The Athletic Hockey Show - NHL Draft: Who’s our consensus top 10?

Episode Date: June 11, 2026

With about two weeks to go until the NHL Draft, the guys work to construct a consensus top 10 list, ranking the prospects and placing them into tiers with debates and concessions along the way.Hosts: Max Bultman, Corey Pronman, and Scott WheelerWith: FloHockey’s Chris PetersExecutive Producer: Chris FlanneryProducer: Chris FlanneryWatch full episodes on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@theathletichockeyshowJoin our Discord Server: https://discord.gg/VTm9VjkFSubscribe to The Athletic: https://theathletic.com/hockeyshow Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This is the Athletic Hockey Show Prospect Series. Hey, everybody, Max Bultman here alongside the athletics, Corey Promen and Scott Wheeler and Flow Hockey's Chris Peters for another episode of the Athletic Hockey Show Prospect Series. We are back doing our joint consensus ranking episode. This is where we're going to get together here live on the show and put together a consensus top while we're shooting for 10. But as a result of how many players we discuss, we may end up at 12, we may end up at 15. The goal here, for those of you who remember it from last year, is to simulate an NHL team's process in ranking players and all the deliberation that goes into that.

So fellas, let's get right into it this year. We're going to get rid of what I think was a popular concept a year ago, the super vote, just for the sake of promoting compromise. I think we were maybe wheeling and dealing, and we were maybe leveraging the super vote a little too much last year in a way that NHL teams obviously probably can't do. So we're going to focus on compromise. We're going to focus on making concessions here and ultimately coming to a consensus.

And we're going to start right at the top, Corey. Did you want to go ahead and nominate someone to begin our Tier 1 of the 26 NHL draft class? Yes, Gavin McKenna, the dynamic Penn State winger, one of the leading scores in college hockey this past season, a guy who projects as a first line, first power play type of wing in the NHL. I think he belongs in Tier 1. All right. Uh, I, anyone have a problem with Gavin McKenna being in tier one? Zero problem.

Zero problems there. Yeah. All right. Scott, why don't you go ahead and nominate our next player for tier one? I've been of the mind that it's only a two player tier and that the defenseman and killed Mel Holter are cut below. So I will nominate Evar Stenberg for tier one. Okay.

Let the conversation begin here. The first question is, do we all agree that Yvar Stenberg is in tier one? Does anyone want to drop Evar Stenberg out of Tier 1? No. No. All right. Then let's debate the placement here. Does anyone want to argue Evar Stenberg above Gavin McKenna?

Do you want to tell us a little bit about Evar, Scott? I do not want to nominate Yvars Stenberg above Gavin McKenna, but Evar is, to me, the clear second best forward prospect in this class and the clear second best prospect in this class. I think he's going to be a star winger. We're talking about a player who had. a historic, near-historic season in the SHL, one of the three or four greatest seasons for his age, for

a draft eligible player in the history of one of the best pro leagues outside of the NHL, was extremely successful internationally at U18 Worlds, a full year ago, at the World Juniors, at men's worlds most recently. He's a

prolific, prolific talent. He's hard on pucks, and I think he projects pretty comfortably as a top of the lineup player. So, That's the case for him in this tier. I still think Gavin is the number one prospect in this draft, but I think it's close enough that they belong in the same grouping. All right.

So so far, we're off to a pretty easy start. Nobody wanted to rank Stenberg ahead of McKenna. Everyone agreed he belonged in the same tier. So so far, we are at a list of number one, Gavin McKenna, number two, Evar Stenberg, both within Tier 1. That's a nice tidy first four minutes, fellas. I think it's about to get more complicated. Chris, it's your turn to nominate someone for Tier 1.

one if you believe anyone else belongs in tier one. Yeah, I do. I think that we have a really great group of defensemen here that are going to potentially challenge the two forwards for being among the best in this class. And I'm going to start that off with Chase Reed, you know, with his size. He's closing it on 6'3. You know, he's also a right shot, extremely good skater. And also a guy that I think is really on the front end of some of his best development.

years here. You know, he's, he played in the O HL half a season two years ago, now the full season this year, based on the body of work, plus seeing him at the World Juniors with Team USA, where he was their best defenseman. I just see a player that is on the cutting edge of where he's going. And so I think that Chase Reed's upside puts him into the tier one discussion for me. You mentioned his development. I have thought, and I'm writing about this this week, when I do my piece about why Chase Reed is my number one prospect. I think the trajectory reminds you a little bit of my car, who was a late birthday defenseman, and just like he kind of just exploded in his draft year, and then he goes to college,

and he was really good, and had the guy Great World Junior Ray challenged. I think your point about how little high-level experience Reed had, you know, before the half a year of the OHL is very relevant. Yeah, and to me, the other thing that strikes me is that he goes from that to being one of the most utilized defensemen in the OHL period and that the results were very strong for a good team. So, you know, I think that to me, there's a lot to like about him, not just in where he is right now, but where he's going, because where he is right now is pretty darn impressive. And then you kind of like stretch that out to the next tier or the next range of where he goes

developmentally, especially going to Michigan State where I think maybe he doesn't have an amazing freshman year, but does he spend a sophomore year there? And then have that McCar-like kind of explosion, I could see that happening too. I'm splitting hairs here. And Reed is my third ranked prospect. So he's kind of was a bubble guy of that top tier for me. My reluctance with placing Reed in that tier, though, is that despite the fact that he is an offensive defenseman, and that that is the sort of primary focal point of his game, he hasn't produced like it. And he hasn't produced like it.

