The Athletic Hockey Show - Corey’s NHL Draft 2023 midseason ranking, Aatu Raty headed to the Vancouver Canucks, listener questions, and more

Episode Date: February 3, 2023

On this week’s Prospect Series episode of The Athletic Hockey Show, Max and Corey discuss Aatu Raty’s future impact with the Vancouver Canucks after being traded from the New York Islanders as part of the Bo Horvat deal, Corey’s 2023 NHL Draft prospects midseason ranking, including Connor Bedard as the no-doubt No. 1 leading an impressive group of 4 at the top, as well as a comparison to Bob McKenzie’s list, and the guys wrap things up answering listener questions in the mailbag.Subscribe to The Athletic Hockey Show on YouTube: http://youtube.com/@theathletichockeyshowGet a 1-year subscription to The Athletic for $2 a month when you visit http://theathletic.com/hockeyshowGet 20% Off and Free Shipping with the code NHL23 at http://Manscaped.com and shoot your arrow with MANSCAPED™ this Valentine’s Day Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This is the Athletic Hockey Show Prospect Series. Hey, everybody, Max Boltman here alongside Corey Pranman for another episode of the Athletic Hockey Show's prospect series. We don't have Chris Peters with us today, but we do have some exciting prospect news in the trade world here with a former one-time top 2021 draft candidate, Atu Ratu, going from the New York Islanders. the Vancouver Canucks is part of the Bo Horvat deal. And I want to start with that, Corey, because when you look at the track, the trajectory, I guess, of Atu Ratu over the past few years, it was really high, and then he falls all the way into the second round and almost immediately shoots back up. I remember that World Junior Summer Showcase that I think was concurrent to that draft.

He was one of the very best players at it. He's now in the NHL or had been with the New York Islanders. He's going to go to the Canucks, and he's going to start in Abbotsford, it sounds like. Where are you at overall on Atu Ratu right now? And what should Vancouver fans be excited about here? I think he's a very good young player. He's not a premium young player. He's not a guy who if he redid that draft,

would go in the top 10 or something like that. But he looks like, you know, a middle to late first round pick type of talent. This is a guy who two years removed from his draft, like he said, has already played NHL games. The impressions of him coming out of his, his camp with the Islanders. Out of his first year in North America have generally been positive. I know his point production in Bridgeport wasn't amazing, but he's still, like I said,

a very young player still. When I've watched him this year, I think he's looked good. He's skilled. He's intelligent. Good side-centeredman. Compete good enough. The issue on him has been whether the skating will hold up in the NHL to help him be an impactful player.

I see a guy who can't be a center in the NHL. I see a middle-sixth center in the NHL, whether it's second line, whether it's third line. That will be, you know, for him to decide over the coming years. But he's a very good player, and he's a guy who, when you consider the Horvatt, is on an expiring deal, getting that type of very good young player

with a first-round pick and Anthony Beauvillier. Like, that trends, what those returns usually are. He's not an outstanding prospect. He's not like, let's say, like, I know what Dobson type of young player is for the islanders, but he's an excellent young player and he will be a Canuck for a very long time. With Vancouver, is what's going to determine whether this was a good trade, whether Ratu becomes a second or a two C or to you, is it more about what's going to happen with the pick that they get in this deal, which is a conditional first for 2023,

top 12 protected optionally. But is that really the game changer here? Possibly. Like, you know, usually with these trades, the team that trades the good player never gets one guy coming back traditionally that is, that projects to be as good as the guy you lost. The exception to that was like, say that Martin Ear after Philip Borsberg.

trade a while back, and that didn't go so well for Washington. So I don't, the first round pick, we'll see where that ends up being in the draft. I know it's lottery protected. So we'll see where and that's up being and what the player ends up being and we'll see what Ratu ends up becoming. But I'm guessing that first round pick is, you know, a middle of the line of four a defenseman and that's what Ratu ends up becoming. And those are two important players.

And Bavilla is an important player. I don't know if you can realistically hope that any one of those three assets become exactly what you lost in Bo Horvett. It's tough to get those kind of players. There's a reason why they got him in the top 10. If I wanted to play big-time Atu-Ratoo advocate here, I would say what's the biggest differentiator between him and Anton Lindell at this stage? I think Lundel had a little bit more success versus men at the same time. but I and I think maybe his compete level was I don't think Ratu is soft but I think like Lundel was that was a major asset of his and still is So I think that's, but I understand the similar size centers, not great skaters.

They're skilled, but they're not going to bring you out of your seats skilled. So I kind of see where you're going with that analogy. And I don't think, I don't think they're that far apart as players. I think Lundell is better, but I don't think there's a dramatic difference between the two of them as players. But also at the same age, Lundel was a regular in a very good Florida Panthers lineup. and was helping them make a push to the playoffs two years removed from his draft, and we're not there with Ratu at this current stage. Yeah.

Yeah, one year older, but obviously Ratu had the late birthday, too, so it's really maybe a little bit deceiving that age gap to it. Right. Yeah, I agree with that. Yeah. So it'll be interesting to see, but I don't think he's the make or break piece. I think it's the pick, and I think it's ultimately the volume, too. Like, you may get something for Beauvillier.

You may get something dealing a different winger who you're replacing with Bovillier. I think it's the volume. I think the Canucks were going to kind of need a little bit of a reset. And I mean, I don't think either of us thinks the Canucks are done here. Like this is, I think this is probably just the beginning of what's going to be a somewhat significant turnover there. Yeah. Demko is probably the most interesting name now to watch with them. Who I know he had the injuries and he hasn't maybe been himself so far this year. But I think that's a player who, if it was on the open market, there will be a lot of interest.

Well, it should be interesting either way. Let's go now, Corey, though, into your draft rankings, which I guess Canucks fans are even more interested in now than they probably already were. A new set of rankings for you. And I think the key here is something you put into your introduction. If at one point it seemed like the gap was closing between Adam Fantille and Connor Bedard at number one, the World Junior sufficiently reversed that course here. Connor Bedard, number one, with a bullet. Yes, that is accurate. And it is accurate as well that in the first few months of the year, I was hearing from many people around the league that they thought there was a closing gap.

And I don't think that was unreasonable to think. As we talk right now, Adam Fantilli leads college hockey and points per game. That is incredible. That is, with almost any other draft class, you're talking about probably the runaway number one overall pick at the moment. You know, he is an outstanding pro prospect. You know, you compare some of the other first-year draft eligible as we've seen in college over the last few years. Maddie Baneers, Owen Power, Kent Johnson, I might be missing one or two, you know, Dylan Holloway, etc. You compare them to what Fantilli is doing right now.

It's not even close. He looks just incredible. But after what Bedard did at the World Juniors to build onto what's already been an extremely impressive resume. and the way he did it, it wasn't just Pucks were bouncing in or something like that. He was the driving force as a very young 05. He's like a July or an August 05, I believe. And the way he kind of just was head and shoulders better than everybody at that tournament, he is by a clear margin, the best player in this draft class.

