The Athletic Hockey Show - Corey reads the comments

Episode Date: September 26, 2025

For the first time in Prospect Series history, but certainly not the last time, Corey responds to comments left on his U23 rankings, as well as his recent 2021, 2022, 2023, and 2024 re-drafts. Does he really hate Gabe Perreault? Why is Shane Wright ahead of Lane Hutson? Is he really obsessed with Zeev Buium? All that and a lot more on this really fun episode.Got a question? Ask it here: t.co/fYieuQEg14Hosts: Max Bultman and Corey PronmanWith: FloHockey’s Chris PetersExecutive Producer: Chris FlanneryProducer: Chris Flannery Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This is the Athletic Hockey Show Prospect Series. Did you know the Athletic now has NFL highlights? You can check them out across the Athletic in our app, in articles, and podcasts, in box scores, and on social. I'm Max Bolbin here alongside Corey Prondman and Flow Hockey's Chris Peters for another episode of the Athletic Hockey Show Prospect Series. A first in Prospect Show history here. We are going to, we know what you guys like, right? We see the listen numbers. We know you like when we put Corey on the hot seat.

This is a time of year that is ripe for that. Obviously, some very contentious articles come out, the U23 rankings, the redrafts. You guys got opinions. And because Corey values his mental health, he makes somewhat of an effort to hear a manageable amount of them. Because Corey does not value our producer Chris's mental health, though, we did have Chris go through and pull the best of the best of your, thousand comments on Corey's recent articles. And so we're going to spend today reading them to Corey. And Corey's going to read some of them himself.

And so we're going to start. We're just going to go around the horn one after another here. We'll see how long this lasts. It's either going to be until we run out of time or until Corey spontaneously combusts. So let's begin with Chris Peters. Why don't you read the first comment? Oh, Max, I've been looking forward to this one for a while. I really have.

And we're going to start with the dramatic reading. And this is one of the few questions or few comments that we took from Twitter because it was just too good. And I really looked forward to reading this one in particular. So if you excuse me for a dramatic reading from recliner sports, I'm offering $100 to Corey Promin for a well-reasoned and evidence-supported analysis demonstrating Luke Hughes, Cole Hudson and Xavier Villeneuve are better skaters than Lane Hudson. Lane Hudson was objectively among the top 2 to 3% of NHL skaters last season, yet Corey Pranman repeatedly cites it as a weakness.

Why is he considered an expert evaluating hockey talent? It's perplexing. Corey, any thoughts on that particular Barb thrown your way? Well, there's some layers to unpack. here. You know, first, I presume this is a Canadian person doing this. So that $100 Canadian automatically becomes like 80 American. 70. 70. Yeah. So what could I get us here? Like a dinner maybe, like, you know, a tank of gas, you know. So I'm not sure doing a special project for that amount. But let's put that aside for a second. I don't know. I don't know.

if I've ever said that Cole's better skater, or significantly better skater. I think the grades I gave him in the U-23 were the same. I do think for Villanova and Luke Hughes that's the case. Different

ages, you know, prospects, but whatever. So I think that where this is coming from is I believe like there's like this NHL edge data out there. Yep. That has lane, you know, in the top couple of percent of skaters in the NHL last year.

And, you know, that's interesting. And, but I'm not really familiar with that data. I don't know how reliable it is. I don't have a baseline for it. And we've, you know, Chris and I have seen, for example, over the years when we see people try to analyze skating at the junior level, for example, not the NHL, but the junior level when they try to, you know, rank fastest skaters and whatnot that you look at the results and you look at what you and other evaluators think of players skating

and doesn't always have an extremely strong correlation. So I have some pushback there in that regard. And, you know, I think I don't, you can have quibbles on him versus Villanova, him versus Cole or him versus whoever. But, I mean, I don't know how anyone can watch Luke Hughes and not come away thinking he's one of the premier skaters in the NHL. It's off the chart skating. And that's always been the big selling point with his game.

With Hudson, it's always been skill and hockey sense. That's been the selling point in his game. I don't, you know, if Lane was an elite skating player, he wouldn't have gone in the second round. I mean, that's the reality. Even with his size, Quinn Hughes was an elite skating small defense, but he went top 10 with his offense. That's just the reality.

And I'm not saying that Lane isn't a good skater, but I think to say the same level of Luke Hughes, I don't really, I don't know if I need to provide evidence to support that. I feel like I should be obvious to anybody who watches the two players. But I guess it's not obvious enough. Well, you know, one of the things I think, especially with Lane, when it comes to skating, there's so many different dimensions to it, whether it's, if you're looking at, excuse me, objectively speed, that's one thing.

If you're looking at the deceptive footwork, his ability to use. his edges, his ability to kind of, you know, make plays along the walls, different things like that. That's where you could say, okay, in nuance, maybe he is a better skater than some of those guys in, in those instances. You know, but I think it all kind of depends on how one defines skating as it's, there are a lot of different dimensions to it. So I wonder if that is maybe part of the disconnect in when people maybe don't understand. I think to your point, too, it is very difficult to make those.

one-to-one comparisons from guys that aren't in the NHL that we don't have this additional data for. And really, I think when it comes to things like skating speed and other things like that as how it's related in the edge data, you know, I don't know that it's necessarily that important in the end in terms of the actual evaluation of the skater.