And he is early in his trajectory and early in his development. I agree with that. He has not produced like it. And he's an older player in this draft. Like he did not produce like Brant Clark in the OHL. He did not produce like Zane Perrek in the OHL. He did not produce like Ryan Ellis in the OHL. This wasn't a put it to bed season where he's just,

the clear-cut best player in the league, and he's taking over games. He played a lot. He played 25 to 30 minutes a night for them. He was a point per game, but guy. But the statistical profile for his age did give me at least a little bit of pause in terms of putting him with players like Gavin McKenna and Ivar Stenberg, who have done historic things at different levels. Gavin in the WHL, Stenberg, obviously in the SHL. We didn't see Reed reach that level. So I, I think you're just counting on more coming for him, and you're counting on that in a player who's already on the older side of this class. Now, Stenberg and McKenner are also on the older side of this class, but a year ago, they

were doing historic things. And I just think you're placing more sort of runway on Reed than maybe he warrants. I think I agree with you that. I don't know if the offense is going to be elite, elite. I think it's really good. I don't know if it's elite. but you compare him to Bouchard, to Ellis, to Frank Clark. He's a dramatically better defender than all those guys.

Like, his skating is way better than all three of those guys that you named to go with the size profile too. So I think that would be my distinction there when comparing them to them. Like, to me, the conversation is how does he compare to those guys? How does he compare to Mikhail Sergachev? How does he compare to Drew Dowdy? How does he compare to Pavl Minchikov? That, to me, is more the names I would think of as opposed to, terms of the player types anyways.

If we're comparing him to Pavel Mintyukov, I don't think he belongs in the tier one of a draft. And I would probably say the same thing of Surgachev. And obviously, Doughty is Doughty. If you think he's Doughty, then he belongs with McKenna and Stenberg. But if you think he's Surgachev or Mintyukov,

like I don't know that he belongs in that group. I think just, I think he's close to what Doughty was at the same age. Like just, that's kind of, I don't know, I don't know if he is doubty at the same age, but I think he's close. That's, that's how I, that's, and that's kind of been my, my thought process when evaluating Reed. All right. So we've got Chris dominating him for tier one. Scott, I think, has kind of told us he does not feel that he's in the same tier, even if it's close. Corey, you have him as your number one player. So we know you have him in tier one.

That puts it at two to one between you guys. I tend to think that this is a, a bigger group at the top of the class. So I think that he belongs in tier one here, Chase Reed. So that gives us three. So, Scott, are you okay with us putting? Yes. Chase Reed in tier one. All right. So now that he's in tier one, we got to place him here. So Corey, you've kind of made your case already for Reed as the top player in this class. Where do we want to slot him here? Chris, why don't you kind of take the lead on this? Yeah, I mean, I'm going to have them behind the two wingers. I'm going to have him at three. And the reason being, for some of the reasons that Scott mentioned is that while I do see that that runway that we have for Chase Reed, where he is kind of, you know, we're kind of projecting

out a little bit more based on where he is right now. There's always risk in doing that. I think that this is more of a risk assessment. I feel a little bit more confident that both McKenna and Stenberg are going to be top line producers. And while I believe that Reed has the capability to be a number one defenseman, I can't, you know, like I don't have the level of confidence at this point to say that he's definitely going to surpass what those other two guys have done. Now, I could definitely be persuaded into Reed in the, you know, the two range. And I think, like, I think it's personally, I think it's very close. The only reason that I'm not putting them ahead of those guys is simply because I'm projecting

out more with him than I am with the other two, I feel like. Okay, here's a question in response to that. Let's say Reed's offense isn't special. let's say it's 50 point offense. How good does Stenberg as a 5-11 winger have to be to overcome a 6-3 defenseman who can put up 50 points? Like Thomas Harley is on Team Canada with roughly that profile. Yeah, I mean, I really do think that that Evar is going to have to be in, you know, an 80-point winger, you know, to over-perform that value. Because I do put such a tremendous value on the amount of minutes that I think Reed can play.

in that setting a 50 point defenseman, a guy that probably is, you know, a U.S. Olympian in this case, you know, where it's like, that's, that's where, but do I think that Stenberg can do that? I do. So like that's, you know, that's kind of where it comes down to the two where it's like, hey, like that, if that's the tippy top of his projection, I do think the top of his projection is a little bit higher, you know, overall than what I'm seeing. Just just because at Reed, I feel like there's a risk, you know, a risk in that, in placing him that high. I think Stenberg can be not only an 80 point winger, but like a winning version of an 80 point winger as well, like a guy who does a lot of things that you like. I think to your point, if I think there's a very real chance that reads a future Olympian, do any of us doubt whether after watching him play with Lucas Raymond, whether Evar Stenberg is a future top six player for Sweden at the Olympics? Like I think that's that's the kind of player we're talking about here as well. Yeah. you know what i've written about the draft class i've written that i feel like it's a five-way tie at the top um i still believe that so i'm not going to make a big deal about whether we put reed a three like i think it's a very reasonable argument you know whether toronto took reed or

stenberg or mccana with their first pick i'm going to give them the exact same draft grade um i'm going to give i'm going to say their farm system has improved pretty much the exact same amount so I think it's fine. So really, I think Maxis comes down to you. Like, where do you want to put it to reach? I'm comfortable at three. I mean, I probably would nominate him at two here, but it's not something I'm going to dig my heels in over.

So if the consensus is kind of at three, I can live with that. So we will have our tier one order right now as McKenna, Stenberg, Chase Reed. My turn to nominate, I'm going to nominate another defenseman, Carson Carl's. I've made my pitch to you guys on the past show, but I'll restate it here a little bit. I think he's the toughest to play against defensemen in this class. I think he's a good skater. I think he's got a real weapon for a shot. And I think that's reflected in the fact that he outproduced the other Canadian

hockey league defensemen in this class. I think he's a tougher comparison to the guys in other leagues, obviously, Keaton Verhoff and Albert Smith's. But when you look at the combination of the tools and kind of the play style, I mean, the offense probably does not maintain at quite that level. But I don't think it needs to maintain at a massive level for him to still become a player in the mold of like a Charlie McAvoy, maybe a Jake Sanderson. know that the skating is quite that level.

That'd be my pitch for Carson Carl's in Tier 1. Does anyone want to join me in putting Carl's in Tier 1? Not at this stage. I'm not quite there. No. Yeah, I feel like our top tier is the three. And I think my distinction with the Sanderson comp is I don't think he's as elite a skater as Sanderson.

