2026 NHL Draft Notebook: Trades, prospect tiers, and Kraken perspective

After sorting through video on scores of prospects, crunching numbers on thousands more, and reading countless reports, rankings, and mock drafts, I approach the finish line of the pre-draft process stuffed with impressions and opinions, both broad and specific. As NHL Draft Week continues here at Sound Of Hockey, this pre-draft notebook is my repository for those thoughts and also my opportunity to address community questions gathered over the last few days.

Today, I’ll cover a dozen topics, ranging from 2026 NHL Draft prospect tiers and a take on the league-wide draft pick trading spree to Kraken-specific draft thoughts.

Want more draft coverage? Get in the know by checking out the Sound Of Hockey Big Board, our data-only watchlist of 2026 NHL Draft prospects, and our scouting video resource. Still to come is our seven-round Seattle Kraken mock draft.

For now, let’s empty the notebook, working our way from more general draft topics to more granular thoughts and questions.

1. Trades! Trades? Why all the trades?

If there is one thing we know about the NHL Draft, it is that picks in the top 10 are rarely traded. Despite significant public speculation, year after year teams stick and pick at the top of the first round. A top-five pick had not been moved since 2008.

Well, this year has been quite different. The No. 9 pick has already been traded twice. It first moved in the Brady Tkachuk deal between Florida and Ottawa, then was later flipped to San Jose for William Eklund. The No. 4 overall pick also changed hands, moving from Chicago to Buffalo for Bowen Byram. Trade rumors continue to swirl around San Jose’s No. 2 pick, Buffalo’s No. 4 pick, and Seattle’s No. 7 pick, too. From my vantage, there are three reasons why this is happening.

First, as I have mentioned on the podcast throughout the year and wrote about more than a month ago, this draft leaves a bit to be desired in the top 10. Gavin McKenna and Ivar Stenberg are legitimate high-end players, but the next tier of prospects looks more like mid-lottery talent than top-five prospects in an average or better draft.

This may have caused a team like the Chicago Blackhawks to conclude that Bowen Byram was a better bet to provide value than any of the players who could have been available at No. 4—particularly now that the tea leaves seem to be pointing toward San Jose selecting Stenberg at No. 2. (To be clear, even in draft-class-adjusted terms, my humble opinion is that Chicago significantly overpaid in that deal.)

Second, the free-agent class is as barren as it has ever been. For teams seeking immediate-impact upgrades, trades are likely the best path to adding talent without crippling their cap situation.

Third, we had an atypical situation where the Florida Panthers, a team in the middle of its title-contention window, were drafting in the top 10. The Panthers, like the Vegas Golden Knights and a few other franchises, have attacked contending windows by moving first-round picks for complementary veteran pieces. It just so happens that the Panthers continued that practice this year with a pick inside the top 10.

Or maybe NHL general managers just wanted to have a little fun for once. Maybe that was it.

2. Evaluating the Mackie Samoskevich trade

The Kraken were ahead of the trade-market curve in the team’s deal sending the No. 25 overall pick (acquired from Tampa Bay) and a 2027 second-round pick to Florida for 23-year-old winger Mackie Samoskevich. As I have argued, this is precisely the profile the Kraken should be targeting in trades.

As for the compensation, while it may be more than some anticipated, it is roughly “fair” within this trade market and for a 23-year-old player with Samoskevich’s statistical profile.

Historically, the deal has echoes of Montreal’s 2023 trade for Alex Newhook. Montreal traded Nos. 31 and 37 overall in the 2023 draft for Newhook, who was then 22 years old with 159 games played, 27 goals, and 36 assists on his résumé. In a near carbon copy, the 23-year-old Samoskevich has played 156 games with 27 goals and 36 assists. (For those inclined toward advanced statistics, Samoskevich’s profile is stronger than Newhook’s was at the time.)

Fast-forward to the current trade frenzy, and I think we can safely call it a “seller’s market.” Based on our Sound Of Hockey trade value chart, the draft capital Seattle paid is approximately equal to the No. 17 overall pick. Washington paid more for Jordan Kyrou, adding both a player and a prospect to the package. Ottawa moved a higher pick (No. 9 overall) for William Eklund. Calgary paid more for Simon Nemec, sending two first-round picks plus a second-round pick in the deal. Let’s just say Chicago gave up much more for Bowen Byram.

Adjusting for player age and quality, Seattle did fairly well in comparison with these other deals. It was no “bargain.” The Kraken had to pay full freight. But it was not an overpay, either.

3. 2026 NHL Draft tiers

Returning to the thought above about the tiers in this draft, here is my humble view of where the various prospect levels shake out. I gave some thought to the order within the tiers, arranging the players based on a subjective evaluation from those with the fewest questions and least risk to those with the most. That said, this exercise is mostly about how I view the horizontal tiers, which I set based on each player’s realistic upside.

To be clear, I have only watched the top players a handful of times and the lower-tier players even less than that—sometimes only once or twice. I used my personal impressions, blended with scouting consensus and scoring-profile strength, to build these tiers, but they’re certainly not the be-all and end-all.

