The Athletic Hockey Show - Canada, USA Olympic rosters: who’s on the bubble?

Episode Date: October 10, 2025

The 2026 Olympics are still months away, but the work to build gold medal caliber teams has already begun, with the final roster deadline set for New Year’s Eve. And so, on today’s episode, the guys have a mock preliminary roster meeting, gaming out the locks, the frontrunners, bubble players, dark horses, and long shots for both Canada and the United States.Got a question? Ask it here: t.co/fYieuQEg14Hosts: Max Bultman and Corey PronmanWith: Scott Wheeler and FloHockey’s Chris PetersExecutive Producer: Chris FlanneryProducer: Chris FlanneryWatch full episodes on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@theathletichockeyshowJoin our Discord Server: https://discord.gg/VTm9VjkFSubscribe to The Athletic: https://theathletic.com/hockeyshow Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This is the Athletic Hockey Show Prospect Series. Hey, everybody, Max Boltman here alongside the athletic Scott Wheeler and Corey Pranman and Flohawkies, Chris Peters, for another episode of the Athletic Hockey Show Prospect Series. And guys, there will be some young player prospects discussed today. But I would say this really falls more in the category of more like the scouting series, because what we're talking about today is the Olympic rosters for USA and Canada. we're going to do kind of a mock preliminary roster meeting. These rosters are going to be due at the very end of the calendar year, December 31st, and all that these GMs have to do is whittled down pools of the very best players on Earth into neat, tidy teams of 23 should be very simple for them.

Now, we do have a nice starting place because we saw the Four Nations rosters. But Corey and Scott did us the huge favor of going through an advance and tearing out some of the players that we're going to be discussing. So as we start with Team Canada here, I want to go. ahead and have you read the locks for Team Canada. The locks for Team Canada up front, I think, are pretty straightforward. It breaks down into just six names. I think we saw the middle of the roster get a little bit muddied with different performances

at the four nations. But the core six is Connor McDavid, Nathan McKinnon, Braden, Brayden Point, Sam Reinhardt, Mitch Marner, and Sidney Crosby. I think up front, it would be pretty surprising for any of those players not to be a part of this group. And then on defense, it's a much smaller group. Defense is where everything seems to be wide open. I think in net, Jordan Binnington is considered a lock.

But on D, it might just be two, if not one names. And I'd be interested to hear feedback on the second name. We all know that Kail Makar is on the team. Kail McCar is going to be the number one defenseman for the team. He's going to run the top power play for the team. He's probably even going to penalty kill for this team. And then the second name that I sort of felt was a lock when I was flipping through them was Josh Morris, who's been kind of at the fringes of Norris,

it's over the last few seasons here and has really established himself as one of the better defensemen in the Western Conference and the number one defensemen on one of the top teams in the league in Winnipeg. So I don't think any of those are up for debate except maybe Morrissey, who there's probably an argument to be made that guys like Shea Theodore and Devin Taves are equals to Josh Morrissey. But they played Morrissey a lot at the Four Nations. And I think he's, I think he's a pretty safe bet. I assume nobody has any quibbles with that group. I mean, Does anyone feel like Morrissey doesn't belong in the locks group here? I think he does.

I mean, you know, I think that really for Canada, it is interesting because I think you're talking about how do you balance this group? What kind of style do you need? And those are questions that are going to be answered down the lineup a little bit. I think in terms of consistent performers, it's hard to find better than Morrissey in terms of a guy where you know exactly what you're getting out of them on a night-to-night basis. And then you've also got, you know, the four nations as the example. And, you know, I think it's hard to argue with some of the guys that were there.

But obviously they're going to have to make a couple of changes here. So really, it's actually pretty fascinating because we're going to talk about the U.S. later, where I think that the decisions are maybe fewer in terms of how many there will actually have to be made. But yeah, I mean, I think to Scott's point, the fact that we're only talking really about two locks on D kind of suggests that there's a lot of questions that need to be answered about how Canada wants. to play at the Olympics with the group that they have available to them. All right. So the meat of this discussion is probably going to be on the bubble guys.

But before we get to the bubble, Scott, there's also a tier of players who you think are going to be on this team. It's just not quite in the Nathan McKinnon, Connor McDavid, lock level. And those players that you have singled out here are Brandon Hagle, Anthony Sorrelli, Sam Bennett, Seth Jarvis, Mark Stone, Brad Marchand at Forward. And on D, Thomas Harley, Shea Theater, Devon Taves, Ingole, Aden Hill, Sam Montembow. As I went through that forward list of the frontrunners, and I got to Mark Stone and Brad Marchand, I started to feel a little bit less sure that those are true front runners.

And I don't know, those might be more bubble guys for me. Is that, what do you think about this, Corey? I tend to agree, particularly in Marchand, even though he looked better in the playoffs there for Florida. He really struggled at the Four Nations. And you'll wonder with, you know, St. Mark, we can be made for Stone in some ways, which is just the age of those players. And we're going to maybe get that with like a Drew Dowdy, too, and get to him, is you get those, you know, those 35 plus guys a year older.

And you kind of wonder whether they're, not that they can't make the team, but whether definitely in Marchand is like, if he's a frontrunner or not. I think he's going to need to have a really good first half just to be considered a top 12 forward on this team. So, Scott, why did you consider that? I mean, obviously they're on the Four Nations. That is a feather in their cap. But what made you feel like they belonged in this category? I think part of it for Brad is experience with the coaching staff, experience in general, his

identity as a player, heart and soul guy. I think they likely view him as a player who can play up and down the lineup, who can play with any mix of linemates who could play on their fourth line, who could slide up a little bit higher. I think him and Bennett are in a unique position now that Alexander Barkov is out in Florida, where they're going to have to be counted on early on this season. season, and I think that will be of benefit to them. They're probably going to play more. They're going to be more involved in the power play. Their points, I think, despite how valuable Barkov is as a linemate for some of the players there, this might go for Carter Verhaggy there, too.

There's just more of an opportunity now for these guys, especially Bennett, to really step up. But I think Brad sort of fits into that group as well. And push comes to shove, it just feels like if it's between him and Robert Thomas or a Nick Suzuki or a younger player who also strong, at last year's tournament like Travis Kineckney, I think push comes to shove. They will just go with the guy that Hockey Canada knows. And that's that's Marchand. Stone's an interesting one. I don't really view Stone as a bubble guy. Like I think Stone would have to play poorly in the front half of the season not to be on this team. They're going to trust him. I think they would view him as a penalty killer, defensive zone guy. Like I think they they just trust

Mark Stone. Marshan's the one where I could see the argument that you guys are making. more so than Stone, I think. And I didn't even love Stone at last year's tournament. No, I didn't either. Shea Theodore is one, I wonder about two. Not that I don't think he won't make the team. But I think a lot of the conversation we're going to have about Canada and the U.S. bubble players is in regards to how they played at the Four Nations.

And he didn't play the Four Nations last year due to injury. So he's a guy who I just wonder if he's, I think when you start getting to 7th, he's somewhere in that conversation for Canada. But we're talking about like, you know, by putting him here, basically insinuating he's a top 4D for them. And I'm not quite sure that's a guarantee right now. I think with Stone, Chris, the thing that I come back to is like his career has been amazing. Mark Stone three years ago, I think is not even just a frontmer, probably a lock for this team. The injuries have started to catch up, you know.

