The Athletic Hockey Show - NHL Redrafts: 2025, 2024, 2023

Episode Date: August 24, 2026

The guys deep dive back into the past three NHL Drafts, 2025, 2024, and 2023, and discuss how projections have changed over time for players like Ilya Protas, James Hagens, Matvei Michkov, and Charlie Stramel, and what the draft orders should have looked like in hindsight.Hosts: Max Bultman and Corey PronmanExecutive 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 Bulbin here alongside the athletics, Corey Prondman, for another episode of the Athletic Hockey Show Prospect Series. We got some redrafts today, 2023, 2024, 2025. We're looking back. Corey just had a series of stories out on the athletic, breaking down those classes. And there's some big movement here, Corey. We can just kind of get right into it in this process here.

And it's, let's start with the most recent one. there's probably the least major movement here. But we'll start right at the top with Matthew Schaefer. The big difference here in Matthew Schaefer is not that he's the number one prospect, it's that you have him in really kind of rare air, that NHL star tier. Yeah, and I think going into the draft, the conversation was between him and Michael Mesa, who went second overall to the Sharks. And we, I think in the media, even with teams, they thought like, okay, this is reasonably close.

So I think almost every evaluator I talked to in the NHL still had Schaefer out one or the clear one, but they didn't think it was like a gigantic gap between the two players. Like people, there were plenty of people I talked to in the league who thought Misa could be a number one center in the NHL. So that by itself would lend to a very high projection for a player. I still think people think that he could be number one center, although not on the sharks, obviously. but, you know, in the year since that's passed, I think Misa, he struggled at the start, didn't have a great world juniors, had a very good second half, though, for the sharks. I still think I'm high on this, you know, you're high on this player, he's looks like a premium young center prospect. But as everyone knows, the Calder Trophy winning Shafer had just an absolutely monster year.

and the level of offense he showed right out of the gate as a very young 18-year-old, I think he's like an August or September birth date and for what he did last season and with the go with the great skating and the size and the competitiveness and the tremendous character this guy has overall like he looks like one of the premier young players in the league I want to, you know, if you, I think after Celebrini, if you said who would you want to build a team around for the next 10 and 15 years, I think a lot of people are going to name him, quite frankly. And yeah, the gap right now is not even close. It's funny. Like San Jose had the second pick in this draft. Can you imagine if the sharks had gotten Matthew Schaefer and they were building around Celebrini and Schaefer, who for as much as the word generational gets misused, those are the two guys of the last decade who would best fit the label.

at their positions. Right. It'd be cross, be Malkin, but in a slightly different variation. Yeah, unbelievable. Where would you rank Schaefer

among activity? I mean, it's a little bit of an offshoot from what this exercise was, but the NHL just kind of came out with their NHL network just came out with their rankings. And Schaefer's already, I think he was seven on that list.

And I wanted to be like, that seems early for that, but what do you think? Well, you know, we were just going through this exercise for Team Canada. We were making a Team Canada. He's on our team.

right? Yeah. So right there, that's top six Canadian D. USA has quite a few good defensemen. So is he a top 4D on team USA? Like, is he putting him over Rewski over Quinn Hughes, like probably not over, you know, even over slaving? We end up leaving slaving off that team, I think.

I know, I know, but it's just you and I now talking kind of thing. So I would guess no. So that's still top 10. Then you got to put like Dowling in there. You got to put Hayskin in there. So I would say like 7 to 13 sounds right to me. All right. Where would you have them?

I think right around 10. I just think it's early to elevate over some. Like I think he was above Sanderson on that list. And that one to me, it's like I think that's a very similar stuff. style of player. Schaefer may end up having a little more offense than Sanderson, but Sanderson's offense is already pretty elite. When you go back and look at what Jake

Sanderson did last year, if he didn't miss those 15 games or whatever it was, I think he's potentially top three for the Norris, but at least top five. He had every bit the underlying numbers that Cider and Hayeskin did, and better offensive production last year. I think he's a guy that gets slept on.

