The Athletic Hockey Show - NHL Draft 2025 first look: can Hagens hold his No. 1 spot?

Episode Date: October 1, 2024

Max and Corey discuss the dynamics of the 2025 NHL Draft, including whether James Hagens will go wire-to-wire as the presumptive No. 1 pick, potential risers over the course of the season, and what it could all mean on draft night. Plus, the guys answer some listener questions in the mailbag to close the show.Hosts: Max Bultman and Corey PronmanExecutive Producer: Chris FlanneryProducer: Chris Flannery 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 Prondman for another episode of the Athletic Hockey Show Prospect Series. Today we're going to be talking about Corey's 2025 NHL draft rankings. And Corey, the last couple drafts, it feels like there's been really clear identities, at least at the top of the draft. Last year, we had the defense draft. There were so many top blue liners, and it just felt like this is the year that you want to find your top pair of defensemen. of the future. The year before that, it was kind of these arguably borderline generational centers. There were three or four really high-level centers at the very top of that draft class,

depending on if you count Will Smith as a center, I suppose. What is the identity, as we sit here in late September of the 2025 draft? Well, it's definitely a forward heavy draft. I think there's one really, really good defense prospect in Matthew Schaefer, but it's a lot of forwards, in particular big forwards that are highlighted at the top of the top of the top of the first. the draft. So that is one theme. And I also feel like something you're going to see in the early weeks and months of the season, unless James Hagan just comes out of the gates of Boston College and just absolutely rips it up, which he might. He's going to be playing with Gay-Paro and Ryan Leonard and that Boston College team's offense rolled last year. It could roll again this season.

Some expects it to. But if he doesn't do say what Adam Fantilly did or what Macklin-Sellibrieney did in college as freshman, which is a very hard thing to do, I think you're going to start seeing a lot of conversation at the top of this year's draft. I mean, you look at the start of the year. You have Roger McQueen coming out of the gate of the four-goal game, six, five sediment who can skate and has legit high at offensive skills. That's a very appealing set of characteristics. You have Michael Misa comes out of the game with a two-goal game. We're going to see how the rest of those top prospects do as their seasons get started in the various junior league. You know, Anton Frundel hasn't come back from injury yet, for example.

But I think you're going to see a draft that's going to have a lot of debate at the top. And unless Hagan's really establishes himself, he is number one on the list. And I think in most scouts' minds, he is number one. But I'm talking to a lot of NHL scouts, I don't think he is a convincing number one. I don't think he is a guy that most NHL scouts I've talked to believe is going to go wire to wire as the one. And he might, but there could be pushed back at some point. in those conversations. And I think that's ultimately what I'm looking for in the opening weeks and months of this

draft season. So when we have drafts like this, which do happen from time to time, where there is a little bit more of a race, I think one of my reactions to that is that, you know, you talk a lot about how the strength of an overall draft typically can kind of be defined or set at the very top. Does that mean that this is kind of, if there is kind of that vacuum at the top, Does that mean this is maybe trending toward kind of one of those more below average kind of drafts? That's my early assessment, but I think it really depends on Hagan's because, I mean, like I said, if he does emerge as a true number one overall type of pick this season,

I could change my assessment of that. There's other candidates like a Porter-Martone or Anton Frundel or Anthony Frundel or Matthew Schaefer or Roger McQueen or others who could enjoy that conversation too and have a really elite season, which can combine with their tools make you think they can be that kind of true number one overall prospect that you expect at the number one pick. But if there is, then yes, I think you're starting to look through this draft and I'm not so sure that I completely love how the top of this draft looks. And with all the asterisk, when we talk about this stuff in September or October, you know,

a lot's going to change. Nobody was talking about Jet Lechenko in the top 15 this time last year. Or Beckett Seneca in the top five this time last year. Or Anton Salev, you know, in the top 10. So, like, things are going to change. I guess maybe Salaya because he had that really hot start. But the behemis side, you get the point that things are going to change. And we'll see how things transpire.

But my, I tend to look at this more like the Yerai Slavkowski draft, which at one point was the Shane Wright draft. Or the 2017 draft led by Nico Heeshire that where I can see a scenario where there's four, five, six, seven players that, you know, you can have conversations about that can realistically be the best player from this draft in seven or eight years. So I always look to, you know, you mentioned Slefkowski because I think that this draft is the only power draft would be another one like that too. Yeah, right. And I think in drafts like that, and Slefkowski is a good example of that.

I wonder if teams start to kind of go looking for certain types of pieces that when there's not that undeniable, like high-end defining guide, and I understand Hagen's could get there, maybe even Frondell could get there. But one of the characteristics of this draft is kind of those power bodies, a lot of bigger bodies. And I think teams have a hard time overlooking those guys, especially when there's not a transcendent guy there to work with. There are guys that Martone, I think, has a chance to be the number one big in this draft.

