially. I plan on doing a very detailed look on Beck soon to see if he truly is a first round guy or not.
Nelson breaks my heart. He was one of my favourites in the early season, and I adore the idea of what he can be as a player. There is no denying the risks that come with drafting smaller defenders, but Nelson has all the tools to mitigate those risks. Unfortunately, I’m not sure if Ty Nelson is becoming the player he could be within the confines of the North Bay Battalion’s system. The team is doing great, he is a key contributor at this level, and there’s no reason to change things up. I just hope it doesn’t mean that a 20 year old Nelson enters the AHL with minimal progression to his transitional game.
Chesley is solid. He’s playing in the NHL without question. He’s a physical defender who plays hard and has relatively strong positioning. It’s not hard to see him being developed into a stable passer who understands his role in the transitional/offensive side of things and just mauls everyone defensively. His U18 tournament is solid enough that he got a boost of eight spots so far, and might even earn himself a few more before the tournament’s done. I still struggle to see myself taking him in the first round, but I understand why someone would.
Filip Bystedt is a big, hard-shooting center who plays really well through contact. I’m pretty sure he’s going to play in the show, and I’m optimistic that he will become a quality bottom six guy. I feel like I should note that, at least to me, there is a difference between being a replacement level guy and a quality bottom six guy. Bystedt isn’t the type of guy who will win you Lord Stanley, but he’s certainly the type of guy you would want as a depth option during a cup run.
Tier 5: 34-20
Mattias Hävelid is one of the more fun defensive players you can draft. Again, another rearguard on the smaller side of things, but he’s shown to possess the skill, mobility and passing arsenal required to scale the pro-hockey ladder. Unfortunately, he’s not shown he can put it all together with consistency, but the few games this year where he did combine his tools.. he was looking like a surefire first round guy. I don’t believe those samples came from luck, and it’s pretty reasonable to expect Mattias to start putting games like that together with frequency. It will take him time to get fully acclimated to doing this against professional players, so he’s likely to take a bit longer than the others in this tier.
My thoughts on Mateychuk are.. well, pretty much the exact same as they were last time around.
Last time I ranked Sam Rinzel in my top 40 despite having such a small sample, solely off of how much he impressed me in those early viewings and that with a larger sample, I was ready to move him in the first. That is precisely what happened. Rinzel has shown what he can do across numerous games now, and the size/mobility/skill combination is extremely endearing. There’s still potential to rise higher in my rankings; however, I have now had one or two of the “bad” viewings I kept hearing about. While they weren’t abysmal, they did show that there is a lot more risk with Rinzel then those initial viewings demonstrated. Regardless, I’d be ecstatic to draft him and work with him in development.
SALOMONSSON. I’m so happy to see Salomonsson string together some good games at the end of the year. I’m still not sure what he is defensively, but there has been some small improvements on that side of the ice as the year progressed. Offensively? Well, it seems one day Salomonsson remembered what he could do in his D-1 and then just started doing it again. Last writeup I said that he was hanging on in the second round by reputation alone. After all, this was a potential top ten pick coming into the year. I just needed a glimpse into that level of form still existing to move him up. Now he is showing he can regain that form, and that really excites me. He’s been quiet at the U18’s, but quiet in a good way. I can’t see myself raising Elias too much beyond this point, it’s not like I can just disregard his slump that lasted almost an entire season, but I am super happy to see him regain his old confidence.
Vladdy Grudinin is probably the smallest sample in my first round. Quite a few games, but not a lot of ice-time because they’re almost all KHL viewings. The mobility to escape into open space is obvious, but beyond that I haven’t seen him using this mobility to drive up the ice and manufacture results. Of course, he plays KHL-level hockey, so it’s extremely unreasonable to expect that of him. That’s the heart of my dilemma with him, so I’ll be revisiting him with a larger sample including other leagues as well. He could jump or fall quite a bit by year's end.
Lane Hutson is still my favourite defender in the draft. He is two inches too short to be a slam dunk top 10 pick in my eyes. He’s the best passing defenceman this year and there are only two or three players who should even be mentioned on his level. Possesses a ridiculous level of skill and combines it with every fake you can find in the book, making him one of the most deceptive players in the draft. This is all with middling levels of mobility, mind you. For a 5’8 defender to drive the results he does for the USNTDP without elite mobility is just mind-boggling. Mechanically, his skating is solid, he just lacks strength, which will come with time. In 2-3 years time, Hutson will be obliterating the NCAA with the increased mobility and likely will be a high impact player for an AHL team. The question is whether or not it works in the NHL, and the risk is undeniable. But if it works, the sky's the limit. Hutson is by far the riskiest player I have ranked this high, but I’m completely convinced that the risk is worth it considering so few players in the draft can do what he does.