And I don't think that this is going to be like a super physical tournament, at least not in the way the Four Nations was. but I do think we can have a Nick Suzuki who's also an elite NHL two-way forward. And it's a younger player who I think you just feel a little better about where the body's going to be at and you're going to be bringing him along for the future. That's where I would start to go. Why not Suzuki over a Kastone? Yeah, you know, I think that that's probably the player that I would look at as well. I mean, and even you could say, you know, we're going to probably talk about him as well. You know, what about a, you know, a celebrini on the wing, you know, as well as a guy that has kind of this more,

he plays the game hard. He's got good two-way capabilities. He's got the speed factor. I think when you look up and down the Canada lineup and you have, you know, the guys that you know, I think that you want to have a team that has that physicality, which is, you know, physicality, but also plays with a lot of pace. And I think that the Olympics are going to be played at a pace even faster than what we saw at the, at the four nations. And so that's where that's, that's one of those spaces where I do start to worry a little bit about Mark Stone in terms. of the overall capability, you know, in terms of the just keeping up with it, and where guys like Suzuki and potentially Celebrini or others that are a little bit younger and, like you said,

kind of have a little bit more of that reliability factor to them in terms of their health, that's also important. So, you know, I don't really, I don't have too many quibbles. Like, I think Stone is absolutely in the mix here. I think he's going to be a guy that they have to take a really long look at considering, you know, so many of the different things that he brings to the table, not the least of which is, you know, the fact. that he's got experience in these high-level situations. But yeah, I mean, I just think that these are going to be these, those types of decisions, though, are the ones that I think are really critical for this Canada team because I don't think

you can use the four nations as a one-to-one blueprint for what you're going to do here. I think you've got to take some of the learnings and like we said, didn't have an amazing four nations, you know, how can you afford that at the Olympics where the stakes just feel higher? there's so much more attention. And obviously there's a lot of pressure. But I think in the veteran presence department, that's something that I could see this coaching staff much more comfortable with a Mark Stone

relative to the two guys that we just talked about. I think it's interesting that none of us mentioned Seth Jarvis in the conversation of frontrunner guys that we would be uncertain about with Seth being the youngest player from that group. Yeah. And you know, I think a lot of it has to do with, you know, some of the things that we just said, like, this is a team that's going to want to play with Pace.

This is a team that's going to want to be up and down the ice quickly. And I think that he brings that. I think we've seen that from him now a little bit more frequently. And I just think with that year, that extra experience that he has now and also getting through, you know, the Stanley Cup playoffs a little bit more, kind of doing some of these other things. Jarvis is a guy that, you know, while he doesn't necessarily have the size, he does just about everything you need for a player to win hockey games where I want to, when a game. comes to playing with the ability to get up and down the ice and then also playing hard.

You know, he's a bit of a pest and kind of gets under guy's skin, but does it in a way that's not going to hurt you in the penalty box. It's not going to hurt you in a lot of other ways. So I really think that, you know, with this, you know, we have to keep in mind that the four nations was not played with I-IHF rules. It was played with NHL rules, essentially, which does create a different kind of game. I think players like Seth Jarvis fit really well into that. It's a versatility. Bring it back to Marchand for a second. I think you can kind of have a debate about one of those guys versus the other.

And I think, obviously, Marcia, it's been a fantastic NHL player through his career. And you can argue has more pure skill than Jarvis. But I think if you're looking for a fourth line winger with energy, I think Jarvis probably has a better case to be that player in February. Do we have any qualms with me slotting Thomas Harley ahead of Travis Sanchez? Holton Pereko, Drew Doughty, 3D, who were also on that team last year? I don't because I think Harley became one of the breakout stories of that tournament, right? You know, right at the same level as like, I mean, maybe even more than like a bad movie.

Yeah, and the league throughout, you know, as Miro Heskin and was hurt and he took on more and more attention. I think Thomas Harley goes into this, I think it's, he's got a spot to lose almost. Yeah. I agree. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, that's in that crazy how that happens, though, he's, he just ends up on the team. and then it's like, oh, hey, this guy is actually probably better at this point. You know, so yeah, I had no qualms with that.

That's going to be the same conversation with Jake Sanderson, who wasn't on the team. That's right. By the end, he was one of their best players. Yep, exactly. That's a better comp. I wonder even in Dallas if there's a bit of a push and pull this year between Harley and Heiskenen in terms of some of the, some of the offensive's own opportunities and that kind of a thing, power play. And it'll be interesting.

All right. So those are our Canadian locks and frontrunners. We're going to take a quick break, and we're going to come back, and we're going to talk about the bubble and the dark horses. All right, we're back, and we're going to go now to, I think, the meat of this discussion, which is the bubble. So, Scott, from what you've outlined, you had 12. I think we're kind of talked to Marchand into the bubble conversation. So we're going to say we've got 11 forwards, 5D, and three goalies for this Canadian roster. That leaves three forwards and 3D to battle this out that are going to make for some really interesting decisions between now and December 31st.

What I want going into that is for each of you to give me, let's start with the forwards. Which three four words, Corey, would you take from this bubble group to compliment Canada's forward group? Oh, man. This is really tough. And it's going to be hard not to make some people very mad depending on which way we go. The one name that stood out to me right away is Robert Thomas. I think he's Nick Suzuki with the skill, the hockey sense. two-way ability, but there's a little bit more pace in his game.

I know you guys mentioned Suzuki earlier. I would lean towards Thomas, kind of like that all-around centerman that I'd like to bring. So I think he's the obvious one to me, and that after that, it gets really murky. I would have a hard time bringing Kinectne after how he looked at the Four Nations. I think he probably played his way out of the mix for me, barring a really good first half. Tavera is how we have Listen to him as a bubble guy here I think his skating would be too problematic for me

To get him in there The one name I'm really drawn to And it's not a sexy name And it's not maybe the highest scoring name of this group Like Shifley would be or Suzuki Would be Carter Verhegey You know this is a guy who's just won two Stanley Cups I think there's a lot of elements in his game

That are really attractive He's a good skater, he works hard He's got plenty of offense You can deploy him in a variety of situations. You know, I look at that Florida team and we might talk about

Marchand earlier. I think there were plenty of times you watch them and you think for Hagee was just as impactful if not more so. And I think that'd be the second name

for me. The third name is really dicey. I think the best player is Suzuki. I don't know if I can bring Thomas and Suzuki. I think you need a little bit more variety there.