But even when you go beyond him, you can get to guys like Spence, Denauget a little bit, can kind of fit that power forward role that I think teams are looking for. Absolutely. And that applies to Schaefer to an extent, too, because I think things could change. We'll see how Logan Handler's year goes. We'll see how Jackson Smith seasons go. You know, there's some other candidates who can work their way into being a premium defense prospect in this year's draft. But presuming Schaefer has the year expects him to, and he looks like a top five candidate.

You know, I've talked to people in the league about this in the early goings. They're like, well, if there's only one legit premier defenseman in this year's draft, there's going to be a lot of teams picking high who are going to need a premier defense. And I think there are people who wonder, can Schaefer work his way into the first overall pick conversation or at the minimum of the second overall pick conversation

just because of those variables? You mentioned the big bodies. He had Martone's huge. He plays hard. You have, you know, Malcolm, you know, you have Spence. He's a tenacious competitor. Caleb Denauget. He's a really good all-around centerman. Roger McQueen, I don't think he plays. is super hard, but he's just massive and he has so many tools to work with.

I think there's definitely a way for you to be picking at the top of the draft and have a unique scenario where it's really close between two or three players. I kind of like that Schaefer call that you were just talking about. Can he get into that top two or three? I think he can partly because of the scarcity. And if you know you're not going to have another kind of crack at getting a top flight defender, you know, you're going to have to take them there. I think there's the argument to do it.

And you mentioned the Slavkovky draft. That was probably a deliberation for New Jersey and when they took Simon Nemichick to. I'm sure. I'm sure. The other thing I like about Schaefer, though, he's almost a full year younger than Hagen's and then Martone. And I think we can at times maybe overrate birth year. But I think it matters, especially when you're talking about that position. And that's a position that we expect you to struggle with more the younger you are.

If he kind of has the year that we think he can playing at age. 17 the whole year. I think that's going to really mean something. I think there's been some minor questions on Schaefer's offense over the past 12 months just watching him in junior. He didn't have a huge year in Erie in junior, but he's 6-2, nearly 6-2. He's an excellent skater. He competes hard. And if you watched his Hulinka Greski games, you did not have questions on that offense. He ran that first power play. He was making a lot of skilled plays. He was making things happen for his teammates. and if that player that we saw at the Halinka, which doesn't,

a Hulika is a short tournament. You don't always overreact in a short tournament. But if the player I saw at the Halinka shows up in the OHL every weekend, he will be a guy who can push for the first overall pick. He looked that good in that tournament. One other name toward the top of your list that I think is going to get a ton of attention is we have our annual,

is this new Russian winger better than the last Russian winger? And that's Ivan Ryabkin this year. Where do you stand kind of so far? not to throw him right into the Michkov-Demadov Derby that's already at full steam. Well, he looked like that last year. He's off to a bit of a slow start in the Russian Junior League this year, which is a bit of a concern, especially if you're going to compare him to the all-time great Russian junior players. So I probably wouldn't get him into that conversation yet.

Where I think people are going to like Reabkin maybe more than those two is he is a true center, and he looks like an NHL center. He skates really well. He competes really hard. It creates offense in the interior while having a lot of skill. So I think that makes him a really appealing player. I don't know if the pure, pure offense in his game will rise to the level of a Demadova or Mitchcoff. I want to take a quick break right here.

We're going to come back and talk about some of the other top players to be watching. So maybe players we haven't talked about enough yet as this season gets going. All right, we're back. And, Corey, there is one name in the top five here right at number five that I think people are going to be really keen to hear about. heard so much about Michael Mesa dating back to his exceptional status days. Obviously, you still have him very high on this list. What is kind of the story right now with Michael Misa? He may not still carry the star on him of being that exceptional status player, which people see that they think of Connor McDavid, they think of John Tavares, they think of that kind of prospect. But it doesn't

always become the case. But he's still a really, really good player. Like I mentioned, the first segment, at a very good first game of the year, and he's going to have a monster junior season in Saginaw this season. He's a great skater. He's really skilled. And while he has a lot of those offensive traits in town that you look for, I also think his compete level is really high. He generates a lot of interior offense.

He kills penalties. He responsible two-way player. So there's a lot of really intriguing parts about this player. I think the question with him is going to be, is the offense in his game going to be elite? Is it going to rise to the level? of James Hagan's, is it going to rise to the level of Anton Frundel? Can he get to that kind of of offense this season? Because I think if he can, he has the other, you know, characteristics

in this game that I think can make him desirable in the top five. I do get the question where I've watched Meese and I've watched a lot of Mesa over the last two or so years. I do wonder, like, is it really good offense or is it special offense? And I've kind of leaned more to the former when I've watched him initially. Well, I think go back to the Memorial Cup that we were at. And I realize that's like the highest level and he was still, you know, a draft minus one at that point. But I don't know that he had like a takeover impact on a more than maybe a shift that I saw, at least when I was there. So I think that's kind of what you're talking about is if you're talking about him in the top five,

I think you want to see him be able to take over that way. And he wasn't a feature player on that team, a Memorial Cup team. He's going to be a featured player on Sagina on this year. He'll get a love opportunity. He'll get major minutes. So I think he's going to have a huge, huge year. when you start comparing the offensive traits, the skill, the hockey sense, is again, does it rise to the level of the other top top names in this draft?