What I think makes it so interesting, though, is that you make the point, the guys who are two through four also could have very, very easily challenged for number one in several recent classes. And I think, you know, you talk often about kind of the symmetry of drafts and how most drafts are pretty average, but when there is a difference, it's because of what happens at the top. Ultimately, you take another draft. You take the Jack Hughes draft in 2019 and you plop in like two more players of Capocaco's level. And all of a sudden, that draft is super deep. And that draft already was really deep. We're already going back and looking at that now and finding really good players from

the teens. I think you can make a really good argument here that, you know, this draft now stretches, certainly when you compare to last year, into, you know, the really desirable players stretch much deeper as a result of what you have two through four here with Adam Fintili, Leo Carlson, and Mavimichkov. Right. I think part of that is they have those two to four, they're all late birthday, so they kind of have blended into that 05 group. You know, imagine if, you know, in that 2019 class if Alexi left for a year was was bored a couple of weeks earlier

and he's in that draft now. You know, that could have changed that dynamic a little bit. It would have been really fun draft if that was the case. But that's a whole other thing. But yeah, no, at the top, I think is really what makes

this class a strong draft class. You have four special draft eligibles in Connor Bedard and in Fantili in Michigan. And you have Moféy Michkoff over in Russia and Leo Carlson with Oribo over in Sweden. But I think after that, kind of what you said, and a point I made often is that once you get past those four,

I think the body of the draft starts to look like a lot of other ones. If you read the article, you see the tiers I use, you compare them to maybe other draft rankings I've done over the years. You're going to see there's a lot of similarities in terms of what the body looks like in terms of like projected middle of the lineup players, how many high grades I give on players total. there's some not completely similar but there are a lot of similarities but that top of the draft is really special. I mean, I think you could have dropped Leo Carlson into the Owen Power draft into

the Uri-Slafkofsky draft and made a really reasonable argument that he was the best player in that draft. So is it an oversimplification or would it be fair to say like, you know, picking at 10 in this draft is similar to picking in seven in your average draft? Is that an oversimplification or would that hold up? it's it's probably close enough i think or 15 to 12 whatever yeah yeah like you think you're you're you're like in the right direction there like i don't know the exact number when that effect would just stop and it looks like a typical draft class but it probably happens sometime around that 10 to 15th spot that starts to normalize a little bit and at some point you know it's just going to look

like a regular draft class or somewhere around that level but but i think you're all on the right track there. We're going to get to some of those names in a little bit here, but let's just drill down just a second because I think Mitchkov is a guy who in the early part of the year, maybe there wasn't quite as much like sizzle as there had been coming in. He missed some time, obviously. He's up to three now in your rankings here. It seems like kind of we're back to talking about Vamavay Mitchkoff as maybe the second

most talented player in this draft or at least right there challenging with Fintilli for that. And I think that's fair based on what he's shown over his career. And this season, when he was in the VHL, the second tier men's league in Russia, he destroyed it. Like, that league isn't the most amazing pro league I've ever seen in my life, but it's still a good league. There are good players. We've seen top draft eligibles like, say, Vasily put Coles in or Fedor Svechkov at the same age, be like average players in that league.

And he was like a goal per game. And there's a draft eligible. And he was carrying his team in those games and some of the games I've watched. And then he goes to the KHL on a very poor Sochi team, mind you, and he's been very good in the KHL. Like there are games where he gets a lot of scoring chances, involved a lot of the offense, and this is a, and for a guy who is not that big, not that fast, like doesn't have the pro attributes he usually think would translate into immediate pro success, especially in the

KHL, like he's getting it done. And I think this is, again, there are issues in his game. I think there are issues on his season that you could kind of poke holes at but he's like the amount of offense he shows is just outstanding. His is what he can do with the puck, his hockey sense are both elite

and he's a very different player from Annifentil until he and from Leo Carlson. But I, I, he is most certainly one of the best players in this track class. You could have reasonable arguments whether he should be in that top four. You could have reasonable arguments whether he will be worth the risk to take in

the top four, top five. But he is an outstanding hockey player. I think that's what makes it interesting is when we start talking about the top four, right? His situation, I mean, the Russia factor here, I think is going to complicate all this. But that is kind of where the next tier gap happens here, right? Between, I think most people would agree, these are the top four on talent. and then you get into kind of some varying opinions. I mean, Bob McKenzie put out his list last week, and that's usually a poll of NHL scouts, some NHL scouts averaged out, and I think his number five is Zach Benson.

And I think that's a player we've heard plenty about, but on your list, Zach Benson is, I believe, number 12. So that's where this seems like it opens up a little bit beyond. We'll see what happens in the actual draft because of the rush effect, but that's where the talent ranking seemed to open up. Right. And I think on Bob's survey, he even had some scouts. to say Mitchkov should be as high as two.

Yeah. So he's still very well thought of in the league. And I think that's what's going to be really interesting when it comes to this decision with Mitchcov is we presume, I think most reasonable people presume that Badaar's going one, extremely likely, I think, that Fantali and Carlson are going to go two and three in some order. And then some team is going to have a really interesting decision to make. where they're going to, if they agree, not everybody agrees that Mitch Kov is a clear top four guy, but most people, I think, do.

And if they believe that, then they need to make a decision on whether they take somebody who's substantially worse as a player. And I don't think it's a small gap between Mitch Kov and the next best player. I think it's going to be a significant gap. And you have to make that decision on whether you want to take on the risks of the Russia factor, of his long contract in the KHL. And, you know, frankly, there are some minor concerns about how his season has gone and that, you know, he, you know, he kind of bounces around, you know,

he's, you know, gone from Scott Asochi, why couldn't he make Scott's KHL team? Those are all reasonable questions, I think, not like major questions asked, but they're worth asking if you want to use a top five pick on him, given the fact he's also a 5-10 winger, not an elite skater. There are some risk variables in his profile. But, man, he's probably one of the most talented offensive players I've seen of like the last 10 years at that age. So it would be really tough to pass on him. And to take, I don't know, Zach Benson, Braden Yeager, and Albert Dvorsock, Will Smith,

Oliver Moore, all great, all great players, but they don't have that special quality he has. And that's the kind of player where if you don't draft him, you might be spending the next decade trying to find a guy who does stuff like him. The flip side argument from some of the people who have to make that decision is if I do draft him, I might be spending the better part of the next decade crossing my fingers for when he's going to come over. And if he doesn't, I might be spending that time watching on TV or something. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. No, that's an argument I hear from NHL people is it's not your job on the line, you know, and I get it. It's not. It doesn't change my life whether Mitch Gop comes over or not. But if you are the manager who drafts him, your job definitely is on the line because if you're drafting him, you're probably not in a good position as an organization. And the devil's advocate argument I hear is once we get past Fantillion Carlson,

where you start thinking of realistic timelines for players to come over. You know, how much is Will Smith or Yeager or Benson or whoever really going to help your organization within the next two years? I think that's very fair. Or three years. They might. You might be talking about a year and a half of, you know. There might be one of those guys in that next group who becomes a really good player within the next two years.

Odds are maybe a second or a third who's like fine. and holds their own in the NHL. I don't know. You cover the Red Wings. Yeah. It's been how many years since Lucas Raymond's draft? Three. And so that's where he is.

But, you know, Sider took two years between his draft and last year when he came over. So that was the first year. Let's say, let's say Raymond was just coming into the NHL, like starting next season. That wouldn't be the end of the world. No, it wouldn't be the end of the world. Did that really change how the Red Wings build went? No. No, and that's a good point.

