The Athletic Hockey Show - Will the Blackhawks pick Levshunov or Demidov in this year’s draft?

Episode Date: June 7, 2024

On today’s Prospect Series episode of The Athletic Hockey Show, Max, Corey, and Scott discuss Corey’s 2024 NHL Mock Draft 2.0 and answer a bunch of great listener questions in the mailbag.Before that, The Athletic’s own Scott Powers joins the show to talk about whether the Chicago Blackhawks are more likely to select Artyom Levshunov or Ivan Demidov with the No. 2 pick in this year’s draft. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This is the Athletic Hockey Show Prospect Series. Hey, everybody. Max Boltman here for another episode of the Athletic Hockey Show prospect series. We've got Corey Pronman and Scott Wheeler in Buffalo at the NHL Draft Combine. Chris Peters may or may not join us later in the show. He's just getting in. Some would say a more dedicated podcast host would have found a way even on the plane, but that's not for me to decide. In his place, though, for this first segment, we have the Athletic Chicago Blackhawks writer,

Scott Powers. in Buffalo for the combine. And we're going to start with you, Scott, because you got kind of the spotlight on your beat right now here. Yet again, it's not like last year where it's the number one overall pick. Instead, it's the first real decision of the draft at number two for Chicago. I know we in the public have really framed this as Ivan Demadov versus Artem Levsinov for that pick. I'm curious from what you're hearing, is that an accurate characterization? Is there more to this maybe than what we're framing it as so far? No, I think that that's what it is. It's certainly different than a year ago where you had kind of

Redard and you knew the Blackhugs were going to take. And yeah, it's, you know, I was asking around months, months ago, because you sort of knew that they were going to be within this picture of, you know, one through three, maybe four. But in all indications that this is the direction they were going. And I know they've, you know, looked at Lindstrom and Slyev and some of these players. and I think they like them, but when it comes down to it, you know, I think with the organization, the two greatest needs are probably, you know, more offensive punch. You have Connor Bardard. And then you have a lot of question marks.

They have a lot of players they've drafted in recent years and Oliver Moore and Frank Nazar and certainly guys who are a little bit further along like Lucas Reichel who didn't have the season that they hope but still are hopeful for. And the defensively, you know, they've spent a lot of resources into drafting defensemen in recent years, even going back to Stan Bowman. when he was GM, you know, they drafted, you know, Nolan Allen in the first round. And, you know, they like Wyatt Kaiser and Ethan Del Mastrow. And certainly they took Kevin Kaczynski's seventh overall a few years ago.

But probably lacking that number one defenseman, they have Seth Jones under contract for a while here. But at some point, he probably moves down the ladder a little bit. So you have that need for a guy who's going to play in all situations. And certainly Alex Velastix emergencies, has probably helped alleviate that a little bit more. I think when it comes down to it, and as much as, you know, I think Demadoff is the offensive player outside of Mack and Celebrini and certainly all these are discussions you guys have had. But I think that for the Blackhawks, how they're building their team and, you know, what they have and don't have. And so I think it comes down to those two players. And then, yeah, it just, you know, certainly all the questions you guys have been talking about, too, about just, you know, the Russian factor and, you know, being able to see these players.

and, you know, what can you get in the free agent market in the years ahead? So I think there's a number of directions that Blackhawks can still go, and I think they're still deciding. But, you know, if we're talking today, and I probably think they're going to go left Schenoff. And I think, Corey and I, you know, we've talked about this off here before and just agreed about just Blackhawks has spent a lot of resources, a lot of time into watching Michigan State this past year and really dissecting what he is as a player is as a player and projecting him out. And the fact that they, you know, they get to talk to Demadoff here in the next few weeks and maybe some of that clears up some of that picture. But I think based on, yeah, just all the homework they've done that left Schnapp, probably at this point is, is probably the safer pick for them and definitely still a need for that position.

So Scott and Corey, we got an article out Friday where you guys really debate this pick and these two players specifically. We kind of made you each pick aside, although I don't know, it kind of, you know, dovetails with your list. I don't think we had to force you too much into this. Corey, you argued for Artem Levschenov. Scott, you argued for Ivan Demadov. What I'd love to do here is kind of have you, you know, brief synopsis of your arguments and then kind of hear Scott adjudicate them. At the time we're recording this, he hasn't read the article yet.

So I just want you to kind of give him the bones of your arguments for Demadov and Levinov and hear what he thinks of him. We'll start with Corey here. Oh, yeah, sure. And with Levchunov, I think outside. of Macklin Celebrini. I think he has the cleanest profile of any player in this draft. I think he checks every box you want in an NHL prospect and many of them with emphasis. He is a big right-shot defenseman who skates very well. He has a ton of offensive skill and offensive hockey sense.

He is not a liability defensively. He has some physicality in his game. He killed penalties on a top college team and played major minutes and was leaned on in tough situations. for Michigan State put up huge numbers in the Big Ten as a draft eligible, you know, way past what players like Quinn Hughes and Owen Power did at the same age. There is no noticeable weakness in his game. I think he has the offense to run a first power play unit in the NHL. He's a very intelligent, very skilled defenseman who can score goals as well. There's a guy who's done it for two years at a really high level between this point in the

USHL and Green Bay in college of Michigan State after just being in Bello, Belarus junior hockey two years ago. It's a pretty steep upward trajectory for this player. He plays a premium position. And I think there's a lot of familiarity with this player for Chicago, having seen him live for the last two years. So I think there's a comfort with him. There is a lot of value in this player.

And I just think you can pick this player and sleep really easily at night. And I think he has the potential to become a star, number one, defenseman in the NHL. Scott, what do you think of that? Is that going to be? I mean, I know this is kind of what you said at the end of the last segment there. That's kind of your lean at this time as well. How much does that overlap with kind of your thought process and what you think the Blackhawks kind of thought process will be?

Yeah. I think that's, you know, at this point, you have the second overall pick and the Blackhawks, especially, you know, they've said, Kyle Davidson said after the season that they don't want to be in this place again. So, you know, with the second pick and, you know, I'm still thinking there's still, you know, picking the top five or six over the next few years, it's still not going to be. even if they do get better. But knowing you have the crack at, you know, one of the top players in this draft. And I think, you know, like the Blackhawks aren't going to take a risk.

So it's, you know, Demidoff in a lot of ways, and I'm sure Scott will get to this in a second. But, you know, Demadoff seems like a safe bet too. Where at his production level, you know, what he's done in the MHL is unprecedented. At least there haven't been many people who have done that before. So I think in some ways that, you know, like there should have. only less, you know, less risk as people make it. But I think Lepshenoff, at least from probably in the Blackhawk size, it's a little bit less risky.

And in the fact that they, you know, Kyle Davidson's gone to see him in Brian Campbell and Norm McIver and, you know, all the people that are sort of in, you know, that help, you know, one that Davidson likes to see players himself as much as you can, but also I think all the players who, all the people in the hockey ops who help him make those opinions. And the fact that Brian Campbell and Norm McIver, guys all who are former defensemen, too, too. I think, you know, maybe some of that plays into it a little bit as well where, you know, they certainly value that position and maybe bring a little bit more knowledge to it.