You know, I'm not so sure. You know, when I watched Mesa play on the same ice as Jamie Hagan's, for example, the World Under 17 Challenge two years ago, both late birthday, so there's some analogies you could draw there. I thought Hagan's, like, skill was clearly above his. But we got a long way to go still to the end of the draft year. Another player of people probably Maybe haven't paid quite as much attention to just yet

And we talked, I think at the last draft About the return of the queue, Caleb Denoiae, the center out there in Moncton. Yeah, and Denaugay leads a very promising QMJHL class For this year's draft. I think there's several players in the queue Who are candidates to go in the first round this year And Denaue would be the top candidate keys

and a very nice underage year. Came into this year, I think he looked like he grew an extra inch or two, which is a very promising development for him as well over the course of the summer. I thought he was one of the best, if not the best forward for Canada. I think Gavin McKenna had more flashy skill moments and scoring moments, but I thought Denoia might have been their best all-around player, playing the middle, playing hard, playing with pace, still creating some offense, even if not as much offense.

I don't think his offensive creativity is elite, but I think it's still very good. He checked a lot of the boxes that NHL teams are going to be looking for, and I think he has a very good chance to be a top 10 pick in the upcoming draft. One of the players I noticed in the top 10 that I do not have much familiarity with at this point is Jake O'Brien, and I'm guessing if I don't know them too well, our listeners probably don't either. What should people know about Jake O'Brien going into his draft year? When I was watching Brantford last year to check in on Merrick Van Ecker,

who went in the late first to Chicago. You know, Van Ecker is a very good player. You obviously were watching him. He stood out, but you kept watching that team, and Jacob Bryan kept standing out to me whenever I watched that team. Just the skill and the hockey sense are just really, really strong with him. He runs a power play like a pro. He creates offense with pace.

He's a good enough skater. And like Dinoye, he grew a little bit over the summer now. I think he put on an extra inch and a half when he came into hockey Canada's camp. So now he's a center with size and legitimate offense in his game. And that makes for a very exciting pro prospect. One more guy in this kind of area of the draft is Rini Merca. And we talked about there's not that many D in this draft.

This is a D who has a lot of traits. I think that NHL teams are going to gravitate towards starting with the tape measure. I think he's 6.6. Yeah, I don't have him in my top 10 right now. I have him closer to 15, but I've talked to some scouts who believe. he could be a top 10 pick in the upcoming draft. He has a good year. You mentioned the size, the six, you know, he's six, six.

He skates quite well for six six. He's not, I think, a really poised puck moving type, but there is some puck skill there. He's got at least the ability to make first passes at the higher levels. He works hard. He's got some real two-way pro potential. So you look at it like Adam Eurecheck who got picked out of that league last year. You know, I don't think Adam Eurecheck is more skilled.

than Merca is, but Merca's, you know, three inches taller than him. So if Adam Yerchik went, I think, 16 or 17 to St. Louis, you look at Merca and you're like, well, I mean, this guy has potentially to be a top 12, top 10 pick if things go well. There's really a cluster at the, at that point of your list, really. Logan Hensler, at Wisconsin, Kishon, Aitchison from Barry, Jackson Smith in the Western League, and Reese Hamilton in the Western League, along with Merca. If you had to pick one of those guys, if I told you one of those guys is, strapped to a rocket ship and going to go on the top 10?

Who's got the best case to do it? Well, I think Merck, I think Jackson Smith as a candidate. He's already got a couple of points here to start the year. He's 6-3. You can really skate. He has he's got skill. He's got some physicality. I think there's still some maturing in his game.

I don't love his decisions at time. He could still be he could play a little wild at time, I think. But there's a lot of tools in his game. And if, you know, if he finds a way to really hit the ground running here throughout the course of the first few months, I think you could start seeing him elevate into the top 10, top 12. on a lot of lists. So one thing that kind of stood out to me here, and I know it's obscured by Hagan's being

at the top of the list and having already left the program, not as much program presence at the very top of this list as I think we've gotten accustomed to. No, and I just saw the program play twice at the USHL Classic, and it wasn't a really strong performance for them. I mean, they kind of got blown out in one game, too. And when I watched them the previous year, I mean, they were, it was just an okay age group. And I think there's players that I have not in there That some scouts would have in there

