The Athletic Hockey Show - Could Macklin Celebrini return to BU next season?

Episode Date: May 10, 2024

On today’s Prospect Series episode of The Athletic Hockey Show, Max, Corey, Scott, and FloHockey’s Chris Peters discuss the results of the 2024 NHL Draft Lottery, with San Jose earning the No. 1 pick and a chance to select Macklin Celebrini, whose stock went up or down at the U18 Worlds, and a bunch of listener questions in the mailbag to close things out.Subscribe to The Athletic: http://theathletic.com/hockeyshow Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This is the Athletic Hockey Show Prospect Series. Max Boltman here alongside Corey Pranman, Scott Wheeler, and Flow Hockey's Chris Peters for another episode of the Athletic Hockey Show's prospect series. Gentlemen, we've got a draft order, a chalk draft order, I should say. San Jose in Chicago get the top two picks in the draft. Scott Wheeler, your first reaction? I was happy. I mean, my instant reaction was honestly that I was pretty happy for San Jose. They're the team that needs him.

most are the team that's furthest away. There's obviously the connections that we're going to hear about ad nauseum. I actually do think that's probably going to get pretty tired here in the next seven weeks of people talking about Macklin and his dad. I'm sure he'll get tired of talking about his dad and answering questions about Steph Curry and yada, yada, yada. But it's going to be great. He's going to be the face of that franchise.

I think he's got a chance to become a little bit of a cult hero there, like a little bit of a local celebrity there if all breaks well. and if he's a part of them returning to where they were a decade ago as one of the sort of perennial contenders in the NHL with a team built around him. So I was excited about that. And it's huge for, I mean,

we'll get into it lots between now and the draft, but it's huge for Chicago. Just getting the pick of the litter after Celebrini is a big, big win, not slipping to third or fourth. That's a big deal for them. The idea of Demadov and Bedard or adding a player like Cliff Shunov or Anton Salaev to that blue,

line with all the size they already have on that blue line coming. There's just a lot to like about the setup now for both of those teams. When you really think about how the sharks built their initial success and then their long stretch of being a contender, it started with the Patrick Marlow pick and him becoming a franchise player and all around impactful player. And I think, as Scott said, this team, this team really far away. And I think you just kind of like after Chicago adds Bidar, he drops air drops in the first year, team's still really bad.

Shelbury's going to, might arrive next year. That team's still going to be really, really bad. But he is the first step to potentially becoming good again, to potentially becoming, you know, a team that could play in the playoffs and, and, and, and make some noise. You know, we'll see how the next five years go in San Jose. but this is a guy who has a potential to be an impactful all around center. And it's a great day if you're a fan of the San Jose Sharks. Chris, how quick do you think, you know, obviously we see how long it can take some of these guys to make a big impact.

We're not even sure that Celebrini will leave college right away next year. How would you approach that as the sharks and how quick do you, I guess, expect this to Celebrity make an impact? Yeah, I mean, it's really interesting because I think that whatever they do with Celebrini really impacts what they do with Will Smith as well. Do you want those guys on the same timeline in terms of contracts and things like that? You know, like that they could go either way. If they wait a year or if they do it this year, then all of a sudden. There's no way he's going back. Come on.

I think there's a chance. I think there's a chance too. It's minimal. Oh, come on. It's minimal. He won the hope he fakes. That is a horrific situation to be in, Corey. I don't care.

He's not going back. He's not going back. He's not going back. They're terrible. They're terrible. What benefit? What benefit does he have going to the NHL next year? If benefits the sharks, it benefits the sharks, it does not benefit him.

Does he have to go and score like three points for a game? Shut up. I'm making a point. I'm playing devil's advocate. Chris wants to send him to Europe. Maybe he could go to the HL. I would actually prefer that he plays for the San Jose Barakuta in front of 400. That's right.

I do think the benefit for him, and the strongest case for him, to go there is a financial one. It's $3 or $4 million plus bonuses, accelerating his entry-level contract. I've spoken to people who think they'd be crazy to sort of leave the money piece of it on the table. Yeah, and let's be honest. He's going to be in the NHL next year.

We know this. But then that also makes the decision, okay, so what do you do with Will Smith? Is he also in the NHL next year? Having two guys under 20 on your roster that is an absolute disaster of a roster I think is not exactly setting either of those two up for long-term success. And so that's why I think you actually have to have the discussion about how bad is it

and how bad are we willing to, how long are we allowing these guys to play in that bad of a situation? Because they aren't, they aren't remotely close to anything. And there is so much that they need between now and when they're going to be competitive. And you think about the different cycles of competitiveness. Like obviously for Chicago, they went through this dark period. They get Jonathan Taves.

They get Patrick Kane, you know, they go and everything's great. But they had also been building up around them for those years prior where there was Duncan Keith and there was Brent Seabrook and then there was the addition of Patrick Sharp. And then, you know, by the time they were ready to make the big swing free agents picks. And as we look at the free agent class that we're in that we're about to head in right now, there's not a lot there that's going to help in the near term.

There's not a lot of guys that are going to be available. So, I mean, I think that the thing is is, you have to have a, you know, Rick Celebrini actually spoke to the media yesterday in, in, in, uh, during a golden state warriors press conference and was asked about this very thing. And I think, yes, they're going to have that conversation. I do think he'll be in the NHL next year. But like everything from here on out, yes, you won Macklin Celebrini. Your job just got a heck of a lot harder because now you have to make sure that you are building around him effectively and quickly. And that's the thing that I think Mike Greer is going to have a real. challenge in doing is that there are so many things they need. There are so many, like, you know, like some of the guys that they've picked in the last few years aren't exactly going to be core pieces for them. You know, will William Meckland, maybe? Will Thomas Bordalo?

Maybe. I mean, but, you know, are they truly going to be core pieces down the road? You know, you have your two guys that you can kind of use as your centerpieces, but I think there's just still such a long way to go that I'd be really nervous about what happens next. So I think this goes back to something, Scott. Scott at the very beginning talked about being like happy for the sharks, right? And I do feel like justice was kind of served here.