Surely Mike Donahy, the scouting director, too, will have a say too. But, yeah, I don't know. I think just the fact that those guys have been there so often and, yeah, all those other factors, I think Lepshinoff seems like the safer pick. But, and I certainly personally can probably be convinced. But, yeah, I'm curious what Scott has to say, too, because I know. know that I think I agree with him in a lot of ways too where I think I think Demadoff's a pretty special player and that's a huge upside. Change his mind wheels.

Yeah, I think first of all, I think I have to start with the sort of caution of look, I've had I've had Artenm Leves Shunov number two on my board longer this season than I've had Ivan Demadov. Demadov finished it too, but they've kind of been two, three for me all years. So I see the value in Livshunov. I don't necessarily see the same sort of smarts hockey sense. piece that Corey highlighted. I think he's still got some learning to do in terms of breeds and decision making and just sort of playing the game of hockey. That will come with reps.

Part of that goes back to what Corey said about the fact that, frankly, two years ago, he was playing in Belarus and he'd never played anywhere else. So there's just been a lot of learning of the game that's happened for him, both in Green Bay and I know at MSU this year and sort of speaking with their coaching staff over the course of the season. But in saying that, I mean, Leves Shunar, has owned it and taken off and sort of really developed at a rapid rate over the last 24 months. But coming back to Demadov, I think what what sold me on Demadov as the year progressed

is just that it's so hard to find, now it's hard to find premium D, but it's so hard to find pure skill point producing game breaking types offensively. You can find really good second line players at 7, 8, 9, 10 in the draft. You might occasionally even find a star player if they're back in that kind of a range picking in the future. But this is quite likely their best and only chance to draft a player who isn't going to be an equal to Connor Badard, but who has an opportunity to be a true star forward in the league. And you look around the league, most of the best teams in the league have two of those guys. They've got a Badard, and then they've got that other sort of point per game potential sort of $9, $10 million player

a long term. And I think Demadov has a real opportunity to be that. And I think they just might not have another chance in the draft to go out and get that. I also think Kevin Kornski and Alex Blasik and those guys have helped to sort of strengthen the back end. Hopefully Sam Renzel can become a piece of the puzzle for them. Ethan Del Mastro had a really positive year. Now, none of those guys are going to be what our Tim Leibchunov is capable of becoming.

but I don't think Frank Nazar or Oliver Moore or the other types who are coming at forward are anywhere close to what you might be getting in Ivan Demadov. And if Ivan Demadov can become a Panarin or a Caprazad, like some of the guys that we've talked about in the past, those guys are unbelievably impactful on a game. And I would probably argue more so than even a first pairing defenseman unless that defenseman is a true, true Norris type talent. So I think it just comes down to, do you believe Ivan Demadov is going to be a, 60 or 70 point winger or is he going to potentially be that sort of 80 to 90 point guy,

that true game-breaking talent? And then on top of that, I think there's just a really natural fit potentially with Connor Badard, not just on the power play, but potentially even at even strength where their games are different enough, but could complement each other in some really, really nice ways. And there just is no other player in this draft class who has that sort of individual talent that we see in Demodov, and that gets me really, really excited. Yeah, I think that, you know, just, I think everything Scott says is true, too. And I'm curious what the discussions are like within the Blackhawks, because I'm sure these are the type of things you're talking about, where Lefshinoff feels like it's maybe

completing the defense, because you have Velastic and Kaczynski and Delmastro and Kaiser and Renzel, you know, probably Renzel probably turns pro after the season. And you have Seth Jones. And it feels like Lefshnoff is maybe the final piece. We're around the offensive side. You have, you spent a lot of, I mean, Blackhawks have spent a lot of resources into drafting forwards in the last two years with Nazar, Paul Lewinsky, you know, Roman Canceroff and Oliver Moore, Ryan Green, and, you know, down the line

where they've had so many, compiled so many first through third round picks. And a lot of them were forwards, Nicolartis. And there's an assortment of guys, but there's a lot of the guys. There's no one that's certain, right? Like it's Connor Bardard and then it's maybe these guys pan out. So you feel like the Blackhawks are so far offensively having locks. And it's also, I mean, the rebuild's nowhere close to being done. You know, kind of Redard certainly accelerates that and it's raised expectations.

But this is, you know, this is two, three, four years away from the Blackhawks being probably a playoff team or, you know, even now, you know, saying that they're going to improve next season. And, you know, like I said, I still think they're in the, you know, they're in the lottery again easily next year. and drafting it another high pick. So there's so much work to be done. And this, they may not have a crack at number two again. So this does feel significant where, you know,

do you go and try to complete the defense? Why are they going to be better next year to Curiosity? Well, they're going to spend my, like, I mean, that's what Davidson came out and said. I mean,

they got to spend about $15 million and they're going to upgrade the wingers and have Taylor Hall comes back. And it's not significantly better, but their hope is to move up, you know, at least a few spots. And, you know, like, I mean, there were expectations a little bit higher this year with all the injuries they had

and at the CU and Reichel and all these guys not panning out. But I think they're going to go out and buy a few pieces this summer and upgrade pieces and bring maybe a better backup goaltender and enough things or, you know, even improving the bottom pairing. They did that last number too, right? Yeah, I think I think the hope was the finish in this, you know, range again. I think Davidson wasn't that before. I'm sure the plan was finished last, you know, dead last, you know, or it was bought on this year.

And it wouldn't be the next year. Just saying, like, I don't, I wouldn't, like, it's very possible they're in the same spot again. No, for sure. But, yeah, but either way, either way, they're going to spend some money this option, whether they're better and makes them better. I don't know. But either way, it feels like the black talk still have a lot of work to do. And there's definitely pros and cons to both players.

So, yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if either way, because I think they both do make sense. That's what makes this argument really interesting, is that they both do make sense for the playoffs. What do they feel more comfortable about? And I don't even know if they have all the information. Because I do think meeting with Demadoff in person, in Florida in a few weeks can change it, where I think if you're really comfortable with the player

and just another piece of the positive they may be put together. So, yeah, it'll be really interesting, but I do think it's still between those two players. I know, for example, like when teams talked to Simashev this time last year, when they met him at Vegas, It wasn't much about like Seema on the ice. It was more about meeting the kid in person and seeing that he spoke like almost fluent English and seemed really committed to the NHL and seeing how big he was. That definitely was a variable, I think, for teams in their final decision-making process.

It wasn't just for Arizona, but other teams had him rated really highly towards the end. I think it's also going to be potentially more of a factor this year with Demadov just because Ska has a reputation as playing hard. ball on some of these things. His brother is also a member of the SCA organization as a player, which complicates things a little bit. There are a couple of people here I've spoken to this week who are concerned about the SCA piece of the puzzle. Obviously, he's represented by Gold Star, and Dan Milstein has a reputation for bringing guys over, but SCA is an organization that is typically sort of done what they wanted and played hardball on some of these guys. And the fact that he has his brother also playing for the organization, I think further complicates it potentially.

