Hello, I am here once again to dump a metric sh*t ton of text on you when you’re already likely over saturated with draft content and just cannot wait for this to be over.
I had initially intended for this to be released far before this point but that became more and more challenging as work, exams, last-minute jobs, life obligations and burnout decided to make that a false reality. It’s even late on the day this releases because I was stuck for an extra 45 minutes on the already 60 minute commute home.
I am tired.
I ranked 64 players this year. I have writeups detailing why the top 32 are where they are, relative to the names around them. I don’t intend for people to sit here and read this whole thing in one go. I couldn’t even edit it in one go. It’s about as digestible as a bowl of moldy nails. However, if any specific player does stick out to you, well, scroll down and read why they’re there and why I like other players more and/or less.
I really want to keep the intro short, especially considering that if you care enough to open this then you already know what I’m about anyways. If you don’t, then my last writeup post will summarize it all in the introduction.I do have a few things to say quickly that aren’t fully covered in the last intro so I’m just going to fire through them.
I look at rankings as if I’m actually going to be involved with the player after the fact. I am particularly interested in drafting the more dynamic, calculated players that better fit my “process”. The process itself has been tailored over the years to, hopefully, identify players with strengths and weaknesses that I believe would fit my "ideal team".. which is basically just any team like Carolina, Colorado, Tampa Bay, Toronto (yuck), etc. I am willing to let players who I know will be serviceable in the NHL go by and just accept that's the cost of operating this way. It's not an inability to recognize what they are as a player, it's a conscious decision to say "yes, they offer me x and y, but if I'm trying to build a team around z and b then other players could suit me more". This approach to the draft feels more and more imperative to me as time goes by, I've basically reached the "what's the point" stage of evaluating prospects without considering:
What their development path(s) could be
Their ideal roles in my team
What strengths I like and what weaknesses I can minimize
If they're a top six guy, are they driving the line as the main player? Are they the secondary guy? Tertiary? Obviously it's not so clear on some good lines, so in that case what is the role I can see them equally contributing in?
Some of the players that I am lower on can find success on those teams, but I also think their archetypical strengths are easier to find elsewhere. That’s why Barlow is an early second rounder and Brindley is a top ten pick.
When it comes to ranking goalies, well, this is basically the first time I’ve ever done it. Wallstedt and Cossa were exceptions back in 2021 -- Wallstedt because even my clueless ass recognized that he was a sensational force in a pro league at 18, Cossa because he was also a high-end goalie prospect in a draft with a weaker first round (compared to this year anyways). I’m not going to pretend like my opinion about goalies is worth a damn whatsoever, goalie scouting feels like voodoo guesswork as far as I’m concerned unless you’re able to actually meet the player and understand the person who’d be undertaking the journey. My first two goalies are Hrbal and Augistine, at 41 and 42 respectively. I can’t discern which one is actually the better prospect, I just know one has the beeg 6’6” while the other one is 6’1”. I can discern what players would have to be off the board before I’d be saying “yeah, let’s take this guy”. This is why they’re positioned at the top of their tier, because that’s when I’m happy to go “yep, let’s do it”. Realistically, guys in the tiers ahead will still be on the board whenever it’s time to secure these players with a draft pick so I wouldn’t be taking them. Shoutout to Clara, I don’t know enough about the position but like.. he seems kinda sick! I didn’t rank him but I’d start considering him at 56 if the tiers ahead were already picked.
Lastly, there’s something not entirely related to the draft but I’m not really sure where else to put it: this is likely the last big gigabrained writeup from me for a while. I don’t know if I’ll be doing scouting for the 2024 NHL Draft. Time was not an ally this year, and I fell to burnout during the stretches where I actually had time. There’s about nine articles on players I wrote this year that never saw the light of day because my perfectionist standards didn’t deem them worthy enough, and that’s a really exhausting, frustrating and ultimately dumb battle to be having with myself. I’m not saying for sure that I won’t be around for it, but it feels really shitty to end a draft campaign with so little content to show for the work I put in. It’s affected my enjoyment with the game of hockey itself and with a lot of other things going on in life, this might be temporarily put on the backburner.
ANYWHO. Let’s get into this list, shall we?
Tiers are always more important than the actual number. If two players are in the same tier then I think an argument exists for each to be placed above the other. Tier 4 (8-18) is particularly close, arguably the closest tier I’ve ever had. I’d be okay with almost any order, but this is the one I’ve eventually accepted as my preferred one.
Here be the list for the 2023 boy auction:
Tier One (1)
1. Connor Bedard
What is there to be said that isn’t already known by anyone even remotely familiar with the draft? Connor Bedard is the king of the 2023 NHL Draft, likely on the way to becoming the king of the NHL as well. It’s not hyperbolic to say that his average game would be the highlight of the average top prospects season.
If you wanted to be nitpicky, it’s fair to say that there are habits in Bedard’s game that are “concerning”. His shot selection can be questionable, he passes up on plays that involve his teammates for inefficient carries and he can make baffling decisions that overcomplicate things for him at times. If this was anyone else, I’d say there is room for concern, but not with Connor. It’s pretty evident that Regina has given the megastar the green light to do whatever he wants and sometimes, when you’re an 18 year old who is playing leagues below his talent level, you’re going to do wild stuff out of sheer boredom.
So, sure, Bedard scored a lot of points through means that won’t necessarily be projectable.. but he has already shown he has what it takes to make the projectable plays whenever he wants to. It’s simply that he doesn’t have to, which makes sense considering he scored seventy goals without hunting for a boatload of efficiency with each shot. When the time comes to play against the best players in the world, it may very well come down to thoughts as simple as:
Oh, I guess I can’t just shoot from here the second I enter the zone if I want to score a goal. Alrighty then, into the slot I go.
Oh, they’ll hit me if I try to dangle through four defenders in a row. That hurt. Better not do that.
Oh, my teammates are constantly getting open and reading the game at my pace. I guess I can just start playing off of them, that seems easy.
Oh, this whole NHL thing really isn’t too hard after all.
Bedard is already one of the best snipers that hockey has ever seen, with a shot that will be imitated for years by every kid who aspires to play in the league one day. He’s also a world class playmaker, with some of his best work coming off of the lanes that exist solely due to the threat of his shot. The attention Bedard is going to draw on the ice will make the life of his teammates so much easier and, even then, I’ll wager (just like everyone else) that Bedard will thrive despite NHL teams game-planning against him day in and day out. In this case, thrive means Bedard is likely to finish his career with a pretty substantial trophy case.
It’s blatantly absurd that a player of Connor Bedard’s caliber exists. He’s earned every bit of the generational label and I truly wonder how many years have to go by before the next player of this ilk arrives on the scene.
To Connor, because of course you’d obviously be reading my rankings, thank you for the most entertaining draft year I’ve ever seen.
Why #1: ???? Why would I even fill this section in? Come on now.
Tier Two (2)
2. Adam Fantilli
It’s a damn shame that a player of this caliber is in the same draft as Connor Bedard.. or, depending on how you view it, it’s the coolest damn thing in the world.
I 100% believe that Adam Fantilli would not only be a first overall pick last year, he’d be the first overall pick in four of the last eight drafts. He’d go first in 2017, highly challenge Dahlin in 2018, highly challenge Hughes in 2019, go first in 2020, go first in 2021 and go first in 2022. He’s about as high-end a consolation prize as any team could ever ask for.
For a while there, Fantilli was viewed as the guy who might knock Michkov off the second spot just because of all the narrative reasons that were infecting the Russian’s draft status.
Now, at least for myself, it’s clear that Fantilli is simply the second best player. He's about as skilled a manipulator with the puck as you can find outside of Bedard and maybe Smith, and Fantilli enters a tier all by himself when you factor in size to the equation. His handling is so dynamic in-motion, there isn't any sequence of tricks he can't pull off flawlessly. The impact of said handling is made stronger by his reach and his literal strength, as it enables him to be so seamless as he transitions from lethal open-ice attacking to protecting the puck with the beeg frame.
He’s made some of the craziest passes I’ve seen this year, scored some absurd highlight reel goals and has dangled the living pants off of an abundance of defenders. He’s as triple threat as it gets. Fantilli is simply an all-star caliber player even in Bedard’s frame. He wouldn’t be as highly touted, but what makes Fantilli excel as a player is not entrenched in size -- it’s simply enhanced by it.
An “underrated” aspect of his game is his defensive play because, quite frankly, Fantilli is just one helluva defensive presence on the ice through his positioning, apt usage of pressure, stickwork and, of course, the beeg.
The only downside I can think of with Fantilli is that sometimes he dons his cape and goes playing hero on the ice, but as I’ve already stated with Bedard, I don’t care. He had the ability to do whatever he wanted against this level of competition all year long, just like Connor did. I do not care in the slightest that he wanted to have fun on some shifts and, considering both the eye-test and event data confirm there is a wicked amount of efficiency across all three zones in his game, I will not factor doing some yolo-shit into his future projectability as a professional player.
Why #2: Last time around I said that I didn’t really understand how anyone could evaluate Michkov above Fantilli. At that time, I was in my certified “Michkov might be overrated” stage, and I’ve been open about the fact that it was a dumb stage to be in, so it probably came off as pretty dick-ish. Today, I will say that I understand how someone could place Michkov above Fantilli… but for me, they’re still a tier apart. Michkov has the edge in goal scoring, but I do not feel like I’m trading an inferior offensive player just to get a bit more impact outside of the offensive zone. Fantilli could legitimately be a point-per-game 1C that makes life hell for the other team, while also being a high-impact player outside of the zone. That’s the type of guy to lead a franchise deep into the playoffs. That’s the type of guy you don’t pass up on unless, somehow, he was unfortunate enough to be in the draft with the next Messiah of hockey.