I'm trying to think who else he was above. I think Ottawa, if they would just gotten a couple of saves last year, there's a little lot of things on that team that could have been perceived differently. Yeah, no, absolutely. All right, continue to move through that 2025 class. The big riser at the very top of the draft. And again, when we're talking the top of the draft, big movement can be just a few

spots. It's Porter Martone getting in between Misa and Anton Frundel in that second tier. He comes at at number three on this redraft. Martone just wowed at the end of the year. Yeah, and both, you know, had a great year at Michigan State and in obviously in the NHL. It's really the NHL stuff that kind of moved the needle, how he looked in the regular season, how he looked in the playoffs. The big thing with Martin was always how is the skating going to look at the next level. And it's very early, and you've got to keep watching and keep

seeing how he adjust year over year. But early on, he showed that I think the pace was not too fast for him. I'm not saying his skating is an asset in the NHL, but when you consider how smart he is and how hard he works and his size, like I think he's got the traits to be a legit top line wink. So that top couple grouping, Schaefer in Tier 1, Misa Martone, Frundell, in Tier 2, there's no surprises there. But when we get into the next tier here, which is bubble top and middle of the lineup player, ranks 5 to 11, all of a sudden there's some names that I don't know that people are going to necessarily have been expecting here.

Again, at the top of that tier, Denoye O'Brien, no surprises. McQueen, not really a surprise. Even Kajon Acheson, you know, he goes a little higher than he did in the real draft. But you start getting into Jack Nesbit at number nine, and we still haven't said the names James Hagan's, Brady Martin, Ben Kindle, who played a lot in the NHL last year. What does the guy like Nesbit do to jump some of those names? I think people will be surprised by Nesbit because his production in the OHL was just like around a little over a point per game last year.

But you're looking at the projection of a player who is, you know, a skilled big man. It's not high-end skill, but you saw at the World Junior Summer Showcase. He's got some skill. And he's very physical. and when you look at what that can project to in four or five years, like there's a lot of qualities in his game that you can see transitioning into being a valuable NHL center, even if his skating isn't great,

even if the creativity in his game isn't fantastic, like yeah, does Martin land louder hits and does guys like a Hagen's or Cole Reshney make flashier plays, for sure. But I think, you know, those guys are, are 510, 511. This guy's about 6 foot 5. I think when he gets to playing versus men,

I like how his game could translate to the higher levels. I think of someone like a Morgan Geeky, for example, and I could see a lot of similarities between their games. It's interesting because he went 12 in the actual draft. So 9 on this redraft is really not that different in neighborhood. But there was such a reaction to him going 12 in the original draft that to see him actually higher on this list, I think, is the notable thing. Yeah.

And I think we talked about this back. back then. Like, that was not his perception in the league. The league loved the player. Like,

if he did, if, Philly didn't take him, he was going one or two picks later. And there was a bunch of interest in that player at the time.

And I don't, I don't think that, I think even despite the fact he didn't have a great year, I don't think the interest has faded just because, you know, he was still a top player

on a top OHL team. Last year, he was a big part of of why Windsor won a lot of games. So I think the projection is still fairly strong for this player, even if his offense

isn't spectacular. He went one pick after Ben Kindle in the actual draft that year. And Kindle, for my money, probably the best relative to draft spot kind of season anyone had out of this group. How could you do better than being a second or third line center in the NHL for a lot of the last season? He comes in a little bit lower here than I was expecting. It's a very similar conversation to what we discussed with Zach Benson on the show a week ago, in that I think Kindle had a great year. I think he's going to have a very,

I think he's going to have a long career. I think he's going to produce a lot of points. I do wonder if the offense is special, special out of him, which I still have some minor reservations about. I think he's going to have pretty good offense. He's competitive. I don't think he's like, I think he's a good skater. I don't think he's an elite skating, five, ten guy.

Like, I do wonder what the projection of that is, ultimately unless he is like you like you've made the conversation of uh the other day we talked about like these two-way centers like can they get to like a sirelli type yeah um like i do wonder like unless he's like that kind of premier two-way player i don't know if the offense is going to be special enough to be like that kind of guy you win with in the playoffs but i do i can see that he's going to have more points than some of the guys that i have ranked ahead of him and we will go back to some of those guys higher on the list kendall comes in at 19 20's Cole Reshney, another guy who I thought maybe would be a little higher,

especially after we just watched him at the World Year's Summer Showcase. He was Canada's best center at that event. And that's right where he went in the draft. So then I would ask you, like, what's the difference between Kindle and Reshney? Other than the fact that I know Kendall did in the NHL, like obviously that's a major point in his favor. But if you looked at the five, six-year projection for these players, stylistically, what's the big difference between them?

You'd probably say Kindle may be a little more natural of a matchup center, or Reshny a little more offense, but I get your point that it probably nets out to being similar. You know, you're probably talking about a second line player, a second line wing probably for Reshny and Kindle, it's a two or three C. Yeah, that's kind of what I think. I think there are third line centers, second line wings, depending on where they end up. Yeah. All right.

