Barn Burner: Boomer & Pinder with Rhett Warrener - 2025 NHL Draft Breakdown Ft. Byron Bader | FN Back Burner - June 16th, 2025

Episode Date: June 17, 2025

Ryan Pike and Mike Gould are joined by Byron Bader of HockeyProspecting.com to break down everything you need to know ahead of the big day. Who's rising? Who's falling? And which prospects could turn into franchise players? It's a full draft preview with one of the best minds in the game.🧠 Expert analysis📈 Prospect rankings🔥 Hot takes galoreDon’t miss it!Presented by Platinum Mitsubishi: https://www.platinummitsubishi.com/#CalgaryFlames #NHLProspects #FlamesTalk #NHLDraft #hockeycontent Let us know what you think in the comments below!!BARN BURNER BLONDE https://originbrewing.myshopify.comFLAMESNATION MERCHhttps://nationgear.ca/collections/shirts/FlamesnationBARN BURNER SHORTS https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLj_bcGtvvo-cW2DHEDZ6dEO5ePDmlhZc9&si=jo8iNGxT4ImhS2Y8INSTANT REACTIONShttps://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLj_bcGtvvo-dO2AraHTeftSpPt00evo8M&si=lY5D3nk8zVtrQgql🚨 Subscribe to @Flames_Nation on Youtube 🚨➡️ / @flames_nation 🔥 Barn Burner with Boomer, Pinder, & Rhett Warrener➡️ • Flames Nation Barn Burner 🔥 After Burner ➡️ • Flames Nation After Burner 💻 Website: https://flamesnation.ca🐦 Follow on Twitter: @FlamesNation @960boomer @PinderReport @Warrener44📺 Subscribe on Youtube: @Flames_Nation Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Welcome back to another edition of The Backburner Show, live here on Flames Nation. And if you're watching along with us, excuse us if you notice any flickering on your stream. We apologize for anything going on as we've been dealing with some technical difficulties here. But if you're listening along where we anticipate we're going to make this available as an audio stream as well, thank you so much for joining us. My name is Mike Gould. And I'm joined today, of course, as always by Ryan Pike. Pike. Thank you for being here, as always.

Hello. And we got a very special guest in the studio here in Mardaloupe today. None other than Byron Bader, who if you follow along with the draft, and if you watch this show, you probably do. You've probably seen his work on social media or on hockey prospecting.com. Byron, it's not your first time here, but we're glad to have you. Yeah, thanks for having me. It's going to be a lot of fun.

We're going to go through Byron's top 32 for the 2025 draft. If you're new to the Backburner show, we've been doing this for the last four or five weeks, I guess at this point. And it's been sort of a forum to talk about the flames prospects, just sort of leading into the NHL draft. But we haven't talked very much about the 2025 draft. We've sort of kept our discussions more so related to what the flames already have. And we're going to talk a little bit about that in this show.

But we're also going to talk about, you know, what the flames could possibly get in this year's draft. And so we're going to lead off with a bit of discussion, Byron, and about your own top 10 and all that stuff. But I also just want to address that the last time, Pike, that we were in this studio, the Edmonton Oilers, were leading the Stanley Cup final.

And now we're here. And game six tomorrow. I thought we had an agreement not to discuss any other hockey clubs. And they're one loss away. We're not going to jinx anything, but we're just going to leave it right there. The thing, Michael, about the Titanic is that it's so iceberg proof that merely referencing how iceberg-proof

the Titanic is seems to be bad form. So thank you for jinxing everything and bringing great shame for this once-fenerable institution. We're really looking forward to seeing what happens tomorrow. Last time we were here, we were kind of looking to take our minds off of that series. And now, I mean, kind of the same thing. And Byron, it's kind of felt like that series has gone on forever. It feels like we've been waiting to see the outcome of this year's draft for quite some time. I just want to sort of pick your brain before we go really deep into it because, you know, there's been a lot that's been said about this year's draft being maybe not as strong as some other drafts. And I'm not even going to really give much preamble. I just want to sort of get your take.

Do you think that's true? Yeah, I think so, especially compared to like, you know, last year, I think was pretty good and 2023 was really good and 2020 was good and 2019 was good. So there was some really strong years there. I mean, COVID kind of messed up some of that. But, yeah, like model-wise, like, it looks like it's certainly not as deep as some of those drafts. Well, and you talk about, yeah, sorry, you talk about model-wise. And I think we should also just sort of set the stage a little bit because we're going to talk about, first of all, we're going to close a circle that we started last week where Pike and Pinder and I went through our own top 10 Flames prospect list.

We're going to talk about yours in a minute. But yours is in part influenced by your model. model and you run a website, Hockey prospecting.com. I am a subscriber and a lot of folks are. And even if you're not, there's a lot of good data that has been posted on Byron's own socials. We're going to sort of dig into his own top 32 here in a bit, but also periodically, especially whenever a prospect changes hands, you'll see a little snapshot maybe

that'll post about how that prospect is faring compared to, you know, some of their counterparts. And Byron, just what is sort of your M.O. in making this model? What are you trying to sort of illustrate with the data that you're putting out there? So basically, you know, following the players, like the model goes all the way back to 1990 now. And so it follows players. And essentially what it's doing is it's looking at how they're producing in each given league. But each league is different in terms of like how a point is going to relate to the NHL. So basically like normalizes. is everything. So you're kind of looking at the same number all the way through. And then you're looking at, you know, what the player's doing and how they're sort of jumping

through these different thresholds, I call it. And if they're, you know, at a low point and they're, you know, making modest jumps or they're maybe at sort of like an above average start at the start of the draft, but then they're not really moving. Like all these are not really good things. Like the way that like a star or a superstar looks is they're kind of making these big leaps or they're basically, you know, at the top of the mountain by the time the draft starts and then they just stay there like a McDavid or a Crosby type thing. So that's basically what it's doing is you look back at this history over 35 years now and there's like these certain archetypes where, yeah, there's outliers that jump through where it's like, oh, this guy looks like he's never going to make it.

But, you know, most of the time it's like this certain archetype like, you know, nine times out of 10, they make the NHL and, you know, 60% of the time they turn into a star. So that's basically, basically what it's doing is is watching these players and trying to see which group they fit into. So there's these, you know, probably 20, 30 different bigger groups that, like, a player can come from. And that's what it's doing is watching to see what they look like. So if they're falling off, the models trying to compare like, okay, if you look back at the other 50 players that look just like that, that kind of fell off like this, i.e., kind of like Hansik, like it's not good. like, you know, maybe this one guy sort of rebounded and turned into a really good NHLer, not a star level, but like a pretty good one.

But most of them, like, they didn't even make it type thing. And, you know, from the other side, like it all started from Johnny Goddrow in college when he was just shooting up and hitting these record breaking numbers and kind of like doubling his production like every year. That was kind of where it started because everybody was really excited about him. and could this be like our next superstar? And like that's where I went looking to see like, was this what like a superstar looks like before they make the NHL?

And that's kind of what happens. Like that's Johnny Godrow is exactly what like a rising superstar looks like before he makes the NHL. So that's kind of what it's doing. It's looking back at history and giving context for every prospect, you know, this is where they tend to land in terms of their NHL career, turning into a star in the NHL. I'm kind of curious.