I mean, one of our favorite anecdotes is when Arthur Calli have won the fastest backward skater when he did the CHL testing. that was awesome. Everybody's knocking his skating and then he turns out that the highest scoring forward was the best backwards skater among CHL players. And then his NHL career proved that he was not the best backwards. Not a good skater.

Yeah. So, yeah. All right, here's a, well, I guess because this is a Habs fan, I guess I can't say for sure that it's Jose versus Jose, but Jose T, maybe it's the Joe Z. Oh, is it, is it him? Is it Jose Tator? Yeah. says I'm a Habs fan

and I don't think he's trolling here. Prondman prefers a certain type of player which is why he has slaff higher than most in lane lower. A Scott Wheeler ranking would be the opposite. We don't have Scott here to confirm or not confirm that. I disagree with Corey here, but that's just how he sees it.

We can find other rankings if we don't like this one. That's very well reasoned by Jose. But Corey, do you think that's the truth? Is this just a player type preference here? I mean, maybe. I never like said that Lane isn't a really good player I mean he's basically been highly ranked by me for years I think you go back to like that first draft ranking

I didn't think he was top 10 or something like that and then I think he went closer to 20 as a year went on I think you know it's frustrating you know all this Hudson stuff but I understand it because of the market and the year that he had I don't have an issue with the player at all. Like, I think he's, you know, he's a hell of a hockey player.

But yes, I mean, you're looking at projection. You're looking at tool kits. You're looking at, you know, the skill versus, you know, this with the other issues that could pop up in a player's game. You're thinking about what ultimately leads to playoff success. And I would, I can't imagine that there be many NHL. teams that would refer the 5-9, 5-10 defensemen who's not an elite skater, despite what the last listener might say, to the 6-4-50-point highly physical winger.

That profile is just more valuable in the NHL. And now, if things change over time, if Lane continues to back it up, if he, you know, has, like, you know, Scott compared him to Eric Carl's in the other day, if he reaches that echelon of offense and Slav, you know, kind of, you know, stagnant. Nathan doesn't reach new, new levels in his game, maybe that changes. But I think with the evidence we have, like, so far, like, that one player type is just clearly more valuable. I mean, will you allow, Corey, that anyone who would take Slavkovsky or Philip

Mishar or Owen Beck over Lane Hudson, clearly hates Lane Hudson, right? Right, right. You're talking about how Montreal had a couple of picks before they took him. and yeah. I obviously am going to not, I realize the other ratings and whatever have him a lot higher right now, whatever.

I know this is the time where everyone does the list, like overall an HL player list and defenseman list and young player list and whatnot. Although I do think it's quite fascinating given what just happened with the Olympic camps when, like, Lanes like in like the top 10 or 15 of defensemen or something like that.

He's not even like a top 20, whatever, USA defensemen. And it's a little bit of a disconnect there. But I don't dislike this player. I think he's a hell of a hockey player. I just want people to go back and listen in 2022. We were on the lane train. We were on the lane train.

I feel like everything and we see it throughout the comments, because I've read a bunch of them so far in terms of what we're doing in the show today, I feel like in a lot of the grifes we've had in past episodes, I feel like a lot of it comes down to this one simple issue. it feels like most analysis of players comes down to did player A have more points than player B? And if player A outscores player B, player A is better. That's how I feel like 90, 95% of analysis on the internet is done. And that is not how NHL teams evaluate players.

I would say obviously, I mean, that's, that's the, it's the lowest hanging fruit, right? Like the points thing, it's the lowest hanging fruit. It's easy to see. and we're not going to beat the Lane Horson, Lane Hudson Dead Horse. That's the 2028 Kentucky Derby winner, by the way, Lane Horstons. That's the Lane Horstin.

That's right. You know, what we talked about this in the Adam Fox stuff the other episode, like Scott used, he got Norse votes. Like, well, the freaking media votes on the Norse. And they just vote based on who has the most poise. They don't evaluate the two-way play of these defensemen and think thoughtfully and scout the players and whatever kind of thing. one of the comments we could just get to says, well,

why did you say Celebrity was the best rookie in the NHL, not Hudson? Hudson won the Calder because he had the most points. Panarin wasn't better than McDavid in his year with the year he won the Calder. He had more points than him. Like I don't care that they won the media voted and they screwed up. Celebrity was the best rookie in the NHL last year. Anybody who watched those two players would say Celebrini was more dominant on a per game basis. I don't know that anybody, I don't think everybody would say that,

Corey. I would. I would. Yeah. People who know what they're talking about would say that. I would, but as a voting member of the PHWA, I would also concur. And I swear I put a lot of work into my votes and everything. Like I spent a lot of time on it.

But yeah, it's not the, it's not always the best measure of things. It certainly helps guys in their bonuses and other things like that. But it's, uh, not the best measure. So before we, before we move on from the Lane Hudson discussion, this came up multiple times. So I want to just get to it. And then we'll move on and we'll get to the Zeev Bouillon discussion after this, which I'll leave for, for, for Max. But there, these are back to back comments here. We got Mr. S says, I need, I need, I need Corey to read the Mr. S one. Okay. Thank you for stopping me. Corey, please read Mr. S's.