Let's move back up the list then. Number 10 is Josh Ravensbergen. And the goalie going high in the draft is always a subject. of much debate. Ravensburg didn't go that high. He went 30, but still a first-round goalie, which is kind of continuing to get rarer. And to see one jump up a list like this is always notable.

Well, he was a guy I had rated in this range coming into his draft year after he had a spectacular draft minus one year. And then he struggled in his draft season. But there was still like he's big, he's really athletic, he's twitchy, like you just wish he was a little bit more consistent. And then this past season, he was great.

He was one of the best goalies in the CHL. you know he's you know the CHL obviously is a little bit especially the Western League was a little bit watered down relative to past years but I still think you look at the athleticism you look at the ability to make high difficulty saves you look at a lot more consistency in terms of his reads and his tracking and then like I think he just ticks all the boxes of what you potentially wanted in a starting NHL goaltender Alexander Zorovsky

I mean Montreal's we talked about it with obviously with their 2022 class and finding Lane Hudson, they find another second round find in Alexander Zorowski. He comes in at number 11 here after being a second round pick. Yep, a guy whose skill level just jumps out right at you when you watch him. He was very good in the KHL as an 18-year-old. He was very productive at a very high level, makes a lot of plays. He's not just a skilled guy, though. He can attack.

He's direct. Good skater. Lot there to like as a potential top six winger at the next level. You're going to want to see if he can back it up this season. But presuming he does, I think the value for this player will continue to go up as maybe even a potential trade ship for the Montreal Canadiens. Yeah. All right.

I want to talk about some guys who really elevated themselves. But before we do it, there's a cluster of players 12 to 14. This is in the middle of the lineup tier. James Hagen's Brady, Martin, Reddy, Merca, all top 10 picks. they're not that far outside the top 10 here. We're talking about ranks 12 to 14 in this cluster. But when you have a top 10 pick and your guy moves the opposite direction, it's a notable thing for fans out there. And I think particularly with Hagan, Martin, I think everyone understands that the year did not pop.

The offense did not pop. Same with Merca. And same with Merca. Hagen's did have a good college season. There's always been the questions. And I think maybe you were kind of trending this direction on him even before the draft. But let's just talk about kind of where James Hagan's. stands.

Hagan's is a tough evaluation because to your point, Mex, he had a highly productive year at Boston College. There's a couple of things there I kind of balance with Hagan's. One, I thought his, you know, despite the fact he had a good world juniors, he wasn't great there. I thought when he turned pro, he was just okay at the higher levels. So, and I do still have some concerns on how he gets to the inside and how his game is going to translate up levels,

despite the fact he's a great skater, already has a ton of skill. So it's kind of like a balancing act with him. I could see still a top six wing. I'm not sure what have you thought what you've watched Higgins. Do you see a top six sender? Because like that's been a struggle for me. No, I agree with you.

What I've seen is like I see a player who I think has maybe more inside elements to his game than I was giving him credit for. And I don't know if that was a missivelle the first time around. But just he's around the net like a pretty good amount. It's just less electric quality. And I think for a center of that. size, you've got to have that. And we've always talked about him in relative terms to Loden Cooley and Jack Hughes.

I don't know if it's the NTDP, the body type, whatever. But it doesn't have that kind of single solo creation feel to me that those other two do. And so I think maybe you're talking about seeing him as someone who kicks out to the wing and can be a really good offensive piece on the wing, but probably isn't going to drive your team as like a second line center. Right. It's probably more Keller than it is Hughes or Cooley. And even then, I don't know if he's quite as dynamic. Keller's got more zip, I think, too. Yeah.

That's what, yeah. So, yeah, that's kind of my struggle with him. Like, obviously, if he turned, you know, he's turning pro, if he kills it next year as a pro, then you have to revisit your assumptions there on how his game translates. But I do have some concerns there in terms of how he's going to fare against men. And I know Bruins fans won't like that. But I still think he's a really good player. It's just, I still have, I have some minor reservations that despite his highly productive

college season didn't quite answer those questions. So here's like a relevant one, right? Like, would you take him or Frank Naser? Probably Naser. And so I think that kind of speaks to the point, right? It's like, it's a similar kind of flavor, but I think Naser is a little faster. I think the skill level is probably similar, but Naser's Jam is even a level higher than that.

So I'm more confident that Naser would be a center. And so that kind of just kind of tells you. I'm just trying to think of like the centers that fit this mold and they don't end up looking that much like Hagen's in the end. There aren't many small centers in the NHL, period. And the ones who are either super competitive or they're extremely dynamic. And he kind of fits in the middle of that. So I think he probably ends up like a good 60-point wing.

