The Athletic Hockey Show - NHL Draft roundtable: will the Montreal Canadiens select Shane Wright with the No. 1 pick?, listener questions, and more

Episode Date: May 27, 2022

First, Max and Corey welcome The Athletic’s Montreal Canadiens writers Arpon Basu and Marc Antoine Godin to discuss the Habs having the first overall selection in this year’s NHL Draft, if they’ll actually select presumptive No. 1 pick Shane Wright with that pick or go with other options like Juraj Slafkovsky or Logan Cooley, who within the Canadiens organization will ultimately make the decision at the draft, and much more.Plus, the guys open up the mailbag and answer listener questions about where the Florida Panthers go from their second round sweep at the hands of the Tampa Bay Lightning, the discrepancy between Shane Wright being described as both a responsible two-way center and as lacking consistent effort, the main differences between Kakko Kaapo and Juraj Slafkovsky, if peanut butter on hot dogs is acceptable or not, why Matthew Savoie’s ranking seems to be dropping, if Corey has ever systemically looked at players that have exceeded his rankings, why Liam Öhgren’s production is so much higher than Jonathan Lekkerimäki even thought they play on the same line, revisiting Corey’s original Cale Makar skating grade, if Cayden Primeau is still a legit NHL prospect, and who the “heart and soul” prospects in the year’s draft are.And now, you can get a 6 month subscription to The Athletic for just $1 a month when you visit http://theathletic.com/hockeyshow Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hey everybody, Max Boltman here alongside Corey Prondman back with another episode of the Athletic Hockey Show's prospect series. Today we are going to zero in on the top of the draft and we are joined by a couple of special guests from Montreal, holders of the first overall pick. Arpan Basu and Mark Antoine Godet, we are really excited to have you guys on and I guess to start off, Arpin, you wrote a story this week where you kind of dove into some Shane Wright film and really kind of Checked out what made him special, what makes him a highly touted prospect. I'm curious as you watched it. Did it change your opinion at all about his fit for Montreal at the top of the draft? Well, I can't say it changed my opinion because I didn't have one before doing that. The reason I did it is because I didn't have an opinion and I can't, I don't watch junior hockey during the season.

I'm busy enough watching the NHL. And I kind of hate draft season because we're expected to immediately shift from this all-encompassing look at the NHL team. and all of a sudden become experts on these kids that we've never seen play. So I'm always somewhat uncomfortable, but with them holding, with the team I cover, holding the number one pick, I just wanted to at least get a decent sense of what this kid is all about. And even then, I don't have a full picture. But what I saw, I saw a kid who plays sort of an NHL-style game already, who's able to

fit into a structure that's being asked of him, that doesn't necessarily, that really sort of emphasizes the team game over his own individual skills. I feel he will very willingly fit into that structure, never did anything that struck me as overly selfish always. And so I think that might hurt him. I guess in the eyes of, you know, evaluators looking at him in a draft year who want him to kind of shine. He just strikes me as a kid who's willing to just fit into whatever the team is trying to get accomplished. And that's kind of the number one takeaway I took from watching him, you know, the term I used in the piece was unspectacularly effective because, you know, he doesn't, he does, you don't come out of, you know, you don't see him do something and instantly be like, wowed or, or find it to be incredibly skilled or extraordinary in any way. But he keeps piling on all these little decisions, all these little actions, all these little plays that as they get piled on, it just shows to what extent he's very consistently effective. You know, it's very rare that you see a shift where you just look at him and say that that was a bad shift.

I really like the way that you kind of wove in things that Martin San Luis has talked to you guys about to the piece to kind of show. To me, I think that's relevant for the fit. But I'm curious with the new general manager, obviously that coaching probably isn't going to have as much of an impact on the decision as the front office is. How much do we know about what Ken Hughes values in players? Well, I think that he's the same as most general managers in the sense that sentiment, are of higher asset value. He didn't go out to say it as much when it came to Shane Wright.

But I think that you hear him talking and it's clearly something the center position just holds more value. So when you are in a situation where you have to pick between Shane Wright, Logan Cooley, and you're off Saskosky, well, that's where Wright and Cooley,

I think, are a step ahead. But you don't want to pick your guy based on your actual roster or who the coach is, but there's clearly a fit there because Nick Suzuki is a top of a lineup type of defense of sentiment, but after that, I mean, there's definitely a need for the Canadians to go get another sentiment, another top six guy, eventually to replace Christian Voracu would be better suited to be slotted in the third hole.

Yeah, I mean, from my perspective, it's, you know, there's a reason that Kent Hughes and Jeff Corton went after, Martin Saint-Louis as hard as they did and really shocked the hockey world kind of to bring this guy up from youth hockey in Connecticut straight to the NHL is because, you know, there's sort of a like-minded view of how the game is supposed to be played. The front office likes the way Martin Saint-Louis views how the game should be played. So, yeah, I agree with you that this is a front-office decision and it will not be predicated on what the coach wants or needs. but the unmitigated support that the front office is shown for this coach gives you some sort of intent, gives you some sort of idea of how the front office views the type of player that they want to have

because if it lines up with Martin St. Louis at this point, I think it's a decent proxy for how the front office also views the players that they want to add to this team. One thing I would like to add is it's a new front office that's making that decision right now for the Montreal Canadians. And it will be very interesting to see who's going to be making that decision because there's a lot of voices that are involved in that decision. Exactly. So you have a vice president of Oki operations in Jeff Gorton.

You have a new general manager in Kent Hughes. You have two co-directors of scouting in Nikolai Bobroff and Martin LaPoint. So those two guys, it's not even clear who's going to be how internally this is going to go and who's going to have the final say in structuring their list between those two men. Arpin mentions the influence of Martin Saint-Dui, and let's not forget that the front office also wanted to have at least one guy that would be at the basis of their analytics department prior to the draft in order to fuel the draft reflection with some data. So there's going to be an opinion coming from.

from the analytics side too, that's going to be put in the balance. So it makes for many influential voices that will chip in to determine who's going to be their number one pick. And I have a hard time imagining that between all those guys, it's going to be a consensus. I'm sure that there's going to be a lot of debate around the table. I would just add the voice of Valacal-Calvier to that group. He was brought in as an advisor to hockey operations. but when they made the Tyler DeFoli deal, they acquired a prospect by the name of Emil Heinemann from Calgary in that deal.

And Vaisal de Calier poured through video on that kid before they made that deal. So I think his input is also going to be in that, you know, too many cooks in the kitchen sort of scenario that Mark Antoine just laid out. He's another cook that's probably going to be in that kitchen. I really like what you said about kind of the values of centers. And that's a position that I obviously, I agree with that opinion. but there are every once in a while drafts where, as it turns out, the winger, which is, I would say probably the least valuable of the positions, ends up just being the better

player. I would kind of go back to the 2018 draft, and I think if you were redoing it today, I don't know what Corey would say about this. For me, I think Andres Vetschnikov would go one, even ahead of a couple of really, really good defensemen that were in that draft. And, you know, we don't know necessarily if you're a Slovkovsky's in that tier yet, but he's having a heck of a performance at the World Championships right now. I'm curious how possible does it seem to you guys right now?