Now, I will say this. Max is not on an island. I have talked to evaluators who think he is Sanderson. and who think he should, like, you know, be talked about at two, three, four in this draft. I have personally not viewed that when I've watched him, but I don't think what Max is saying is unreasonable or not shared by some professional evaluators in the league. My sense is that it's very close between him and Reed and a consensus around the league from those I've talked to. Like I've talked to maybe not just as many people who have him as the top defenseman, but a number of people who have him ahead of Reed. Yeah. All right. So we'll withhold debate on Carl's versus other people for later in the, in the episode when someone else is in Tier 2. For now, Tier 1 is McKenna Stenberg-R-R-Reed. Tier 2 is Carl's. Corey, it's your turn again to nominate someone. Do you want to nominate anyone else for Tier 1, or are we into Tier 2 now? I'm going to nominate Albert Smith. To me, this is a guy who has just had a fantastic season, played very well against men in Liga and in the DEL playoffs, played well against NHL players at the Olympics, played

was one of Latvia's best players at the world championships and at the world juniors, 6-3, mobile competitive, has pretty good offense. Like, to me, this is a profile. You think of some of the best European defensemen that come up into the draft in the last decade. You think of Hayeskin and you think a cider.

Like, I think what he's accomplished in those leagues and against men is comparable. He's not a skater that Hayeskin is. He's not as physical as cider. He's a different player. But I think to me, he looks like a, pretty good bet to become a top pair defenseman in the NHL. All right.

So that's a tier one nomination to be clear? Yes. Is anyone oppose Scott or Chris, Albert Smith's in tier one? I'm not there. I love Alberts. He's my number two ranked defensemen. I actually have him ahead of Carl's on my list. I work.

The one hiccup I've had with Smiths is sort of the decision making and the reads at times. I'm not sure that he thinks it at a high enough. level to become a true, true sort of number one, to become what cider has become. I love the tools. I think there's more, I've said this on the podcast before, but I think he's actually got more offense than people give him credit for. I think he's very, very skilled with the puck. But it's just that it's very much reliant on instinct, I think, more than the other top

D in this class. And I worry that he'll, he'll run around and get caught out of position and put himself in some bad spots at times. Chris, where are you at? Albert Smith's Tier 1? I'm not there either. I think that some of it is I don't, you know, I definitely don't see like the offensive creativity, the opportunity to, you know, be a guy that is going to play.

I think to play the top level minutes in the, in the NHL, you have to have a more dynamic element than he has at this point. What I will say is I think he's an incredibly steady, stable, predictable kind of defenseman that does have the maturity, the physical strength, the defender. all those things. Like I feel like he's among the most complete players, but I look at some of the other guys, and I see a little bit more of a dynamic element to them.

You know, he's my third ranked defenseman. I have reading Carl's ahead of him at this point. But, you know, I do think that he is a really intriguing player overall. And while I don't see him as a tier one guy, I certainly see him as one of the top tier players in this draft. Chris, how would you compare him to Kiannre Miller? I would say to me, Kie Andre was,

that's a good question. I would say that they're probably fairly similar in terms of profile. The thing that I would say is like Kianre, the difference between him, like I felt like we were... He was bigger, and then also on top of that, he really was kind of a lot,

he was more raw than... For sure. Than Smith was. Like, I think Smith's is more advanced than I wonder kind of about the floor versus, you know, the ceiling kind of, scenario, I felt like Giannri had this ceiling to him that I'm not necessarily sure that I see

with Alberts, but at the same time, like, I just look at this guy and I'm like, it wouldn't shock me if he played in the league next year. You know, like, I think that he's got that capability. He was telling all the teams of the combine for what it's worth he wants to be in the NHL next year, but not that it's his decision, but he seems to be a confident player. Yeah, no shortage. So we're going to have Smiths in tier two here. Now we got to debate Smiths versus Carl's. So, Corey, why don't you make the case for Smiths above Carl's specifically? I think he's got just as much offense.

I think Carl's is way more physical and competitive, but not going out, way more. He's more physical and competitive. Smiths is bigger, though. I think there's a little bit more natural offense there with the hand skill, the big point shot. What he's done against men to me is significantly more impressive than what Carl's did this year against junior players. I think you're doing a lot of projecting with Carl's still, that there's going to be offense at higher levels.

I think with Smith's, what he's shown you against men at various different levels of competition, I feel like there's not a lot of projection. He played against NHL players. He played successfully against NHL players. So I think you take some of the guesswork out there a little bit. I'll say on Carl's too. I've had,

I've had NHL people sort of flagged to me that they're not sure. One of the things that defined him in the WHL this year was how mean he was, how physical he was, his ability to bully guys at times. I've had people flagged to me that at six, one and a half and playing in the 190s, maybe he plays at 200, he's not actually going to be a big defense, like, that's not a big, big defenseman in the NHL. And so I do wonder if that's, if that's his identity. Now, it is similar to sort of McAvoy.

I actually like the McAvoy comp for Carl's, but he's not, he's not going to be that bully mean type in all likelihood, or it's going to be harder for him to be that kind of player in the NHL. Like he's just, that, that's not huge. Is he not that much different than like Kishon Atrickson? Like, I think they're different, but like, I feel like that body type's closer to him than it is to like, uh, Smiths and Verhoff for me. I like that player too, but I, I think he's a way better skater than cash. That would be the, yeah, better skater. They're both big point shots. And I think Carl's, I've seen moments with Carl's where the vision, I think does. look like it projects to be able to play on a second power play.

Maybe you could say the same for H.S. But that'd be my case. But, you know, I think these two players are close. They'd probably be close to back to back to me, certainly within a group of two or three. Chris, where do you fall here? I think you said you had Carl's one ahead of Smiths. Yeah, I had him ahead of Smiths.

I don't necessarily view him as a, you know, as a top tier player in terms of where I look at where the delineation is. but to me because of some, like, I just think there's a lot of completeness to his game. I think he's an incredibly smart player. I also, like, this doesn't really factor into my slotting, but he's like the perfect player for North Dakota. It's kind of crazy. Like, it's like, hand a glove fit. Like, I think they're going to really maximize what he does at that school.