And I think that's still a worthwhile player where the Boston Bruins drafted him. But it makes sense to me. One spot behind him is an opposite story here. Not one spot behind him. Sorry, a few spots behind him. Hagen's at 12. At number 15 is Benjamin Rauteainen. He's at number 15 after being 108 in the draft of the Lightning.

Tampa kind of built their dynasty by finding guys who outperformed to this level. What's Rauteinen doing to trend that way? Yeah, obviously, Rautei Annan is not a guy we discussed a ton, in part because most of the questions we get are from big market teams, and he's a Tampa prospect. He was also a draft plus two when he was drafted. So he was a 20-year-old when he had this big year in Liga, which quality has kind of dwindled a little bit in recent times,

but still had 77 points in 59 games in league, leading that league in scoring, extremely impressive campaign, high skill level, high hockey sense, you know, makes a ton of plays, good pace to his game. You know,

I think, you know, whenever you have like a 5-11-60 guy who is a good, not great skater, they can look like a dime a dozen type, but this guy looks like a little. different. I think there's, he's got a pretty good chance, I think, to be a middle six scoring wink in the NHL guy who can help a power play. And it's why I think Tampa Systems in, you know,

all right shape. I'd like him. I like Connor Geeky. I really like Sam O'Reilly, who we're going to get to in the next segment. I'm not saying they have a ton of guys, but they got enough to either help transition them into the NHL for the next few years or use them as trade chips to potentially go out and get some help to try and make one or two last runs with this aging core. All right. Well, let's take a break right there. And you said it.

We'll come back. We're going to do 2024. All right. We are back. We are moving now into the 2024 redraft Corey. No surprise at the top. Macklin Celebrini is in a tier of his own, elite NHL player. Back at Seneca and Ivan Demadov, two guys who jostled in that Calder race this year,

both had outstanding rookie seasons together in a tier at numbers two and three. Seneca two, Demadov three. And then it starts to get interesting. When I think about the 2024 draft class, yes, it's defined by Sellebrini. But the hype in it was all about this group of defensemen and what order they were going to go in. And we're talking about Ziv Bouyev. We're talking about Anton Selyev. We're talking about Artem Levchenov, who actually went number two.

Zane Perak, who went nine, Sam Dickinson, who went 11. It was a really splashy group of defensemen. And yet, the defenseman who is listed first on your redraft in a tier of his own at number four is Cole Hudson. I'll get into my rationale for why that is, but I'm kind of curious for your opinion, Max, because Boyam, Leveschunov, Dickinson, Perrick,

all played in the NHL this past year. Hudson played, whatever was, 10, 12 games. 14, yeah. From what you saw, who did you, not how you'd rank him, but just from what you saw,

who do you think was the most impressive defensemen from this group in the NHL last season? Well, Hudson, in the games he played, was the most effective, productive, right? I still think Dickinson's tools are something to really watch. Now, you do question what the ultimate ceiling is there just because of the kind of vision, creativity element to that.

But I do think when you six three and skate like that, it has a lot of advantages. And I think, you know, I'm not giving up on Artem Leveshanov either. I think there's huge upside in this game. But I get where you're going with this because I think Cole Hudson, in his 14 game sample, small as it may have been, seemed like he had the least trouble transitioning to the league, which is usually a really good sign. Yeah, it's not just 14 games. He had two fantastic years in college too, and it's easy to compare him, obviously, to his brother

and how he did a BU and his early transition into the NHL. And, you know, maybe not Dickens, but you compare him to say Parick, you compare him to Lev Shunov, you compare him to Boyam. Guys were supposed to be these offensively tilted players. And I thought when I watched those, and now at those end of the season,

games could always be deceiving. a little bit. But Washington was pushing. This wasn't like this was like a bad team or whatever. Yep. So, you know, I looked at how Hudson played and I saw a difference maker right away, not a guy who was shy, not a guy who was struggling. Like, I thought he looked impactful right from the get-go. I think that's most interesting, like, in contrast to Booiam, because Booiam was the guy that I was most sure was going to just, because with the way he transitioned into college hockey and how good he was as a freshman in college hockey, I kind of just expected, obviously not to, the degree. Like, Kalachaki is a different thing from the NHL. But I kind of expected William to just come in and be just as fearless, just as effective immediately. I'm not saying he was

afraid when he got into the league, but it wasn't the same Zeeb Bouillon, like assertiveness that I expected to see right in the NHL. And he's got the mid-season trade. Right. He's got the mid-season trade that I think disrupts things too. And I don't know that it's, you know, we may see a very different Zeebubium when he starts from, from, you know, zero in Vancouver. But that's the one that I think I expected to be, and he's, I think he's your number two on this group. Yeah, he's at number five, one spot behind Hudson, albeit in a different tier. He's the one I'm most watching to kind of get back on track. And I think their games are quite comparable. Both are not elite skaters, but they're good skaters. They're both extremely intelligent and creative. They both defend okay, despite the size.