One of the things that came up in the piece, Scott and Corey, was the league in the MHL. And I know some of that's, you know, the quality of the league. I think part of it goes back to Scott's point about the familiarity and the resources that they put into, you know, scouting and following and being up to speed on Levshanov. Just there is a different conversation there to a guy in college hockey that's in your backyard. There's so much familiarity to a guy in the MHL, which is a, you know, more variant league and you probably haven't had as many, certainly with your decision makers, great in person looks at the kid. And I think, you know, Corey mentioned the getting to know the kid part of this, but, you know, the Blackhawks have only really used one high pick in recent years on a Russian, in this environment where it's been limited viewings and that's, that's cancer of. I'm curious, like, do you sense any hesitation on that side of things from, from them of, you know, limited viewings and how that kind of affects the picture, I guess? Yeah, it has to be a piece of it, right?

Like, I think with cancer up, it was, they saw a player they really liked, but there's less risk there. It was in the second round, and the Blackhawks had an abundance of, you know, early picks, and he wasn't even their first second round pick last year. So I think there's less risk there. I think they need to be a little bit more certain and, yeah, a little bit more confident about it, that they were rushing scouts over there and certainly the values opinion. but I think, you know, the fact they do use, you know, everyone in their hockey ops and Davidson

goes out and sees games and tries to see all the prospects themselves. Like it just, yeah, I don't know. It just, it leaves it sort of the unknown that regardless of whatever you see on video that you're not absolute, you know, like you can't see his skating in person. And, you know, it doesn't, maybe he might not even skate in Florida based on his injury. So it's, I think all those factors, yeah, I think that comes into play. If you feel really strongly about Lefshanov and, you know, like it's, and if the Blackhawks can argue either way,

and if there are a few more, you know, just pieces that they feel positively about with Lefshnoff rather than Deminov, I think, I mean, I think that can help decide that for them, too. I just, I think, yeah, whatever risk they can remove from the equation will probably, you know, at least play a factor into the decision. I was talking with our co-host, Chris Peters a couple days ago, about the MHL. And it looks like Chris may not actually make it.

It's a shame he didn't have the foresight to not book an earlier flight in case the flight got delayed to miss the show. It's unfortunate. But we were talking and he asked me, who's the highest ever player picked out of the MHL who played only MHL games in the draft year? And it was kind of, you know, I think after we look at the way, I think the answer was Gregori to Denisenko at 15th overall to Florida

in 2018. And just because that's the case, doesn't mean that you can take a guy second out of that league. Otherwise, Colorado wouldn't take, you know, kill McCarforth out of the AJHL. Sometimes precedents have to be broken for a reason

when a guy is extremely talented. But it is a concern. That league, in particular, has seen some significant changes in recent years to its structure. You know, like I see sometimes online,

there are references to coupchere production in that league when he was draft eligible. That league is not the same league when Kuturov was in there. There's nearly 10 more teams in that league right now. This is a league where Ska has three teams in that league. Their main team and like two feeder teams, Locomotive has a feeder team. There's unaffiliated teams in that league.

I think there's like a Chinese team in that league. It's just, it's a very weird and strange junior league where the quality of competition is massively different from the. the top five to seven teams to the rest of the league. So I think you still isolate the player. And when he was playing the playoffs, he was playing against good teams and was really, really good.

So he's clearly a hell of a hockey player and an extremely talented. But if I was in that position, I would be treading very carefully, particularly when analyzing the quality of that league and trying to do any sort of deep dive on the analytics of Demetov's production there. because there is definitely for me some uncertainty in being comfortable using the second overall pick on a player who did not play VHL who did not play KHL this season. All right.

One thing I want to get to before we let you go here, Scott, and it's not about the second pick. It's about the Blackhawk's second first round pick, which moved up by two spots pretty recently. Really kind of anachronistic trade. Usually we see this happen right in the lead up to the draft, maybe during the draft. you had any feelings on why they would want to come up kind of two spots? Yeah, I feel like they were a little antsy to maybe trade that pick. Like they had three second rounders entering it. And I think they were looking for some, you know, and it depends on who you talk to because I mean, certainly I think our, you know,

Domino's decision has said that it probably doesn't favor the Blackhawks. But I think the Blackhawks, their own analytics that they saw a little bit more value in and moving up two spots in the first round and four spots in the second. and, but yeah, traditionally you don't see that type of trade. I mean, especially you don't know who's on the board and off the board sort of thing. So, yeah, I don't know. It seemed like the Blackhawks were they moved quickly on it just because maybe they saw the potential now and we're worried that they weren't able to do it later. Is it setting up for something else?

I mean, as of right now, it doesn't seem to be that way. But I guess if you're going to trade that first round pick, maybe 18 is a little bit more valuable than 20. So, yeah, I don't know. I'm curious to see if there's another card to kind of for them. the play at the draft. But, you know, from what Kyle Davidson said that it's just, they saw some increased value and thought, you know, might as well do it now instead of sort of waiting it out. But, yeah, certainly a trade that you don't often see at least that early on.

What I find interesting, especially, you know, Scott and Corey's rankings, Scott, you got kind of there's a cutoff tier wise at 17, Corey at 18. I do wonder if by getting from 20 to 18, I know what the value chart may say that in this specific class, that actually could be a pretty advantageous spot to be. I also just don't hate the idea. I know it took some flack online for such a small movement up with both of those two picks relative to getting rid of that third second rounder, but I don't mind for them just from a theory perspective, the idea of quantity over quality and where their pools at, the number of picks that they've had in the last few drafts, the number of picks that they have still in this draft and in next year's draft with multiple firsts and

multiple seconds. There is such a thing as too many prospects and it can get crowded in a pool. We saw it happen with the Los Angeles Kings three or four years ago and all of the guys that they had coming at the same time. There just wasn't enough opportunities for those guys. The HL team really suffered as a result, just with too much youth on the HL team at the same time. So the idea of if they believe they can get a better player at both of those picks, then suddenly that extra player, that extra pick that they would have made doesn't feel as

relevant for them as it would to a team that has taken half as many players as they have in the last couple of drafts and doesn't have the ongoing draft capital that they're likely going to have in upcoming drafts, right? I'll reserve judgment until I see who they take. Yeah, that's happened. And the Blackhawks do, they do have like an early third round or two. So like it was, yeah, I guess it was all just like them sort of balancing that they were going to be making a lot of picks in a row and some of that was in the equation too. So, yeah, I think there are a lot of different factors in the fact that they have accumulated so many draft picks in last few years that it doesn't seem like it's, yeah, a huge need for them to make a lot more picks. But yeah, definitely. The one question I had for Scott and Corey while I had them was with Demidoff being in the MHL and sort of that being a variable.

but if he was in a different organization, do you think that he would have been in the VHL or KHL last season? Like how much of it is a scoff factor that he wasn't promoted maybe sooner? I mean, he was the best player in the MHL the prior year. He definitely didn't need to go back there. I would have liked to have seen him play versus men. I think he very well was capable of playing versus men. He did play versus men briefly to start the year prior to his lower body injury, and then he went back to play junior for the duration of.

of the year. It's really hard to say why they made the decision. It didn't really seem like it helped his development in any significant way repeating that level this season. And it's not like Scott had not advanced players. They played facility put Colson in the VHL in his draft year. They played Montefay-Mitchcock in the VHL in his draft year. So it was definitely a very interesting decision on their part. I do wonder what role that injury in the fall may have played. As Corey mentioned, he did play in the Sochi Hockey Open, which is sort of a pre- season tournament that involves a couple of KHL teams and the U25 Russian team. He was a point per game player in that.