The moment you see Shane Wright ahead of Lane Hudson, the writer has lost. absolutely all credibility to write this article. And I am a blues fan. And I don't care about either of these players. You know, and that's it, I mean, I think that's so strange. And, yeah, Robert L. also would like to say, how can Shane Wright possibly be rated ahead of Lane Hudson? And I get it.

And I'm going to address this to players because you can't appeal to draft position because that's old data. It is funny, though, that this is a player that was in the first overall conversation by the Montreal Canadiens. He was in their final three. Three years ago. There were jerseys. And now that it's offensive to suggest

he was better than their second round pick that year. So it's not just wrong. It's like offensive to suggest that. Anyway, so, but moving on. I mean, I think Wright's been really good as a pro for the last two years. I understand that there's a stigma with Wright and like he's not this dynamo or this,

elite two-way player that some portrayed him as a couple of years ago. But he's a good two-way centerman. Like he's a good skater. He had 20, what, 2019 goals, 40 points last year. He showed a lot of interior offense. He's got a really good motor. You know, he's got decent size. Like, that's a really attractive profile.

That's a guy who I think could be like a second line center on a winning team. Like, that's a hell of a hockey player. And then, like, you just balance that against what you prefer the, like, There's no doubt Hudson has more offense. He has more skill in his game. But I feel like, you know, in the playoffs, I would mildly prefer that other player type. But it's not unreasonable.

Like I have him like neck to neck, essentially. Who wanted to flip it to be fine? But I would push back that it's offensive to suggest it the other way around. I think Wright is, by all measure, still a top four or five player in his draft class. Despite the fact that, like, if he was continuing to stackmate or not play well, it would be one thing. But he's had two very successful years. years back to back.

Like, I don't know. If it wasn't for all the hoopla and stuff like that, if like a coolie had just been or Slikovsky had just been the one coming into the year, I feel like people look at what he's done so far and thought, I think he's an impressive player. Maybe not booze. And there were at least gasps in that arena. Yeah. Whoa.

Ah. Unless they were listening to us. That's right. Which apparently they weren't. So. But yeah. So I don't know. I feel like we've, we've, we've beaten the Lane Horson to death.

I thought we did so like nine months ago too, but here we are. No, we did. See, this is the thing, Corey. That's not how this works. That's not how this works. The audience dictates when the horse has been beaten. I've never experienced something like this. Like the closest I've experienced something to this,

like this is when I said Carter Hart wasn't super athletic. And when I said Elias Pedersen wasn't a great skater. And like that drove those two very passionate fan bases, absolutely bananas. But like, But eventually it faded because they've moved on with their lives. Here's the difference, though. Here's the difference.

This one won the Calder Trophy. And that does matter in terms of the conversation. And that's why it's, it's, I mean, Patterson did too. No, the difference is the difference is Pedersen came back to Earth and Hart came back to Earth. And then obviously he had off ice and legal issues or whatever. But I mean, the issue is that it was, he had just a fantastic year. And it's more that I, I've elevated. the player of him where I can elevate him every year, more or less.

But I guess I just, I think the perception is I haven't elevated him enough. I haven't said he's celebrini-esque or something like that or whatever level that be, or he's with Schaefer or whatever level that be sufficient to say that would be, uh, proving me wrong or something like that. So, but it's just more, like, usually I get like, when there's like this crazy fan base, uh, agony over something that I have written, it usually fades after about a year. this one that just feels like we're heading into year two of the exact same thing essentially you're going to get mentions on Twitter every time he has a point this year just so you know and that'll

probably be roughly 60 to 70 times so i think the thing i'm most amused by about it all and granted we are doing a podcast episode reading these comments so i guess there is at least a little bit of of two-way street to this but i just love people being like oh like you won't let this go you won't admit you know but they're also bringing it up at every opportunity like if this This is such a two-way street right now of like neither of us can end the feedback loop. The fans can't stop getting mad and we can't stop like putting Corey on the hot spot about it. Right. And you look at you look at these fan bases and, you know, Vancouver, super passionate.

Philadelphia is super passionate. Montreal on a plane all its own, I feel like in the, in the NHL, though Vancouver is pretty darn close. And yes, and Pedersen won the, won the Calder, which probably didn't help. No, it didn't. No, it didn't. No. So when that happens that somebody else saying that isn't you, that you're, you know, and isn't the fans, it's like the ultimate evidence. Let's take a quick break right there.

We're going to come back with more of these. All right. We're back. And we're right back into the comments section, as we should be. The next one comes from Avery L. Buiam, I'm going to read both of these, actually. Should I read all three? There's three of them back to back back back to back.

Yeah, Avery L. all three. Booiam ahead of Schaefer is, dot, dot, dot, wild. John F. Dude, you're obsessed with Booiam. I don't see a number one stud D man in him. And Rowan B.