I think there is some, there's some similarities between the two players, Hudson and Boyham, but Hudson, I just think, showed better against men, despite in a much more limited sample. So you rank Levchanov down at 18, and when you go from 2 to 18, that's a huge swing. What are you and aren't you seeing with Levshanov? What are the big fears and where is there still room for confidence here? Well, that's why I compared him to Perrick and compared him to Boyham. And it's like, because this is a guy who, despite the fact he is 6-2, 6-2 and a half, he's supposed to be a guy who's supposed to be known for his offense. He definitely hasn't shown that he's been known for his defense as a pro.

So you look at him, you say, okay, well, then he must have a lot of offense. And I think that offense and his playmaking has been inconsistent as a pro. And really, you know, between his American league games and his NHL games, he has not really been, you know, a dynamo. He's been good offensively. I don't know if I consider him, like I said, a dynamic offensive player to go with so-so defensive play. And it's like, okay, well, then what's, you're just kind of banking on the tools here, which is still a really good toolkit,

but I think you'd want a little bit more certainty there, especially since he's like a good skater, he's not like a Sam Dickinson level skater. What I'm holding on to with Lev Shanov, and at the time of this draft, Noah Dobson was coming off the best season of his career. He was a top 10 Norris finisher. He was a point per game defender.

And I think that was my comp form. I don't remember if that was your comp form at the time. It would have been within the range, I think. Yeah, yeah, I think so, yeah. So Noah Dobson didn't get to the NHL until he was in his age 20 season. He only played 34 games that year. The islanders really managed him carefully. It wasn't until he was 22 that he really popped and had a big year.

And I'm hoping that if that comparison had merit to it, that it's really just that Artim Levshinov's getting thrown into the fire earlier. And it's going to kind of be able to work these things out. Different philosophy to developing him. I think the islanders were kind of pulling him in one game out the other, not that dissimilar to how the ducks. did with Leo Carlson. That's kind of what I'm holding on to. I think it's perfectly reasonable, but then the question becomes, like, would you take, if you make a trade today, would you take him over, no, boy, would you take him over Hudson?

Would you take him over Dickinson? Like, those are questions that I think would, I would struggle with, just given the data we have so far. Obviously, if he has, like, 50, 60 points next year, right? He's 6-2, and he could skate, then obviously he leaves back into being a premium young player. especially given how much Chicago has struggled. He's had every opportunity there to try and help and elevate that team. It's not like the Islanders back then with Dobson,

where they were, you know, they'll a little bit more competitive. So I have some reservations, but it's... I still really think he's going to be a 50 plus point D. Where I've moved on him, if at all, is I thought he was going to be a 50 point D who you trusted in defensive situations, and I'm less sure about that element today than I was. Yeah, I agree with that. I think he gets to a good offense.

The question is, given his D isn't great. rate is can he get to that 60-70 point level, which I'm less certain on right now. This isn't interesting. And we've done some of this as we've done these redrafts, talked about some bigger picture lessons. But Luke Hughes is a guy who had obvious offense in college. And when I watched him, I would always go, okay, he's really special. But man, there's some defensive moments that scare the crap out of me. And I was more hesitant on Luke than you for that reason. And with Lev Shanov, I kind of just decided, you know what, I just think this is going to work out. But I think there are some rhymes in those two games there where there's a little bit of,

you know, there's great offensive skill set. And Luke's is obviously even more dynamic than Lefshadoves. But there's a real push and pull to that offensive and defensive game. And I've always generally kind of assumed like the offense is going to win out as they get in. It may still with Luke. He's still pretty young player. But I wonder if there's a lesson to be learned there about you do want to see a little more baseline defensive game, even at a young age. I would argue that Luke's skating was a tier higher too. Like that's like I think like his skating is elite, whereas I think left schoenov is just like pretty good. Yeah, that's totally fair.