He was a point per game player in the preseason and initially made the roster over Matt Bay Michkov. The injury was in the VHL, wasn't it? The injury was in the VHL, yeah. And then he didn't go back after coming back from the injury. So it got me wondering how much of that was just them wanting to get him back playing with his own age group fresh off the injury. But again, he still, it's still.

not nothing that he stayed there, even when he got back and continued to light up that league. And frankly, there was a run of games in the early part of the second half of the season where he had three or four points a game in like six or seven straight games or six of seven games. And that would have been a prime opportunity to reward him for that play and move him up. And they just never did again. So definitely a sort of peculiar situation. All right. Let's take a quick break there. Thank you to Scott Powers for joining us. great stuff today, Scott, and I hope you enjoy all the many wonderful things Buffalo has to offer, particularly at Gabriel Skate.

Appreciate it. Thanks, guys. All right, we are back. Just Scott Corey and I here now, Scott Wheeler, that is, Scott Powers has returned to the Combine portion of his week. And gentlemen, you guys are both out there too. We're going to get to some of that in a second. But Corey, you had a mock draft that came out earlier this week. Mock draft 2.0, this is.

And a few things that I wanted to kind of highlight here. The first one is Caden Lindstrom at number four. And I think he's going to be a really big topic as we lead up to this draft because of some of the questions around the health. What made you feel like you wanted to put him at four here in this mock to Columbus? I mean, I'm sure Scott will dive into this a little bit more in a second here. I know he had a long conversation with some of Lindstrom's people. But like I think the general sense I'm getting from people is, well, it's a little mixed. There's some people who are very concerned by the back injury that.

Lindstrom suffered in the second half of the year and the time he missed. But I don't get the sense that's the prevailing feeling in the league right now. I think the majority of the team people I'm talking to think he's going to make a recovery. And the questions they may have on Lindstrom are not as medically focused as they might be on just making sure they have the hockey player evaluated properly and making sure they believe this guy could be a potential first line center in the NHL. But I think, like I said, there are. some of people who are definitely very concerned by the back injury. No question about it.

But I put him there because I'm getting the sense that if the draft happened today, I think he could still very well be a top five pick. Teams are getting his medical information while we're here at the combine. So in the coming days, I'll make some more calls about that and get an idea of where, you know, team doctors are sitting when they've evaluated this information. But, you know, I've run into Caden quite a few times already over here. I mean, he seems, I mean, he's not playing hockey, but he seems to be fine. He's not like an abraser or anything like that. Like, you know, he's, I think, you know, he's good.

I think the goal is for him to participate in some limited portion of the workouts on Saturday, which is obviously a very optimistic sign. And it's like he seems to be trending in the right direction. Yeah, I spoke with his, his reps here today's and always sort of have to take that with the grain of salt that's required when you're dealing with agents. but the sense I got from not just that conversation, but previous conversations I'd had with people around Caden, when I wrote a feature on him a couple of weeks ago, is that it is, it's trending more positive now for clubs than it was

sort of midway through the year when it looked grim. And even in the playoffs when he came back and didn't look anything like himself and was clearly not at 100%. So they've all got the medical reports from his physician and the physio, who've been dealing with him. Team physicians are now reviewing those medical reports to have their own people look them over. It's been a hot button topic in his conversations with people this week, but he's already done some of the testing.

That was a big deal. Based off some of the initial conversations I had, I wondered whether he was even going to sort of put gym clothes on this week and be doing that. And he is. He's back on the ice and it seems to be trending in a positive direction. Now, we're going to find out in the fall, of course. we might even find out sooner than that with development camps, whether he's actually sort of going to be ready to go on time.

Medicine hat should be one of the best teams in the CHL next year if he's healthy. So there's a lot there. But just the raw athleticism and all of that, I think teams are still obviously extremely excited about. There's a big belief system there that he's not just early in his development, but that he still has a lot of runway here to get way better and learn the game. And this is a kid who was playing double A hockey until almost his, his WHL draft year.

Like he never had elite coaching or a skating coach or anything like that. He's been treated much differently than a lot of these prospects are. But just from the medical standpoint, it sounds, it sounds positive. Like it's, it's not the huge, huge red flag that teams maybe thought it was. But he's still not healthy. And he's been dealing with this for a long time. And he's an 18 year old. So there's also, as Corey mentioned, there are camps of people who are very worried about

what that might look like if it lingers. Yeah. And I think there's a certain point in that draft where you're concerned. but if the concerns are a little alleviated, then you're more open to the idea. I think maybe we'll talk about, say, Chicago's picket two, for example, where they have other players that are really, really passionate about. And whether it's Anaheim or three in Chicago, two,

there's premium positions available or potential game breakers available, and you're really passionate about those players. Maybe you'd lead away from the guy who you might have some medical concerns on, but it'll get to a point in the draft where if your doctors are saying it's okay, and then the alternatives aren't as, glamorous than I think Lynch Jim very much comes in a play and I think whether it's four, five, six,

seven. I think Columbus and Montreal at four or five is where the really hard conversations will be had. I thought it was interesting, Corey, you're talking about making sure you get the evaluation of the hockey player, right? And that does still kind of come back to the injury because ultimately injury meant he had a shortened season, right?

Like he only plays 32 games and especially when you talk about a guy who looked as good as he did and had the breakout that he did earlier. in that season. That probably complicates the picture as much as anything. As much as the going forward projection, it's really like which guy is he kind of thing, right? I agree with that.

I mean, quite frankly, outside of Celebrity, I don't think there's another player in this drag class. Scott can correct me if he's heard differently. I don't think there's one other player in this draft class that I think every single team has in their top five. I don't think there's one player like that. You know,

I think everyone loves Lefissela. I think everyone loves Salive and Lidstrom and Demandov I mean, I can call teams that will have one of those guys not in their top five right now. And I think with Lindstrom, like I said, the questions it will come down to, are you a believer in this player being a big time offensive player? Are you a believer this guy is going to be a center in the NHL? And a lot of people would say yes. A lot of people think this guy can be a first line forward.

You know, some people think it's first line wing. I've heard the name Chris Kreider a lot. You could be compared to worst players in the NHL. But I've heard that name a lot. And some people do see a first line center, a potential Dylan Larkin, Rupa Hins type of player. So, you know, depending where you fall on that question, depending where you fall on the injury questions, you know, that will determine where you think Lindstrom should go.

And I still think it's, you know, and if, you know, I think right now, as we sit right now, I think he has a really good chance to be a top five pick, but I can't say it's a guarantee either. As I still hear those opinions out there, people who think there's a chance this guy could slide. All right. At number six, Corey, you've got in this mock, Sam Dickinson going to Utah. And Scott and I can talk about, I guess, the Memorial Cup final, too, as part of this.

But he ends up being kind of the next defenseman after Levsinov, Selyev. What did he kind of do to separate themselves? I think we all think Utah is a landing spot for a defenseman. Why Dickinson here? Yeah, I think, you know, like I said, after Salaev, left Sion and go off the board, it's hard to say who the next defendant for sure is. I think Dickinson's in that conversation. I think Zeev Boyam is in that conversation.