Some scouts would argue William Moore deserves to be in the first round mix Some scouts would argue that Cole McKinney deserves to be in the first round mix And he's not in there Both would be kind of high seconds for me As a stands right now McKinney I worry just how much offense

It's going to be at the end of the day Even though I think he got two goals In his first game of the year And then William Moore I see the traits I just don't know how well He sees the game right now But I think there's a lot of

tools there. Both are right there in the mix. I could see even the one MTTDP player who I have in there, Charlie Trethewe, like, I'm not like in a love with him. Like, I could see him go out in either McKinney or Moore come in or Conrad Fondrick come in as the season comes on. I think that's kind of this year's to like some, you know, some, you know, outside of like when Jake Sanders went top five, like that kind of year where there's going to be like, I think a lot. There's going to be some late first, It's going to be some high mid-seconds. Like, it's not, I think, the strongest program year overall, but they're still good players, and I still think,

you'll still find one or two first-rounders from this group. I just can't tell you definitively who those are for sure going to be. All right, Corey, let's go now to the mailbag, and we got a few, it's a little lighter mailbag this week, but a few good ones, starting with Nabil Raymond, who says with how good Jetluchenko has looked in Flyers Camp and given how it seemed NHL teams were higher on him than the public sphere at the time of the draft, would you change the current projection you have on him being a middle six

forward? So here's the thing with Jet. I'm a big fan of a lot of the things he does. He's a great, great skater. He's super competitive. And despite his modest point totals last year, I still like the skill. I like his hockey sense in particular. My big concern with Jet last year was, can he finish?

Because I felt like whenever you watch his game, he's always around the puck a puck a lot. lot, creating a lot of chances for himself and for other, and for his teammates, but the puck never went in the net. I think, like, between like 70-ish OHL games for the regular season and the playoffs, I think he had 20 goals. And it's, that's a concern for me. And some, and some might say, oh, well, that's sample size, his shooting percentage, yada, yada, but like in my history doing this, there are sometimes guys who just can't finish. And it's not the end of the world, but in the NHL, there's between being a hardworking 15-goal 40-point guy and a hard-working 30-30 guy. That couldn't, so it, that's my head-in-Zee with Lechenko.

If we fast forward six months and you tell me that issue was gone or not gone, like he's a, like, he's a sniper or anything like that, but that he's actually able to finish chances at a typical rate, then I absolutely could elevate the projection to where the Flyers took him and buy that and buy them as a top six forward, potentially a second line center in the NHL. But until I'm completely convinced the offense is there,

I have my prediction more as a third line center. And I understand where this debate comes from. He's so likable. You can watch him at the World Junior Camp. Super likable. You're watching with the U-18 team. Super likable. Watch him at Flyers camp.

He jumps out of you. He's a great, great player. The talent's there. The character is there. The compete is there. He just needs to score. If he doesn't score, you can't be a top six four in the NHL. Well, here's what I might argue with you, though, is that when I've watched

Lucenko, his playmaking really pops. Like, at an above average level that I think can carry the offense. And I'm with you. I think he can create chances at a high level. I need him to actually finish those chances that he gets. I'm not calling him Robert Thomas. Robert Thomas had a 65-point season with 18 goals. Yeah, I mean, I was on London, and they were, like,

I was a deep team. That was in St. Louis. I'm talking about it in the NHL. He had 18 goals and 65 points in an NHL season. I don't think it's impossible. Okay, I thought you're talking about what he was draft eligible. I'm saying like, you know, if you told me Lucchenko is a 40 assist guy in the NHL, I don't bat an eye. So I don't think he needs to get to like more than 20 goals to be like a solid number two center.

Yes, if he's 20-40, that's difference. But I guess he's my issue is he 1030 or is he 20-30? That's more my, but I, listen, I agree with you. His playmaking is really, like I said, he's got the skill, he's got the skating, he's got the hockey sense. Like, he checks off so many boxes other than he's a little bit on the smaller side, which, again, maybe Robert Thomas was too. I think there's a little bit difference of players, but a little bit, yeah, that issue was some similar. I just, I worry about whether he could finish chances. And I worry that maybe, do we disagree here, is I don't think, like, his offensive skill in hockey sense is as high end as Thomas's was to the point where if he doesn't finish, I think he's going to,

create so many chances that'll leave it out. I think it's a notch below that. But if I'm off, then maybe he could be that kind of level of player. That's just my hesitancy. But, yeah. I think it's like it's a sense over skill profile. And maybe that does kind of speak to your point that, you know, there's an easier trajectory to that becoming meat and potatoes, I suppose.

But I could also see that that, you know, the sense I don't think is going anywhere. And I think that's where he gets a playmaking from. Like he, I know he's in the conference. to make the Flyers roster. Maybe he does, maybe he gets a couple of games. I presume he's going back at some point in the junior year. And if we get to this point next year and he has like 35 goals in the O HL or something like that or 40 goals or whatever.