I'm guessing it would be either, you know, Zach Hyman or Shifley from my third forward. And I might lean towards Shifley just in case one of my skill guys go down and I need some money there to give me some offense. That's the way I'd have it. It's kind of funny when you think about this is I can see one or all of you guys having three completely different names. And like I'd be really curious to see how much we actually. actually overlap because like we didn't I didn't even mention like celebrini who I'd love I love the idea of bringing celebrini I love Macklin celebrini but it might be too early and we don't know we'll we'll see how what everybody says here but is there such thing as it because I think celibini

would be in my three here I think I would like the fact that he's young and I think it's a good thing for the Canadian program to bring a guy like that who I think absolutely is ready to play at the level but more importantly even if he is your 14th four word and isn't playing. He's soaking that up. He's seeing what it feels like maybe he gets into one or two games in group play. I'm not saying Canada has to build their 2026 Olympic roster with 2030 and 2034 in mind, but it's not a bad thing to keep in the back of your head, much like we see at the world juniors, Chris. Yeah, exactly right. I mean, and Celebrating would be in my three as well. You know, and I think that it's not just about preparing for the future. I think that he does a lot of

the things that Suzuki does, but faster. I think he also has some of these, you know, he just, the way he plays just fits really well. And that's the thing is like, Suzuki to me, like, if you're, if you're asking me among the bubble players who I would have on there, Suzuki would be one of my three, you know, and I think that he, it does come down like him and Robert Thomas. I think Shifley would also be in that group for me. And then on top of that, I would also have Carter for Hagee. So you'd have, if we're just selecting the guys off the bubble, but I think you want some of that two-way element. I think Robert Thomas, you could really interchange him, Suzuki, Celebrini in that mix. That's a guy I could see. Like, the thing is, is if you bring a Macklin

Celebrini for your fourth line, I don't think that's a problem. Like, you know, I think he's actually going to help you. He's going to be a matchups guy. He's going to make things more difficult on the opposing team. I don't think it's too soon for him. Same thing. Suzuki's going to do that same thing for you. Robert Thomas is going to do that same thing for you. I think any of those guys have the versatility to fit into a role. I just think that for me, Celebrini brings the most of anybody,

even without that experience. But then Shifley, I think, you know, for him, you know, you've got so many different factors that go for him in terms of where you can put him in the lineup. I think he's a Swiss Army knife in terms of your top nine, where, you know, can he play with anybody? I do think he could. And then on top of that, you know, as Corey mentioned,

the Carter Verhege factor, the championship success, the style of play, everything that he kind of brings to the table. I think you could utilize and he's another one of those guys where he can kind of put him in a bunch of different situations. Am I the only one lost there on who the three, Chris, actually picked our? I think it's Verhegey Schifely-Selabrini. Yes, Verhege Schifley-Selabrini. Yeah, exactly. But I'm saying like that's the nice thing about where you're at with Team Canada in terms of the depth that you have to select from because basically I just gave you three. three guys, make it a pick them. I pick Celebrini.

And then you've got your other guys that that kind of fit into any variety of role that you kind of need. For me, Sheifley would probably, you know, he wouldn't be on my fourth line. He'd be somewhere in, probably on the third line. And then you've got Verhege who can kind of go wherever you need them to. All right, Scott, your three. The most interesting part of this debate for me is that I actually think typically when you're picking these last three spots, you, you are laser focused on role and on rounding out your roster. I think in Canada's case, because we've slotted players like Sam Bennett, like Anthony

Sorrelli, like Brandon Hagel, like Seth Jarvis, potentially like Mark Stone and Brad Marchand, Canada already actually has a lot of players who can do different things, who can play different roles, who can play in your bottom six. And I actually think what's needed here is a little bit more skill. And so for my three, I would probably gravitate towards Suzuki and Thomas. I just think they give you a little more playmaking, a little more feel on the puck than a player. like a Zach Hyman does, for example, or that a Carter Verheghi does, for example. So I think Suzuki and Thomas would be two for me that feel like they should be on the team, like they're less bubble guys and more guys that I would want in this mix with the rest of the collection of players

that Team Canada already has penciled in. And then I think I go back to where everybody seems to be going back, which is I think Macklin-Cellegriini has a legit case to be brought over a Kinec or a Hyman or a Shifley or a Verhege. I just think there's value for now and for the future to getting Macklin Celebrini into this mix. And even if he's your 12th, 13th, 14th forward, I think you feel good about potentially slotting him under your power play at some point if somebody gets injured or potentially playing him a little higher in your lineup. And you can feel that way about Mark Schifley or John Tavares or whoever else as well. But Celebrini, I think just gives you a little bit more juice. And I think it's important that he be there for the future.

So I think I'd probably go Suzuki, Thomas, Celebrini. And I'd be Celebrini, Suzuki, and Zach Hyman, because I think Zach Hyman can score you those dirty goals where it's a big game. You don't know how this puck's going in. He's going to have his stick right around the blue paint. He's played with Connor McDavid. You can play him down your lineup. He can do whatever you need him to do.

And I think Suzuki just, honestly, Canada has some, to Scott's point, you do not have to pick and choose roles or you don't have to hunt penalty killers. You don't have to look centers. But I don't think it's ever going to hurt you to have a guy like Nick Suzuki, who is that well-rounded and can do everything. So to me, those would be my three. Chris's were Verhege, Schifely, and Celebrini. Scots were Suzuki, Thomas, and Celebrini.

Corey, remind me yours again? Thomas, Schifely, and Verhege. All right. So we do have some good variability there. Thomas makes it onto multiple. Suzuki makes it onto multiple. Celebrini makes it onto three of the four. So that's the four words.

Now we're going to do the same thing with the D, same number. of spots, three to decide. We'll do it in the reverse order. Scott, uh, your final three defensemen on team Canada here. So I'll start with the, the D that we'd kind of slotted. And we use Canada's orientation camp as the basis for this. But we've, we've been through the top five D in theory. So we've been through McCar, Morrissey, Harley, Theodore Taves. And then there's sort of this next group vying for the final three spots. We've slotted three players who were on last year's team, Travis, Travis, Sandheim, Colton Perecoe, and Drew Doughty. And we've swatted one player who wasn't on last year's team as in that same bubble group, and that's Evan Bouchard.

I think there are other players who are in the mix, and I'll be interested to see whether someone, anybody raises them. The other 4D invited to Canada's orientation camp that we haven't discussed were McKenzie Wieger, Aaron Ekblad, Brandon Montour, and Noah Dobson. I don't feel like Eckblad, Montour and Dobson are really in this mix. I think Weiger is an interesting one because he's very comfortable playing both sides. And the idea of bringing a seven or eight D who and play the left and right side, I think is really compelling, and I think they like McKenzie Weger. I would probably go, I think Evan Bouchard belongs on the team. I've made this case on Twitter and

on social media and that kind of a thing, but I think Evan Bouchard, even with his warts, belongs on this team. I think he's going to make more plays going the other direction in downice and offensively, even if he's on your PP2, or even if you want Josh Morrissey on your P2 and Bouchard's in a third-peering role in just a puck mover. I think the headaches that come with Evan Bouchard, and I understand why a coaching staff would get squeamish with him, I think the headaches that come with Evan Bouchard have proven in back-to-back runs to the Stanley Cup final to be more than upset by everything else he adds. I think he's been excellent in back-to-back playoffs, especially two years ago. Two years ago, I thought Evan Bouchard was world-class in that playoff run.

Last year, I just thought he was really good. But Evan Bouchard would be one of them. I just think there's a quality gap between Evan Bouchard and Travis Sannheim, Colton Pereco, Drew Doughty at this stage in his career. And I'm going to go with Drew Doughty and McKenzie Wigger as my last two. I didn't love Sannheim. I'm not convinced that Poreko is sort of up to the task. So Pereco and Sanhine would probably be my cuts.