Tier Three (3-7)
3. Matvei Michkov
Let it be known that, while this tier does extend to seven, it has a pretty clear top-half and a bottom-half. Every player listed between 4-7 is someone I think a team would be genuinely happy to take at third overall, especially the guys at 4 and 5 respectively.
But I would not take any of them above Matvei Michkov.
There’s got to be some humor in the idea that it’s now June and I have Michkov ranked higher than quite a number of outlets that, understandably, probably would have thought I was dumb as a rock for my perspective on him back in December.
He’s simply the sensational forward talent that everyone proclaimed him to be. I have no damn clue what the hell he was doing back in the first half of the year, but I don’t even care after his video game-esque performances with Sochi. He’s one of the best players I’ve ever scouted and letting him slip through the draft would be a great travesty.
Why #3: His offensive dominance is more than high enough for me to take him over the complete 200ft game of Leo Carlsson. I still don’t think I like Michkov enough to say he’s a better prospect than Fantilli, but like I said above I’ve at least grown sympathetic to the idea that some believe he is. If he slips out of the top five then the anti-Russian bias is really going to start hurting every team that passes on him.
4. Leo Carlsson
Another player who is just unbelievably talented for his size.
I didn’t know what to expect out of Leo Carlsson at the beginning of the year. I was a big fan of his OZ play but only through small samples, and wasn’t sure about how he’d fare as a transition player. Now it’s abundantly clear that Carlsson is a highly efficient playdriver, gaining controlled entries with relative ease whether it’s by pass, carry or reception.
He’s also just as good as I was hoping for in the OZ as well. Leo’s handles aren't on Fantilli's levels, particularly in terms of manipulating the opponent, but there’s an element of beauty in the way he controls the puck in-motion -- and this lad is always in-motion. The footwork and power-driven game has so much potential. He’s more apt at using the power aspect of his game to gain middle-ice compared to Fantilli as he brilliantly overwhelms anyone from his age group that he plays against while also finding consistent success against professionals.
He can play either center or wing, although I do adamantly believe he should be played at center. This positional fluidity is always a nice bonus, especially when the player in question can yield great results out of rushing, cycling and forechecking. That, combined with his ability to both lead and support transitions, means a coach can play Carlsson in a ton of different roles -- the spectrum spans from F1 on a heavy forecheck to the F3 trailer on a rush.
Now, out of the top five, I would say that Leo Carlsson is technically the lowest ceiling player.. but that ceiling is still stupidly high. As a reference, I’d take him first overall if he had this draft campaign last year. I stand alongside the near-consensus notion that all three of Bedard, Fantilli and Michkov have higher ceilings, although I think Carlsson’s near-certainty of being an elite player can argue him above the latter. Whether or not Smith has more upside is almost a debate in personal preference -- Carlsson has more tools and, theoretically, a higher ceiling as a result, but Smith’s the more dynamic manipulator and that alone might end up being more valuable than the sum of Carlsson’s tools.
Why #4: This combination of safety and upside is seldom found at the fourth overall pick, and is truly a testament to the strength of this draft. I’d prefer Michkov at the third spot myself but it’s super close. I spent a lot of time wondering if I’d be more interested in Smith’s manipulation ability as there’s a path to an NHL superstar there that’d really fit well on my ideal team, but Leo’s versatility wins out. The odds are in Carlsson’s favour because of how many different paths to success he has.
5. Will Smith
In my initial writeup for Smith, I talked about trying to weigh the sensational abilities he has against the perceived risk of his habits leaving him exposed at higher levels of play. It made me hesitant, and I deemed him a bit of a riskier top ten pick with a tremendous amount of upside. There still is risk, but I don’t think it’s as much as it was. More importantly, I believe the upside is far more likely to come through than I originally did.
So, with my hesitation now gone, I will happily say: give me the damn wizard kid. He’s an artist. Other players are out here making macaroni drawings to go on the fridge while Smith is painting the Sistine Chapel.His creativity feels limitless, like he always has a new move he can fall back on in case the first one isn't working. It's like thriving off instinct.
Don’t get me wrong, I still have concerns with things in Smith’s game. He still overhandles the puck in situations where a more simple play would yield equal, if not greater results. He also isn’t as active defensively as you want a center to be, but his offensive game thrives as a center. He’ll still be a good player regardless of position, but I think making him a winger does start to make some of the names after him more appealing. He’s really good at coming off the boards and gaining middle-ice, but his role isn’t as versatile as Carlsson’s. It’s a hot take, I know, but the best version of Smith is the one that’s a more engaged center in both transition and defense. Scolding stuff, truly.
He’s definitely gone above and beyond insanity with his problem-solving more than a handful of times, but it’s very reminiscent of players like Trevor Zegras, Kent Johnson and Logan Cooley. Like them, Smith’s shown more than enough sense with his creativity to show there is a method behind his madness. Players of this caliber should not be underestimated because the viewer has an expectation of efficiency that they aren’t meeting. Realistically, these guys just love to see what type of absurd stuff they can pull off and they’re out there having fun. Intelligence isn’t meant to be solely measured by their decision to make one play over another; instead, it’s a complex concept where efficiency is just one part of something larger. You can forgive a little inefficiency here and there when the same player can pull off some of the most gigabrained plays you’ve seen in years.
Why #5: You do not find puck handlers like this anywhere. How many teams in the league want Trevor Zegras? It’s important to not confuse flashiness with overall effectiveness at even strength, but it’s also important not to go overboard prioritizing efficiency in every area of the game. Smith is the rare type of player that can break down multiple defensive layers in quick succession while being the primary priority of the opposition. He does so in a way that players like Leo Carlsson, Zach Benson and Oliver Moore can’t. It might require a bit more care when building a line, but the reward could be so overwhelmingly strong that I can’t help but feel like it’s resoundingly worth it. God damn though, I actually can’t believe someone knocked Benson out of the top five.
6. Zach Benson
Seriously, I actually cannot believe someone managed to steal Benson’s spot in the top five. How stupidly good is this draft?
Benson has great hands and mobility -- neither at a high-enough level where I think his game projects cleanly to the NHL as soon as October rolls around, but enough to the point where I don’t think Benson will struggle adapting to the league down the line. After all, they only need to support his best trait -- his “hockey IQ”. Usually, I hate using “IQ” to describe someone’s intelligence as it’s such a generic phrase. What even is IQ? Any professional hockey player can break down the game of hockey into such fine details that you could never question their understanding of the game. Whether or not they process it fast enough is one thing, but the majority of prospects have their own distinctive areas of the game where they excel at making reads and others where they need that extra half a second -- which, at the NHL level, is often the difference maker between making a great play and being completely useless.
Yet in this case, I can’t help but feel like using the generality is the right call. Zach Benson is a quantum computer that was specifically designed to make the perfect read on the ice at just about every opportunity. The epitome of high-end hockey IQ, if not the literal dictionary definition. Benson's in-game philosophy is so simple: what is the most impactful play I can make for my team, and what are the follow-up plays for each possible result? Like any physical structure in our world, there’s a weak-point somewhere -- Benson’s entire game is built around exploiting it, and then exploiting the weak-point as the defense goes to adjust, and so on and so forth. His work is done on the perimeter, but done with the intent to open up space in middle-ice. Like many before him, he knows how to drag defenders out of position and what areas open up as a result. These players tend to hit a wall in the NHL because rotations are so crisp, the timing window to punish shifting defensive structures is so small, and to truly gain enough space in middle-ice to manufacture a chance requires breaking down multiple opponents. It's hard to do that on the perimeter without setting up the perfect attack. Fortunately, Benson's game is all about setting up the perfect attack. He knows one move alongside the wall is not to force a considerable defensive shift as there just isn't enough of a threat to cause drastic movement. Zach surpasses this by making the play that opens the most space for a teammate, and then immediately timing a movement into the open-ice caused by that defensive shift while still keeping himself open. Some plays he's looking to be the immediate recipient, others he knows that the other four teammates moving the puck will do more to break down a defense so he moves and slips into space according to each one. It's a dance of tactical brilliance, yet even then it's not entirely focused on offense. Benson's sense for whether a teammate or opponent's play will work or not is about as good as one can be in a game filled with chaotic bounces, weird physics and split-second misreads like hockey. So while he may try and set up a play with his passing that starts a sequence to break down the OZ, he's prepared to wheel out and make a supporting, possession based play. Or the defensive one. Or the space-creating one. Or, occasionally, the “holy shit he can do that too?” one.
He's also the best two-way winger in the draft, excelling at creating plays and working off linemates in the defensive zone, defending transitions, leading and/or supporting transitions, and on the rush, cycle or forecheck in the OZ. There isn't an area of the game where Benson can't help contribute, and his teammates benefit from his presence in every way.
He's the most exciting secondary option I've ever seen. I do not want him as the primary option on my line, which is why five guys who can be elite primary players are ranked ahead, but Benson is the piece you give one of those players to elevate their line to the top of every analytical chart you can find. He may not score as much as the name’s surrounding him, but I cannot think of many players who are more adept at actually helping a team win the damn game. Zach Benson is the best player I’ve ever ranked at sixth overall since I’ve started doing this. He is everything I want in a player. There isn’t a star in the league that wouldn’t love to have Benson on their line. It’s a legitimate tragedy that time travel prevents putting Zach Benson on a line with prime Sidney Crosby.