I have a lot of trouble understanding why Renzell is at number 85, but Booiam is at number eight. People do not like booiam. I will say about Renzel is that he's looked pretty good in camp. Yes. And it is Chicago,

and they don't really have. like, you know, they're probably going to be a bottom-feating team this year, but there's a path where he has a really good year this year, and I've got to, I've got to maybe, like, say, I might have misjudge how much offense this player has, but that's, I think that's, but also he's not, those two players are not in the same conversation right now, but that's a different thing. I'm just acknowledging that Renzel looked impressive in the preseason in camp so far. He was, he was object, like, Bouillon at the same level, NCAA level, Booiam was objectively

miles better than Renzel, who had an incredible year. But then I think the amount of time, the games that he played in the NHL last year has significantly inflated the opinion of what he ultimately could be. Now, I'm saying he is, he's definitely, he's way ahead of where I thought he would be by this point when he was drafted. But yeah, I mean, like, that's, that's the thing is like, you can actually look at them at the same level with similar strengths of schedule. And Buyam was, to me,

me, Booiam was the best player in college hockey last year. He didn't win the Hobie Baker. So, but yeah, interesting. I'm, I'm quite surprised. It seems like Renzel's going to open the year as the power play quarterback and not lift shoot off. Like, that to me is surprising. And that could change. And very well may change, but that is surprising to be right now. I'd agree with that. But getting back to the Booiam thing, though, so particularly ahead of Schaefer and obviously now everybody has seen the back check of the century from Matthew Schaefer that nobody will shut up about, which is not at all surprising because everyone that's seen Matthew Schaefer knows that his skating is his best attribute.

However, you know, Corey, I guess let's get into it. Why would you have Boeum over Schaefer? Well, obviously, this is a, I think both players are great, but I think the argument isn't about Schaefer. Everyone knows Schaefer is a great player. I think the question is, you know, has Boyum done enough to elevate himself to that truly premium? prospect status. And obviously, I think he does. And I don't know if he's quite as athletic a Schaefer,

but I think William's a great skater. Like, he's got tremendous edge work, and he's very elusive. And you look at how he could, like, dance on the blue line and make guys miss to go with the high-end skill and playmaking he has. Like, I think there's a lot of traits there. He's played heavy minutes of college.

He's, like, that's physical, but he's competitive. I don't know. all this guy does seem to play heavy minutes and win and make high and skilled plays and he seems super talented and I just have a lot of belief in this player and I mean I think he's one of the very best players we've seen in college hockey as a teenager last 10 15 years outside of like the truly truly premium names like celebrini and Ikel and Fantilli I don't I don't understand what people's issues would be with him quite frankly what has he done to create him to raise any doubt other than him not, you know, having 6-0 essentially.

Yeah, what I, what my question to the fans would be is what, how much are you judging this on the four games that you saw of them in the playoffs last year? Probably a lot. Which, yeah, which that's probably where it comes from. Because if you are using those games at the end of a season where he played 49 plus, 40, you know, whatever, however many when you include the, the world juniors and everything else that he did. Um, and that's where you're, you're, your, your, you're, you're, you're, you're, you're evaluating in Amman, then you're wrong.

Similarly to how you're wrong about evaluating Sam Renzel off of his nine-game stint from last season, where he had five assists over the course of the game. It's just these things happen. But yeah, but to me, I think it's the lack of appreciation for how good Boolean is versus, you know, like the upside of Schaefer. Maybe he is going to be better. But I mean, objectively, offensively, Booiam's miles ahead in terms of his decision-making. his offensive playmaking bill.

He actually might even be a better defender, which I think is something that people continually get wrong about Zeev, is that he doesn't have that nastiness to him. He's got a lot of it. He's a highly competitive individual. So I just think, and, you know, that to me, it's, again, it's, these are what these lists do. They make people, you know, and you start,

but like we can only tell you what we see. and that's what we see. It is just funny though. These are both players that everyone on this show has like all very. Okay, Renzel at 85, like maybe whatever. Like Corey said, that may be something to revisit at some point. But like Schaefer versus Boo, and we're talking about two players that you had what,

top 10 on the under 23? Yeah. Well, I think the issue is people might think that Boyd mustn't belong in that conversation. But listen, I can't remember every single player I've done this for. but, you know, a lot of hockey players tend to blend together. And, you know, they all have, you know, have similar structures. They're a skill player. They're a speed-based player.

They have size. They're a physical defenseman or something like that. There's only a handful of guys you watch in the course of a year that, like, kind of bring you out of your seat, that look unique, that have a real, like, wow and dynamic element. And Boyam has been that one for me on a consistent basis. and I think there's some special traits there. Maybe I'm wrong, but from everything I've seen of him the last few years, that's what I think. Will R, Corey. Eh, there's a few of these.

Will R. Gabe Perot at 160 is criminal. Jason S. What has Gabe Perot done in his dominance of college hockey to deserve falling 15 slots lower than his draft slot? That just doesn't sound logical. David G., the Gabe Perot hate is quite astonishing. At least put him in the tier with Ryan Leonard. but Prondman hates him for whatever reason.

Is that true, Corey? Do you hate Gabe Perot? In the tier of Ryan Leonard seems a little aggressive to me based on how they project them to the league. Hey, answer the question, do you hate Gabe Perot? Hey, I think Gabe Perot is low for you, too, I have to say. Yeah, so he's a tough one in that. So, like, it's kind of addressed the profile other than the whole, it's criminal thing. Because if I have to lawyer up, it's a whole, you know, it's a whole other issue.

but, so like the profile is, he's a 5-11 below average skating winger who has a high motor and is extremely talented offensively. And then the question just becomes, well, how talented is he?