Like, where should the Kondoslovsky odds be at right now? How real a possibility is that? Well, I think that there is a possibility. I still think that the Canadians would be more inclined to go towards Shane Wright. But when I mentioned that there's going to be heated discussions around the table is, you know, the one thing that's been nagging Shane Wright's reputation throughout this season is the fact that sometimes he's not, you don't feel as though he's fully committed or engaged

and, you know, leading the charge and bringing his teammates into the fight. And I think that for some guys around that table, it might be something that will go against him. Whereas Slavkovsky, just his player profile, him being a power forward who's got, who's already physically mature, who brings components, to the game that are hard to find, forget about the position, but just the toolkit is something that's hard to find.

So I can easily see how it could be an attractive proposition for the Canadians. So at the same time, can't use mention the other day. He said, listen, if we are, if there's no prospect that's clearly above the other ones, we will really take into consideration what's our need. And in terms of needs, it's not just the positional needs, but you're not. always need a guy like Slavkovsky. But the Canadians could also say, well, we already have a guy like Josh Anderson who's like a power forward, a speedy power forward in the slower but more puck protection type of player, they still have your alarm, you even though he's really coming down a down season. And Slavkovsky, if he reaches his potential, it could be sort of a better version of

those two guys mixed together 50% Josh Anderson, 50% Y'allel. alarm you, but the good you alarm you, another one that's sleepy and 70% of the time. I guess a related kind of point off of that then would be where, this may be not so much informs the pick per se, but where does Montreal view themselves in kind of their timeline? Are they at the start of a long rebuild here? Are they thinking this can be a quick retool? I'm sure Kerry Price's situation is going to factor in big time to this. What's your guys read on where Montreal sees itself right now? I don't think they know, to be honest, because of what you just mentioned the carry price situation kind of weighs on everything that they can or can't do this

offseason. I think that's a shifting timeline. My impression or my read based on, you know, a number of things is that I think they feel that they just, they don't, they're not in a position where they have to force anything. So it's not going to inform this pick in any way shape or form. It might inform some of the other things they do this offseason and some of the other things they do at the draft. They have a good amount of draft capital to get creative and do some things and be aggressive if they want to. But I just don't get the sense that this season is anything more than a transition year to them, that they need to, there's a lot of financial things that they need to clean up. And whether that happens this off season or whether it happens over the course of

next season, it kind of has to happen before they can make any meaningful steps forward other than accumulating, you know, some prospect capital and some talent in the organization. But the whole financial mess of Carrie Price's knee and Carrie Price's status puts that whole process on hold to a certain extent. And the mystery around it or the lack of certainty in terms of how his knee's going to respond, whether he can even ever play again, cast a massive shadow over everything they could possibly do. So I think the answer to that question is that I don't know. I don't think Mark Antoine knows, and frankly, I don't know if Ken Hughes and Jeff Gordon know because they need an answer on Carrie Price before they can make that determination. Yeah, and what I would add to that is I think it's fair to say that the Canadians are not about to go into a scorch-herd type of mentality and go the route of the Phoenix, the Arizona Coyotes, for example.

they would prefer if that turnaround was rather quick. But where would, for example, next season fall into that? As Arpin eloquently put it, we don't know yet. But I suspect that they would be okay with living with another difficult season next year and then try to really go forward the year after. But I don't think that they're going to be in for a long rebuild and say, well, we're going to bite the bullet for the next three or four years. I don't think that's where they're going.

But you also don't kind of see them saying, you know, what Chicago and Stan Bowman did a year ago. We're one Seth Jones away from being contenders again. That is definitely not happening. They're not going to be trading a first round pick for any player who's in the league right now. I mean, I think just to further to what Mark Antoine said is that this whole unknown is kind of a, it's a bit of a blessing in disguise for these guys. Like, I mean, it's really a lot of people in Montreal are clamoring for the Canadians to be in the mix for number one to 2023.

I don't think the Canadians have any intention of intentionally being in the mix for number one. But I think the beauty of the situation for them and, you know, the beauty, maybe that's not the wrong word. But I mean, Carrie Price's situation creates a scenario where you can go into next year with more or less a status quo situation, which if nothing to, significant changes other than the development of Suzuki, the development of Caulfield, Romanov, a few other young guys. There's nothing meaningful that the Canadians could really do with that financial situation ahead of them. So they could.

And in fact, would most likely be a lottery team next season, if not a whole lot of changes. And they could be in the mix for maybe number one overall, but at least a top 10 pick, which would be, you know, back-to-back years, adding top 10 talent would be something this organization really needs and they kind of don't have a choice but to do that i mean i could be wrong but the current situation makes it so that they can kind of accept that and say listen we're our hands were tied and it's kind of a good outcome regardless that's why we hear so many uh so many fans say oh well if they if they draft Shane right you know he could go back to the oh hl for another season after all he missed a whole year so he could he could play another season that's going to be

fine if he goes back to juniors or slavkoski well he could he could stay uh in the Finland for one more year. That's okay. So no rush in bringing like a high profile talents on the roster just yet. It can wait another year. It's just interesting to me because I think timing-wise, we've all gotten used to a certain core of the Montreal Canadians. And certainly that core has obviously already started to unfurl. And as I look ahead, I guess I wonder who is kind of the next core. I assume obviously there's some obvious ones, right? You know, Nick Suzuki's in there, Cole Cawfield's in there. I think Alex Romanoff is probably still in that mix. And I would probably say Justin Barron belongs in the similar conversation there, though you guys can tell me if I'm

wrong there. Well, he might eventually become that in terms of Barron. I mean, we haven't really, we didn't get a good sample. Unfortunately, he got hurt very early, like very soon after coming over from Colorado and that Arturi-Lekinen deal. But yeah, he has the potential to be part of that core. I mean, the three guys who identified Alex Romanov led the Canadians a nice time, basically from the moment Ben Chirot got traded. So he became their de facto number one defenseman from that point onward. He played his game evolved by leaps and bands. And honestly, you know, the impact of Martin St. Louis' arrival on Cole Cofield really monopolized a lot of the attention. And even Nick Suzuki really monopolized a lot of the attention. The development of Alexander Romanov's game

under Martin St. Louis was in many ways even more remarkable because he really changed the way he because of the added ice time, you know, the big knock or what previous coaches had a problem with with Alexander Romanov was, was raining in the energy. He wanted him to play within himself and within the game more often and not go out constantly looking to make an impact on every single shift and basically skating himself into mistakes. What the added ice time, I think, allowed him to do is to learn how to manage a game better. And he really developed in that area. He was playing, you know, north of 22 minutes a night, but, you know, down the stretch, down the last 30 games or so. So that's a really, really interesting development.

I don't think Alexander Romanov projects to be a prototype number one defenseman. Actually, I know he doesn't, but he could be a hell of a top four defenseman. He's a very good piece. And so I think he is part of that core right now, but what's clear is that the core needs more guys. That's really what's the most obvious thing right now. Yeah, I don't think there's anybody apart from the three guys you mentioned. And that's one of the reasons why they finished 32nd in the league. Yeah, I think I agree with Arvonne.

I think he projected the top four defensemen, but that's presuming they add a forward with the first overall pick. Probably Shane Wright, that's an area of their team right now. I like Justin Barron. I like Romanov a lot, but it's hard to admit. They need a lot more on that blue line going forward to even have some sort of semblance of a good team. Well, they need top pair talent.