I think Zane Perrex in the conversation. I think Kariakum-Chuk's in that conversation. I think Dickinson, you know, does a lot of things really well. He's a great skater. He's big. He's competitive. He has skill. He has a great shot.

You know, I think, you know, he wasn't a first power play guy for London, but it was a great London team still scored at a really significant level for them. I think this is a guy who would check a lot of boxes. The one thing I do wonder about with Utah is I think Dickinson is their type of player, the type of player that an organization would covet and a lot of NH organizations would covet. But I look at Utah and I see Simishab. I see Maverick Lamaroo. I see J.J. Moser there.

And I wonder, does this organization need a true power play type? Do they need a Zee's volume in this organization instead? But I end up giving them the guy who I think they would, you know, that has the more typical prototype that most age organizations would covet. Scott, it's funny. We were at the MECOP final the other game, which the other day, which was a fantastic game, one of the best hockey games I've seen live. And early in the night, we were talking about how we thought, you know,

Dickinson had kind of been par for the tournament, right? Yeah. He wasn't going to, certainly hadn't hurt himself, probably hadn't shown anything that was going to crazy change opinions on him or anything. And then he's maybe the best player on the ice in the Memorial Cup final. Especially in the second half of that game. He really seemed to take over that game.

There were stretches late in that game where the best players on both teams, I think, were tired. Like, I think the week had started to catch up to them. Swoppiness took over in the second half of that game. London pushed back. And when London pushed back, it was Dickinson making two of the three biggest plays of the game, literally himself, once jumping into the rush and activating to score a goal of his own,

and once carrying a puck not just across the line, but deep into the offensive zone, and then hitting Easton Cowan with a beautiful cross-ice pass to set him up. So he was excellent. He played big minutes, obviously. They got down to a situation where they were really only playing three or four defensemen, and he was obviously one of them and the youngest of that group. And then this week, I think, is another piece of it for him, I've spoken with Sam a lot over the course of this season,

and I think he's going to carry himself well in the interview process throughout this week. He's going to do well in the physical testing. He's a really good athlete. He's not going to hurt his case this week either. So he just checks a lot of boxes. And I think if there weren't a ton of scouts, frankly, in Saginaw at the end of the tournament, as people got sort of on planes to come here, to come to Buffalo. But everybody was paying attention to a high stakes game,

like that and he was he was outstanding Corey I also want to go back to the other defenseman draft eligible defenseman from the MECC here in Perrette because he drops all the way to 13 in this latest mock for you which I think is the latest I've seen one of the kind of big six go in one of your mocks and you know what was kind of the thought process there with

Perrette getting down to Minnesota at 13 well as the season has gone on it's this happens I think every draft season the amount of potential top 10 picks seems to expand to the point now where when you get to a week before the draft, there tends to be 13 or 14 names. People are convinced they're going to go to the top 10. And the math doesn't seem to work out usually when you try to put it on paper.

You know, because like if Tija Ginnla is going to be a top 10 pick and Beckett Seneke's going to be a top 10 pick and people think maybe Berkeley Cadden can still be a top 10 pick. And there are people in the league who think Carter Yakenshuk can be a top 10 pick. You run out of draft picks. and somebody's going to have to get into that 11, 12, 13 range. And that's, I just, you know, I would be a little surprised if New Jersey went down that path and took a Zeev Boyem or a Zane Perak. That would surprise me a little bit, just given the elite puck movers they have.

I think they're going to have a real hard time finding a spot even for a lesser caliber club. It's more like a Seamus Casey, for example, in that organization. I would be a little surprised if Buffalo went down that. path just because I don't you know there's somewhere in that line for them to play but I don't know boen byrum uh drasmus Dalline Owen Owen power like it's going to be really hard to maximize the value of that pick those guys are lefties though he is a righty I get it but it's power play yeah yeah I'm saying that you would have to find that you would have to get creative and create a two or three D man power play which you can do if you are that big a believer in the player if he's like

four on your list and the next best player is nine you take the guy who's four and you'll figure out that problem later um but that's just you know some of the scenarios i was thinking through as i was going through this exercise you know and it's you know as i'm here at the combine you know you know you hear those opinions you hear people say like oh i think caton's going to go really high i think i think i think you know people are being too critical of him i think you know uh you know yacemch can still go really high people are being too critical of him i think you know you know ginnluck is going to go the highest of all of them but But it's like, well, the math doesn't work.

And I'm not sure where to put all these guys in a mock draft exercise. It's so one of those guys or more than one could be available later. All right. Let's kind of use that to shift, I guess, into kind of the some of the guys that you've been hearing about a little bit over the week. It's gone on at the combine here. And anything here, Corey, that you've heard that makes you rethink a pick you've made in this mock draft or make you think, oh, I shouldn't have done that one. I need to get this guy higher up the list, anything like that. Where did I have Hague on there?

Hage, I think you had it at 21 to Los Angeles. Yeah, and I don't think that's unreasonable. I think that's about the range. I do think there is some optimism for that player, though. Like, it wouldn't surprise me if he went two, three, four picks higher than that. You know, obviously had a really, really strong end there to his season in the USHL. I could see that one be a little bit later. I think the ultimate man at mystery is going to be where Solberg from, you know,

the Norwegian defenseman goes. I'll be really curious to see where he ends up on draft day. I think a lot of people in the league are still trying to figure out where they fall on that one, just because he played in a league that isn't really a highly competitive league from an NHL prospect standpoint. But he was so impressive at the World Championships that I know it's, I'm not hearing exactly where, what range he's going in, but I know he's been a player of much debate of late. All right.

All right. Let's take a quick break right there. We'll come back with a mailbag that I think is going to cover some more. guys you all want to hear about. All right, onto the mailbag and you guys continue to bring it. So appreciate that from all of you. Corey, this one's about a guy you just mentioned at the top of the last section. John Sebastian Godin was to know had Stein Solberg played this season in the CHL. What kind of season would he have had? Would he have been considered in the top group of D, do you think, in this year's draft? Yeah, it's always kind of fun to have those conversations.

That's about Sol or about any prospect. I've had conversations in the last week or two with people who are, say, like, big, already left Shunov believers who would say things like, well, if Lepshunov had played in the OHL, he would have done what Zain Perak did this season. And it's hard to, like, prove, just prove those things because, like, he wasn't there. You know, it's like, what would Ivan Demadov had done in college hockey this season? Like, we can try and make guesses, but it's hard to really know, you know, like, I, I obviously believe a lot in Solberg. And so when I see a 6-2 defenseman who can skate the way he does, who is hyper-competitive the way he is, and who has some offense, by comparison to him was Caden Gully.

So I think he could have had the year in the CHL, presuming on a similar quality team with similar quality line mates that Caden Gully had in his draft season, which was, you know, had put up a respect to amount of points, play a lot of minutes, be really physical and hard to play against. And I think that would have been a reasonable season. I think Solberg could have had. But of course, I'm just kind of guessing here. Who really knows with those kinds of questions? Scott, any thoughts here? Yeah, I think that checks out. Again, it's difficult to sort of transport and teleport a kid from league to league.