I know people have talked about it. Yes. Like this was a, this was a team that pushed the pedal to the medal for a really long time. This was it inevitable that they were going to get in this position. And it's good that they got it. But to Chris's point, all of a sudden now,

you are pretty similar to Chicago getting badard, honestly. Like there's a lot of pieces that's willing to come into this organization. And when you said like effectively, and quickly. I almost think you got to chop the quickly off of that. And you just have to focus on doing it effectively. I agree, Celebrini is probably going to be in the NHL next year. But if you want to slow play a lot of those other guys and let this thing, you know, chug along so that, because they are going to, they don't really have any big time defensemen prospects in the system yet. They're going to need to build that out. They're going to need another couple of years picking in the top five or so. I don't think they need to do anything to rush to do that, even though obviously you want to put good people around McLan Salbray. Yeah, I mean, I think the quickly thing is that, you know, how long do you want to have this dark cloud hanging over your organization where you're, you know, winning 20 games a season, you know, like that's the thing where it's because I mean, I think in terms of what Macklin Celebrini is going to be able to do immediately, you know, I think that it's fair to assume that there's, there's that potential to have a similar rookie season to that, to a Connor Bidard. And Chicago obviously tried to put pieces in place around Badar. They had the Taylor Hall injury that kind of blew. things up, but they still had some decent veterans around them. They also had guys that were on the come up like Alex Flasic. And so there were definitely things there that, you know, made that a little bit more of a tenable situation. And I, you know, I just look at San Jose. I'm just like, what is it?

Like, where does it go from here? Because now you've got your two guys that, that, but, but not a whole lot else. So yeah, the thing about the quickly thing is really, you just don't want to get into a situation where you're like the Buffalo Sabres were, where they started their, they tore, they everything down, probably at the wrong time just in terms of what was available in the draft coming forward. And they're still paying for that. You know, you think about the many, you know, the whatever, 14 years without playoffs there. You know, that's, if you're, if you're not careful about your rebuild, that's, that's the potential of the darkness that befalls your, your organization. They also made decisions, though, with the idea of, you know, competing with Jack, like giving Jeff

Skinner this big deal that are still biting them and limiting them in the short term. So there's a, there's a tradeoff for all that. Sorry, Scott. Absolutely. Absolutely. No, I was just going to say, I opened their cap sheet immediately after the draft on cap friendly. And I was shocked at what it looked like, even for 2024, 2025. I think they have two forward signed, Fabian Zetterland, I believe, and one other forward are signed for next season. They've got one or two defense been signed. Like, it is as empty as a cap sheet can possibly be. So when Chris was talking about the expediency of it, I think of just between June 28th when they pick them. Now, they can have, they can preempt

some of these conversations. But between June 28th, when they pick him in July 1st, they're going to need to know whether he's coming and whether he's playing in the NHL next year because they're going to want to make decisions in free agency accordingly. And that doesn't mean accelerating the process, but it means maybe doing what, what Chicago did and bringing in the year, you're sort of Nick Folino types on two, three-year deals to bridge that gap and at least surround him with guys who can play at a level that they maybe weren't playing at a year ago. Or taking on people's problems. Yeah.

Likely scenario there too. Yeah. Yeah. Let's go to the team that got the second pick here in Chicago. And obviously, you'd love to pair Celebrity with Bedard. But they still come out of this in a really good place, Corey. As Scott said, their pick of the litter of the next bunch. And it seems like in the early discussion, this looks like a.

race between Ivan Demadov and Artem Liv Shunov. Is that fair to say? Yeah, I think those are considered the top guys in the draft. Depending on who you talk to, someone throwing Anton Salive into that mix. Some might even throw a Caden Lindstrom or Sam Dickinson into that mix, too. But our colleague Scott Powers think that those are the two names they're debating right now. And for Mylene, if that was the case, I think if you are close between the 511 wing and the six two mobile defensemen. I think when it's all said and done, I think you take the defenseman. Now that might be said, if they don't think it's close, then you take the wing.

Because if you think Demadov is the next Kucharov and the next Panarin, then obviously that's a little bit of a different analysis. But if you, I think it's at least close between those two. And for those reasons, I would lean towards left shootoff for their pick. What do you think, Scott? the more I've thought about it over the last couple of days, the more I've sort of felt myself thinking that the other direction is the play here. I love Artem. I think he could be number one, number two type,

first pairing guy for them, the length, the skating, the defensive upside with how physically strong he is, how quickly he's progressed over the last two years in North America, and the likelihood that that's going to continue to take place for him here. But I mean, you look at the playoffs right now, it's a league in terms of who's left. that's being dominated by duos, right? It's upfront in particular.

It's McKinnanen and Ranton, Barcov and Kachuk, Sam Reinhartz, kind of joined that duo as well. Pasturnak and Marcian, McDavid and Drysidl are obviously a class above. This is their opportunity, I think, to get that second guy, that second true star player.

And if they believe that Demadov can be that for them, the idea of him and Bred, the compliment, potential complement on Bedard's wing. They play very different games. The power play fit. There's a lot to like about the potential of building with two kids from the exact same birth year.

We forget that because of Demadov's late birth year. A lot of things just really align with the two of them together moving forward, I think. But it's like I said, they're in a can't lose situation. Like those two players in particular, I think are both going to hit. Obviously,

you've got a little bit of sort of logistic. and practicalities to figure out in conversations with Demadov. Chicago, I'm sure, will be in Florida at the end of next month to sort of meet with Demadov as part of Gold Star's showcase that they're planning there. But it's going to come down to those conversations with Demadov, and then they're going to have to make a very difficult decision as far as the future goes. But just that the idea of the two of them together, I think is really, really exciting. And I think it would be, for selfish reasons, I think it would be great for TV as well

and for what that could look like in terms of how much fun they could be having on the ice in the prime of their careers. Well, I think it's interesting as how quickly you rattle off all those score names and how many them are left in the playoffs. And I'm trying to think of how many legit number one defensemen are left in the playoffs. You know, I'm thinking of guys like Mero Heskin and I'm thinking of Charlie McAvoy. But I feel like that player type to me is a little bit more rare. That's just the way I see it. The other, so the thing about what Scott said, too, the idea of which one of them is going to hit on the highest projection. That's the thing that I'm kind of curious about.

I think both will hit as well. It's which one will hit on the highest projection. And, you know, I think Demadob, to me, when I watch him and I, you know, you look at his body of work and the different things that we've seen from him. And I think that there is, you know, still an element of risk because he's done, you know, he's absolutely dominated the Russian U20 league, which is impressive in some ways. but in other ways, I don't love that level of hockey in terms of being an indicator for future success. But what I do think is there's a little bit more wiggle room between, you know, if you believe that Lev Shanov is going to be a top pairing defenseman, you're very confident

that he's going to be a top pairing defenseman. I think that does make it a little bit easier to make that pick. But if you're not convinced to that, I do think that it really comes back to that, the idea that the winger might be a little bit safer of the projection. I think that there's no doubt in my mind, which, I mean, I mean, there always should be doubt, but, you know, there's marginal doubt about whether or not, you know, Demadov is going to be a top line winger. I'm pretty certain. The way that he plays, what he's shown so far, you know, I'd love to get official measurements from him, you know, to figure out in terms of the size, the weight.