I mean, they have lots of guys. Like, Caden Goolie is going to be, I think, a good NHL defenseman. Yeah, Gouley is really good player. He's up there with Barron, if not above Barron. He's a really good player. Yeah, and then they have a lot of, they have a lot of lottery tickets on defense. You know, I mean, Jordan Harris, I liked what I saw from him in in Montreal, but like, it's not quite clear where he would slot in on an NHL defense, you know, and he could be a bottom pairing guy.

I think he'd be a really good bottom pairing guy. He's just a mobile smart player. But they have a whole bunch of other, you know, wildcards, like, you know, Matias Norlander who got some time in the H.L. And who knows

what he's going to be. You know, Jayden Struble, there's a bunch of guys, but they don't have... Logan Mayu. Logan Mayu as well. Yeah.

Yeah. Who was just okay this season when he actually played. Like, he's a little productive, but, you know, well, yeah. Yeah, he was fine. We'll see.

We're a couple of years from knowing if he's even going to have a future in Montreal, frankly, but we'll see. Well, you're a year, they have to make that decision

within a year now. Right. Yeah, by next summer. That's right. Yeah, I meant like two seasons away, I guess, from seeing him in in Montreal or not. Honestly, like his situation would be a whole podcast unto itself. But it's the problem, the whole, I mean, that's why the two defensemen who are near the top, you know, I think it sounds like it would be a stretch to consider Nemitz or Yerechek at number one. I agree.

But they represent needs for the Montreal Canadians. They do. So if there's a deal to be made out there. and listen, Arizona crafted their entire season to pick number one this year, if they can pull something out of Arizona and wind up at number three and get their pick of one of those two defensemen, then maybe that's something they could consider. But in my mind, when you have Shane Wright just sitting there waiting to be drafted by you,

sometimes it's good not to overthink things. Nine or ten picks, I believe, in the first four rounds, depending on, I think there's an Edmonton condition in there that decides whether that pick is this year or not. If Edmonton makes the cup final, then they get next year's second round pick instead of this year. Which looks a little more plausible than I guess I would have said at the time of the trade. But how many of those you think they're going to make? Is this like a situation where you think they do them all?

Is there a situation where you move a couple to try to get up back into the first round? What do you see there? What's interesting is that under previous management, Mark Bejevin was almost allergic to trading up. He was a lot more of the mentality of trading down, multiplying the assets and have, as he used to say, and Trevor Timis used to say, have more darts to throw on the board. This time, can't use as open to trading up. I think that the number one pick overall, trading down to three could be a smart play, who knows. But I think that I'd be looking in trading up for that second pick that they'll, have at the end of the first round, the one of the, the, the, the, the, the, the Calgary, that belongs to the Calgary

flames. And for that, having all those, that, that, those assets in the second and third round, those are bargaining chips that could help you propel yourself in gaining ground, you know, late in that first round. So I, I really, the fact is, the Canadians have so many prospects already in their, in their pipeline, not necessarily top prospects, but definitely, they've got a lot of guys that are worthy of a pro contract that how many more of those, you know, flyers are you going to take on this third rounder or that third rounder? At some point, you got to consolidate. And I think that either if it's trading some assets to move up

or sliding those picks to next year by trading them to other teams, those are options to be considered. But, you know, as you mentioned, nine potentially 10 picks in the first four rounds, no way they're going to draft 10 players. I'm sure that. Yeah, and I think we could also talk about the hockey theory of trading, you know, one to three, one to two, one to four, whatever. I think in practice, though, I think for the host team to trade the first overall pick is a very easy way to get pelted with beer cans on the stage. I just can't see that happening personally.

No, and the first time this franchise has the first overall pick in 42 years. It's also another way to get pelted with beer cans on the stage. So, I mean, it's, yeah, I don't know the likelihood of trading down to three, and I honestly don't think the chances are very high, even if it might make some modicum of sense. But I do agree with Mark Antoine that Calgary Flames pick, which will be somewhere in the 27 to, you know, 32 range, I guess, technically. they do have that that second, second round pick from Edmonton, assuming Edmonton doesn't make the Cup final,

that they could use as currency to move that pick up into maybe the early 20s or the late teens. And I think if the player that they covet slides that far, I think that's something that they wouldn't hesitate to do. There are two teams, Pittsburgh and Washington, that are really in need of picks. They don't have a lot of them. And they sit, if I believe, if I'm,

if I'm not mistaken, the 20th and 21st. So those are good candidates. If those teams say, okay, well, you know, our guy may still be there later on in the first round. But if we can get one or two more picks and trade down and create just more, a bigger pool of picks, those two teams, I think, are teams to keep an eye on. Yeah, I think that's right about the right cost, too. I think last year when Detroit moved up for COSA, it was, I think they went up eight spots, I want to say, and it cost them, it was either five or eight spots, but it cost them a second and a fifth.

And so having that, you know, that surplus of picks and that two through four range is definitely the market price. Yeah. I mean, Corey, I would have a question for you, though. I mean, I think the relevant thing here is that, you know, late teens, early 20s of the first round, do you see a potential top-paring defensemen still being available in that range, in this draft? I mean, probably not.

Those guys go. I think there's one or two guys that they're intriguing. They have a lot of potential. I think the three defensemen that are really talented that will probably go somewhere in that teens to 20 range are the two is the two CHL defenseman, Kevin Kortinski and Pavel Mityakov. And Kortinski, I expect, will go really high. the draft.

Mityakov, it's kind of an ongoing process trying to figure out where he's going to go because of the passport. Even though he played in Canada, he is born in Russian, his Russian nationality. And we'll see how teams approach that one. So I kind of hear mixed opinions on where he'll go in the draft. And the third guy would be Leon Bischel, a big Swiss defenseman who played in Sweden. I think those are the three guys. I think they will all go top 20.

But I think if there's going to be what, if you have to pick one. defenseman outside of David Eurecheck and Simon Nemich, who's going to pop and be a really good player in this draft. It would be one of those three. And I think it's very possible. You can get one of them in like that 15 to 22 range. It's possible at least. Where do you think Matechuk goes?

I mean, maybe not necessarily top pair, but that's a guy who could figure into that kind of top four range. Yeah, yeah. I think he kind of goes to the same thing, that 15 and 25 range. But he wouldn't be the one I would pick of those guys to pop. Or the one you would move up for. I can't see somebody moving up for Nendematech, the 5-11 defensemen. It just seems unrealistic. I think that's the kind of guy who teams who tend to value the small, skilled mobile defensemen will hope just gets into their spot.

How about O'Dalius and Renzel? Again, I just don't see those guys, at least in the top, like the top 25, I don't see people going up to get them there. I think O'Dalia's probably, I think O'Dales is unlikely to be a first rounder. Renzel is probably a 50-50 to be a first rounder. high school guy was just okay in the USHL, 6-4 mobile with some skills, so it's a tools bet there, so I think he'll go, he didn't really have a great USHL stretch there at the end of the season two, so I'm guessing he kind of goes in that 25 to 45

range. O'Dalia, so it's a more 30 to 60, depending on, you know, who likes him, smaller defense men, but very mobile, good first pass guy. I think those other guys we mentioned would be like the dream candidates if you want to get a really premium defense prospect,

and those other guys. And I would add Ryan Chesley to that mix, too. He's a really good player. He's a guy I could see being one of those end of those two first round picks. I think he's going to kind of go between 25 to 35. I mean, knowing that they already have Gully and Barron and the types of players those guys are, Minchikov would be a really nice fit into that mix, right? Right, and Chesley probably would.

