Prospect Info: - 2025 DRAFT Thread | Page 21 | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League
Toggle sidebar

Prospect Info: 2025 DRAFT Thread

LazyCircuits said:
Any thoughts on trading up?

Looking at all of the differing versions of pick value charts, we could move up into the 5-10 slot using #14 & 20.

Are there any guys in that range you would consider worth it?
Click to expand...
I have this as a 9 person group worth trading up for (i'm on the edge on McQueen being 10), Most of them won't be remotely available obviously but if any of these are available I think you pull the trigger unless you can get a better deal/set of deals for current roster upgrades.

1. Matthew Schaefer
2. Michael Misa
3. Anton Frondell
4. James Hagens
5. Jake O'Brien
6 Caleb Desnoyers
7. Radim Mrtka
8. Porter Martone
9. Brady Martin
 
Drafts rarely go as the pundits mock. I still think we move one or both picks (same or separate deals). I could absolutely see them moving 20 and Chinakhov for an upgrade up front or on D. Maybe it's bigger than that, but I do think these are the three pieces that will be most talked about.
 


As it relates to the Blue Jackets, you said it's maybe a little bit of a crapshoot. It's going to depend on what happens in front of them with that 14th pick. Remember, they also hold the 20th pick that once belonged to the Minnesota Wild.



The Blue Jackets get that in that David Jiricek deal. What could be the options? Give me some names for the Blue Jackets in that range.



What are we looking at?



Yeah, I mean, I think there's a lot of different options available in terms of the positions. I think that you look and you see, OK, well, Denton Mateychuk is one of our top guys. Do we want to go D again?



You know, I do think that there's going to be some options for the defenseman in that range. I think that there's a good potential that Jackson Smith, a six foot three defenseman from the Tri-City Americans, is available at 14. He's got offensive upside, but there are some concerns about his overall hockey sense, his ability to execute plays.



“We saw that at the Under 18 Worlds a little bit more, but he's a very intriguing prospect in that way. Does Kashawn Aitcheson, who's a more physical defenseman and had 26 goals this season for the Barry Colts and the OHL, is he going to be there? And those guys both bring something a little bit different than what is currently within the Blue Jackets system for players that you're trying to get something out of going forward.



You really can never have too many defensemen. Obviously, trading away David Jiricek does bring back that first round pick, which is helpful, but it does leave a void in the prospect system. And if you want to bring some size back, you get that with Jackson Smith.



I think there's actually quite a few similarities in Jackson Smith relative to David Jiricek as well. But I think other, if you're looking up front too, Carbonneau out of the QMJHL, he's more of a powerful, aggressive forward that showed the ability to score this year. I think that that's a guy that's going to be right there in that 14 range and would make sense.



Lynden Lakovic as well from Moose Jaw, another big guy, bring size, bring scoring. So you have some of those options there. I think those are guys that are realistic in that range.



I think it's a little less likely maybe that an Aitcheson is there. I think he's going to go a bit higher than people expect because of that physical brand of hockey that he plays. But you're just hoping that somebody slips out of that group and it pushes some of these other guys down.



But really, at 14, I still think you're in a good range to get really good value. Once you get past 15 and when you're getting into that 20th overall pick, that's when you're saying, okay, we got to find the guy that we really like because there's not a lot of great 100, like these guys are it. I feel like the reason that I'm less excited about this class than I have been in years past is that you can kind of spot those flaws in players a little bit easier.



Is he a little less competitive? Is he a little less consistent? Is there something wrong with the skating?



Is there something, is he not big enough? The different things that kind of come into play, I think as you move further down that board, it becomes a little bit more of a crapshoot. That's when the area scouts and that entire year that you've spent comes in so handy because you know the type of player that you're looking for.



You can still get that type of player. Whether or not they pan out is a whole other story, but then you turn them over to your development team and hope for the best.



*break*



You know, Jackson Smith, who I mentioned is an option, potentially could go higher than you think because he's a big defenseman with the ability to move the puck. So those things haven't really changed. But I would say like, you know, the focus and, you know, everybody gets kind of attached to their players.



The thing I'll caution fans to is that if you get yourself attached to a player that really doesn't fit your system or what your team generally does, you're just setting yourself up for disappointment. So maybe don't do that. But, you know, so, so, you know, I think getting an understanding of kind of how your team drafts, the different, you know, the priorities that are there.



And we can't know everything, right? NHL teams aren't going to reveal all their secrets to us. But there's a lot to learn from, you know, previous drafts and how things have gone.



But I think in general, the philosophies have have have remained the same. And if there are any changes, really, they've been subtle and gradual over time just as teams get better and better at player evaluation. So, there's a lot to like about, you know, kind of what what I've learned in this time is there's a lot to like about how NHL teams go about their business because it's it's far more thorough than I think they're often giving credit for.



Chris, the final thing I have for you, where do you stand on the goaltenders this year? You said not a great crop of goalies. I think maybe one in the first round potentially.



Where do you sit with these guys?