Really quick on this, just because I think this is where everyone's going to, their minds are going to go as we talk about this. Seven teams, I think, realistically in the mix for, you know, those top four right now. Columbus, Chicago, Anaheim, Arizona, San Jose Montreal, Vancouver. Are there any of those that would shock you if they took Michkov? And are there any that would shock you if they passed on Mitchcove at number four? Well, the Blue Jackets, at least under the Kekyllian regime, haven't really shown a hesitation to draft Russians. So that's one organization I kind of circle and could see a willingness there. But again, the devil's advocate argument is, is Kekalayanan's time running up a little bit?

Can he afford to wait three years? Yeah, there's been some tumult there, some turnover. They've reinitiated this rebuild now. And, yeah, I think that's a fair, fair question. Pat Verbeek and Anaheim comes from the Eisenman school where they didn't shy away from Russians. That is what I was thinking of there too. You know Pat Verbeek may be better than I do. Not really.

They kept their front office pretty siphoned off. Yeah, I think I can look through all these organizations really and make arguments for and against it. I mean, with Arizona, you can make an argument like, well, they're not going to be really good for much for the next few years. and not even in an NHL rink yet for the next couple of years. So why not? And the other side of it is love to get a player that actually helps you win games and our fans actually can come and see sometime in the next three seasons. Right.

So it's why whenever I talk to people, like we can spitball what we think in the minds of Kekeleinen or Bill Armstrong or Pat for Beak, but everyone says this is an ownership call. So I don't know what's in these owners. his heads. No, but I guess my point being, I think when I see people talk about this draft and Michikov, I think it often comes from fan bases who think they're going to be picking like 8, 9, 10, they're thinking, well, the rush effect, you're like, Michikov's going to, you know, he's going to drop. But like, when I look at these teams that I think are the most likely to be the ones picking

around four, I don't see any of them that I say there's no chance they take him, right? That's what I think. I don't know. I mean, we'll see, especially some of those Canadian markets where maybe there's more pressure to win quicker than Cuba, Montreal, I don't know, maybe. But a lot of those, especially those Western teams, I think you can argue, why not? And I would say that people I talk to in the league, it's split.

I think there are some people in the league who think he's going to slide, who say they would be hesitant to do it. And then there's another large pool of them who I think are like licking their chops at the chance of getting this guy. Like they just see the incredible talent and hockey sense, and they're like, yeah, sure, whatever issues.

No, we'll take that and we'll find a way to make it work. Yeah, should be interesting. Let's take a quick break. We'll be right back. All right, Corey, let's dive back into your rankings here. And what I want to do for this segment is because the Bob McKenzie list tends to be a pretty good beat on where the league is at, I want to ask you about some of the differences I see on your list and on Bob's list.

And I want to start with the one we teased in the last segment. Zach Benson at five on his list, at 12 on yours. I know you talked to plenty of NHL sources here when you put this together here. So were you a little surprised to see Benson up at five when this came out? A little bit. I was. Yeah, I think there are plenty of people in the league who love him and think he could be a top seven, top eight guy. But I've heard enough reservations about that that I think, you know, if we were doing prop bets right now,

I don't think if you told me like under over under seven and a half I would lean to the under like I almost look at him as a play style and tool kit and production like I think there's a lot of similarities to him and Marco Rossi in his draft season in the body type in the skating and the competitiveness in the offense could argue Rossi had even more offense in his draft year and he was a center and he went ninth overall. So that's just based on history. I love Benson. He's an incredible player. It's one of the best forwards in WHL, arguably, and although junior right now is skills outstanding, great hockey sense, might be arguably the most competitive player in this draft class. The athletic tools, though, are scary as a 5-9 winger, who is, I think, a fine to good skater, but not an incredible skater at that size.

And so I think there's some risk variables there. We talked a little bit off air about looking through history and league for this player type. And scarily enough, I asked Max how many five, nine wingers are shorter than the NHL are half a point per game or better right now. And he got it right on the first guess, which maybe he's hacking my computer. I don't know. But is that there are eight of them currently in the league. And if you increase that by one inch to five foot 10, it jumps to about 20 something. You increase that to another inch to about 511.

It jumps about 50 something. So there's very few players in the league who are legit scoring wingers at that size. There are even fewer of them who were used with a premium draft pick. Most of them are guys who are kind of value guys or developed later, whether it's someone like a Zuccarello or Marsha or Marci or so or, you know, Bradman Marchand one later, Johnny Grosven, you know, You know, you basically have, it's basically Cole Cawfield is the only guy who went that high and became an impactful player at that size. And it was something I've been thinking about what Benson is. I've watched Zach Benson a lot over the last two seasons.

And I watched Cole Cawfield a lot going into his chapter. And everybody knows I was a big Cole Cawfield guy. And I would ask you, Max, I'm not sure how much Benson you've watched, but, you know, who do you like more going into their draft year, Cawfield or Benson? Coughfield, but I think it's because of the shot was that. Like, even at 17 years old, you knew that this was going to be one of the best shots in the NHL. You're right. That's kind of where I lean too, is that I think Benson's a great player. But when I watched Cawfield, I thought, okay, there's something special about this guy,

whether it's his skill, whether it's a shot. Like, there was a game-breaking element and not really a hot take on a guy who scored 70 goals in his draft season. But you could kind of see there was a, and it wasn't. always the case throughout the draft season with Cole. His first half did not, didn't always look that way. But as his draft season progressed, you saw there was certainly a special trait to the small guy. But he still went 15th overall. So when trying to project where I think Benson's going to go in the draft, I just don't think five, six, seven.

I have got to imagine when teams get into their late meetings and they start having discussions with their management that, trying to sell the 5-9 winger who isn't like an incredible skater, I think that's going to be an uphill climb. A couple of guys we've talked about, I think, who there's not total overlap with, but in some cases, like it's a couple of Swedes, maybe that's lazy, but we've talked about, is there a little overlap on a William Eklund? Is there a little overlap on a Lucas Raymond? You know, maybe not as fast as Ecclund, not as skilled as Raymond, but also not quite

as big as either of them. Right. They're both about 510, 511-ish. And again, you might think, oh, Corey, you're being trivial. That's one inch. But again, I just told you the stats. You move the body types just a little bit and the amount of comparables in the league chain substantially. And like Benson might be the next Cole Caulfield.

I'm sure there's some people listening and thinking, well, you just talked about one of the young stars in the league. Oh, and so what's the problem here? And I think that's right or wrong. It's why Caulfield went 15th. when I was talking to people in the league, is they say, you look at the player pool in the National Hockey League

and you can't find a whole lot of comparables for him. At the time it was DeBriken and that was it. I think with Benson, I think the two outcomes you're hoping for, like on the median case, you're hoping for Jonathan March or so and on the best case you're hoping for Matt Zucarillo. And if he's not either of them,

he's probably in the American League. Yeah, and to your point, right, like, when we talk about it, It's not the Johnny Godreau, Alex DeBring. I do think these are guys that go comfortably top 10, obviously in a redraft. Godreau goes top five. But it's the risk of all the rest of the universe of outcomes that makes you question, well, what if not, that usually will drop these guys beyond that, right?