And Chesley is kind of just like an almost like more, you know, another right shot defenseman, you know, good skater dot dynamic. Mate Chalk is a little bit more dynamic. Minchikov is very dynamic. Yeah. Yeah. Well, dynamic is something that's kind of missing from the organization as a whole. I mean, if you take the NHL guys out of it, you know, obviously Caulfield and Suzuki are oozing dynamic.

But there's not a lot of dynamic in the system right now that's not in the NHL already. So, I mean, that kind of goes to the first overall pick debate, doesn't it? And that you kind of have, and I think that's what the debate really structures around is that you have this one guy in Shane Wright who, I know, you just watched a bunch of his tape. and I've watched him, you know, whatever, like 30, 40 times over the last couple of years. And, you know, there aren't a lot of games. You come away watching this guy and you say, like, holy shit, he took me out of my seat tonight. Right. But he, you know, the 40 goals of 15, the 9 goals of 14 points of the U18s.

He's top 10, OHS scoring, top two center for Canada, the has a U-20. We know the track record. And then you have this other guy in your ice Levkovsky who doesn't have, he has a really good track record. is not even close to the same. 40 goals and 15-year-olds was just insane for what Shane Wright did. But when you watch him, whether it's at the Hulinka, the World Juniors, the Olympics, or now with the men's world or the last week, he just pops a little bit more to the eye. It's a 6-4 guy who can skate and he's toe-dragging everybody and he's scoring goals

and he's bowling his way to the net. It just, that kind of seems to be, he seems to be more dynamic than Shane Wright. Doesn't mean he's the right pick, but that seems to be, at least from what I've seen, over the last 12 months. Well, Ken Hughes have been watching Slavkovsky at the world championships. And what I like there is that, you know, you mentioned the Ivan Linka tournament. I mean, he's been playing, Slavkovsky's been playing almost nonstop since last August. So he's been playing at the, Ivan Linka, he's been playing.

playing games for the under 20 TPS team? He played for the Olympic qualifiers too for Slovakia that summer. Exactly. He played 31 games in Liga. He played the playoffs in Liga, too. He played a couple of games at the World Junior Championships. He played at the Olympics. Now the World Championships, that's a lot of hockey, a lot of situations too.

And he got the World Championships the prior year, too. Exactly. And now he's at the tail end of it. And it seems almost like he's picking up speed. So that's impressive because he hasn't run out of the gas. Well, here's one thing that I intend on looking into, but I'd be interested to hear you guys' take on it. You know, I think of like a guy like Kail McCar in his draft year.

Like guys who pick up steam late, like coming into the draft and sort of have this gradual run up to the point where they just burst into like a top three or a top five conversation somewhat out of nowhere, like Slavkovsky, have kind of done this season. you know, I mean, from, I'm just, I'm going to look into it and actually try and find these guys, but I mean, what is the history of, of these late risers? Like, do they generally continue rising or do they plateau? Or like, what's, what's your take on it? We kind of talked about this a little bit last week.

Maybe not necessarily in the kind of study that you're talking about, but we were talking about kind of why it happens, especially a lot of times right up before the draft when, you know, Slefkev's playing right now. It's a little different, but there have been situations, especially during the COVID years, where, You had a guy like Jake Sanderson rise and everyone was like, well, what's going on? He's not playing hockey. Why is he shooting up these boards? And we talked about kind of the role that like the information lag plays in this. And that, you know, especially as lists start coming out and NHL people start to say,

hey, I think you might have this guy too low. Go back and check this again. And the guys that came to my mind, the first thing when you said that were Sanderson and Mason McTavish, McTavish off of that, you know, U-18 tournament hadn't played the whole year. I think those guys both had pretty strong, you know, draft plus one seasons. Corey, do you have a longer view on this than I do. Jack Quinn was a reserve recent one that came to mind. It was just tore up the American League this season.

You can keep going back, you know, over time. We, again, the draft's very long. Even going back to 2017 draft, you had a guy like Heiskin and who kept going up and up had that great U18 worlds there at the end where I think it was like a point and a half per game or something like that and ends up being going ahead of Kail McCart in that draft. So it's hard for me to say without doing some sort of study, like I presume you will. But there aren't a ton of examples of come to mind of guys who seem like they're on the up and up and there's crash the next season.

And I don't think Salkowski's going to crash. I think he's an excellent hockey player. It's just I think what was 10 months ago, a clear number one has looked a little closer. It makes a more of a decision. And if we've mentioned the center parts of this, center versus wing, and it's a very, very legitimate aspect of the argument. And it's as a very possible Montreal will ignore, you know, not ignore, but may not, you know, fall in love with Slykovsky based on just what he's been doing in these various tournaments.

They'll go with the guy with the track record, or they might see the tools and the things he's done versus men and decide to be persuaded that way. Time will tell. When Mark Antoine was talking about, you know, the speed that Slefkowski showed at the end of this run, that was the thing that has popped to me watching him at the world is the way he's attack the pace that he's attacked with, you know, whether it's with the puck or going to get the puck. And that to me just, I'm at a little bit of a distance from Montreal, but that's an element to me that really stands out as something that could boost them.

When you think about the shooters that they have and the intelligence that they already have, to get a guy with Slavkovsky's physical tools and the speed that he plays with, it just, to me, I see an argument. Yeah, he's very different from Suzuki and Caulfield. You're talking about their top player. Suzuki and Caulfield are not elite skaters for small guys, but they got tremendous skill, hockey sense scoring ability. This guy is an elite athlete,

like a truly elite athlete. He's physically imposing to go with a very high skill level as well, even if it doesn't have the long history of scoring that Shane Wright does. I would also just add that all year, well not all year, but definitely since Martin St. Louis took over, there was a revolving door

of wingers next to Suzuki and Caulfield. Hoffman got a look there. Anderson got a look there. A variety of players were shuffled in and out and they got two to three or four game auditions there and none of them stuck. So when you're looking at holes in the organization, this is also one. It's just that positionally, the value of the position is not as high, but they need a guy like that. But they also have like 12 holes. So it's yeah. Well, that's kind of the beauty of their situation. Right. They don't have to like,

they don't have to pick which hole is more important than the other. But I think, you know, conventional wisdom would be that the hole at center is the most important of them all. So. Certainly the hardest to fill outside the draft. I think we all, I don't think anybody, I don't think I've met that many people who disagree with that. I think most people understand that the center is more valuable than the winger. But to Max's point earlier, there are sometimes some years where the winger is just a better player than the center. You know, I'd go back to, let's say, 2011, would you guys take Ryan Nugian Hopkins over Gabriel Landishcock right now? Yeah.