And it looks like everything I say here was just stupid. And he's like finishing chances at mid-range at a reasonable basis. And like, then I, to answer the actual question, then yes, I could absolutely upgrade him to where he got picked. Just to say the picks perfectly justified. It looks like an awesome player, going to be a top six forward, a really like a two-way second line center. I can get there.

I'm not there yet. Producer Chris wants to know does Torz helper hurt him, which I guess forces you to ask if Tortorella is still the coach when Luchiko's on the team, but... I think people overthink this stuff.

John Portorella, I know John Tortorella is a hard ass and I think he's going to love Luchenko. I think it's going to help him if anything. Yeah, but I just mean like, like, I know Tors gets this perception that he's a hard ass, but like I think most coaches are reasonable evaluators of talent

and want players that will help them win hockey games and I know people will be like well they bench the kids all the time like yeah like that's how that process works you're not going to have a lineup full of teenagers playing in the NHL because they're all super skilled you there's other components that go into winning a hockey game but I think like we had the conversation with Mitch Koff sometimes too is he gonna is Mitch Koff and Torts going to vibe I'm like, well, if Michkov is not a dog and creates a bunch of scoring chances, he's going to vibe.

If he's a dog and doesn't create any scoring chances, he's going to get bench. That's how coaches operate. So I think, like you said, Lachenko is very likable. I think, like all young kids, even if you're very likable, and, you know, we're going to get to this next week when we do the preseason recap podcast. But I think we have a tendency to look at this rookie camp stuff. and then we look at the preseason games and we say the player we saw at these games is going to look exactly like how he's going to look in the NHL next week

and that is often not the reality because even if these are really talented kids and had really good camps and even look good against the quote unquote NHL players in the preseason games I can assure you those NHL players were not trying like they are going to be trying the next week not that they were not trying

but when players' livelihood are not on a stake, and they're playing for contracts, and they're playing for legitimate standing points, all of a sudden that game changes a lot. And I think, you know, Jet Lechenko looks like he has a really translatable NHL game, but with teenagers, when it comes to saying, oh, is it going to work in the NHL? Is it going to work with this coach?

You don't know until they actually get there. And usually the answer is no. All right. next question is from Joe Falzan. He says, what prospects do you see as having exceptionally huge gaps between their respective

ceilings and floors? And who do you see as having very small gaps between ceilings and floors? Basically, who are the notable boom busts and notable, quote unquote, sure things?

Max, I know you have some opinions on this. So why don't you, everybody always, here's my opinions first. So why don't you tell the listeners what you think? Well, I kind of reject the premise,

to be honest. I think people talk about this a lot I hear it a lot from Red Wings fans who I think really want to chase a little more star power. And they often describe that as, you know, take the risk, go boom, bust, enough of these high floors. And I often find that there's more of a correlation between, like a positive correlation between ceilings and floors than people want to give credit to. I think a guy with a high floor, maybe not across the board, but often does have a higher ceiling because there's a B game. And I think that that gives you a lot on nights that they're not scoring. I'll use an example that I'm literally directly referring to right now.

Michael Brancigiegard and Cole Eisenman. I can understand that Cole Eisenman has a ton of skill. And that's probably a reason to believe that, you know, okay, here's this big ceiling. But I think as shooters, they're within not that far of each other as just pure shooters. And I think Brancic Neegard brings a lot of other projectible elements to a game that gives him that kind of higher floor. I agree with that. But I don't think the gap in ceiling between those two is so wildly different just because Iserman has a little bit more skill.

I really don't. I think that they have the same standout trait with the shot and Iser might have a little more skill, but Brancic Neger has a bunch of other stuff that I don't think Iserman has. So I think that more often than not the player with the higher floor actually does have more ceiling than we give credit for because they have, it usually means they have so many more elements, which is so many more avenues to reaching like a high end level. But do you think I'm off base with that? Yes, my issue with this stuff is I have never been articulated to in a way that's been convincing to me what is ceiling and what is floor.

I've never actually had that defined to me by any fan, media member, scout, executive in a way that clicks in my brain. And maybe I'm an idiot. And I just can't grasp this simple concept that everybody. else seems to talk about. But to me, I look at it even in a more simplistic matter. I just ask, are you a good player or not? And to what degree are you not a good player or you are a good player? And that's how I assess the players. It's how I rank them. And it's how I project them into the National Hockey League. You mentioned two players there, Cole Eisenman and Michael Branson Neegard, both who I have projected as second line winger. Now, I have my evaluation. Now, I have my evaluation,

of players and their skill sets. But I'm often wrong. I will almost assuredly be wrong about one of those two players. In some way, I don't know how I'm going to be wrong, but I will be wrong. So let's take Michael Branson and Negaar, for example. He's like what, 6-1, 6-2, he skates well, he competes well, and he's got a great shot. That's my assessment of him. And I think that's a second-line wing in the NHL.