So, like, you know, I think that that's going to take him to a, to another level here. But, yeah, I mean, I like the player a lot. I think the offensive game, the flourishing of the offensive. game this year really was a selling point for me and just seeing that that physical nature that he doesn't lose that, that he often outplays, you know, other top guys because of how much he can impact the game in so many different ways. That's a huge thing. So I mean, like, could I, could you persuade me that he's among the best guys in this class? Absolutely. Could you persuade me that he could even one day supplant read? You know, I think like that's, that's a conversation too. So

there's a lot of a lot to like he i know i mean smith so not to make the case for chris here but he was better than and reeds obviously not we're not we're done sort of talking about read but he was better than read at the chl usa in november oh yeah yeah but not at the world juniors so no yeah all right so i think we're two two on this one so we are going to have to have someone volunteer to compromise uh on either smits or carls here does anyone want to volunteer to throw their hat down So I know there's some Keaton Verhoff hate among this group already kind of thing. I don't know if I'd say that.

Skepticism? How about skepticism? Yeah. I have my tier one. So I can bend on Carls here, but Verhof, to me, has to be in the top seven overall for me to do that. I mean, I... That's going to be hard for me. I have Verhof eight, but I'm pretty confident in the seven ahead of Verhof.

I knew that Verhof was going to be a point of contention for us coming into this. I have a tough time with Verhof ahead of any of Carl Smith's, Bork, we'll get to Bjork, Malholtra, like that's, I don't know. I'm just not there on Keaton. Okay, Chris? Yeah, I mean, I can, I can bend because I don't like what I would say about this group of defensemen, and I would include Verhof in this too, is that after we get past, like, I've got Reed as like the ceiling guy, the guy that I'm, you know, maybe feeling a little more confident about. The rest of them are clumped. And, and I think you could even clump multi-Gustafsend into this clump as well. And, and so, like, now you're, now we're talking about just kind of, like, I could be easily persuaded to do any order of those guys and not fight it. because, you know, I don't have as strong a feelings about any single one of them.

So it sounds like we're putting smits. We are putting smits at number four, Carl's at number five for where we have it right now, both in tier two. What I'll say, Chris, I agree with you about the clump. But I just look at it and I see like every defenseman in this seems to kind of have a lane. And I think Carl's kind of fits into every lane somewhere. He might not be number one on maybe, I think maybe number one on the physicality. But I understand Corey's point.

I think it's a good point. but how does kind of size translate into what that style looks like in the NHL? I still think, you know, I think you've used Ryan McDone for him before. I think Ryan McDonough was plenty physical in the NHL to a similar size. Oh, sorry, Scott's point. But I think Carl's is kind of on all of those. And that's where it elevates to me, but I am okay with this how we have it standing.

So Tier 1, McKenna Stenberg and Chase Reed, Tier 2, Albert Smiths and Carson Carl's. I think Corey basically already gave us our next name that we're going to discuss here in Keaton Verhoff. And it sounds like he's gone right in number six. Well, when did we stop talking about Caleb Malhotra? Yeah. We never started. We're going to get around to it. Malhotra will come up, but we've already kind of broached Verhof.

Let's just have the conversation. Corey, go ahead. I don't know. He's had the same kind of numbers as a 17-year-old in college that Zach Rowensky. and Noah Hanifin did. He's got size. He's a good enough skater. He plays both ways.

Captain Canada type of character. I don't think the offense is elite, but it's good. Like, he was a top power play guy for a top five team in the country in North Dakota. He was not late in the year. When the games mattered, he was not running PP1. No, it was always living avid running the power play, but he was a part of their power play. And like, I don't know. It's, to me.

me, like, he just checked so many boxes, the body of work so impressive, going back to his junior days. Like, I don't see the issue here. I think people are overthinking this one a little bit. I think he's awesome. I don't think he's hockey sense is awesome. And that's the thing. Like, his reads throughout the season were not good. And then they got worse.

And so I think, you know, basically it got to the point, you know, there was a lot of focus on him. Jake Livenavidge was the number one defenseman on that team. And then on top of that, you know, they had other guys that were able to kind of fill the gap. But I think, you know, the things that the other things that I'll say, though, about Keaton that is important caveats in this is that he was one of the youngest players in college hockey. He's young for the draft class. He does have this incredible, you know, size profile. The adjustment from WHL to college is far greater than I think anybody really anticipated. and it was a significant difference.

And his role was different for Victoria than it was for North Dakota. And he had to kind of figure that out. I think that he's a guy that I would expect to take a big step next year. I think he's a guy that will be a very important player for North Dakota. But my concern is when I see the hockey sense concerns, I look a little bit less. I was like, you know, all the athletic profile and everything looks good. but I think he was jumping into plays in weird spots. He was not really tracking back all that well.

And then it continued a little bit too at the world under 18s. I saw a player that I expected to dominate. I saw a player that looked lost at times. And so, I mean, you guys were there. I was watching on video. Maybe you saw it differently. So I'll, I'll, but I couldn't, you know, I expected him to be a dominant player. Now, I will say going back to last under 18s two years ago,

or the year before and his WHL season, the profile there suggests, you know, a lot more to come. And I think that that's not, I'm not discounting that. But I just, I have more concerns about the hockey sense at this point than I did at the beginning of the season. And to me, that is where I start to draw a little bit more of a line. Yeah, I agree. I don't think he's super smart, but like, I don't think Ekblad is super smart. I don't think Chickren is super smart.

and that's kind of what I kind of project him as at the next level. I worry, in terms of him becoming that kind of a player, my worry on top of the hockey sense is the boots. Like the pivots, the clumsiness when he has to get going quickly, turns, I've found that to be an issue. I think he skates fine when he's moving. When he has to adjust against coverage or pivot to go back and get a puck, he's almost always losing those races and stumbling a little bit.

it's just not clean. And that is going to be an issue. It's the similar issue that I had with Carter Yakumchuk at the same age. But I think that's going to be a bit of an issue. And I think we're going to see almost immediately the difference between Carl's and him on that team next year. Like, I just think with the way Carl's skates that he's going to quickly become their number one. And that I'm, and I don't even see like great offense. Like he's got the big point shot, but I don't think his hands are particularly soft.