You know, I think he's a strong player. But I look at his skill, his hockey sense, his physical tools, his hand skills, all those things. I just feel more comfortable saying that he'll hit on his projection. than I do with Lebschenov, who I think is the best defenseman in this draft, and the most likely to be a guy that could be a top pairing, number one potential defenseman in this class. So it is a great debate, and that's one that I think Chicago will continue to take to the wire here. I think they will do their due diligence and really, but I do think it will be down to those two guys.

I mean, obviously, there was other number one defense minutes given over, Quinn Hughes, you know, Kayla McCarr and out of Fox. But I was thinking of like the two-way, like, you know, guys with the size and high in skating. One thing that I think is interesting in the Deminot discussion, and this doesn't apply to Scott, because I think Scott had him like two or three on his list from point A to point B this season is I do think it's strange that he's kind of emerging as a consensus number two or number three prospect.

And it's like, well, he had a great playoffs. And I'm like, you know, he was like the MVP of that league last season, right? Like, it's, I don't think anybody reasonable would have expected him to do anything other than dominate the regular season in the MHL this year and dominate the playoffs in the league this year. And if you liked him already in that range, that's fine. But I just think it's interesting that like, oh, look how good a playoffs he had. He's rising. It's like, really?

Like, he had like one and a half points per game in the league, you know, a year and a half ago. You, like, I just think the, I think that to me is an interesting part of the Demadov gut dialogue. This doesn't necessarily impact the pick between Demadov and Levshanov, because neither of them. as a center. But I've been thinking about it as people have talked about kind of Demadov as a as a wing for Bardard. How sure are we at one year in? Like can we take as a given that Badard is going to be he's a 39% face off percentage? We knew this was a question coming out in his draft year. Corey, like, are you sure that Badard's a center should Chicago be operating as though Badard is a 15 year center for them? I mean, there are other options of their system now is Nazar and Moore. They're not exactly

giants either. Although more skating, I think, gives you some confidence. he can stick down the middle. And I think, you know, I don't know. We'll see what long term, but it wasn't there like points there towards the end of the year where Jack Hughes was being played at wing by New Jersey and probably for those similar reasons. I think with Badaad, he's so special and then quite frankly they're so bad that I think you have to give him every opportunity to play down the middle and prove it.

But that frame will be a concern. And, I mean, face-offs are not the most major aspect of centers in the, in the modern NHL, but it's a variable for sure. Like you see guys, you know, play the middle, but may not take the face off, something like that or something along those lines. But it's a little bit of a concern there. I do like the synergy between the two of them, though,

and that I think Demadov's an elite playmaker, and then you have badard with the elite goal-scoring elements. I do think there is a synergy element there, although I wouldn't draft based on that at two. I think at two, when your team is that bad, you have to take whoever you think is the best player. But I think just thinking out loud in terms of how those two would play together, I think there's definitely a way to make that work.

Although, like I said, I think it would be interesting kind of seeing how that four group would come together because it feels like that, you know, I feel like that kind of in Chicago's type is high-compete, high-skill types and while sacrificing a little bit on the size front. but they have a lot of work left there to do anyway. So I think they'll get, even if they would draft Demadov there too, I think they have plenty of more bad years ahead of them to draft a bigger forward.

Quincy. Constantly, Demadov did an interview with Russian press yesterday where he said he wants to learn how to play center moving forward here. So not that a team should be banking on that or projecting for that, but it doesn't seem like it's something he's opposed to. And we saw another Russian in Danila Urov switch from the wing to center and have a ton of success in the KHL this year because of that switch and the way it fit his game. And I do think there are some similarities between your of and Demidov that

way in terms of the way they think it. I think Mitch Kopp tried it in the last like 10 days. It's always easier said than done. It's always easy. And you know, Max, before we move on from the Blackhawks, I think it is important to say why, you know, why most of us aren't talking about Selyev as an option for them. You look at their entire future of their blue line. They're all shot defenseman. I mean, it's, it's, it's Kornski, it's Flashik. With the exception, Sam Renzel is the only one that has like a higher end projection than in that system. So that's that that's why like Salaia doesn't seem to fit as much in there. I think Kaczynski is going to be their long term guy on the left side. Flashik is their number one shut down defenseman for the

long term, you know, so that's I think I think. I think you have to least entertain Salaio there though. Oh yeah, no question. He has to be in the conversation, six, seven mobile physical, You know, KHL power play guy at 17. Like, I think he has to be in the conversation for Chicago, with two. And, you know, I think there are people around the league, quite frankly, who would take him at two. Oh, yeah.

So I would not, even though we even though we can talk about the other two, I would not rule out Salaev as an option there. Anybody have any non-San Jose Chicago lottery thought? When we have a chalk draft or there's nobody that really gets punished with a fall or anything like that. But was there anyone who's. spot in this thing. I guess maybe it's Pittsburgh losing their pick to San Jose. Any non-notary winner thoughts here?

I mean, I'm fascinated to see what Montreal is going to do at five. You know, Kent Hughes has been very vocal about the desire for a forward. You know, I think in my mock, I had Caden Lindstrom available to them and them taking him. But I think Montreal is another team that still has a lot of work to do, a lot of roster building to do. and you think, okay, well, if you have your belief in David Reinbacher and Logan Mayu is, you know, the future of the blue line. But, I mean, I think the guys that are available at five, the defensemen that are available at five, I like better than Reinhbocker. You know, so like that's the other thing is like if you, if you are going to be in, I mean, you know, we've had these Reinhbacher debates before. I've been a little bit lower on him than others.

And, you know, I think that this D class in particular is really fascinating. You know, you've got May you've got Hudson, you got all those guys. but, you know, when you see the level of defensemen that's potentially going to be available at five, and you've kind of say, you know, we'd love to get a forward there, you know, you'd probably have to have a lot of belief in Caden Lindstrom. And as, you know, we talked about on the last podcast, as I talked to scouts about Caden Lindstrom, it turns out that injury stuff is a concern. A lot of them are talking about it and talking about how important the medicals are going to be on,

on him. And so that's another thing. If he's the number two center on your board after Celebrini, and that's the guy you want, And certainly he would make, he makes you bigger, more physical, all those different things. You know, then maybe that is the pick. But at the same time, you know, you're just, is that, that's a bit of a risk situation there, even at five. You know, so I just think there's a lot of interesting discussions around what Montreal can do, given the range that they're in. And I think, I believe you guys in your in your team mock draft traded that pick down.