My thoughts on Danila Yurov and Conor Geekie are mostly the same as last time. Their positions changing mostly comes from my shifting opinions on the players around them in this range. They’re both highly touted players by other scouts, and I see the allure, but I also see less upside than most. Still, they’re both going to be solid middle six contributors and there is still the chance that they become more, so having them any lower is a disservice to the abilities they possess.
Owen Pickering is fascinating. I haven’t actually had many elite viewings of Pickering, which is why he was in the 40’s last time around, but that was also before I learned of his monstrous growth spurt. As a fellow tall-man who grew something like seven inches in a year, I can testify that it takes quite a long time to understand how to control your elongated limbs. That’s what I see when I watch Owen Pickering now -- a player who is trying to execute skilled, high level plays who fumbles the puck due to flawed mechanics. As the years pass, I have full confidence that Pickering will capitalize on the puck skills he currently shows in flashes, and that player may turn into something very dangerous.
Tier 4: 19-9
Kemell at 19? Likely blasphemy in the eyes of many. This tier is extremely close together though, and I wouldn’t fight drafting him 12th or 13th if that’s what the team wanted. The reality with Kemell is that his extremely lucky start of the season drastically overrated what he brought to the table. I wasn’t sold on it then, and I’m not fully sold now. He has good goal scoring instincts, is a solid secondary/tertiary option in transition, understands how to route himself in the offensive zone and can even meaningfully contribute to a heavy forecheck. There is practically no scenario where Joakim Kemell doesn’t become a half decent goal scorer in the NHL in my eyes. But that’s also pretty much all I see him being, as I do not believe in the first line upside others claim to see. Maybe second line, if all things go right, but we are talking about one of the most inefficient passers amongst first round forwards, with next to zero results of advancing the puck into dangerous areas via pass. He is entirely reliant on his teammates to do the hard part, and that’s more than fine. Not every player needs to be the playdriver for a top six line in order to be a solid prospect. At the same time, his inability to be the guy makes it difficult to put him anywhere but the bottom of this tier. He’s still a great prospect.
The other guy who is very unlikely to become the guy but is still likely to be a solid top six guy is Jonathan Lekkerimäki. The difference between the two comes down to Jonathan having a better shot, and being the better skater. Lekkerimäki has also shown in recent years that he can evolve a skill from being a detrimental flaw to being a highly coveted asset, as his feet were considered a negative just a few years back.
Cutter Gauthier is sick. He actually is what Rangers fans think Brennan Othmann is. There is no part of me that is convinced he is anything less than a middle six guy. He feels like a lock to contribute meaningfully in the NHL, and such certainty in a player doesn’t come around often. It’s this reason that I constantly feel that I’m underrating Cutter in my list, especially because the upside to be more does exist. He’s one of the best play-thru-contact players in the draft, and loves to boast his puck control while shouldering through a defender. I’m not sure if that makes him a massive playdriver in the NHL, but it makes him an undeniable asset.
Isaac Howard is so disrespected that I just don’t get it anymore. The idea that he just rides Nazar’s coattails confuses me heavily. For the few of you that wouldn’t already know, my Director at McKeen’s (Mr Billiam Couch Scout himself) tracks event data and those results back up this claim as well. If anything, Howard’s toolkit is the more desirable of the two against the best players in the world. I still like Nazar more, but the idea that there is this massive gulf in talent between them feels outlandish.
Seamus Casey is a top five talent who plays like a second rounder. So much passivity in the second half of the season that really seems to place these artificial limits on what he can do in a game. Casey is one of the few players that can actually take a game over, but he opts for the more simplistic plays way more often than not. Once in a while, you’ll see a next level play from him that reminds you of what he could be, but then it’s followed by four middling shifts. I can’t drop a player of this skill any further, as developing him into a surefire top four defender could be as simple as increasing mobility, encouraging him to take risks and reassuring him that mistakes are okay.
Calle Odelius has the same talent level as Seamus Casey, and brings the added mobility. He might be the single best defender I’ve seen this year at escaping into space while driving macro results up the ice. The skill, mobility, intelligence, deception and dynamism makes him one of the very few who could be a first pairing guy, and it’s a bet I’m willing to take. But don’t make a mistake -- those who are lower on Odelius are certainly justified. There are some plays he makes that make you want to tear your hair out. There’s more risk here than with Casey, but there might be a slightly larger boom.
