Bultman: Scott, you mentioned the difficulty of finding potential point-per-game players like Demidov in free agency. Would it be fair, though, to suggest it’s at least as hard to find potential top-pair defenders like Levshunov? Or is it more a matter of your projection on him not quite being at that level?

Wheeler: It’s obviously incredibly difficult to find first-pairing-level defensemen as well, but I think it depends on whether you view Levshunov’s upside as that of a true No. 1. To Corey’s point, you’re less likely to be wrong about Levshunov’s projection than Demidov’s. But I don’t think worrying about job security should be a deciding factor in a decision as significant as this one. As hard as that is in practical terms for NHL scouts and managers, the good ones are comfortable taking risks and are bold in their vision. That’s how you find stars.
I like the Brent Burns comp, but I don’t see any Karlsson in Levshunov’s game and I think the areas of his game that actually need work are his finesse and his game feel/decision-making on offense — things that the Norris types (Karlsson, Fox, etc.) all have in spades. There’s still some rawness to Levshunov’s game that does come with some projection risk. The athletic tools are clearly there. He’s talented. He impacted play offensively and defensively at a very high level this season as a teenager in college hockey. I think it’s close, too, and there’s a real chance he becomes the more impactful NHLer. But he’s going to have to take some important steps to be a truly elite player, like Demidov will.

Bultman: Corey, one of Scott’s points was that this could be Chicago’s last chance for a while to draft a forward like Demidov. How would you respond to that?

Pronman: I think the disparity comes down less to the positional aspect and more to the projection. I think Scott is projecting Demidov as a potential 90-to-100-point winger, and I see a potential 70-to-80-point winger. I see a potential 1D in Levshunov, and Scott seems to lean more toward a 2D.
I can buy Demidov at No. 2 if you see a potential next Panarin or Kaprizov. That’s a superstar. I couldn’t get there with him this season as I could with, say, Matvei Michkov, who Demidov has size and compete edges on but his offensive touch is behind at the same point and times. For me, the comps for Demidov have been names like Lucas Raymond, Kevin Fiala and Jeff Skinner.
I’m frankly just not as impressed as some others with Demidov’s dominance of the MHL. It’s great, obviously, and he’s incredibly skilled. But that league is not the league it was. I often see his performance compared to Nikita Kucherov’s in that league at the same age. There are 37 teams in the MHL now (as opposed to 29 when Kucherov played), in an era where teams like SKA have three teams in that league. The top Russian prospect in the next draft is Ivan Ryabkin, an average-sized high-compete forward who scored at nearly the same rates Demidov did as a draft-1 in that league.
I just would have liked to see what Demidov could have done versus men in the VHL/KHL before elevating him to that special status as a prospect. If you have no issue with the skating, I can somewhat buy it, but as I’ve said before, I have issues with projecting that style to the NHL, which some NHL scouts do and do not agree with.

Bultman: Scott, what were your feelings about evaluating Demidov in the MHL, particularly without some of the tentpole international events?

Wheeler: It complicates the evaluation process a little, but ultimately, we just have what we have. I would have liked to see him at U18s, U20s and the Hlinka, too, but I also have little doubt — based on the talent level he has displayed in the MHL, the back-to-back MVPs, the way he elevated again in the playoffs, and the older, drafted players he has outplayed the last two years — he would have dominated at those events and strengthened, rather than hurt, his case as the No. 2/3 prospect in the draft because of it.
We do have some pro sample to work with as well. Had had five points in three KHL exhibition games and won an initial roster spot over Michkov with SKA. He had six shots on goal and eight attempts in the one VHL game he played in. He had four points in four games in the Sochi Hockey Open against KHL teams (and Russia’s U25 team) with SKA. It’s not the KHL regular-season sample size we had with Michkov, but I think he likely would have played a little more at the pro level had he not lost a month and a half in the fall to a knee injury.

Bultman: All right, I’ll give each of you a closing statement here to wrap this up. Corey, you first.

Pronman: I think there are so many reasons to be excited about Levshunov. He’s an NHL athlete. He has a ton of offensive skills and instincts. He and Buium were as good a draft-eligible defenseman as I’ve ever seen in college hockey. He’s proven he can go up against older players and excel. He plays a premium position. He’s on an incredible development trajectory and has excelled in North America for two years. From the first game I saw of him in the USHL, he just looked like a unique prospect. He looks like a potential star No. 1 defenseman in the NHL and the kind of player you can build a contender around.
There are other great prospects in this draft, but there isn’t another player with as clean a profile who I think checks as many boxes with emphasis outside Celebrini.