I don't think he's a natural, natural playmaker for his, for his linemates. Like there are just enough question marks there where I just, I would have a very hard time having him ahead of Mal Holter or Bjork with what we've seen those two guys do this year. Scott, how would you explain the production then? Because, I mean, for a 17-year-old to have 20 points in college hockey, like, there has to be something like contributing to that kind of offense that, to Corey's point, really the only guys in recent memory that have had that have both been, you know, Noah Hanofin and Zach Wrenski are both high-end. and NHL players. Yeah, the offense, I mean, it's good. He can score, he can shoot it. He's very active.

Like, he likes to be below the goal line and at the dots and jump into the play. So he's very involved that way. I just don't think it's natural, natural puck skill or sort of clear PP1 offense. I don't think it's PP1 offense, but I think saying he doesn't have good hands or can't make plays. Like, I think that's a little egregious for me. Like, I think we can just disagree on the line. level of offense. But a guy who had, what do you have, like 20, 25 goals as a 16 year old and the

Western League is a defenseman? Like, this guy has skill. Like, I mean, come on. Like, it's just a level of skill is the debate. Yes. Yeah. I'd also wonder, like, how much the age explains both of these kind of conversations that we're having, right? Like, if you're the youngest player in your league, I think it's natural that the processing is going to be one of the biggest things that we debate about you, right? I mean, this is, he's about as young as you can be for a college hockey player and he played in the toughest college hockey conference, the most kind of pro-simulated conference. To Chris's point, though, we also saw it at the world juniors at U-18s. Like, we've seen it at levels that are college hockey. This Hulinka wasn't great either. This Hulinka was just okay, too,

in the summer. I'm also like, we're going to have this debate even more now in the coming years. We've had it with McKenna and Verhof and kind of in Lawrence to an extent. I'm not so much a big fan of saying it's college hockey. Like, it's so tough. Let's just give these guys a break. It's like, you know, I think. I'm with you on that. Yeah. Yeah. Like, yeah, we're getting better answers because it's higher level hockey.

Like, it's more, it's more clear information for me as opposed to not, you know, the proper information just because they weren't playing junior hockey. Junior hockey requires more projection. College hockey doesn't. So I think it's fair to say, if a guy, like, say a Lauren struggle, you're like, oh, man, there's some real problems here. But I don't think Verhoff struggled. I know the second half of the year is offense tailed off there a little bit. But I think his season overall was a successful season. In the games that mattered late in their conference tournament and into the Frozen Four,

they did not trust him to play him defensively. Oh, I know. And he was a top player. And he was brutal in some of those games. I didn't say he was a top player. But I still think, like, when you think of how his season went overall, I still think it was a good season. I didn't say it was a great season.

But I think it was a good season and the toolkit is great. So that's more my argument is the producer. I still think remains positive. Noah Hanifin didn't have a great college season, but he still went top five and might, you know, and might win a Stanley Cup here in a couple of days. Yeah. All right. So it sounds to me based on the discussion here that we do not have Keaton Verhoff in Tier 1. Does anyone want to vote Keaton Verhoff ahead of Albert Smiths at the top of Tier 2? No. No. Does anyone want to vote Keaton Verhoff above Carson Carl's at number five on this list? No. I would, but it sounds like everybody here is no, unless I release something I hear differently. Scott?

No. Okay. All right. So our list right now, Tier 1, Gavin McKenna, Evar Stenberg, Chase Reed, Tier 2, Albert Smith's, Carson Carls, and Keaton Verhof. Scott, delayed nomination to you. Yeah, I'll nominate Caleb Malholtra. I thought he had. At which tier?

In tier two. I thought Caleb had a tremendous season. I think he's the number one center prospect in the class. And I love, love, love, love, Vigo Bjork. But Caleb at 6'1, almost 6'2, the way he skates, the way he thinks the game, the two-way details, the playmaking, the skill level, the runway in terms of his physical development and the likelihood that he's going to add some real muscle here. I'm big, big on Caleb.

I think he's going to be an important winning sentiment in a top six in the NHL and potentially even on a first line. That is, I think, the crux of the debate with Caleb is whether he's sort of that excellent high end, one of the better two Cs in the league, or whether he actually has enough offense to be a one C and a franchise sort of building block.

And I think that's a fair debate to have around Caleb. But even if he's the high end 2C, I still think he's at top of this draft level player with all of the things that he's going to bring with the potential for him to be a captain for you and that kind of a thing. I think he's the real deal. I actually think Vigo Bjork might be the top center in this draft, actually. You know, a typical Scotty underrates small players. But I think, you know, like, but like I think how Bjork looks at the men's world,

it's like I actually might have him ahead of Malhotra, but I think they both belong like top of tier two because of the center position and and their their their their the premium value they could deliver to an angel organization. I'm going to guess do you have would you have malhotra ahead of it ahead of all those de scott no no I have malhotra ahead of verhoff and I have him carls and bork sort of really really close four five six on my list so that would verhoff the only verhoff's the one I would feel strongly about I think bork and melchelcher are both ahead of Verhof, which would put Verhof at 8. Right, but where, okay, so we have these defensemen now, those three defensemen,

who's Malhotra ahead of them for you? So we just get an understanding. Malholtra and Smits and Carls and Bjork are all back to back to back on my list. I have Malhulture fourth. I have him ahead of those D, but he's, I mean, it's, that's, that's not one I'm going to fight over. Okay, but let's use that as a starting point here. Does anyone want to argue Albert Smith's ahead of Caleb Malhotra? I would just for the reasons I said earlier. I think that he has both the offense, the competitiveness, and the athletic profile. I think, you know, Malhotra, you know, he's a little bit bigger than Malhotra.