So, you know, like that, that and which would be interesting. I mean, I think there's certainly a potential for that. And I think the value of these defensemen is going to make that trade up scenario very attractive to some teams. So we'll have to see how that all shakes out. I think when you're in a position like Anaheim and you have say Leo Carlson, Trevor Zegras, Mason McTavish, already in the NHL, even a guy like Troy Terry's a little bit older, but he's still a relatively, you know, in his prime age player. And then you have somewhat like a top prospect of a Cutter Goce coming. I think when you're in that position, you could start talking about do we have too much here

and not enough somewhere else. But I think if you're Montreal, I don't think you have enough high-end defensemen in your organization to where you can exclude defensemen for the conversation. I've had this conversation with people about Chicago. I don't think with Chicago you could exclude defensemen because you have Ethan Del Mastro and Sam Renzel and Alex Blashek and Isaac Phillips and Nolan Allen.

That's not elite players, enough of them anyways, to exclude defensemen from your conversation. So I'm not saying I understand why people think Montreal should take a four or five. I understand that if you look at the pipeline, there's a little bit more of a neat there. But just because you have Lane Hudson and Logan Mayhew and Justin Barron and Katie Gully and David Reimbacker, you know, odds are some of those guys will become really good NHL players. And odds are one of those two guys are going to miss, just like completely miss. And then one or two of those guys become like nice players, nothing special. when you're at that point in the draft, you probably need for much.

Is it fair to say, though, Corey, with Lane Hudson, like, does he factor into how you would think about Aziv Boulem or a Zane Perak for them, or is he also meet that level of, like, well, we haven't seen it at the NHL yet, so it wouldn't stop you from those guys. It wouldn't stop me. I understand if you really are a lane believer, or you think he's going to run your first power play for the next 10 years, then, I mean, then you have to think about that. I think anybody who's drafting Perak or William have to at least consider. consider that given that is how you will maximize their value is by running your first power

play unit. But yeah, my personal opinion is I would not exclude those two just because I have Lane Hudson in my organization. Cool. All right, good stuff. We're going to take a quick break. Come back, talk about some of the risers out of the U-18 worlds and other takeaways from that tournament.

We're right back. All right, we're back. And hopefully by now, guys, you're all kicked the jet lag from your travels to the U18 world championships. got a heck of a finish to that tournament. I think it was Chris who, when I asked. No pun intended. That's right.

When I asked you what you were looking forward to in the medal round, Chris, you just begged the gods for a USA Canada final. You got it. And it went off in spectacular fashion. That's one way to put it. I mean, like, it was a crazy game. I mean, obviously there was so much hype and so much, you know, just with what James Hagan's was doing in the tournament,

with what Gavin McKenna was doing in the tournament. And it is actually upsetting how far away both USA and Canada were from everyone else in that tournament. It really, like that tournament, the quality of the under 18 world championship this year was so below its standard, which was kind of annoying. But at the same time, you get this fantastic final.

We've talked about it before. Scott mentioned it before about. the, you know, when we had, we had that terrible summer world juniors, but then Mason McTavish had a moment and it kind of saved the whole thing. You know, that's basically what we saw. And, you know, I know, I know, I know, I'm going to get into it, but, you know, it's, it's this gold medal game that's going one way and then it completely flips on its head with 10 and a half minutes to go and everything changes. And all of a sudden, you're just like, what did I just witness? What did, what just happened.

And what happened was not good things for USA and great things for Canada. The first half of the game, I think you saw a U.S. team that other than maybe like Hagan's doesn't have like a ton of eye-popping talent on their team that was just going to dominate the game. But they were so deep. They had three lines that they can roll. They had, they trusted their defensemen. They were controlling possession.

It was, even though it was only a one goal game. before the Trevor Connolly major. It was a game they were in control of. And I know Scott's going to talk about this, but like Canada didn't trust it felt like half their roster at times. They didn't trust, you know, anything other than two centers in Jet Lucenko and Colbo Dwen. They were kind of, you know,

by the end of it, I think they were only playing two defense pairs there regularly. And it was just like it just felt like USA was really in control. Canada was stressing out over their. matchups with Hagen's on the ice and even Trevor Connolly to an extent. And it really felt like USA was dictating that game for 70% of the game. The one thing that leapt out at me was, and Corey kind of touched on it there, but the lack of options down the middle for Canada and the way that that influenced

the way that Gardner McDougal coached that team. It was just defensive zone draw or James Higgins was on the ice and Colbo Duane was going over the boards, whether it was his turn, whether he needed to slot in as the center with two other wingers that he hadn't played much with. They were chasing that game. They were on the back foot. Gardner McDougal, who did not lose a single game

in the 2023, 2024 season, said, and I quote post game, that he thought his team had no hope in the second period. Those are crazy words out of the mouth of a head coach who's trying to win a hockey game, right? And that's just the way that the game was going. that USA seemed to roll their lines.

I thought USA's fourth line with Brendan McMorrah, Lucas Van B. and Shane Van Sagi was excellent in the tournament and in that game and a difference in that game. Just the depth, the ability to roll the lines. I thought L.J. Mooney had a really good tournament. Like, there were just, it felt like there were waves coming with the American group that the Canadian group didn't have. And there were several players on the Canadian group that just never really settled into their roles in the tournament. And others like Caleb Dain Y.A. that were maybe in a little bit above their heads.

And as a result, it just felt like this game was going to get away from Canada until the Trevor Connolly hit. And then three goals on a five-minute power play and everything changes. Yeah. You know what? It's interesting. So, you know, Corey talked about how Gardner McDougal was so focused on the matchups. And he was almost to the detriment of some of the forwards on his team.

But James Higgins and Teddy Stiga did not score in that game. And that really ultimately. was what allowed them. They were a great line together. You know, and then Trevor Connolly was kind of doing his thing. And they actually, that whole matchup ends up changing the tie of the game. At one point, Nick Four puts Trevor Connolly with James Higgins and Teddy Stiga to try to get that line going. They have a tremendous shift.