Nazar.. Alright, let’s just get it over with. I have no idea how Nazar is a slam dunk top five guy. This does not mean that I don’t see his value, as I also see a possible top six guy, but a lot of what I’m reading with Nazar does not line up with what I’ve seen. An inside driven attacker with skill who can facilitate and finish? Absolutely. A limitless work ethic that creates chances from nothing? Eh… kinda, but it lacks the consistency that made someone like McTavish so desirable last year. Ridiculously high levels of skill to break down defensive layers like they’re nothing? I’m not so sure. A lot of what seems to work for Nazar only works because he’s really good at coming up with solutions to problems on the fly. Yes, that’s a sign of a sophisticated player and I don’t disagree, Nazar is sophisticated. But a LOT of these solutions require Nazar escaping pressure by the skin of his teeth and I’m not so sure that translates as well as others think. Someone like Beniers understood how plays would break down, how chaos would ensue, and he would circumvent this by navigating the chaos with brilliance. I’m not sure Nazar has the same ability.
All aboard Noah’s ark. Noah Östlund is almost guaranteed to be the name that tops this tier for the rest of the year. I am such a believer in his talent, and his U18 tournament only has two games so far but boy, is he showing off what he can do. I’m kind of floored that most people have ranked Noah in the 20’s or even later, especially those who prioritize upside. Östlund is as dynamic and shifty as any player in this draft not named Brad Lambert or Gleb Trikozov. He has an unreal set of hands he can use to lure you one way before dancing around you the other way. His positioning is relentless and almost Suzuki-like, as he’s just always in the right spot to impact the play. He’s a transitional monster, defensively responsible, one of the best goal scorers in tight, and understands how space opens up around the ice as well as anybody in this draft. Yes, he struggled in SHL play this year relative to his linemates, but that doesn’t diminish what he offers compared to them. He is the glue guy on his line, driving macro-play far more than anyone else he has played with this year. The only major complaint, and it is one worth making, is that he isn’t creating as many dangerous chances as you would expect. However, what chances he does come from unbelievable problem solving, showing that the hard part of developing dangerous chance creation is already taken care of. Expect a piece on Noah very soon.
Tier 3: 8-5
G l e b. You can pretty much copy and paste the Östlund writeup and post it here, but change the part about dangerous chance creation because Trikozov attacks dangerous ice like very few in the 2022 class can do. This is as high upside a swing as you can find this year. Dylan Griffing and Boss William get the credit for finding him, but I’m just as much a believer as they are.
I posted a top 10 screenshot a while back and Nemec not being on it brought along a few responses and a few DM’s asking if I’m insane. The answer is no, but I can at least see why the response was so negative. I have had a LOT of Nemec viewings where I walk away unimpressed relative to the expectations I had set. For a player, argued by many as a potential second overall candidate, I wanted to see true first pairing upside. That’s not often what I saw. I did see a stable, smart defender who can be a quality second pairing guy, and that had him around Odelius, Casey and Korchinski for the last while. Unlike them, I saw him make a lot of plays that can be summarized as “well, I’m not sure that works against better competition at all”. A three point game where one point is a point-shot goal, another is a second point-shot where the rebound was scored, and the third where a defender would just lose his man for no reason and Nemec slips the puck through a wide open lane he didn’t actually create for himself. Regardless, the response to my post made me revisit, and after specifically asking for game dates where his upside was shown, I have FINALLY seen the Simon Nemec that people praise. Not only smart, as he was able to practically solve problems and consistently make the right play everywhere on the ice, but doing so with brief touches and ensuring he was in the right spot in transition through smart positioning instead of over-relying on his feet. I still do not believe his skating and skill levels are as high as others believe, as they’re good enough to beat his current level of competition but not by a margin that makes you comfortable against NHL defenders. At the end of the day, he feels like a safe, quality second pairing guy. With the right partner, first pairing isn’t out of the question. At this point, Nemec has distinguished himself as the #2 D of the class.
Matt Savoie scores a lot of his points in similar fashion and he still struggles to escape aptly applied pressure. He handles 1v1 encounters with utter brilliance, but if a team can trap him in their defensive structure then the problems with Savoie’s game are brought to the forefront. His entire 5v5 game has projectability issues, and that terrifies me. Yet I can’t deny that Savoie is as dynamic and deceptive as anyone can be in the draft. I don’t think you draft him hoping he is the guy who takes over a top six line, but you draft him to be the ultimate complimentary player to the guy. That way defenders can’t apply the same level of pressure to take him out of the game as they do now. With some strength and added explosivity, Savoie’s weakness to heavy pressure should be further negated. Some may find this issue more concerning than I do, and it feels a little out of character for me to downplay something as major as “he struggles under pressure” when talking about a top five player. Still, he feels like an exception when you look at the level of dynamic ability he can bring a team. Video sessions, strength, conditioning and time will help alleviate the one crucial flaw he has, and it is terrifying to think of the player Savoie will be without that flaw.
