Eduard Sale (pronounced SHAH-lay), selected No. 20 overall by the Seattle Kraken, is a 6-foot-2 left-shot winger. He played at the professional level this season in perhaps the third-best league in the world, Czechia’s Extraliga, for HC Kometa Brno.
Quick thoughts on the pick
On the one hand, this is a swing on talent. The Elite Prospects team had this to say on Sale: “[On] sheer talent alone, Sale is a no-brainer top-10 pick. Perhaps even higher.” On the other hand, this isn’t an example of drafting an unproductive player. To the contrary, he checked in at No. 21 overall in the Sound Of Hockey consensus analytics ranking. My NHLe calculation pegged him as the 25th best prospect in the draft.
Eduard Sale player profile
Left Wing | HC Kometa Brno (Extraliga) | Age: 18 | Height: 6’1.75″ | Weight: 175 lbs | Left shot
Sale has been closely scrutinized, playing at a top professional level in Czechia from a very young age. But this experience makes him one of the more pro-ready prospects in the draft. It’s also possible he could come to North America this season to play in the OHL for the Barrie Colts, according to Jeff Marek.
Expect Seattle first round pick Eduard Sale to play with the OHL’s Barrie Colts next season.
Alternatively, he could be a candidate to follow in the footsteps of countryman David Jiricek and play in the AHL immediately. If so, there would be yet more reason to fire up AHL.tv and watch the Coachella Valley Firebirds again next year.
What does the Big Board say?
At the time the Kraken drafted, Sale was the second-highest ranked remaining player on the Sound Of Hockey Big Board at No. 17 overall. Only Gabe Perreault was ranked higher at No. 14. There were some highly productive North American players that were still on the board at the time of the Kraken’s pick (Perreault, Quinton Musty, and Andrew Cristall) that I thought would likely be strong considerations, but of those players only Musty’s physical tools compare with Sale’s. Sale’s highest ranking was No. 7 overall by Craig Button of TSN.
How does he look on the ice?
What are scouts saying?
Strengths: “His movement stands out as a top trait, stemming from technically sound skating mechanics. He’s able to accelerate quite quickly, reaching his top speed effortlessly. He might just be one of the fastest prospects in the draft. It’s not just his straight-line skating either. He has strong edges that he utilizes to change direction quickly and suddenly, making him hard to predict as he attacks in the offensive zone. . . . His puckhandling is nearly as good as his skating . . . . He’s able to head into traffic with the puck or without and come out with it with relative ease. He also regularly jumps into board battles and isn’t afraid to get physical in his play. He plays without any lack of confidence, sometimes even overconfident as he cheats to the offensive side of the puck. He has a strong shot but does need to work on his accuracy at times. He’s just as good at dishing it out though, showing off great vision as he moves the puck around the offensive end. . . . What might just be Sale’s most intriguing attribute though is his ability to play in all situations. He can be depended on during the penalty kill, and more than contributes at even strength and on the power play. He can play up and down the lineup and be relied on in the dying minutes of a game.” – McKeen’s Draft Guide
Weaknesses: “Where he does need to focus is his consistency, as he can tend to lack urgency or off-puck commitment depending on the scoreboard. When he needs to be, he’s on, but this needs to be the case every time he hits the ice.” – McKeen’s Draft Guide
Where can I find more information?
Corey Pronman of The Athletic (link) ($$): ranked Sale No. 24 overall
Scott Wheeler of The Athletic (link) ($$): ranked Sale No. 14 overall
Chris Peters of FloHockey (link): ranked Sale No. 21 overall
There are a lot of things working in favor of this pick. Sale is a tall, toolsy player with good speed and skating skill. And beyond that his data profile already supports his status as a first-round pick. Add to that the fact that he has performed at an adequate level in a high-level professional league already as an 18-year-old, and there are many different ways to look at Sale and like the pick.
Kraken general manager Ron Francis has often said he looks to his scouts and analytics department to support each other before making a move. This looks like a pick where both sides of the front office were able to find common ground, and with director of amateur scouting Robert Kron having plenty of connections in his native Czechia, he undoubtedly had plenty of information about Sale.
It has been a while since we have done a round of Musings, but with a crazy week ahead across the league, I thought it was time I dusted off the template and shared some thoughts before we head into the NHL Entry Draft and then free agency.
Managing expectations of NHL Entry Draft prospects
The first round of the NHL Entry Draft kicks off Wednesday as 32 of the best draft-eligible hockey players in the world will hear their names called in Nashville. Rounds 2-7 will be Thursday starting at 8 a.m. Pacific. For the players that get selected, it is a remarkable accomplishment, even if a lot of them might not ever suit up for an NHL team. For those players that do eventually make it, there is still a long road ahead. To help manage everyone’s expectations, here is a quick refresher on the outlook of an NHL prospect.
First round of the NHL Entry Draft
The first round of the NHL Entry Draft is as close to a sure thing as it comes. 98 percent of NHL skaters drafted in the first round between 2010 and 2018 have played at least one NHL game and 81 percent of the first rounders played at least 100 games in the NHL.
Note that this visual excludes goalies drafted. Goalies are unique in terms of development time, and games played can be misleading since goalies can be in the NHL but not get credit for an official game played if they are serving as the backup.