I think he's got just as much offense. I think he's just as competitive. So I'd lean that way, but I'd find putting Malhotra head of Carls ahead and ahead of Averhof. Chris, where do you stand on all this? Yeah, I have him ahead of. I have him head of my tier two defensemen. You know, I have them fourth on my list at this point.

But again, I think that the distance between those two players or him and the defenseman is really minimal. I think a lot of it comes down to the position-based, you know, kind of argument, the importance of the center position. The fact that I think that he can be a top two-line center, but not a guaranteed number one center is probably where, you know, I would have some, you know, ability to wiggle off of four. So, yeah, I mean, I think that there's, for a lot of the same reasons, like, I just don't, I couldn't project him safely into a number one center position. And then, you know, if I have Carls or Smiths or any of them as a top pairing defenseman, that would be a more valuable commodity to me. So I think it's close. I still have Malhotra 4, but I, you know, I don't need to fight that fight too hard. And I think that's kind of the story of the class, too, is like the distance, the gaps between these players, especially in Tier 2 is minuscule as far as I'm concerned.

Corey, and I think there's a lot of teams picking like 5 to 10 are very happy just to let the cards fall as they are kind of thing. And they'll get a player they're very excited about. Sorry, Scott, I cut you off. No, no, you're good. If Chris and I were to relent on Malholtra at 4, would you be okay with Keaton at 8? i.e. putting Keaton behind Caleb and Vigo, and those two that we talked about, Smits and Carl's. Yeah, that's fine. All right. Well, we only have seven right now, but it sounds like we're going to go with Caleb Malhotra at five. So it's going to be Smiths at four, Malhotra five, Carl's at six, Keaton Verhoff currently at seven. Is that correct? Yeah, and it sounds like Vigo, Bjork's coming up here and he's going to be the next player up. And I would nomin the next player up.

And I would nominate him for tier two. And I think you're looking at a guy who looks like Frank Nazar. He looks like Logan Stancovin. He looks like that next small play-driving hyper-competitive centerman who has a path to being a top six center in the league. I don't know if he's a one-see, same debates as Malhotra. I think he could be a really good two-c, though. And I think the skill, the sense, the competitiveness are all very excited. I think he's even a much better prospect than Nazar and any Benson and all those guys were at the same age too.

Like Vigo, what he's accomplished over the last two years deserves a ton of respect. I think he's a better skating version of Benson who also happens to play center. Yeah. Yeah, I'm fully on board with this. You know, I think that Vigo, to me, Vigo has the best hockey sense in the draft. I think that he's one of the smartest overall players. He just knows how to play. And I say it every time I watch him,

Guy just knows how to play hockey, which seems like the most basic kind of analysis, but it's just like he plays it at a level that is above most of his peers in terms of how he processes and how he, you know, the decisions that he makes and also just that competitive drive that he has is special. So, yeah, I've, so where does he land then? Where does he land on our list? Scott, why don't you offer the first possibility?

Yeah, I'd like him ahead of Verhof. I would even listen to him at sort of five or six ahead of Carls. Corey? I'm fine with him ahead of Carl's. And I'd put him ahead of Malhotra, but I think I'm going to lose that one. So I'm fine with him right in between Malhotra and Carl's. Okay. Yeah, I mean, I think that sounds good.

I like that. I wouldn't, yeah, I mean, I wouldn't, like I said, I wouldn't, I think these guys in this four to eight range here are interchangeable. So I wouldn't even fight the Malhotra versus Bjork fight. So I could be persuaded of that too. We told the guys to come ready to compromise. I'm a little thrown off. This is a lot of voluntary compromise.

People almost asking to compromise. I'll tell you what, Max, here's why. because it just it really doesn't matter at this like they're really that close i mean like that's the thing is like i don't recall a time where we could have this level of conversation around and they're all different positions they're all different you know like ages sizes all these different things and i i think part of that is because what's coming in a like later one we're not even going to talk about those picks is like a massacist. compared to whatever whatever is happening up here because this is this is this is close everything else

is a crapshoot all right so here's here's where we stand is as i understand that someone correct me if i've mischaracterized tier one gavin mckenna ivar stenberg chase read tier two albert smits caleb malhotra vigo bork carson carles keaton verhoff anybody out of order there from what i just said nope sounds right to me and then i think the next kind of like consensus name that I'm guessing we all like a lot as Daxon Rudolph. Yep. Yep. To me, he'd be at the bottom of that

list. He'd be behind Verhoff. He'd be behind Carls. Does anybody have Rudolph higher than that? I don't have him higher, but I do think he has played well enough to be at the back of that tier rather than the start of the next one. Like, I like it

as a nine-player tier. If you guys are comfortable with that... I think that... Or a six-player tier that extends to I should say. I think people's, he's a really exciting prospect because of the tools. Like he's six, two and a half measured at the combine. He could skate. He's got legit skill, legit playmaking ability.

I think the concern for people is that he's a little tentative defensively. He's not very physical. Now, I've made analogies with him to like Thomas Harley at the same age. I think that was the charisma on Harley. He's not, you know, he's a little aggressive offensively. He doesn't defend very hard. plays a ton of minutes, etc.

But where's the defensive impact? So, but for me, I think Rudolph still has enough holes in his game to where I'd probably want him at the back end of this group. Does anybody not want him in tier two?

No, I would like him in tier two. Yeah, yeah, I think tier two at the end of tier two. His playoffs kind of sealed that for me. Yeah, this is a guy who bombs the puck, too. I mean, this is going to be a volume shooter from the point. That's kind of a theme

with this year's defenseman. It's interesting that, you know, it's a lot of shooters back there. But I think we're all pretty sold on Daxon. And I think, and he's the guy along with Chase Reed, who I think teams feel like have the best chance of this top group to be a power play, one guy in the NHL. Yeah. Mm-hmm. All right. So we will slot Daxon, Rudolph in at the number nine spot at the end of tier two. Anyone have a qualm with that? All right. That's no yeses. So we are on to the 10th player to nominate. Chris is. Is it your turn to nominate someone here? I believe it is.

