The Athletic Hockey Show - Sharks celebrate Macklin Celebrini 1st overall in the NHL Draft

Episode Date: June 29, 2024

Max Bultman, Scott Wheeler and Corey Pronman recap the first round of the NHL draft from the Sphere in Vegas with Macklin Celebrini going first overall to the Sharks. The guys discuss some of the picks that stood out to them including the Duck surprise pick Beckett Sennecke at 3, Tig Iginla at number 6 by the Utah Hockey Club, Zeev Buium at 12 by the Wild, Cole Eiserman 20th overall to the Islanders, Dean Letourneau at 25 by the Bruins and Matvei Gridin at 28 by the Flames.  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This is the Athletic Hockey Show Prospect Series. Hey, everybody, Max Boltman here alongside Scott Wheeler and Corey Pranman from the Sphere. The first round of the 2024 NHL draft just wrapped up. And it started off chalk. Macklin Celebrini, no surprise. We felt like it was Artem Levinov to Chicago, and it was. But it was at number three where we started to get a little bit more fun. The Anaheim Ducks, as Scott Wheeler said, on our pre-draft show yesterday,

There was buzz about this, and it was Beckett Seneca for the duck, Scott. Yeah, I mean, we've talked about Beckett a lot on the pot over the last several months. Beckett was the riser in this draft. Teague Ginlow was probably the closest thing in terms of where these kids were at pre-draft. Teage was even lower. Beckett was viewed kind of as a late first rounder amongst those I spoke to in the front half of this season. Then he just took off. It was an unbelievable run for him in the second half of the season and into the playoffs for Oshawa.

I don't hate it. Like, I don't hate it. It feels a little early for me, but they need to, if you look at their pool and where they're, where they're at as an organization. Wasn't he like 15th for you on your list? Yeah, he was 16th on my list. So you don't hate it? Well, I don't hate it because that, it always felt like that range from really after

the big dogs right through, it felt like it was not interchangeable, but like it was close. And they need to, you look at their pool, they need a right shot winger. It's one of the things that within their group, their young group in the NHL and within their pool, that sort of right shot winger is one of the things that's quote unquote missing. There is some risk associated with his statistical profile and where he's at, but with the size, the skating, the skill, we've talked about it, the room to fill out that six foot three frame now. There's some real potential there. So wouldn't have been my pick there, but no, I don't hate it.

I'd love to see what you do hate with a third overall. How long with the guys go on your list for you to hate it? But, you know, the Seneca buzz really started picking up in NHL circles right after the U18 World's Papua Beak was over there, the general manager for the Anaheim Ducks.

And immediately after coming back from Finland, he spotted in North Bay for a couple of games watching Beckett Seneca. And right when that was happening, the buzz started, okay, we don't know, you never know. we're doing the mock draft. We don't know, like, where guys fit in teams and mix. You start hearing rumors about who the short list are, but we never know. But we started figuring that Seneca was in the shortlist at some point.

And like I get the argument. We talked about this before. In that guy, he is dynamic. Like the toolkit he has, he's one of the most purely skilled players in this draft class while being 6'3, while being a good skater. Like he had some dominant games. I would have liked to see it a little. bit more consistently.

This trajectory with the groves spurty had, the second half in the playoffs he has, it reminds me a lot of Ryan Johansson, who went fifth overall, who also didn't have a huge regular season, also a little over a point per game. The similar type of argument, we'll see how Seneca's career goes, but I get the upside and the talent-based portion of the argument. So here's my only question here on that is Scott mentioned they had a need for a right-shot winger. I think I could argue that they had a much bigger need for a number one defenseman, a big-time defenseman. Maybe Pavel Minchikov can be that. But were you surprised that they didn't go

that route? Well, I think a lot of teams would tell you with Ivan Demadoff and with Anton Salaf, they felt uneasy. They felt uneasy because they didn't have the live viewings. Montreal did get the live viewings at Ivan Demadov. Their head scout, Nick Bobrov, went over to Russia. I think he was one of the very few North American executives who did that. and so they got to that comfort level but I think with Saliaf, I think they liked Saliav but I can understand for them,