And I'd go with Bouchard, the veteran in Doughty and McKenzie Wigar, who I like Pizzi can play both sides. All right, Chris, I think that goes to you next. Yeah, you know, as you kind of look through, I think that the case to have Evan Bouchard on the roster is pretty strong. I think you want that power play weapon on your roster. I think that that's a guy that you can have. Now, they have players that, you know, can fit into those roles. And maybe he's not as established as some of these others. And I think creating the power play units for this team is one of the great problems a coaching staff can have because you have so many great options available.

to you. But I think Bouchard to me is one of those players that, yes, he makes, he does fit what you need. I think that this is a game where the finesse, the puck moving, the ability to get a big shot off and get some traffic in front is all going to help you in this. So I think Bouchard is a guy there. I do think it gets trickier, you know, as you go forward in terms of what you would have next. To me, I think that Sandheim is an option. I think that he's, you know, he'll be fine. It's not, you know, I don't think you love it. So I actually am thinking more along the way of, you know, Dowdy is kind of the known commodity.

So like for me, I think having a Drew Dowdy who has been through the Olympics, who has done this, who has obviously played in the big moments, I do think that he is is a better, you know, a better option at that point. And then I'm also on the McKenzie Weger train here, just for the reasons that Scott mentioned, having a guy that can play both sides, not getting so tied up with handedness in terms of different things, like just trying to make sure that you have good options. I think he gives you some good two-way capabilities, you know, certainly a guy that does, you know, a little bit of everything you need.

But again, we talk about this balance. And I think, like, you know, you look at when we talk about Team USA, we're going to see a lot of different styles of defensemen. what I think is interesting. And you could say, like, you know, Kail McCar is going to play a ton of minutes. He's going to get, you know, all those opportunities. But, you know, how do you insulate him? How do you, how do you make sure that those other shifts are valuable?

And I think by one, one Bouchard gives you kind of some of that more offensive capability that you're going to need, I think, at this tournament. Because when you look at some of the other rosters, they're going to have a lot of those guys that are quicker, puck-moving defensemen and having a bunch of trees doesn't necessarily give you, you know, the best, the best foot forward. But I think for Canada's blue line, I don't think it's a problem. I don't think it's a, I don't think it's a significant weakness.

But, you know, when you look at that compared to the forwards, it does look quite a bit different. So, yeah, so for me, it ends up being, you know, Bouchard, Dowdy, Weeger as well. You know, I, again, I think like Weiger is one of those guys. He's kind of interchangeable with some of these others. But I think, you know, with Doughty's experience, Bouchard's offensive capabilities and Weiger's versatility, that to me is, is, you know, is the best group.

So for me, the way I look at this, and I agree about that you don't need, you know, you're not going to have this physical, you know, type of game that we saw at the Four Nations, right? But I do think Colton Perrako has the size and specifically the length that this team lack. I mean, they have some tall guys, but I don't think they combine it with muscle in that way. I think that is the play here is to take Colton Preco. I agree you can take Bouchard, partly because of the guys that you have higher in the lineup, none of them need the second power play. They can all do it, but I don't think any of them need it in the same way.

Shea Theater can do it. Josh Morrissey can do it. Thomas Harley can do it. But I don't think they're going to do it at quite the level Bouchard would. So I would take Perrako. I would take Evan Bouchard. And then I think I didn't come into this expecting to take Drew Dowdy, but I think I kind of have to. I don't think there's anyone who makes an obviously more compelling case than to take this kind of veteran presence who's been there, done that.

So I think that's where I land. The question with the Bouchard conversation becomes, I get the power play aspect there for him and the skill and the hockey sense and the shot he has. But if you're bringing him, I think one question is, is he actually going to be on a power play? Is he actually going to play? Or is he kind of like your seventh eighth, which is fine. But then I think you actually, to what Max said earlier, you got to think about who is actually running the second powerplay is in Morrissey, is it is a Theta or someone else? I think Dowdy stands out as the first one that I bring. I thought even though he's going to be up there in age,

and that is a concern for me. And, you know, he wasn't really healthy last year also. But I think he was good enough at the Four Nations. He's a very well-rounded player. And he'd be a guy, I'd be happy to be the six because we've already locked in five, so he's the sixth. And then the seventh to Max's points earlier, I'd lean Pareko. The size skating physicality combo is pretty, you know, unique for him,

especially among this group. You can be a penalty killer, tough minutes guy, de-zone draw guy, limited minutes type of player. And then you get to the eighth, and this gets really tricky here. I have some reservations on Sandheim, kind of what Scott alluded to. They weren't invited, but I look at Jacob Chikrin. I look at Thomas Shabbat, and I almost kind of wonder, like, what can't they do, what he does, what Uyghur does, and maybe even do it better. I think Shabbat and Chikrin are both better skaters than both of those guys.

guys. Weager to me, I don't think the skating is good enough to be a Team Can Olympic guy. I'd have some reservations there. Bouchard's skating definitely isn't good enough, but that's, the options run thin here. Like, I can't, in good conscience, bring Aaron Eckblad over Evan Bouchard. So I think I bring Bouchard as the eighth. I'm like gritting my teeth while I do it, but that'd probably be the way I have it there. And, yeah, and then obviously there's injuries. or whatnot, you put him in there, you make him the second powerplay guy and limit his even strength minutes. What a horrible punishment, Corey, to have to bring a defenseman who's put up like a point per game for like three years running to the Olympics. What a horrible grit your teeth kind of situation.

I mean, I, okay, that raises the question. We're all bringing him. Who here has him in the starting six? He'd be in my six. I think he's running power play too. Yeah, I think that does fit. So then, so you're benching both Pareko and Dowdy for him? That's a good point.

Do you dress seven though in the in the in you dress stuff? You do dress seven, but you're not going to roll seven be realistic. Oh, yeah, but that's the thing when you, because you roll seven, because you roll seven,

he's, if nothing else seven. And I do think he's on a power play. I think he's got too good a weapon to not have. Well, you can't dress him and not put him on a power play. What's the point of them? Well,

yeah, exactly. But that's it. When you have, when you have the seven slot, So could you play him like eight minutes a night or, you know, eight to ten minutes in a game? You see that all the time like world juniors and stuff like that guys do it all the time. Kiel McCar played like three minutes at his world juniors, like three minutes a game.

It was all power play. And he led the team, led defensemen and scoring in the tournament. So, I mean, it happens. So there's your path. So Bouchard and Doughty, both unanimous by the way, four for four on that. And then it was two for Uighur and two for Pereko, which I do think is a bit of the indictment of the depth of the Canadian blue line here. Because I do think, like, Dowdy being one of your best options,

as good as he has been over the course of his career, is not that player. He's not that same player. You're taking him because you want the insurance. And that's the thing where I find it, like, it was not a hard decision to have Dowdy on this roster for me because of what Corey said. It's like, are you bringing Eckblad over him? Are you bringing Shikrin over him? But guys like that, no, you're not.