4. Upside at the top of the draft

One of the questions I received in the Sound Of Hockey Discord asked which player projected to go between No. 5 and No. 12 had the most upside. I thought this was an interesting framing, particularly since the Kraken are slated to make their first pick in this range. These are the Sound Of Hockey Big Board players in question: Carson Carels, Viggo Bjorck, Keaton Verhoeff, Alberts Smits, Daxon Rudolph, Wyatt Cullen, Malte Gustafsson, and Ethan Belchetz.

At their peak projections, I see Carels and Verhoeff as No. 1 defensemen. Rudolph edges into that territory as well. If I had to choose based on a pure best-case scenario, I’d go with Verhoeff. Among forwards, Cullen probably has the highest overall upside as a skilled, All-Star-caliber winger with plus size and strong skating.

5. Top defense prospects in historical context

Another inquiry I’ve seen, in a couple of different forms, asks to put the top defenders in this class into context, often by comparing it to the 2024 class that saw six defenders drafted in the top 12. Could we see something like that happen again? It’s possible.

Doing my best to eliminate the creeping bias of the 2024 class’s post-draft performance, I believe I would stack the players this way based on my evaluation of them at the time of the draft:

1. Zeev Buium (2024)
2. Zayne Parekh (2024)
3. Chase Reid (2026)
4. Carson Carels (2026)
5. Sam Dickinson (2024)
6. Daxon Rudolph (2026)
7. Keaton Verhoeff (2026)
8. Artyom Levshunov (2024)
9. Alberts Smits (2026)
10. Carter Yakemchuk (2024)
11. Anton Silayev (2024)
12. Malte Gustafsson (2026)

The top four are fairly close and could be called “Tier 1.” The next four are very close—almost tied—and form Tier 2. The final four form a third tier. All told, I would put this defenseman class ever so slightly behind the 2024 group.

6. Two important players that confound me

I have spent the most time in recent weeks trying to form a concrete opinion about two top-10 prospects in this draft, and I have to admit that I haven’t been very successful. One is a forward and one is a defenseman. Let’s start with the forward.

Viggo Bjorck is a player I like. He impressed me at the World Juniors and the U18 World Championship, and many analysts I trust have expressed support for him.

Yet, I cannot get past his size and production. He is 5-foot-9 and did not score much this year, even in league-adjusted terms. While No. 6 on the Sound Of Hockey Big Board, Bjorck is only No. 19 on our data-only watchlist. He plays bigger than his size, is a heady player, and does countless little things right. All of this is good stuff, but when you are talking about taking a smaller player at the top of the first round, he needs to bring elite offensive tools or production. Bjorck showed neither in his draft year, unless you want to count his hockey smarts as an elite offensive trait. He had six goals and nine assists in 42 SHL games.

On the defensive side, no player is more pivotal to the Kraken’s draft plans than Keaton Verhoeff. The 6-foot-4 defenseman brings a physical edge, a good defensive stick, and some scoring touch. He is viewed as a leader and person of high character off the ice. He was also regarded as the player most likely to unseat Gavin McKenna as the first overall pick coming into the season.

Yet, I developed some reservations when watching the player and reading reports from prominent analysts. There’s a bit of awkwardness in the way he moves, and he gave up the puck far too much under pressure. I have no doubt he can play NHL games, but if he’s going to be your No. 1 defenseman, he needs to be able to retrieve pucks and break them out under heavy pressure. This is a high bar that others in this draft class might not clear either, but I saw enough to be concerned.

How do we sort it all out with these two players? I’m still trying. If you have the answer, let me know.

7. With the Kraken’s first pick…

The most frequent question I have received is the most obvious and most important: Who will the Kraken pick at No. 7 overall? For that answer, you’ll have to wait for our forthcoming Seattle Kraken mock draft, but I will say I think it comes down to the players within my third tier (Malhotra, Verhoeff, and Rudolph), mentioned above. Beyond those players, it wouldn’t necessarily surprise me if Bjorck were the pick. I would still be a bit unsure how to feel about it, though.

8. Trades and No. 7 overall

Alright, that was unsatisfying, but should the Kraken trade the No. 7 overall pick rather than draft a player anyway? After all, contender Florida, mid-table team Ottawa, and builder Chicago all made the choice that a top-10 trade was the better path.

Unless it is a means of acquiring a true first-line or first-pair player, I’d say no. Even if it’s a below-average draft, this top 10 still has players I view as likely long-term contributors in the top half of an NHL lineup. I do not think it makes sense to move that asset for a young defenseman who could still realistically be available, such as Alexander Nikishin, nor for other forwards in Samoskevich’s tier, such as Mason McTavish. I’d rather continue to pursue those types of players with lesser picks.

Jason Robertson remains the wild card. A package of the No. 7 pick, Jared McCann and two future first-round picks has to get the conversation started. In the end, though, I would wager the Kraken make the No. 7 pick.

9. Players who could surprise or disappoint relative to the Big Board

Reading the tea leaves of recent draft coverage, it wouldn’t surprise me if Xavier Villeneuve (Big Board No. 21) fell below his Big Board position, perhaps out of the first round entirely. It’s possible Nikita Klepov (No. 20) could be more of a late first-round pick at this point after bypassing the NHL Draft Combine. Conversely, it would not surprise me to see Viggo Bjorck (No. 6) go within the top five and oversized defenseman Maksim Sokolovskii (No. 44) outperform his Big Board position.