They dominate in the offensive zone. They control the puck for almost a full minute. And then as Canada is about to get the puck back and get it out of the zone, all of a sudden things change. the entire game changes Trevor Connolly levels what it was a was it Lechenco or Richard Ritter Ritchie. Thank you. Yeah. Right of Ritchie. Right in the Noggin.

5, 10. Three power play goals later. USA's out of it. So it's amazing how that like the long game somehow worked out. But yeah, I mean, it wasn't until that power play where Canada actually was able to start generating offense. How many times have we seen in a junior tournament like this that a Canadian team or an American team with a loaded offense gets a major penalty?

and it could be against like a Slovakia or Latvia, and they get one goal on it, maybe two. But to get three goals on a major in that kind of game is something that you don't see very often. No, insane. Go ahead, Scott. I was just to say, full credit for Carter George getting them there in the first place too, right? Like that game might be even more out of hand,

and then three goals doesn't get you to the finish line like it did unless Carter George is just excellent in the first two periods. All right. So let's talk about some of the prospects themselves now here, Corey. And not just in the gold medal game here, the whole tournament. Who on Team Canada do you think helped themselves the most at this event? I think it was those two centers I just mentioned in Jet Lechenko and Colbo Dwen. I think they both showed the traits that NHL scouts think are going to translate up levels.

Lachenko with his speed and his compete and ability to make plays. He was running the second power play on the flank there, for example, and a guy who can, on top of being a guy you can play both ways. Bob Dwayne, I think, is just a super high-end competitor with size who can show some offense scores the game-winning goal, for example, at the front of the net there. And skating isn't amazing, but I think it's okay enough to play in the NHL. I think they both have potential to be maybe third line centers in the NHL,

guys who can play significant defensive responsibilities in the NHL. And then, of course, I think the Tiji Ginnla high trains in full gear right now. I don't think he was their best forward. There he wasn't even their second best forward there. But he was an important for them. He was an important reason for why they won a gold medal. He's a guy who showed a ton of skill. He able to score goals.

He made some plays, including on an important play to score up, set up, I believe it was McKenna's first goal in the gold medal game. And he competed hard. And he didn't play a ton in the gold medal game, but in the semifinal game that they had to win against Sweden, which was, you know, an important game, a contested game. He played a massive amount in that game and played really well. And I think Gidla is trending towards being a very high draft pick. How about you, Chris?

Anybody really pop for you? You know, I think the guys that Corey mentioned, certainly did. You know, I don't think that one of the guys that I was most interested to watch in this setting was Charlie Ellick from Canada. You know, he's a really good skater. He's solid defensively physical. You know, I think it was interesting to watch his role diminish some as the tournament

progressed and seeing, you know, I didn't think that that was necessarily helpful. But I think you could still see that the tools and the different things that he brings to the table in some of the earlier games. I think that just the lack of offensive hockey sense is the concern there. He at least intrigued me. So I guess if we're looking more for risers, I really think the guys that Corey mentioned were the clear risers from Team Canada. You know, looking at some of the other teams,

like there wasn't a ton of guys, you know, that really did jump out at you. That it was like, wow, they significantly helped themselves in this tournament. But, you know, yeah, to me, you know, Carson Wech is another guy where I think he's going to be a player that teams are looking at for he's he's not a high-end guy like he's not going to be a big producer but he was so good on the forecheck and his speed and his size and his physicality you know you can say oh that guy absolutely has has a place in the n hl um you know could probably be an earlier day two pick as a

result um but you know those are the kind at least from canada that was those were some of the guys that really kind of stood out to me as the guys that was watching closely how about from team usa scott well i think the emory hudson pairing was tremendous they were searching all year long on that blue line. There were a lot of question marks about that American blue line early on this season. They really fought the puck at times early on this season. That blue line, I think, frankly, and some of the goaltending issues they had earlier in the year lost them, some games that they shouldn't have lost. So it was really nice in the second half of this season in particular to see Emery's defensive game really emerge. The skating and the length

and the athleticism has always been his calling card, but just his ability to close on pucks, to go back and to retrieve pucks. I made a number of comments sitting next to Chris and Peters throughout, or Chris and Corey throughout the tournament, where he would go back on a puck and sort of give the guy a shoulder fake with his back turn to him and exit the zone, just little things that he wasn't doing a year ago. I think Emery's one of the most improved players on this team

over the course of their two years together at the program. And suddenly I think Emery's quite likely going to be a first round pick. You look at the second half of the first round and the defensemen that have a chance to go in that range, it's not a big group. And I think Emery has sort of emerged at the front of that group just because of the skating and the way that he defended. Mick Ford talked about it how they wanted him this year

to become the best defensive defenseman in that age group. And he was pretty close by the end of the year to that conversation. So a credit to Emery. And then the other one, I mean, we talked about him a little bit. I thought Teddy Stiego was a driver. And not just because he was playing with James Higgins. There were games where in the first, period of games. It was him that was pulling everybody else into the fight, him making that

first big play, scoring that first big goal in a game. Teddy's a 510, 511 winger, which complicates the projection in terms of the NHL. But with the way that he works, the way that he skates, I think he's an above average skater. He's got above average skill. He's got some craft and creativity to his game. There's a very good player there. And I think he's going to surprise some people at Boston College next year and have a really solid freshman year. So Stieg is another one. It was kind of a second, third round pick for most of this year for most teams. And now you start to wonder, okay, how early on day two can he go? And will a team maybe even consider him sort of in the late 20s or early 30s?

I think there's going to be some hard conversations in NHL, a scan departments this summer about Cole Hudson, too. I think just given how good he was at the tournament, he was really good at the last year's tournament there too. I think there were some times this year where I wasn't blown away by him, and I think that goes into the conversation with Cole. but just given the success that Lane has had at Boston University, I think the team Verlis, like, looking at this player and wondering,

is this going to happen in a very similar way again? Is there some differences between the two players that make you think he can have more or less success? I just, I don't know where I lean on Cole right now or where he's going to go in the draft. I just know there's a lot of hard conversations going on about him right now. Speaking of hard conversations, one of the guys we talked about on the last episode that maybe wanted to see a little bit more from it, this event was Liam Green Tree, who had a spectacular season in the OHL for Windsor, quieter tournament here. I know Scott talked in the last episode about him maybe being kind of one of those victims of the, you know,

shortened bench, so to speak, for Team Canada, Corey. But what do you think the outlook is for Liam Grinchry coming out of this event? I don't think the comp is perfect. But when I wrote an article about a week or so ago, I talked about lessons from the 2019 draft. And I kind of drew a line between Green Tree and Arthur Calliiff in that I think, you know, both are not the best skaters, not the highest compete level kind of players, but scored a really high rates in junior hockey, really skilled, intelligent players, goal scores. And so I look at these two situations, and I do wonder if Green Tree does get maybe a little bit later into the first round, early second.