Timing of first-round draft picks
When players make it to the NHL is another core component of setting expectations. Where a skater is drafted in the first round will correlate with the expected games played by season, but on the aggregate, the peak number of games played by a first-round draft pick will be around his sixth season after being drafted.
Assuming no trades that impact the Kraken’s first pick of the NHL Entry Draft, they will select 20th overall Wednesday. That means we should not expect Seattle’s first-round pick to play more than 25 games in the NHL until the 2025-26 season.
Other themes of the NHL entry draft
One of the biggest stories of the draft will be who drafts the Russian phenom, Matvei Michkov. There was a time when I remember people debating who would go No. 1, Michkov or Connor Bedard, but the world has changed since then. Michkov faced adversity and is proving to be enigmatic. Teams will need to evaluate the risk they are willing to take on by drafting Michkov, as there do seem to be a lot of questions about when he might make it to North America. Most prognosticators seem to think he doesn’t slip past eighth overall.
On that note, here is a look at the number of Russians drafted by team and round over the last three NHL Entry Drafts.
They released the Kraken… schedule
In case you missed it, the Kraken released their 2023-24 schedule. They will open in Vegas on Oct. 10, which will be the night the Golden Knights raise their Stanley Cup Championship banner. The home opener will be Oct. 17 against the Colorado Avalanche. The Kraken have the fewest back-to-back games in the league next season, which should be an advantage. During the 2022-23 season, the Kraken were 8-5-3 in the second game of a back-to-back scenario, though, so maybe this is a bad thing.
The Kraken will travel 49,572 miles this coming season which is 5,000 more miles than last season. 49,572 is fourth most behind Edmonton (53,902), Winnipeg (53,008), and Calgary (50,013).
Other Kraken Musings
The Kraken prospect pool is rather shallow at defense. We all like Ty Nelson (2022 third round) but of the drafted players, Ryker Evans (2021 second round) appears to be the only lock to eventually make the NHL.
On that note, if either of the Swedish defensemen of Tom Willander or Axel Sandin-Pellikka slip to the Kraken at No. 20, either of them will be hard to pass up.
The Kraken have never drafted a Swedish hockey play in the NHL Entry Draft.
It was fun to start entering Kraken game dates in my calendar this week. I have also started to circle a few away games on the schedule.
I wonder how many fans will be booing Cale Makar on opening night?
The Kraken have just three regular-season home games in October and a whopping 10 home games in March.
One of the rumored players on the trade block is Samuel Girard from the Colorado Avalanche. I would love to see Ron Francis pull another Oliver Bjorkstrand-like trade for Girard.
The Kraken re-signed defenseman Gustav Olofsson this week to a two-year, two-way deal for a league minimum of $775k AAV. Olofsson was steady for the few games when he got called up this season, but what I remember about him is his interaction with the fans when they were playing one of their AHL games at the Kraken Community Iceplex. He made a point to wave to kids on the glass and give fist bumps. Things you just love to see.
NHL clubs have until Friday to submit qualifying offers to their pending restricted free agents. We have mentioned it multiple times, but we do not anticipate Daniel Sprong receiving a qualifying offer. Essentially, he played too well and priced himself out of re-signing with Kraken.
Morgan Geekie is the interesting pending RFA. We saw how shrewd Ron Francis can be when he did not qualify Ryan Donato and Sprong last season, only to re-sign them in free agency later in the summer. Could he do something similar with Geekie? If Geekie is not qualified, I do not see him coming back to Seattle.
There are seven days where the Kraken, Silvertips, and Thunderbirds are all playing home games.
The busy week ahead
It is going to be a busy week, so to help you (and myself) keep it all straight, here is the rundown.
6/28 – First Round of the NHL Entry Draft (ESPN)
6/29 – Rounds two through seven of the NHL Entry Draft (NHL Network)
6/30 – Qualifying offers due for all pending restricted free agents, buyout period ends
7/1 – NHL free agency period opens
7/1 – Seattle Kraken development camp starts
7/2 – Seattle Kraken development camp open to the public
7/5 – Seattle Kraken development camp 3-on-3 scrimmage open to the public
There is a lot going on right now, and we surely missed a few topics, but if there are any questions, thoughts, or areas you would like me to explore, leave a note in the comments section. Thank you for reading. Enjoy the draft, free agency, and development camp.
It’s draft week, and that means a lot of content here at Sound Of Hockey. John Barr and Darren Brown will be talking about the draft on this week’s Sound Of Hockey Podcast. On the website, check out:
The Sound Of Hockey Big Board, compiling rankings and other data for 6000+ draft eligible skaters;
Today, we mock draft. I will presume that players will come off the board in the order predicted by the Big Board. For example, if a player is slotted at No. 47 on the Big Board, I treat that player as unavailable to the Kraken at pick No. 50. In highlighting potential “alternative” picks, I’ll mention a few players who could be in range if they “fall” to Seattle’s pick. I won’t “predict” any trades, but I’ll mention a few that would be fun along the way.
Age: 17 | Height: 6’1.5” | Weight: 200 | Left shot | 27 goals and 55 assists in 57 games played
Scout’s view: “Musty has an excellent shot from range, distributes quite well off of the rush and does a great job of creating space for himself. His ability to create consistently at 5v5 is a credit to how well he handles pressure. Musty will take advantage of tight lanes when looking to thread the needle and will look to complete drop passes when hitting a wall.” – Josh Tessler
Notes: Musty would check a lot of boxes for the Kraken. His point production stacks up against past high draft picks from the OHL. He has the size, shot, and playmaking ability to thrive in the top half of an NHL lineup. He is one of the youngest players in the draft. And, he happens to play a position (left wing) at which the Kraken have not yet invested much draft capital.