for Columbus, for Utah, et cetera, why it was just a level of discomfort with that when using a major asset. That being said, they did get a very similar type of defenseman

in Stuy and Solberger 23, who I love, who I think it's going to be a top four hard play games defensemen who will complement all the skilled defensemen they have. And, you know,

in the background of all this, yet again, a draft where there's a lot of trade buzz, but no actual trades, we do figure at some point, Trevor Zegrois. Not none. This year there were a couple. I'm talking trades of real substance. Sure.

There was a one pick jump. There was a next year pick traded. It was not super significant. My point was that we suspect at some point in the next, you know, one to two years, Trevor Zegress is probably going to get traded from Anaheim. And that could be an opportunity for them to try to address some of that defense needs in their organization. But listen, I don't know. what they thought of Seneca. I don't know what

Papua Bique thought of Seneca. But the people who love Seneca, like, love him, say he could be a 90-point player. He could be a hundred-point player. They think he's got, like, star potential. If you believe that, then it's no longer a matter of position. It's a matter of he's clearly the best player available in your eyes.

I think Solberg, just quickly, I think Solberg is also just a natural fit with the Pavl Minto Yukov, with Nolan Selweger. They get something a little bit different in Steyon Solberg, relative to the other young players that they have on the blue line there. So part of the reason I didn't hate Benick Beckett at three is because I think in getting

Solberg, you're getting someone who was maybe not in the conversation for every team in terms of that big group of 60 that we've talked about all year. But when I did my survey of NHL Scouts last week, he was the consensus number seven guy, even over, over year check, who obviously ended up going in front of him here. But I think the Solberg pick is a really, really nice get late in the first round there. The next big decision point, and we talked about this pick, I think, as much as any almost, maybe as much as the Chicago pick in the lead up to this draft, was Montreal at five. They do take Ivan Demadov.

And Scott, I know you love their draft because at 21, they come back and get Michael Hage, a massive infusion of skill to their system. Big time. One winger, one center. I think this could be a huge, huge day for the future of that franchise. When you look at the way that they're built, a ton of good players, everybody likes Nick Suzuki. they needed a little bit of that juice. And this was their best opportunity to add it.

I think they hope not to be back here moving forward. Now, everybody says that. We'll see who's bad next year. Also, Demadov won't be on the team next year. No, but the idea of Demadov and Michael Hage being a part of that group moving forward, I think H legitimately has an opportunity to become a second-line player in the league. That's the kind of talent that I think we're talking about. He's one of the better skaters in the draft.

He's one of the more talented forwards in the draft from a skill standpoint. I think he's going to really pop at Michigan and be given an opportunity to really pop at Michigan under Brandon Nerato. And Demadov, I mean, we've spoken about. You guys know how I feel about Demadov. I think he's the second best player in this draft class and a high, high-end talent. We were talking about Beckett Seneca of if you're a believer in him, he could be a 90-point player. I believe Ivan Demadov has an opportunity to be that. And frankly, Nick Suzuki and you're,

Slavkovsky, who are great players, they may never get there. So having Demadov to potentially be that leading score on a team, that top dog from a point producing standpoint, I think it could change the way that that franchise looks long term. And you look at now their power play with Coff Field and Suzuki, Demadov, Slavkovsky. You know, we'll see how Lane Hudson hits if he become that true top power play guy or not. But now you're starting to see a foundation come together in Montreal. all. You know, I, you know, we had a lot of Demadoff conversations throughout the year. And obviously, you know, we had to discuss it in the context of two, about five, like, this guy's got star scoring

potential. And, you know, it's a very nice day from Montreal as they try to progress and get to the other side of this rebuild. All right. So number six, I think, was another pick that really stood out to me. Tejiganlet at six, I think that's as high as we had even discussed him. Maybe there was a little peripheral talk higher than that, but six is about as high as he was going to And he does go there to Utah. And he was a guy where there was some divide in the NHL over him. Like, some didn't have him in that mix. I think Tisha Ginnla versus Berkeley Caden was a debate in the NHL all year.