All right. So one of the other interesting elements of this class is how many guys from later in it have already moved into the very high echelons here. Ilya Proto is number six on your redraft list. He went 75 initially. Igor Chernoshov went in the second round. He's at number seven. Sam O'Reilly was the last pick of the first round. He's at number eight.

Julius Mietnan went in the second round. he's at number nine. I don't have to, you don't have to talk about them as a cluster, but is there anything in that group that really stands out as notable?

Chernoshov's year in the NHL last year was excellent for a young player. Yeah, I don't think Chernishov surprised people who loved him because I think he just fell because of like some weird stuff

that happened at the end of the year there where he couldn't participate in the Milstein camp because he got sunburnt and like he just it rub people the wrong way. And also he didn't end his year great. over in Russia.

There was a combination of factors, but he still saw, he was still really productive over in Russia over, over his couple of year career there playing between the MHL and the KHL, big, fast, competitive. Like, there were some indicators there. Sam O'Reilly, you know, still a first round pick. Obviously, the offense has developed more than people expected. MVP of the OHL regular season playoffs to go with the big, you know,

the way he plays heavy, the competitive two-way style. Like, there's a lot. there to like to. Ilya Pradesh is the one that I think really stunned some people and how quickly he developed. Like you could go back and look at his season. He was, I think, like, well under a point per game in the USHL in his draft year. Now, and I think like the first half of the year, he was getting like healthy scratched

in what, and some at points for his USHL team, Des Moines, I think. And then second half of the year, he would think it was closer to a point per game. He was getting a little bit more productive. But the transition he made from USHL to being a dominant OHL player, almost from the get-go for Windsor. And then right from the OHL is a 19-year-old to being a dominant American League player. And he goes to the American League, he does reasonably well in the NHL. For a guy who's not a great skater, like, the show that kind of ability to play up levels that quickly

shows, you know, great hockey sense, you know, a really strong drive. in this player's game. And I mean, it's hard to doubt this player at this point. Like, it's all he does every year is just get dramatically better year after year. So the tier is bubble, top, and middle of the lineup player. And if you're at the top of that tier, I got to assume you're toward the top of that bubble. Does that mean you think Ilya Proto can be a, like, legit second line center on a good team? Yes.

All right. I mean, that's a huge find for Washington. And they've pulled off this rebuild on the fly about. as well as I can imagine a team doing it. It's been extremely impressive. I mean, just him and Hudson in the same draft, I think just significantly changes their future outlook, especially at those positions, D and center,

because they had drafted a ton of wings with first round picks up until they drafted Oliver Savanto this summer. And to find a center prospect and a D prospect, that looks like they could be, you know, premium young players, both in the second round. I think pros was pros in the third round? O.A. Prodos was the 75th pick. So yeah, mid-mid third round. Yeah. So at that point in the draft, like I said, that changes things significantly for their future outlook.

Another third rounder from that year who ends up really high on this list at number 11 is Thomas Levois from the Utah Mammoth. And this is not a name that I'm super versed on. I imagine our audience is not super versed on. But number 11 on your list, that's a really high placement here. Yeah, well, he was a former number one overall pick in his Q draft. there were some questions on his offense going into his season and you don't want to overreact too much to a 19 year old pointing in the queue

like that's not like a huge development at times but he had a really strong year in the queue really good playoffs there for Shakutomi one of the better defensemen in the queue overall this past season I thought he should have been on the world junior team kind of surprised he wasn't 6'4 you could skate

makes a reliable first pass good point shot very physical player this is a guy look at a similar player like Maverick Lamru who Utah drafted that I don't think there's that much of a difference between the two players

and I think Lamru is going to play in the NHL I think this guy's going to play in the NHL there's a lot to like there I think and obviously there's going to be a big what if we'll see how much offense comes with him to the American League next season that's the one real question in this guy's game

but I thought he when I watched Shakutu to me towards the end of the year there like he just like kept jumping out on me like he was like I thought like borderline dominant I thought in some of those games for in the queue playoffs so like I just got really sold by this player and like I said D one of the big storylines of this class right above him is Adam Yurecheck who was kind of at the fringe of that top group that we had talked about that year he ends up going number 16 but there were moments especially he got hurt at the world juniors I remember

it looked like he had a chance to elevate himself into that group of six defense that we talked so much about, he ends up as the third defenseman on this list behind Cole Hudson and Z. Buya. Yeah, I mean, after Aitchison, you could argue he was the second best defenseman in the OHL last season. You know, big, fast, physical, has, you know, good puck moving ability, good point shot, good hockey sense. I think he has every indication he could be a top four defensive for the blues one day.