Some scouts faulted his engagement and defense, though others reported that these aspects of his game improved as his draft season progressed. His skating may be the biggest question mark, but his physical profile and skill creates an avenue to a bottom-six role in the NHL even if the skating doesn’t come around.
How about a few alternatives? LW Samuel Honzek (Big Board rank: 19 | Analytics rank: 20) is an impressive athlete. LW Andrew Cristall (Big Board rank: 25 | Analytics rank: 8) is intriguing for his offensive potential if Kraken scouts are sold on his skating and overall game.
What if the draft were 10% more fun? Let’s trade picks 20, 52, and 84 to the Pittsburgh Penguins for pick No. 14 and draft LW Zach Benson (Big Board rank: 6 | Analytics rank: 6) if he falls due to size concerns.
Age: 18 | Height: 5’11.75” | Weight: 190 | Right shot | 6 goals and 55 assists in 77 games played
Scout’s view: “The four way mobility (especially his edgework and lateral quickness) is excellent . . . . As a puck mover, Brzustewicz stands out because of his vision and decision making. Poised under pressure, he always seems to make the correct play with the puck on his stick. . . . I’m a little leary of the projection, but he passed the eye test almost every night in the second half showing great progression.” – Brock Otten
Notes: Scouts describe a well-rounded profile that was trending up toward the end of the 2022-23 season. Scouting critiques point to his underlying athleticism and engagement level, but his skating skill seems solid enough for him to project as solid in the transition game. While he may not have a dynamic element that makes a top-of-the-lineup projection likely, he checks a lot of boxes for Seattle. He plays a position of thin depth in the organization (right defense), and his scoring suggests he is a solid value in the mid-second round.
How about a few alternatives? Many scouts prefer RD Beau Akey (Big Board rank: 47 | Analytics rank: 43). LD Luca Cagnoni (Big Board rank: 49 | Analytics rank: 23) is an undersized but talented player who could pay dividends if he can survive defensively at the NHL level. LD Etienne Morin (Big Board rank: 52 | Analytics rank: 57) was highly productive in the QMJHL. In reality, pick No. 50 may be a selection where Seattle tries to catch a player, likely a forward, who “falls.” I’ll highlight a few of these as alternatives to pick No. 52.
What if the draft were 10% more fun? Let’s trade picks 50 and 52 to Chicago for pick 35 and draft RD Lukas Dragicevic (Big Board Rank: 33 | Analytics Rank: 19), a blueliner with as much offensive upside as any in the draft.
Age: 18 | Height: 6’1” | Weight: 185 | Right shot | 12 goals and 13 assists in 59 games played
Scout’s view: “[T]here’s no doubt about Hämeenaho’s best quality being his intelligence. He’s an extremely smart off-puck player at both ends of the rink. . . . On the other side of the coin is Hämeenaho’s skating. It’s a problem with both the mechanics and the output. . . . Both the top speed and the acceleration are lacking.” – Elite Prospects Draft Guide
Notes: Hameenaho is routinely lauded for strong intelligence and hockey sense, making the right plays without the puck consistently. Otherwise he has a solid-but-not-superlative skill set across the board and is burdened by below-average skating. Several scouts suggest he’s close to being ready to take on a third-line role in the NHL right now but doubt he has much more upside beyond that. While this is seemingly meant as a criticism, I don’t see it that way. If Hameenaho caps out as a third-line player, that is an excellent result for a second-round pick. His production at the highest Finnish pro league at his age makes him a prime target in my NHLe calculation. At the very least he’d be a high-floor counterbalance against other high-upside picks if the Kraken selected him in the second round.
How about a few alternatives? RW Jayden Perron (Big Board rank: 36 | Analytics rank: 30), who would be a worthy selection at pick No. 50 or 52 if he falls. RW Koehn Ziemmer (Big Board rank: 44 | Analytics rank: 22) could very well be the choice at 50 or 52 if he lingers. Setting aside the uncertainty of drafting Russian players, Roman Kantserov (Big Board rank: 64 | Analytics rank: 34) would be in the mix. If I could have cheated on the premise of this exercise–that players will be drafted in Big Board order–I would have gone with Perron or Ziemmer at No. 50 and Brzustewicz at No. 52.
Age: 17 | Height: 6’2” | Weight: 179 | Left shot | 12 goals and 43 assists in 70 games played
Scout’s view: “Bertucci’s a lockdown defender with a budding transition game. He gets on his check early, matches opponents’ footwork along the boards, and ties up sticks around the net. Physicality and pace kills plays across the rink, and make him a formidable 1-on-1 defender.” – Elite Prospects Draft Guide
Notes: Bertucci’s data supports a selection in the top two rounds. Add to that quality size, young age, and on-ice performance that was trending up toward the end of the season, and there is a lot to recommend selecting him, even if it is viewed as a bit of a “reach” at pick No. 57. Critiques of Bertucci often returned to his performance with the puck under pressure, but some noted improvements as the season moved along.