Why #6: He’s too valuable to let by at this point. It would not take much for me to be convinced that Moore is the better pick here because Moore’s tools are undeniably superior while also being exceptionally efficient; however, Benson’s sense for the game is simply too incredible to pass up on. I know there’s a chance that Oliver Moore ends up as the superior player, but the gut feeling is overwhelming here. Honestly, reading this back makes me wonder if he should still be in the top five.. but some clips of Smith at his best was enough to just barely creep back out ahead.
7. Oliver Moore
One of my biggest struggles was accepting that someone had to be seventh. Oliver Moore just feels too good to be ranked seventh, yet here he is. Just like Benson was the best I’ve ever seen at sixth, I think Oliver Moore might just be the best I’ve ever had at seventh.
One of the best transitional players I've ever watched and, to the surprise of none, the event data matches that, confirmed by the ghost (Scouch) himself. A skater talented enough to be among the NHL's top crop today.
His OZ play doesn’t feel as strong as the names ahead of him, but it's not a slight against him whatsoever as he's still exceptional there. Helping on the forecheck, moving the puck in the cycle and escaping small areas with possession are all strengths. It's just another testament to how absurd this draft is at the top.
Right now, the rush is where Moore is undeniably most effective. This is the least surprising thing ever for a player who moves like he's Brad Lambert. Still, there's limits to being a pure trailblazer when everyone knows what speed you want to operate at. Being able to blend that speed with slower pace changes is what really makes defenders uncomfortable. It'll make them hesitate to transfer their weight, and explosiveness from a lull can really punish that. The same goes for slowing on a dime and changing direction as only the best skating defenders will be able to keep pace.
In the past, I justified Fabian Lysell exceptionally high by basically saying he's got the skill level of Kent Johnson but with better feet, and that if he slowed down more he'd find a boatload of opportunities to use his hands in more creative ways. It's pretty clear that Lysell has added some levels of pace changing to his game, but who he is as a player didn't change. He's not likely reaching Johnson's level on that front because the speed is hardwired into his brain. So while, in theory, his hands and feet should grant Fabian a higher ceiling than Kent, it’s clear that he’s still a less effective manipulator. I'd still much rather have the fast, dynamic skater who is always making defenders put their weight behind them over the slower player who can't create separation for himself, but it's becoming more clear that introducing pace changes for these players isn't as easy as I thought. Perhaps this is the biggest reason why Smith and Benson are ahead of Moore, as I did have Oliver in my top 5 for quite the stretch.
Why #7: I think getting a player of this caliber at the seventh pick is a luxury for whatever team finds themselves so fortunate. It seems like he’s going to be slipping out of the top ten entirely, and to that I’d say it’s reminiscent of Barzal slipping to 16th in the 2015 Draft. He’s good enough for me to take him over Benson or Smith if that’s what the table wants, but my personal preference is ever so slightly in the favour of those two.
Tier Four (8-18)
8. Gavin Brindley
Now everybody, say hello to my personal pick for the most underrated player of the draft. I don't believe that I'm alone in rating Gavin Brindley high but I do know that the vast majority don't see him as a top ten caliber player. Some see him as a mid first, others as a late first. It's something I understand to an extent as this is a draft with lots of diverse playstyles amongst the high-end talent. Differing philosophies means that a player like this can be ranked later on by someone who still thinks he's a really good prospect. Still, I feel compelled to really justify this one as I believe eighth overall is about as high as you'll find him anywhere.
It's hard to be unimpressed by Gavin Brindley. He's everything I look for in a smaller player. The skating is breathtaking -- complete 360 degree mobility, separation from a lull, a high top speed and quick weight transfers to recover momentum if he ever over commits. Luckily, he rarely is found overcommitting because he's not often putting himself into situations where he isn't leading the dance. The mechanics of his skating have been called into question, unsurprising of any player measuring in below 5'10", but I will always care more about output than input. I don't care in the slightest if there's a notch in his knee or his hip angles are off mid-stride so long as he's generating the necessary agility and fluidity he needs to play his game.. and he's most certainly getting those results. I only start to consider biomechanical deficiencies when the output isn't projectable.
He can make such a large impact with a few brief touches of the puck, all because his focus is just to get play into an area that's better than where it just was. While he can sustain long carries, his game seems to benefit from executing fast decisions to create an advantage for a linemate before darting to an area that then makes the most opportunity out of the advantage his teammate will create for him. He's shifty as all hell in-motion and has fantastic control of the puck. He can pass, shoot, carry or handle out of a lot of situations, often only succumbing to the opposition when he's trapped in small areas with physical pressure being applied from more than one direction. Fortunately, he recognizes that weakness and plays around it to avoid being in those positions in the first place. I trust his sense for the game and believe this will remain true at the NHL level because he rarely drives into such intense traffic. He isn't necessarily the type to be toe-dragging around defenders, although he has shown that he can use some incredible skill when the time is appropriate. He wants to make the most impactful play that he can, and he seems very happy to let other teammates have the glory of the goal even if his only contribution was gaining inside-position on a defender along the half-wall, luring the defense one way and then slipping a pass into a sharp turn to reset the puck to the point where there is tons of space for 2 or 3 linemates to really work with.
He'll contribute everywhere in 5v5 because he can play all three OZ styles: his smaller stature and lower center of gravity helps him on the forecheck when he needs to shield the puck while he skates away from pressure, but he does struggle if a larger athlete is actually able to pin him down. His dynamism on the rush only improved as the year went on to the extent where I'd argue he's one of the best players in the draft in that sense. As for the cycle, well, that's Brindley's bread and butter. The modern NHL suits Brindley.
I've found myself confused with lists that have Brindley lower but players cut from the same cloth ranked high. I wouldn't argue Brindley above Benson, but they're similar enough that loving one typically does lead to loving another unless there's something in Brindley's game that really scares you off. In that case, it makes sense, but the same logic should be applied to guys like Perron, Cristall and such.
Why #8: I think I could take a few guys in this tier ahead of Brindley at 8, but every version of my ideal top six has a player like Brindley in it. Sure, someone like Perron could play in this role, but the likelihood isn't as high and I genuinely think you can argue the upside isn't either.. although I don't want to sell Perron short. I just really like Brindley. Gavin's biggest competition would be the stud defender ranked ahead. It's actually pretty easy to argue Simashev ahead because of his potential as a defender, but I tend to lean towards the forward in a tie as they often require less development to reach their expected ceiling.
9. Dmitri Simashev
Good luck to the future NHL forwards who need to try and create offense against this behemoth of a player. He's currently a teenager and he's denying KHL attackers with such ease that it's easy to forget that the elegantly moving, massively framed defender is still only a draft eligible.
Simashev is a defensive artist, with a masterful understanding of how to position both body and stick while in-motion to deny advances into any valuable space. You need to layer multiple threats into your approach against Dmitri if you intend to come off the wall into middle-ice against him. His defending is almost an attack on its own as Simashev will be in the carriers face for every moment, matching their footwork and hip movements so that dynamic pace changes and crossbody movements seldom fool him. He seeks to deny you every millimeter of space you can possibly get until you're smothered against the boards or forced into passing it out to the perimeter.
This is beyond valuable, and makes me wonder if nine is too low. What is the value you can place on a defensive impact that is so large that teams will start to gameplan about keeping the puck away from the zones that Simashev occupies entirely? In the NHL, that value is absurdly high; however, it's not a guarantee that he's going to asphyxiate NHL defenders to the same extent that he is in Russia.
The best way I can think to answer this is actually looking at another sport entirely: basketball. Before his surge to the top tier of scorers, Kawhi Leonard was one of the most revered defenders in the league. "The Claw" was so effective at half-court defense in his San Antonio days that Coach Pop would simply choose one attacker on the other team that he wanted to reduce to a non-factor, and then he'd stick Kawhi on him. It's a basic tactic that every pee-wee coach understands, but a mind as capable as Pop's knows that denying superstars in the NBA requires layers of defensive gameplanning.. or it just requires saying "Kawhi, you guard him". The cyborg would make it a nightmare for his target to even get the ball to begin with and would then deny him every possible play there was until he was forced to make a play that resets the offense. Leonard functionally denied any and all space that the attacker had to such an extent that he won Finals MVP in 2014 before his offensive breakout because of how well he single-handedly led the effort to shut down Miami's wings, including LeBron god damn James.
So yeah, I think there's something that can be said about the value of a player who forces dynamic offenses to alter their approach so drastically. Of course, hockey's OZ cycles and forechecks do not have the same calculated structure that basketball's half-court offenses do, but the theory behind it can remain the same. Simashev may not be glued to a single player like a defender in basketball, but what he is glued to is the high-danger around the defensive zone. He can create a significant amount of problems for attackers who wish to use this space. Looking at it this way, the value of someone who can almost certainly guarantee denial of the ice that the other team wants becomes obvious. It gives them less offensive freedom and creativity, forcing their plays to start from the same areas, which ultimately boosts predictability.
The above makes it sound like Dmitri is on the path to being as high-end a defensive star as one can be in the NHL. I don't know if I'd go that far with it as I imagine a lot of the details that make up the NHL's elite defenders only come into play after they're drafted. That being said, Simashev is the best prospect I've ever watched in the defensive zone and he's managed to do it in the KHL as well for the minutes he's played. It's about as much an indication saying "hey, this guy might actually do the shutdown thing kinda good" as anyone could possibly have at this age.