You know, at the minimum, it's a tough decision. and I think a lot of people would take Landishcock. I think Max's comparison applies too. I think Svetnikov seems like the most impactful player in that draft so far. Well, Spfeechka versus Kock and the Emmy, especially. Well, yeah, for sure. I mean, Kitchak is, I guess, in that conversation too. Right, but I meant the center versus wing thing.

Even if you make it wing versus D, which I think most people would tell you D's at least close to as premium position as center, right? And you've got two guys that are clear top pair, I think, number ones in Dahlene and Hughes. still I've still taken Svetnikov. So, yeah. I think one of the key elements of this debate, if you narrow it down to right versus Slavkovsky, is that when it comes to Shane Wright, it's pretty easy to see how his attributes would translate into the NHL.

And I think that there's a very, very low risk related to that player. Whereas with Slavkovsky, you have to wonder, well, with all the great. toolkit that he's got which of his attributes are going to translate and which are not and it factors with the not only the fact that he's playing on the on the big eyes but there's there's a difference just in in his style of play between when he plays with his team with tp s turku in liga and when he plays for the national team uh you know on when he plays in leaguea it seems as though he's they ask him more to, he's a lot of a puck carrier. He's not just a shooter, but he's a puck carrier.

Whereas with the Slovakian team, we've seen him being F1 a lot more often, and he's very effective on the forecheck. He can do takeaways and stuff like that, but it seems as though his role might showcase different tools, and which role is he going to be given, and this will depend on which assets that he's got are going to be transferred the best to the North American game. And I think that there's a little bit of a flux. There are a little bit more uncertainty. Clearly, his puck possession skill is something that he's going to bring to the North American game,

and he's going to be great at that. His shot, when it touches the net, it's great. But is he going to be more a guy that's going to try to stick handle through traffic? Because he tends to go in busy areas. He's not a guy who's going to look for the open pockets. He skates into busy places. He reminds me almost a bit of Alex Gelcenaic in that sense. But he surprised me also has how good of a puck carrier he is.

And I think that's the dimension that if he's able to bring this to North America is going to add a serious dimension to his game and make him a lot more of a versatile player being able to put him on any line. I think one thing to bring it back to the beginning of this conversation that we don't know about, because the one guy we haven't mentioned, obviously, or in great detail is Logan Cooley. And I think the one question I have about the new front office is to what extent their familiarity with, you know, not only USA hockey, but like the northeastern part of the

United States and the players that have kind of gravitated around Ken Hughes. his sons and Martin St. Louis kids and Jeff Gordon's kids and just that kids that they've watched grow up just because they've been around their own kids, what kind of influence that's going to have on them? I mean, it's just, you know, it's, it's kind of delicious that Ken Hughes becomes a general manager in his son's draft here. It just happens to know a whole bunch of these kids and has been watching them since they were whatever, 12, 13, or 14 years old. And so I don't know what, I don't know what kind of an influence that's going to have. but I mean, Logan Coley's right there and he's a kid that they know, like, really well. And I don't know how much that's going to play into with their decision here.

It's a great point. When Chris Draper was running the draft, or he is running the draft, but one of the ones that he ran, I think it was last year, it was last year, it was the year after his son's, like, birth year and an age group. And he had coached it. It was 2020. Right. So, yeah. So Keenan went in 2020. And then last year they took Carter Mazur and Red Savage, both of whom had either played four or again.

Draper's like minor hockey teams. It's like it's a similar age group. He knew these guys from playing with or against them in Metro Detroit. And they took two of those guys. And I think you're making a great point. Sometimes it's that extra little bit of familiarity that tells you, yeah, I know exactly how this kid, you know, how he, what makes him tick. I mean, you look at the prospect they got in the Ben Chirot trade, Tysmalanik.

I mean, he played with with those kids. Yeah. They knew him because he had been playing. He played in those leagues or in those games. and they had seen him play at a young age. And listen, they didn't come flat out and admit that that's why they did it, but it had to play some role in identifying that guy to go get in a trade like that as basically the kind of the throw-in prospect, you know?

Especially because the buzz around Smolonic, like around the industry, wasn't with this guy's a top prospect that you had to have. So, like, this, he was not, if you pulled people around NHL, they weren't saying Smolatic was a top three, top five prospect in the Panther system. So this is obviously a guy that they knew really well. he played in Connecticut, that probably was a variable. As the move, by the way, has the move to, his move to Wisconsin been confirmed? Because I haven't seen, because there were rumors that he was leaving Quinepiac and going to

He is leaving, he is leaving Quinnipiac. I don't know whether it was Wisconsin or not. I haven't followed his transfer particularly, or if I did, I forgot, but he is, he is leaving Quinnipiac. All right. Well, I guess we've pretty much taken you right up against our time limit here, guys. But it was a great conversation. Really appreciate you both coming on.

I would encourage everybody to make sure you read ARP and Mark Antoine's work on the athletic. They're going to do a tremendous job cover in every facet of this lead up to the draft, whether it's about number one or there are many, many, many other picks. So whether you're a Canadian fan or not, definitely some content you're going to want to key into. Guys, thanks so much for joining us. Thanks for having us. Thanks for having us, guys. All right, let's pivot now into our mailbag.

And I want to start off with one that's really more in the NHL sphere. It comes from CF 3234 who wants to know where do the Florida Panthers go from here? That's a good question because I think they obviously went all all in at that trade deadline. And they have very little capital now left for future trade deadlines or offseason trades to make. They have, I think, one top three round pick in the next two years. They have no first round pick for the next three drafts. and they traded Owen Tippett, who may not have fully realized his potential as a tenth overall pick,

but is a good player. He, you know, a player is going to help the Philadelphia Flyers win games going forward. And they don't really have a lot of prospect capital left. I like Mackie Samiskevich. I like Gregori Denisenko. They're both talented wingers. I don't know if they're going to get huge halls for them at this stage,

but they're valuable assets. But even if they don't, even if they lose Giroux, they lose Sharott. I still think this is a really good team and they will absolutely be a contender again next season and they should be a threat in the playoffs. But it's tough to swallow

after seeing how dominant that offense was I'm not sure how much of that series you watched but it just seemed like Barkov and Huberto and Girou they just never got it going offensively. They never seemed like they were threats. And I think all three, three of them don't exactly have the greatest of pace in them. And it just, it never seemed like, they played really well that last game. Obviously, they got nearly 50 shots. It just never felt

like their top guys were that threatening, at least consistently. Yeah, I watched almost the entire series, and I agree. And the thing, the question that I never really felt like I could answer was, like, why is this happening? Is this like a situation of, you know, Tampa, Tampa has been through this so much. They know how to play play play playoff games. And I do think that they shift their game into something that is just take away your big guns. And obviously, to some extent, it happened a little against Toronto as well. But I think Toronto had actually shown that they learned from having that happen to them in previous playoffs. And so I guess I wonder, like, is this a Florida still learning about the playoffs thing? Or is this a stylistic thing that's intrinsic to their

game that just didn't work? It might be a bit of both. And probably just a little bit of bad luck, too, and just you have some off games at the worst time kind of thing. But I mean, you can use for that first argument, Barkov and Huberto and Ekblad haven't really played that many playoff games in their long career. They certainly haven't played against, you know, top teams like this,

that often in this kind of context. So it could be a little bit of that. You can make some arguments that someone like a Hubert O or Giroux's games were not really built for the kind of, what happens in the playoffs. But that's why they got Ben Chirot is to try and have that kind of counterbalance. And it just didn't work out. I didn't find the problem.