I almost think of Quentin Musty, too, where would Mustie go, like round 25? or so, I can see some similarities in connecting those player types there too. So I do water of Green Tree who we thought might be a top 20 pick after the tournament maybe goes more towards like into the 20s. And then Cole Eisenman, Chris, obviously, we've talked about him plenty on the show. We don't have to belabor the point. But I know we talk about wanting to see a big statement from him in the medal round. He does come through with the three goals that he needs to become the all-time goals leader.

But has the outlook really changed fundamentally for Cole from where he was coming into this tournament? to where he is now. Yeah, I don't think so. And it's crazy to say that about a guy that had nine goals in a tournament like this. You know, and I think that the one thing that as you talk to scouts out there, there's like these, these instances. And you look at the two games where he didn't score goals, I think those are the games where you say one of those games, Team USA scored nine goals. He didn't have one of them. And he just looked, he didn't look himself. We talked about it. I think that was the last time we talked. well the thing about that is is i think that there are some some growing concerns about you know his his overall sense you know his overall you know in terms of you know if he's not impacting the game the way that he thinks he should be does he compound that with other mistakes and not playing to his identity so like it's it's such a weird

discussion because you know oh i want to see more from i want to see more of a goal score but then when he when he's not scoring and you're like i will rather like him when he's trying to do all the goal scoring things you know because he's he's a little bit more playing to his identity. You know, so that it's tough. You know, I think that some of the other games where you saw him get the goals, especially in the metal round, I think against Slovakia, he played a more physical game. He was getting, you know, he actually almost got a major penalty.

You know, they took it off the board when they realized that he hit the guy in the shoulder and not the head. But, you know, like that, that's, he was engaged physically. He was competing at a higher level. But I look at some of the one-on-one skills. I worry about that. You know, he was having a hard time beating defenders. He was having a hard time getting shots through it various times.

And we've talked about his shot selection, his decision, making all those different things. And that comes back to that hockey sense as well. And so I do think that there is a stronger chance that he's going to slip toward. I think he's still going to be picked among the lottery teams, but I think it's going to be towards the back end of that. And I think that, you know, guys like Tija Ginla, you know, Consta Hellenius,

Berkeley Caton have, I think, vaulted themselves a fair amount past him on where a good number of teams will be, you know, sliding those players. Feels like Seneca has joined that group too, which complicates it for a player like Eiserman. Absolutely. Yeah, I would be fairly confident that Seneca's going to go ahead of Eiserman on draft day. Well, that's a good tease into the mailbag. So we're going to take a quick break. We're going to come back and we've got a packed. mailbag to get to a lot of draft stuff. Stick around for that. All right, let's get to the mailbag

here, guys, and CV Sports Guy wants to know, Corey. You just talked about him in the last segment. How much did Colbo Duan help his draft stock with his U-18 performance and a newer topic here? Who are some other players who have a similar game with the size and compete combo? He also says skating in there. Yeah, and I'm not sure his skating's amazing, to be quite honest. That thing is actually people's biggest issue with him, but I can talk about that in general. I think I was pretty high on cold blood when coming into the tournament. I think I had him whatever around like my last list, what was it, like 20, 21, 22 kind of thing.

I think I might move him up one or two spots since then, but I, you know, I think that's pretty similar to where I have him. But I think that's going to become, I think, more of an emerging consensus here after the tournament. I think he's going to go around that, say, 18 to 25 range in the draft. I think he's worked his way to being a very solid first round pick just because of how likable his game is, his work ethic is off the charts. He's big and there is a little bit of offense there in his game too, to where you see a way that he could become a really nice

pro and an NHL center that people are going to want to build around. In terms of thinking of guys like him in terms of the really high end compete, I think, you know, that's a good question. I don't think as a forward, it's the same thing, but I think Stee and Solberg, the defenseman in Norway is making a lot of people like him just because of how competitive that player is. He's 6-2. He's mobile. He's super physical. He had a great end to his season there with his club team in Norway.

He's going to go to the men's world championship now. I think if he shows he can defend against men already at this age, I think he's going to be a guy who can stir some conversation in terms of just how competitive he is and elevate his profile a little bit. And I, you know, we've talked about him before, but just Jet Lechenko. I think his competes really, really strong. And I think this is a guy who, you know, I think last episode I said he's elevated from a late first early second to a mid to late first.

I think just my conversations, I think he's going to be a midfirst. I think you can, I feel pretty confident he's going in the top 20 of this year's draft and for those reasons. He trades the size in, right? He's only 511, but he's got the much better wheels. Yeah, I think of Frank Nazar a lot when I think of that player, for example. And I think there's a lot of similarities. With a comfort of both, Nathan Gosey from a couple of seasons ago.

Is that a similar kind of profile there? Yeah, I think that's on the money there. And Gosey went around, run around the 20 spot. I think this guy might have a little bit more pure offense and maybe not, maybe it trades back an inch. But I think there's a little bit more hockey sense there than Gosey had. Gosey was a better skater, too. Yeah, fair, fair.

All right, this next one will be for you, Scott. It's from Krause-Oben. We hear about how players rank from three to eight, on draft list may be virtually interchangeable. Need aside, how do team scouts and analysts rank players who are seemingly equal in their respective upside? Well, I think ultimately they start at what position they play. I mean, we see it every year.

And I think in building my mock, my first mock draft that came out today and in speaking with scouts over the last few days since I returned from Finland, just exchanging some text with people, I think there's a consensus yet again, surprise, surprise that some of those wingers and some of the smaller centers are going to inevitably linger on boards longer than people realize. And I think ultimately that those those tend to be the deciding factors. It's can this kid be if it's a defenseman? Can he be a top four guy? And teams will always put a premium on that, even if they really like the available forward. I think we're going to see that in this draft. I would expect that five of the top six defensemen and you can kind of select any five,

but five of those top six defensemen are probably going to go in the first eight or nine picks. and as a result, I mean, you do the math, you start to count how many forwards there are also in that second group. Even if teams have them slotted closely together with some of those defensemen, it's just an inevitability that two or three of Heleneas, Beiserman, Seneca, Patton, we'll see what happens with medicals in terms of Kaden Lindstrom. Multiple of those guys are going to be available outside the top 10, even if they're viewed in this so-called sort of three-to-eatine. conversation that has emerged in this group. So I think that's ultimately the deciding factor for most teams when they sit down at the table is the wingers just tend to have a tougher time, especially if you're a 510, 511 winger, right?