one of the things I really like about the way you do things is sort of you talk about the stats modeling. I know like NHL equivalence, you know, has been sort of a thing that people talked about in the hockey blogosphere, dating back to, you know, Rob Volman and, you know, even before Rob. And just the idea of like figuring out, I'm just looking, I've opened on my screen, disclosure, I've opened my screen, a nice social media comparison that Byron made with Anton Fondell and David Pasternak. And it's sort of, you know, I really like the way. you do the modeling because it's you do your best effort to provide sort of an apples to apples comparison like oh similar leagues similar ages similar production and then sort of it I think it's really

nice especially like if you're a fan that let's let's say you're a fan of a team that's been in the playoffs or maybe your team wasn't in the playoffs and just checked out for a couple months just to sort of relax and decompress you can go into your socials and check out like okay who are these guys again are they are they like what are these guys like who are these players like and I think it provides a really nice sort of entry point to folks who maybe they don't really have the the math background, for example, but you can sort of connect them with sort of players they can, you know, Yeah, it's like, oh, Pach, Frandt was like Pasternak. I like Pasternak. He's pretty good. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. And it's like, like, that's like an interesting one, right? Right. Because Pasternak was drafted like 24th or something. And then all of a sudden like two years later, he's like one of the biggest drivers on Boston and like verging on becoming a superstar. now he is there and it's kind of trying to show well this is what this guy looked like and you you know if if you're talking about the draft in 2014 like probably nobody was really talking about

pastor knack because i think he had mono or something that year and like you know he's talked about as like one of those late round guys but if you actually look at how he looks like he like he had some really good numbers and he stands out in a model like this so that's you know when you're talking about like frondell like obviously i'm very um high on him as well and he looks like even better than past your neck and it's like this guy is more talked about in like the seventh range rather than like a top three picks so that's it's kind of trying to frame that like you know this when a player looks like this they often turn into a star level player in the NHL you know um whereas if you're you know like a guy like Uri Slavkovsky's he was like the lowest value first overall pick

that the model's ever seen so that's why I was talking that was a weird year too was a weird that's a weird here like the way he looked he he looked like a guy that was normally drafted in like the teens not a guy that goes first overall but like and he's you know he's done okay but he's he's not that obvious first overall value certainly right now so yeah so it kind of puts an into an interesting context and um shows some of these archetypes and how these players look if you're just tuning in i think we've solved the flashing problem a little bit of an orthodox way but we'll just we'll keep moving forward here Byron, you know, the interesting thing that I always glean from seeing your model, because no model is going to ever be infallible, but at the same time, no NHLGM is infallible. And I think, I think there's a good case to be made that if you compare the way that your model works against, you know, the work of a lot of teams, you know, the model might win a lot of those arguments. The thing that I find so interesting about certain players is it only really seems to take one step back. And the NHL or probability, because when you break it down,

Byron's model sort of works, and there's an NHL probability and a star probability. And even if a step back doesn't hurt the NHL probability, it almost always hurts the star probability. And it doesn't even matter. Like the one that I look at is Isaac Howard, who is a guy who the flames, you know, could maybe look at this summer. He's certainly not going to be with Tampa Bay, it seems. But he had, I think, a pretty strong draft year, has a tougher first year of college at Michigan State.

Seems to be doing fine since then. But it's just that one little drop back. and all of a sudden, I think his star potential, even though he just won the Hobie Baker trophy, his star probability in your model is like 8%. Whereas, you know, if you just took that one season out of there, if that had been his progression, it'd probably be a lot higher. He'd probably be looking like a Logan Cooley type guy. So it's just, it's amazing to me just the way that one season, I mean, you mentioned

Hansick too, but there are other guys as well, how it just impacts them so, so strongly. Yeah, yeah, like that one killer season. So like the most important seasons for the prospect, or their draft year and then the D plus one, the post draft year. So if you have like a big drop in that year when you look back at history and you, yeah, you might think like, well, now he's fine. Like what's the big deal with? I always hear that.

Like that's, you know, what's the big deal with this year three years ago? And it's like, well, look at the data. Like players who did that, you don't often see them rebound and turn into a star. It's very rare. So like, yeah, like if you have a killer season like that where, you know, your production drops in half like it did for Howard. then yeah, your star probability just really tanks, whereas your NHL probability might go down a little bit,

but not quite that drastically. So, yeah. But even in the case of a guy like Howard, it is worth mentioning, 8% is not 0%. So there's always going to be a chance there. So, you know, I think we've set the stage pretty well. Byron, so we're going to go into your own top 10, first and foremost, just before we go into...

Top 10. What? Top, well, I'll get to that. I'll get to that. Pike keeps the on my toes. Byron's top 10 Flames prospects heading into the draft. Now this ties back to what Pinder Pike and I did last week, where we all had our own top tens. And they were all generally similar.

And I expect I've seen Byron's top 10 list. Pike is not. And of course, Byron has seen his own list as well. Is it similar? It is somewhat. There are a couple areas in which it's different. So Jack, why don't we go ahead and have a look at Byron's top 10 Flames prospects? And Byron, when it goes on the screen, why don't you tell us how exactly you came up with

this list. So I mean, this is largely based on the model and how players look in it. But it's also based a little bit on like their reputation. So like, you know, what does the team think of them? Were they drafted high? So are they going to like keep on getting chance after chance or are they somebody who's, you know, never really going to get a chance? So basically the way it shakes out is obviously you have the guy at the top. I mean, the, the parameters I was given was called or eligible. So like, Same as ours. Cornado's out, Zari's out, Wolf's out, right? So those guys would obviously be like in the top five.

So they're out. So, I mean, you have Parakek at the top. Like he looks like he should be the star that the flames need, maybe even a superstar level defensive. Hopefully, like the guy can skate. He kind of has that kale McCar roaming around. Like his production, how he looks in the model, very rare profile. But like guys that look like that tend to turn into big time stars.

And then you have like a whole bunch of guys that all, look pretty similar in that they have like a little bit of star potential they have kind of like a you know 50 to 65 percent chance of making the n hl but they're all kind of like right in that same zone so you have bris devich and then you have karen's that was like a bit of a surprise but like he's really grown like he looked pretty good even at the draft is it progression you think from because i know like karen's speed plus one he had that hundred point season and then like missed that whole year because of the the oh i think he he missed his D plus one because of the OHL show.

Oh yeah. And then it was his D plus two that he had that big jump. But he actually looked pretty good in his draft year. And then he kind of went to the HCHL. And then so he looks a bit unorthodox in the model, but he looks okay. But like he's had this nice progression. And now he's really producing the HL.

He got his little sample last year and then they just sent him back and never used him again. So I like him. I'm sure. I'm sure if we, if we had the nice graphics that you put on social, it had like a nice, nice little progression and like a big.

spike. Yeah. I think like point per game in the in the HL, even like even with the, you know, the rough spots in this game, you can still score. Yeah.

And in your model, if you can score, you can score, yeah, score early. And I think he's relatively young. I think he's born in April or something. So he's not one of those like October born guys.

So like that is helpful in the model because like the younger you are, the more runway you kind of have. So if you're like Johnny, like born like mid August versus like, you know, a guy born in like, October, November type thing. Like that's such a difference in the model.

So yeah, like all these guys, like Proustavish and Karens, Basha, Rydin, Bataglia, Muse, Misa. Like they're all, you know, at a little bit different stages of development, different years, that type of thing. But they're all really, really close in terms of a model. So like, I took about 10 minutes on this, to be quite honest. But like, so you couldn't move some of those guys around a little bit, but like they're all really close.

And then Hansig. he's like I mentioned he's fallen off quite a bit he he looked okay when he was drafted there was a couple guys younger guys that I liked that draft year and then he kind of stagnated he was injured in his D plus one that was kind of like the excuse or whatever and then his D plus two he has those nice injured his D he's been injured every year yeah exactly yeah and it's like well once he's not injured well once he's not going to be injured I mean like three years straight right so and then he goes he has those nice two weeks in training camp where you think he's turning the corner and then his HL year was okay i would not that's a stretch um so like but like he's a first rounder and you know he's a big huge guy like you can probably use him in a third line or fourth line center roll so he's going to get the opportunity so i'll keep him there at nine and then you have a guy like soon you have who people are really high on but like he's making nice jumps but they're not like people are pretty high on what he's doing but like they're not like big huge jumps and i think he's a little bit older as well he's in november yeah so

like you know like he's making those college jumps but they're not like those groundbreaking jumps so maybe he's a player um so yeah so that's that's that's who i have a tent he's not johnny goddrow but you can sort of see like going you know the bcchl he had those insane numbers but you can go it's the bcchel and penticton vs like they're the glow trotters the bcichl third on that team in school you know there's reasons to doubt it and then he kind of got off to a slow start UMass his first year and it took him a little while to get going and then yeah okay and then last year he was good but he missed i think three weeks three four weeks because he was heard midseason so like there's there's reasons to be optimistic but there's also reasons to go yeah that feels like

a 10 to me yeah yeah well and byron it's worth mentioning because you did mention this multiple times in this uh it's not your model isn't just points um like you mentioned the birth dates what are the other criteria that sort of really help specify the difference between you know player A who scores 90 points and player B who scores 90 points. Yeah. So I mean, the big one is is the age. So, you know, the difference, you know, even six months can make. And then it's kind of what the model is doing is, it's looking to see like, I call them threshold.