But with his physicality, there's no question he'd be a major presence, game to game, shift to shift at that level. He would dominate some of those guys physically. He did that, frankly, against men, like laying out men along the boards in battles, boxouts in front. He would have been an excellent, excellent defender at that level. And I think he would have had enough offense to be what Gouli. I think Gouli had 40-something points in 60-something games.

Like, yeah, he's probably a 40 to 50-point guy. He wouldn't have had the kind of numbers that we saw Carter, Yachtn Chuck, or Zeev William put together, or Zane Perak put together, I should say. But that's probably what you're looking at, I would guess. Yeah. This next question seems to be almost directly in response to the previous. Hawks Tank says, is Stein Solberg being too hyped at this point for his recent play? Or is he going to be a legitimate top 15 and a projectable top four defenseman, Corey? Well, this may be a way to direct this question to you, Max, is I kind of think there'd be some

people who weren't big believers of the player who wondered whether Marco Casper got overrated because he had that great world championship for Austria at the end of the year. And I think the people that I talked to the league who are skeptical of Stein Soberg would say, I think we are overreacting too much to this 10-day tournament where he was given a lot of minutes and played excellent, mind you, against some really good competition. But it was, you know, if there were people who didn't, there were some people who were fans of this player. I'm kind of like hearing about this, you know, probably later than I really should be.

but there were teams that were high on this player already, but like really high. But there were also some teams who weren't high on this player and now are being kind of asked to reconsider what we're wrong about this. And I understand the hesitancy to really change our pigeon significantly based on two weeks. So, I mean, Matt kind of changes to you. When we talk about Marco Casper, who also had some offense questions,

we'll seem as highly competitive two-way settlement. Do you think Detroit made a good decision picking him where they did? Or do you wonder whether maybe his play in the S-HL play playoffs and then the world championships may have overrated his value a little bit. It's certainly possible, but when I go back and I look at the 22 class, I still don't see a whole ton of guys that I'm saying are definitely clear cut ahead at this point, right? Like I can go look and yes, I think at this point we're confidently saying you take Pavl Minchikov above Casper. Are you sold that Matt Savoy's passed him?

Connor Geeky, Frank Naser, Magrorty, maybe a conversation, Lekiramaqui. I think these are all at least in the same tier, but I don't think there's any that's clear cut ahead beyond Minchikov, right? Yeah, I would agree with that take. So that's kind of where I think that was like Sowerberg. It's like he might be getting overrated a little bit, might, but like compared to who, that would be the question. Now, I do think we do occasionally run into that

where a small sample size of play gets people a little bit too excited. I think we saw that a little bit with the silly pot Colson, with Philip Broberg and his draft year in an international tournament where he stood out. So it can be a dangerous game to play, but we've also seen it. I mean, not to constantly go back to Detroit,

but Moritz Sider and the DEL playoffs into his men's world championships looked not obviously at a different level and a different caliber of prospect, but it sure looked a lot like the Norwegian playoffs into the world championships that Steyn Zolberg had, right? Like we're talking about that sample size of play, really grabbing people and sort of solidifying where they were on him. Now Sider was taken sixth overall,

but there's some parallels to draw there too. So I think in terms of the top four part of that question, yeah, like he looks like that from a profile standpoint in terms of the physical elements, the skating, the way he's going to be able to defend. I think the offense was the big question with people and sort of the decision making and the reads. He could look sloppy at times.

But he's answered enough of those questions that I think he belongs in the range that people are now talking about him. I've also become a bit of a believer in the late push. I think a lot of the guys that have kind of become that, you know, postseason riser in the last several years have actually panned out pretty well. That's not so much talking about like a Tyler Boucher who, you know, gets picked way higher and it's a surprise pick.

But the guys that there's like a steady build of momentum for, I'm thinking of like a Mason McTavish or a Cutter Gautier, guys like that, Jake Sanderson, Jack Quinn. Those guys that we've had like a month of conversation about. bottom moving up leading up to the draft. Maybe that's a little higher tier than we're talking about with Solberg. We're talking about a lot of top 10 guys there. But there has kind of been a track record of those guys being legit in those spots.

Easton Cowan's OHL playoffs with Denver Berkey and Ryan Winterton on that line with London last spring as well. Yeah. So I think there's a little bit of track record there. It's certainly an interesting conversation. Next one, Scott, I'm going to go to you with first. It's from Andrew. He says Tija Ginnla in the top five. I don't think I've seen either YouTube project him.

in the top five. So I guess he's more asking, would you buy it? I wouldn't hate it. There are certainly teams that view him, maybe not top five, but teams that talk about him as sort of top six, top seven, top eight kind of guy, which obviously Corey and I believe we have him at 12 and 13 were a little bit lower. But again, as Corey mentioned off in our first segment, there are only 10 guys who can go in the top 10 and he's in that conversation for a lot of people. So top five to Montreal specifically, you start to get into the weeds, I think, of hypothesizing about fit and all of that. But it wouldn't be a, I don't think it would be a complete shock. I do think it would speak to the conversation we just had about Rizers and his play this season.

And again, a bit of a smaller sample size just because of the limited role that he played on Seattle last year, all of that. But he feels more like sort of top 10 to top 13 guy. If he's taken eight or nine, I think that that would be a lot more predictable than, say, taking at five or six. That still would feel maybe not like a surprise, but it wouldn't be the most likely outcome that I'm counting on. I've been trying to think of players who fit his profile, who look like him at the same point, and where they tend to go in the draft, whether you agree or disagree with where they went to the whole other issue, but where they end up going. I've thought of Seth Jarvis. Again, not a perfect, comfortable.

Tees is a little bigger. Seth may be a little faster, a little bit more of an interior game. But I think of that, Jarvis' post, but I think it might have been like 11 or 12. I think of Max, suggested to me the other day, Jack Quinn, which I think, again, Teage is a better skater.

Jack might have a little bit more pure playmaking. Jack goes closer to, I think it was 9-10-ish. I thought of Joachim Kamel. I think Teach has more. and maybe a little bit more interior play than Camel, but Camel goes 17. I'm like I'm trying to like her Mackey. No, I mean, he's got like he competes way hard on like her. Yeah.

Don't you think? Yeah, no, he does. Like the scoring winger. Yeah. Again, it was like he's 511.60. That's, you know, that's teach. I'm trying to think of that profile that's gone in like the top five. And like the only one I can think of, I guess of that's kind of size winger is Raymond.

and Raymond and Raymond was like this dynamic game-breaking skill player, which I don't think even Teage's biggest advocates are telling you like this guy's like game-brain. It's probably high-end sense too there, right? Like that's a different theater. Yeah. Yeah. I think, well, the people who love Tees in that range will tell you they think he has high-end sense. I'm not there, but I think no those opinions exist out there. But I'm trying to think of that profile that's even if you believe that that's gone that high at that side on the wing.

And that's the asterisk there on the wing. So I think some people will notice when they look at Central Scouting. rankings that Teague is listed as a center. He didn't play center all year. There are some that do wonder whether he actually can be a center as a pro. I would guess most people would say no. I would say no. But I think there's a chance Colonna plays him down the middle next season more regularly.