All right. That's the 2024 class. So we're going to take another word break. We'll come back with 2023. All right, we are back. We'll close it out today with the 2023 class, Corey. And really the headline here is pretty chalky. Connor Bedard, tier of his own at number one.

Leo Carlson, the debate was Carlson or Fantillion at two? It was Carlson on draft date. It's Carlson here. He is in a tier of his own that feels notable. Fantelli, though, in a tier of his own at three. Will Smith went four. He's still four. And then, you know, you start to get a little bit of variation,

but it's still seven of the top eight picks on the actual draft are your top seven today. Which is a little unusual in that usually as time goes by, this is the draft that furthest out from when the draft actually happened. You know, this is three years now. Usually you see some variation, but I think that speaks to particularly that top, you know, those top five forwards, which were Bedard,

Fantilli, Carlson, Smith, Mitchcoff, that they were so high up there that even if they fell off a little bit, the drop could only be so much. And they were such premium players that it would be hard, I think, to unseat them unless somebody just had an absolutely monster rise or they had just a disastrous fall. It does feel notable that Mitchkoff stays exactly at 7 because when that pick gets made, it's under the assumption that he's got this contract in Russia. He's not going to be able to come over for a while.

that actually changes. He comes over much faster than anyone anticipated and has a outstanding rookie year. And so naturally you're thinking, all right, this guy's going to be, is he going to be three, four? But then he has the rocky year last season. And he ends up seemingly exactly where he's supposed to be, seven on draft day, seven on this list. What did you think of that, like, where I had him? Would you get him over Smith? Would you get him over Leonard? Like, that's kind of the conversation. I don't think I'd be ready to get him over Smith. I think the conversation starts with Leonard at five, but I do get that there's elements to Ryan Leonard's game.

I think Mitchkoff's going to score more than Leonard throughout their careers. I think you agree with that. But there's elements to Leonard's game where I don't think a coach is ever going to hesitate to throw Ryan Leonard on the ice in an important situation, especially a year or two from now once he's really established in this league. That may still be true of Mitchcoff. So I think I can argue him up to five. And I understand why you highlight Smith.

I think there's kind of a similar, you know, skill perimeter flavor there. but I do think Smith's technical ability to play the center and just, I don't know. Better athlete. Yeah, like the skating. So that's where I would lean to Smith. To me, the conversation starts at five, but I don't really have that much of a problem with it at seven.

The one I think people will really pick a knit with is Simashev being over him. Well, there's a reason Simishev went so high on draft day is that he's this huge defenseman. He's like six five, six five and a half. He can really skate. He's very competitive. And you look at the offense, he showed in the American League this year.

He was like, what, like, and you're a point per game player in the American League as a 20-year-old? Like, this is, to me, this is another Simon Edvinson. Like, this to me is, like, he's a premium young defenseman. He's a guy who I think is going to play major two-way minutes in the NHL. And that is super valuable. It's just, I think it's hard for people sometimes, and including for me, to put guys who it's still projection over guys who have this much kind of body of work now in the two seasons of body of work in the NHL.

Yeah, I think that comes down to the position a little bit too. Like if he, like, you know, Sanders and D, I always tend to have a preference for. And I just think if, I think Simishev's got a really good chance to be like a number 2D in the NHL. Yeah. And I just think if he hits that, like, I'd rather take that over. Well, the issue of Mitchcoff is there was a point where I was thinking special wing, like first line 80, 90 points.

wing. I'm thinking now more like 60-70, which is still first line. It is, but if that's the case, I'd rather take the number 2D. That totally fair. Another Russian winger comes in right behind Michkov, and I think this is one of the stories of the class, is that you think that Madhvi Mischkov's going to be the Russian winger who really outshines, and he looks like it's pretty much par. Roman Kanserov goes in the second round to the Blackhawks. He's just one pick after Mitchcove when you're redrafted at number eight. And he was a dominant player in the K-H,

this past year. One of the best players on one of the best teams. Doesn't play the game like Mitchcoff. Mitchcoff is about skill and hockey sense. This guy is about his compete. He's direct. He's, you know, on the same team that drafted Frank Nazar, he plays a lot like Nazar, albeit more as a winger. Like, he's very, you know, very competitive, very good around the net. But, you know, you look at the offense he's shown versus men already.