So it's looking to see like what you're hitting. So like, let's say in their draft year, they're at like something in the 20s. And then they jump up to the 30s and the 40s. And they're continually making these jumps to like this new echelon. Like that's really good in the model. you're going to see the player develop into something nice, whereas if they're dropping off or if they're kind of stagnating, like Etienne Morey kind of did that.

Like I was really high on him when we drafted him. But then as soon as we drafted him, he basically stayed at the same spot and never went up another level, which is when you look back, again, the history behind it, like that's not a good thing, you know. And then the other thing is there's a little bit of height mixed in there. Um, mostly for like these big groups where it's kind of like, you know, below average or average producers. And then you factor in, you know, them being short as well.

Yeah. That makes it sort of, uh, you know, a long shot where it's like the samples at the high end for like those, those really elite players. Uh, height isn't factored in as much there because you have such a small sample set that there's only a few players that sort of look like X or Y. So yeah, those are the main. factors that are in it. And then like I said, like normalizing across, you know, about 50 different leagues and kind of shooting out this, this one number to be able to follow the players, that's kind of what it's doing. Yeah. And I just want to add some additional context here because we're

going to talk about Byron's top 32 for this year's draft, but also last year's draft, we don't have it ready, but I actually have it on my computer. Three of the players on this list, on this top 10 were in your top 32 last year. And Zane Perek was at number three last year. He ends up going at number nine. But the numbers have always been in support of Zane Perek and even more so after he was just astonishing this past season.

We actually debated off Mike. We weren't sure if we could remember if Matt Biggreden was in your top 32. He was not, although I think he was like right there. I might have had him in the honorable mentions. But Andrew Basha and Henry Mews were. and Henry Mews was all the way up at 18. Henry Mews was profiled extremely well in your model last year

and the flames ended up getting him in the third round. And then Andrew Basha, I mean, he was a guy who everybody was clamoring for at the end of the first round. They ended up getting him in the second anyway. So, and yeah, I mean, it's funny because me looking at the 24 draft class, outside of Perrek, you know, those top five picks were definitely of a certain echelon. But the guys who I'm more excited about are the two who are,

who aren't there. I'm excited about Pataglia ingredient. And so it's just like, wow, they did quite well. Yeah, they did very well. Yeah. Like model wise, I always look at how a team did like in terms of like outshooting their draft slot essentially. So when you add up all the probabilities, you know, like a second rounder only makes

the NHL 30% of the time. And then like a fourth rounder, you're down to like 15%. And you add it all up, all this math in the background. And then I always look at, you know, how. far did they sort of like, you know, the expected NHLers, like how far did they outstretch what they should have with their drafts lot? And like that Flames draft was one of the best team drafts that the model seen. Um, like a guy like Misa too was, I don't think he was in the top 30. You would have been in your top 50 though. Yeah. Like he was probably another one that I was kind

of debating put him in the, like nobody was talking about him and he went in what, the fifth round anyway. So yeah, like that was one of the best drafts that the models ever seen. So, So that's encouraging. And then even going back to 2023 as an example, because we don't want to touch the 2022 draft class, but that horrible draft. But 2023, when you're looking at who the flames picked, Hansik was ranked at 20 in your list that year,

and he ends up going to the flames at 16. And Moran, who you mentioned was at 28 and your top 32, and he ends up going to them in the second round. So they've done reasonably well, especially last year. And so now we go into 2025. And, you know, as we mentioned off the top, it's a draft class that folks are maybe a little bit more down about. Although, I will admit, you know, just every year I always find myself just so enamored with a certain group of prospects. You know, you just wish you had, you know, unlimited picks to get some of these guys.

And so let's throw up, Jack, let's throw up Byron's top 32 for 2025. And we're going to spend most of the show digging into this because I just think it's always such a good thought experiment. I mean, the thing that I love about comparing all these different lists is they're always from a different point of view. And so we're going to start from the bottom. No, let's start from the top track. Let's go, let's go one to 16 and get that up first because I think there's going to be a lot of players will be. You might be gone by the time the time. Yeah.

Let's let's let's talk about this first. Except for number 10. There might be a couple of it. Maybe maybe number 10 and number 11 might still be around. So this is this is the top half of Byron's list for 2025. And like I was saying, the thing that I love about comparing these different perspectives is, you know, it's sort of like at the draft. No, two lists are the same. And it's just such a different perspective.

I love looking at like Bob's list because he talks to all the scouts. And I love looking at Scott Wheeler's list because he has such a unique perspective on the game. And then Byron's list is is kind of just this. It's, it's empirical. It's empirical, right? It's the nerd list. It is. Oh, absolute nerd list.

It is just totally unfiltered. I mean, it's not completely unfiltered, but it is, it is just like, it's pure. I love it. So, so Anton Frundel, number one. And those are three words, four words that have not been said on any other list, I don't think. I've seen a lot of Matthew Schaefer at number one. I've seen a couple with Michael Mesa at number one. He'd be number one on my list.

But Anton Fondell number one. Yeah. So again, model-wise, when you look at how he looks, he's young, he's big, he's already built like a, you know, oak stump. And he's, the other thing is he's, he had a really good pre-draft year, like where he had something in the 20s, again, talking about these thresholds. And then in his draft year, he's playing in the secondary Swedish league, the Avanstan, which is like criminally underrated.

Like, it's actually a really good league. It's comparable, like, when you look at the translations and stuff, it's comparable, like, the league of league. But, like, people are like, oh, it's a secondary league in Sweden. But, like, it's really good. you look at his equivalency he's got equivalency in the 40s which is giant especially with how young he is and like when you look at players that have that sort of jump from the 20 to 40s and they're a young player you know born in the spring summer type thing like they almost always work out

really really nice kutrov looked like that you know mark savard um Mitch marna looked the same way quentin byfield hasn't popped yet but he's coming um so you have players like that like they always make the NHL and I'd say you know four out of five times they probably at least turn into a star a lot of times superstar but there's also this like added bonus where if you're doing that in a pro Euro league as a young guy in your draft year like there's a little bit of an extra boost in the model and the only other player that looked exactly like that is Barkoff barkov I was going to say and like when he was drafted in 2013 and he was taking second overall there was sort of like a growing like oh barcoff barcob and then he was taken second overall like over drouin and

people didn't like it yeah like they were like oh my god but then like you look he he's super super young he was born a day after mckinon september 2nd september 1st and he has that exact same profile and he's big and strong and then the other fun part is like that's who like when you're comparing him to people they're like oh they might be like barcoff so it's like the math model is saying like he looks like this guy and then like you hear some scouts and and they're saying copatar and barcob that's so i mean he just bubbles up to the top like i think he has like an 89 percent chance of turning into a star right now and highest you know wow highest in the in the group yeah he just bubbles to the top and you know even when you look at players

coming specifically from that league that were kind of like of a younger variety you get like william nielander and you get david pasturac who are both drafted later than they should have been in in 2014 and they would both be top five top three picks in the 2014 draft now. Yep. And he has an equivalency, like, even like, you know, 15, 20% higher than that. So, yeah, it's not like, I promise, it's not like clickbait. I don't, I don't do stuff like that.

But he just bubbles to the top that I had to put him at number one there. So just so folks are aware, so in Sweden, they do, in every place except for basically North America, they do relegation. So in, in Swedish hockey, if you finish in the box, I think it's bottom three or four. They have a playoff where the best teams in the second league and the worst teams in the first league play and then the rest of them advance.

So if you're playing, the cool thing is for Frondell is that you played, he was just shy of a point per game in the Alstonskahn, 25 and 29 games, which is very good for a player who did not turn 18 until May. And then he was half a point per game basically in the qualification. round that they won the playoffs and got to move up.

So he not only was playing in a league that's very good against grown-ass men as a 17-year-old, he also was a key player in getting them up the ladder again. And, you know, the big thing we've seen in Swedish hockey, I mean, you know, the cool thing I like about the way they handled his development was typically, you know, I just wrote a crap ton about Michael Backland, so I have in front of mine. a lot of Swedish players you see them play sort of bounce all over the place their draft year because

you know, there are a lot of these guys, especially if you're not like a high, high end first round or like if you're sort of in the mid to late first round, okay, we'll send you down to the U20 team. Oh, we'll send you, you might send your whole year in the U20 team and spend like a week playing pro or like Jacob Ies Wozniak is a guy

that I like for the flames in the second round, disclosure. But he's a guy who's a fairly prototypical Swedish forward in his draft year where he sort of plays mostly U20, played a bit of U-18 in the playoffs when the U-20 team got knocked out, a bit of the pros, and then he was sort of off and on out of the team for different international tournaments. So it's a lot of jostling around your draft year.