And I think I may be going off a little bit off the board from where we were before. I, you know, I'm on the fence about nominating him for Tier 2, but I am really among the people that have warmed greatly to Wyatt Cullen as my next person, at least on the list, whether he's in Tier 2 or Tier 3, is kind of irrelevant to me because I think that I feel very comfortable with all the guys we have in tier two. But I do think that Wyatt Cullen, with his late rise, a lot of the, so he's, you know, winger, more dynamic player, makes a lot of plays, you know, had this huge growth spurt over the last two years, going from basically 5 foot 5 to 6 foot 1 to, you know, essentially being, you know, a top player for an NTP team that was really poor this year,

didn't have a lot of excitement about it and certainly had a tough end to their season. But I look at the totality of tools, the fact that he grew, didn't lose that skill level, didn't lose that ability to make the plays that he does, and now is only going to be able to fill out that frame more and become a more well-rounded player. I think that Wyatt Cullen has the upside to be in this conversation. All right. So Chris nominates Wyatt Cullen here. We're at an interesting spot on the board at number 10, because we set out here to make a list

of 10. And I understand we're probably going to talk about one or two more players here. But in addition to Wyatt Cullen, who Chris has nominated, Corey, who do you think, who would you vote as the 10th player in this class? Is it Colin or is somebody else? Cullen, on my personal list, is 11. The one player who we didn't have, who would be ninth on my personal list, is multi-Gusufson. Gus of sin to me was, you know, I thought he was the best defenseman at the UA teens, a big reason why Sweden won a gold medal, measuring in at the common. And he was combine a six four and a half. He skates very well for his size. He can make a first pass. He's physical and competitive. To me, he has all the indications of potential top four defensemen at the

next level, a guy who's going to be playing a very premium role. You know, you look at what Brandon McNabb has been for Vegas right now. I could definitely see him playing that type of role for a winning team. And I would lean that over the top six sometimes enigmatic winger, but in Cullen, he's also the most, maybe one of the most dynamic players. in the draft outside of the McKenna Stenberg level of player. But that'd be my nomination. All right. So my nomination for the 10th spot would be Ethan Belches, the power winger out of

Windsor. I think it's a rare profile. I think, you know, the size, the power. I think there is real offense in his game. I understand the second half of the season didn't carry where it began. But I think when you talk about how, we talk about like premium positions and defense men and centers, I understand winger is not a premium position. But I would argue that this specific type of winger is as,

rare in the top six as a two-way center or a really good defenseman. So I would nominate Ethan Belches to be number 10. Scott, do you have anyone outside of that? Yeah. And no, I was going to say that. That was part of the Slavkovsky debate, I remember, a few years ago. Yeah. Scott, do you have anyone else besides Cullen Gustafs and Belches that you want to discuss for 10? Just to make it four for four on four different nominations, I would nominate my, Our top nine are my top nine here, but my 10th guy on my list is Ryan Lynn, so I will nominate Ryan Lynn. I think Ryan is the smartest defenseman in this class.

I think he's one of the most well-rounded defensemen in this class. I think he's extremely competitive. I think he skates well. I think he sees the ice well. I think he can make plays at international events. I think he's been every bit as good as Carson Carls and Keaton Verhof when they've played on the same teams going all the way back to U-7 teams. And certainly from a production standpoint, he's been highly productive on a poorer team than some of those guys have played on in Vancouver with the Giants.

I think he's going to go to Denver next year and prove that he belongs at the back of this sort of big cluster of D-Men. I think he's in that same range as them. Although Gustafsson's right there for me too. Like Gustafsson and Lynn are really close for me, but I have Lynn ahead of Gustafson. How would you compare Lynn to some of the other kind of defensive? of his profile in recent seasons. Axel Sandine Pelica, Nils Lungfist a little bit,

he's probably more physical than Lundkfest. Some of these kind of like mobile, smaller puck moving types who have gone teens. I thought of Cam York too for him. That's another good one. Yep. I think there's a little bit of Cam York. Cam York feels like the closest of those names that you just mentioned.

I think he's a better prospect at this age than ASP and you go down the list, Victor Soderstrum, some of those guys that have struggled to live up to where they're, they were drafted. I just think he's more well-rounded and more polished at this age than any of a lot, and frankly,

significantly more well-rounded and more polished at this age than a lot of those kids were. Like, I think he's got a real chance to be like a Josh Morrissey type. Like, that's the kind of belief that I have in the player. Okay. All right. So let's break this up into the two-wingers and the two-D, and then we'll have one winger and one-D at the end of this to choose from.

We're only looking for one player here. So the order for Elevonon is not. not the goal here. So Belches versus Cullen, Corey, did you want to weigh in on that one? I would probably lean Cullen just because I feel like he's more dynamic. Like there's a skating and a skill gap there. Otherwise, I agree with what you're trying to say, Max, that the size, physicality combination is really intriguing. But I feel like there's the talent. And now that Cullen was officially measured at 6-1 at the Combine, like, to me, his profile is just very exciting, even though his production does scare me this high,

but I feel like if you're putting a 10 on your list, it's not as scary. So that would be my lean currently. I'm in the same boat as Chris and Corey on it too. I lean Cullen over Belchese. They're close for me, but Cullen may well run the half wall on an NHL power play, and there's not a lot of guys in any draft class

that you can say that about. All right. So Cullen is going to advance to our, final deliberation. Let's go to the D side of this. Chris, did you want to weigh in on multi-Gustifson versus Ryan Lynn? Well, I have Gustafson as my next player right after Colin on my list. And I think the size profile, the physicality, all those different things, like I think that's a real separator, the fact that he's near, you know, six, almost six, five at this point and has the mobility that he does. I think it's just, to me, it's a bit of a safer projection.

and I will say that I think that Ryan Lynn is among the smartest defensemen in this class. I won't dispute that at all. I think that that's a valuable commodity. I think he's going to be a very good player. They're not as close on my personal list. You know, I have Gustafsson here. So I would definitely lean Gustafson. All right.