The way I see it is that you draft Simashev for the defense and you live very happily with that decision. I think you can argue some of the other names in this tier ahead of him, such as Axel Sandin-Pellika considering he offers fantastical upside in both offense and transition, while having the tools to hopefully become a competent NHL defender as well. What has cemented Simashev in what is essentially a tie for eighth overall is the hidden layer of offensive/transitional upside lurking beneath the surface. Currently Simashev doesn't waste possessions or often try fancy moves that don't work out, electing to keep it simple and controlled instead. He could remain on this path and it'd be completely okay considering the magnitude of his defensive impact.. but then there are those moments where he actually does use his shockingly quick handling and reach to dance around incoming pressure, activate off the blue line or seamlessly open up a high-impact passing lane and thread it through on a tight timing window. He doesn't do these types of plays nearly as often as one would expect, yet the final result is often something glorious. Getting him more activated offensively could be the difference between a stout shut down top 4 guy that you want to secure the DZ against the other teams best players, and the guy you play for every minute of the game that you can because he's dominating the opposition at every possible moment.
Why #9: It is unfathomably hard to actually become a #1 defender in the NHL. Many have the talent in some areas, but it cannot be overstated how difficult it is for rearguards to overcome gaps/ weaknesses in their game without losing those strengths. AKA being a transitional weapon but cheating on DZ retrieval positioning to do so, or not being as apt a rush defender as they should be so they spend 25% more time in their DZ which is enough to lower their overall impact. Simashev doesn't have these weaknesses. His game currently plays pretty much identically to how it will in the NHL. Not every link in his chain is connected, but the metal forming each individual is unbelievably strong and they appear to be magnetized enough to be slowly moving together.
10. Ryan Leonard
There's such beauty to be found in a player that can stick to a few core fundamental principles and then build a highly projectable game out of them. It’s made far better when that player is a damned animal waiting to be unleashed with every shift. That intense, never-give-up attitude fuels Leonard and is found in every aspect of his game.
I’m not entirely sure he fits the mold of a Tkachuk like others claim, but at the very least it’s a useful way of conveying the type of player one can expect with Leonard.
He is the epitome of the modern power game inside the body of a smaller player -- using contact to go through pressure with skillful control, rather than barreling through them with pure force. No player benefits from the lower center of gravity and natural advantages that physics bestowed him more than Leonard does. He has a fantastical shot that is often set up with lightning quick hands, which just happen to also be extremely effective at setting up passes. The rest of his body is selling all sorts of misinformation to draw pause amongst his foes. He’s a real nightmare to deal with.
The best part of his game is that, despite the wide range of strengths, he actually does stick to the fundamentals of the game. He attacks along the dotted line, he likes to use his gravity to make space elsewhere and he won’t often rely on the more audacious side of his toolkit if the simpler play to be made is also effective. I don’t see him being the driving force on an NHL line, and I’ll be quite stunned if he ever has a season like what Matt Tkachuk puts up, but he’s a damn good player to walk away with at tenth overall. He’s estimated to go as high as five and honestly, that’s fine! It’s not my preferred approach, but I still get it enough to roll with it.
Why #10: I see nine players that I think are just likely to be better than Leonard ahead. With Brindley, it’s close, but I lean more towards him as I think he fits what I’m looking for just a bit more. As for the rest of the names in this tier, I think a few like Musty or Stenberg have a tiny bit more upside, but at the cost of additional risk I’m more than okay with taking Leonard. He’s likely to be an awesome top six winger. No one should be upset about getting that at tenth overall.
11. Andrew Cristall
The last member of the three-way tie of my favourite players of the draft. Like Benson and Brindley before him, Cristall is also a small boy with a lot of talent.
I’m gonna be honest, I think I’ve reached the point where everything I read and hear said about Cristall kinda.. pisses me off. The read I have on him is almost the exact same as what it was back in February -- the old writeup encapsulates my thoughts on Cristall so accurately that I’d copy and paste it here and call it a day if it didn’t look lazy. They were thoughts many others shared at the time. Now? Not so much.
I know his skating needs some improvements to ensure projectability. I know he can be inactive away from the puck. I know that his reliance on drawing guys in will lead to struggles in the NHL. I just don’t give a shit. There’s so much nuance to this conversation and it feels like it’s just been reductively boiled down to:
If skate good, then he good.
If skate bad, then he bad.
The phrase “skating is the easiest thing to fix” is muttered so often, yet we nitpick every biomechanical deficiency on every smaller player when draft time comes around. I remember Logan Stankoven falling two years ago because of a similar sentiment. Not that I’d compare the two in general -- the Stank is a bulldog and Cristall has some complacent activity off-puck -- but the general point remains considering that Stankoven’s skating has improved, and it also was never as big of an issue as people made it out to be in the first place.
The skating isn’t as bad as people say. Cristall has brilliantly deceptive footwork that compliments every one of his small-area handles. He changes direction really well, elevating his cross-body handling. The skill and agility come together with tremendous big-brain energy, allowing Cristall to somehow dangle the pants off of a ton of players that come near him even when they know what he intends to do. His ability to bait a stick, fake one move to capitalize on the baited stick and then execute an entirely different move sends defenders into fits. He reads their intentions so well and they really struggle to read his. The only concern at the NHL level is whether or not he can consistently pull this off against better, smarter athletes. I think the actual solutions will work if they feel the threat of him escaping with his feet and gaining any level of separation whatsoever. There is a lot of reason behind every touch of the puck, choice of angle, etc. Very few players prepare their intended attacking space like he does.
Now, to be a hypocrite, I am going to use lackluster skating against some players later on, but I do believe there’s a crucial difference between Cristall and the others: him gaining any level of separation at the NHL level means he’s going to torch those players in the same vein that he slaughters WHL players. All he needs is the ability to actually escape pressure through his feet alone so that people have reason to fall for his pace changes. Everything else he does here is sensational. It doesn’t even need to be an exceptional level of explosivity. Any separation will do wonders for making his game functional at the NHL level.
The public was all over the Cristall is a top five talent hype-train all year. Then it came out that the league didn’t emulate their thoughts, so many ended up changing their tune. To be fair, other players did very well in the second half and earned passing Cristall on merit, but that’s not the reason I keep hearing when I ask people why he’s slipped. I also know that I’ve lowered him as well. I think part of what annoys me is that even though I’m an avid believer that the narrative has spiraled a bit out of control with Cristall, I’ve still felt some level of influence because of it. It makes me a complete dink and, as I started this paragraph with, a hypocrite.
If his skating does improve then it’s not just the ability to threaten multiple paces that makes Cristall an animal -- it’s that he would become a far, far more dangerous open-ice attacker than someone like Matthew Wood or Dalibor Dvorsky would be. It makes his gravity-driven style of attacking more effective because other threats would have to be respected, and each of those other threats will become significant strengths. Everything in his game becomes unlocked.
If his skating doesn’t improve then he just doesn’t make the league, right? I’m not convinced that’s the case. Why is it that Cristall can’t just play a lesser role and make the most value of his puck touches when they come around? Gabriel Perreault might be a top ten pick by playing the same game even though he also has perceived issues moving around the ice. I really like Perreault but I don’t think he’s better at handling the puck and weaponizing gravity like Cristall does. He doesn’t need to be the guy to be a useful player. It’d be a disappointing result, but it’s still some level of role he can play.
Now, I will say that it’s entirely possible that some teams hoped a lesser role would be possible if the speed never came and they realized that it’s just not going to work after an interview and some filmwork. If Andrew gave me pause that this more reserved playstyle is not possible and shouldn’t be factored into his floor then yeah, I concede that everything above is wrong, that there is a lot of risk and that I’m a dumb idiot. From what little I’ve heard from afar, this is not the type of person Cristall is. Realistically, I’m too removed from the situation to truly know.
What I do know is that, while his U18 performance was considered subpar, he seemed to improve with every game. Team Canada needed more from him in areas that Kelowna gave him a free pass with -- no cherry picking the blue line here. I wouldn’t say he ever became particularly amazing off-puck but he did show more engagement as the tournament went on. I also believe that his off-puck play is better with Kelowna than some people give him credit for -- he gets himself open for passes through small timing windows that an NHL player could definitely hit, but a WHL player wouldn’t always recognize. I think there’s a far better give-and-go player here than people think.
I don’t know. I never had the time to really write a “Let’s Have a Conversation” piece for Cristall this year like I did with Brad Lambert last year so some year-long frustration that has been pent-up has now finally been released. Yay?
Why #11: I love, love, love the upside and think there’s more to work with in other areas of his game even if the feet don’t improve like people hope. If his skating was at a level to gain separation then I’d have him in the third tier and he’d be pushing for the top five or six.
12. Quentin Musty
One of the three players this year to have changed my opinion so drastically after the first set of viewings is Quentin Musty.
This makes a lot of sense given the news coming out about an illness affecting his play earlier in the season. Add that to a coaching change that happens to coincide with his form turning around and yeah, it makes a lot of sense in hindsight why he was a bit of a mixed bag early on. He often left more questions than answers with every new viewing such as "will he play in the NHL?" or "how will he achieve his success?"
The answers to those questions are now very clear, and I believe only one question remains: just how high can Musty rise in the league? He is a highly skilled power forward with a ton of creativity/diversity in his problem solving due to how well he layers his power, agility and handling together.
At the very least, Musty should be a third liner. He can sometimes look disengaged with play when it's further away from him, something that is often not associated with your stereotypical third line play, but the intensity ratchets up as soon as Musty is at a close enough distance to actually impact the play. Considering that he was ill for a stretch of the season and the second half showed far more of an individual effort, I think it's entirely possible (if not likely) that effort isn't actually an issue with him to begin with.
Quentin is a great example as to how my own biases blinded me to a player I would typically really like. I was waiting for him to impress me. I wanted him to show me that he can play my style and not make the mistakes that I don't want him to make. Those "I want you to impress me, the ever important online scout" thoughts are almost always a flaw in our process, especially in this case considering everyone around him who actually mattered in the draft process likely already knew about the illness and weren't too concerned about Musty proving that extra effort level exists to them or, most importantly, himself. It's imperative that we keep our shit in line when evaluating kids who shouldn't give a damn about what we say.