No one else does that. It only really happens with the high-end European players. But Fondell basically outside of like 10 games playing in the U-20s, he was in the top league, the second league, but he was on the pro-league, against men all year, then maybe got a bit of a break to go to an international tournament, they came back and played against men, then played big, yeah, and then played late into the year. Yeah. Got, like, it's, it's one of those things where we hear the, the flames talk about how, yeah, young guys playing in a meaningful games is important. He played meaningful hockey all year.

And was a key player in a really good team moving up the ladder. Yeah. And if you're him, not only does it allow you to sort of grow your game a bit, but you have some confidence. You get confidence from the coaches. And then you come into, your draft experience probably feeling like a million bucks. So looking at your model, every time I sort of look at the scouting consensus, most got most,

most, most rankings have him six-ish. You know, some have him, I think Craig Button's list had him at three. Peters got him at two. Elite prospects has him at 13. Which is,

but most, most places have him. Like, Proman has him at six. Wheeler at six. McKean has him at six. E.P. has him at six.

13. I think that's that's that's too low. Yeah, they do. Wow. In below Justin Carbino, that's that's that's a bridge too far for me. I, the way, the way that I see it, I mean, I look at a team like Chicago, which to me is his pro as prioritized style over substance a little bit too much. Um, and I would love to see. I mean, I don't really like Chicago personally, but I would, I would think that would be a good fit, uh, for them at three. And I, hear they're trying to maybe make a move for an established guy with that. I would, I don't know why you would do that. I think for what they have. that's a player that makes a lot of sense.

We don't want to spend too much time talking about guys who, you know, the flames have no shot at. But we're going to do that a bit more. But we're going to do that a little bit anyway. You know, we have talked a little bit, and there has been obviously been plenty of talk about the flames, you know, maybe trying to move up. But of course, everybody's trying to move up.

They always try to move up, especially in drafts like this year where, you know, there seems to be a decent consensus that there's, you know, maybe a bit of a gap between eight and nine or something. something like that. One guy who's caught my eye and I saw you actually talking about him a little bit and I'm kind of curious is Jake O'Brien. That's a player who I'm kind of curious about because, you know, the flames obviously need centers. And, you know, there's sort of been some models or some rankings that have had this guy lumped in with, you know, Braden Coots and Cole Rushney. And

I think I think this guy's just a bit of a cut above, I would say, to say the least. Yeah, yeah, and I would agree with that. Like, again, when you look at him like in the model, so like Caleb De Noye, he's been rising all throughout the year. He actually looks like identical to him like in the model. They both look really good. Yeah. You know, and the thing with O'Brien is he's a little bit younger than De Noe A and they both play the same position. They're both big.

And you look at players at profile like that, like some really good hits in there. I mean, McKinnon looked just like that. He's, you know, he was a little bit of a different, different mold with the speed and stuff but like you know matt barzel uh matt boldie is one that really comes to mind is sort of like a guy that he could kind of compare to and um you know you look at guys that look like that and they often hit and then the ones that that don't make it or bust out or maybe make it to about 100 games they tend to be smaller um like abramov uh nick murkley looked that way i think kefir bellows also looked similar but they're all pretty small guys and then like oh brian's a

good size like he's six two six one um not expected to go till probably around i don't know 10th or something like that like he's he's he's almost exactly like matt boldy to me like matt boldie was drafted 12th overall you know look the exact same big guy um and then he kind of falls off a little bit in college his first year but then starts to shoot up a ton and like three years later like he's one of the drivers on minnesota so that's who i think jake o'brien can be so if he starts to fall like certainly into the teens and stuff and the flames can like jump up there and get them like I think that could be like a massive under the radar ad

to get something of that caliber for sure Matt Boldy taking one pick after Victor Soderstrom who that's they traded up together did they just trade it yeah they trade it up with Philly and Philly I think got I thought I want to say phillaby got Farabee or something with all I know is nothing if you look at the history of Calry Flames drafting nothing

nothing ever goes wrong when you move up Remember Trevor Kidd. Oh, that was 35 years ago. 35 years ago, this year. There you go. Feel old. That was before I was born. But I mentioned O'Brien for a couple of reasons.

Mostly, you know, because I also agree, I think he's a really interesting prospect. You know, 98 points in 66 games. But I do want to ask you a couple things as they relate to the model. Questions that, you know, I'm legitimately curious about. because O'Brien for being, you know, having excellent production, he is third on his team in scoring. You know, Nick Lardis for Brantford had 71 goals this year. And then there's also the equivalent thing with the OHL where, you know,

the OHL, I think over the last five years or so, it's become a higher scoring league. How does your model account for things like that? So, I mean, the first part, like being not the leading score. I mean, Nick Lardis, fantastic season, but he's also like 20 or 21. Yeah, he's older. That's a huge difference.

Whereas O'Brien is not only, you know, in the 2025 draft, he's also born in July, I think. July, yeah. He's super, super young and he's, you know, up there. So that's one point is like the age, again, is going to be, like, that's a massive difference, you know, recording like an equivalency in the 30s, you know, when you're not even 18 yet versus doing that when you're 20 as one of the oldest guys in the OHAL is, obviously. a vast difference.

And then in terms of, you know, the league become a higher scoring league. So it takes a while to sort of see that in the model. Like I'm kind of looking at it every year to see if the equivalencies are changing. The way I do it is sort of by era. So it's kind of like 10 year gaps. So I have the past history. And, you know, I can say like in the 90s, this is what the equivalency was. And then in 2000s in the 2010.

So now I'm kind of like in it. But like they haven't made it yet. So it's sort of like a tricky thing where I have to figure out, like, you know, is that changing kind of on the fly? So that one's a bit of a, that's one that I have to look into every, every couple of years and, and yeah, figure that out. But like it's, it's, it's, it's, it's tougher to see that translating through to the data. I was always kind of curious how you do that with the USHL because I think like one of the big

stories of the last quarter century and junior hockey and hockey development in general was like when, when, you know, Blake Coleman and Johnny Goddrow were sort of in the US HL at the same time. It wasn't really considered a major league. It was basically a, oh, it's a place you go to keep your NCAA eligibility open, and that's it.

And it wasn't really considered high level hockey. And then because of guys like Goodrow going there and really lighting up and how, you know, the, the, the, the USHL is able to leverage that. It's,

it's not just the national level team anymore, just ragdalling teams. Like Chicago Steel has become a powerhouse. Muskegon has been the last few years. It's been really, really good. There's a handful of teams now that have been really, really effective at producing talent.

And, you know as a result i imagine the coefficients that you have to use to sort of adjust the production the shl it's like night and day from let's oh yeah that one's grown like tremendously over the last 10 15 years you know like it was probably on par with like you know the junior two leagues in the in the in the in Canada and now it's more on par like even like a little bit better than like the queue so yeah that one's that one's really grown over the years for sure we should mention now that more folks are tuning in and now that we've gotten past the flashing

and crazy lights part of the show, we should mention that this show is brought to you by Platinum Mitsubishi, the good folks up at 2720 Barlow Trail Northeast. Through the end of June 2025, if you miss the chance to get a $5,000 rebate on a plug-in hybrid Outlander, or any plug-in hybrid for that is, you can't get that rebate anywhere else,

but you can get it at Mitsubishi, and you can get it up at Platinum Mitsubishi, five grand off, any new seven-seat outlander PHEV. It's the best-selling PHEV of any class in Canada. And boy, it's just, it's very smooth. And just as smooth is this transition

into continuing in our top 16 here because there are a couple guys who are in this top 16 who Flames fans have been clamoring for for a long time. That's a good word. You like that word clamoring. Clamoring, that's a good word. I'm clamoring to get into an outlander PHV. There's two guys here in Ben Kindle and Cole Rushney

who, you know, are WHL boys, although in Rushney's case, not anymore. But two WHL boys who put up huge numbers this past season and are higher here than they are, you know, in some spots. Although personally, I mean, I think these guys deserve their flowers. I think they really deserve credit for being just, you know, exceptional. I mean, folks who saw a lot of the Western League this year would see these guys at 10, 11 go. Okay. Yeah, sure. Yeah, why not?

especially, you know, with, I would, it's funny. In some readings, I kind of prefer the group after 15 in this draft to the group from 10 to 15 in some rankings. Like I like these prospects a little more. Of course, they are 510. You know, they might not be centers at the NHL level. Who knows? But Ben Kindle, Cole Rushney. We don't know where Kindle's going to play next year.