I know there was the one really obviously egregious defensive play in this series that people will point to, but I didn't find that the problem was with their defensive game, really. I think it was just, it was scoring. And so that's where, like, I think Ben Chirot did exactly what they needed to do. I just wonder if they need that. I don't know if it's like a Nick Paul or whatever it was, but that kind of presence. I mean, it really hurts that you got out goalied and you're paying your goalie $10 million or whatever it is that Bobrovsky is getting paid.

it's the Bobrovsky contract just hurt so much right now. I thought he was fine though. He was the reason that he was fine. Yeah, he was fine. Yeah, he was fine. But, I mean, they got out goalie nearly every game there. No shame getting out goalied by Vasilevsky to be all like it. No, there isn't.

But if you're paying this guy to be a superstar and he's, it looks like an average starting goalie, it's not enough. Yeah. To your point, you're paying him more than Vasilevsky is getting paid. And obviously Vaselowski was, to me, the difference in the series. So a lot of questions, I think, for the Florida Panthers. What's one move? I don't know. I don't know how long we want to keep going on this.

Is there one obvious move that you would like to see them make? It's tough, right? Because in that offense, it's just so good in the regular season. It just, I know they got called the comeback cats a lot because they were just, they just score anytime they would go down. It's tough. They look like they were a really complete team. It's other than, you know,

hopefully Spencer Knight taking a big step forward and giving them two really good goalie options. It's tough to see what's going to happen there, right? And the toughest part of it is they went all in. They traded so many picks. I think they've traded all three of their next three first round picks. Is that right? Yes. Yeah.

And so like even if you want to go make a splash, you're limited by what you can do. You're really limited to basically free agency and they're up against the cap. I think they've got a couple deals coming off, but it's not going to be easy. They need Denisenko to turn to something too. Like he has not been good in the American League. They need somebody to come up now because they are not going to be able to get it by the trade market. To me, Zach Hyman has been awesome for Edmonton, and obviously they're not going to get Zach Hyman. But that's to me the kind of piece that they're missing is that guy who can score that ugly goal right at the crease.

That's the only way to me that you're going to beat Vasselowski. Sam Reinhardt was that guy for them this year, but he doesn't play like Zach Heimann does. Yeah. All right. a good one. Going on to the next one is from S. Dusharm, who wants to know, how do you explain that Shane Wright is both described as being an extremely responsible two-way center and as lacking consistent effort by others? This kind of actually came up in our conversation with the Montreal writers. Mark Antoine said, like, you know, there are times where you wonder,

like, is he kind of fully engaged? And it was interesting to me. It's an interesting, I necessarily hadn't expected to hear that about Shane Wright. Yeah, and it's been a common criticism from an HL scouts I've talked to who watched him, particularly in the playoffs, particularly in the second half of the season is, you know, I've said it many times, and I believe it, that I think this guy's a very good two-way center. I think he competes well, but it's fair to say there were plenty of games this season. You watched him, and it wasn't the case. He wasn't competing hard. He wasn't making a difference in those games. He seemed kind of sleepy. And I had talking to somebody about this last week who worked in the league, and I think he made an argument that made a lot of sense to me.

in that he believes the compete is strong. You know, you don't do what he did as a 15-year-old in the OHL if you don't have a high-compete level. You don't do what you did at the U-18s as an underage if you don't have a high-compete level. You don't make Kennings under 20-team if you don't have a high-compete level as a 17-year-old. But it's fair to say, even though he has shown that historically,

he did not show that this season in large stretches. I would still grade as compete as an asset. But you go to some of those playoff games, and there were definitely some times where you were hoping for more out of him. I'm not even sure if it's a compete thing. I've heard this argument made to me that it just might be he doesn't have it in him to take over a game. And there might be something to that. Interesting.

All right, Lucas C wants to know. He says he's like Slovkovsky at the Olympics and the World Championships, but can't help but notice. Everything being said about him was said about Capocco going into the 2019 draft. Not ready to write off Coco yet like some people have. But in fairness, many people said he would have an easier, more successful for a few seasons in the NHL compared to Jack Hughes, thanks to the size and power forward skill set. And this clearly hasn't been the case.

What do you think are the main differences between Slavkovsky and Kako? This one would have to start first and foremost with the skating. Yeah, I think that's the one and obvious difference is that Kako is that Kako historically has been a below average skater, and that was always the issues. I do remember me pointing that out at the time, and Rangers fans not appreciating that. Even though I did have Kako rated rather high,

I thought he'd have a much more successful career today, so I was wrong about that for sure. But yeah, the skating differential is quite significant. Slavkowski is 6-4, and as we talked about earlier in the podcast, he can play with pace, he can move. He will be able to put NHL defensemen on their heels, and Kako just can't do that. That's not his game.

I thought the power would translate quicker. I thought when I watched him this year, I saw a little bit more of that. You know, playing hard-winning battles getting to the net. But those first few seasons as a teenager, he struggled to do that. I think Slavkovsky's going to be able to get to the net easier because he is, one, bigger, and two, faster. I'll also add, I've liked Kako's playoffs more than I've liked any other part of stretches that I've seen from him in the NHL. I think his game just seems to be suited to this style. I mean, him and left Rania have looked awesome in these playoffs.

You can't discount everything you've seen the last two years, but if I was a Rangers fan watching those two play right now, you're excited about where those kids can go going forward. Absolutely. And I think just this is the time you want to see it, right? You probably prefer a player who, I mean, you got to get there, but you prefer a player who, okay, maybe the regular seasons aren't exactly right, but once the playoffs start, they're tailor-made for it.

I think. What does producer Chris think? He's a Rangers fan. He just slacked us. He's very happy. Thrilled that we're talking about his guy. Producer Chris, coming to the conversation. Yeah, thanks for inviting me on.

I am very excited. It's heartening to see, particularly Alexei Lafranier, play the way he's playing. He's showing a lot of leadership. He's physical. He's probably been the Rangers most consistent forward throughout the playoffs so far. All right. Thank you for your input, producer Chris. Thanks for having me.

That's Chris. He's great. He's the one that makes this work. Big Mo Cider wants to know. Peanut Butter on hot dogs. Yes, no, or jail? It's a no for me. I think jails is harsh.

I understand when people put their weird food takes online, people get all kind of up in arms. But I'm all for creativity. I have no issue with people getting a little bit wild with their food takes. I've actually eaten a hot dog that had nerds on it and the bun was cotton candy. So I don't think I'm in much of a place to scold. I did do it for a story. It was not something I would have ordered organically, but I did do that.

Okay. Oh, ho, hold, back and back on. What kind of story could have you doing that? I went, when I was covering the Tigers, I did like a minor league, like road trip to their affiliates. And the Erie Sea Wolves, which is their double A, sold this hot dog at a concession stand. And so I was like, all right, I guess I'm here. I got to try it. So I did.

It was awful. made it hard to eat nerds for a while, to be honest. But anyway, I'm saying jail for this one, and it's because I'm allergic to peanut butter. So if you put peanut butter on my hot dog, you might go to jail. That might be murder. Murder might be harsh. You know, maybe negligence, but we will keep peanut butter away from your hot dogs. I appreciate that.