You know, it's kind of fitting that they go basically one spot away from each other in the actual draft. I think with a Gindler, everybody sees the high-end skill he has, the goal-scoring ability, the compete, the skating. I think with a Gindler, the question for some was, is the hockey sense that the play-making good enough to go in that range? Some believed he was that good. You know, when I've talked to NHL people throughout the year, some thought he was the second best forward in the entire draft. And that would be the reason why.

They thought the hockey sense was an asset. Some had some questions. They see him more just a pure shooter. You know, maybe a more competitive version of what Cole Eisenman is, essentially. And I think with the Ginnler, what's going to be really interesting for him going forward is, is he a center or a wing? Because people believe he's going to play center next year in the Western Hockey League. And if that's the case, it changes the profile a little bit.

I want to see how he handles that and how he would do, say, at a world junior level and where he would slot him a lot of position-wise. It's worth noting, too. I think I know that Columbus and Montreal both liked him. So they didn't take him in that range, but it seems like teams were in that range were considering Utah wasn't alone in liking him that high. We're sitting five or six rows from the top of the sphere here, guys, looking out at this board. And it is notable that as they project this thing over whatever the size of this screen is, the top 14 whatever order you might have thought they would go in. These are pretty much the 14 names that we thought we were going to see in the early part of this draft.

The one exception to that, maybe Jet Lucenko, but we had talked about that there was buzz for him in the teens. The surprise, Corey, might be that Carter Yakumchuk is the second D on the board. And I don't know that, I mean, I know you had him the second D on your list. I don't know that you even had that in any mock drafts. No, I did. And I thought maybe Anton Salaya would go ahead of it, maybe Sam Dickinson or Zeevon. Boyn would go ahead of him. I'll talk about Lechenko quickly for a second before we get to Yakovchuk.

I think I mentioned either one of the articles we did or on a podcast. And I said, if Frank Nazar can go 13, I don't see why Jet Lechenko can't go that high. I thought there was a lot of similarities between those two players and the skating, the compete, you know, being maybe not dynamic offensively, but good enough offensively. And sure enough, they go in exactly the same spot in the draft. And we'll see how Lechenko projects out, same thing with Nazar. But that's interesting in that regard. Yakimchuk, I mean, you know, for me, it was always 6-3 defensemen with high-end skill,

who scored 30 goals, who are athletic enough, go in the top 10 of the NHL draft, and should go even higher into the top 10 of the NHL draft. And I kept coming back to that. I didn't know where he was going to end up. But when I watched that player this year, he was one of the most dynamic players I saw, a skill set that was rare and stood out to you constantly. and I just thought it was ridiculous how low he was being talked about in the public discourse. For me, he was always clearly one of the premier prospects in this draft.

But that being said, you could ask some people, and they would have said, well, clearly Anton Soliov is one of the best players in this draft, or clearly Sam Dickinson or Steve Boym is one of the best players. But, you know, and somebody said about Seneke or Lindstrom or Demadov, I think there was that group of 12, 13 players, and maybe for every team that wasn't always this exact same third team, maybe plus or minus one or two players go in and out of it. But they were always going to have those guys in a little bit of different order.

But ultimately, the right players went on the board. And what I thought was kind of a tame first round in terms of surprises, outside maybe one or two players that went later. Scott, the flip side of that is that Zeev Boullum ends up being the sixth of that group of six. And if you had had me pick, I guess I wouldn't have picked Lev Shinov to be the six. But other than that, I think Zeve might have been the one that I said there's no way he's the last of these guys picked when you look at what he did in the NCAA this year. My scout survey this year, not to keep going back to it, but my scout survey this year was rank the top 60. Who's your top D and who's your 60?