How about a few alternatives? Bertucci’s teammate RW Coulsen Pitre (Big Board Rank: 68 | Analytics Rank: 41) is an intriguing alternative. Undersized but hard charging forwards Luca Pinelli (Big Board Rank: 61 | Analytics Rank: 46) and Denver Barkey (Big Board Rank: 66 | Analytics Rank: 51) would also make sense. The Kraken may opt to snag a goalie in the second round, and, if they do, Jacob Fowler (Big Board Rank: 71 | Analytics Rank: 136) and Juha Jatkola (more on him in a minute) stand out to me based on their production.
Age: 18 | Height: 6’1” | Weight: 181 | Right shot | 8 goals and 19 assists in 42 games played
Scout’s view: “He’s solid in his own end, going down to his positioning (most of the time), his active stick, and his impressive four-way mobility. His skating especially stands out as a trait that should carry over extremely well to the next levels. There are times when he can puck chase, but it’s important to note his age here. He has a great deal of development time left. He also brings an excellent level of physicality, not afraid to mix it up with anyone.” – McKeen’s Draft Guide
Notes: McCarthy’s data justifies his draft position, particularly as a right-handed defenseman. And scouts saw an emerging physical presence with a quality defensive game and movement skills. Headed for college in the fall, he affords the Kraken a longer timeline before reaching a signing decision.
How about a few alternatives? Tanner Ludtke (Big Board rank: 106 | Analytics rank: 72) intrigues as a center prospect who still could be on the board at this point. Winger Aiden Fink (Big Board rank: 91 | Analytics rank: 83) would be a home run swing on a small Junior-A scorer. Alexander Rykov (Big Board rank: 78 | Analytics rank: 47) would be interesting if he is still there.
Age: 20 | Height: 6’1” | Weight: 176 | Left glove | .905 save % in 43 games played
Scout’s view: “He lacks the massive frame that a lot of scouts look for, but makes up for that with an intelligent, aggressive approach to facing shooters. . . . Playing in a professional league for an extended period of time for the first time in his career seems to have paid off dividends for his situational awareness. . . . Strong skating ability in regards to both his strength and edgework are also key components to Jatkola’s game.” – Elite Prospects Draft Guide
Notes: Jatkola makes sense to me for two reasons. First, playing in Finland dovetails with the team’s goalie expertise in its scouting ranks. Second, Jatkola showed that he could perform as an above-average regular at a high professional level (Liiga). Junior goalies are years away from reaching that stage. So, theoretically, Jatkola should carry less uncertainty and a shorter development path.
How about a few alternatives? From this point forward in the draft, any player with a strong data profile becomes a likely Kraken target. Among those not mentioned below are: RW Yegor Klimovich; RD Mazden Leslie; LD Magomed Sharakanov; LD Oskar Asplund; LD Elmeri Laakso; RW Alexander Suvorov; and C Antti Virtanen.
Round 5. Pick 148: Ryan Conmy, RW, Sioux City Musketeers (USHL)
Age: 18 | Height: 5’10” | Weight: 185 | Right shot | 34 goals and 30 assists in 62 games played
Scout’s view: “Conmy’s a precision shooter, crafty playmaker, and inside lane attacker. . . . When Conmy’s not on the puck, he’s getting open and creating space. . . . And he gobbles up every loose puck with a two-metre radius, cementing his 200-foot player status.” – Elite Prospects Draft Guide
Notes: Perhaps my favorite sleeper draft prospect in this class, his data profile resembles a top pick, and scouts seem generally complimentary of his play. Critiques focus on his skating mechanics and overall speed, but similar things can be said of prospects ranked much higher.
Round 6. Pick 168: Ivan Anoshko, C, Dinamo-Shinnik Bobruysk (MHL)
Age: 18 | Height: 5’10” | Weight: 168 | Left shot | 21 goals and 33 assists in 55 games played
Scout’s View: “A skilled playmaking center out of Belarus, Anoshko plays a heady and mature game. He was the MHL’s rookie of the year this season and has been on the scouting radar for a few years thanks to his international performances for Belarus. Despite a lack of size, he routinely attacks between the hash marks and drives the net. The athletic tools will undoubtedly need to improve . . . .” – McKeen’s Draft Guide
Notes: An interesting late-round center prospect, there are some rumors he may play in the USHL next season, which would make his development more manageable.
Round 6. Pick 180: Justin Kipkie, LD, Victoria Royals (WHL)
Age: 17 | Height: 6’4” | Weight: 190 | Left shot | 8 goals and 25 assists in 67 games played
Scout’s View: “[Kipkie] is a strong, hard-nosed defenseman who showcases impressive mental fortitude and above-average hockey sense. He utilizes his strength and grit both in battles in the defensive end, as well as by leaning into his heavy shot. . . . His skating is flat-out ugly, with heavy boots and minimal agility, but there is possibility for improvement. He is a little difficult to project at the moment, but there is enough raw material here that a development staff could sculpt an NHL defenseman out of.” – McKeen’s Draft Guide
Notes: This is the point of the draft where gambling on a big-bodied defenseman makes the most sense. Kipkie is young, has tools, and some production to go with a 6-foot-4 frame. The Kraken will face a quick decision about whether to sign him, though, which is what makes this pick a bit difficult.