Avco Cup says, do you intend to do a full seven-round mock draft again this year? Very easy question to answer? Yes. It just is usually close. closer to the draft. Did you go back and count? Did you nail any, like, random fifth rounders last year?

I did, yes. Who was it? There was a couple of them. I think I got Carolina's third round pick. I think I got Toronto's fifth round pick. The year before, I was, like, laughing about it. I think I had nailed like three or four Montreal's picks.

I think I got, like, beyond you to them. I got Kaden Gouli to them. I think I got, it was either Jan Bishak or Luke talked to them. It was kind of, it was kind of hilarious. I'm sure some of the Montreal hockey off Tihor are staring at that one and

wondering where the leak was in the organization and I think I got all over captain into them last year too so those are the hardest ones so that that is I'm shocked that you got that many John D says why just if you know like roughly the range guys are going in and just by dumb luck you're gonna but I think I got Toronto was like fifth round pick two years in a row now like some Leaves fans think I like I got like an in I have like their list or something like that which I don't. So pay extra close attention on that seven-round mock to Toronto's fifth rounder.

That one's gospel. John D wants to know why Matt Savoy's ranking seems to be falling. Kind of the reverse of what we were talking about earlier with some guys who, I mean, Savoy's still playing as well. But why do most feel he will be easily here? He will be a winger and not a center in the NHL. Is it because he's too small and would get pushed off the puck too easily? Well, to answer the first part of the question, production slowed a little bit in the first half, taking off the first power play, just not making as big an impact, I would say, in the recent games as he did in the first.

half of the season. And to the second part of the question, yes, that is, is it. It's just, there's just not that many five foot nine, five foot ten centers in the NHL. We had this debate with Frank Nazar, and we've had this debate, even, I've talked to some NHL scouts who are not a thousand percent convinced. Logan Cooley's couldn't be an NHL center, just for that reason. We love him, but there's only so many of them.

And he might be the next one. He might not. Lane Hudson could be the next Tori Krug. He might play only five NHL games. It's just when you, whereas when you're between, you know, 511 to 6 foot 3, when there's just more of them, your odds are higher. Fair enough. Matt S wants to know, I assume that's not Matt Savoy, but you never know.

So have you ever systematically looked at players that have exceeded your rankings? I know you look back at individual draft years, but have you gone like wider to single out player characteristics or players are characteristics that overperform like guys with questionable footspeed with good hockey sense? Is there like a, I think they're looking for a market inefficiency here, Corey. I can see where they're going with that. And I think you go over a long period of time. And it's, I think that especially in certain stretches of the 2000s, you saw size and skating, we're getting overrated.

But at least in terms of my list, it's kind of been the other way where I feel like I've overrated those elements a little bit in favor of the guys instead of value in guys who have big pro projections. Although there have been plenty of times, like when I, like when I, like, when I, when, I rated Nikita Kutrov really highly that it was the other way too. But I've missed on guys who have underrated their, you know, just the physicality elements, the pro projections, et cetera, et cetera. It's tough to find, unless you really do a real coherent study of it, which I haven't. You look at your lists, always go back in time, and you squirm and you're like, what the hell was I thinking?

But I haven't done a systematic process like that. It's kind of interesting. I'm trying to remember what the book was. I don't know if it was like an astro ball. kind of thing or something like this, but I remember it was a baseball book. Astroball hasn't aged well, has it well, has it? Well, no, not in a lot of ways, but in this way it might. I think there was something in there about them kind of like, like using some algorithm or whatever to kind of scout their own scouts. Yes, I remember reading that, yes, and they would curve their scouts. If their scouts graded

too harshly, they would elevate their grades on average and stuff like that. And yes, they would, They had like a, they had algorithms to kind of go back and, like, evaluate the way their scouts were doing things. Right. So if a guy was, like, always giving out too low speed grades and the speed grades that he would give out were like consistently like, no, this guy's actually above average runner and you rate them average, they would just correct for that automatically. I thought that was interesting. Which would be something that could apply to me because I think a lot of our readers think that I think everybody's a bad skater. Well, so, okay, actually, I do want to talk about this. So that's like a bell curve thing, right? Like, it's just, it's not so much that two guys who are both graded as average. average skaters are identically gifted skaters. It's just that you're going for within a standard deviation, right?

Right. Yes. I mean, I'm grading on a one to six scale. You could split hairs and do all kinds of things, like where teams have, like, some levels in their skating grades. You got to grade all like whatever the first few steps, the speed, the edge work, etc. But I'm just doing a straight one to six. And if you're doing straight one to six, and on that scale three is the average,

that's just going to be heading out a lot of threes. Yeah, and those threes could look different. And a lot of twos and a lot of fours. Right, absolutely. All right, cool. Lars, Thorsell, okay, he's trolling me here. If you were to travel to Europe to watch some prospects, where would you like to go?

Okay, that part is fine. But what would your first meal be? Some local cuisine or McDonald's nuggets. Well, you just went to Europe for your first time. So what was your first meal? This is what he's trolling me about. My first meal was not McDonald's nuggets. My second meal, however, was McDonald's Nuggets.

But it wasn't because I felt like I just needed to try Sweden's nuggets. It was because everything was closed on Sunday. There was nowhere open for me to go get food, and I was jet-legged. I had to get the nuggets. My first meal was a burger at a local sports bar called O'Leary's that I really enjoyed. Wait, hold on. You travel all the way to Sweden and you went to O'Leary's. I went to O'Leary's because there was a game on that I wanted to watch,

and one of my friends there told me that that would be the best place to watch it. All right, there you go. I got wings, a burger, and a Swedish beer. So your first couple of meals were wings, burger, and chicken nuggets. And I had five steaks on that trip, yes. I was not real adventurous. Okay, you're up next. Where in Europe would you like to go?

And what would your first meal be when you got there? My favorite city I've been to when I've been traveling to Europe is Prague. Nothing against any of the other big cities I've been to, but just Prague has always just stood out to me as a place I love, and I usually do, unlike Max, I do try to get the local cuisine, so I would be getting probably some goulash on my first meal when I get to Prague. Okay, that's unfair, though, because if I went to Prague, I already know the Czech food that I would get for my first meal. It's called Swichcova, and Zedina has told me about it, and I looked it up, and it looks

incredible. So if I was in Prague, I would have been more adventurous, too. All right, well, there you go. All right. Next one is Dylan H. Would love some insight into why Ogren's production is so much. higher than Le Caramaki on the same team or line. What have to be to make Le Caramaki the seemingly consensus better prospects of the two

when projecting to higher leagues? Why the disparity in production this year? Is that true? Was Ogrin's production in the J20 better than the Caramaki's? So he must be talking about the J20 level here because obviously Le Caramaki got more SHL opportunity there. And now produce him at the U18s too. Right.

But at the J20 level, it is an interesting one. Yeah, I mean, Ogrin had a monster season down there. He was nearly two points per game. And it wasn't just, you know, that team was good. They went, I think they went to the finals in the, in the J20s. He was a leading player for that team. It's a fair argument. I think the first thing that kind of stands out is the skating.