Wheeler: I’ll finish with this: If Demidov’s floor is the player type Corey highlighted (a Raymond or a Fiala) — and I believe it is — then you can live with a 60-to-70-point winger at No. 2, but there’s also a good chance Levshunov is the better player. If he’s the other end of the spectrum (a Panarin or a Kaprizov), it probably won’t matter how good Levshunov is because points come at a premium, those types are the best players on the vast majority of NHL teams (you can count on one hand the number of D in the league who are better), and he and Bedard will be one of the better one-two punches in the league in that scenario. I’d take my chances.

After reading the Pronman/Wheeler q&a I'm more confused than ever about who to draft.

I know Wiz thinks both of them are morons

1 interesting thing was Pronman mentioning the mhl isn't the league it used to be,at least not when Kucherov was playing there etc...

And, Hronek is a right shot...... Haven't followed VAN cap news but my guess is they find a way to ink Hronek. Can't remember the compensation but just a couple yrs ago VAN gave up some assets to DET in a trade for him.
- Mr Ricochet

23 million to sign 9 guys and he's an RFA. Probably gets a little less than Bouchard got for a bridge.

After reading the Pronman/Wheeler q&a I'm more confused than ever about who to draft.

I know Wiz thinks both of them are morons

1 interesting thing was Pronman mentioning the mhl isn't the league it used to be,at least not when Kucherov was playing there etc...
- captainserious

I don't think they're morons they just have different perspectives that tend to be less right while Bill is excellent at finding the little things that tend to make NHL players successful and incorporating that with their more obvious strengths.

Dale Tallon was smart enough to take Toews over Kessel and Patrick Kane first but also drafted Jack Skille instead of Kopitar or one of the Staals so what does anyone really know?

I think that Levshunov checks all the boxes for successful NHL player and leader down the road. Size, Skating (all directions), overall athleticism, technical skill, intangible poop like being an engaging guy and involved in the community, speaking fluent English, not a moron and actually goes to class, does stuff outside of rink like go to basketball games which would be a nice contrast to Bedard. Someone needs to be the fun guy who helps the lads blow off steam productively off the ice.

Super high floor with him which is appealing. Maybe more of a Pietrangelo than Hedman. The knock seems to be on ice awareness which you would kind of expect for a guy who came to the states 2 years ago and is a true freshman in the NCAA.

I'm pretty pro get guys into the NHL asap but he's at least one more year at MSU and maybe two which isn't a bad thing.

But then you play the giant Russian is also 2 years from being out of contract, 2 years younger and playing against men.

With either they get close to being able to play that really high 1-2-2 that the Hawks ran in 2010 where they're so mobile and good at denying entries at the blue line and so fast at forward that they eat teams alive in the neutral zone and consistently flip the ice. (but also drafting for need or whatever v bad)

But also as Bill points out, can you pass on a guy whose floor is probably a Tom Wilson but hopefully not a cheap shot artist and at the high end maybe a Barkov type in Lindstrom.

It's a tough call.

23 million to sign 9 guys and he's an RFA. Probably gets a little less than Bouchard got for a bridge.
- fattybeef

Hronek? He's coming off a bridge of 4.4M the past three years. He probably wants close to a max contract at this time. But I doubt if VAN pays him more than Hughes 7.85M.

I don't think they're morons they just have different perspectives that tend to be less right while Bill is excellent at finding the little things that tend to make NHL players successful and incorporating that with their more obvious strengths.

Dale Tallon was smart enough to take Toews over Kessel and Patrick Kane first but also drafted Jack Skille instead of Kopitar or one of the Staals so what does anyone really know?

I think that Levshunov checks all the boxes for successful NHL player and leader down the road. Size, Skating (all directions), overall athleticism, technical skill, intangible poop like being an engaging guy and involved in the community, speaking fluent English, not a moron and actually goes to class, does stuff outside of rink like go to basketball games which would be a nice contrast to Bedard. Someone needs to be the fun guy who helps the lads blow off steam productively off the ice.

Super high floor with him which is appealing. Maybe more of a Pietrangelo than Hedman. The knock seems to be on ice awareness which you would kind of expect for a guy who came to the states 2 years ago and is a true freshman in the NCAA.

I'm pretty pro get guys into the NHL asap but he's at least one more year at MSU and maybe two which isn't a bad thing.