That's really the bar. Because if it's like incredible, high, high-in offense, then you're talking about what Cole Pervetti is pretty much. And, and, you know, a top six,

wing in the NHL who can score, you know, that 45 to 60 point range and has some limitations at even strength. But that's a really, you know, interesting player profile. And then if he doesn't do that, then you're kind of really looking at him and wondering, well, what does this feel like in the NHL? Because now you're, now I'm starting to think of guys like, like Matt Poitra in Boston last year. I'm thinking of Neal's Hoglander.

that profile can be tough to get super excited about unless they just blow you away with their offense. And I had Perot in that range going into his draft year. But despite how good he was in college, there were times where I didn't quite feel that way. I'm not sure what Chris thinks from all the times he watched Boston College. But, I mean, I thought he was really good. I didn't think he was off the charts dominant. that it made me think that this is a perfetti-esque type of player. And I know he's had a really good preseason so far,

and we'll see how it goes going forward. But I also think it's funny, coming from a fan base that picked Lefranier first, that they didn't pick, but they were, you know, the Rangers picked Lefrenier first and Kako second and skating held them back from achieving their tremendous offensive potential. They show as amateurs. I do find it interesting that there's a lot of pushback here

on the assertion that there's some risks in this profile. And I understand with the draft class there's some asterisk there that had looked like a really good draft so far and there's like

I think I've one of the you know the highest rated in terms of middle of the lineup players are more or better players in terms of how many

I gave high grades out to it's a really, really good draft class right now. But I guess that's my concern with Gaye basically comes down to I'm not just completely

sold is so special that I think he's for sure to be a top six guy given the risks in his profile. I'd be curious to hear what Chris has to say because he probably, you know, like me, he probably watched a lot of Boston College the last two years. Yeah, I have. And you know what? I'd say that in the three years that I've, or four years or whatever, I've been watching Gabe Perrault in some level, he's always been one of the toughest evaluators, evaluations,

because you might not notice him a ton, but you look up and he has four points. Like it's almost, it's, it's incredible how often he was there. And I don't think that he was simply a product of playing with Will Smith and, and Ryan Leonard. I do think that both Smith and Leonard profile better in terms of their pro outlooks.

But what I would say with Gabe, and I think the hockey sense is at such a level that he has a chance to really make it and continue to be a guy who defies the odds. but I agree completely. He's never looked the part. He's never looked the part of a guy that is, you know, the all-time leading score at the NTP or the, you know, whatever he has done in his career,

you're just like, how is this continually happening? And it's because of the skating. If he could have success, I think of like Jackson Blake a little bit too. Like that was kind of the same profile. Like that could be an outcome for him that's positive. Yeah, I mean, I think that would be a great outcome, you know, and I think Jackson Blake is far, far, you know,

surpassed his expectation level. But yeah, I think for Gabe, he is, and he's a guy that I think NHL teams, quite frankly, have just really not figured out what to make of them. But what I've seen in the preseason and where he still knows where to go, he still knows how to get there, he knows where to put pucks, he reads plays incredibly well. Those are all things that could help him get there. But the thing is, is if you don't have that separation speed, if you don't have that escapeability that some of these other players have, it's going to be harder for you to produce

at that level. So I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, but I think that there is absolutely risk there. There's absolutely reason to pause and say he might not be an elite player. I think he's going to be an NHL player. I think he's competitive enough. I think he's smart enough. As he continues to build strength, he'll still have a chance. But I think for me, like, you know, in terms of the overall U-23 rankings, he's probably, you know, lower than I would put him. I haven't done that deep, you know, I haven't made that list. So I couldn't tell you with certainty until I started getting down to it. But I would say that he probably is in that, you know, 100-ish range or wherever, you know,

the one, you know, somewhere in the 90s in terms of where what I think of them. Because I like the player a lot, but I think to Corey's point, it's, it's very difficult to project him. beyond just saying, well, he's always produced. And there are guys where that continues for them. And there are plenty that it did it. We can do this with Hudson, too, if you really want to just keep poking that bear. But, you know, when it comes to Perrault,

I think the obvious question when you bring him up to people in the league is, well, who final four, final eight teams last year looks like that player? And I think the common answer would be like somewhat like a march or so. Is, you know, when Vegas won, that was the guy that he would be compared to. but it's a small list. You get to the final four teams.

I've done that exercise every year. There is nobody that size on a team who doesn't skate well. It doesn't exist in the playoffs. So it's he's going to, he can't just be good. He's got to be crazy good offensively to really move the needle for a team that's trying to win games. Chris, why don't you take us to the Chicago portion of the program?

Yeah, we've got, we've got a few Chicago ones. And I'm going to start with this one and then we'll go to the other ones separately next. But just we've got just a group here. If Bajar, if Bidad shot isn't grading out as elite, I don't know what would. That's Alex B'B on the U23 ranking. And L says, I just don't see Bidard as a different level from that second group, which is talking about the tiers. I bet Fantilly would be more likely to make team Canada than Bad.