So, yeah, so it's going to be interesting. I think that's also why it's not a hard decision to have Evan Bouchard in that six. Like I would have Doughty as the seven and Scratch Weger with the three that I brought. And then Doughty's your guy where if somebody's struggling, he's someone you can trust to go in and sort of slot into whoever's pairing and play a regular shift and whatnot. But I don't think there's an easy case to be made that even without the power play that Drew Doughty or Aaron Eckblad or McKenzie Weger are having a greater impact on the game than Evan Bouchard. All right. Let's hit the goalies really quick here, Scott, because I think, you know, we'd, we'd, don't have another spot to give a goalie, but I think Canada is the country with, I would say,

the biggest, like, Binnington is the starter. I think we've seen that very clearly. But I think you feel the least confident of any of the major nations in Canada's goaltending situation, and we've had like no debate about it here. Yeah. And despite the fact that we feel the least confident, Canada clearly doesn't because it's the only position where they just invited in theory, the three goalies that they have already either put on the roster or that they've put in, if not permanent marker, have put in pen or pencil, right? They did not bring anybody else. And that orientation camp was not small. And so they chose to take their three, including Sam Montaumboe, who still has, by all measures, a lesser track record than a Darcy Kemper or a Logan Thompson, some of the other

goalies that are available to them. So I thought that was telling. Like, they seem committed to Jordan Biddington, Aden Hill, and Sam Montaumbo, and that surprised me. And maybe that's because they got the job done and they know that Binnington's the guy, and they were happy with the role that Aden Hill and San Montembo played as basically practice goalies for them at the Four Nations. But if Logan Thompson or Darcy Kemper or McKenzie Blackwood in Colorado, if they're playing well, I don't see. And Sam Montembo and the Montreal Canadiens struggle and regress maybe a little bit this

season, which I think is a very real possibility for the Montreal Canadiens and for Montaumbot, I don't see why they wouldn't have brought more goalies to the orientation camp, just in case something does go wrong with this shallow pool of goalies, and one of them does really struggle. It feels like they've handicapped themselves a little bit. Now, the orientation camp does not mean that those players aren't on their list, but they also have a list that they have to submit on October 15th here, which I believe is 42 players, and I don't know the cap on goalies for that list. but if if they lock those three in and Thompson, Kemper, and Blackwood aren't on that list on October 15th,

which won't have included much regular season hockey, then they have no choice but to run with those guys barring injury. So I did think that was interesting. Like I view Thompson, Kemper, and Blackwood as comparable goalies to Aden Hill and San Montaumboe, no? I think so. Yeah, I mean, I just, I think you don't feel that amazing about any of it, right? It's just kind of all one big group. And to your point, they may have tipped their hand. let's wrap there for Team Canada.

We're going to take another quick break. We're going to come back and get to Team USA, which I have a feeling is going to be a battle. All right, we're back, and let's bring it home today with Team USA. This might honestly be the better debates of the entire episode here. So we're going to do it all at once here in this segment. Corey, you put this one together. Why don't you read us your locks for Team USA?

The forwards who I think are nearly guarantees to make the team, presuming they're healthy would be the Kachuk brothers, Brady and Matthew Kachuk, Austin Matthews, Jack Eichl, Jack Hughes. And even though I don't think his offense is as dynamic as those guys, I think Dylan Arkins for sure to make this team if he's healthy just because of all the qualities he brings to a hockey team. And then the blue line, it was hard to differentiate the blue line between the locks and the quote unquote front runners with the categories that we used.

I think there's a lot of guys who are really good and seem almost assured to make this team. But the four guys who I put as 100% to make this team would have been Quinn Hughes, Zach Rowensky, Charlie McAvoy, and Jacob Sleven. And then the goalie would be, you know, the reigning Vezna winner, Conrad Hellibuck. Dylan Larkin in a lock, I think is a little interesting. I don't know that I fundamentally disagree, but I think you could have also, I mean, I think I expected him in front runners more so than Locke, but I don't necessarily disagree. I just think the the speed, size, compete, offense combination he brings, like I say, he's not going to be in the top six, but he's on the team. That's kind of how I view this.

And he was excellent against Canada in both games at the Four Nations. I think that's going to count for a lot. It's not just that he was on the team. He was one of their most impactful players in those most important games of the Four Nations. So anyone have any qualms with the locks before we go to the front runners here. When Corey was putting this together and I opened up the document after he said that he was done with it, I was not expecting to see Dylan Larkin there. And then as soon as I did, I sort of thought, yeah, you know what?

I think that checks out. He was so good at the Four Nations. And I think him just being a captain in the league, the way that he skates, his ability to play different roles, I think Larkin is the only debate there, really. I mean, I know Jack Hughes has been a bit of a mixed bag in playoffs and with USA hockey at the men's level, but I think Jack's there as well. So I have no issues. All right.

The players Corey has identified as the front runners for this roster are, and this is the guys that we think have like an 80, 90% chance of being on this team. Matt Boldy, Jake Gensel, J.T. Miller at Forward on D. Brock Faber, Jake Sanderson, Seth Jones, goalie Jake Ottinger. I know the name that we're going to spend the most time on in this segment here. But I think J.T. Miller stands out as well as a guy who I think is bubble for me. but I do think probably ultimately gets the nod onto the team. Yeah, I'd probably have J.T. Miller and Seth Jones more bubble than front runners for me.

I know Seth had a really nice rejuvenation in Florida, but I still think he's got to prove, at least that he's still among the elite of the elite in the league, especially on a blue line that's as loaded as the American group is. Well, that's the one we're going to spend the most time on. So why don't you just take us right into it, Scott, Seth Jones. Yeah, it had been like, let's all, let's all not forget. And it was a bad team in Chicago, but he was not at his best there and didn't play well there for a couple of seasons. And now we've seen him play well for a very short stint with a very strong team in Florida.

And I think in both cases, the team is probably not telling the true story. The Blackhawks were probably not telling the true story of how far he'd fallen. and I think in Florida, the same is true, where he benefited from playing with very good players all of a sudden. And he looked more like himself, and I think that's positive. And I think he absolutely belongs in the mix. But when I think of Seth Jones of October 6, 2025, I just don't place him in the same category as a Jake Sanderson or a Brock Faber or an Adam Fox. And I'm sure we'll get to the Fox debate. But I would sooner have Adam Fox all day long on my team over Seth Jones based on.

what we've seen over the last two or three years. Now, if Seth plays, lights out in the fall, I think he's in the mix. He's obviously someone that USA hockey's very familiar with. All of those things matter. I think he is among the 10 or 11 players who are vying for the 8D that they're going to take. But he feels more at the fringes for me than firmly in the mix. Corey, why don't you give the positive case here for Seth Jones being in this category? I'll be curiously here what Chris says, because I know both him and I have been a major

Seth Jones fans for a long time. And I get, he wasn't even in the mix for the February team. So someone wondered, like, well, was there really enough new information here to get him to the front rudder status for the team the following February? And I think he did for two big reasons.

One, this is still a player with a ton of traits. Like, he didn't just come out of nowhere and have a great spring. This has always been an extremely gifted player, great skater, great length, great hockey sense, does a lot of things really well. And so, you know, there's already, you know, a really good foundation there, even if he wasn't executing at a high level in Chicago. And then we get to the, when he gets to Florida and talk about the playoff run, I don't think

he was surrounded by a good team. I think he was a reason they were a good team. For me, he was one of the two, three, four best players for them every single time I watched that team in the playoffs. He was a really impactful defenseman. and I don't see how you can't watch what he did, not just over a couple of games, but over a period of months there in Florida,

and not conclude that he's one of the better defensemen in the NHL, that he should be in the mix to be on this team. I think he absolutely has the traits to, you know, we talk about where he's in the fan of this lot. He's not going to be a top four guy. You're talking about like a third pair, penalty-killing type of guy for this team, this USA Blue Line so loaded that I think he would excel

in like that five, six, seven type of role for this team. Chris, what do you think? Yeah, you know, I'd say like, I think that the first half of the season is going to loom very largely for Seth Jones because now he needs to put it together after, you know, having the full off season and now you got to ramp it back up for this, for this Panthers team. And that will be ultimately if he makes it or doesn't make it more so than what we saw. But to Corey's point, what we saw over the course of the playoffs was the Seth Jones that I think a lot of us believed, well, not. maybe not a lot of us, but those of us that have been following his career since he was a prospect, there are dozens of us. There are literally, literally dozens that saw that type of defensemen in him, a guy that could be

relied upon in all situations, a guy that could be playing significant minutes and tough matchups. That is ultimately what we thought he could be. He had, whether you know, you can say it was his fault or not, the situations he was in over the years never really allowed us to see. that full component. So now you put them in a team full of elite players, and now you've got what we saw.