If he's Johnny Godreau, which I don't think he is, but if he was Johnny Goodro, you're taking top five all day, right? We're talking about Connor Bedard, who's, well, he can't be much more than 5'9 as a clear cut number one. Right. Matve Mitzkhov, similar deal. But if the second it drops below that, no doubt, you have to wonder about the rest of the universe of the players. And that's where you get it.

I mean, where should Matt Zuccarello go in a redraft? He wasn't drafted. I know, in a redraft, right? Where should he go? Right. I think I looked at his age group. Yeah. I think I looked at his age group, the one he should have gone in.

I think he was like top five-ish or top seven-ish and scoring in that age group. So now there's some defensive aspects of that too because of the size. But, but, you know, he's, he's, would be a high, high draft pick if he was to be put back into his original draft class. And like I said, the issue is the risk is, I just rattled off, I said, the stats before, I said there were eight wingers who are legit scoring wingers at that size in the NHL. Think about all the other players that have come over the last decade or so, all the five, nine or shorter guys who lit up junior or college or were grading Europe.

And, and they're not there. I mean, he was a second round pick, but yeah, I'm just thinking it could be anybody, anybody. We're talking about, I mean, heck, it looks like Niels Hoglander was going to be that guy. Now he's in the American League, and he's playing well in the American League. I think he'll be back. But that's the universe, you know. Maybe Marco Rossi is going to be that. Maybe he won't.

We'll find out what time, what he is at the wild. It's just a very small player pool of guys that actually look like Benson at 17 and become impactful in HL players. and that risk has to be calibrated, I think into his projection. If you don't watch him, and like you said, you don't watch him and think he's special. And I don't, I haven't concluded that. I think he's an outstanding player, but I don't watch him and I see like special skills, special hockey sense. Like you saw with Cole Coffield or with Lucas Raymond or with Mafei Mitchkoff. I just, I'm not there yet, but I might be wrong.

And I know plenty of other. And you have met 12, right? Yeah, and I know plenty of other evaluators who think I'm wrong. So yeah, and you got him at 12. So it bakes in some risk, probably explains the difference. Another guy kind of goes the other way, Corey. Your number one defenseman is David Reimbacher, the Austrian defenseman, number six on your list. That correlates a little closer to where we usually see the first defenseman go off the board.

He's number 20 on the McKenzie list. Is this somebody who you would, I imagine this is someone we expect is going to rise higher than 20 over the second half of the season, though? I would think so. again, we did a prop bet on Benson. If we did a prop bet like say over under 12 for Reimbacker, I would take the over right now. I think he has a decent chance to be a top 10 draft pick when the draft actually happens.

You just look at what he's doing right now in a very good league in the top Switzerland league where he's playing real minutes on a team that looked like it was going to suck coming to the year in Clotin, but they're actually doing okay. right now. He plays power play for them. He's listed on the top pairing every night. It's not one of those things where it's like kind of, we see in the Europeans.

Like, where they're on the top pair of the top line, but then they play five minutes in the game. But he's actually playing a real role on this team. He is 6'2. He is quite a strong skater. I've been impressed with his defensive play versus men. I'm not saying it's outstanding already, but I mean, he's physical.

He competes hard. He can kill rushes with his skating in his length. He's showing offense at a young age versus good players. I don't know if he's going to be like this elite offensive player, but I see some skill, some playmaking. Like he shows comfort playing at that level on the power play. There's a lot here that leads me to believe he will be a high draft pick. I'm not saying, you know, I've had a couple people ask me like,

oh, is this some similarity as a cider? And I don't want to say that because I think that might be overselling this player a little bit in terms of I get the how the brain connects those dots when you look at maybe a non-traditional league for a top defenseman to come out of both right shot defensemen with size. I don't think he's cider.

That's not what I mean to imply, but I think this is a guy who has a very good chance to be a top four defenseman in the NHL. How far off of like a Noah Dobson do you think he could be? It doesn't have quite the size Dobson does. Right. Maybe a little bit meaner to play against, but I think Dobson is one I've thought of. I've thought of Jacob Truba when I've watched him. Those are probably the two that have come to mind right away.

And, you know, I'm not saying he's going to be those guys specifically, but a guy who can make an impact at both ends of the ice, you know, a really good pro-defenseman. A couple of guys who are, I think high on both of your list, but in the top 10 for the McKenzie list, Braden Yeager and Colby Barlow, they're more mid-teens. for you. We don't have to talk about them together necessarily if there's one you want to start with here. But I think, you know, these are some of the top CHL players who it's worth discussing here. What's the gap? So two different debates, although there is some mild similarity between the two of them. Yeager, I have rated still fairly high. I think he's an excellent all-around

player. He's a good skater. He has skill. He has an amazing shot. He has a lot of energy in his game. He competes well. The scoring this year in the dub, probably not what you expected coming in after his tremendous underage year and after his great Holinka, that he's just slightly over a point per game right now is probably a little bit off of what we expected

coming to the year. I think Mooshaw in general, I thought would score more goals than they have this season. So now we're looking at Yeager and we started asking the questions for the pro projections. Because I think when I watch them,

I don't see, like outstanding offensive abilities. I think he has skill. I think he has good offensive hockey sense. I think the shots up, it's a big time NHL weapon, but I don't think you look at him and think there's like elite offensive abilities here.

So now you start asking the question, okay, well, what is he in the NHL? He's 5 foot 11. He's a pretty good skater, he's a pretty good skill, but I don't think like there's a, I don't think he's dynamic. So I think that's,

that's where the debate comes in. I talk to people in the league. I think there's like, I think there's a people in the league who are more on my side and some who are more on the side of, like, he's still a premium prospect. He's going to be this really good two-way forward, play all day, have a long NHL career, etc. So we'll see where he ultimately ends up in the draft. But that's my hesitancy is I just don't know if the high side there is going to be all that significant.

With Barlow, he's kind of the opposite, though, right? Like, I mean, he's producing maybe more than you expect just watching the show. shift to shift, right? And I think that makes him a really interesting test case here. You attribute this to, you know, he's got the full beard and he looks really physically matured. Is that what it is? Or is this just a player who maybe we're not giving enough credit to the things that he does that leads to that? It's a great question. I'm not sure what the answer is I've, what I've watched him, I personally don't see anything other than the shot where I think, like, wow, like that's a significant NHL asset there. Like he's got a touch. a skill or he has great hockey sense and instincts and vision. Like I don't see that. I just think there's really well-rounded player. He's a good skater. He competes hard.

He has good skills. He can shoot the puck really well. And I think he's a very nice player. But yeah, when I watched him over the last year or so, I haven't seen a player that's matched up with his incredible production he's at. I mean, he's going to score possibly 50 goals this year. You know, that's what Stephen Stamco said. That's what Jeff Skinner did.

That's what Arthur Caliow did. guys who've had typically the level of offense he has in the O translates into being an excellent NHL player. So yeah, I'm kind of going against the grain on the stats here a little bit, and it makes me a little hesitant. I've talked to people in the league who agree with me, who wonder if this is a little bit of a mirage, and some people love this guy. I think he's top 10 all day.