I'm very, very happy to have changed my tune on Musty regardless. He's a talent who offers a combination of traits in a way that is unique in this draft, and an NHL team and can be aptly developed to fit a wide array of roles. He's estimated to be a late first but he's also the exact type of player that teams sometimes swing on early.
Why #12: As far as I’m concerned, Musty is a great combination of upside and floor. It’s basically the exact same reason for having Leonard at 10th, but I think Leonard’s safer in lieu of the additional upside Musty has with him. Arguing about the two of them feels almost semantical considering you’re laughing if you get either of them. I lean Cristall because I just really, really want to draft that kid.
13. Daniil But
The unicorn of all unicorns.
The single largest turnaround I've ever had with a player. I started this year thinking "I have literally zero interest in him" and am ending it thinking "I would take him in the top ten in a heartbeat if an interview and a game tape session went well."
He's gigantic. For his size, he's a nimble skater with lots of room for improvement. The speed is there but I'm more surprised with his agility being so competent given he's a skyscraper balancing on thin knives. The handling and puck control is remarkable -- cross-body handling is done with ease and he can set up all sorts of drags, curls and other skill-moves with the full length of his reach. You can imagine what happens if a player with all these traits combined his agility, skill, handling, puck protection and reach manipulation.. but with Daniil you don't have to imagine. You simply need to watch.
Now, the big problem with But is that you may need to watch a few games. Keep in mind that I had him bordering on DND territory earlier in the season because I couldn't comprehend what he was thinking on the ice. It's not like Musty where I was falling victim to my own bias of him not doing what I specifically wanted, he was just objectively making bad decisions. Passes to no one, blatant drives into three layers of traffic, blind stickhandling that did nothing but harm the progression of play and, I shit you not, he ran into his own teammate carrying the puck more than once. The spectrum of his impact was wider than his wingspan.
Fortunately, the really bad side of things started to die down and he started finding some level of success in each game as the latter half of the season went on. He also started to have some games where he bullied MHL players worse than I've ever seen any top prospect bully them. The MHL is questionable, yes, but that level of dominance doesn't just happen because the league is bad. The same skills that led to his Superman-esque performances there were ultimately the ones that led to his really great flashes in the KHL.
So what do we make of all this? Given his expansive toolkit, I'd say the development path forward is completely wide open and he can fit into almost any role in the NHL. He also lacks certainty in almost every single role. There's a real chance he doesn't play in the NHL, or that his development stalls entirely. There's no one really like him in the NHL, and prospects like him don't come around often either.
I ended up deciding on where I wanted to rank But after expanding my thoughts past hockey, once again entering the land of basketball. Now, I know the absurdity of what I'm about to say, so I need to very boldly state that I am comparing But to this player when he was a draft eligible prospect, NOT what he is today… but the dude is kinda like 2013 Giannis. If you followed the NBA draft before the hype train took off after he was selected then you'll know what I mean.
I remember reading about Giannis back then and seeing the people who were so enamored with the idea of what he could be, saying that a package of tools like this is already so rare to begin with but the unique ways he blended them was truly one-of-a-kind. Obviously we know that every single possible thing went right with Giannis and he's a lock for the Hall of Fame if he was to retire today. Obviously we also know that the likelihood of that happening here is exceptionally low. I don't know how else to say it other than to reiterate it one more time, as clear as day, that Daniil But is almost guaranteed to not impact the NHL the same way that Giannis did the NBA.
Buuuuuutttttttt.. the possibility of it even existing is so rare that it's exciting so long as there are reasonable fallback options. And there are. There's actually a lot. His frame, skill, skating, physicality and general "f*** you" approach to the game is about as insane as anything I've ever seen.
There's a wide open development path to make him whatever you want, mold him into anything. Maybe, just maybe, one of those is a true, honest to god superstar.
Why #13: The inherent risk keeps him behind those names listed ahead, as they carry great upside and a lot more safety in their projectability, but I just can't let the idea of Daniil But slipping get by me. This feels like a good time to remind people that the perspective of an NHL scout considers how a team would work with a player after the draft to become an NHLer, it's not just throwing names on a list in order of predicting who will be good and who will not be. They know the plan in place and who will be actively involved in making sure he ends up good. Knowing this, and knowing that I'm trying to emulate that perspective as much as I can from afar.. yeah, it makes sense. I don't care if he doesn't play a single NHL game. I want to be a part of the team that works with Daniil But so badly.
14. Otto Stenberg
I loved Otto Stenberg's game so much that he was in my original top ten at the start of the year. The season was a frustrating adventure of ups and downs where I just couldn't figure out what the hell was going on.
At the time of my last writeup, Stenberg had begun to alleviate the complaints I had for the first half of the season. Since then, he's only improved -- the mobility and hands were being used to attack and create space much more frequently than before, his off-puck movement was much more focused and allowed him to be involved in play a lot more, and he became more willing to use said shiftiness to evade pressure & create the space necessary to start manufacturing dangerous chances. So, through a confusing season of ups and downs, I believe that he's cemented his status as a top prospect. All the weird, worrying trends no longer trouble me and I'm back to seeing Otto Stenberg as capable of being a high-end NHLer as I believed him to be in September.
The U18's really showed this to be true, as every Canadian who watched probably will have an involuntarily lower-body clinch every time Stenberg touches the puck for the foreseeable future. He completely torched us twice and looked better than just about every player we had out there outside of Celebrini, who is a titan all in his own right.
Why #14: This is the range where the high-end manipulators who don’t feel like absolute locks like Benson or Moore are going to be ranked. Leonard and Musty’s physical game feels a bit more fitting for the chaos that is the NHL playoffs, but Stenberg’s already shown that he can make the same playstyle that completely decimates his age group work against pros. A lot of the hesitation and doubt I once had are gone specifically because of his late-year form in the SHL, and that is enough to warrant being ranked ahead of the non-Cristall manipulators. But’s just a freak.
15. Axel Sandin-Pellikka
It's pretty easy for me to say that ASP is the most dynamic attacking rearguard of the draft. While his fellow countryman Tom Willander has certainly begun to contest this point, and other players such as Russia's Gulyayev or Canada's Cagnoni remain in the discussion, I think the combination of ASP's tools and the means to which he uses them to advance play forward and facilitate around the OZ has locked him into the #2 defender spot.
For the most part, my read on ASP is the exact same as it was before. He’s a really, really good puck mover and all of those aspects project cleanly to a top four role. Any improvements could push him into first pairing territory; however, the defensive game doesn’t project as cleanly. I do think he’ll be serviceable in his own zone at the very least, but I don’t know if he’ll ever be an esteemed defensive presence. That’s completely fine!
Why #15: I think ASP is a top-ten talent, although a slightly risky one, but I will almost always defer to selecting a forward over a defender if all things are relatively equal. This tier is.. relatively equal. Forwards carry more of a certainty and have a lower hit rate in the later round, whereas defenders are less likely to recoup the value of a first round pick and also have higher hit rates in the later rounds. It's not a coincidence either as I think the NHL Draft Market for defenders is a bit inefficient, often valuing traits that aren't necessarily correlated with upside. Don't get me wrong, ASP is all upside, but if the decision is to take an equal forward here and then take someone like Cagnoni at the end of the second or the early third then I'm not thinking twice about it.
16. Mikhail Gulyayev
My read on Gulyayev remains almost identical to what it was before, and he trends in a similar spot as a result. The combined factor of him being a defender and him being a helluva risk limits him from being selected any earlier, but if this is the range where I'm looking at guys like Cristall and But despite their risk then I really do need to consider him as well. Their forward positions earn them the spots ahead, which is why ASP and Gulyayev are closer to the back of this tier, but if the table is saying “we’re drafting a defender at 12” then I’m still okay with either of them. I’m just.. clenching a bit more if we decide Gulyayev.
I don't actually have a whole lot to say here beyond that. At some point you just cannot pass on a player who moves like this.
Why #16: He feels like the epitome of a boom-or-bust player, and unlike a forward like Cristall who I think has some fall-back options, the rearguard position just cannot afford the same luxury. He has to be better at defending or a coach will never want to play him. Fortunately, his feet will give him as much of an advantage to overcome that weakness as any tool possibly could.
17. Riley Heidt
Hello Mr. "Hardest player to rank in this tier", who also has a splash of “is he even in the right tier?”
I pretty much stand by what I said in the last writeup about Heidt entirely: he is a borderline top ten player in terms of what he can do but seldom does he show what putting everything together can do. I thought this was a bit of an exaggeration when I wrote it down, but I actually think he's pretty on par with Leonard and Musty when it comes to their respective tools and how they're used.. and those guys are ranked at ten and eleven respectively
Another player with genuine triple threat capabilities, Heidt has shown that he can actually layer the threats together to create highly sophisticated plays that I believe can work in the NHL. He has all the tools to be a high-end 200ft player and has shown to be quite capable as a playdriver, scorer, facilitator, off-puck support player and defender. Theoretically everything should click together and the end result is an easy top six NHL forward.
Yet it feels like Heidt can have games where it feels like his impact is negligible compared to what he can be doing. I don't know if it's a matter of sample size but this was a recurring trend that lasted as the year went on. I was unable to pick up on a pattern of improvement with regards to interweaving these separate elements together. Instead, he just had random games/shifts/stretches where it'd click and others where he was highly passive.
Ultimately, I believe it works itself out. I want to believe in the players when they've shown this much good. Maybe not every strength ends up coming together to be tied with a nice pretty bow, but I think enough will to make Heidt have a serviceable career nonetheless. Of course, the idea of it all coming together is the desired outcome and then he could be quite the player.
