2024 NHL Draft Grades

[Kevin Musto]

Artyom Levshunov : B
Sacha Boisvert : F
Marek Vanacker: B+
John Mustard: A-
AJ Spellacy: A-
Jack Pridham: F
Joel Svensson: didn't scout him
Ty Henry: didn't scout him

The story of the draft was Kyle's poor asset management. Just way too willy nilly with the Islanders trade that amounted to nothing, and throwing away a 3rd to take Pridham.

Click to read more...

 

[Darkstar]

I guess that means Boisvert and Pridham are confirmed core pieces and future HOF'ers. Cool...

 

[Kurtosis]

I guess that means Boisvert and Pridham are confirmed core pieces and future HOF'ers. Cool...

Your lips to God’s ears.

 

[Crow]

I respect that you are going on record here but calling two picks an A- and two picks an F makes you seem pretty dualistic and not very nuanced with your grading. Really how is taking the 22nd or so best ranked player an F? Maybe it’s a C- or something. F?

 

[Kevin Musto]

I respect that you are going on record here but calling two picks an A- and two picks an F makes you seem pretty dualistic and not very nuanced with your grading. Really how is taking the 22nd or so best ranked player an F? Maybe it’s a C- or something. F?

To start, I think spending assets to move up well ahead of time to 18 backfired for them. I liked the trade at the time because I thought it put them in a good position to move up even further. That didn't happen.

Instead they sat at 18, and the player they got was one that would've been available at 20. It's a player that they could've traded back a few spots for if they wanted.

The player they got was roughly the 7th best available player from the USHL alone. Factor in all the other leagues, and you got a guy that shouldn't have gone that high.

Now that's just my opinion on how low I am on Boisvert. But even if you look at a more consensus opinion, Bob's list had a whole 5 players ahead of Boisvert. That difference matters a lot in the 1st round. Hockeyprospects.com had Boisvert down at 30, if you want to see a credible opinion on him.

I don't like his projection at all. Talent wise his ceiling is a 3rd liner, but he doesn't play with the consistency, motor, or tenacity that you want out of a bottom 6er. So what is he then? Someone you shouldn't be touching in the first round, that's who.

F.

 

[belfour30]

To start, I think spending assets to move up well ahead of time to 18 backfired for them. I liked the trade at the time because I thought it put them in a good position to move up even further. That didn't happen.

Instead they sat at 18, and the player they got was one that would've been available at 20. It's a player that they could've traded back a few spots for if they wanted.

The player they got was roughly the 7th best available player from the USHL alone. Factor in all the other leagues, and you got a guy that shouldn't have gone that high.

Now that's just my opinion on how low I am on Boisvert. But even if you look at a more consensus opinion, Bob's list had a whole 5 players ahead of Boisvert. That difference matters a lot in the 1st round. Hockeyprospects.com had Boisvert down at 30, if you want to see a credible opinion on him.

I don't like his projection at all. Talent wise his ceiling is a 3rd liner, but he doesn't play with the consistency, motor, or tenacity that you want out of a bottom 6er. So what is he then? Someone you shouldn't be touching in the first round, that's who.

F.

If they offered 18 to Columbus instead of the 2025 2nd I'd get the trade up.

I think that's a hefty price but I believe in Demidov.

Habs got a good one there.

 

[MicronMega]

2. Chicago Blackhawks: A+​

Notable picks: Artyom Levshunov, Sacha Boisvert, Marek Vanacker

Quality and quantity, baby. Levshunov is the best defenseman from this draft and is destined to be a top-pairing option for them. Boisvert gives them a potential No. 2/3 center who can do a bit of everything, including score. Vanacker is one of the harder forwards to play against due to his energy, and John Mustard is one of the fastest skaters in this class. AJ Spellacy and Jack Pridham were great value picks in the third round, too.

Chicago Blackhawks: A​

I’m a huge fan of Artyom Levshunov, and that’s a large reason for the big grade on Chicago’s draft. After Levshunov they went out and got a lot of forwards with well-rounded games. They added a lot of size and speed in this class. I don’t know if they added tremendous natural skill up front, but if Boisvert hits you could get scoring out of him in the NHL. They acquired several players who could fill out their bottom six in time, and a potential star defenseman in Levshunov.