10. The Samoskevich draft pick

You have to give to get, and the Kraken gave up an asset with value—the No. 25 overall pick—for Samoskevich. The Florida Panthers used a similar pick (No. 24) in 2021 to draft Seattle’s new winger.

In preparing for Seattle’s selection at that pick, I developed the following preference list of potential targets at No. 25:

Nikita Klepov, LW (No. 20 on the Big Board)
J.P. Hurlbert, RW (No. 22)
Ilia Morozov, C (No. 23)
Casey Mutryn, RW (No. 32)
Liam Ruck, C/W (No. 25)

Klepov and Hurlbert scored at prolific rates in junior hockey and bring enough physicality and skill-set diversity to translate to the NHL. Ilia Morozov brings size to the center position and projects as, at least, a strong defense-first player.

Following my mock draft rules — which assume prospects come off the board in Big Board order — I likely would have projected Mutryn to the Kraken at No. 25. He’s a 6-foot-3, physical, good-skating forward prospect from the U.S. National Team Development Program. Maybe my viewings caught him at his best, but I really liked how his style of play could translate to the NHL. If the offense doesn’t come, he’s still an identity player in your bottom six, which is something the Kraken could have used in the system. He seemed like a good fit.

Ruck is another prolific junior scorer, but I have more questions about how his game will translate professionally than I do about Klepov’s or Hurlbert’s.

In the unlikely event that any of these players slide to No. 38, I would be interested if I were drafting for the Kraken.

11. Day-two value picks

Here are a few prospects projected to go in each round on Day 2 of the draft that the data suggests could be underrated relative to their Big Board ranking:

Round 2
Adam Valentini, F, Univ. of Michigan (NCAA), Big Board No. 45
Ryan Roobroeck, F, Niagara IceDogs (OHL), Big Board No. 47
Pierce Mbuyi, F, Owen Sound Attack (OHL), Big Board No. 58

Round 3
Jonas Lagerberg Hoen, F, Leksands IF U20 (U20 Nationell), Big Board No. 69
Alan Shaikhlislamov, F, Tolpar Ufa (MHL), Big Board No. 74
Blake Zelinski, F, Des Moines Buccaneers (USHL), Big Board No. 75
Mikey Berchild, F, USNTDP (USHL), Big Board No. 77
Lavr Gashilov, F, Avto Yekaterinburg (MHL), Big Board No. 80
Matias Vanhanen, F, Everett Silvertips (WHL), Big Board No. 93

Round 4
Evan Jardine, F, Youngstown Phantoms (USHL), Big Board No. 99
Landon Hafele, F, Green Bay Gamblers (USHL), Big Board No. 100
Dayne Beuker, F, USNTDP (USHL), Big Board No. 108

Round 5
Julien Maze, F, Regina Pats (WHL), Big Board No. 138
Braidy Wassilyn, F, London Knights (OHL), Big Board No. 139
Ryan Brown, F, London Knights (OHL), Big Board No. 148

Round 6
Ludvig Andersson, F, Örebro HK U20 (U20 Nationell), Big Board No. 170
Jonas Woo, D, Medicine Hat Tigers (WHL), Big Board No. 173
Bode Laylin, D, Tri-City Storm (USHL), Big Board No. 190

Round 7+
Philippe Veilleux, F, Val-d’Or Foreurs (QMJHL), Big Board No. 195
Jasper Kuhta, F, Ottawa 67’s (OHL), Big Board No. 216
Justin Graf, F, Cedar Rapids RoughRiders (USHL), Big Board No. 233
Cooper Soller, F, Sioux Falls Stampede (USHL), Big Board No. 279
Oliwer Sjostrom, D, IF Björklöven (Allsvenskan), Big Board No. 285
Jet Kwajah, D, Madison Capitols (USHL), Big Board No. 290

12. The Seattle Kraken and local connections

The Kraken have not been afraid to dip into the local junior ranks over the years, drafting Julius Miettinen and Kaden Hammell from the Everett Silvertips, Berkly Catton from the Spokane Chiefs and Lukas Dragicevic from the Tri-City Americans.

Could the Kraken make a similar pick this year? On the goalie front, I like the statistical profile of Tobias Tvrznik (No. 125 on the Big Board) of the Wenatchee Wild. He could be available when the Kraken select twice in the fourth round. Among skaters, I like the playmaking ability Everett Silvertips forward Matias Vanhanen (No. 93) brings, along with his rapport with Miettinen. I am not sure he makes it to the fourth round, and the Kraken do not have a third-round pick. I would be a bit surprised to see them take him as high as No. 38, but I like the player.

* * *

Any draft opinions you want to get “on the record”? Any comments, criticisms, or questions on the points above? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below or on X (@deepseahockey or @sound_hockey) or Bluesky (@deepseahockey or @soundofhockey.com).

Header photo of Matias Vanhanen by Evan Morud courtesy of the Everett Silvertips