Corey? Well, I did have Baderd shot graded as a lead goal. going into the draft and he hasn't really scored like we thought he would in his first two years. That might change. But, you know, for a guy who that was kind of his bread and butter as a junior, it really hasn't been, I think his skills been more of the thing that's driven his game in the NHL than his shot has to date. That could change. And I think it will change, but it hasn't been how his first two years have gone.

And also, I mean, I think, I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that Fantilli could get into the conversation. I think he would need to have the first two, three. three months of his life essentially to leapfrog 15 players or whatever it is, given that he wasn't even on the original orientation camp roster, but Dart was. I don't think either of those two are realistically in the conversation to make Team Canada right now. But Pantilly, his toolkit's really exciting if he has like a crazy, good scoring run to start the year, but that's what it's going to take.

Yeah, I'm with you on that. And I think that the important point, yeah, we'll see. Benard is in for a big season. We've, you know, Max, you probably saw him at that preseason game against Detroit. He's moving like his skating. Yes. Everybody keeps talking about how much faster he is. He, he does look faster, which I think will help. But again, when he, you know, grading the shot tool specifically is a little more difficult because we've, we haven't seen that, that level where, you know, he's, he's scoring as consistently. And you look at guys that have come into the league with that scoring tool like an Austin Matthews, like a Stephen Stamco, those, it's, it's evident immediate.

in their rookie seasons. All right. So more on behalf of Blackhawks Nation here. This one comes from Ted M in the U-23 ranking. And Ted is really looking forward to the Promin Blackhawks podcast Apology Tour in spring 26. Apparently didn't like the way you ranked the players in their system. How about David S?

Nazar at 45 is just hateful. You hateful man, Corey Praman. And this last one from Matt P. Nick Lardis scored 71 goals in 65 games and moved from 67th to 65 on this list. Really? So, Corey, let's go one by one here. Sure. So let's mean apology.

I don't know what they'd be referring to. I feel like generally. I think he means where you had Naser a year ago, basically. Oh, I guess. I mean, like I'm going to say, I feel like when it comes to Chicago, I've been. you know, plenty positive. I think the issue as well is when they've had as many picks as they've had over the last five years is you're not going to agree with every single one of them or have the, you know, made the same assessment on their 70 top three round picks as some of their fans or their management might. But I feel like in aggregate, I've continued to say that their rebuilds going well, that they have a lot of promising young players. you might quibble on this player versus that player or should they have taken this guy or that guy?

But I mean, generally, I feel like I've been, I don't know what I'd be apologizing over unless the only thing I could, I apologize over is if it's just an absolute disaster this year and all their young players are terrible, then I might have to, I guess, apologize to how I thought they had good young players, I guess. In which case, I don't think this guy is looking forward to them. Yeah. I definitely think Nazar, that's the one that I tend to hear most about when I do black. Cox podcast and they're like, why does your friend Corey hate Franks Nazar so much?

And it says hate, do you hate Frank Nazar? So again, we brought this up, we did that U-23 drop the other day, is that we selected, what, 44 players? And nobody even mentioned his name until I brought it up at the very end there. And it was like, oh, yeah, he's the next guy I was picking. Even after they already said that.

Well, that'd be 45. The Kent Johnson next or whatever kind of thing or whoever else they were mentioning. So I'm just, you know, I feel like this. What did the guy say? I'm being hateful? You're a hateful? He's played, what, 30 games in the NHL? You're a hater.

You know, and I know, and I know he signed the big contract. You know, that's kind of like the Roman Yosey contract that Nashville signed to a long time ago, where you're like, where you're trying to gamble a little bit before he has a good another year. And then the price goes up significantly because they got to try and get all these guys signed. So I appreciate why they, why they did that. But I think to suggest that I'm, you know, we've litigated this player before and the potential issues that he might have, how much offense is going to be long term,

et cetera, et cetera. We don't need to go through this again. I feel like, I don't know. I don't know what level you put him at based on the one year he had that was great, which while ignoring the fact that he was kind of average in college beforehand essentially.

So, you know, let's see how his next year goes, quite front. And then we'll reassess, but everything to date has been very positive. Yeah. And how about this one? To give you a break, I'm going to step in front of this bus instead on your behalf for the Nicolaardis question. I think you're too high on him still.

Ooh. So he has, you haven't moved up from 67 to 6th, yes, he had 71 goals for the Brantford Bulldogs last year, incredibly impressive. Outstanding. I watched a lot of those goals. I watch and I feel like there's a good chunk of them that will not be scored in the NHL. You know, and you also have to take into account age, different things, you know, players experience, the team that they're on. Brantford was a very good team, all those different things. This is not to take anything away.

71 goals is nothing to see as that. It's incredible. Unbelievable. I think, you know, I will be very surprised if Nick Lardis walks in the AHL this year and scores more than 25 goals. That'd be an incredible number for a player at his age. But I would be very surprised. I just think that the jump from junior to pro is going to be more onerous to him. But am I being too harsh on him, Corey?

Because you had him 65th. And like I said, I think, or 67th. I think that that I was like, I don't know if he's in that mix for me. To go back to something we talked about earlier in the podcast, I think this always comes down to how people actually project hockey players in the next level versus what they accomplished at a certain level in terms of their stats. and that I think nobody would dispute that Nick Lars has skill, that he has a high-end shot, that he has good hockey sense.