Like those guys always, I mean, you go back all the way back to Cole Coughfield, Alex DeLex de Brinkett on and on and on. Those guys always just tend to linger, even if on talent they belong with players who are drafted in front of them. I think the biggest variable is positioned. and then the second biggest variable is, are they a Russian? Chris, Nabil Raymond wants to know. He says, Beckett Seneca is definitely this year's riser, like Tudor Goethe and Mason McTavish in past years.

You think he could end up going as high, like top five high as those two did? You know, I don't think it's going to be that high, but he certainly, you know, enter that top 10 conversation. I mean, you know, I think that that's been the real remarkable thing. Like, you know, the interesting thing about this year's draft is, I really think that those defensemen are going to really dictate how that top eight, nine, go. You know, and then also, you know, whether or not the centers, the decision on some of the centers that we're seeing, you know, being picked and things like that. So there's, there's a lot of different things that I think will come into play.

But, you know, those two guys went a lot higher. The other thing is, like, Mason McTavish's rise was, you know, during that weird season where, you know, he was playing in Switzerland, you know, like there was all these. different kind of variables that it was really hard to get a handle on where certain guys were going to go. Meanwhile, Cutter Gochier, you know, his his rise wasn't just within the last, like, not to say that Seneca's rise is only because of his, only because of the playoffs that he's had, which is absolutely a driving factor of that. But, you know, I felt like Gochier's rise was a lot longer than most people realized, you know, so that was the other thing where it wasn't like he had a great under 18s and now he's, you know, because he had an okay under 18s, you know, it was like he,

he was already kind of moving in that direction as a bigger forward. But I mean, you think about the size, the right shot, you think about the, the goal scoring that he's had, the work ethic that he's playing with, the just, you know, at the toughest time of the year being a driving player for his team in the postseason, all those things are putting him in from a guy that, you know, I think was kind of towards the 20s into a guy that's going to be in that 10 to 15. 16 range. Like we're talking about,

he was in the lottery range in my first lottery mock. I think that there's a good chance that he goes in that range as well. But yeah, I mean, one of those players that has moved along. So not quite top three, top five, but obviously if you can make a move from 20 to 10 at this stage of the game,

it's kind of incredible. Yeah. If I was doing a mock now, I wouldn't have him in the top five, but I think he's got a really strong chance to go in the top 10. I think he's in that conversation. right now. All right, Corey.

This one's from J.P. Hendricks, who says, what justifies the gap in your eyes between Kaden, Kaden, Lindstrom and Berkeley, Katton? Is there a risk with Katten translatibility at the NHL level, where Lindstrom's skill set would shine more and Katten would have a harder time impacting the game to the point he becomes a lesser player? Basically, why the gap between Lindstrom and Katten? I think with those two players, you know, I think with Katton, the size is definitely the biggest concern.

but I think everything else in that guy's game is a major positive. I think he's a really good skater. I think he's really skilled. I think he's really smart. I think he's competitive. I think he can score goals. Tija Gindler is supposed to be the goal score of that draft age group from the West, but Kaden had more goals than him this season

in the Western Hockey League. I just think this guy does so much at a high level. And then with Lindstrom, obviously he's an elite athlete. A six three, he can fly. He's super physical. you know what I think I had I was talking to a scout the other day I think he eloquated the uh the the Lindstrom debate really well he's like if you believe he has

decent enough hockey sense you think he can be a star because now you're talking about a six three guy you could fly he has skill he could score he's physical and he makes some place if you think that you think he's a star if you don't think he's smart enough then you're thinking okay maybe he's like a second line player or at least second line center maybe a fringy first line wing a guy who's really really good but not a premium player and you know and for me talking about those two players, you know, before you get into the injury stuff with Lindstrom or anything along those lines, because I think he'll be, I think, you know, unless I learned anything new injuries, especially a back injury is concerning, but I think you got to

presume he's going to be fine, you know, if he's a young athlete, he'll, he should be able to recover, is that I think about when they were on the same team nine months ago at the Hlink of Gretzky, and not only was Katten better, he was miles better. Like, like, they couldn't play Lindstrom towards the end of that gold medal game, whereas they just kept rolling caten over and over and over again. And I understand that was nine months ago, but Lynchstrom played like 25 games since then. And so I don't understand the conversation that all of a sudden,

one guy is significantly better than the other guy when nine months ago, the other guy was significantly better than that guy. So that's where I have trouble with this conversation and where I think Cayman Lynchum is going to go really, really high in this year's draft. But I just, just not the way I see it from what I've seen of those two players. All right, Scott, this one's from Matt Maneer. He says, this question likely won't get asked. Jokes on you, Matt.

Which player is the analytics darling of the 2024 draft? Oh, there are probably two or three players that immediately come to mind. Obviously, Zane Perak, you look at any sort of public model. Byron Bader's sort of the typical go-to for most. Byron's model thinks that Zane is not just going to be a good player, but is like a superstar echelon projectable defenseman in terms of the production piece of the puzzle. Miles ahead of where recent very talented OHLD,

like Brandt Clark and Pavelman T.U.Kov were at, for example. So Zane's a natural one just because the counting stats are so off the chart. How similar are his numbers to like Bouchard? Bushard was, yeah, close enough. I mean, Bouchard played for the London Knights, so that's always a factor, whereas, I mean, I mean, Saginaw was good this year, but he, I mean, he led that team in scoring by 30 points as a defenseman. I don't know whether Bouchard ever got there, but Bouchard was 70, 80 points.

87. Yeah. 87. Yeah. Yeah. So, so, so, and Bouchard's a 70 point defenseman in the NHL right now, right? So, he, he comes to mind. And then the two kids over in Europe, surprisingly, and we talked about Demadov earlier,

surprisingly, despite the fact that he hasn't played international hockey, really, and despite the fact that he hasn't played in the KHL, or at least hardly at all. He, his, in terms of the models and the analytics piece of it, he also projects in that sort of superstar category, like in the same conversation as players like Matt Vaymichkov and Macklin-Zellabrini and that kind of an echelon just from a purely statistical standpoint.