And coincidentally, Ziv Boyam appeared in zero. He was the only of the 60 to appear in none of those answers. So nobody had him ranked amongst the 20 people I spoke to. Nobody had him ranked one and nobody had him ranked six. So to see him go six speaks to the fact that maybe... 12, sixth among the D. Speaks to the fact that maybe everybody kind of had him. But somebody had to go six.

Yeah, somebody had to. And maybe everybody had him fourth or fifth. And there was a guy who they had third when it was their turn in line. And as a result, he sort of lingered a little bit. And I think Minnesota gets a heck of a player and great value. When something like that happens, I start sending some text around the draft floor. Is there a medical thing I miss? Is there a character thing I missed?

And my understanding was Eve, as the answer to all those questions were no. I think it was just some people didn't see Elite 604. defeat. I don't think people were loved the defensive play at times, but I think you could have said the same thing about Zane Perrick. I think the profiles are really similar in that regard, but you can only pick one player, and obviously Calgary preferred Parick over Boeum. I think they

liked both players a lot, and you know, in New Jersey preferred Salaia. I thought it was interesting that San Jose went for Dickinson instead of Boeum, but he's a good player too, and I can see the argument there. So just the way it worked out is you know, I think if

Salaya would have gone 12, we would have been talking about that a ton too. If people think Zeev Boyam can't defend, I honestly to God, don't know what player they were watching. I thought this year in the second half... I think it's more about the NHL projection because of the size. Yeah.

I mean, he swallowed up the best players in the country defensively in the Frozen Four and I don't dispute that. I love Zeeve. It's just, but I, listen, 6-0 defensemen, it's tough. I understand the concerns there were both him and Parick. But listen, I love, like, he was like, He was like, whatever, five or something on my list.

I think he's a great player. But that was something I was hearing consistently throughout the season. Is there one pick here that's, that I know we're talking about that's the same names, but is there one pick here, Corey, that stands out to you and say that one I don't get? Consta Heleneas 14 to Buffalo. And I had him 14th on my list. I don't have a problem with the player. I have a problem with the strategy.

They've got like 20 of these guys now that they've picked in the top two rounds, 5-11, 6-0, 5-10 forwards. and I'm sure they would tell you, well, we just took the best player available and we'll figure it out later. But the problem is, everybody knows you have to figure it out later. Because when it comes to, like, defensemen, let's say they would take an Amirichick or Stein Solberg. And they'd say, well, they have a lot of defensemen, too. Yeah, but you can find a place in the lineup for Adam Erichick. He doesn't need to be on a power play. Consta Heleneas needs to be on your power play to maximize his value. Just like Isaac Rosen does, just like Noah

Oslin does, just like Matt Savoy does, and Yuri Kulich. And there's a lot of and John Jason Petirka and Zach Benson and all those guys and I think they're really backing themselves into a corner here where they're going to have to trade some of these guys at some point and I don't think they're going to get full market value on them and maybe they had them rated super high

and they just thought it was massive value like they thought was Zach Benson last year but I do wonder what the long-term strategy is for them other than just drafting a Ford lineup full of 5-11 guys. I think there's a quantity issue for them almost regardless of who they draft. They're still going to have to move some of those guys. There's not going, whether they took a different, whether they took a Michael Bransick

knee guard or a different forward in that range. But I think Michael Branson and Neegard had a path into the bottom six for them. That would be more legitimate. I don't think Consta Helena is going to be a bottom six forward in the NHL. I think with his detail and his work ethic, if he's a 3C at some point for them and then moves up to become a 2C for them, I think there's a pass. I agree with the 3C part. I just don't know if he's like a fourth line wing in the NHL.