Tier 2: 4-2
Logan Cooley is just as spectacular as he was last time around. Don’t think of him as fourth, think of him as my 3B. I think he is decisively the best player on the USNTDP, and checks every box required of a true triple threat top six center. Whether you attack primarily via rush, forecheck or cycle, Cooley will be able to contribute and contribute massively. He’s a transitional freak of nature, likely the second best forward in this class in that department. The defensive upside is surprisingly high as well, solely because of his ability to track play and identify the moment to get involved defensively. The effort defensively is inconsistent, but I’m not convinced that’s a long standing issue. There have been stretches of play this season where Cooley goes a little too far with being an offensive dynamo, turning down plays that are notably more efficient, but Cooley has already shown that he can identify and make those plays with ease so I’m not concerned. If anything, I’m happy to see Cooley experimenting with his skill levels and trying to come up with these crazy solutions to problems. The mind behind the talent here is sound, and he is as safe an upside bet as you can find in the draft. He may be fourth, but a coin-flip separates this tier. Cooley may be second overall by year’s end.
The 3A to my 3B, David Jiricek is a freak of nature. To understand how thin these margins are, I had Cooley ahead of Jiricek as I started these writeups, and decided last minute that I’d pull the trigger on Jiricek first. If this was last year, Jiricek would likely be in the 4-8 tier, maybe even 9-12. My philosophy has changed to recognize the difficulty some defenceman have translating their game to the NHL compared to forwards, and I like to think I better understand how complex the process of refining a defenceman can be. He’s missed a lot of ice-time this year, and the same concerns I brought up last time still exist -- he can be an objectively bad player in some games because of the crazy stuff he tries. There’s nothing he won’t try and there is nothing that scares him on the ice. The reason I’m growing higher and higher on him is because I’ve gone back and watched more early season tape, and I see more of a method behind Jiricek’s madness. Last time around I said: I see a pattern forming among all of his “did he seriously just try that” plays that has me believing there is a reason to expect refinement and subtlety to enter his game. This time, I fully believe that the needed refinement is possible. The riches that refinement can bring to his game makes him the clear-cut #1 defender in this draft for me.
What else can I say about Brad Lambert that I haven’t already said? I honestly don’t know, considering I went way over the top and decided a 9000 word project would properly encapsulate my thoughts on him. My opinion is still the same as it was before -- Brad Lambert is so good for the Liiga that he legitimately looks bad. There is an obvious level of frustration in his game this year that is resulting in legitimately bad decisions being made, but it becomes forgivable considering he makes such complex reads off-puck that inevitably lead to nothing because his teammates aren’t identifying the lanes he is providing them. One can criticize that he should be dumbing his game down and fitting in more of a team system and yeah, I agree; however, I would disagree with lowering his draft status as a result of it. Lambert is a player who knows he’s NHL bound and that Liiga is just a destination of that journey. The players alongside him currently are of significantly lower quality than the players he will be playing with in just a few years. It isn’t good that he isn’t able to find chemistry in these environments, and a real interview process could be a huge difference maker considering it gives you an insight into who you’re potentially drafting with the second pick. But no one in this draft has his level of talent and I’m including Shane Wright when I’m saying this. He just feels like an extremely easy case to overthink, but I am pretty much locked in on him at #2 myself. Lambert isn’t the most likely player to be a 1C in the draft, that player goes first, but he is the player with the highest probability of being the best player in the draft.
Tier 1: Just one.
Shane Wright in his own tier is not because I believe the talent is far superior to the three names preceding him. It’s mostly just because I wouldn’t take another name at first overall, so it feels right that he gets his own tier. What is there to say about Wright that hasn’t been said by a hundred other scouts already? Well, there isn’t much. But I will say this:
Wright is exceptionally intelligent and a positional mastermind. This is the framework of his game, and will guarantee some manner of NHL success. What Wright lacks that makes him a bit of a “weaker” first overall pick is a lack of game-changing dynamism with the puck on his stick. Wright has this talent and shows it off at times, but he seems to play the most pro-ready hockey I’ve seen in recent memory from a prospect and that involves relying on hockey fundamentals to score instead of creating the chance for himself. He’s Tim Duncan, so if you’re expecting a Kobe Bryant-esque player with the first pick then yeah, you’ll be underwhelmed. I’m absolutely shocked if Wright isn’t at least a quality top six center, and he’s still the most likely pick to be a true 1C in my eyes. He has easily the best shot in the draft, and could be an explosive 40 goal scorer with the right linemates. In fact, with the right linemates, Wright very well could be a dominant NHL center -- just a different type of dominance than you’d expect from a first overall pick. Normally, you would hope your first overall player can be the guy on any line and drive the bus against any level of competition. Shane Wright feels like he can be that player, but requires specific linemates to elevate what he can offer. That is less valuable than what someone like Jack Hughes, Nathan MacKinnon or John Tavares brings, but it does not mean they still cannot provide that same level of value in a best case scenario. It just means the conditions have to be right, and the team will need to approach the decision of who his linemates are with more caution. The range of outcomes is so wide with Wright, that I’m very excited to see what he is five years down the line.