He'll probably be back with Hitman. We'll see Reschney is going to college. But if they are available for the flames at 18, I mean, you got to think if one of them's there. No brainer, right? I mean, for me, yes. I mean, they look identical to guys like Jake O'Brien and Caleb De Noier. The only difference is they're a little bit, well, a little bit older.

They're born in April, both of them. And they're shorter. That's that thing where you get a little bit of, you get more busts with those short guys. But still, this profile that looks like this, like, you know, you get a lot of hits that way too. like Matt Barzell, who's not very big. I think he's 5, 11, 6 feet, whatever. He looked the same way.

He was drafted like 15th overall, took a couple years, and then he turned into a pretty good player. So, I mean, especially based on what's going to be there at 18th and what's going to be already off the board, like those are going to be two of the ones, the highest value model guys that are still sitting there, while they start to, you know, lean off and take these kind of low probability bets, but they're bigger and they have a higher.

reputation to them. So certainly if both those guys are there, if one of them is there at the 18th spot, I hope that the flames are strongly considering it. Okay. You were familiar with the flames organization. Yes. You were aware that they have obviously invested a lot in their data apparatus. And I'll put it even further. They took a lot of guys last year that performed well in your model. Yep. Based on that, do you think there be, you know, knowing, based on how last year's draft went, you think if one of these guys, like one of the smaller high performers is on the board, that they just go, okay, sure, let's do it.

And just, because it feels like to me, like this seems like the kind of draft where those be the kind of value picks that are available, especially with multiple picks in the first round. Like you have, like, you know, they dash if arguably just fell to them. Yeah.

because of probably because the injury the injury he was playing through and you know they had some guys that oh they're a little bit like luke misa how do you get luke misa at 150 get look at 150 because he's 510 yeah and you go okay how many points you get great good enough like if he's two inches taller he probably goes certainly in the second round somewhere so he drops you know a solid 90 spots we're talking about a league where the flames got a goalie at 214th overall who led the western hockey league and everything And his draftier, but because he was six feet tall and not six four, six two or six one, they got him fourth and last. Yeah. So what I'm saying is there's some inefficiencies in the league that at least based on

how the flames have drafted in the last year or two, they appear to be aware of these inefficiencies. Yeah. I certainly like they're, you know, they've, they've had some spots where they take these these smaller guys that are sort of being overlooked. And interestingly, like in terms of the league and the inefficiency. So it's been forever that the short guys have been discounted and not picked as high as they should be even when they look like really, really elite, you know. And that was starting to change around 2019.

These guys were, you know, the 5-10 guys. There's more of them being drafted in the first two rounds than ever before for a good four or five-year run. And then, you know, a couple big teams win Stanley Cup. And then teams are like, no, we got to go big. And now they've completely gone away from that again. So I bet that at least one of those guys is going to be there at 18th when they go to pick because they're going to start picking the big guys, the McQueen's and the Martins and all these. We're going to talk about them. You know, like all these guys that are not 510 and, you know, thinking, oh, it's apples to apples, but this guy's got the size.

So then, again, it's always like, you know, the fallback. Like, oh, we can use them in like a, you know, a checking rule or a fourth line roll at worse. But like if this small guy doesn't work out, then. the old high floor idea but like if it if that small guy does work out you might have something pretty nice so okay well we're talking about small guys uh how small is too small like is there a point where like in your model like say you have a bunch of guys where like 511 and 510 with fantastic numbers pretty high up uh but you know i'm thinking i'm gonna pick on a guy and you don't mean to be mean but i'm just going to say Cameron smit because i love cameron smit as a player but he's

five nine and that's the kind of like is there a point is there point in your model that sort of like the size that starts to become yeah like basically like when it when it's like below 510 it's like okay now that's like i still like Cameron smit a lot like i i i have him ranked um at 20th but like the way he looks is he would normally be a guy that i would have ranked like you know in that 10 11 spot like if he because he's so small i had no way he's near i dropped him back a little bit but then like after him like you start to look at that ledge and it's like, oh, now it's just kind of like a whole bunch of guys that all look similar in terms of like model value. So yeah, like he's so small that like I have him

ranked a little bit further back. So basically, yeah, kind of like rule of thumb is like if it's like five, nine and below it's and it's like not like out of this world numbers like Marco Rossi numbers. I still have that guy in the top five. Then I start to drop him back, especially like D2. Like, you know, I used to be like, oh yeah, like, you know, model says this guy. guy's going to be great, but he's like five, nine. Like, you know, you have some reservations. Like, Lane Hudson was like that next elite level that I think I kept them pretty high still, like in 13th or 14th or something like that.

But like, yeah, like once you get below 510, it's like, okay. Well, and it's going to be such a tougher road for the guy because he's going to have to jump through consecutive burning hoops just to like get there. And he's going to have to make these massive jumps and like, you know, go through the HL for a couple of years, even if he's destroying it. And like he's like the way he's going to get treated is just not going to be. Yeah. You know, lead lead to a lot of success.

So yeah. I was always thinking like, oh, man, let's be blunt here. Every NHL team had multiple chances to take Johnny Goodrow in 2011. And every NHL team had access to his numbers, both his counting stats at the USHL and the fact that he was, I think his draft year at one, he was, I think he was buck 40, like five, five, five, six, depending on when in the year they draft. and they drafted him. Apparently there was some shenanigans with this way they put some

put some weights in his shorts. Yeah, he put he put pucks in his shorts. Yeah, like he was he was small by small standards and you go like oh man like all we hear about all these teams you know investing in data and obviously that the way they do things now is so much more sophisticated and it was and it's sort of integrated into the scouting now whereas you know before it was a little bit less

advanced but you still see this guy with insane numbers you go how the hell to three you know every team had two or three or four chances to draft him and the answer is I mean, their numbers guys are probably going, there's not a lot of guys his size that make. Yeah. Yeah, you're going to take.

I can kind of understand. I don't want to disparage the scouting community, because you can kind of understand why they do it. But then if you're a team that takes them in the fourth or if you're the flames and take a tiny goalie, like goalie standards in the seventh, damn, you look smart. But what were the flames missing out on by not taking Dustin Wolf and round seven? Yeah, like what's left in that? Like, it's like, okay, all right.

That's the thing like that like you know it's so the flames last year like when they were drafting like I was you know obviously in flames guy so I'm watching every pick and I was like the first four or five picks I was like holy crap like this is awesome like they are just hitting value after value and then they started to get like a couple like low probability like no chanceers they kind of draft those in the middle and it was like if you just keep on going with that like especially when you get to those like late rounds like with what's left at that point like and there's you know some guys with some guys with some. you know, a medium value model-wise that's sitting there versus like this giant who has like no chance and you look at like all the comparables that look like that drafted from rounds, you know, five to seven and like one out of a hundred make it like go go with the math. Might as well. Give yourself the probabilities. I was in the media room at whatever the frigging hotel was in Vegas. I was doing the draft ad.

And I was in the media room sort of going through the list and, you know, going through and I have my notes open and I have disclosure, Byron's Twitter open and a few other outlets and you're going down and guys at a certain point friends a certain point we get even people who are hardcore draft honks get to the point they go who the hell is that guy. Who? And like it's usually like the third or the fourth round like depends on the how the house guy of the draft is. But like this is the type of draft where you go, huh, Henry Mews, this first round guy on a couple lists.

People like this guy. Mesa, someone, someone liked him enough to have them in their first round mix. I forget what outlet was, but like, if you're getting like 100 picks in and you go, I have still heard of these guys. What are they doing? You kind of know it's a good draft. Well, I'm like getting like parake to the ninth two. Like just, yeah, like, it's crazy value to get that even at that point.