Age: 20 | Height: 5’11” | Weight: 176 | Right shot | 2 goals and 28 assists in 74 games played
Scout’s View: “[Konyushov] led his KHL team in average ice time, as his cerebral game on both ends convinced coach Igor Larionov to immediately give him an opportunity for a leading role on the team. And if we look at advanced stats, those are telling that this trust paid off really well, as Konyushkov is among the league’s leaders in both completed pass amount and percentage, as well as in the puck battle win percentage.” – Victor Fomich
Notes: This draft ends up a bit too heavy on the defensive side, but Konyuskov is too interesting to pass up given his strong play in the second-best professional league in the world.
Welcome to year two of the Sound Of Hockey Big Board for the NHL Entry Draft. It’s back and better than ever.
What is the Big Board? It’s a compilation of reputable draft analyst and public scouting service lists and an overall composite ranking built on those lists. We gathered ranking data from 19 sources.
Then we consolidated those various ranks into a single composite ranking by a weighted geometric mean calculation. Why do we use geomean? Read up here. Weights were assigned based on our assessment of the depth of experience, sourced reporting, or scouting insight factored into the component lists themselves. Bob McKenzie’s list will be weighted heavily when it is added, for example.
In addition we have compiled rankings from several data and analytics sources. By a similar weighted geomean process, we then tabulated those into a separate “analytics” ranking for each of these prospects. The main composite ranking referenced above is built from the primary scouting sources only.
I included my own rough NHLe calculations as a source on the Big Board, but those numbers are factored into these rankings at very low weight and only become significant for prospects who are unranked by any other source. I explained why I did this in an earlier post.
Finally, the Sound Of Hockey Big Board provides information on each player’s measurements, statistics, and playing experience in the 2022-23 season, mostly drawn from Elite Prospects, NHL Central Scouting, and the NHL Draft Combine. In fact, based on what we have seen, we believe the Big Board is the most comprehensive single source in providing this information anywhere.
And the Big Board provides all of this for almost 7000 draft eligible prospects. (That is not a typo. Last year the Big Board covered almost 700 prospects. This year it is almost 7000.)
So, without further ado, you can find the Sound Of Hockey Big Board in Google Sheets HERE.
Important note on using the Sound Of Hockey Big Board: If you want to filter the data by various categories, highlight row 3, then select “Data,” “Filter Views,” and “Create New Temporary Filter View.” This will allow you to manipulate the data in a way visible only to you.
Here is a snapshot of top 64 prospects in the 2023 NHL Entry Draft, sorted by the overall composite rank:
Rank
Name
2023 Team
2023 League
Position
Hand
1
Connor Bedard
Regina Pats
WHL
C
R
2
Adam Fantilli
Univ. of Michigan
NCAA
C
L
3
Leo Carlsson
Örebro HK
SHL
C
L
4
Matvei Michkov
SKA St. Petersburg
KHL
RW
L
5
Will Smith
USNTDP
USNTDP
C
R
6
Zach Benson
Winnipeg Ice
WHL
LW
L
7
Ryan Leonard
USNTDP
USNTDP
RW
R
8
Dalibor Dvorsky
AIK
HockeyAllsvenskan
C
L
9
Oliver Moore
USNTDP
USNTDP
C
L
10
David Reinbacher
EHC Kloten
NL
D
R
11
Axel Sandin Pellikka
Skellefteå AIK
SHL
D
R
12
Matthew Wood
Univ. of Connecticut
NCAA
RW
R
13
Colby Barlow
Owen Sound Attack
OHL
LW
L
14
Gabe Perreault
USNTDP
USNTDP
RW
L
15
Nate Danielson
Brandon Wheat Kings
WHL
C
R
16
Dmitri Simashev
Lokomotiv Yaroslavl
KHL
D
L
17
Eduard Sale
HC Kometa Brno
Czechia
LW
L
18
Brayden Yager
Moose Jaw Warriors
WHL
C
R
19
Samuel Honzek
Vancouver Giants
WHL
LW
L
20
Tom Willander
Rögle BK J20
J20 Nationell
D
R
21
Quentin Musty
Sudbury Wolves
OHL
LW
L
22
Calum Ritchie
Oshawa Generals
OHL
C
R
23
Daniil But
Lokomotiv Yaroslavl
KHL
LW
R
24
Otto Stenberg
Frölunda HC
SHL
C
L
25
Andrew Cristall
Kelowna Rockets
WHL
LW
L
26
Gavin Brindley
Univ. of Michigan
NCAA
C
R
27
Mikhail Gulyayev
Omskie Yastreby
MHL
D
L
28
Riley Heidt
Prince George Cougars
WHL
C
L
29
Bradly Nadeau
Penticton Vees
BCHL
LW
R
30
Oliver Bonk
London Knights
OHL
D
R
31
Ethan Gauthier
Sherbrooke Phoenix
QMJHL
RW
R
32
David Edstrom
Frölunda HC J20
J20 Nationell
C
L
33
Lukas Dragicevic
Tri-City Americans
WHL
D
R
34
Gracyn Sawchyn
Seattle Thunderbirds
WHL
C
R
35
Michael Hrabal
Omaha Lancers
USHL
G
L
36
Jayden Perron
Chicago Steel
USHL
RW
R
37
Tanner Molendyk
Saskatoon Blades
WHL
D
L
38
Oscar Fisker Molgaard
HV71
SHL
C
L
39
Kasper Halttunen
HIFK
Liiga
RW
R
40
Nick Lardis
Peterborough Petes
OHL
LW
L
41
Anton Wahlberg
Malmö Redhawks
SHL
C
L
42
Theo Lindstein
Brynäs IF
SHL
D
L
43
Charlie Stramel
Univ. of Wisconsin
NCAA
C