What if he doesn't score? What if his shot is like mediocre in the NHL? And he's just a 6-1 guy who skates well and competes hard. What is that? Third, fourth-line wing, probably. Yeah, it's just a meat and potatoes checker. I'd even say, I think if you're going to be wrong on one of those, I think you're going to be wrong on the skating.

I think the skating has been a question so far when I've seen it. Okay, but that's just make an example. I was wrong there. It changed the projection down to like a third, fourth-fine wing. I think Cole Eisenman is super skilled, skates well, not great. as a great shot. He's an average competitor.

And he's like whatever, 5-11-6-0. Let's say I was wrong on the skill. And that's been a question this past year. Let's say he's not super skill. Let's say he's just good skill. Good hockey sense. Really good shot. 5-11-6-0 wing who skates well.

That's probably not a second-line wing in the NHL, right? That's like in Alabama. Strong bottom six kind of scoring power play two type. Okay. So I was wrong about one characteristic on both of those players, and it changed their projection into a very similar manner from where it was before. So which player had the highest ceiling and which player had the highest floor in this scenario, or is it just that player evaluation is hard?

And ultimately, depending on whether you are right or wrong on your projection, will determine whether you get a good player or not. you know, we're going to talk about Lane Hudson in an upcoming question. And I can analogize Lane Hudson to Adam Fox. You know, Adam Fox was a third round pick. He was a 5-11 defenseman who didn't skate very well, wasn't super physical, but had a lot of offense. He was considered this really skilled and really smart player.

He went in the third round because 511 defensemen who don't skate well and are really skilled and really smart playing the NHL. That player plays in the American League, goes playing the KHL. But he wasn't just really skilled and really smart. He's like one of the smartest players we've ever seen in the NHL in the last 10 to 20 years. But nobody, at least when I was doing this, said that about him when he was 17 years old. We missed on that, but you missed upwards.

And if that happened to any other player, any other player who's had a very good hockey sense. Like this, this Pashch, you know, I think Berkeley had a catten has really good hockey sense. I think everybody who watches him think he has very good hockey sense. But nobody I talked to in a league says he's going to be one of the five smartest players in the league in 10 years from now. Yeah.

Because if they thought that, he would have gone first overall. Yeah. So, like, that's the distinction with me when it comes to the ceiling floor stuff. I just think it's overthinking something that's just a very complicated exercise overall. But I guess what I was trying to say in mind

is like you talked about missing down. and you can also miss up on a guy. That's what if you miss. Right, right. Yes. Okay, so that's a good point. So, like, we talked about some of those forwards. If you find out that Cole Eisenman actually is a dogged competitor that raises his ceiling,

if you find out Michael Brancid Neegard is much more skilled than you thought it was, that raises his ceiling. And I think the guy with the higher floor, so to speak, and I get what you're saying, like floor maybe just is a weird concept to talk about. But I think those guys that have all these projectable tools, if you miss up on them, their path to being a star, I think, is quicker personally because they have so much else already going for them. I think for me, the way I think about it is

which traits are the hardest to evaluate? Which traits are you most likely going to be wrong about? I would say the easiest one to project is size. People's size do change, but typically the guy who's 62, when he's 18, is going to be 6.2 when he's 21 and 6.2 when he's 25. we have a lot of disagreements about skating and skating is like oh he can become a better skater yada yada yada but 99% of the time that doesn't happen the guy who's fast when he's 18 is fast when he's 25 and the guy who's slow when he's 18 and he's slow when he's 25 most of the time in my experience

there are outliers and they get a lot of articles written about them and they get a million players compared to them like brayden point um but i think for me projecting skill i think for most scouts they would argue hockey sense is the hardest thing to project to the NHL, is that when you're wrong, like in the case of Adam Fox, you are wrong on hockey sense. It doesn't mean you're always wrong in a good direction. You can be wrong in the other direction, too. Yeah. All right, that's interesting. All right. Let's go to the next one here. Sam wants to know, looking at the 2025 so right off this ranking we were just talking about, any way too early predictions about who could be a faller in this coming draft class. So let's limit this to like the top 20. Yeah. Well, we mentioned

in Bree Atkins off to a little bit of a slow start in the MHL this year. I mean, it's really, really early, but I mean, it's for a Russian four to go top 10. I think he's got like no goals, four points and six games this year. That's a slow start. He will need to ramp it up. I think he had like a really good first game. He's just been really quiet since then. But he will need to ramp that up if he's going to be selected in the top 10 with his profile.

It's just a reality. I think Malcolm Spence is a guy that I think some scouts have some questions of. he's actually going to stay in the top 10. He's super likable. His competes off the charts. He's a good skater. He does show offense at the international level in an Erie last year. I think there are some questions of this.