And I think that could affect some people's opinion a little bit if you're talking about in that range of the draft. But I think for now you're still looking at a 5-11-6-0 winger. and I don't know if he checked enough boxes to go in the top five. I think you'd have to make a skill argument more than to go to your point, Max, I think you'd have to make a skill argument more than a sense argument with him. Like his biggest proponents believe that with the puck on his stick, he can make a play and he can score a goal,

and he can beat a guy one-on-one, and he can get to the inside. And then his critics will tell you that he doesn't read it as well as other players who typically go in that range, and he doesn't make his linemates better and that piece of the puzzle. So I could see the skill argument, frankly. Like when you watched him play this year, he was as talented on the puck as just about any player in the draft. But does he have the rest? Now he works and to Corey's point about like Karmacki, like way more like completely different realm in terms of the competitiveness and his ability to get after it on a forecheck and all that.

But it is the top five to ten conversation for Teage is an interesting one. I do remember we were talking about Yol Kim Kamel, the top five, ten there for a long time. were, yeah. Yes, no doubt. And in hindsight, Kamel went probably, like, he's a teen's pick, right? Like, he's been a good player, top player for the Finnish national team, had a couple of good seasons in the H.L, but there's still question marks even about whether Kamel is going to be an impact top six forward in the NHL.

So now I think I like Teague better than I liked Kamel at the same time, but it's a, that's an interesting one. You can probably put three, I think you have three plus, grades on him, right, Corey? So there is some well-roundedness here. He's a great play. I think he's going to be a top six-four in the NHL. Yeah. We're talking about five versus ten here, and it may seem like semantics, but at that range of the draft, I think it's significant. Yep, absolutely. Next one, Scott, or sorry, next one, Corey, the Jeff Skinner, like-liker says, it feels like there's been a good amount of catten in, is this draft's Benson discussion?

Is that a short dudes who are good comparison? Or are their playing styles actually comparable to each other as well? I think more the former than the latter. I think Benson's compete is like really, really high end. I think can competes well. I think he gets to the inside. I think he gives good efforts. I don't think he's like this like dog on a bone mentality that Benson is. But Ken is taller.

He's way more dynamic with his skating ability. I don't, you know, he just plays with pace a little bit more. So I think they're both are short guys. They both are, you know, short guys. who are good, I guess. And I think for me, I, I'm a huge catten proponent. And I was a little bit more harsh on Benson than probably should have been in a strapture, but I still think there was some reasonable doubt about a 5-9 guy who wasn't an elite

skater. But I, if Cadden gets outside the top 10, I won't be shocked. But I would be like, I thought, I think someone has to do it. I think that guy is just too good. He's been too good for too good for too long. long. He checks every single box with emphasis outside of his frame. I think he deserves to be a top 10 pick. That is, if I had to guess probably where the conversation's coming from, though, not so much as comparable play styles, but in terms of a really good player, a top 10 talent who because of

size could slip outside the top 10, whether he will or won't, but that's, I think, the way that's better than Marco Rossi, though, at the same age. And Rossi went nine, like he's, I think this guy deserves to be a top 10 pick. Yeah, totally fair. I'm just saying there's a chance that he could out of the, like based on the mocks, right? He's right around the fringes, I think, in both. I don't disagree. I think he could get out to the top of Ted. I say he deserves to go in the top 10. For sure. All right, Scott, next one to you on this one's from Maxwell, not me, I swear. Why are teams seemingly higher on Sasha Bavere than the public is? Well, first of all, I wonder what Maxwell's sources are for his belief that teams are higher

than the public. But no, I, there's some, there's an element of truth to that. He did say seemingly higher. Yeah, yeah, yeah. No, there's an element of truth to it. I think it comes back to the one thing you hear about every time you talk to anybody about Sasha Bwavere, whether it's staff in Muskegon, whether it's people that coached or were managers on the other side of the equation in the USHL, whether it's NHL scouts. You often only hear good things about him.

And among the first things that people always say about Sasha Buever are intangibles and competitiveness. And that piece of the puzzle is very. viewed as a premium asset by NHL clubs relative to Sasha Blather. People are just really excited about the kid, about how hard he works, about the physical upside. He's six foot two, but he's got a lot of room to get stronger. He's still a very lean kid. He fought four times in the USHL this year. He just works hard and finishes his checks and he's a center. And there's just, like he just checks a lot of pro boxes in terms of what that package looks like, what a middle six

center usually looks like in the NHL, his profile fits the mold. And then on top of it, he's viewed as a really good kid who's a real competitor. Like that's among the first things people always talk about when they talk about Sasha. So I think

teams just really value that. They really value the quote unquote intangibles. Like it's a legit word that I've heard tossed around with him in every single conversation I've had with anybody about Sasha. And not just NHL scouts, but his staff and, and, And the people who oversee these people are always biased.

But his staff in Muskegon don't speak about him in sort of cliched ways about their guys. Like they are true, true unvarnished believers in this kid. And opposing coaches among several I've spoken to this year sort of really went out of their way to give Sasha a shout out because of the way that he plays in that league and how well-rounded his game is. So I think that that stuff carries some weight with teams. All right. next one's for Corey. Koharski's donuts wants to know are the devils better off keeping the number 10 pick or trading it as part of a deal for a goalie like Jacob Markstrom or Linus Almark?

The Markstrom one is fascinating to me because it's like, are we talking about the Markske's from five years ago? Or we're talking about the Marksum you're getting next season. He's getting up there in age. He was really good this year. He was really good this year. It's just like I just feel like when you're at that point of the age trajectory though, it just there's a lot of risk.

It's like, is that really worth that? a 10th overall pick in a draft. Like that's, this is, you know, when you consider that goalies never go close to this high anymore, outside of the most special of goalie prospects. And like, like, if we're talking about sorrows on an extension, that would make more sense to me. But I, like, you know,

Allmark at least, you know, is a little bit younger. I know he's been splitting starts, but at least, you know, the age definitely would Markstrom would make me a little bit worried in terms of moving the 10th pick. But for a goalie in the abstract, like, If you get an extension on a Soros, you'd be okay with it? I could buy that, yeah, because now you're thinking of, like, a comp, like, to, like, when the Corey Schneider deal happened for the pick that became

Beauoravad. Like, I can buy that one a little bit more, yes, because it does feel like that's the one piece they are away. I don't think they are just one piece away, but it feels like that's the one major piece they all are away from taking that next major step as an organization. Yeah. All right. Next one, Scott.

Peter wants to know, would you say Michael Bransig-need-negeard has a higher ceiling than Nate Danielson and Marco Casper? More Red Wing stuff today, huh? Well, I think part of that conversation is tricky, if only because we're talking about two center, two natural centers and a natural winger. I think if you were to take the position out of it, there's a lot of parallels to sort of, one of lines to draw there, if you will. They're all very competitive players.

They're all good skaters. They're all decent sized. I think Neegard has a shot quality that a player like Marco Casper doesn't have or didn't have at least at the same age. Neegard can finish plays from mid-range, and that was always a question mark for me with Marco Casper. I would say Danielson's got a decent sort of shot and finishing touch. I think you're talking about relatively the same caliber of player.