R
44
Koehn Ziemmer
Prince George Cougars
WHL
RW
R
45
Trey Augustine
USNTDP Juniors
USHL
G
L
46
William Whitelaw
Youngstown Phantoms
USHL
RW
R
47
Beau Akey
Barrie Colts
OHL
D
R
48
Carson Rehkopf
Kitchener Rangers
OHL
LW
L
49
Luca Cagnoni
Portland Winterhawks
WHL
D
L
50
Caden Price
Kelowna Rockets
WHL
D
L
51
Danny Nelson
USNTDP
USNTDP
C
L
52
Etienne Morin
Moncton Wildcats
QMJHL
D
L
53
Alex Ciernik
Södertälje SK
HockeyAllsvenskan
LW
L
54
Carson Bjarnason
Brandon Wheat Kings
WHL
G
L
55
Hunter Brzustewicz
Kitchener Rangers
OHL
D
R
56
Lenni Hameenaho
Ässät
Liiga
RW
R
57
Aram Minnetian
USNTDP
USNTDP
D
R
58
Maxim Strbak
Sioux Falls Stampede
USHL
D
R
59
Kalan Lind
Red Deer Rebels
WHL
LW
L
60
Aydar Suniev
Penticton Vees
BCHL
LW
L
61
Luca Pinelli
Ottawa 67’s
OHL
C
L
62
Nico Myatovic
Seattle Thunderbirds
WHL
LW
L
63
Easton Cowan
London Knights
OHL
RW
L
64
Roman Kantserov
Stalnye Lisy Magnitogorsk
MHL
RW
L
Rankings sources
Here are the scouting sources sources we used (so far) in building the Big Board:
NHL Central Scouting (link): 453 prospects split into 4 separate lists
Elite Prospects (link) (top 32 free; full list $$): 136 ranked prospects
McKeen’s (link) (top 32 free; full list $$): 224 ranked prospects
At this point, a few more words on the Big Board and its uses are likely in order.
First, when you click through to the full composite draft board (here is another link), you will see that many of the individual rankings are grayed out beyond the top handful. This is because those rankings are behind a paywall. To get to Corey Pronman’s full ranking of prospects, for example, a subscription to The Athletic is required. While we utilized all of the individual rankings listed above to develop our composite list, we will not be sharing subscriber-only individual rankings in the public version of the composite big board.
Second, the Big Board does not reflect our view on these prospects. We at Sound Of Hockey have read reports, watched some videos, and crunched a few numbers. I’ll be putting up a few thoughts of my own before the draft, but that is not what this exercise is about. The Big Board is simply a tabulation of the rankings of others. A player’s ranking has nothing to do with whether any of us here “like” the player or not. (I can assure you that, personally, I like Thunderbirds goalie Thomas Milic very much, for example.)
Third, and finally, it bears emphasis that a “composite” ranking is not the be-all and end-all. In many ways, finding the “best” public list and trusting it is preferable. A consensus board cannot explain why one prospect is ranked higher than another, and it certainly cannot displace the work of scouts or draft reporters.
But a composite ranking can provide some added information. Think of it as the cherry on top of the sundae, not the sundae itself.
How so? Last year I used the case of Brad Lambert as an example. This year Andrew Cristall could be an instructive case. Both players are talented but viewed as risky and had widely varying rankings on individual public boards. How do we synthesize that information? A composite approach can exploit the wisdom of the crowd. Cristall’s final ranking may blend the upside and risk, placing him in a “fair” or “expected” position.
Local connections in the draft
For a team already loaded with drafted prospects, the Sound Of Hockey Big Board sees six more Seattle Thunderbirds having their names called during the 2023 NHL Draft:
C Gracyn Sawchyn (ranked No. 34 on the Big Board)
LW Nico Myatovic (No. 62)
G Scott Ratzlaff (No. 88)
G Thomas Milic (No. 171)
LD Jeremy Hanzel (No. 175)
LD Sawyer Mynio (No. 198)
This projection of six drafted players would trail only the U.S. National Team Development Program in total draftees. This is yet further confirmation of the remarkable team GM Bil La Forge has assembled. (More coming on that soon. Yes, that’s a tease.)
Beyond the Thunderbirds, there should be no shortage of local connections in the draft. One of the top defensemen in the draft is Lukas Dragicevic of the Tri-City Americans (No. 33). G Tomas Suchanek (No. 151) also has chance to get drafted from the Americans. C Tommaso De Luca (No. 168) and D Sage Weinstein (No. 206) of the Spokane Chiefs have a shot. And, from the Everett Silvertips, C Austin Roest (No. 172) is a good bet to be drafted as well.
Final thoughts
The 2023 NHL Draft kicks off in just two weeks, on June 28, 2023, at 4:00 p.m. PT. In the meantime, here again is a link to the 2023 Sound Of Hockey Big Board. Bookmark it, share it, and consult it between now and the draft. Keep it close by during the draft itself because the data in it is a pretty strong indicator of what the Kraken (and other teams) will do. In the meantime, similar to last year, we’ll return before the draft with some opinions on Big Board value targets and with a Seattle Kraken mock draft.