I don't think Ogrin's a strong skater. I think Lekra Amaki is a stronger skater. So a little bit more pro-projection there, probably why Lekiramaki was able to have the success in the SHL that O'Gren wasn't able to in the limited number of games. Although he was played bad, just didn't. Lekromaki, before he got injured, looked like he was an important part of that year, garden lineup.

And so that would be the main thing. And I think Lickramaki just has a little bit more skill shooting ability. There's a little bit of a differential there in terms of their birth months, too, where you think, like, if Lekaramaki could he just put on weight, especially with a better skating stride, he'll be a better pro. But it's a legitimate argument.

And Ogren's season was fantastic at the junior level. He looked like he was getting two, four points every time he played down there. Another one about kind of your, your your your scouting scale here from christopher t and he notes that it is written with genuine curiosity i assume so that you know he's not trying to be mean but he says a few years ago around the time macar was debuting he thinks he rated his skating as slightly above average or perhaps a 55 back then on the baseball tool scale i could have sworn i rated as a 60 but anyways yeah go on

i can fact check that while you talk but uh here you go what went into that evaluation and do you still agree with it that's a good question uh i would probably still have it as a more than a 60 to 65 of right now, I think, I think people would be surprised by the, the guys I think of the NHL who are great skaters, that probably wouldn't have the highest of highest grades on. Because, like I said, it's a bell curve.

If McDavid and I think McKinnon are the 80s, or like on the one through six, they're the six. Then you can't give out sixes to everybody because that's McKinn and McDavid. So, you know, Kail McCarr would be a four or a five, then for me.

I just, I don't see him on the level of those guys, even though his skating is fantastic, great speed, edge work, he's very, very elusive, you know, just he's a fantastic skater, just even getting a four or a five, if you're getting a five on a scale one to six is extremely high praise. I don't know if like in this draft, this upcoming draft, that I have a five on almost anybody. Because they're so rare. Realistically, it's supposed to be on the NHL level.

It's top 1% NHL, right? Yeah, right. Almost everybody kind of fits within that two to four range that's in the NHL. If they're a one, they're probably not in the NHL. And if they're a five or a six, they're exceptional. Yeah, that makes sense. You did have a 60 on Kilmachar skating, so you can rest easy at night. Yeah, I sleep like a baby.

Would you still have it as a 60 or would you bump it up? it would be a debate for me. I would need to kind of go back and look at it. My initial instinct is to give it a 60, or which would be a four on the one to six. But I could see a four or a five. Yeah, all right. Mr. Jared Moore says, what's the biggest flaw with Slavkovsky's game? And should you read anything into him quote unquote only having 10 points in 31 games in league? That is the biggest flaw in his profile is that production in league play. Yep, absolutely. And even when he played junior games with TPS this season, it was really good. production, it wasn't outstanding production. He wasn't scoring something like three points per game in that league where you thought, oh, he's clearly way too good for this league. Why do we even send him here?

So, I mean, that is the debate. And when I watch him and when I grade out the tools, there is no weakness for me other than the fact that he's not a center. But it raises the question. It's why you look at both the numbers and scout the players, because it's possible that you're missing something when you watch him, that the numbers might reflect and vice versa. Maybe he is not as skilled as I think he is.

Maybe he's not as competitive as I think he is because he's not getting a done versus men. And the counter-argument to that would be, and what I've said for now several episodes, is that TPS was a very good team this year. They went to the league of finals. So not a lot of opportunity, at least in the first half of the season there for him.

With that being said, you can look at some of the guys who have become stars out of that league, who were draft eligible while in Liga, and he is far behind where you would have wanted to bend production-wise. Could you quibble at all with the playmaking, maybe? I mean, at the World Championships, he does have several assists, but you look at kind of the Olympic track record, and it was seven goals, no assists. Could you quibble with playmaking? Would that be a fair one? It is. Like, yeah, it might just be gold twice in earlier. Like, when I said it might not be a skill that I thought. Are you going to say maybe he's not as smart as I thought?

It doesn't make as many plays. That's all, I think, fair a game. All right, fair enough. I'm not saying that. I'm just trying to... Yeah, I don't think he's plenty smart, but again, I might be wrong, and the numbers might inform why I'm wrong.

I don't remember if it was the Switzerland or the Denmark game, but he had a sequence with Tatar, where he set him up right in front for a look, and then he kind of got it back, and I thought it had a really creative way to get that puck on net and got the rebound at Tatar, who then missed another look with it. But I thought that was a really intelligent sequence by him.

And he's very clearly a smart player. But just trying to humor the question here. Sure. Tiernan C says, with Kerry Price's future in doubt, Habs fans undoubtedly start thinking about the future in net. What are your thoughts on Montreal's goaltending prospects? Is Caden Primo still legit, NHL prospect? What's his ceiling?

And your thoughts on Jacob Dobis, Frederick Nissen, Dikow, and Joe Verbetik. Do you have to have any goal-attending prospects who could be a 1A or 1B in the next five years? I'm very impressed you read that whole question out loud. You could have just like stopped at the goalie part,

but you even went through like the Danish goalie's name, which I, you pronounce it right, so very impressive. Heck yeah, I love to hear it. Anyways, pretty well I think to back up. Not sure any of those other guys or NHL guys. I think Dick Cowell was like someone interesting. Kind of like a, he's kind of a home run shot there.

Hasn't really, really developed that well, but he's got a prayer probably. but yeah they need a goalie of the future I don't see that guy in the system right now anything could happen with goalies I could be wrong on preemba I could be wrong on one of those other guys but I wouldn't say the clear goal of the future I don't see him in that system

right now and again they have got so many picks they can afford to take a shot or two on a fairly early one this year yeah I don't get it's not an amazing goal of class there's no COSA there's no wallstet in this class but there's I think both tie that Brendan Tobias laying in will go in the second or third round so

they have picks in those range and that could be that could be a time to take one of those guys. Yeah. Matt, manyer, I think it is. Here's what I'm dying to know. Who are the heart and soul prospects in this draft? Who are the guys considered warriors by their peers who dragged their team into the fight every game? Do any of the top 32 prospects fit that description? That's a good question.

I think there's a couple, even including the top guys in the draft. I think you really love on the defense side. You love how hard David Eurechik plays. You love how hard Leon Bischel plays, how hard Ryan Chesley play, all different. spectrum of talent there, but all three of them are highly competitive, physical defensemen who will give their all and be wanted out there in those tough situations. Up front, I think you love kind of the way Iva Mera Sancho plays. You love the way Rutgers and McGuarty plays.

Marco Casper is a really competitive player. Maybe not on the top top names, but I think those big Q defensemen, Maverick Lamberto, Noah Warren are big, hard to play again. guys who I think coaches will lean on in the NHL because they play that kind of that kind of style. All right. Well, that is going to do it for us today. Thanks for listen to this episode of the Athletic Hockey Show Prospect Series. You can subscribe to the Athletic Audio Plus on Apple Podcasts to get all the bonus content from our entire network. Start with a 30-day free trial and then it's just 99 cents a month

after that. Right now, you can subscribe to the athletic for $1 a month for $6,000. months and you visit theathletic.com slash hockey show. Take care. We'll talk to you soon.