No. No. No. But you're hoping to not draft a fourth line wing at 14. I just think we're having. But they had Savoy and Oslin and all those guys in that range. Some of them are not going to be able to play in your top nine. You run out of spots. One thing I do appreciate about the Hellenius pick is given their timeline,

given their desire to get better, he is one of the players who's closer. Now, whether or not there's a job available to Corey's point in terms of the log jam that's happening there with the young players is a completely different thing. But there are people who believe that he's going to come over and play pro hockey in North America, if not next year, than the year after. And so he does fit into that sort of accelerated. He's not a guy they're going to have to wait on for three, four years.

Let's take a quick break right there. We'll come back and talk about some of the final picks. All right, we're back. Let's move to the other half of the board here, which is neatly divided into a column for us here. And the capitals at number 17, Corey, took a name that I frankly did not expect to see this early in the draft. I know Scott did have him, I think, in the top 20, right around 20. But Terrick Parishack to Washington. And the first thing that came to mind is this is the same team that took Andrew Crystal last year.

Same thing that took Andrew Crystal, same team that took Hendrix Lapierre, same team that took Conner-McMichael. I don't think they really care whether they take guys who are 5-11-60 and our elite skaters. There's a premium clearly being made in their forward group with on skill and hockey sense. And he has a ton of skill in hockey sense. What do you have, what do you have 100 points this year or something? 105. Yeah, that's a massive number. And you can debate whether that was, how much was him and how much was that was the Prince George Powerplay machine.

that was rolling all year, but obviously he's an excellent player. And, you know, I thought he had a good chance to be a middle six-wing, help of power play in the NHL. But for me, that's a lot of risk at 17. Like, it's a lot of, like, I don't know. Like, when I watched that Prince George team, he was clearly really good, but I never felt he was driving the bus on that team. I never felt like he was the reason they were winning games.

He was the reason the power play was going. He's obviously, and then the skating is a minor concern. It was the same issue as Riley Heights. I think his profile is really similar to Riley High, quite frankly. Riley High goes to the end of the second round last year, and this guy goes to 17. I'm not really sure what's significantly different between those two players on the same team. I think he's a good player.

I think he could play in the NHL, but with his feet, he's going to need to be so smart and so skilled at 5'1 foot 11 on the wing to have a meaningful NHL career, and time will tell whether that happens or not. I honestly don't have a major issue with his feet. It's something I've heard about all years, sort of below average skater. He tested extremely well at the CHL testing at the top prospects game. He was one of the fastest players in all of the drills there.

He did really well in the agility stuff at the combine. Is this like Arthur Calliiff, like being the best backwards skater kind of testing? No, no, this is the testing that they did it. And not just on. No, that's what I was going to say. Arthur Calliath. I was going to say Arthur Calliiff tested really well. I think Brett Lieson also tested really well.

Also happened to be a Washington pick, and he also can't skate. I'm not sure how much I trust that stuff. I mean, when I watch that team, he's a right place, right time player all year long. He skates well. I thought he skated well. He created breakways for himself. He actually kind of reminds me, coincidentally, a lot of Gabe Perot. Now, the skill level isn't in the stratosphere that Gabe Perra was in, but he played on a line

with two drivers, played on a line with two very, very good players in Zach, Funk and Andre Becker. I think we're going to see Andre Becker get drafted tomorrow. Coincidentally, Zach Funk was signed as a free agent by the Washington Capitals, so he stays within the same organization. And the more I watched him this season, the more I felt the way I did about Gabe Perrault a year ago, where a lot of questions about, was he, was he a passenger on that line? I think he was every bit as important to the breakout seasons that Zach Funk and Andre Becker had as they were to the season that he had, obviously, as a rookie in the league this year. So I would have taken a

Sasha B'averer or Michael Hage. There were players there that I liked better who went shortly after Terek. But I think he belongs in the sort of late teens, mid-20s conversation. At 18, Corey's Chicago did take Sasha Buevaire, one of the players

Scott just mentioned. And Chicago end up making three first round picks in it, by the way. They trade up and take Merrick Van Acker at number 27. But Bovare, the thing I think is notable about this pick is that he's a little different type of center than the one they've taken. And the past couple years with Nazar and Moore. Yeah, and you got Colton Dock the organization, too, who I like to.