One thing is for certain, the details need to be more cohesive than they currently are for Heidt to be an effective NHLer. His ranking basically reflects one's confidence in his ability to do so. In a damn good draft, I'll take a few of the other high-end dynamic boys ahead, but after they're gone..
Why #17: Heidt is as talented as the names ranked ahead in this tier, but feels like his strengths are more disconnected from one another than the rest. Still, I’d be very happy to take him at this pick and even though he’s near the bottom of the tier, he really does feel like a top-15 caliber talent in this draft.
18. Gabe Perreault
There’s a really interesting case study here.
Like many, I was initially lower in the year because I felt like Perreault was finding a significant portion of his success by being played with the right players. Ask me at almost any point in the year and I’d have said “any other USNTDP team and I don’t think Perreault explodes like this". Hell, I might have even said the same if you just changed his line.
Yet it’s important to know when to explore these hypothetical situations, and when to throw bullshit like that aside. General rule of thumb is to fully understand the player, or at least have a strong grasp as to what, why and how they're doing what they're doing on the ice before investing too much into your own theories. Every scout imaginable has fallen victim to this practice and I have been very susceptible to it myself.
It didn't take long to understand Gabe once I tossed that crap aside. The general sentiment remained true: Perreault did have a historic season largely in part of his dynamic with Smith and Leonard and he likely wouldn't have been broken the record if he was the primary guy on the line. But what became abunduntly clear was that he was still was just as impactful a player as his points indicated. At times I'd argue he was the key player on that line despite being the tertiary option.. which sounds a bit paradoxical.
Here’s how it works, and it’s an expansion of what I wrote above for Cristall: we often associate high production with high NHL upside for obvious reasons. They were consistently creating and executing scoring chances, and you expect that trend to continue unless they’re doing so by non-projectable means. Yet when you compare Perreault to his teammates, it’s clear that two of them can recreate their methods of production against higher level competition. Smith will dangle the pants out of everyone and Leonard will bulldog through everyone. Perreault found so many points just by exploiting any weakness in the opposition. Players like this typically hit a wall when oppositional mistakes become more of a rarity unless they have the tools to force the mistakes. That's why Smith is 5 and Leonard is 10.
But, Perreault’s impact is defined by making the most out of every play he can. Not every play is equal in terms of potential impact and Gabe makes sure to be there for the key plays and do everything he can with them, and given his tools, that’s better than a high volume of plays. He picks his moments to strike and goes for the kill.
Make no mistake though, Perreault isn't some toolless wonder. He has a fantastic set of hands. They are undeniably effective at misleading opponents and opening up lanes. He’s also not a bad skater by any stretch of the imagination, it’s just there are improvements required to gain separation in order for Perreault to maintain his current approach in small areas.
Why #18: Initially, I’d say that someone like Perreault being seven spots away from Cristall when they both have similar flaws but one already has mastered being a tertiary supporting player feels.. wrong? It’s something I’ve had trouble trying to figure out for a while, but a few weeks back the simplicity of the answer finally dawned on me: what Cristall could be with skating improvements feels like much more of a force than what Perreault could be, and I do carry a fair bit of optimism that Cristall can alter his game as he enters professional play if his feet had not improved much by that time -- ultimately making the two forwards fairly close in that regard. This does require optimism on Cristall’s part but I think it’s pretty evident that I’ll roll w/ the optimism on that one.
Tier Five (19-27)
19. Tom Willander
God, I love great skating defenders.
Evaluating offensive defenders at the time of the draft is tricky because what equates to offense in the NHL isn't exactly what these players tend to do in their respective leagues at 18. Activating in the offensive zone is cool and all, but going overboard with it or having slightly poor judgment as to when to do it will be highly detrimental in the NHL. It'll also glue your ass to the bench.
My favourite NHL defender is Miro Heiskanen, who personifies my definition of calculated aggression. He will attack every bit of open space there is and is exceptionally dynamic when it comes to solving problems against even the best players, but he also knows when to chill tf out.
Willander plays this type of game. He's aggressive, but measured. He escapes pressure into space with his head up, puck under complete control, and surveys his options. Oftentimes, he's feinting one play while looking to execute another just to keep defenders honest. He's not Miro Heiskanen, or he'd easily be my top defender, but he is still very projectable into a top four role. At the highest level of play, that role demands that rearguards are able to get the puck into positions where multiple options are available for each player getting the puck. Predictable puck movement does not challenge an NHL defense.
Now obviously I wouldn't say Willander is there yet, but his performance this year in J20 suggests this is the path that Willander is on. It's a bit too restrained at times, but a standout U18 tournament leads me to believe that his on-ice reservations were more of a system thing than a player thing.
There aren't a whole lot of defenders that give me confidence that they can execute their strengths at NHL pace, but Willander is one of them. He already plays the "right way" already. It's now about making the next step to the SHL, then adding a bit more assertiveness before coming over.
Why #19: I was a bit late to the Willander train, which made ranking him with respect to the other defenders a bit trickier. No matter where I placed him, the answer felt wrong. After spending more time reviewing all the names around him, and directly comparing him to the likes of Gulyayev, Reinbacher, Molendyk and Cagnoni, it became more and more clear that Wallinder was the best combination of upside, security and fit for my ideal lineup. Gulyayev's skating is so good that it's a toss up between these two for me, but my hunch is that I'd rather Willander. Reinbacher does not move the puck like this and, as I'll detail below, I'm more hesitant that consensus seems to be.
20. Jayden Perron
There may be no greater measure of me learning lessons over time than ranking Perron here. I adore watching him play, Jayden is easily among my favourites in the draft. He'd likely be 4-7 spots higher in a different year.. hell, he was higher back when I did my last writeup.
His strengths in the OZ are all built around how well Perron reads space and positions his body to navigate through tight areas. This principle seems to be the driving force of a lot of his productivity, whether he's passing, carrying, shooting or receiving the puck. A lot of the work is done with lateral mobility rather than pure speed or handling, constantly shifting the angle he plans to attack with. It requires smart teammates, but that’s usually the standard set in the NHL.
Fortunately, we have some proof on how this works with NHL caliber brains as his dynamic with Celebrini was utterly brilliant. They were one of the most exciting duos I’ve seen in recent memory. I would never try to argue that Celebrini was anything but the primary force on that line, but Perron had plenty of moments where he was the one creating space, opening lanes and disassembling the defensive structure for Macklin to capitalize on. They fed off each other so well.
I'd like to briefly mention a forward that I'll be talking about in more detail later on, as his play with Celebrini was also very good but in a different way. Matthew Wood is a high-end NHL Draft prospect and played alongside Macklin at the U18’s, finding a ton of success working off of Celebrini’s cerebral genius. Yet, despite the obvious success the two found, I found myself thinking Perron was more suited to capitalize on the advantages Celebrini generated, except for scoring goals as Wood is a far superior shooter. Celebrini was the one doing the majority of the work to deconstruct the defense and he made Wood's life as easy as it possibly could be. This is not to belittle Wood's performance as he was legitimately great, but I think it's a testament to Jayden that he spent the whole year keeping pace with Celebrini from the very beginning while Macklin had to shoulder more responsibility when handling some of the trickier situations the U18's threw at him. It was a bit of a travesty that the Canadian team left him behind considering how badly they needed dynamic offense.
Perron plays his style of game very effectively and, from what I see, he should be an NHL player. He’s undeniably smart enough and I think he could contribute in a role lower in the lineup than you’d expect of a player with this description, but it’s a trickier road to see him being a more impactful player than someone like Benson or Brindley, and he doesn't have the same upside as someone like Cristall or But.
Perron being 20th is a testament to how good this draft is.
Why #20: Perron being ranked behind the names ahead typically comes from the fact that you can get something similar out of them but with a bit more developmental range. The biggest standout in this tier is that two similar players, Brindley and Perron, are as far apart as possible. The reasoning is this: Brindley does everything Perron does, but is more of a dynamic skater and executes his plays at a higher pace (albeit not by much). His escapability in tight spaces is a bit cleaner than Jayden’s and, most importantly, Brindley is more effective at using his lower stature to play off of larger, physical players. That last point is the biggest separator of the two. I will say that out of both of them, Perron does seem to have slightly higher-level problem solving in middle-ice to create chances than Gavin does, but the means to which he executes those solutions are more punishable by NHL caliber players than Brindley's is. Even if that wasn't the case, Brindley is still really good at solving middle-ice problems, so the margin isn’t large enough to overcome the swings in consistency, as well as the lack of versatility. Other comparables ranked ahead are Stenberg, who has superior tools and already showed he can use these tools to create space in dangerous areas against pro players, and Cristall who can be argued to have the same flaws but ultimately wins out in the upside debate because his offensive play is batshit insane.
21. Timur Mukhanov
Many seem to show concern towards Mukhanov's game, as he seems to fit underneath the statistical bar you're looking for from an undersized, skill player coming out of a pro league. Historically speaking, the lack of production is the biggest red flag from players who match his build description.
Yet I sit here in June simply wondering "how was Timur so unlucky this year" because, simply put, he created a lot of chances. There were enough moments of brilliance that not having more production is almost an astounding feat in its own right. With the right luck, he'd have the production to be considered despite his archetypical downsides and this wouldn't feel like such a stretch.
The reality is that whether the points came or not, Mukhanov was in the position to be generating them. A lot of what will (hopefully) work out for him in the future was already working out for him this year, in his DY season, against pro players. In my opinion, this provides more optimism than it would if he had played MHL and actually scored a lot more, or had he played in just about any Jr league. The VHL may not be the most elite league in the world, but it's good enough to limit Mukhanov if his current approach wasn't actually projectable.