So is it, are we at Gustafsson and Cullen? Sounds like. What do you think? Yeah, I'm good. I mean, it's a, I think close, but I would. would go with Gustafson there. So Gustafson and Cullen are the two we have to debate. Not as easy to compare apples to orange as the D to the winger.

Corey, you nominated Gustafson. Chris, you nominated Cullen. Scott, I'll give you the first word on settling this. I lean Cullen here. Again, just because of the skill level, I do think there is a question of absolute ceiling with Gustafson. I think he's going to be a very good middle pairing two-way defenseman in the NHL.

I'm not sure that we've seen enough. from him against, whether that's at the professional level or even internationally, where he's been very, very good for them. And he's even run their power play over guys like Axel Olibson or very skilled D-Men. But I'm not sure we've seen, I'm not sure I've seen enough offense to justify swatting him ahead of a winger that I think can be a high-end, high-end point-producing winger in the league. Corey, do you want to respond to that? I just feel, I feel like Colin, one of the,

I feel like there's some risk that he's actually going to be that. He's never actually produced anywhere. So I think that's one minor concern, even though I think he has a chance to be a really productive, dynamic player at the next level. I just feel like premium positions. I think Gusison is going to be a top board offenseman in the league. And like I got to be really convinced the winger is different. And I'm not sure there's,

I haven't seen the evidence with Cullen in that regard yet. I would say in terms of the production question with Cullen. He was on maybe the worst NTP team ever. I mean, like, it's up there. Very low production of a team struggled. He was still over a point per game player on that team, which I think is an accomplishment. On top of that, also had dealt with injuries earlier in the season.

He's also September 8th birthday. Yeah, he's one week away from not being eligible for this draft. And then also in his, you know, in his youth days, he was always, is the most productive player on his teams. I love that matters. He's right in this mix for me. I'm just saying like if I had to, I think,

don't think, I think there's just like with every player, there's risks in all of profiles. And this is the risk in this player. You're drafting a score who's never actually scored. I mean, he has scored though. Like that's not,

not the level of a top 10 pick where you're placing him right now. I know. You look at NTDP history. he's not close to like where guys who go in this ranger he could be like sunny milano for all you know like that's you know that's the risk most for the for the record multi gust of sin has also not scored at the level of a top 10 no but but i'm not telling you who's going to run a power play in the nchel right but i mean like i think if you're if you're if you're convinced that multi gustavson is going to be you know a top like i think like there's a ton of value if he's a top 4d and

cullen is a second line wing i'll take the top 4d no problem you know but like i think that the... So you think Cullen's a top line wing? I think Cullen has the ceiling to be a potential top line winger. Yes, we don't have as much evidence. That's a huge risk in the projection. But I look at the dynamic scale. Like, like, let's get him on a decent team and see what, what happens. Because like, Sonny Milano had Jack Eichel. You know, so it's like, you know, those are the, those are the differences that we're talking about. Like, I think this team's, like, looking at the historic numbers for this team versus every other NTDP team is, is foolhardy.

Is the golfer's going to be a good team next year? They'll be better than what he had this year. I'll tell you that much. I think what's interesting about Colin is, especially for me, who I'm probably in like, you know, a lower tier,

obviously, of when I watch these guys. Colin performed at every big event. And that's kind of coloring how I see him, but you do, you pull up the numbers, Corey. You kept talking about how he doesn't score.

I'm like, I feel like he was the MVP of like half of these big showcases this year. But it's, it is, you know, it's point per game. at the NTDP, which is, you know, to your point, that's producing, but it's not big time production. So it makes for an interesting kind of assessment, especially if you've only kind of

followed the big events this year. Yeah. We got to pick a number 10 here, guys, so we're at the point where we've got to vote. It feels like we're going to call in here, just based on reading the room. Chris, Colin, Scott? Corey? Gustafson. I think I want to go Gustafson, too. But I came into a thinking Cullen, but I think Corey kind of won me over with his argument there. So we are at a 2-2 here. I feel pretty ambivalent here.

I'm pretty willing to compromise. But does either of you two, why have any interest in changing the vote? They're back-to-back on my list, so it really doesn't. My thing is, like, I think there's a real world where Augustifson's like a 4-D. And I think, like, when you talk about top 4, but it's the 4, like, there's a little bit of sizzle that's lost there. But to Corey's point. What if he's like Braden Schneider, Caden Gouley, like that profile? That's what I mean. Yeah. Like, Kate and Gulley's, I think, a good version of that.

It's a good player. It's a good player. It's not a sexy top 10 pick. A producer Chris has decided he's going to break the tie for us. He said, Cullen is never going to score as much as you want. I'm going multi. From the rafters. He just wants us to wrap this conversation. He's like, get out of here. I think that might be true. Yeah. And I'm fine with that. Thank you, Chris, for saving us from ourselves. And to be clear, this is in tier three, or are we in tier two here? We're tier two. I would say tier three for all of the, yeah. Chris? I don't know.

It's three for me. I'm not there on Gustafson. All right. So our final board here through all of this deliberation and debate, tier one, Gavin McKenna at number one, Evar Stenberg at number two, Chase Reed at number three. Tier two, Albert Smiths at number four, Caleb Malthy. Hota at number five, Vigo Bjork at number six, Carson Carl's at number seven, Keaton Verhoff at number eight, Daxon Rudolph at number nine, and Tier three, Maltigustafson at number 10. The other players we

discussed, Ethan Belches, Wyatt Cullen, and Ryan Lynn, so those would presumably be the next three names in some order. That is going to do it for us today. Thanks for listening to this episode of the Fletakaki Show Prospect Series. I am amazed that we did this in one hour, fellas. Thank you for all the all the great compromise, all the great work. And fans, remember, you can catch more of Chris over at Flohockey on his podcast called up. Much more content from Scott and Corey on Theethletic.com. We'll talk to you soon.