The 2023 NHL Scouting Combine took place in Buffalo, N.Y., from Monday through Saturday of last week. 106 draft-eligible prospects attended. One aspect of the combine is a battery of physical measurements and tests that afford teams further data on these top prospects. The information can be useful for teams in cross-referencing their existing evaluations of a player’s on-ice physicality and athleticism.
Unfortunately, the NHL does not disseminate the full results. Annually, Mark Scheig of The Hockey Writers does Herculean work tabulating as many height and weight measurements as he can. (This year he captured more than 100.) For the other measurement (wing span) and all of the physical tests, the NHL publishes to the public only top-25 rankings (and even then in relatively difficult-to-use format). Only the teams know the full results below that.
We collected all publicly available combine data and built a sortable chart,HERE. As far as we know, this information is not available in this comprehensive, searchable form anywhere else.
Important note on using this combine data: If you want to filter the data by various categories, highlight row 3, then select “Data,” “Filter Views,” and “Create New Temporary Filter View.” This will allow you to manipulate the data in a way visible only to you
For each test listed, you will see the available results and the rank position among combine participants. (For a primer on the tests themselves, check out this recent article.)
In addition, we included two composite score rankings for each of the combine participants, derived on the geomean of the player’s ranking in the various tests. The overall ranking includes all size measurements and athletic testing. The “athletic testing only” rank gives a ranking that excludes the size measurements.
Now, a word on the limits of this dataset: Since we only have top-25 results for most tests, we do not even know if all prospects participated in each test. A player may be dealing with an injury, for example, or simply decline to participate, and we would have no way to distinguish that in the publicly available data from a player who participated but performed around group average or worse. I would imagine the full data is most useful to teams in identifying players with “red flags” in their athletic profile. But since we have only top-25 data in most categories, this data is most useful in identifying positive outliers. Who were the players that performed exceptionally well? (Beyond that, I would caution against parsing the results too closely, as I am not sure there is any indicative difference between a top-30 performer and a top-50 performer, for example.)
Let’s get into a few of the top performers and some Seattle Kraken-related takeaways.
Combine is most useful for the interviews
The bulk of the week in Buffalo is allocated to meeting time between teams and players. More so than the athletic testing, this is by far the most important aspect of the combine. Teams have long studied the players on the ice, but may not have had the opportunity for in-depth conversations with the person. This is their chance, with many top prospects reporting that they speak with twenty-plus teams during the week.
As an example, according to Mark Scheig, the Kraken spoke with Kitchener Rangers right-handed defender Hunter Brzustewicz, a player projected to go in the mid-second round. (A strong performer in my analytics ranking, it happens I have been mock drafting him to the Kraken frequently.)
Hunter Brzustewicz spoke to 18 teams this week which include Seattle and #CBJ. He says his shot mentality is his biggest area of focus for improvement. pic.twitter.com/Lqvf3OdrHp
Guelph Storm (OHL) right-handed defenseman Cameron Allen and Vancouver Giants (WHL) winger Samuel Honzek stood out as the two top-of-class athletic performers at the combine.
Allen was a highly touted defender coming into this season, but an up-and-down year sent him tumbling down draft boards. He is currently ranked 77th on the forthcoming Sound Of Hockey Big Board, and his analytics ranking is even lower. This was a necessary performance for Allen to prompt teams to think back to the raw, talented prospect they had envisioned at the beginning of the season. I will be watching to see if this performance halts his slide down draft boards.
Unlike Allen, Honzek has seen his stock on the rise this year. A hulking winger with some scoring touch, he is currently ranked No. 22 on the Sound Of Hockey Big Board (and No. 21 in my personal analytics ranking).
For the Seattle Kraken and the 20th overall pick, Honzek’s profile is intriguing in comparison with Andrew Cristall, the current No. 25 player on the Big Board (and No. 10 in my personal analytics ranking). Honzek is a big, loud, toolsy player with strong production.
Cristall, on the other hand, is relatively small at 5-foot-9.5, possesses just average speed, and did not place in the top 25 in any of the athletic tests at the combine. Yet, his CHL production was elite, far outpacing Honzek, and Cristall is generally viewed as something of an offensive savant. Indeed, consensus No. 1 pick Connor Bedard has called Cristall the smartest player he’s ever played with.
If the Seattle pick came down to Honzek or Cristall, which player would Seattle prefer? The combine got me thinking about that question.
Some smaller players may have answered questions
It is a common refrain when we hear from team scouts that smaller players without elite speed or athletic traits often are ranked lower by NHL franchises internally than they are on public lists. These players are viewed as less likely to successfully transition their game to the NHL level if they cannot be counted on to win with either speed or physicality.
Accordingly, a sterling combine could be a boon to a smaller player. This year a pair of sub-5-foot-11 players posted strong results. Bradly Nadeau of the Penticton Vees (BCHL) and Easton Cowan of the London Knights (OHL) stood out positively. Nadeau is currently ranked 31st on the Sound of Hockey Big Board and Cowan is ranked 72nd.
Nadeau’s performance, in particular, piqued my interest from a Seattle Kraken vantage point. There likely won’t be a player (short of Cristall, perhaps) who carries as much offensive upside as Nadeau when the Kraken pick in the first round.