I don't think they're overly similar players, but I see shades of Noah Östlund in Mukhanov -- so much of their play is done with high pace, constantly routing themselves into high impact areas. It requires operating on a very thin timing window with a small margin of error, so if they're half a second early or late to any given play then they won't be able to actually make that large of an impact. Noah Östlund in the SHL was consistently off his timing by that half a second and a lot of people were not a fan of how he played. You see Noah this year in Allsvensken and, while the league may not be as strong as the SHL, he looked incredible. I can see Timur following a similar route next year. The one downside is that I don't think the league Timur will play in will develop his game as projectably as the Swedish system does.
Why #21: I like Cristall, Heidt, Perreault and Perron just a tad bit more, even though I'm not convinced they'd have done as well in a pro league as Mukhanov did. I like what they are likely to be a little bit more. That’s really just it.
22. David Reinbacher
This is an interesting one considering Reinbacher is currently viewed as a near unanimous selection in the top ten and the top defender in the class.
This one is gonna be long.
The reasons why he's ranked so high make sense to me. Like I've said before, you simply can't miss on a first round pick. You can lose your job for whiffing on a top ten pick. The big, solid skating, physical, smart defender with the reliable first pass and a cannon of a shot is likely to play in the NHL and contribute in an above average role, so it's an easy pick to make. The NHLe looks like a star defender in the making as well which hints at considerable upside. When that upside is viewed along with the undeniable safety then, yeah. Go Reinbacher.
I think Reinbacher is the best example in this draft as to what I mentioned earlier regarding inefficiencies with scouting defenders, and is also a great example as to how NHLe can paint an imperfect picture, at least in terms of measuring the likelihood of becoming a star. The modern NHL is getting faster and more skilled with every year that passes. Putting up even strength points as a defender is really, really hard and there's already a large surplus of capable PP quarterbacks.
The bulk of Reinbacher's production came from the PP, and many of them were the result of his shot. I won't downplay his shot, as he does the smashy-the-puck-into-net-from-long-distance really well, but I will say that point shots are just not a thing that reliably scores points in the NHL. His NHLe paints the picture of a considerable scorer in the NHL, but he does not play with the dynamism that any of the top scoring defenders have. So.. how is he going to be scoring these points?
His activation in the OZ is enough to help keep possession: simple pinches and the like, and honestly I actually see this as a good thing. Blue line activations in the NHL can go wrong in less than a second and then you have a defender out of position against the best rush attackers in the world. If Reinbacher is a first pairing guy and he mistimes this, then it's only a Nathan MacKinnon or a Trevor Zegras coming up the way with a numbers advantage. No big deal. Probably a good thing that he doesn't do that.
Now, I'm fine with defenders that can contribute elsewhere beyond scoring. The entire theme of the Simashev writeup was that his defensive abilities are so stupidly good that he could not score and I'd be happy for it. It's just an incredible bonus that Simashev also actually has the tools for a Seider-esque breakout after the draft. The thing is that I do not believe Reinbacher to be a better defensive player, and I do not think his tools will give him the launchpad he needs to ascend as a playdriver to the same extent that Dmitri's can/will. They're serviceable at the NHL level for sure, but serviceable is not what I'm looking for with a top ten pick. Not when equal safety and drastically higher upside exists with other skaters.
I do think Reinbacher will be a stout defender, and this next bit is a teensy bit nitpicky, but I'm going to say it anyway. There's a few concerns for me in the DZ. They'll likely be ironed out before he's in the NHL, but they're worth mentioning:
His positioning defending the rush can be tweaked as he can sometimes close the distance too early and be burned laterally. I've seen his rush defense praised and while it is good, I've seen him pinch up very early for little-to-no discernable reason and then be burnt for it. It's completely fixable and isn't really a factor for his ranking, but it's something that bugs me.
His defense behind the goal line is pretty damn good but it's not like he instantly locks down anyone who comes within his space like Simashev does. He can overcommit his weight to attempt a physical play too early or too late and end up not really doing a whole lot. Again, likely fixable, but a teensy bit more concerning considering the pace of play is only going to ramp up.
This is less DZ oriented and more of a general point, but I don't think the output from his skating is as good as some people claim. I wouldn't dare say it's bad, and like many others he can absolutely get better, but he sometimes just doesn't have the lateral agility to stop some of the NL's more agile players. What is the NHL if not littered with the most agile athletes in the world?
Normally I wouldn't bring things like this up, but Reinbacher is being quoted as someone capable of playing in the NHL next year. I'd imagine the majority don't think that's a wise idea, and you can absolutely count me to be a part of that. To me, that's wild. The above traits are all huge selling points for Reinbacher and are almost always mentioned when talking about why he's the best defender available. Meanwhile, I'm frantically pointing in Simashev's direction going "HEY, THE GUY YOU'RE LOOKING FOR IS RIGHT HERE".
So if there are only 32 PP1 spots in the league, he doesn't routinely create high danger offense via manipulation, his transitional game is solid but not astounding and his defensive game is very effective but has little gaps that can be exploited.. then exactly what is he in the NHL? Especially for next year?
Even if we give him full time to develop, do we really think he's going to be out there denying players of this caliber? Would Matty Beniers struggle to play around Reinbacher? Will Sebastian Aho be unable to come and find ways to access dangerous ice? I won't say with certainty that he's unable to affect them, but I'm not certainly not saying that he will do it with confidence.
I despise writing overly negative write ups like this. I rewrote it multiple times because I feel like an asshole. I also know that when you have a prospect low like this, people are rushing to call you stupid for it despite watching a highlight reel and reading the opinions of others, happily willing to pass it on as if it's their own. So, unfortunately, you dickheads win and I'm berating a player who is probably a really nice kid. Now we all suck.
Why #22: He's a perfectly capable NHL defender who can play in an above average role, but lacks the dynamic ability I'm looking for in my preferred style of top four defenders. If I scouted for a team more suited for his strengths then, yes, he'd move up the list, but ultimately my read as to what he is as a player wouldn't change.
23. Oscar Fisker Molgaard
OFM is one of the players that is just so easy to project to the league. Considering that the key rule with a first round pick is that you're not allowed to miss, guys like him with a great balance between upside and potential risks are very easy to just move up and up my list.
OFM is a great skater who frequently plays at a high pace, making quick, efficient decisions to move the puck around and just get things done across all three zones. He's a great skater who seems to always route himself towards the play, but he does seem to lack any other high-end tool to layer with the skating to become truly manipulative at the NHL level.
It is very unlikely that he is going to be a surefire star down the line with his current approach, but Molgaard's appeal is found in the safety he provides the team that drafts him. He already plays pro hockey and fits in seamlessly, electing to make the "pro" play where many, many others in this range would not. The handling is good enough to give OFM the puck control he needs to execute plays at a pro pace without having to spend those extra moments to secure a bobbling puck, but he doesn't often show off dynamic handling when at speed to really break down defenders.
That's fine! It's the late first, those types of players are either already ranked or carry some noteworthy flaws that I'd rather just not deal with compared to getting a guy like this.
Why #23: Some of the other names to come can be argued ahead, and maybe a few may turn out to be more viable 5v5 creators in an NHL top six, but the gap between their perceived best outcome and OFM is not large enough to circumvent the fact that you're likely getting a quality third line center with this pick. The type that you want on your team when competing for a championship. The role isn't fancy but it's integral and god damn, OFM is good at it. A player who I have ranked later that I see likely fitting into a similar role is Dalibor Dvorsky (more written later). OFM is the superior skater and is already better at playing with pace, and I have quite a bit of confidence that he can transition to a league as fast as the NHL with relative ease. Possibly a Lehkonen-esque player down the line.
24. Gracyn Sawchyn
It was roughly a year ago today when Joel Henderson, king of the West, said "Sam, you'll love Gracyn Sawchyn. He's just your kind of player."
He wasn't wrong. It's always exciting when a player with a good array of tools plays such a sophisticated game for a team that develops pro players well. Now we have a high motor forward with skill, quality off-puck movement and a lot of brain juice flowing in his noggin. Sawchyn is a player who I've just grown to appreciate more and more as the year goes on, and I think him being ranked here really is a testament to the available upside this draft has. It wouldn't take much to sell me on selecting him earlier over other names in this tier if that's the direction of the draft table.
He looks to route within the gaps of the defensive structure as much as possible when he's away from the puck, causing shifts that can be exploited by others or, if the puck makes it to him, himself with his ever improving set of hands. Sawchyn isn't the pinnacle of dangerous chance creation, but he's solid enough everywhere to make the little impacts that add up to a lot over the course of an entire game. He's also still good enough to just make dangerous chances when they're available. There's also the good ol' fashioned gut feeling coming into play here -- he's one of my bets this year to be the type of player that just somehow keeps getting better even when people think they can't.
I'm not particularly sure how he's ranked towards the end of the second on Bob McKenzie's list as he really feels like the type of guy NHL teams would love. Maybe a few do and he goes earlier after all. Simultaneously, I am even more confused as to how he fell by the wayside of a lot of public scouts until years end. He has improved over the season but he's been the same archetype of player for a while now. He's jumped from a second round pick to a first on a number of boards and I'm not really sure what changed to cause such a drastic rise at the end. You either liked him or you didn't.
Why #24: For almost the exact same reasons that OFM is 23 -- I just like the fact that Oscar has already made his game work in the pro leagues. For what it’s worth, they’re basically a tie.
25. Luca Cagnoni
The most interesting defender in the draft for me is Luca Cagnoni.