This is going to be a major score? Is he going to have 80, 90 points this year? Is he going to have like 65, 70? And you're not really sure is that offense going to be power play type offense in the NHL. So I think that's a guy I watch for. He's either the guy who stays in the top 10 or so he gets closer to the teens, close to the 20 by the end of the year.

I think Logan Hensler is going to be a candidate to watch in the opening months. He came out of the gate looking really, really good in his draft minus one year in his 18 year with the program. Second half of the year wasn't so good. A lot of really quiet viewings for me in the second half of the last season. And now he's going into Wisconsin

where we've seen a lot of NHL prospects leave, including guys who were picked relatively high, including first round picked Charlie Strammel, you know, Brady Cleveland, William Whitelock, Cruz Lucius, and we don't have to get into their particular situations, and some of them didn't have good years. But the question is, is Hensler going to walk in a situation where he's going to get top four minutes, first power play minutes, or is he going to get 18 minutes in second power play? And Wisconsin, who, you know, had a really nice year last year, are going to try to keep the momentum,

keep trying to win games, play the older players, and he doesn't get his points, which, Hensler, he's got a good size, he's good skater. but offense is a big part of his game, big part of his value. And I can see him fall a little bit, maybe not dramatically. I think most NHL scouts realize it's hard to score in college, especially hard to score on a team that's trying to win in college. You know, Dylan Holloway didn't score a lot in his draft year still went pretty high. Ken Johnson didn't have massive, massive numbers in his draft year.

Still went top five overall. So I think that'll be, I think it'll be consideration with Hensler. and it'll be something interesting to watch as this season gets started here in the fall. All right, and by far the most common question we got on this mailbag call was from the great city of Montreal, or at least the supporters of the team from the great city of Montreal, wanting you to answer for your crimes. So we'll just go with this one question from HFTV to catch all of it. Do you stand by your opinions on Lane Hudson? I mean

Yes I didn't I did not think this was going to be such a big thing Like sometimes you write things Like I was talking to like Jeremy Rutherford before It went up And I said I think the blues wants to be a little contentious and stuff like that And you write a couple of things like oh I know this team isn't going to like this

Teams isn't like that I didn't think this was going to be such a big deal I'm actually a little surprised By how big a deal this this became game because if you actually, I know there's like the U23 list. It's like he was like 80th or whatever kind of thing. But I think if you actually like, this is a guy who was picked like 60th overall two years ago who in my opinion is a top 15 player from that draft class.

And I honestly think and I not honestly think I know because I've talked when I saw this like all this Lane Hudson crap going around the internet and in my comments or whatever, I started asking a bunch of people in the NHL like, hey, am I off here? Like, you guys have, like, Lane created as like an elite, elite prospect. Guys, you would invest in top five. You would trade a top 10 pick for. And, like, I got some minority opinions. Like, maybe, like, one out of every 15 people I talked to would say, I think he could be the next Adam Fox.

But most people did not say that. I probably got more people saying he's going to be on waivers in four years. You put people in the NHL. People think he's going to be the next Fox. Both opinions, I think, are a little extreme. based on what he's shown in college and based on how talented he is. He is a dynamic offensive player.

He is one of the smartest offensemen I've ever seen. And I think he's going to have a successful NHL career. My opinion of Lane is, I don't think the stylistic comparison works. When I think of the level of talent that I've seen coming up as teenagers, he doesn't remind me as much as Fox as he does as, like, say, Samuel Gerard in the level offensive talent.

I think he can have a Gerard-like career where he's a very good player, plays a long time and helps the team's offense, but you're worried about his defense. Where I think the questions come in is based on the quote unquote grade structure I gave to Lane. I think that offended some people. Yes, average skill.

I saw over and over in the mentions. But, you know, we just talked about Jet Lechenko, who I raved about his skill and his playmaking. he also had average skill in his in his grade and i'm going to go to some other players who i've given average skill grades to you know players like ryan murkley ty smith adam bogfist uh i think i gave adam fox average skill at times coming out of college it's not and i was you can argue i was on literally every single one of those guys but that's not really the point is nch l average skill mind you

is the caveat there when I say that and I know Lane speaks guys when I want a lot I know he's really skilled I'm literally not disputing that

I think they think like the way I would phrase it in my mind is if you would maintain the grade structure I have

which is good skater high end sense in a 5-9-ish 5-10 body and NHL above-average

skill you're talking about like a top five. That would be my assessment of that player. That would be a special, special player. That's like a Zee, Booiam kind of thing. Yeah, like that, yeah, like he would be smaller than Zeev, but would probably, you know, would be like, it'd be like, that's the similar offensive structure I gave to Zeev,

essentially who just had a, you know, what a 50 point year in college as a draft eligible, you know, it would be, you know, it's like, you know, I think, I don't know if I, I think I gave Quinn Hughes a different grade coming out of school either. Obviously, wrong. Again, I'm wrong all the time. Might be wrong on the lane. In one direction or the other, we'll see.