But then you play the giant Russian is also 2 years from being out of contract, 2 years younger and playing against men.

With either they get close to being able to play that really high 1-2-2 that the Hawks ran in 2010 where they're so mobile and good at denying entries at the blue line and so fast at forward that they eat teams alive in the neutral zone and consistently flip the ice. (but also drafting for need or whatever v bad)

But also as Bill points out, can you pass on a guy whose floor is probably a Tom Wilson but hopefully not a cheap shot artist and at the high end maybe a Barkov type in Lindstrom.

It's a tough call.
- fattybeef

Makes me wonder if true that Montreal really wants Demidov, that you look to trade down to 5 if there is still a player on the board the Hawks really like?

Hronek? He's coming off a bridge of 4.4M the past three years. He probably wants close to a max contract at this time. I doubt if VAN pays him more than Hughes 7.85M.
- boilermaker100

Ah - didn't realize that. Good point. You're probably right on there. Maybe he'll take a 3 x 6 and then re up his 29 year?

Here is another clip of Ball calling the action as the Flames announcer in the game against the Hawks:


https://twitter.com/i/status/1798799998210970103

Makes me wonder if true that Montreal really wants Demidov, that you look to trade down to 5 if there is still a player on the board the Hawks really like?
- LAHawk

Boy, that trade down scenario with Montreal is getting some legs here. Let's say it happens.

Montreal selects Dedimov.

Someone said Anaheim is leaning defenseman so Levshunov or Silayev goes next.

What will CBJ do? Take a big center to go along with Fantilli? Or does Waddell want to emphasize defense like he did at Carolina. So maybe Lindstrom or the defenseman Anaheim doesn't take goes to Columbus.

That leaves D-men like D!ckenson, Buium, Yakemchuk (too early to take him?), and forwards Catton or maybe Lindstrom.

If the Hawk brain trust think there is a toss up among three players they would select at #2, and if they make they trade, there is a chance one of them would be available at #5. That plus the other assets they get from Montreal would be my best trade scenario.

I don't think they're morons they just have different perspectives that tend to be less right while Bill is excellent at finding the little things that tend to make NHL players successful and incorporating that with their more obvious strengths.

Dale Tallon was smart enough to take Toews over Kessel and Patrick Kane first but also drafted Jack Skille instead of Kopitar or one of the Staals so what does anyone really know?

I think that Levshunov checks all the boxes for successful NHL player and leader down the road. Size, Skating (all directions), overall athleticism, technical skill, intangible poop like being an engaging guy and involved in the community, speaking fluent English, not a moron and actually goes to class, does stuff outside of rink like go to basketball games which would be a nice contrast to Bedard. Someone needs to be the fun guy who helps the lads blow off steam productively off the ice.

Super high floor with him which is appealing. Maybe more of a Pietrangelo than Hedman. The knock seems to be on ice awareness which you would kind of expect for a guy who came to the states 2 years ago and is a true freshman in the NCAA.

I'm pretty pro get guys into the NHL asap but he's at least one more year at MSU and maybe two which isn't a bad thing.

But then you play the giant Russian is also 2 years from being out of contract, 2 years younger and playing against men.

With either they get close to being able to play that really high 1-2-2 that the Hawks ran in 2010 where they're so mobile and good at denying entries at the blue line and so fast at forward that they eat teams alive in the neutral zone and consistently flip the ice. (but also drafting for need or whatever v bad)

But also as Bill points out, can you pass on a guy whose floor is probably a Tom Wilson but hopefully not a cheap shot artist and at the high end maybe a Barkov type in Lindstrom.

It's a tough call.
- fattybeef

Levshinov/Lindstrom/Demidov - As long as it is the right call, I honestly don't care. I just hope that in 2-3 years we look back and say that mgmt made the right call.

Was all in on Levshunov during the year and when the lottery passed. Then kept seeing Demidov articles about how he is can't miss etc... I'm tired of it all.
Just want to see them make a pick, and hopefully it is the right one, and the kid develops into what they need.

hockey prospects radio (and Wiz's buddy Shane Malloy's sit final top 32 rankings

https://x.com/ShaneMalloy...98790182667198522/photo/1

Paul, they have your guy Sennecke at the Hawks #18 position

They have Demidov at #7. This podcast is where I first heard the concern's with Demidov's skating

hockey prospects radio (and Wiz's buddy Shane Malloy's sit final top 32 rankings

https://x.com/ShaneMalloy...98790182667198522/photo/1

Paul, they have your guy Sennecke at the Hawks #18 position

They have Demidov at #7. This podcast is where I first heard the concern's with Demidov's skating
- LAHawk

My 2 cents is the Hawks select Levshunov at #2 unless there is an offer too good to be true to move down. For example Montreal's 5th OA, one of their top prospects (preferably a F) and a 2025 1st rounder.