So I do think that there's in the mix. The interesting thing is it's not because I don't think it's the Adam Fox discussion that is as tied to Seth Jones as it is just simply to Adam Fox. And I think even Mike Sullivan has said now publicly that there needs to be some figuring things out for Adam Fox to be in the mix for the Olympics. He's not just giving him a spot. And that's going to be a really interesting debate about how they build this team. Because as we talked about, the, you know, making sure that you have a team that can play, you know, that faster-paced style, Adam Fox thinks the game very quickly. He doesn't necessarily play it

very quickly. And I do think that guys with, and if you're going to be that. size and like that's going to be a part of it. He didn't look good at the four nations. Like it wasn't it wasn't just that like he looked outside of himself at the four nations. I felt like and this is a player that I really like too. But that's going to be an absolute discussion. I think to me, Brock Faber is already a lock for that team. I think Jake Sanderson should be a lock for that team as well. My locks would be probably more aggressive in terms of who's there. I have no problem with these guys being front runners. But the Seth Jones discussion is a real one.

And I think it's one that USA hockey is having. And, you know, as much as we talk about like the USA hockey, hockey Canada of it all, Bill Garon is very much driving the bus on these decisions. And he's doing it in tandem with Mike Sullivan. Mike Sullivan is going to have as much of a say in what this roster looks like as anybody else. And so that does make it interesting in the whole kind of discussion about what's this ultimately going to mean for Adam Fox. he's going to have, you know, it might actually be not beneficiary for Adam Fox to be under Mike Sullivan's watching every single shift of his game because he will be nitpicked in a way that

no other player is. But if you look at, if Seth Jones just sends Mike Sullivan that highlight tape from the Stanley Cup playoffs this year, he's going to see a guy like if he, if you can deliver that on the Olympic stage, that makes our decor better. Well, I think it's a little different between the Fox debate with USA and Evan Bouchard with Canada is I think if you said, well, we need Bouchard to run our second powerplay unit. And he's like, yeah, like I can see that. Like, we love Morrissey.

We love Chey Theodore, but we love Thomas Harley, but Bouchard will do it at a different level. With Team USA, you have Quinn Hughes and Zach Rowanski. And I'm not convinced Adam Fox runs the power play better than either of them. So then you really ask, well, what is he really providing to our starting six, starting seven? At this point, keep in mind that Hughes was injured at the four nations. We got to decide, is Seth Jones in this. group that we're taking here. So Chris, break the tie. Seth Jones, like, are we putting him on or is he in this bubble group that we're going to debate between? I, as much as I love him, I will put him in the

bubble group for now, because I do think that this is, the question is yet to be answered about Seth Jones because the first half will loom large for players like him. Okay, then Scott, take us right in, and you can go ahead and give us your first bubble answer. We'll start with the D this time. Yeah, I'm going to start with Adam Fox. I think the conversation around Adam Fox over the last, whatever it is, six months since the Four Nations has kind of divorced itself from the reality of what Adam Fox has accomplished today. So I've actually got some notes and I'm going to read off some notes. I don't do this very often, but I'm going to read off some notes. He has in four playoff runs, never been outscored in a playoff series at five

on five. The goals for and goals against are 36 to 24 across huge minutes. We're talking 25 minutes a night. 36 to 24. That's 60%. Six seasons. Six seasons. the league. He's been a top five finalist for the Norris Trophy in four of his six seasons in the league. Last year in his so-called down year, finished 12th in Norris voting. It's coming off a serious knee injury last year. He was playing with Ryan Lindgren last year. This is all well-known. These are the more important ones. Forget the production. He's fifth among all defensemen in the league since he entered the league in points. He's played at a 70-point pace across 82 games for his career. He's also, and this is the most important part when we talk about five on five and what he's

adding to a team. He is fifth in total goal differential in the NHL among defensemen at five on five since entering the league. He is plus 117. The names ahead of him are Kail McCar, who's obviously a singular player. The next three names, the only three names other than Kail McCar that are ahead of him are the agreed upon better defenders on the planet. Gustav Forseling, Jacob Slavin, Devin, Devin, So we've got, at 5 on 5, he is in elite company in the NHL in terms of play driving. I just think that because of the missed handoff on the McDavid goal, because of the goal against that he got burned on in the previous game at Four Nations, and because of the way that his role shrunk in that tournament, and because he's not the biggest guy, and slow.

We've sort of forgot, it doesn't, whether he's slow or not, does not matter to the impact that can be measured and that he has performed at the NHL level over the course of his NHL career. It matters in terms of the way that he's talked about and the ways that he can be better and the ways that he needs to be better. And it sounds like he's been in the gym this year and this summer and he's super dedicated to improving in that area. I imagine a lot of players were in the gym this summer. Yes, but the impact has been just flat out better than the other players who are considered quote unquote, bubble guys for this team. He is just better at hockey. These things to a certain degree are measurable.

He has performed at a world-class level for six. He's only been in the league for six years, and he has been for all six of those years, one of the very best players in the world, including last year with Ryan Lindgren, coming off of knee surgery, etc. I think the Adam Fox that we're going to see in the first half of this season is going to put this to bed, and he's going to be on Mike Sullivan's team. In what role? in whatever role you want to pair him, whoever you want to play him with, whether it's third pair, P-P-2, I would have him running P-P-2 over Zach Horensky, as great as Zach was last year. I think Adam Fox is just a more cerebral, more intelligent player at the top of the umbrella with the puck on his stick and

thinks the game at a higher level. I think Adam Fox thinks the game at a higher level than just about anybody. I think he can run your second power play, and I think he can play a regular shift at five-on-five, whether that says your five, six, seven, whatever defenseman, I think he's, I think he belongs on that team. Here's a question. So we talked on the hockey show Monday about the Jets. And I was saying the Jets and the Rangers to me are more similar than anyone really wants

to admit in their roster construction. And as I was breaking it down, I'm going, you know, Shisterkin and Halibuck and some of the way their forwards are grouped. And Morrissey and Fox, I think, are probably in a tier. I think I'd prefer Morrissey as a player. but they'd probably be at least in a tier, right? Morrissey's a lock for Team Canada, and we're talking about Fox is a bubble guy for Team USA, and yet I do think that's a legit, I don't even know that I would take Fox on my bubble

because the difference between them in this context, and Scott's stats are all really good, really helpful information, but they are against NHL players and NHL teams in a spread-out talent pool versus at this, it's super concentrated of the best players in the world, and you're kind of within the confines of your team. Whereas Morrissey, I don't think needs one of your two power plays to really be impacting the game. I do think Fox does need that, at least to maximize him, right? Like, it's not that I'm saying Adam Fox will ruin the Olympics for you if he's on your team. I don't think that.