I kind of feel pretty confident he's going to score the NHL. Is he going to be an elite scorer? I don't know. Is he middle six? Is he top six? Time will tell. But I think he's got a really good chance to help Chicago win games. At number nine is a player that two years ago, I don't think either of us would have imagined,

is in the top ten on this list. And that's Charlie Stramel. When he got to Michigan State after his first couple years at Wisconsin, at that point, I think you're kind of just hoping this guy's still going to make it, still going to play in the NHL. But for him to now be in this tier, the bubble of the top and middle of the lineup, up right behind names like Mitchikov and Kansarov.

Charlie Stramel has really gotten himself back on track. He looks like the guy he was coming into his draft year. He was one of the best players and one of the best teams in college hockey last year, really for two years running at Michigan State. He was a top six center for them playing a lot of important minutes. He's big, he's fast, he's really physical. And, you know, the offense wasn't fantastic, but he scored at a reasonable level of college.

And I think the way he plays gives you a lot of really strong feelings that he's going to be able to take some of that offense to the pro level, that he could be a middle six center who can, you know, PK, second power play, physical, playoff style centerman wins really good at faceoffs. Like there's a lot of things in his game that are very attractive. And given how, given that the level he played at in college, hockey, I feel pretty confident he's going to be a good pro. Another NCDP guy that I think overlapped with Stramel in this class is Danny Nelson,

and he was a second round pick in this class at 49 for the Islanders. He's at number 17 now. I mainly bring him up, not because I think 17 is like a surprising place for Danny Nelson. He's had a pretty good post-draft trajectory, but because his brother is in this current class, Sammy, and could be one of the more interesting names in it. I mostly wanted to draw, Like, where do you think that the overlap and where are the differences between Sammy and Danny? They're both big. They both skate well. They're both physical.

I just think Sammy has more office. I think with Danny, you're always going to wonder, like, even, I think he's going to play. But I think he always wonders he ever more than like a third line center. What is all said and done? Third line, wing, third line center. His hockey sense has always been kind of average. I think with Sammy, he's got good hockey sense. Big shot.

And, yeah, great shot, great offense. Not like fantastic offense. but I think there is more natural scoring in his game than there is the Danny's. Yeah. All right. Earlier in the show, I mentioned how chalky it is. And that's going to probably limit the length of this segment here. Like I said, seven of the top eight, still the top seven.

Obviously, that means one has dropped a little bit. And that's David Reimbocker. He hasn't dropped a ton. But from 5 to 14 in that range of the draft, every pick does kind of count. I don't think David Reimbacher's been bad. It's just that he hasn't maybe had some of the. the sex appeal to what he's done since the draft. Yeah, I think that's fair.

Part of that has been injuries. He's been hurt a lot over the last few years. He was mostly healthy this past year. He was fairly productive. He played a big role on a top American League team in LaValle. I think when you watch Ryan Bacher, you do wonder, like, what does he ultimately project as? Is he a tough minutes guy?

Is he a PK guy? Is he a power play guy? That's kind of always been what he is. He's like, does it all type of play. player, which I still think is valuable, but I also have watched him and I have wondered, when I saw him in his draft year, I saw really good offense. I saw a really physical, hard to play against guy. He didn't just check every box.

He checked a lot of them with emphasis. I haven't seen that emphasis as much lately. I'm kind of wondering what he ultimately is going to be, but I think some of the parts could still lead to him being like, you know, a number four defenseman in the NHL. Which I think if he can be that, that's really all Montreal needs him to be at this point when you find a Hudson, you have Gully. Obviously, ideally, if he found a way to blossom into a two, three, that's a perfect world. But as long as he's in the top four, that's really all Montreal needs.

Yeah, you know, ideally a little bit more than that, especially since they took him before Simechev, but I get what you're saying. Well, if you have Hudson as your, you know, top pair guy and kind of your driver, ideally, yeah, you have a guy who matches up and is also a true top pair guy next to him. But a lot of the number ones in this league end up playing with guys who you might call a second pair D. And it just kind of works out, especially if the role fit is as obvious as Ryanbacher would be to Hudson. Right. I think the question with Montreal is like other than Gully, who are their quote unquote playoff style defenders? And that's where I think you've got to hope Ryanbacker kind of embraces that jam a little bit more in his game.

Yeah. All right. That's the 2023 class. So that is going to do it for us today on this redraft episode of the Athleticocococ. show prospect series. Remember, you can read all of these on The Athletic.com, and actually, I would really recommend you do so. Plenty of players that we did not get into today that I'm sure you're wanting to hear about. They are in the redrafts, most likely. A couple of them dropped out of the first rounds entirely. But you can read that on Theathletic.com. We'll talk to you soon.