Nadeau absolutely obliterated the BCHL this season, posting more than two points per game. Yet, the lower level of competition (when compared with the WHL, for example) leaves many scouts with unanswered questions about just how well his game will translate. And these questions were magnified by questions about how well his skating and athletic traits would translate at his smaller size. The combine may have at least partially answered some concerns falling in the latter category.
The draft’s top-ranked goaltender may also be its most athletic
Michael Hrabal of the Omaha Lancers (USHL) has emerged as the top goaltender in this class on many public draft boards, and he ranks as the first goalie, and No. 38 overall, on the current iteration of the Sound Of Hockey Big Board. He may have added some fuel to the fire in Buffalo by posting impressive athletic numbers to go with a 6-foot-6.75 frame. At this point, a pick at the end of the first round or early in the second round seems likely for Hrabal.
Next up: The Sound Of Hockey Big Board
Next you hear from me, we’ll be publishing version 1.0 of the 2023 Sound Of Hockey Big Board. Not every scouting or analytics list is available yet, but there is a critical mass at this point, and we can’t wait to share the results. As we did last year, we will continue to update the Big Board as more data roles in.
We are now within four weeks of the NHL Entry Draft. This means we are close to the return of the Sound Of Hockey Big Board. Last year, we compiled public rankings from 19 draft reporters and scouting services and ranked 675 prospects.
In the coming weeks, I’ll have a bit more information on how the Big Board performed last year as a predictive tool. In short: It was a strong indicator of consensus in the top 100, but less so after that. The Big Board was particularly strong predicting first-round prospects. It accurately “predicted” 28 of 32 first-rounders, and the player the Big Board listed No. 32, Owen Beck, was selected with the first pick of the second round (No. 33). The other three players that “fell” out of the Big Board’s top 32 were No. 26 Jagger Firkus (whom Seattle scooped up at pick 35), No. 29 Ryan Chesley (drafted at pick 37 by the Capitals), and No. 30 Calle Odelius (drafted at pick 65 by the New York Islanders).
I’m hoping that the Sound Of Hockey Big Board will be better than ever this year. One respect in which I have tried to improve it is by lengthening the board. The board missed almost two dozen drafted players last year, and I wanted to get that number down into the single digits this year. That meant going beyond the players ranked on public lists and directly gathering data on players from more than 20 leagues around the world from Elite Prospects.
After gathering that data, I encountered a question: How was I going to “rank” the players that don’t appear on any public rankings? The best solution I could come up with was to create a purely data-driven ranking of my own to supplement the public rankings and provide some type of order for the additional prospects.
My baseline for this work was the concept of an “NHL equivalency.” What is an equivalency? To oversimplify, an equivalency is projected point production at the NHL level based on a conversion of the player’s point production in another league, such as the WHL. By studying the performance of players historically, analysts can come up with relative league strengths and then use those strengths for a per-game conversion. This is a very crude metric, but a draft pick’s historical point production has been proven again and again to be a strong indicator of future NHL point production. (For goaltenders, save percentage tends to be the metric used.)
While many have worked in this space, I built off of the work of TopDownHockey. I then tweaked the gross equivalencies I created with directional adjustments based on the draft eligible player’s (1) age, (2) height, and (3) redraft status. I did not choose these factors at random–all have been proven significant in projecting draft prospect success or failure. I also made position-based adjustments, since a point-per-game defenseman is rarer and arguably more valuable than a point-per-game forward.
This gave me a crude data-only “ranking” of thousands of draft eligible prospects. While it’s primary purpose will be, as I mentioned, to supplement the Big Board, I figured it would be fun to share it as a stand-alone list too, since we are in draft ranking season.
Before I get to that ranking, three more notes. First, this list does not contain any qualitative evaluations or adjustments from me. I have watched some of these players and have personal preferences, but I haven’t incorporated those here. Would I personally rank Connor Bedard No. 1? Yeah. When it comes to the draft, data is only a piece of the puzzle. Most importantly, the team needs scouting conviction on the player.
Second, the aspect of all of this I feel least confident about is the positioning of goaltenders relative to skaters. I normalized the goaltender scores so that the number of goaltenders ranked within the top 224 would approximate historical norms, but this process won’t account for whether this is a “good” goalie class or not. So, at the end of the day, the order of the goaltenders may be illuminating, but perhaps take their placement relative to the skaters with a grain of salt.
Third, before sharing this, I ran last year’s Big Board through the same equivalency process. The sample size of last year’s Big Board was smaller, but it still captured the vast majority of top prospects. The results were intriguing, particularly with respect to the Seattle Kraken.
Seattle had six picks in the top three rounds of the 2022 draft. Five of those six picks ranked within the top 40 overall in my equivalency calculation, with goalie Niklas Kokko being the only outlier. Later in the draft Tucker Robertson and Kyle Jackson were two of the very highest ranked re-entry candidates too. Beyond that, only the high schoolers (Barrett Hall and Ben MacDonald) were, somewhat predictably, not data-driven picks since their competition level was so low compared with other draft-eligible prospects.
All of this gives me confidence that the Kraken, at least, are using similar data to support their draft process. I’ll be keeping a close eye on the top-100 in this equivalency ranking on draft day when it comes time for selections by the Seattle Kraken.
Without further preamble, here is our data-only top 250 for the 2023 NHL Draft:
The full list will be part of the Big Board, but if you have a question about where a player not listed here is ranked, feel free to reach out in the comments below or on Twitter @deepseahockey.