Certainly in Casper's case, though, I think what benefited Casper was doing it against men, at a level that, frankly, I don't think Brandzegh Neegard, as good as he was in Hockey Al-Sfenzkin, and even in the playoffs in Hockey Al-Svenskine, I think he, not that people soured on him at men's worlds, but he didn't have the kind of men's worlds that Marco Casper had, for example. And Constellanius also didn't have the kind of men's worlds that Marco Casper had. So I think teams will remember that, that sort of final viewings for Brand-Segneegg-kard, had this, frankly for him and Consta-Helanus, had their seasons ended at the end, at the end of their playoffs.

They were both excellent for their teams in the playoffs against men in pro leagues. It would have been a different potentially conversation. I love Michael Brancic-Neegard. I was a little bit lower on Casper and Danielson, respectively, when they were picked. I viewed them as sort of teens guys rather than top 10 guys. And I also view Bransag-N-Seggard as a teens guy. So I'm kind of in, frankly, a very similar range on all three of those players.

I think they're all going to be very good top-nine forward. in the NHL. I'm not sure any of the three of them have the sort of true top of the lineup quality to their games. But Brancet, like, there might not, other than Steyan Solberg, his countrymen, there might not be a more competitive player. We just talked about Sasha Bauer and there are others, Colbo Duane. There might not be a more competitive player in the draft than Michael Bransag-Sag-Neagard. And that with his size and the success that he had in Hockey Al Spenskin this year, that's not nothing. Corey,

I know you had a little higher grade on Danielson. And so you probably, when we're talking about the ceiling here, you'd probably feel like that's the bar to clear here, right? Like it's against Danielson. Yeah. Yes.

I wonder about the shot as the differentiator, right? Like in terms of pure offense, I think Danielson skating is a big, you know, a big asses than I think you do. I think Danielson has legit NHL skill. Yeah. But the shot is the selling point for Brandsigni.

He may be the best goal scorer of those three. I agree with that. Yeah. Crash Dummy wants to know, why are scouts so high on Artem Leveshanov's offensive ability? He says most of his points are secondary assists, fortunate bounces to teammates and empty net goals. Tell me how you really feel. He plays a rovers style, which is an ideal for NHL system, doesn't have an elite offensive trade, shot risk, or playmaking. Crash Dummy does not like Artem Leveshanov, Corey.

Why are you so high on him? Sorry, why are scouts so high on him? I know you're among them. Yeah, I thought that was a really interesting question. I saw it in my Twitter mentions. By the way, we never actually tell people this. If you want to submit questions for this mailbag, I put them out on my Twitter account a day or two before the episode airs, and that's how you submit the question.

So I saw that in my mentions, and I actually thought I was kind of losing my mind a little bit. It wasn't just from this one person. I've seen it mention other places on the internet that people say that left shoot off doesn't have been of hockey sense. I just heard Scott question just now. He said when I said, I think he's a very smart player. Scott's team's team disagree. And I kind of thought I was losing my mind a little bit.

So I read after I saw that, I went to go down, you know, watch some of left shootoffs games in college to make sure that I didn't miss something super obvious. And I watched, you know, a lot of the games that I've seen before, quite frankly. And I came away thinking the exact same thing. I think this guy's a stud. Like this guy, I think he is super creative. He has great skill. He makes high-end plays on the move.

He makes plays in traffic. He sees the ice at a high level. I understand there's a little bit of wrong. honest in his game, given the lack of high-level hockey, but I think the way he processes and thinks the game creatively is a really high-end level. I think he's going to have a ton of offense. And I really think, and I know this is not what Scott fits. It was. Let's take Scott out of this equation for a second. But I think in general, I find that people can get way, way too harsh on young players when they're at the college level. Like, that is such a high level of competition

to be really good at. And we have recent history for this. I remember in their draft years, never mind even their post-drafters, but especially in their draft years. I've seen games from Quinn Hughes in his draft year, from Owen Power, from Matt Baneers, Kent Johnson,

Matt Wood, where they were not good at all, where they looked like they didn't have, they didn't work in making plays, they weren't creating offense, they weren't winning battles. Heck, they were even games in the, years after the in those draft plus one years for guys like veneers in power and Quinn Hughes where I would watch him at the college level I didn't think they were all that

good I remember even talking to a scout once after I saw Quinn Hughes kind of have a very mediocre game in his 19 year old year like did I miss something here he kind of sucked tonight and the guy told me to stop overreacting it was losing my mind and he was kind of right but that's a whole that's a whole other issue you know like Penn Johnson and Matt Wood dominated the BCHL dominated it in their draft minus one years, and they got their teeth kicked in some nights in college, and where they did absolutely nothing in those games. So I think you want to be really careful before you are being overly critical

of how a player looks in college. It's not supposed to look like what Zeev Boyum did this year. Zeev Boym might have been the best player I've ever seen in college hockey as a draft eligible among defensemen, and I think he deserves to be in that conversation with guys like Fantilli, and Eichl and Sellebrini in terms of the impact he had on his team, not as a pro prospect, but the impact he on as a team, those guys don't look like that.

Lev Shunov was way better for me on a game-to-game basis than O'N Power was in this draft year, like way better. And O'N Power is a fantastic young player. But for me, I mean, I disagree completely with that analysis. I thought Lef Shinoff was an impactful college player this year. I'm not saying he had full highlight real assist and goals and whatnot, but that's not that's not the assessment point for this player i thought he impacted the game he was a leading player of one of the very best teams in college he was a guy who was trusted in all situations

and he has the athletic traits to be a really good NHL player and now that my rant is over yeah i mean i think you go back to the to the western michigan game in the NCAA tournament like there's seasons on the line they're down who makes the big play you know carrying the puck behind the net and fighting the slot it's ardom leveshanov right like there's clearly a your offensive vision to his game that I would have a really hard time knocking his hockey sense for that reason personally. I think part of the question about the rover style not working, I'm not sure that's the case at all anymore.

The game is played increasingly by transition D and not by sort of D who are roaming around the offensive zone making things happen in his transition game, both defensively and offensively, that's his strongest quality. He's going to continue. the way he plays and how loose he plays, he's going to continue to jump into the rush. He's going to continue to track back when he does jump into the rush

because of his length and his skating ability. I think that's going to be a big, big part of his career in the NHL. And there are plenty of defensemen around the league who play very, very active styles in transition offensively, including Roman Yossi, who just absolutely dominated men's worlds by doing that in his 30s right now. So that piece of the puzzle is, I think, think I don't think that's necessarily a negative that he creates a lot of his offense from

jumping into the rush and jumping into the offensive zone. He might not have the natural ability that Aziv Boyam has on the puck that sort of impresses you breaking guys ankles and that kind of the thing off the offensive zone blue line. But he's going to create plenty of offense in the NHL. All right. Good stuff. That's going to do it for us today, guys. Thanks all for you for listening to this episode of the athletic hockey show prospect

series. You can catch more of Chris over at Flow Hockey and his podcast Talking Hockey Sense, even though he wasn't with us here today. You should still do that. And obviously, keep reading Scott and Corey on The Athletic. They have just great stuff coming day after day that you're going to want to stay up on as we lead up to the draft only three weeks away. Good stuff, guys. We'll talk to you soon.