I'm just a big fan of what Cagnoni is trying to do on the ice, constantly using lateral mobility to create separation in the defensive zone and looking for any long-pass there is to stretch the defense while still opting to carry the puck and/or make short passes into the space that the long-pass threatens. His OZ game isn't filled with so much activation that you're concerned with what happens when it's dialed back. A lot of it is just advancing a bit off the blue line to force a shift and making a play that is meant to capitalize off said shift. Most of the time, it's not Luca's play that creates the dangerous chance or drags the key defender out of the slot (although he's certainly more capable of that than most). Instead it's getting the puck to a teammate who is in the right spot to take advantage of the shift, then they can make the key play. That being said, I don’t want to diminish what Luca can and does offer in the OZ as he is quite simply one of the best passers in the draft. If I compiled a list of the ten most impressive passes I’ve seen from a rearguard, I’d imagine Cagnoni has about half of them.
Now, Luca does have games where his pass percentage is concerning, but they're often just off their mark and the read itself was correct. Considering he also has stretches where he can go 17/19 in passing with the same approach, I think it's fair to say that this will work itself out and is a manner of consistency, not ability. The fact that he can both pass and carry after finding separation with his lateral agility makes Cagnoni as high-end a transitional player as just about any other defender.
The question comes down to what I said the first time around: how often does Cagnoni rely on escaping pressure laterally, and how predictable does that make him? Attackers with reach, strength and speed won't have too many difficulties pinning him down and taking the puck away if they know to expect Cagnoni to try and circle away from them every time he's pressure, but if Luca blends these plays in with quick passes as soon as he gets the puck and manages to add some level of forward play as a carrier that doesn't rely on spinning off a player then suddenly, he's now threatening too many key plays simultaneously for attackers to assume his intentions. At this point it's fair to say Cagnoni is a top 4 puck mover, so long as he has the strength to deny an overwhelming forecheck.
I actually like Cagnoni's defensive game, and can see a lot more being done effectively with some added strength. He manages rush gaps well and doesn't get lost against sustained cycles.
Why #25: Cagnoni is one of my personal favourites in the draft. I see the risk is high enough to stop me from ranking him a bit higher, but I really want to bring a player like him onto my team. The poise and composure he has is mesmerizing, and I would be willing to take the risk over the last two forwards in the tier.
26. Alex Ciernik
A high pace winger with a lethal shot and great skating, Alex Ciernik is one of the names that immediately jumps to mind when we're talking about underrated forwards. He's constantly putting in the effort to help an impactful forecheck and he has the talent to be a legitimately dangerous player off the rush.
I think Ciernik is a bit limited in the cycle, but not to an extent that stands out relative to any of the names left in this range. The parts of his offensive game that work are pretty projectable in their current form and don't require anything but natural strength improvements and refinement in their timing/off-puck details as he starts playing in higher pace leagues.
He's a solid middle-six guy with enough in the toolkit to potentially offer more, but I wouldn't draft him depending on it.
Why #26: He has some of the best tools left in the draft and found great success with them at the pro-level just as the season was ending. Part of me thinks he should be ranked a little higher. 26 is about as low as I could have him without feeling dumb, which is a bit funny considering most have him as a second rounder.
27. Nate Danielson
A smart center with some interesting tools and a style that projects to work in the NHL, Nate Danielson is a safer pick in the first round. He is likely to be taken higher than this, and I’m not entirely sure that’s the decision that I’d make, but I do see where an NHL team is coming from with it.
The thing that’s nice about Danielson is there is enough there in his skating and handling to believe a higher ceiling than the one he regularly shows does exist. Obviously this ranking doesn’t indicate that it’s a bet that I’d take, but I do believe in the possibility of it happening more so than some of the other safer picks later on because of his skating and flashes of cross-body handling.
Why #27: A safe center who’s gonna play in an above average role is never a bad player, so long as you aren’t passing on considerable upside. I’m more interested in other upside/safety combinations than Danielson, but I see the appeal nonetheless. I’m ever so slightly more interested in Ciernik’s upside.
Tier Six (28-41)
28. David Edstrom
There's beauty to be found in the simplicity that Edstrom plays with. It's not flashy but he's effective at getting things done. The U18's show exactly what Edstrom is capable of, as he was a terrific player that yielded results nearly every shift, yet very few were your typical fancy highlight reel play.
It’s similar logic to what put OFM, Sawchyn and Danielson in their respective spots. If I’m being completely honest, the only reason Edstrom is behind them is because he has the lowest sample of anyone in my first round and I am relying a bit more on his U18 tape then I’d like to. It’s unfortunate that I didn’t get to spend more time watching him, as I really do believe he could out-play this ranking.
Why #28: I think he’s more suitable to be considered in the tier above but the small samples will instead keep him at the top of this tier.
29. Calum Ritchie
I am more of a fan of Calum Ritchie than the 29th overall spot would indicate. The reality is that it’s just a mix where he doesn’t have the playstyle I’m particularly looking for in my centers, but I really appreciate what he does bring to the table.
His puck protection is great, especially when he’s spinning off pressure. He really utilizes his reach in these escapes and often blends all of that together with deceptive passes that are masked by him extending or pulling his reach back in to change the angle.
Considering it’s been rumored that he’s suffered numerous injuries this year I think it’s very likely that we just didn’t get to see the best version of Calum Ritchie. I don’t know exactly what that version is, and I don’t know how his game changes as a result. It’s too difficult trying to place the hypothetically healthy Ritchie amongst the names ahead. I’ll stick with the read I made all year long before finding out about the injuries and accept that he’ll likely outplay it because at the end of the day, I wouldn’t be taking him above the names ahead.
Why #29: He’s an extremely reliable center that projects cleanly to the NHL and has potential upside that’s been masked by injury. If I knew exactly what he was capable of when healthy then there’s a big chance that he’d move up.
30. William Whitelaw
I'm so curious what happens with Whitelaw after the draft. He has as much upside as anyone can in this range, yet as for the likelihood of him reaching it…… 🤷🤷🤷???
The legitimate capabilities as a triple threat player is obviously the main interest here. He's among the best shooters in the draft and he moves exceptionally well as a skater. The two work beautifully in-sync, making Whitelaw a dynamic goal scorer in-motion. That makes projecting that aspect of his game quite easy. Fortunately, he's also incredibly skilled with the puck in-motion as well and can blend handling and the threat of his shot to open passing lanes. In theory, he's a triple threat player.
In reality, it's a mixed bag. His playmaking progressively improved over the year which is the biggest thing going in his favour, but I still felt like I wanted more from him in terms of him using these three skills together. Your effectiveness as a triple threat diminishes if you can't actually threaten the three simultaneously.
A big reason for this is his activity away from the puck. It's lackadaisical to say the least. There are games where he does seem to have more effort, but it doesn't change the fact that his overall approach seems to be "I don't care where I am, get me the puck and watch me do this". Where you are when you get the puck is half of the battle to begin with so, yeah, it's a bit concerning.
To his credit, I will say that this can absolutely be one of those instances where my personal bias towards off-puck routing supporting on-puck efficiency may be leading me to believe this is a bigger issue than it is. After all, I have said in other writeups that you're supposed to give talent the benefit of the doubt in some of these situations, but I don't appear to be doing that for Whitelaw.
Why #30: Expanding on what was said above, Whitelaw is still one helluva upside pick to make later in the draft. I'm not entirely convinced he's someone I'd select at this pick in the first round, because there's likely to be a Stenberg/Perron/Brindley/Cristall player available and I'm just more interested in them for an upside swing, but he's still a high caliber player with first round tools.
31. Matthew Wood
I know Matthew Wood will play in the NHL. He has a shot that will anchor a PP2, will catch some goalies off guard at 5v5 and he has enough vision with his short passing to work some give-and-go sequences in transition. Another player I'm lower on compared to consensus, and I think it makes sense if you know what I'm looking for in a player.
Immediately I'm just going to state that it's hard to envision Wood playing for a team that plays my preferred approach of faster, give-and-go style hockey. Yes, I know I said that he'd work some give-and-go sequences but I don't know how many he will be involved in considering the pace the NHL plays at and the current level of pace Wood plays at. I'm not convinced Wood is going to be a dangerous open-ice player in the league because he simply doesn't have the footspeed to get to that point, and I don't think he has the puck skills to circumvent that. This is already evident in his NCAA play as there are quite a few instances of Wood driving straight into traffic and trying to stickhandle his way through it. This is the largest difference that makes me hesitant on Wood and bullish on Cristall, even though it’s entirely possible that Wood plays and has a serviceable career while Cristall doesn’t.
Why #31: The lack of speed and the lack of high-end handling is just a combination that I'm not particularly looking for. Maybe one takes a special leap forward and becomes a legitimate strength, but does both? It’s possible. Either way, I recognize his strengths will make him an asset more valuable than 31 assumes him to be, but I just can't picture myself confidently calling for my team to draft him until this range.
32. Tanner Molendyk
There isn’t a whole lot to comment on as this is yet another player where my read has hardly changed since the last writeup.
I am a big fan of how Molendyk plays, even if I don’t think he’s ever going to unlock the next gear defensively. He may be a reliable bottom pairing puck mover with the potential to play in a #4 role if things go well in his development, and that’s a solid player to get when the names above are gone.
Why #32: I like Molendyk’s ability to be safely projected into a depth role with above average impact, especially as every other player behind him in this tier either carries more risk or doesn’t have the same upside.
On the off chance that you actually read this whole thing then, from the bottom of my heart, I thank you sincerely. I don’t know what compels me to write these things, but it’s work that I can at least be proud of and even a few people getting thorough enjoyment out of it is enough to make it feel worthwhile in the end. It’s genuinely hard to express the gratitude that comes with the idea that people actually have interest in what I have to say. I hope this continues that trend. <3