Read the full analysis of Chicago’s draft class here.

Chicago Blackhawks​

Grade: A

First rounders:

• Artyom Levshunov, D
• Sacha Boisvert, C
• Marek Vanacker, LW

Day 2 Picks:

• John Mustard, C
• AJ Spellacy, RW
• Jack Pridham, RW
• Joel Svensson, C
• Ty Henry, D

Analysis: Chicago got very aggressive, adding three first-round picks to their prospect system via a series of trades. They got their No. 1 defenseman of the future in Artyom Levshunov, which is the key piece of this draft. He was No. 2 on my board as well. Sacha Boisvert fits a need the team has with getting a bigger center with two-way skills and scoring ability. While I think Chicago reached for Marek Vanacker, that was a player they really liked and he may not have been around in the second round based on what I had heard. Meanwhile, Chicago landed one of the better skaters in the draft with John Mustard, who can really score. All four of their top picks were on the FloHockey Top 100.

PICK	PLAYER	TEAM
2	D Artyom Levshunov	Michigan State (NCAA)
18	F Sacha Boisvert	Muskegon (USHL)
27	F Marek Vanacker	Brantford (OHL)
67	F John Mustard	Waterloo (USHL)
72	F AJ Spellacy	Windsor (OHL)
93	F Jack Pridham	West Kelowna (BCHL)
138	F Joel Svensson	Vaxjo (Sweden-Jr.)
163	D Ty Henry	Erie (OHL)

Levshunov gives the Blackhawks a potential top-pairing defenseman with a huge development runway. He was playing Belarusian junior hockey two years ago and just put up one of the best seasons ever by a collegiate rearguard. With a franchise cornerstone at forward in Connor Bedard, addressing a major organizational need - the blue-line corps - was a smart choice at No. 2.


Chicago then added two intriguing forwards to round out the first round in Boisvert and Vanacker. Boisvert can play down the middle and brings both goal-scoring and two-way skill. Vanacker blossomed in Brantford this year despite playing through a torn labrum. He's someone who could be looked at as a steal next year.

Add in speedsters Mustard and Spellacy, and this was a great two days for the Blackhawks organization.

 

[CallMeShaft]

EP Rinkside:

Chicago Blackhawks​

Picks: Artyom Levshunov (No. 2 overall), Sacha Boisvert (18), Marek Vanacker (27), John Mustard (67), AJ Spellacy (72), Jack Pridham (92), Joel Svensson (138), Ty Henry (163)

Did the Blackhawks leave some value on the table by taking Levshunov at No. 2? Maybe. Ivan Demidov and Cayden Lindstrom both possess rarer qualities than Levshunov. These two forwards would have complemented Connor Bedard exceptionally well. Still, it’s hard knock the Blackhawks for their top pick which is safe without sacrificing much upside.

Levshunov could become a top-pair defenceman for them. They can’t rush him to the league and expect him to control games, however. That’s not who he is right now. He will require focused development work and a stable environment to thrive.

Boisvert projects to the team’s bottom-six, but he has rarer qualities of his own. He’s highly competitive, cares about the details of the game, and flashes some impressive skills from time to time. We also had him in the range where he was picked. And then Mustard and Spellacy, drafted with the next two picks, add even more speed to a prospect pool that could already outrace every other one in the league.

The Blackhawks stayed true to their philosophy, filled some needs, and added some exciting talents to their draft class. They’re not getting a perfect grade, but close to it.

Grade: A

 

[TLEH]

To start:

I find Musto's postings to be a different way of portraying his opinion than I would, but I appreciate him providing an outlook based on something, rather than just blindly supporting (or hating) every single move made. It provides for an interesting conversation.

2) Levshunov B

I scouted Levshunov extensively this season and came away always expecting more. The tools are elite but I never felt like the dynamic offensive moves were ever even attempted. He's an elite transitional D and will likely be a good player for a long time but just didn't see the #1 upside someone like Pronman did

18) Boisvert B+

Only watched three of his games this year, one was good, two were bad. I like the pick mostly just because its something different other than work hard and skate fast. I think the upside is probably 2C with a missile shot. Maybe 3C with some scoring. His B game is pretty solid.