I think he's a good skater too. We're looking at a guy who's not really physical, who plays a lot on the outside, who's not very big, and for that profile to become a top nine forward in the NHL, I mean, he's going to just need to score so much and make so many plays, which he really didn't do for a large part of his junior career up until his 19 year old year.

So I think he's going to have a lot to prove as a pro to your point, to prove he's more than like a Daniel Sprung or whatever type of prospects, essentially. And that might be aggressive even to use that name because I think Sprong had a little bit more creativity in his game at the same age. But I think that's the profile right now. And I think what Chris and I do is largely thinking of profiles. It's not about, you know, I always think it's funny when people send us this stuff. And they say, did you not know this guy?

scoring like yeah no shit i all this league every single day i i know what these guys scored at but that's not the job i might be wrong but i'm not and i don't we don't not know this all right warrant kore from the 2021 redraft this is a good one how is j j mozer who has played the second highest number of games 259 out of all the players drafted in 2021 not on the redraft list So that was my screw up in that. So like he should be on there. He should have been whatever top 15, whatever kind of thing. So when we do the redraft articles, which come out after the U23 list, like we kind of build a database to use that to help put the redraft together.

And then I have to go in and try and find guys that are over the age of 23 that were drafted. And there was a guy like Moser, he was a third year eligible. So whatever, he's 24, 25 now, essentially. you know, like a guy like Victor Mancini comes to mind as a guy who's older, but he qual, he's not U23 eligible, but he fits into one of the redrafts, for example. I missed him when I went through that exercise, so that was an oversight. I make mistakes sometimes, not even, I make plenty of evaluation mistakes, but sometimes I just make basic, you know, editing mistakes. And so that's, that's on me. He's a great player.

I think, you know, he's a legit, you know, second-payer type defenseman in the NHL, real, really smart, competitive. that draft class was light so he should be well up in any list for that one. So yeah, I've made some real big screw ups. I think remember one year I forgot to put Phil's Zadina in there by accent, which in hindsight may not have been the most. You were right. I could have said it was intentional. You were right.

You were just early. Weren't wrong just early. Yeah, one of my biggest draft whiffs ever right there, Zadena. All right. So warranty, you win. This is, you defeated Corey on that one. Good job. Yeah, you got them.

All right, this one is... I know the one you're going to. Yeah. Josh in our 2024 redraft here, your 2024 redraft. I had nothing to do with it, just so everyone knows. I want to make that abundantly clear. Josh says, bro has Dean Laterno, who had three points in 36 NCAA games. Three points.

He put four exclamation points on there. He put more exclamation points than Dean Laterno had points. Fair points. In 36 NCAA games in the top 50, you really can't make this up. This guy is obsessed with size, and that's the only thing he considers insane. And that's just, yeah, that's. So, Corey, Dean Luterno in the top 50 of a 20-24 redraft. Remind me where he went?

20, I think, 21? Yeah, something. Somewhere in there. That'd be quite something that suggests like 12 months later. that, like, he's not even up a top three-round player anymore. Like, there's 90 guys in that draft who are better than him. And Luterno has significant issues. Let's not discount that.

And if someone wanted to put him significantly lower, I would understand completely, because he had a completely disastrous year at Boston College. I think, you know, it's more than just the size, even though size is a variable. He went 25th overall, sorry. that, you know, he's a pretty strong skater for that frame. There is some skill there. Like, even though he didn't score much, like, I think you still see there's flashes with

a puck play there. I think the hockey sense is a question. His compete level at times is a question. But also the context of the team that he was on, Boston College, one of the very best teams in the country. You got to imagine if he was on a mid-range college hockey team last year, he would have been on the power play more often. He would have had more ice time.

often he was healthy scratched or 13th forward or barely playing. And I think there was a lot of people, myself included, but a lot of people in the league I talked to who were very surprised. He went to the college last season. He seemed like a prime guy who should have gone to junior hockey last season after playing prep. And it was a really big step and he clearly wasn't ready. So that's my logic there. I'm not giving him a mulligan because I definitely lowered him on my ratings

from a year ago, but I wasn't willing to completely tank his rating based on that difficult year. Now, he's completely bad next year with Leonard and Perugan. If he can't find a way to elevate on that team and become a useful player for them, then I think you can agree with that assessment. And that's okay. If you put him like 40, 50, 60, it's not unreasonable to me. I think saying top 50 is like laughable. or whatever term this reader used,

I would push back on that. I think that's a little, that's a step too far too soon. Yeah, the upside hasn't gone away yet. I mean, but I would say that this was, that season was predictable. I mean,

I think anyone looking at him saying that he, I mean, he had a chance. He could have gone to Sioux Falls in the USHL. It's absolutely where he should have been. BC loses Will Smith and they bring him in. And I was very concerned. early in the season and the concerns remain later in the season. Now you wonder, you know, does he recover?

I think you will, but yeah, you're going to have to find ways to put him in the right situations. Or you're going to have to send him back to junior. And he might have to go somewhere where he can play and play in an elevated role to, you know, get back on track. Because this is a guy that did score 127 points, 61 goals in prep. But prep to college, seismic gap between those levels. Prep to a college team with frozen four aspirations. Yes, impossible. I still don't know why they did it that way.