My 2 cents is the Hawks select Levshunov at #2 unless there is an offer too good to be true to move down. For example Montreal's 5th OA, one of their top prospects (preferably a F) and a 2025 1st rounder.
- boilermaker100

I am good with whatever they decide. I don't see enough games that include the prospects to have any opinion. Sizzle reels of kid's highlights are just that. I just hope whatever KD decides ends up being a positive.

Levshinov/Lindstrom/Demidov - As long as it is the right call, I honestly don't care. I just hope that in 2-3 years we look back and say that mgmt made the right call.

Was all in on Levshunov during the year and when the lottery passed. Then kept seeing Demidov articles about how he is can't miss etc... I'm tired of it all.
Just want to see them make a pick, and hopefully it is the right one, and the kid develops into what they need.
- captainserious

My worthless thoughts:

Demidov's possible skating issues, the fact that he'll be skating on a smaller ice surface against considerably better competition doesn't entice me.

Lindstrom starting to give off Eric Daze vibes for me.

Levshinov (or another d-man) that actually plays defense would be nice. Maybe the Hawks won't have to count on a goalie to keep them in games if the opponents chances are snuffed out before they start.

Regardless of who KFC picks, most likely half the BOD will say he picked wrong.

Here is another clip of Ball calling the action as the Flames announcer in the game against the Hawks:


https://twitter.com/i/status/1798799998210970103
- LAHawk

I don't mind it. He's pretty even throughout the call, and doesn't get overly demonstrative with scoring plays. I do miss Doc Emrick though. He knew how to call a game and sprinkle in just enough personality to not make it offensive.

Makes me wonder if true that Montreal really wants Demidov, that you look to trade down to 5 if there is still a player on the board the Hawks really like?
- LAHawk

Top 2-3 were pretty clear last year. This year it seems about 2-7 are the same animal.

Free Agency happens after the draft right?
- vabeachbear

Correct

We didn’t watch an entire season of absolute garbage hockey just to select fifth overall. Use the second on the second best player in the draft. This isn’t NHL 24.

After reading the Pronman/Wheeler q&a I'm more confused than ever about who to draft.

I know Wiz thinks both of them are morons
- captainserious

I have simply been around for awhile, abd have seen both draft guys for a bot longer than you all, I bet.
Wheeler was a part of Future Considerations, a iste that has been around awhile....they used to want you to pay for their download.
(It was nowhere near as extensive as the present Elite Prospect draft download.)\
(It is still sorta that way with the site, but now you pay to see more.

Coery Prronman drifted from iste tio sit with his opinions and it that might make it a bit more difficult to track his mocks.

My point (jealousy, LOL)is, that they both were gifted a tremendous Mel Kiper like hockey draft forum where the sit on the thrones as with their huge Athletic fan base and shape a lot of fan's opinions.

To me, I know why they have joibs and what they do for the site: drive traffic with the mocks - evaluations, article, and stoopid re-ranks and NHL team prsoepct pool rankings.

1 interesting thing was Pronman mentioning the mhl isn't the league it used to be,at least not when Kucherov was playing there etc...
- captainserious

Pronman says. a lot, but you have to decide what HE says and what he writes from waht he has heard.


My draft starts and ends with a Chicago Blackhawk fan attempting to pigeon hole prospects neatly falling to the Indianhead without too much unrealistic ranking.

If you look at last night's fun update of the 2024 selections, you see I have imagines not right defnseman until pick #50.

But no one is doiung anything but guessing.
My guess is my favorite big kid centre in Cayden Lindstrom - and a slection that Kyle will be able to vocally sell to the fans IF he was to go that way.

I think the best guess is that they have a strong relatioinship through their scouts on the Belurusian kid, and he is so sanitized in his play & character and upside that the "safe pick" that maintains building a big fluid defense.
Sure I like a lot of the later ranked defenseman and although they are LD shots, they just do not have the stick and motion and easiness to their play that Artyom Levshunov has. Of that thick early flurry of top four pairing stars we see filling the top ten, he seems to have the leats chinks in his armor.
He has the makings on an NHL defenseman...he plays with your team.
Is he your game breaker?
He is your roster add with little worry that he flops, or ends up in the NHLPA rehab.