So, and that's kind of reflected on the McKenzie list, too. If you told me, Arthur, you give me Arthur Calli, but maybe a little more rugged and competitive and a little better skating stride, I'm suddenly extremely excited, right? But my question, I guess, would be on like the pure offensive instinct. But you made the point in the article, like, can't, is it really even possible to produce the way this guy has without the hockey sense? And I think that's a very fair argument. Right.

I don't think, yeah, like when I watch him, I don't think he has quite the level of like skill and sense that already has. I think Arty's always had the great shot. But his playmaking, I think, has always been a big asset too. and like his vision, I think, is like really high end as well as his shot. But yeah, I think he's a, I think Barlow's a better skater. I think he competes harder. Frames are a little similar.

Maybe Arte's a little bigger, but not by much. So it's a great argument to have. And I might be too low on Barlow. But he is one I definitely had to put a lot of thought into and will over the next few months. All right. Let's go back to the Russian conversation here. A couple of locomotive teammates here. Daniel Boot and Dimitri Simashev, guys who were lower on the McKenzie list than I expected,

number 25 for Boot and number 35 for Seamachev, who I think belongs closer to that conversation for the top defensemen in the class. I think you've got him 15, I want to say, which I think makes them your number two defensemen in this class. And you got Boot number eight. I wonder, how much did this surprise you to see the placement of these guys? I know that the Russian factor complicates all the conversations around these guys, but this one seems even more surprising to me.

Yeah, I think it's hard to say why people believe what they, you know, where they've slaughtered them for various reasons, whether it's because of the Russian factors or because of the players' abilities. Yep. Simashev is an interesting one in that I think everybody sees the six-four defensemen who can skate. I do think the offensive abilities is a debate. he's been producing better in that league of late. I do think within that league, it can be tricky evaluating offensive production

because there's definitely a haves and a have-nots to a significant degree in that league. If you're on Locos junior team or SCAS or CSKAs, that team composition looks a whole lot different than like the 20 other teams in that league. And it's pretty rare for guys to produce who are 17-year-old on those. elite junior teams. And so, I mean, I've seen Sinejave, you know, work the power play at various levels, tournaments, whatnot. I think that I see Flash as a skill.

You see him make plays. I think there's offense there. But I understand there's a reasonable debate there. That might be the hesitancy for some scouts that I've even talked to. Like, hey, I'm not sure this is going to translate into a legit two-way guy. He might just be a 6-4, good skating defensive, defenseman type of player. I think you see really good meanness there, too, to compliment. And that's like where I like if it's just like six four good skating and is the offense going to going to translate like we'll see. Yeah, you're talking about a late first early second. But I think when you then add in some of the meanness that you see on tape with him against pros, that's when I start to think, okay, well, then I feel like this guy should have like a Caden googlyish baseline expectation. That's kind of like how I come at it. Yeah, I'm not all the way there. I don't see like goooly type of tenacity when I watch him. But he's a really good player. Like I buy I buy the offense.

I think he's a good defender. I think this is a really nice all-round player. But I get the debate. I don't get the debate on boot. Like I don't know how you can watch this guy and not think he's one of the best players in his age group. And I think most scouts I've talked to think he's a good player.

I mean, it's like he's 6'5. He has legit skill. You can score goals. I think there's maybe a minor debate on his skating on whether like the skating is like incredible enough at to be like a top you know you know you know a legit like top 15 top 20 traffic but i personally have seen that when i've watched him um like i think he checks all the boxes other than where he plays when you watch those mhl games he plays and like for me he dominates those games sometimes uh so yeah i think that one is

interesting i think i'll be really fascinated to see where these guys land and we don't know because of the Russian variable where ultimately they're going to be drafted. We're doing a mock draft. I don't know really where I would slot them. But I think about last season, and let's take Mirozacchenko and put that one aside for a second, because obviously he had the medicals. Let's compare those two to Danila Urov, who went mid-20s.

You can argue Urov versus Simashev and have debates on who was the better player going in. But I think Boots is ahead of Urof at the same point. the draft process. So, like, I think he will be a top 20 pick when it's all said and done. I just don't know where that's going to be. I got to think a lot of it has to do with just what share of his play right now is coming in the MHL as opposed to, you know, those men league. When you're 6'5, like, it is a little bit harder to know, especially when you can move

like him and stick handle like him. And those are good things. You're not going to knock him. But you expect that toolkit to really dominate in the MHL, the junior thing. opposed to if more of it was coming in the KHL, in the VHL, I wonder if you would see a little quicker buy it. I don't know. Yeah.

And Loco doesn't use their VHL team. So it's only going to be KHL or MHL for him. So we'll see ultimately where it ends up with those two and how the rest of their years go. So they kind of like bounce those guys around. They put them up bring up to the KH, both of them, they played KHL games. They go down. They go to their, they have two, such a bizarre league. So Locomotive has two MHL teams that they're associated with,

and SCA has three MHL teams they're associated with so they can move their various players around. So sometimes they've gone to that. They've sent them to the other MHL team, which is weaker so they can get more ice time and opportunity. But I think once their postseason starts this spring and they're playing for something legitimate and they have to lean on their guys a little bit, I think that will be a really interesting test of those two value and the kind of impact they can have. if they can rise to the occasion in the MHL postseason. One more guy I want to get to here that there's a little bit of a discrepancy.

It's not a huge one. You've got them more toward the top 10. Bob has it more toward the back half of the top 20, and that's Samuel Hansek. He's a guy who I know you've been following the rise pretty closely here throughout the course of the season. What's kind of your read on Hansik? What is he going to be in the NHL? Obviously, you know, you talk about a winger with some size here. and I know above average compete is the tool grade that pops out for you.

Yeah, I think Hansik was really trending in a positive direction up until the world juniors where he looked like he was going to play a big role on that Slovakia team. And then he had that really brutal injury in the game versus the United States where he had a leg laceration from a skate. And that obviously he's been out since then. But I see a player when I've watched him. in the Wichel who checks a lot of the boxes that you look for in a top prospect, similar to our Daniel Boot discussion,

where I think he's quite a good skater for a big guy. His production is quite strong. I mean, he's producing the same clip that Brandon Yeager is. And it's not like he's not showing any offense this season. And he's a two-way guy. He works hard. There's a lot of traits there. I think that will be really appealing to NHL teams.

He's going to come back, I think, within the next couple of weeks. I don't think that injury was a long-term injury. And the Giants have really fallen off. So if there's a playoff chase, it's to get kicked out of the first round rather quickly for them. Is he kind of a better skating Reed Schaefer for you? Is that a fair comp? Maybe not as nasty as him or like,

have that type of goal scoring touch. But I think he is a better player than Schaefer is. But I think that's kind of what you're looking at. Like I almost, I think of, I think of Pavel Zak on the Bruins a little bit where like, it's like this well-rounded toolkit, but there's nothing about him that's like really exciting. Sure.

Elite for the NHL level. And I understand Zaka may not be the most exciting name, but he just signed up, but it was it, a four, four and a half million something extension. He's a good player on a good team. I don't think Hans is ever going to bring out your seats, but I think there's a lot of traits there. Like I said, that will appeal to an NHL team

and make an NHL coach want to play them a lot. All right, let's take a quick break there, and we'll come back with a mailbag. All right, Corey, into the mailbag. We got some holdovers from last week that we didn't get to. Really, really good stuff from last week. We had too many. So we're going to pick right back up with Brad W.