And then I think that Wiga has been watered down over the last five to 10 years, but some of those kids that perform well in Liga, like a Consta Hellenius, do tend to typically get sort of bonus marks from any sort of model. And Heleneas wasn't just good in Liga this year. He was one of the best players on his team in Liga, including in the playoffs. A year ago, he played a full season in Liga.

A year before that, three years ago now, he was one of the leading scores at the U20 level. So there's anybody who has that sort of three-year track record instead of two-year track record typically gets a boost. So those guys come to mind. And then the one who actually surprised me when I was having a conversation with Byron about who jumped out in his model about a month ago is Michael Brandzegn Neegard, who is actually viewed as as sort of a projectable player, a safe pick, a future middle six checker type, who's physical and works hard and has kind of that Cobo Duane motor

that we talked about, but not necessarily viewed as a points guy. And yet you look back at Michael Brancigneegar's trajectory here in his production in Hockey Al Spenskin and his production before that at the J20 level, some of what he's done internationally, including with the men's team, scored four goals in a game two weeks ago now. He's actually a kid who I think gets more love from the models than people may be realized. I think maybe that's a sign that there's a little bit of offense there that people might not expect. Yeah, tremendous playoffs in that league too.

I think he had 10 points and 12 games, which is really impressive at that age. Chris, this one is for you. What are the chances of Demadov sliding to five for the half? I mean, I don't think it's out of the question. You know, like it's, I feel like it's unlikely based on, you know, I think that there's, there's a lot of belief in him as being, you know, one of the top three forwards in this draft, you know, and so it's just a matter of, you know, confidence. I mean, the other thing is, is that he doesn't have a long contract in the KHL at the moment.

You know, that is, that is part of it. If he does sign an extension, I guess that would be things a little bit scarier. But, you know, I think there's there's some interesting things that I've learned about, you know, from European scouts about, you know, the various things that have kind of been happening with Russia and everything else like that. And, you know, I think most of them feel like the Russian risk isn't as high with him just because of the certain things. He's also represented by Gold Star, which, you know, we've talked about is that kind of, I guess, gives people some feeling of good feelings because obviously Dan Mills. They don't really love him in the KHL because of the amount of guys he has in the NHL. But, you know, that's that's another thing that I think is good. So is it impossible?

I don't think so because I think you look at some of those teams. If Chicago decides to take Levshinov and then all of a sudden you're, you know, you're looking at what are you going to do if you are, if you're Anaheim. You know, you've got all those different things that you have. You got another chance to add another piece. I mean, is there, does the run on defensemen happen in three, you know, in two, three, four. Is there something there that? So there's always the possibility that that's there.

I think it's a little unlikely, but at the same time, I don't think that it's, it's impossible. And I do think that the Demadov hype train has like fired back up to a certain extent to Corey's point earlier about, about that. And I don't think it's necessarily just to the playoffs and how we played in the playoffs. I think it's just a matter of that certainly played a role in, in, in terms of. of how the public has viewed him. But, yeah, but I mean, I think that there's still, there's plenty to be excited about with him.

And I think it's going to be hard for him to slip there, but certainly not impossible. I mean, we saw Matt Faye Mishkov go down to seven last year. So clearly that's there's a possibility. Yeah, I agree. That's particularly the Mitchcoff point, although they would say the difference at the top of last year's draft was probably stronger than the top of this year's draft. I think that creates more of an avenue. I think people like Devonoff more because of the contract, who's

represented by. I think he has a play style with his compete that I think is very appealing and makes him very likable. But it's interesting if you start comparing him to say in Machvae-Mitchcock, you know, Demadov had a great draft season. Would you have argued, though, that Mitchcoff had just as impressive, but not a better draft season, given what he accomplished versus men? You know, you look at the draft minus one year.

I would argue Mitchcoff's numbers were better than Demadov in the MHL and his draft minus one. You look at, you know, international, you know, Mitchcock has a number of. already with the senior team in his draft year. He was a world junior player in the draft minus one. Holinka, you know, top player, U18 MVP, draft minus two. These are all things that Demodov just either didn't do or didn't have the opportunity to do. And so it's, I think it's interesting how there's like, oh, he could go to, he'd be a consensus

to consensus, two, consensus three. And there's no way he's going to slide to five, but Mitchcock did. So I think, you know, how I said earlier, small, you know, whether it's, I think he's a winger or that he's a Russian, I think there are. there's plenty of opportunity there for teams to talk their way out of him at 2, 3, 4. All right. Last one is from Betelberg 14. Corey, we'll start with you here, but everyone feel free to chime in if somebody comes to mind.

Who in this draft, have you heard from teams, is going to go way higher than expected by the public, like an Easton Cowan, for example? Well, we've already mentioned Seneca. I think he's an easy one to talk about. I think we've talked about both Dwayne and Lichenko. I think those are guys who have helped themselves. I can be really lame and just go right. right to Easton Cowan's team.

And I think Sam O'Reilly is a really nice prospect. He's, you know, a 6-1 center. He skates well. He competes well. He's showing decent offense. He's been a big part of the success of that London team this year. And I'm not saying he's for sure going to go in the first round, but I wouldn't blink if that happened quite honestly.

I think he's a really nice player. And I just, I would not put too high of, you know, of a C league in terms of where Dean Latterno is going to. go. I know he played prep hockey, St. Andrews, but he's six, seven, and he could skate, and the toolkit's really tantalizing. And I think there's just, there's going to be an NHL team that's going to convince themselves to take him in the 20s. It's two games in the USHL that he got, and I don't know how much you read into that, like, but like, what, you know, when you're picking a guy out of St. Andrews College here, like, it is one of those tricky things where

you're betting a lot on just physical tools other than what you saw. Pre-U-SHL's done. I mean, he's too easier than Mark Jankowski was, and Jankowski got taken out of Quebec high school. And that worked out great. I didn't say, you know, I was endorsing the idea, although I do like a player. And I think he's, I think he is more athletic than him. I, when I watch him, the player I actually think of is someone near and near to your heart, Max, is Rasmussen. I think there's a lot of, I can see a path where he becomes a player like that in the NHL.

Jack McBain did the OJ to BC path and Latourneau is a BC commit to. So there's some natural things there. But I think in watching Latourneau, there's finesse and skill that his game that some of those other big guys, like McBain, just never had at that same age. All right. Good show today, guys. That's going to do it for us.

Thanks for listening to this episode of the Athletic Hockey Show Prospect series. You can catch more of Chris over at Flow Hockey and on his podcast talking hockey sense. Obviously, read all Scott and Corey stuff on The Athletic. We'll talk to you soon. What a show.