Me, I totally understand why this would be the selection.

I love hiow the Athletic / or the two draft coverage guys were willing to debate the pick.
It is a pretty "safe" article.

Top 2-3 were pretty clear last year. This year it seems about 2-7 are the same animal.
- rpeters01

I much rather see the two of writers sweep down the top five and project different kids and tell me why their selection is possible, or why those kids cannot project to the top two.


To me, this is click bait and a safe one, b/c he don't have Corey or Scott saying much new...

I have simply been around for awhile, abd have seen both draft guys for a bot longer than you all, I bet.
Wheeler was a part of Future Considerations, a iste that has been around awhile....they used to want you to pay for their download.
(It was nowhere near as extensive as the present Elite Prospect draft download.)\
(It is still sorta that way with the site, but now you pay to see more.

Coery Prronman drifted from iste tio sit with his opinions and it that might make it a bit more difficult to track his mocks.

My point (jealousy, LOL)is, that they both were gifted a tremendous Mel Kiper like hockey draft forum where the sit on the thrones as with their huge Athletic fan base and shape a lot of fan's opinions.

To me, I know why they have joibs and what they do for the site: drive traffic with the mocks - evaluations, article, and stoopid re-ranks and NHL team prsoepct pool rankings.




Pronman says. a lot, but you have to decide what HE says and what he writes from waht he has heard.


My draft starts and ends with a Chicago Blackhawk fan attempting to pigeon hole prospects neatly falling to the Indianhead without too much unrealistic ranking.

If you look at last night's fun update of the 2024 selections, you see I have imagines not right defnseman until pick #50.

But no one is doiung anything but guessing.
My guess is my favorite big kid centre in Cayden Lindstrom - and a slection that Kyle will be able to vocally sell to the fans IF he was to go that way.

I think the best guess is that they have a strong relatioinship through their scouts on the Belurusian kid, and he is so sanitized in his play & character and upside that the "safe pick" that maintains building a big fluid defense.
Sure I like a lot of the later ranked defenseman and although they are LD shots, they just do not have the stick and motion and easiness to their play that Artyom Levshunov has. Of that thick early flurry of top four pairing stars we see filling the top ten, he seems to have the leats chinks in his armor.
He has the makings on an NHL defenseman...he plays with your team.
Is he your game breaker?
He is your roster add with little worry that he flops, or ends up in the NHLPA rehab.

Me, I totally understand why this would be the selection.

I love hiow the Athletic / or the two draft coverage guys were willing to debate the pick.
It is a pretty "safe" article.




I much rather see the two of writers sweep down the top five and project different kids and tell me why their selection is possible, or why those kids cannot project to the top two.


To me, this is click bait and a safe one, b/c he don't have Corey or Scott saying much new...
- wiz1901

If you look at all the mocks and there are many, it seems like any of 5 guys could go anywhere in 2-7.

As much as I don’t think Philadelphia is willing to trade number 11 pick for number 18 in order to allow the Blackhawks to take on the contracts of Cal Peterson & Cam Atkinson, I see the monetary shift aids the Flyers and does give the Blackhawk a nice chance back in the dance in a spot where the team can take a prospect off-setting what every position they chose earlier at #2.

That is a strong ask by Kyle but Cap casualy "favors" will continue to cost....not sure, if this one is a bit too steep to get my Hawks another early first day pick.

Brief snippet of Hawks Director of Amateur Scouting Mike Doneghey at the combine.

https://www.nhl.com/black...nhl-combine-6354460075112

We didn’t watch an entire season of absolute garbage hockey just to select fifth overall. Use the second on the second best player in the draft. This isn’t NHL 24.
- ObeseOprah

And if there is no consensus on the 2nd best player and you can get an extra piece or two to the rebuild puzzle, why not? Watching that garbage for a year can pay off in more than one way than just picking at #2.

Top 2-3 were pretty clear last year. This year it seems about 2-7 are the same animal.
- rpeters01

I dont agree with that. I am curious of the teams that would want to move up to #2 who they would draft.

I don't mind it. He's pretty even throughout the call, and doesn't get overly demonstrative with scoring plays. I do miss Doc Emrick though. He knew how to call a game and sprinkle in just enough personality to not make it offensive.
- Chunk

Agree