Which says if you could place the top five prospects in the draft on the bottom five NHL team, which would you place each player on? In other words, who would you most want to see Bedard play with, et cetera? So the bottom five teams right now at the time of recording are Columbus, Chicago, Anaheim, Arizona, and San Jose. And your top four prospects, obviously, Bedard, Michkov, Carlson, Fantilli, and Will Smith.

How would you match all these up? I feel like, even though they're like the biggest market, do we really want Chicago to get Bedard given just how like how one they already had their their number one overall given their three Stanley Cups and two they just really tore completely tore it down

to get to this point so it's almost like it's almost like rewarding the behavior I think any team that's been rebuilding like in earnest for like three or more years would be livid with Chicago immediately tanking and getting maybe Patrick Kane 2.0, the second Patrick Kane 1.0 is kind of finally aging out or potentially going to leave Chicago. It would be hilarious. It would be very much like Pittsburgh getting Crosby. It's probably the closest analog I can think of.

Right. My inclination is kind of to Columbus. I hope they get Pardard, just because I feel like those fans have been as patient as any fan base in the NHL for good news and you know Anaheim has had their Stanley Cup San Jose had a lot of really really good years obviously Arizona hasn't had a consistent success but do you really want to see

Bader go and play in a college rink right away so my lead would be I hope if I had to pick one that I hope I do hope Columbus is the one of those five that gets him. I think Columbus is who I would match with Fantilli. They've been looking for their one C forever. They've gotten Kent Johnson and Cole Cillinger.

I think we can debate whether Kent Johnson's best on the middle or on the wing. I think I'm going with Fantilli to Columbus. I think I'm giving Bedard. I want to see Bedard and Trevor Zegrois play on the same line. That's where I'm going with that one. San Jose, I think San Jose and Michkov. They can, you know, wait out there some of these big contracts and while Meechikov percolates. Give me Arizona for Leo Carlson.

We'll get a maybe center for Dylan Genther there. And Chicago can have Will Smith, which is just fine. Right. I like that. Also, I can see, I think Adam Fantilli and Ziegress would be a really interesting duo. You have a top two line center now of like Mason McTavish and Fantilli, and you put Zegers on the wing of one of those two. Yep.

So, okay, that would be fair. So if you did that, you could swap Columbus at Anaheim for what I had. Right. But I like your analogy. And I think Mitch Koff makes a lot of sense in San Jose. Yeah. All right. On to the next one.

We got Patrick McConnell and Brandon S. Both here, similar questions with a little bit different flavor. So Patrick McConnell wants to know how many potential top of the lineup centers you see in this draft. Brandon S wants to know, who do you? think will actually stick at center out of the drafts top 10 or 15. Any true top line, no question centers after Fin Tilly. Really what we're debating here is Leo Carlson, Will Smith, positionally, and then kind of the ceiling argument on Nate Danielson, Oliver Moore.

I think that might be. I mean, Dalboard Dvorsky, Yeager. Yeah. Yeah. So Carlson's an interesting one because he actually really, I know he's always listed as a center, or we listen to as a center, but he hasn't really played center at all for like two years. I think he did it a little bit at the J20 level when he was down there last season. But even when he was with the Swedish under 18 team, he was a wink. And he was that with the under 20 team. And he's been in the SHL. So I haven't seen a whole lot of high level games from him in the last couple of years where he actually is a center.

And he might be. there is a toolkit there with the size and the compete and the instincts where he could be. I'm not sure I'm sitting here though and telling you confidently he is going to play center versus NHL players. I haven't really seen him do it yet. It would be a leap. But I could see some similarities between him like Pierre-Luc Dubois, who also wasn't a center when he was drafted and then got converted immediately after. is he quite as mean as Dubois?

No. But he competes hard, but he's not like, he's not like nasty to play against. Cross-checking guys below the net and all that stuff. Right. Like, I think you might be like hope. If he's a wing, like, still could be a really, really good winger. Yeah. But maybe like he's more like Miko Ranton than he is like Dubois if you think of how he looks as a winger.

I think, I think a lot of, I think most teams would take Miko Rattinen and over Dubois. Is that fair? I think so. But I'm just like, I'm looking for like guys with that frame who have that kind of play style a little bit with the skating. Yeah. All right. So I guess that so he's he's the one that I think gives you the potential true top line center. What would your feelings be?

I mean, I guess we could have the same argument as Will Smith. How sold are you that he's a center? I think he is. But I'm not sure like he's like the one C on like a team that wins at all kind of thing. I don't know if he has like that true two-way like powerful high compete type of game unless the offense is just incredible that he produces in the NHL. Like when I think of him like the one, the guy I think of as like who's nets off like in terms of like how he plays and the tool kit. A little smaller. Right.

And you know, and you know, so like obviously things have changed in Washington. but he was the, you know, he was the two to backstrom there for, for a while. And, you know, but that's kind of what I think was, I think Smith can be a center because I think he's a really good skater and the hockey sense is incredible. And he's been a center for a long time and done so successfully. So the other interesting thing that I think, I think if we're talking about Danielson and Dvorski, we're probably more talking about a two-see. Is that fair? I think so.

And I think Danielson has the best chance to stick. Yes, I think he's going to, I think he, I feel pretty confident. Actually, he's going to be an NHL center because he is this. And more we should put in this too. Yeah. Yeah, I think more should be in this. Yeah, I think I was like, Danielson is pretty strong skater. He is a competitive all-around player.

At this top prospects game, he measured in at nearly six foot two, good hockey sense. Like, there's a lot of things there that make you think, like, yeah, he's an all-day NHL center. more I think not a luck but I think pretty good chance because his skating is so dynamic and he I think he works hard he actually started the year on the wing with the program and moved his way towards center usually he goes the other way with the you know the small skill guys um so I and he's done so very well he competes well I think I think he will play the middle Dvorski

Good Chance Can I sit here today And tell you I'm 100% sold I can't Just because his skating Is it amazing I don't think his compete is fine

I don't think this is a great Two-way player So like he has to be kind of one of those centers That just really drives the play with his offense And he could But I don't know if that's a guarantee And then same thing with Yeager where I think he is good skater, good compete,

but there's only so many 5'11 centers in the NHL, right? So I guess you're kind of hoping he's the, I feel like every year we're like, oh, this is the next brain point, this is the next Vincent Trocheck. And like, he could be one of those guys, maybe. Probably won't be, though. If I had to, like, he looks more like a winger,

and I know there's a lot of scouts I talk to who think he's probably a winger in the NHL, but some do think he's a center. So there's a little bit of a split on that one. But yeah, that's why I'm not completely sold. We'll be a top two line center in the NHL. Good questions there from Patrick and Burton. I like that.