27) Vanacker B

Saw him a bit when watching Lardis. Always thought he was inconsistent in his engagement of the game. Maybe now its because of his injury. I preferred keeping 34 and 50, but I think Vanacker can be a solid piece.

67) Mustard A

Must love Mustard

72) AJ Spellacy C+

Sort of a played out archetype for me and I preferred a couple different options. He's raw though and has barely played hockey so maybe you catch lightning in the bottle here. Its 70 so who really cares, but I thought you got a similar rawness with Tarin Smith but more dynamic upside.

The rest I really don't know enough about to comment. I did see Ty Henry a bit this year and thought he could PK and play a role in the NHL.

 

[hawksfan50]

Look...once the committed to Lev over Demidov and find the RD need ,the 2nd most important need would be a 2C ..I and many others assumed in this scenario it would be Hage and not Boisvert..but they wanted a more 2 way 200ft and bigger more gritty type Center withva more power style than another flashier more creative type than Hage ...so I get it...looking at Bob Mckenzie's ranking Boisvert ranked #23 and Hagewas at #24..so they in fact took the higher ranked Center and got the type they wanted to provide a different style than the creative 1C we have with Bedard.. Strategically looking at Centers ,there was no thervoption except Connolly ranked ahead of Boisvert left on Bob's list which shoukd givevinevthe closest grouping afca range of talent...So tgey took their center target right fully..Bosvert does Not merit an F ...What does merit an F is that Boivert would have still been there at #20 and they could have got him anyway without making that silly deal with the Islanders..Maybe tgey hoped Luchanko would still be there ...he was the higher ranked C of thev200ft power typecthey wanted but he was already off the board.Connoly was there..but they wanted no. part of him given his PR risk ..we alk knew Connolly would not be a Hawks target for that reason despite his talent level asxaxfksxhy scorer and playmaker.. So indeed they took the right vtyoecof Center they need ed to be a balance cobtratratibgvto the Bedard center ofblinec1 ...and the highest ranked Center not named Connolly ..ITwas avtualky the correct pick ..but notcat #18..it shoukdvhVe beneath #20 ...tgey never should have made that deal with NYI... THAT is where he gets an F .for taking Boisvert he gets an A fir correct valuecaftercthectrade with NYI put him in that position at#18..

Had he not made tectrade ,hecwoukdvhave picks 54 and #61 instead just #5050 ..

So KD coukdcaksobhavectriedcto movevup to #21or#23 as both L A.and Toronto traded their picks down for quantity picks.

Montreal gave picks #26+57 +198 to Montreal forvtgec21stvpick..

Kd could have beaten that offer with picks 34+54 +61'...but that opportunity was wasted because the pick #61 which he did notvhave anymore and was a wasted asset anyway was notvtgerecto throw ay to best the Montreal offer!

Or he could have bestedctgecAnahein deal with Toronto for #23 (they gave Tor #31 and# 58... He could have bested that with 34+54÷61 too!

So instead we end up with #28 instead of #21or#23 ...which would have gotten us our next nerd = defensive andvuber physical stud for 2LD behind Vlasic.

That solutiontargetvwax Stian Solberg who Anaheim took at #23 after their deal with Toronto.

Solberg ranked #20 on the Bob Mckenzie ranking and we coukdvhavevhad him instead of another forward inVanacker who rakedvonly #28 and we used our 34 andc50 assets to move back up for him.

Solberg was a better value and a greater need in my opinion than Vanacker ..

So I give KD anF for mis-managent of asessments picks .

Also even after KD boxed himself at choosing Boisvert at #18 ...he still could have gotten Solberg at#23 WITH an offer of #34++ 50 + a future pick they gave up to getbOridhanat #92..

Solberg would have been a great acquisition...because any coach trusting KK for defensive competence would be crazy..but any coach instantly would trust Sokberg to kill plays in the d-zone.Plus his shot is better than Kk's.. .this would force KK to drop to 3LD and EdM topllay RD (he pkayed RD 40% of the time when dounle shifted in Misdissauga so he has experience there on that side......or move KK to his off side..as 3RD and EdM play 3LD..