You could put Rowensky and Fox on the second power play together, though. You could. They're also in the context. And sure, it's not the Olympics. They're in the context of the Stanley Cup playoffs. Adam Fox has played deeper into the Stanley Cup playoffs than Jake Sanderson and Brock Faber. Now, those guys are playing different roles. And Faber, I agree with Chris, belongs on this team. I thought him and Slavin made a great pair and should make a great matchup pair again.

But we only talk about these things with Adam Fox. We talk about this, whatever it is, spread out across. We're not talking about, we're not discounting Jake Sanderson or Brock Faber because they haven't been on a deep playoff run. And yet we're saying that Adam Fox has issues at this level because he had a couple of bad games at the four nations, right? Like, I think that part of it just feels like it has taken on a bit of a life of its own to me. If you were McDavid or McKinnon and you're coming down the ice on a two on one, two on two, let's say two on two, would you rather one of the defensemen that you're going up against be Seth Jones or Adam Fox? I would rather not go against the defenseman that is likely to outscore me 36 to 24 in the playoffs at five on five, which is Adam Fox and not Seth Jones. You kind of dodged that close to shit, right?

Hey, Scott's ready for a Senate run is what I just learned in that answer. that was deft. That was deft. Chris, what do you think on this one? Seth, Joe, forget coming down on me.

Adam Fox is going to beat me back the other way as well. Like, it's not just about defending. He's going to beat Carter McDavid back the other way. He's going to beat me in a game of five on five ice hockey. He has proven that he will beat me on the ice at five on five across six seasons in the NHL and across four playoff runs. So here's the thing.

Like, I know, that we don't want, you know, we don't want to use small sample sizes too much here. But I think the four nations thing does loom large because he was overmatched in that in a way that I've never seen. And I will grant you, I think he's one of the most intelligent players. I think he is far better defensively than he's ever given credit for because of his anticipation ability. He actually guard, he's really good at defending odd man rushes in terms of how the space that he's able to take away and angles.

I think he thinks the game at an incredibly high level. But I do think that in this concentrated area, in this game where a lot of these micro battles are going to be what decides the game, like the margins are so thin between the U.S. and Canada in this event, that one bad shift can be the difference

in a game between these two teams. And that's where I think, like, getting a level of comfort with him in the past, pace of this of this tournament is where it is now i'm not saying that he's not going to make the team because i think really like we're saying he's on the bubble which means he's still in the mix it's not as strong in the mix yeah we all get two here we all get two i think he's probably on the team despite everything i'm saying right now yeah exactly like that's the thing there are eight defensemen taken you can't convince me that there are seven better you know or eight better

than him you know like i i there's no way um and i do think that you need to have him at worst as insurance for if the power play goes south or anything like that. If you do have Werenski running or maybe you have both of them on on P2, whatever you end up doing. But he is still that player. The question I think is, you know, where do you slot them? And all those five on five numbers are super important. But again, like, like how much is he going to play five on five for this team ultimately? Now, Mike Sullivan may get a better picture of that with the Rangers,

with the amount of that he's going to have to play for that team. And I think that's good too. But I do think that, you know, in terms of the way that USA wants to play, and this is another important fact, the way that they want to play, he isn't as adept to playing that style as what the rest of those guys are. And that's where I think Mike Sullivan is going to have some qualms about who they're going to put there. But again, these are the discussions that we have at the Olympics

Because we're talking about a Norris trophy winning defensemen. We're talking about one of the most productive defensemen over the NHL in the last five years. This is absolutely one of the best players in the league. But these, the margins is where the games will be won and lost. And things like skating and things like size and other things will become part of that discussion when Bill Garon and Mike Sullivan and the decision makers make those decisions. And they will probably be looking at a lot of that tape from the four nations. But again, did we all not watch Seth, just watch Seth Jones get walked for two years in Chicago off the rush?

Like, why are we any more convinced that in the margins against the best players in the world against Connor McDavid that a player like Seth Jones or whoever's next on your list for Noah Hanofin or whoever. next on your list for for the American like I don't I don't know that I'm more convinced that those players aren't going to make a mistake or also get burned playing against Connor McDavid and Mitch Marner and Nathan McKinnon like I don't know that any of those guys are equipped to play

serious minutes for this USA team anyways I think we all agree that Av Fox is going to be world smarter you know massive difference between his puck play and whoever else we're talking about like there there's no conversation

there. We have the 5D that we've all, sorry, whatever, five or six D that we've all kind of established there. So it's Hughes, McAvoy, Slavin, Wrenski, Faber, Sanderson. So first question, does anybody here think Fox is in the starting six over any of those players? I do not. Over any of those, those main five? Six. No. Faber Sanderson, McAvoy, Werenski, Slavin, Hughes. And Hughes, yeah. No.

No, with Hughes healthy. So we're talking about the seventh defenseman right now. Yeah. It's an important place. It's in margins, baby. You need that. I get it. I'm just saying, like,

I could see a scenario where Jake Sanderson has an off night and he's not in, not in my six kind of thing. Like, Jake would be, Jake would be the six there for me. Right. I guess my question is, is anybody taking any of those six out to put Fox in? I am not. No. Scott's saying he could see a world where he would.

Yeah, I can see a world where Sanderson is in that six for me come, come December. We got to get to the forwards here. So just real quick, who's everyone's two? We got two spots here. Is it Fox Jones universally or is anyone dissenting there? I think it's Fox Jones for me. But I am keeping an eye on Hennifin. And the other guy I'm really keeping an eye on after his world championships is Jackson

Lecombe. I think he is probably more in that conversation than, the average person reading hockey content would be aware of. I think they are really high on him. And I think if he has a really good first half, I think he's in the starting eight. All right. So that's the defenseman. We got a lot of forwards to get to in a very small amount of time here.

So let me just read you the guys that we have highlighted that Corey put together on the bubble and the dark horse categories. And if you want to throw in a long shot, we got five names. Everyone's got to get to. And I think we're kind of including J.T. Miller in there now, right? I think you got what you guys wanted to do. All right, so let's bump. I think he's going to end up in it just looking at this thing.

So I'm fine to leave him in front runners, just the more I look at this bubble. So we have nine fours then. We need to take, we need to break four then. 14 and eight, right? Yeah, sorry. Yeah, five. All right. So we got, so here's the names we're choosing from.

It's Logan Cooley, Kyle Connor, Clayton Keller, Patrick Kane, Matthew Nise, Brock Nelson, Jason Robertson, Tage Thompson, Vincent Trocheck, Cole Caulfield, Shane Pinto. I think this is Conavar pool, but to feel free, I know Maddie Baneers, Ryan Leonard, Frank Naser, Brian Rust, Alex Tuck, all also would be in that pool. So five names. Corey, go ahead. It was your five. I'm kind of envisioning a fourth line with Logan Cooley in between Brock Nelson and I would have gone in between. between Nye's and Trocheck. I might lean towards Trochik just for the experience there.

I can really go either way there. I'll lean towards Nye's, but it'd be really close. Then for the 14th forward, I think Tage Thompson, not the 13th forward, sorry, I think Tage Thompson is an ideal 13th forward with all the tools and traits he brings to the table, the size, the skating, the skill. I think that that'd be really appealing.