So yeah, they just, that was great. Oh, I want to talk about goalies, because we did bring up goalies. Which goalie they take them in the first round? It's been too long. I have a question from. Oh, God. No, the flames? I have a question.

I have a question from an E. Wills. And I also want to tie this into Button because we have mentioned Craig Button a couple of lives. He has, I think it's Jack Ivankovic. Ivan Kovic, okay, for I think the Brampton Steelheads. 511 goalie. I think he hasn't ranked at like 12 or something or like 14. I mean, yeah, I mean, I wouldn't necessarily do it. And it's not like in Wolf's case rate a 930.

I think he had like a 903 this year. He hasn't. Yeah. But like, I don't necessarily want to talk about him because a lot of people are talking about Joshua Ravensberg. And who's more of like a prototypical goalie. And either way, Byron, just need your quick thoughts. Goleys first round. This year?

No, any year. Like, do you typically support that? Because I don't know. Not typically. If we had Kent Wilson on, he's like, no, no, no, no, no. But what are you, what are your thoughts? I'd say almost never. Like the only time that, like, Ascarov and Walshded, because they're already playing pro

Euro in their draft year. No, Spencer Knight? I mean, NCAA guy, like, I probably wouldn't do that in the first round. Unless it's a super weak draft and you can kind of get them in the 20s, I would almost never, but except for those. Like the Vasilesky types. Yeah, those European guys where like, you know, those, because coming from Europe, especially coming from pro Europe that early, you tend to have good success in the NHL. Do you rank them? Like, relative, like, if there was a goalie that was that good in your model, would you have had them in?

your top 32. Yeah, I had Walsdead really high. I had him in the top five. I think I maybe even had in third. Wow. That one's burning me right now. He's, he's falling off a little bit.

But yeah, like he looked, he looked really good, especially compared to the other goalie options that were available. Like so it's very rare, I would say. Okay. Almost never. Okay.

So let's, let's keep this thing moving along a little bit. Uh, let's, let's put up the top or the bottom 16, the bottom 16 of the first round. We call these the potential flames picks, presuming that no one from the top 16 slides. Which we think there might be some.

One or two. So this is pick 17 through 32. I do want to mention one of the guys from the top 16, though, just briefly. And you don't have to bring up the graphic jack. But we're going to bring up these guys sort of, you know, in conjunction with each other. Because there's been a lot that's been talked about Sam Bennett this summer, or I guess this spring. Playoff Sam Bennett. And of course, whenever somebody has a big playoff that leads to the,

leads to the imitators, leads to the people who try to make the same thing out of it. And earlier you were talking about if you were to redraft 2014, you'd have William Nealander and the top five and all that stuff. And I think there are a lot of folks out there in hockey. I wouldn't be one of them, but a lot of folks who would have Sam Bennett really high, like maybe the top three right now. But, you know, I might have closer to 10. Folks are looking at Roger McQueen and at Brady Martin especially and saying that

these guys might be the next Sam Bennett's. But does that necessarily mean to you that they are, you know, top 10 picks like guys, some, some analysts, some prospect guys have them? Does that, are they, you know, what do you think of that comparison? So, yeah, like, from what I've read and watching Brady Martin a little bit, like he does kind of play like Sam Bennett, where he just kind of like bowls his way right through the middle and doesn't give a crap and just goes in there. and like how Sam Bennett is right now. But like, you know, there's talk that he might go forth overall to Utah, which would be, that's very much like the Seneca thing from last year where he went third overall and he was like, oh my God, I can't believe him going this high.

And then like we were all like, oh my God, I can't believe he's going this high. Like that's the same kind of thing where, you know, once you get to like the teens, like that's great value to get that type of player. But what's going to be left on the board where you start to reach too early, I don't love that idea. Even when you look at a guy like Sam Bennett, who didn't profile, he actually,

because he was so young that he profiled quite a bit different than Martin. Like Martin has similar equivalency, but Sam Bennett is like six months younger, which again is a massive difference. And then Sam Bennett had that shoulder injury, which basically took him out for his whole D plus one year, where he couldn't do a single pull-up. Look to jump,

but like, you look at Sam Bennett now, and it's like, oh man, this guy might win the cons might. He's having it. But like it took eight, nine years. He had to switch teams to get to this. Is this what you want?

Like this is the same kind of thing with Slavkovsky. Like, yeah, like maybe when he's in his prime, he's going to be a beast and he's going to be a 60, 70 point power forward. But he's probably going to have like some learning curve before that. And he's probably going to move teams before he even turns into that.

So to draft that guy like at fourth overall and think this is a player I'm getting. Well, you know, you might be reaching a little bit. And then if he kind of. kind of hits that peak, it might take at least five years before he gets. He might be on a different team by the time.

That kind of kicks in. And there's a lot of revisionism going on with Sam Bennett because I think folks are forgetting that when Sam Bennett was here at the end, granted he wasn't getting probably as much ice time as he should have, but he was awful. Like he had 12 points in 52 games the year before he was traded. I mean, he wasn't, again, I grant you, he wasn't playing top six minutes,

but there were guys playing in the bottom six when, he was here with the flames who were outproducing him by a lot. And it was just, it was like he's, he's had a remarkable run in Florida. But at the same time, you're, if you're drafting at fourth,

you want a guy whose career high end points isn't 51. And I grant you, Sam Bennett, once he gets to the playoffs, he's a monster. But I also think that if Sam Bennett goes to, uh, the Calgary Flames,

let's say, and he's not going to. Everybody seems to think he's going to sign in Florida again. But let's say if Sam Bennett hits free agency, he signs with the Calgary Flames. I think the flames missed the playoffs. and then what good is it right like what so so it's it's tough to justify the drafting a guy who's you know maybe going to be that playoff performer at number four if he's not on the same

echelon as the guys who actually get you to the playoffs i'm just also kind of curious just the idea like okay i'm just thinking out loud just for like let's use uh let's use brady martin's an example where brady martin is playing against kids and he can barrel through kids to score up the middle like you know like uh or like jervish all the time and sure you can you can you can that against kids, but can you do that in the HL? Can you do that in? I'm just curious, like, just the idea of that, you know, are all points made equal in your model is in terms of like, I'm trying to, I'm trying to think of how you even account for that in the data, just because like, okay, like, again, big guys that can just sort of muscle the way through and score versus

Roger McQueen. Yeah, like Roger McQueen versus like, say like Kendall, Kindle does not get his points the same way that, that McQueen does or that Martin does. And yet, a lot of these guys have very similar production. They might have very similar equivalencies, but how they get to that point is like night and day. Yeah, exactly. I'm like, it's going back to like how teams draft and it's kind of like,

yeah, like Kindle might have this gigantic ceiling if he gets there, but like teams tend to try, like they always play it safe, I call it and they drop. Well, this guy, you know, it could be like a great second liner,

maybe a first liner if he absolutely hits his max peak, but we can always play him as like a fourth liner because of the way he hustles and the way he plays. But it's like, it's, I always talk about like, they, they make these safe picks, but like they kind of like light themselves on fire with these types of picks because like it doesn't end up being safe because you end up skipping on, you know, the Kuchrov and the Johnny Godro to get this real safe guy that, you know, he can do everything. Hunter Smith.

That wasn't great. Great counting stats in his draft year. Big guy. He didn't have great counting stats. Not in his draft year. But he was, but the year he, the year they got picked up. He was, he was older and bigger than everybody. I will, I will, I will interject here.

Hunter Smith and his draft year had one point in the OHL. He had 40 in 60 games. The year he was drafted. Yeah, he was drafted. Not the old age. Yeah. Not the same thing. Yeah.

But like, yeah. So like you, you know, like you're, you're drafting for this like prototypical player. Like you said, like a playoff performer. But like, even if they hit that, like, when is that going to be? Like, you know, it's not going to be immediately. So like if you're like, oh, we're going to draft this guy and then we're going to make the playoffs. And this guy's going to be like our big tank that's going to be chugging us along to, you know, the third or fourth round. Like, no, that's going to be, you're going to be San Bennett.