Boyver's got a little bit more size to him. He's a good two-way player. He skates well. There is some offense there is some offense there is some offence there is some people who really, really like him, think there might be even more offense than he showed this year. This was the buzz that on Boyverer going into the draft. I thought I had heard from quite a few teams that thought there's a chance he goes

in the top 20. Not the top 20 is going to go in the early 20s. Some people think this guy can be a middle-six center in the NHL. If you really like him, I even heard second-line center, I'm guessing Chicago, might agree with that assess. by taking him at 18. I see him more as a 3C, but he's a good player,

and he was expected to go in this range. It's actually, coincidentally, it's not hard to imagine Sashy Boat Bear and Merrick Vaneker are playing together. Right. The style that they play, they could be two pieces

of a good third line for that team long term, I think. At number 20 is Cole Eisenman, and this was a name that I think a lot of fans were keyed into from the jump. Understandably, he went into this year as a top five, arguably top three prospect

in this class. He ends up going 20 to the Islanders. My question, Scott, is, Is this, if Islanders fans out there listening, is this rhymes of Oliver Walsstrom or is this something different? And Kiefer Bellows. Yeah. It's a natural, it's a natural comparison because of the goal scoring tilt, the NTDP, the lack of a B game. I think Cole Eisenman's a much better score than both of those kids were.

I think his premium skill grade, the shot gets a higher grade than both of those kids. He scored 50 more goals than both of them over the course of two seasons. Now, Kiefer Bellows only played one season at the program. but 50 something more goals than Oliver Wallstrom in the same approximately the same number of games played. He was a much more productive player. His one-timer is a higher quality. Like I think we're talking about a better goal score.

I think we've talked about it. I think Cole Eisenman's going to score a lot of goals in the NHL. Oliver Wallstrom hasn't. There are certainly some similarities. I think I think Eisenman's a higher grade prospect. I mean, I like the pick for them and that I like the player. I didn't like him in the top 10 or top 50. I liked him at 20.

I think you give you the top six four in the NHL. And I like him because the Islanders need offense. They need skill. They need scoring. That being said, in their pool that way. That being said, they in part need scoring because Oliver Walshroom hasn't panned out. Fair enough. At number 25, I thought, was one of the biggest swings of this draft.

And I know you guys did feel this player could go in this range. But Dean Lettono at 25 to Boston, Boston's a team that does not have a high-end farm system. They do at least give themselves a chance at a, at a rare kind of profile. All right, Boston fans, you're going to sit down and take a deep breath for this one. I like Dean Laterno. I think he was a good pick at 25,

and I think he's got a really good chance to be a meaningful NHL player for you in a few years. I mean, he's huge, he skates really well for his size, he's got skill. It's tough to assess his skill at the prep level, but when you look at the guys who've come through St. Andrews, he ranks right up at the top in terms of the historical scoring at that program.

He's the most talented player I've watched at SACC including Warren Vogel who was just in there. He's going to school next year. Some people don't love that, but he's going to school next year of Boston College. We'll see how that goes. But if he hits the ground running and if the offense meaningfully translates,

that you're talking about a guy who could be a really important prospect. If he had gone in the USHL this year and he had gotten 50, 60 points, he's going top 12. But he didn't. So he didn't. Just like if Ivan Devonnell had gone to the KHL and ripped it up, he might have gone two, but he didn't.

He went five. So that's the distinction with Laterno. Now, Laterno may go to college next year and get his teeth kicked in, but we don't know. I like the swing. I like the talent. He's a unique prospect. And I think a 25 was a very reasonable decision by Boston. The one name I heard a couple of times this week in terms of a little bit of concern about

Latourneau was Logan Brown, who was drafted in that top 15 range that Corey's talking about by the Ottawa senators and just never really put it together. He had the finesse skill. He had the length. He didn't move like Latourneau. I think that's the distinction. Littorno's a more athletic player. He was softer than Lutrano too, I thought.