And then for the 14th, probably should have flipped these guys, but Kyle Connor would be in there. I know he didn't have a great tournament in February, but he's still a dynamic player, and he should be on this team. All right, Scott, who's your five? I'm going to include J.T. Miller,

but I'm not sure he would be the very next name on my list. Like, he might be more of a 13th or 14th forward for me, but I think he is on this team. And then I'm going Logan, Cooley, Kyle Connor, Clayton Keller and Tage Thompson. I know three of those names skew a little bit smaller, but between Tage, even Eichel, Larkin, Matthews, the Cichuk brothers, like I don't think Matt Boldy, I know he doesn't play that way, J.T. Miller,

like they've got enough size. I think Cooley's going, we've talked about it on the pod a little bit already. I think Cooley goes nuclear this year. Like, I think he's one of the breakout candidates in the league for me this season. I think he's going to have a massive year, play his way onto this team. I agree with Corey, Kyle Connor, and his office. defense, whether he's playing for you in every single game or not, despite his, his struggles at four nations last year, I think Kyle's talent, I believe he's like tied with Austin or a couple of

goals behind Austin over the last five years for goals by American forwards, ahead of, ahead of the Kachucks and all of these guys, ahead of Eichael. I think Kyle's on the team. And I think I like, I like the way that Clayton Keller's game has, has really developed here. And I think he's more than just a playmaking winger now. I, I like the, his playoff. the puck. I think he belongs in this group and they clearly feel like, I think coming out of men's worlds, I think it showed that they clearly like them and they feel like they can trust him. So I think I'd go Cooley, Connor, Keller, Tage, and J.T. Miller as those five. Miller was in our nine, so you get one more.

Okay. See, this is maybe Trocheck as the next guy. Like, I just don't think, I don't think Nelson's there anymore. I think we saw that last year. I don't think Brock's there anymore. I don't love Jason Robertson as a fit for this team. I just think unless he's playing in an offensive role, he doesn't add a ton.

And I don't think Nise is there. So I'd maybe go trocheck. All right, Chris, who you got? Who's your five? Yeah, this is a tough one too, because I think that as I look at this roster and I'm starting to try to plot out roles, I feel like in the case of Canada,

we had a lot of guys that fit certain roles or could fit a lot of different roles. In USA's case, they've got a lot of high-octane offensive players, more where, you know, you've got your guys that we already have on the roster, like a Larkin, like Miller, like Boldie, that I think are going to give you some good two-way capabilities. But yeah, I mean, I think that that's where it gets a little bit tougher for me. But I said, well, if that's what the player pool gives you, lean into it. So I've got Kyle Connor in there. I just think the goal scoring is too much of a factor.

Clayton Keller is absolutely in the mix there as a guy that you want to have on your team. I think that he makes a lot of plays. And I think that him getting the captaincy, like I think of the players that did not make the Four Nations team, I think he was one of the guys that really was the most upset by it. And then comes back, goes to worlds, where's the sea, leads him to the gold medal. I think that that's a guy that you're bringing, Tage Thompson. I think that his fate was sealed at the world championships as well.

Also the fact that you get a big forward, a guy that can play a little bit all over the lineup. You can find ways for him to make an impact in the game. So I've got Connor, Thompson. I think that means you also got to bring, you know, I think Logan Cooley is another guy where he's probably my 14th forward.

He's a guy that I think that you can have in the mix as a player that can slot around your lineup and give you that speed factor, play at the pace that you want to. And I've got one more, right? I've got one more so far. Yep. Yeah. And this is where, you know, I debated.

I think Brock Nelson has been one of the great soldiers of USA hockey over the years, where he's such a good two-way player. He does so many things well. But I think I want to skew younger here. And I'm actually going to go with Matthew Nyes. I think the guy, the size factor that he brings, that there's some, you know, you can get a little more power out of your lineup. I can see him playing on the line with some other big players that could potentially, you know,

make things a little bit more difficult on Canada's blue line when you're playing Team Canada, because we assume that there's going to be a collision course between these two teams. And that's ultimately who you're building the team for. I think that, you know, this U.S. team that we have collectively and what we have now is it's faster. And again, like Scott said, we're leaving out Jason Robertson, who is a guy that I think a lot of us figured would be a lock for these types of national teams. the pace of the game is really the difference maker there. And he is not somebody that plays at the pace that the Olympics are going to be played at.

And that's why it's, you know, it's really that to me, that's the biggest reason that you leave him out. Even though I think he's one of the smart players really processes the game at a tremendous speed, just doesn't play it at the pace. I think USA is going to need to play at. I do think they are going to bring one of Nelson or Trochec because I think, you know, because you're going to need a fourth line center. you need a guy who can play DZone draws, who can kill penalties,

who can out muscle guys and all those, you know, those young players or smaller players are going to have, even though Trojax on the smaller side, he's sturdy. Like there's, I can't see them not bringing one of those two guys on this team just for very specific situational usage.

Yeah, that's a, that's a really good call out because like, yeah, as I look, it's just like the, the roles of the team. It's like who,

you know, how much, how much of the, defensive matchups are you given to Dylan Larkin all the time if he's the only guy like that. So then you, yeah, you probably do end up bringing a Larson or a Nelson. I could see Austin in a, in that kind of a role as well. And he's going to have to play in that way. Yeah, he's going to have to PK and, yeah.

All right. So mine would be Tage Thompson, Kyle Connor. I agree about Nyes. I'll take trocheque between those two. The one that I'm hemming and honing over is Logan Cooley versus Patrick Kane. And I think the future minded angle that we've talked. about with Celebrini would certainly lead you to Cooley. But I look at this USA team and Austin Matthews wore the seat for them at the four nations. But doesn't it feel like when you look at this

player pool that the guy who screams out captain of this group is Patrick Kane? I mean, he is Mr. USA. He's been there, done that. All these guys grew up idolizing him. He has to have a really good first half to make this team. And I don't know if that's going to happen. But he is the one that if I had to guess, I bet USA hockey's rooting for him to do that. They might be. He's certainly the most of those guys idol, you know, in terms of he's, he's really set. Why is this team so skilled that Patrick Kane birthed a generation of skill players in the U.S. And I think for me, it's a tough sell just because of the pace. And he's not at the same pace that he was as a younger man.

I, you know, I think I'd be intrigued by it. I'm sure I agree with you. They're probably rooting for it. I just think that now they're at a stage where there can't be an nostalgia. Like, it feels too much like a nostalgia pick. And I know if Patrick Kane is going to use that as fuel, he wants to play. He looks really good this preseason. And let's see.

Let's see where, like, again, the first half is going to loom super large on those last decisions. So it's not out of the realm of possibility. On the pace note, and he's not going to be on this team, but on the pace note, I thought it was awesome that they invited Frank Nazar to the orientation. camp after the way that he played at men's worlds. And it's just preseason hockey, but boy, oh boy, has preseason hockey. Frank Nazar looked really good again here. So I'm just fascinated to see what he does in the next few months here.

We are short for time here, so I can't ask you all for your last goalie. So congratulations, Jeremy Swimming. You get it by default. That is going to do it for us on this episode of the athletic hockey show. You can catch more of Chris over at Flow Hockey. get on his podcast called up. We'll talk to you soon.