Maxwell Long, how do you feel about GMs intentionally making their teams worse for draft positioning? Corey, I'm told Gary Bettman says this does not happen. He might be slightly misinformed on that issue. But it's an interesting dilemma in the NHL with the way the lottery works, right? I mean, you could win one game all season, and you still have a three and four chance. I'm not getting the first pick and, like, what's like a 50-50 chance? I'm not even getting a top three pick. So, I mean, given the team you cover, whether it's, you know, the Red Wings or the Blue Jackets or Vancouver,

there's been plenty of teams that have finished low in the standings for a long time and have not been able to, you know, get that number one pick or sometimes even the number two or three pick. It's interesting that I can see the argument of what he's trying to say that. The system is set up in a way where it doesn't really reward you to do that. And I think the math does not help teams actually build that way. But, I mean, teams clearly do it. Yeah, he chose his wording carefully too.

He talked about tanking as something that players and coaches would never do, which is true, right? I don't think you're going to see any player or coach. The players don't want a replacement in the draft, and the coaches will get fired eventually if they're down there too long. But it's obviously happening. I guess the question here, though, is how do you feel about it? I think most people would say that there's some element that it's bad for the game in some competitive spirit kind of way. But it does remain seemingly the most viable way to inject the talent that you need in your organization. Yeah, I mean, when you talk about how teams have quote unquote rebuilding plans, that's usually what it is, right?

It's suck and get a couple of high draft picks and hope you kill it in the draft because it's really hard to rebuild your team through free agency, through trades, through, I don't know, killing it in the mid to the late rounds. those things do happen. One out of every 10 rebuilds do work that way. But most of the time, that is not the highest percentage way to rebuild your organization. All right. Next one is from Jonathan Andrew Paul. Do you see a time when we could see a goalie go top five again? What would this mythological goalie look like?

And what type of scouting report and pedigree would be required? I think this is a great one because we've seen some pretty high pedigree goalies come through, not last year, but the few years before that, when you had Spencer Knight, you had Yaroslav Ascarov, you had Jesper Walstead, you had, and Sebastian Kosso worked his way up into actually being the first goalie off the board that year. If not a Spencer Knight or Yaroslav Ascarov, I guess in particular, you could also say Yesper Walshstead is with the pro experience that he had. If those guys aren't going to go in top five, are we ever going to see a goal to go top five again? here's the thing I thought if we would have had the draft

in December of 2020 I think Ascroft might have been in that conversation if he

kind of tanked himself a little bit at that World Juniors and then he actually went to that February 5 9th U18 5 Nations

and he was just okay there too so it's stock kind of the slide but he still went 11th even with that in mind so

I thought he was a special athlete and had a really good track record up until the last two months of that then canceled season that kind of catapulted his chances. But I had him right as a top five player at one point. Like I thought he was, I thought he was the next one of those goalies. And he's been pretty good this year in the American League and hopefully he gets back on track. The next guy who I think has a prayer, and I hate putting some pressure on a guy who's 16 years old right now.

But we do that all the time on this podcast, so that's fine. is there's a goalie in the queue who I really like name is Gabriel Daigla and he's had you know he was a super high draft pick and his Q draft he's 6 foot 4 he's very athletic he has something like a he is three drafts out I think he has something like a 920

say percentage already in the queue this season when I saw him the U-17 challenge he was he showed the ability to steal a game at a very young age like there was a lot of things there that led to like okay like if there's going to be the next one of them that's what it looks like but you know again we're three drafts away so we'll see where we are when his draft actually rolls around but the but like I said I don't those are two guys that I that would trend that way and I think it comes down to like you know like Ascarov was the

big time performances right like when he yeah broke the heart of that 2019 NTD team when he stole that gold medal from Canada, the Halenka, like those are the kind of things those goalies need to do typically. They need to have outstanding performances in big moments and do so in a way that makes them look like a pro prospect, not just, you know, like how like that Hugo Havillet did versus the U.S. team last spring where, yeah, you're a 5-10 goalie and you have your life. Like you need to show some high in athleticism and things that will translate to the

NHL. I'll say this. If I was in the position to potentially draft a goalie in the top five, I would be really scared of that goalie being a Canadian, especially coming out, not being a Canadian, coming out of the Canadian hockey leagues. Because I think what you have, you know, Degle's a late birthday, right? So he's November birthday. And he'll still have to go back for another year. Even if he's coming off three years of 930s. And I would really worry about stagnation.

I think this is something, you know, with COSA and the Red Wings that you saw, he goes back. And, you know, obviously every player is different. But he comes off that year in the shortened season. He's got like a 940. He goes back. I don't know what it ended up at, but I think it was like 915 or 920. You take these steps back. But I just wonder developmentally if I would really want to sign up for that trajectory

of having to send a guy back to a league that he's been dominating. That's with the angle. He's already a late birthday. He gets it shortened by a year. Right. The argument against that would be that was Kerry Price's development path. But that was one player. You haven't seen a whole lot of premium goal always come out of to CHL over the last decade or so.

Yeah, I don't know. I think I'd rather take one out of Russia or out of Europe personally. Or let them go to college for three years. Yes, or college. Yes, exactly. JJ Gab, how high could you see Reinbacher being taken? Does Barlow have top six potential or will his skating slash dynamism hold him back? So obviously you've got him at six.

I assume you think he can get taken as high as six. Yeah, I think he's. He's got a good chance to be a top 10 draft pick, just for the reasons we said earlier, the podcast between the athletic toolkit, six two guy who can skate and works hard. You have, he's showing offense in a really good league. He's playing a major role in a very good league. You know, he checks a lot of the boxes that you look for typically at a high in the draft. Defenseman doesn't seem to be a glaring flaw in his toolkit.

I'm not, I don't know exactly where he's going to go, but I would say something between six, 12 would be my projected range for him right now. And how about Barlow? And Barlow, yeah, kind of what we said before. Like, I like him. He's a really good player. I think he'll be a second-line winger in the NHL. The stats say he could be a top-line winger in the NHL.

I think that's really what the debate is, is do you buy that that offense is going to translate? Or is it a bit a mirage? I lean to the latter, but there are good arguments on both sides, and I don't feel overly confident about that one yet. Next one is from Joseph Noariak. How do you value the change in point production across leagues for a player's projection? A player in the NCAA goes point per game as a freshman and a sophomore. How would you evaluate that player versus one who went from one and a half to two points per game in the CHL?

He's talking specifically about Matthew Nyes. And I think this is a really good question here because I think it's some, you're always kind of trying to compare players in different leagues. And it's hard to do when you're in these very different developmental contexts. It's hard to do because the leagues are different because you're. you got to evaluate how does it maybe a guy on a good college team, right to a guy on a poor junior team versus a stacked KHL team versus a mediocre SHL team. And for better or for worse, this is why those international tournaments gets a lot of importance put on them because it's the leveling field.

Because you see them all on the ice at the same time and you can start making those red comparisons. even if it's in a shortened sample. Now, there's no really great way to answer this question in a way that'll be satisfying to the listener other than takes experience and time, and you've kind of get an idea of what certain production and certain impact, not just production, but impact. You know, guys will get a lot of power play time if they're on crappy junior teams, it'll score, but it doesn't mean they're having impact in the games

and helping their team win hockey games. So you got it just, after you've seen a lot of guys at various levels, you kind of get an idea of like, is this different? Is this impressive? Is this not as impressive? You know, is this just a dime a dozen guy who scores in junior, but it's going to like go right to the East Coast? It just, you know, I can't sit here and tell you specifically how to do it. It just eventually you get it. I think I would rather have a guy who's flat at a point per game in college.

a guy who increases his production by 20 points, you know, his age 20 or 30 points or whatever, his age 20 season as a CHL player. Is that fair? Yep. I think you just, you know, anytime you go against older players, it gets harder and you get more valuable information in terms of his NHL projection, you know, whether it's going from junior, like USHL to college or junior to European pros or from junior to the American League, those are major jumps in the quality competition, the age, the strength level of the players you're going against, and if they show success, those are checkmarks in terms of their age-all projection.