Anonymous, you says, how do you have several goalies listed but no Jacob Fowler? And Isaac G. hopefully replies, because Corey believes that Fowler, a top three goaltending prospect, projects to be a backup. Your response. Feels like he's leading the witness there a little bit, right? Could be. Obviously, I have a different assessment did.

So, like, this player type is tricky, where, and it's kind of funny, too, we just talked about this with the Rangers in Perrault, you know, comparing it to Lefranier and Coco. Do you remember Max the Caden Primo hype train coming out of college? Oh, yeah. You know, and that's kind of like the profile of Fowler is that he's not huge, he's not super quick, but he's smart, he's technically sound. He's put up monster numbers in college. I think he's a better player,

you know, skill-wise than pre-bo was. He's actually a little bit smaller, but maybe a little more athletic and makes more high-quality saves. But that's kind of, the projection here is tough. I'm not saying it's, there's some good outcomes that can come here.

I'm thinking of players that look like this. You're thinking of Carter Hart. that was a success story. It's a similar profile. I think of Jeremy Swayman as a good outcome from that player type. I'm trying to think what else. Philip Gussesons, another one I thought of.

Like that's the similar, you know, athletic profile. It's really good hockey sense player type. But then there's, you know, there's some ones where you're like, well, what if this is Wedgwood? What if this is Eric Comrie? What if it's Vitech Vanichek

or Mikey DiPietro, although he's like way more athletic. Or the Colosov kid in Philly that people were so excited about and then he comes to the NHL and it doesn't work so well anymore. I think that's my concern with Fowler is I look at the profile

and I think you've been an awesome junior player, awesome college player, but when we get to the NHL, when you're 6162 and not super quick, I have some concerns. And until you get it done versus men, I'm still the concerns. I had that on Dustin Wolf, quite frankly, too.

I had it on Devin and Levi. We've talked about them over the years. And I know Wolf had that big years on that big contract. I have some issues with that contract. That's a whole other conversation right now before we antagonize Flames fans. You know, we had this conversation about Swamen this time last year. Like how interesting is that profile and how does that project into the NHL? And obviously he had a disaster every year.

We think that he's not that bad. But I don't know. anything like this, does it sound unreasonable to anyone? Like, I, I don't know if just dominating college immediately lends you when you're not. We don't have the typical traits of like an ass scare off or something like that or the true Spencer Knight of the true premium goalie prospects should have me project you as a starting goal in the NHL. Right. No, I mean, in my opinion, the truism of how hard it is to predict goalies, right, the old goal to or voodoo, like we should apply it double to prospects that are going to jump up levels.

Like, that's, to me, we've seen so many goals. In fact, some of the best college goaltenders by statistics every year don't even make the NHL, right? And it's because of the underlying profile. I don't think you're ruling it out for Jacob Fowler here. But you're probably trust in the evaluation a little, especially with, it's not just college goaltenders, it's any goaltender outside of, you know, pro hockey and particularly the NHL, we just don't know until you get there.

So I would exercise a ton of caution on goaltenders. I mean, and we mentioned all of those players I mentioned. There's a reason they all went in the second or the third round is that there's risks. I never would have disputed that Fowler was going to kill it in college hockey. He might have been a little bit better than I thought he was going to be. But after how good he was in the USHL, I thought he was going to be a fabulous college goalie. And he was, he was, he dominated the two years he was at Boston College. but pro hockey is different.

And the NHL is very different. And I have some reservations on how that's going to translate. I mean, look what we've seen from even the top goalie prospects, right? Like we see that with, you know, Spencer Knight, I think, has come through and been really good. But a lot of these are their first round picks. Is Sebastian Kosa blown you away? Yeah. No, and even Knight has some questions, quite frankly, still.

Like, how good is he going to be? Walsdeck, obviously major questions. Ascarov, we're still. kind of waiting. We think it's coming now, but it's like to say a guys, I think, to be insulted,

I think he's going to be a backup goalie. Like, I think that loses context of, of just how many guys really, truly predict a starting goalies. If a team thought a guy was going to be a starting goalie, they would take him in the top 15 to 20 picks. And that happens like what,

once every couple of years? Yep. It shows like how hard it is. And with the guys that do become that, it's a lot of fortunate. development and then we can even take this a step further and ask how many guys in NHL do you feel are true number ones that you'd want them starting 50-60 games that you feel super confident with them that they can make a difference for you on you know on a

nightly basis or that they're just kind of in the second tier of 30 to 40 names that are not really a premier goalie in the NHL yeah all right let's close there that is going to do it for us today. Congratulations to warranty for stumping the hateful Corey Prondman, but Corey, we do very much appreciate you doing this. And we also, I should say, we really do appreciate the commenters. I know that we read your comments sometimes in a little impressions. I hope you guys can take that in the good-natured spirit that it is intended to just to make an episode like this work. So we appreciate all of you, and we especially appreciate you listening to this episode of the Athletic Hockey Show Prospect Series. You can, of course, catch more of Chris at Flow hockey.

And on his podcast called up, we'll talk to you soon.