I think the big concern, the biggest concern I think teams have about Littorno is that he's soft. I think Lerno really does not get after it in any kind of way. Yeah, I'm not saying it's as big as asset. I didn't have a major concern. But again, that's the issue with Lutrano. I don't know what his computers. I don't know what his hockey sense is. because the player he plays against just aren't good.

It's not a level that pushes him in a really meaningful way. He could kind of at that level he could sleepwalk through a game and get three points. It's a really tough level to assess, but you see there's obvious talent there. I'm going to say this. I don't want people to think I'm making a comparison to Tage Thompson here. What I'll say is, remember the lesson of Tage Thompson, that a guy of this size is going to take a long time, whichever way it's going to go. If he's not immediately a star, you mentioned he could get his teeth kicked in in college next year, Corey.

That will not be the end of Dean Laterno necessarily. No, and Tage Thompson, you know, didn't really have a huge year in his draft year in college. He got his points, but there was worries about the all-round play and how he would just have higher levels. And obviously, as time went on, he ended up hitting and becoming a very good NHL player. So we'll see with Dean, but I do like the talent. All right. Well, one last thing I want to hit here, guys, and then we've got to go right. But Motvee Green at number 28, Scott, was the leading score in the USHL. And there were two guys in this draft class in that same league who went at 19 and 21,

Trevor Connell and Michael Hage. Matt Vigridden outscored both of them. What's Calgary getting here? Yeah, frankly, I just like generally what Calgary did. Their pool really lacks high-end skill. They've got some very good players coming. Conner's Ary's a good player. Samuel Honsick's a good player.

Matt Coronado's a good player. But they don't have that sort of game-breaking skill type. So I liked them going after Zane Perrek and Matt Vey-Gridden. I had Matt Vey Gridden in the early second round on my list. I had him kind of between 33 and 36, 37 on my list all years. year long, but it is hard to, as you mentioned, it is extremely hard to lead the USHL in scoring in your draft year. He has some skill. Ironically, the concern about both Perrek and Griden is sort of whether they have the well-roundedness, whether they're going to be able to play pro hockey

in a pro-style game. But skill-wise, both of those guys give that pool something that I think it sorely lacked. And they could, if they hit, be impact offensive players. One last thing from a player is not on the board. I think we largely expected Igor Chertershap to go in the first round today. He does not. Igor Surin goes 22 overall. Igor Chernerchap does not go. People like the player.

He is 6-2. He skates well. He has offense. He played well in the KHL in brief ice time this year. But I think there was some attitude concerns on the player that definitely was accentuated by the sunburn incident. I referenced on the last podcast where he basically missed all of the Milstein camp in front of all the NHL evaluators.

because he basically was going out right before the camp and got a massive sunburn that prevented him and prohibited him from being able to play. So that's, in my opinion, is why you don't see him on top of the usual factors, him being Russian, et cetera, et cetera. But I thought that was one of the most interesting players that we didn't see go in the top 32 today. You know, we mentioned the Russian factor plenty,

that it's always a variable. Every team will take things a little bit different. and I think that was always a theme with this draft too in terms of things being different is because that group from I would say 2 to 13 was always so close we had great debates is Lindstrom going to have the offense

what do with Demadoff skating what do you do with the Ackhamtooks all around plays is catten big enough does Salive have the offense does Boeeman correct to fend well enough is Dickinson smart enough we had all these debates throughout this season but I think if you really would have rearranged the draft order in any random way

that top 13 players would have been a completely different order. Like, we had talked all in the lead about Chicago and Lev Schnappers versus Demadov. There were plenty of teams they didn't have either of those players in their top three or top four. But it just so happened that these were the teams that we ended up with in the specific order and thus we got the draft order we got. All right, that seems like a good place to leave it. That's going to do it for us today from the first round of the 2024 NHL draft. We're going to have more for you tomorrow after rounds two through seven. So check back here. We'll talk to you then.