They can jump the level and they can still have success. Good point. Logan Horn, how big is the gap between Will Smith and Oliver Moore right now? Could more be the first American off the board on draft day, or has Smith separated himself too much? I don't think he separated himself. I thought he did, but the more the season has gone on, I don't think there is separation. And I don't think it's for sure more either.

Depending on which scout I'll talk to, some think the gap between Smith and Leonard is razor tight. I think on Central's rating, they were like back to back. I think there was like Smith was like third, North American and Leonard was fourth or something like that. And there are some scouts who think it's razor type between Moore and Smith as well.

I think it's getting really close between those two players. Like as of now, I think I have Smith five and more like nine or ten on my list. But I could see a reality. where we get to the spring, particularly after we get through the UA teens. And I can see a world where I flip those. I'm not there yet.

But more keeps impressing me as I keep watching him. And I would not sit here and guarantee you Smith is the first U.S. born player off the board. Frank Nazar 2025 Calder. I wonder who, what team that guy cheers for. wants to know where you have Kristal going in this draft. I remember an episode where he said a lot of NHL people wouldn't take him in the first round. He is in your first round, though, here when we look at your rankings, Corey.

Yeah. And he will be probably the most fascinating player among them anyways against Mitch Kov's pretty fascinating. There's plenty of fascinating players. But for me, he might be the most fascinating player to monitor where he ultimately goes and how his career ultimately goes in this draft because his offense is incredible. I think as we sit and record us now, I think he's either to think after Bedard and Stancove, and I think he might be next in terms of point per game in the Western League. He's definitely top five.

You know, his skill is creativity, his offensive instincts, they're fantastic. He can score goals. You know, he, when he's on the power play, he stands out in a massive way. but he is a barely 5'10 winger, and he is a very awkward-looking skater. And I think his compete is fine, but I wouldn't call it a major asset. So I think when a push comes to shove at the draft,

I think there are going to be some real debates about him within NHL organizations, and I believe those are already happening, about where does this guy fit? when does it make sense to select him? And I just think, do those various risk factors, I don't see a top 20 pick. I think it's just so much risk on his projection.

But I could see a late first round pick. I think of it's different type of player types because of the score is a little different, but I almost think of where Ely Tollivan went in his draft year, where he had a lot of risks in his in his compete, his skating, his size, but he had a tremendous track record of scoring and skill and he went like in the mid to late 20s.

Bobby Brink, similar, amazing, you know, USHL top score, small guy with monkey skating issues, first couple of picks of the second round. I think that's kind of the alleyway, which is where he's ranked on my list right now, where we kind of start talking about Kristall. I think it's interesting,

you go back to the conversation we were just having about guys under 5-10 and how many of them are half-point-per-game wingers in the NHL, how many of them had below-average skating? I mean, that's the other element there. Right. You know, the guy I keep thinking about with him, and I think there is a difference. I think this guy is a fine, good skater, but he skates a lot like how Jeff Skinner skates. Like he has. Like he just, like he defaults into the Mohawk constantly.

He's always on his edges. He never, never, he can't like push the pace. Like he's very elusive, but I think Skinner does that with power. You know, there's a reason why he was the top tip pick is the skating was awkward, but it was still powerful. I think with Cristal, it's almost like how Francesco Pinelli skates, where it's that same kind of style, but it's not like a powerful mohawk. It's not a powerful, like explosive edges.

So those are the things I'm balancing with him. But if you're a believer, you think this is. is the next Jeff Skitter. Brendan P's got a fun one. Axel Sandine Pelica or Denton Matechuk. I kind of feel like these two could go in the same range, too, Corey. I do. It would be pretty close to me.

I would lean Sandin Pelica just because the brain and the pure office, I think, will be a little bit better, but I think Metajok's the better defender. Much better. Probably a little bit more competitive. But I would be close for me. I like the comp, Brendan. Brian Kelly, do any of the other leagues you follow have elements that would make the NHL product more entertaining?

if they were copied. I like this question because I think we can probably share from our experiences about going to Europe that I think their games are, you know, the experience is different. I think of the way games are in Europe and I think of the way games are in college hockey what I think of this question, where you go to the game and there's an experience to the game. I don't think like when you go to most junior games, when you go to most pro games, NHL games, there's an experience in the game. I think for the most part, it's two and a half hours of sitting in your seat. There's like seven or eight times you cheer when there's a

penalty or a goal and then you go home. Whereas, you know, when you go to Europe, like there's drums banging, people dancing and chanting. You know, when you go to a college game, there's heckling and the student sections are, you know, always, always a ruckus. Like, there's just more going on. And I think you think of what the sport of hockey is like, kind of how soccer. is over in other parts of the world when you watch those games. There's an experience, you know, that while the game flow is going on, there's other stuff going on in the stands. I think those are things that are missing from an NHL game right now.

I agree with you. I think if you could have an organized supporter section that's going to lead some chance or even just do themselves at various points of the game. It doesn't need to be continuous, but I think it would add a lot. I also think, Corey, and this one will absolutely never happen. I think there's, if you shortened the schedule. to the way that it is in Europe, which is also true in college hockey, it just brings up the meaning of every game.

And I think that lends to this kind of investment and passion. But you're leaving so much money on the table, you'd never do it. But I think even if you cut it by 10 games, it would have a big impact on that personally. Right. And you're probably attracting your diehard fans to more games too, right? Because they can't afford to go to 40 games a year. But if you say come to 10, you probably can get the same people to come to those 10.

10 games. For sure. I think that's right. And I just the stakes of it, right? Like the stakes of losing a game in, in Europe on a 52 game schedule are almost double the stakes of losing a game. And obviously there's relegation that plays into that too. But you know what I mean?

Like it's right. That'll never happen. But if you had a 40 or 50 games schedule in the NHL and it's I don't know, like you go to the into like the Atlantic Division and it's Boston versus Toronto tonight or something like that. Like that game all of a sudden has massive importance. Totally. I mean, you see it in football too, right?

In the NFL or the NFL, like 17, 18 game schedule, everything, every quarter is as important as like an NHL game. So it's, yeah. All right, I think that's going to do it for us today, Corey. Thanks to you all for listening to this episode of the Affedickees Show Prospect Series. Just a little programming note. The Tuesday boys are going to be recapping the NHL-99 project and discussing some of the controversial rankings within it.

So you can feel free to leave an email for Craig and Sean at the Affedic Hockey Show at Gmail.com or a voicemail at 845-4-45-8459. All of you who filled up my DMs about Steve Eiserman's placement on that list, these are the people that you want to talk to. You could also follow us on YouTube at YouTube.com slash at the athletic hockey show. And right now you can get a one-year subscription to The Athletic for $2 a month and you visit theathletic.com slash hockey show. We'll talk to you soon.