But I think you've got to say he has that kind of special offensive traits. You have to be really convinced. And he might, you know, what do you have? 50 points in back-to-back years in college? 48 and 49. That's what I was going to say, yeah. It's like very special years and very special offensive player. Like I say, it's just, it's a balancing act.

Like, you know, those are higher grades than, you know, I've given quite a few really talented offensive defensemen. I guess, you know, I think ultimately this comes down to, I think he's a really good prospect. I think he's deserved to be picked way, way higher than he's going to deserve to get picked. I think he will be the outlier and he will play the NHL at that size. But I think some people look at this guy and I think he is special. he is different you know i had an argument with chris peters last week and he told me he is i think

he put this on the podcast he told me he is way way more skilled than raspus dalene and i told chris that's insane it's just simply insane dalien's one of like the top three to five most skilled defense i've ever seen in my life like to say he's way more skilled than dalian is just simply insane and chris disagreed and he said i anything he called me some names and we moved on with our lives. But regular Wednesday. Yeah, more or less. So here's my question.

When you do a skill grade like that, are you saying NHL average among defensemen or is an NHL average among players? Because that probably is a relevant distinction. If we're comparing him to like Yesper Brat, you know, he's not a skill that's yes per brat, right? Yeah. And I think it's among all players. And I just like, like I use the skill in the hockey sense to basically say this is

the degree of offense I think a player has. And I try to relay how I think he creates that offense. In my opinion, Ling creates office through his skill. He does like the fancy stuff where he walks the blue line and then dangles guys. But to me, his offense is driven through his brain. And I would say most people in the league who I talk to agree with that assessment too, that his office is driven through his patience, through his vision, through how he can hold on to the puck for an extra second and just,

and walk the line and see how the, lanes develop and how to attack defenses, that to me is what makes him special. Now, if you think he has that kind of brain and yes per Brat's skill, and like I said, I can understand why you disagree with myself as a player. You would think he should have been a top 10 pick in his draft. You think he's going to be a top pair of defenseman in the National Hockey League is going to play 22, 23 minutes. May not perfect comparable, but you think instead of Gerard, he's Tori Krug.

That could be what. Which is a great player. Great player. That would be an awesome outcome. But again, I think because also their points were very comparable in college, I think there's a big contingent of people, including the two co-hosts who aren't here right now who think he's Adam Fox. And he might be. We'll find out. What do you think from what you've seen?

I don't think he's Adam Fox. But I think Groo's like a pretty good. That's probably right on the money for what I think he'll be. I think he's going to be like a steady 45 to 55 point power play quarterback defenseman. And I think that there are going to be limitations that come with that in the power play. Now, Krug also is like an elite competitor, I think. And that's like the other part of this. And like when I brought up Kroog to NHL people, that's usually the pushback.

And they don't think Lane has that kind of bite in his game to survive. You picture Tori Krug flying down the ice with like no helmet to lay a hit in that Stanley Cup fine. Like that's my defining image at Tori Krug. And I don't, you know, I don't know that Lane has quite. that level of fight to him. I think he's, you know, he plays hard for sure.

But, yeah, so I, I really like Lane. I've liked him since his draft year, but I do, I do find the,

the pushback a little amusing. And I, I really think that, the reason that I asked that question, I wish, Nashville would have just taken him. There you go. Somewhere nice and quiet.

I think, though, that the reason that you got so much pushback was that above average, I think if people think, or sorry, average, I think if people think about that is all players

rather than defense, but he's clearly an above-average skilled defenseman, right? Yes. Oh, like notably. And like, he's dynamic. Like, you know, I don't dispute that. We're just talking about the levels of offense. Are we talking about a, like you said, a 40 to 50 point defenseman in the NHL? We're talking about an 80 point defenseman.

I think that's the distinction. Who is a good, not great skater in 5'9 and not superficit. By the way, Montreal, if Lane Hudson is a 50-point defenseman in the NHL, You got him with like a pick in the 60s. You're over the moon. Like it's still a really good outcome. But that's where the debate comes out again. And it's kind of funny because I think this is where the debate has centered.

But I think in the league among the professional evaluators, there's somewhere like he may not play. Like it's still. Like there's still quite a few people in the league who I talk to her convinced he's not going to play. I'm not even entertaining that concept right now. I'm just debating whether he's 50 versus 70 points. Yeah. And I lean to more towards 50. and I think to some that's insulting.

But yeah, this is how we've gotten here. All right. Well, hopefully that edifies our strong listener contingent in Montreal. That is going to do it for us. Thanks for listening to this episode of the Fletic Hockey Show Prospect Series. We'll talk to you soon.