You're going to be a decade out on that if it happens. The flames took Michael Furland in what, the fifth round. They did. And he was a great playoff performer. But he was also the kind of guy that you're like, okay, based on his play style, based on how he gets his points, maybe later on is the best time to take him. Because then you have the opportunity to take guys. with might have a little bit different. And at the time,

at the time they drafted Ferland, they were like the furthest team in the world from even making the playoffs. They were like, they were the most mediocre team. They couldn't make the playoffs. They were finishing four points out every year. I just like,

working in the end. I just like bringing up Michael Furland from time to time and saying positive things about him. He was awesome. Because God damn, what a good player. That 2015 playoffs, he was awesome.

And then he, yeah, he goes to the Canucks and he played 15 games, but he got like 15 million out of them. Good. Good for him. I'm happy for him. We're going to get some questions and there's some good ones that have been put in the chat.

I really appreciate folks sort of sending them and keep sending them because we're going to just, Jack, let's put up that bottom 16, just one last time. Just have one more look at it because there's a few guys here who, you know, I think are really intriguing. A few guys who are, you know, totally, I think, unique to your list as well. the Slovak Leche, I think, and Zubek, the Austrian,

but, but there's also guys here who are just, you know, exactly where you might see him on Bob's list, like Acheson at 22, that seems like bang on. Ivan Ryabkin, though.

That is, that is a name who people have just been like all over the place on. There were folks two years ago who were saying this guy might be number two in the draft. And now it's kind of like the Atu-Rat-U-Rat-U thing. In October, he was top five on a lot of lists.

And there are folks now, there are, you know, interviews coming out where they're saying, this guy is not even on our list. He's, he's, he's, he's, he's, he's, he's, he's, there are folks who are saying they wouldn't take him in the seventh round. I mean, it's, they, they, they, they, they just don't want him. And, and, and, and sometimes that's the way that it goes. But like, how do you parse these types of prospects who are just, you know, they, they, they, they, they belong on this list, but at the same time, they kind of feel separate from this list in a way.

Yeah. Well, like, so. when he in his pre-draft year like he looked phenomenal like I think he had like an equivalency in like the 30s he's born in april I was like oh my god this guy's gonna be like top five pick for sure and then he kind of comes in this year he's bouncing around every league in Russia not really doing much and then he comes over the ush-h-l like two-thirds of the way through and kind of does okay but not great and like when a guy falls off like that just kind of like out of nowhere and he was playing in the same league like he was in the mhl last year and he was in it this year like Like you figure he would just put up an equivalency in the 40s and it'd be like, oh yeah, this guy's like a home run pick. But bouncing around like that, falling off like that,

like there's so many like, you know, this isn't in the model, but there's so many like character stuff starting to bleed through. And you look at guys that like start off that high in their pre-draft year and then they fall off like that. Like it's basically never good news, you know,

like. And it happens more often than you might. Yeah. And these guys are often taken like in the first round and stuff. Like, you know, Angelo Esposito. I remember him from like,

decades ago, you know, started off really high in his, in his pre-draft year and then fell off. Sean Day. Sean Day was like that too. Joey Hishen, I think, look that way. Edward Saleh. Shala. Shala. He looked the same way.

I called him Salé. I did the PA for the Holinka. Red Deer and I called him Sala the whole tournament. And it's what? Shala. Shala. That's the word Shala. That's crazy spelling on that one.

But like he looked the same way. Like I was really high on him. And then he kind of went to the Czech League and, his draft year and really fell off. And now you look at him and it's like, I mean, he might make it, but like he's still a ways off if he's going to do anything with Seattle.

So that's kind of what you got with Rebkin. So, you know, with the flames pick, which is going to be probably 32nd or 31st. Let's say 32. Let's go with 32. Like,

if he's still sitting there, like, again, what's left at this point? Like, I mean, once you get that late in the first round, like it's like under 50% of those guys,

make it to the NHL and play 200 games. And most of them are kind of just like fill role guys anyways. So might as well take a swing on something like that then, but certainly not super early. Like I wouldn't even probably do it with the 18th. No, I don't think so. Even if all those guys in the top 16 are gone, like I still don't think I do it there.

But at 32, I take a swing. Maybe take a swing. So every time I talk to people in hockey and I ask them like, you know, you always hear about teams. Like every team talks to 75,000 kids at the, craft combine because you know you want it's helpful you know before you hire someone for like a multi-million dollar job it's helpful to meet them right yeah uh and you especially like first round picks it's literally a multi-million dollar investment to these kids so you kind of want to make

sure you you see the whites their eyes it's kind of an old school thing but i kind of get it and i always i've always been skeptical because like we have tape we have modeling we have data we have all kinds of things and i asked someone in hockey you called like actually a couple years ago what's really the value there and the answer the answer i was given was for most guys you're not really learning anything new. You're sort of getting confirmation of stuff, you know, but a lot of guys, I think for for guys that like maybe somebody was injured all year, maybe their numbers took a dip. Maybe, you know, you heard a crazy story about them. A lot of times it's basically, you're just going there to sort of like, you're either trying to get something confirmed or something

denied about about guys you're sort of on the fence about. And there's a lot of guys I heard, you know, when they have guys with bad interviews, they go, oh, that's it. Okay, you're going down the list. So I think, I think my guess is, Ryabkin did not interview well. It could just be a language thing. It's so tough for Russians, I think, because of the language thing, although a lot of Russians know English pretty well. But like compared to like Sweden and Finland, like it's much lower that they, you know,

like a lot of like Finnish and Swedish, they know both languages, but Russians, it's not the same thing. It's a bit of a barrier there. Senator Berci told me that's Swiss got, Swiss kids, I think in school, primary school, you learn like four languages, maybe five depending on what's crazy. they live in and you sort of like you learn you know your german or swiss german and then you learned like the other three or four and so like he came into the western league speaking flu english already and got people were blown away that's like this could be is there is there any kind of

geographic bias in your model or any kind of adjustment like sort of oh guys from league x or league y country x country y tend to have more success or is it not uh i should look at that i mean yeah like i've always thought that with like the russian guys like get these guys a translator like yakopov like oh i mean he was he was kind of dumb as rocks anyways but like from what you hear but like i think if he had a translator like telling him like this is what like i think he could have been something more but they're just like i just get in there and whatever like i can just imagine playing doing like a really you know i imagine job like that i imagine dan nilstein probably brings in every single person he knows it speaks english

and russian and sort of has to hang out the combine yeah but there's just some maybe some things just don't translate well. So I want to dig in a couple of these questions because we actually unintentionally I just asked a question that I was going to ask. There was Brad Windsor who asked about Reapkin specifically earlier in the earlier in the chat. And thank you all for sticking with us in the chat. I know it's been a bit of a strange show and we just got past an hour. We're going to go a little bit longer just because to make up for the start. But a couple of interesting questions and I'm going to ask this one first. Jack, you can scroll all the way up. It's the very first message that was sent in the chat today.

It was G. Fount Y, Y, Y, C, who says, Byron, thanks for doing this. I've heard this a week draft. If Perrette and Grideon were in this draft, in this draft year, and I think it's easier probably to answer for Peret, but where do you project they would have fallen as, you know, compared to this draft class? Because last year, obviously, going up against Celebrini Demadov. You had him at three, though.

Yeah. And, you know, looking at this year, would it be sort of similar? Yeah, like, on my top 30s. 32 you mean yeah yeah um yeah probably yeah probably right after me yeah after me so it'd be at four yeah yeah yeah yeah that makes sense yeah like yeah misa and per rec i mean so similar play on the same team yeah yeah preck obviously being defenseman sort of maybe lowers thresholds a little bit but it'd probably be right in that range like even schaefer like perik profiles better than shafer technically but shaffer's like the unanimous number one and

Schaefer is like super, super young and has like the highest equivalency ever for any defenseman born basically May to September 15th in their draft year. So, you know, would he usurp Schaefer there based on, I mean, he has a higher probability, but yeah, I'd probably have him at fourth, I would guess. All right. Yeah, that's a good question. And then this one is is a bit of an interesting topic to me. Johnny Bravo in the chat, Johnny Bravo.