IN any event we could have made a Solberg-Lev dream pairing ..true Vlasic saddled with $9.5 as RD pairing for 6 more seasons ..but still we wouldvhave gotten a competence in the 2nd pairing ..And that is due would have been fixed for years ahead.

You do not want Lev to be sadfledcwoth KK's no nack for defending as a 2nd problematic pairing..

So KD realky blew his chance to get the D properly fixed in least 1 pairing of the D core 4..
Instead all his deals got us was Vanacker ..And unless Vanacker hits big as a top gun wing in ttop 6 forwards,the opportunity cost foregonecin not getting Solberg iscgoubgvto beca big mistake .

Our draft coulda /shoulda been much better..but KD mis-managed it.


So he gets an F on his deals...

Prosoects he got were fine ..

THE criticicism is not on players picked but on notvgettibg either puck#21or#23 to get Solberg ..He gave up picks for no goidxreasin to getvto18 then compounded it by failure to get Solberg when hexsimply had sets to accomplish that .

He bungled his chance at a Great draft to just a hoid draft.



.

 

[bwanajamba]

To start:

I find Musto's postings to be a different way of portraying his opinion than I would, but I appreciate him providing an outlook based on something, rather than just blindly supporting (or hating) every single move made. It provides for an interesting conversation.

Disagree, his schtick is often entertaining as a spectacle, but when that wears thin, the rage spam and complete unwillingness to have an open mind about picks who aren't his guys is a pretty boring approach to discussing the draft. Obviously there's the disruptiveness but it also creates a knee jerk counterreaction where people can simply defend the player and pick by making fun of the temper tantrum and pointing out his poor evaluation track record. Maybe that's better than dozens of "let's wait and see" posts but it certainly doesn't drive balanced discussion

 

[TheFridge]

To start, I think spending assets to move up well ahead of time to 18 backfired for them. I liked the trade at the time because I thought it put them in a good position to move up even further. That didn't happen.

Instead they sat at 18, and the player they got was one that would've been available at 20. It's a player that they could've traded back a few spots for if they wanted.

The player they got was roughly the 7th best available player from the USHL alone. Factor in all the other leagues, and you got a guy that shouldn't have gone that high.

Now that's just my opinion on how low I am on Boisvert. But even if you look at a more consensus opinion, Bob's list had a whole 5 players ahead of Boisvert. That difference matters a lot in the 1st round. Hockeyprospects.com had Boisvert down at 30, if you want to see a credible opinion on him.

I don't like his projection at all. Talent wise his ceiling is a 3rd liner, but he doesn't play with the consistency, motor, or tenacity that you want out of a bottom 6er. So what is he then? Someone you shouldn't be touching in the first round, that's who.

F.

Your individual opinion on Boisvert not withstanding, the bolded thinking just needs to die. You don't know shit, none of us do. The Hawks probably had a *group* of players they were looking at with the 18th pick and didn't project any of them to be there at 20 -- including, possibly, Boisvert.

Maybe they could have stood pat at 20 and got him but you don't know that. He was the consensus 21st-ranked player and the guy ranked directly behind him went 13th to the Flyers.

 

[TheFridge]

I'd give CHIs draft an A personally. I think they'll get 3 NHL players from this draft, at least. Levshunov, Vanacker and Spellacy all look like guys who'll play games in various roles and obviously Levshunov has a chance to be a cornerstone piece for the team. I haven't seen Boisvert and Mustard play, so hard to for me to say.

 

[deytookerjaabs]

I understand taking Lev & why they did.

But, if I'm a GM/Scout and it's the top 2 pick of a draft I'm only going D for a Hedman/Dahlin type, and IMO Lev isn't in that tier of prospect.

 

[Larmer83]

EP Rinkside:

Levshunov could become a top-pair defenceman for them. They can’t rush him to the league and expect him to control games, however. That’s not who he is right now. He will require focused development work and a stable environment to thrive.

Rockford says come on down.

 

[giza]

Draft grade: B+......Day 2 lifts them to the B status. The speed and compete of this team in a few years will be downright crazy.....and they filled a few holes that I was hoping for......thus the grade.