Thank you for tuning in. talking, this isn't really a question, but it is a topic that I like to talk about. I always like talking about overagers in every year's draft because I just find them, it's interesting to me to find the guys who are already a little bit further along, maybe a little bit closer. And I'm curious,

just because Johnny brings up Bryce Pickford, who plays for Medicine Hat, teammate with Andrew Basha, scored like in eight straight playoff games this year. But I just want to hear your general thoughts on teams picking overage guys. because usually, and I, shameless plug, I just wrote a thing on this at Flames Nation, talked about four overagers who I like, and Pickford was one of them. The other three were, it just so happened that all four of them played with Flames prospects

this past season. So Pickford played with Basha, Francesco Delicchi played with Sunniev at UMass, Charlie Serrato played with Sergiev at Penn State, and then there was Christian Epperson who played with Saginaw with Perak. But, you know, usually when we see these overagers, like last, year the first one was a goalie and it was Ilya Nabokov who went to Colorado in round two.

Usually, yeah, he looked amazing. Usually it's not earlier than round two. I think the last overager I can remember who went in the first round was Tanner Pearson back to L.A. Chinikov. Oh, you go Chinikov. Very good. Yeah, yeah. Of course. I should have forgotten. I couldn't

have forgotten that one. But true. But it doesn't happen very often. That's the point. Like maybe once or twice a decade, really. But what are your general thoughts on teams picking overagers. Like is, is there really a one note you can describe it? Or is it just sort of the same case by case thing?

Yeah, like I like overagers, especially like the really young ones. You know, like when you look at like a model like this and how they're progressing because I mean, I wouldn't take them probably, I mean, it depends on the draft obviously,

but like probably once you get past like pick 25, then it's like, and if there's, you know, like you're kind of looking at like, you know a bunch of guys with like an equivalency in the 20s there's you know dozens or dozens and dozens of these guys drafted every year like if you're looking at that or like you know a young player that maybe had an equivalency in the 20s like in high school or something in his draft year and he wasn't drafted and then he spiked to like an equivalency in the 40s in

you know college or maybe switched over the CHL or something that's when I would kind of like go for that type of player like it's interesting like i have a story about actually talking to the flames about this and showing them data about overagers talking with chris snow and i was showing them like basically you have like the same success rates for these overragers if they look a certain way and i was i was showing him like guys like andrew mongiopani was one of the players that i brought up and i said like look at the jump that he made from his draft year where he like just got on with the very colts and then he made this big jump this year like if you had a prospect in your system that went from like an equivalency and like you have like 16 or something in their draft year and then

they spiked up to something close to 40 and signing them yeah they're an april guy like you'd be so excited about this player and what he could become but like these overages because they're not on your squad they're sort of like you know treated like a toss away like it's oh like you're not even really looking at them like and talking to teams and how they draft their list and Like they have a couple overagers on there. Some guys that they're interested in. But like really their focus is on the Firtz eligible guys unless there's somebody like really, you know, like a Parisé type thing or Danny Heatley type thing. But like, yeah.

So I love overagers. I think there's tons of value there. And especially if you're getting, you know, those young ones that are making those jumps. Sort of later like earlier birthdays kind of. Yeah, yeah. Exactly. And they're making like those jumps I talk about. Like they're moving from like a 20 to a 30 to a 40.

It's like that's the type of player that comes out of nowhere and like makes the NHL from like the fifth round. So if that type of player is available, then I'm all about it. There's not that many of them this year. Yeah. It's like one of the best. He's going to be like a third rounder. Yeah. So there's, it's pretty weak for this year.

Yeah, like Pickford's in April 06 birthday. So he's okay. He just turned 19. So it's not like he's, he's only six foot 190. So it's not like he's, you know, barreling around guy, you know, ragdalling small children around to get his number. and the way he scores his points is pretty skill-based. He's from Eminton, so that probably hurts in a bit, but

we'll see. Yeah, I mean, it's, it's not uncommon. The Flames picked three over-agers last year, if memory serves. They, they, I think they picked Hoskin and Jameson. It was just the two?

Yeah, okay, they picked two last year. And Hoskin was the CJA. He was a double overage. Yeah, he was 20. Those were not the type of OJMISN. That's the overrages that I like to take. Those overraiserers were like, oh. Yeah.

You don't like the overachers where they have an area scout who's like, I saw this kid. He's fantastic. Yeah. Yeah. But at that point, they already cleaned out your list. So I mean, yeah, yeah. I mean, they did well. I don't mind the second page of your model.

I don't mind the. I don't mind the Jameson. They did really nice. I think Jamison will get a contract. But in any event, just one more. I think before we wrap this thing up, Boba Fett in our in our chat. This is, this is a really good question.

I was just wondering, how many star players come out of most drafts? Yeah, great question. I would say on average, like six to eight, kind of had a heavy run from 2013, 2014 to like 2016, where you're kind of, you're getting 10 sometimes, like the 2015 draft is the best one ever. I think there was 15 or 16 stars from my model that came from there.

But typically it's about six to eight. So it's about three to four percent of everybody drafted will turn into these sort of official stars. What I'm looking at. And a star is essentially somebody reaches 200 plus games and is basically like a outlier point producer over the whole career, not just having like a couple nice seasons. So for a forward, it's point seven plus points per game. And for a defenseman, it's 0.45 plus. So yeah, you get about six to eight. And within that, like there's a superstar range and you typically get probably.

you get probably one to two superstars for draft. So if you can, if you can get, you know, a star to like as a team from a draft, like Colorado drafted Barry Ryan O'Reilly and Matt Dushain all in one draft, which is like to get three stars from one draft is basically one in a million. So yeah. Well, and to think, I mean, back in 2016, the Calgary Flames picked Matthew Cuch, Adam Fox and A2, too, Lola. All in the same draft year.

Yeah. All superstars. All three of them. Pretty sure. Cholola in that draft year gave us the greatest quote in the history of quotes. All things are possible in this life. All things are possible in this life. And he scored a hat trick and development camp.

A221a did. Boy, this has been a lot of fun. This has been a lot of fun. I think this show has been so much fun. And we're going to have some more great episodes coming up leading into the draft. At least one more. At least one more. I think we might do one or two before the draft.

I'm not exactly sure how we're going to do it. And then we're going to do a live draft show, which is going to be great. I haven't decided if we're going to do day two. I think that might be such a slog. It's a slog. I'm there on Twitter. It's gotten faster a little bit in recent years, but it's a slog. When you get to that like fourth round and you're just, wow, I'm just like drinking from the fire hose, like trying to keep up with it and trying to get stuff out.

And then by the end of it, it's like, I'm going to have a nap. You're doing all the teams. Yeah. Like you're going, look at how smart my model is. And we're all going, who? Yeah. So it's a different draft experience. for both of us.

Yeah, yeah. It's fun, though. I love the draft. Well, that's what you do. Yeah. We love the draft. Pike's indifferent on the draft. Pike loves it.

I just, I was just like learning new names. Pike loves everything. And then, and then reading the double IHF transfer agreement to them. Which I got to, someone sent me the double IHF transfer agreement. I'm so excited to read it. Pike is hoping that the flames just draft like the guys who have the same surnames as the guys already in the system.

He's hoping to draft Henry Bustevich. We keep, that's you. We keep, every time we talk to Kent, we keep joking that, you know, one of these years, the flames will do an oopsaw goalies edition. Yeah. They simply just draft goalies with every pick. I think the Islanders drafted four of them last year. Yeah, they got some good ones.

They got some, they got some nice zero. The plane's peak is two. I think they take at most one this year. All right. Just before we sign off, score predictions for tomorrow's game, Byron. It'll start. Were we talking about the Calder Cup? No.

You know which one. You know which one. 401, Florida. Florida, okay. Pike? I'm going to say 3-2 Abbotsford and 3-1 Florida. I'm going to be the Debbie Downer here. I'm going to say it's going to be 5-4, Edmonton in overtime.

But I hope I'm wrong. Last time I was the Debbie Downer, too, and Florida ended up rattling off three wins out of four games. So here's open. Thank you all for tuning in it. Thank you again, Byron. It's been a pleasure to having you. Yeah, thanks for having me.

And Pike, as always, you've been exceptionally well-dressed. That's right. That's, that's how we're going to wrap this up. Thanks to Platte-Mitsibisci, once again, up at 2720 Barlow Trail Northeast. Head on up there, 10-year power train warranty standard on all their new vehicles, including the 2025 Cross with its super all-wheel control and five passenger seating. It is just a fantastic vehicle. And maybe the flames can fill it up with some excellent prospects at this year's draft.

Stick around. More episodes of this show to come, but for now, you've been watching The Backburner.