Yeah, I mean, you know, the number one goalie this year is Joshua Ravensbergen. And, you know, he has all the tools, but you look kind of at the performance this year and it says, okay, that scares me in terms of first round goalie. I think he's still gonna go in the first round.



And I think part of that is because if this was a better class, I think the goalies would slink a little bit further back. But as we've seen over the years, teams still very much value it. In a year that we thought was really weak on goalies, I think it was last year, with five goalies taking in the second round alone.



And that blew me away because I was like, wow, most of these guys would typically be there in the third or even fourth round in a lot of drafts. So teams will still do it. I think this year's where, Ravensbergen is the top guy because he's tall, he's got the ability, he clearly has the tools, he hasn't put it all together yet, teams are gonna wanna work with him.



And then you look at a guy like Jack Ivankovic, who has all the tools and has the track record and has the performance, and yet he's under six foot or right at six foot, and teams are like, I don't know if we can draft him. You know, like that's the kind of thing that kind of goes into it. So I think we'll still see goalies picked.



I think it's, you know, it's a year where if I had, you know, precious few picks to spend, I probably wouldn't be spending it on a goalie this year. But at the same time, you know, that that's just not how it works. You need as many bullets as you can in the chamber.



Not all of them are going to work out and not all of them are going to hit the target. That's basically what you're doing by drafting these players. So, you know, I think that this is a year where if you want a goalie, you know, go ahead and try.



I mean, and if you have a lot of faith in your goaltending development as well, which I think is vastly improved in the NHL over the last several years, the points of contact the teams have with goalies, then I think, you know, if you have a lot of faith in that, then go ahead and get that raw talent that you think you can mold. But yeah, I mean, for me, it's just, I think it's a year where I would avoid them if I could.
 
There’s nothing at picks 14 or 20 in this draft that stands out to me. Most of these players wouldn’t be considered this high in a stronger draft class. A lot of them come with significant flaws or question marks.

In a typical year, trading these picks would be a no-brainer—almost guaranteed value. But this year, it's going to be tough to move them for anything truly worthwhile.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jovavic, Toe Pick and GoJackets1
Youngguns80 said:
There’s nothing at picks 14 or 20 in this draft that stands out to me. Most of these players wouldn’t be considered this high in a stronger draft class. A lot of them come with significant flaws or question marks.

In a typical year, trading these picks would be a no-brainer—almost guaranteed value. But this year, it's going to be tough to move them for anything truly worthwhile.
Click to expand...
It only takes one team to fall in love with a guy at #14 to make a deal.
 
Honestly I think there is a lot guys who could be exciting in their own right at 14. 20 is where it gets interesting for me. They’re not flashy but they’re players who are potentially exciting to project to the roster down the road in terms of value they could bring. Not every pick will be flashy but some could provide depth that teams need eventually at a cheaper cap hit and cost controlled as well.

At 20:

Mason West (now that he chose hockey)
Logan Hensler
Justin Carbonneau
Malcom Spence
Bill Zonnon
 
  • Like
Reactions: Xoggz22
I'm not that interested in drafting goalies, unless you have someone that you think is very undervalued and can get him with a later pick. But for those who are into it, this is the most detailed analysis you are going to get on the goalie draft class:

 
  • Like
Reactions: Jovavic
majormajor said:
I'm not that interested in drafting goalies, unless you have someone that you think is very undervalued and can get him with a later pick. But for those who are into it, this is the most detailed analysis you are going to get on the goalie draft class:

Click to expand...

Two and a half hours...gonna need to put this aside and watch later. Thanks for the link though! I want to hear what they think of Medvedev.
 
So I was thinking Prokhorov might be a reasonable choice at #20. Now after watching this report I'm wondering if he might be a reasonable pick at #14, if high upside guys like Lakovic and Smith are gone? I'll probably have him ranked in between those numbers.

 
  • Like
Reactions: tunnelvision
So with a soft player like Lakovic, who is more apt to do a fly by than engage along the boards, do folks think he can be trained to play the right way?

Obviously kids spend most of their training time working on handling and passing and shooting in open ice scenarios. Can you correct Lakovic's deficiencies in puck battles simply by training with battle drills? Like battle drills every day with technical instruction? In that view, poor engagement in puck battles is just another matter of technique, not about heart and soul.

I could be overly optimistic and trying to find us something at pick #14 that just isn't there. Maybe Lakovic will always feel disappointing to watch. But there are some scouts I like that have him closer to top 5.

 
Last edited:
Doggy said:
Two and a half hours...gonna need to put this aside and watch later. Thanks for the link though! I want to hear what they think of Medvedev.
Click to expand...

The video is cut and labeled for each goalie they talk about, so you can just skip to the goalies you want more insight on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Xoggz22
majormajor said:
So with a soft player like Lakovic, who is more apt to do a fly by than engage along the boards, do folks think he can be trained to play the right way?

Obviously kids spend most of their training time working on handling and passing and shooting in open ice scenarios. Can you correct Lakovic's deficiencies in puck battles simply by training with battle drills? Like battle drills every day with technical instruction? In that view, poor engagement in puck battles is just another matter of technique, not about heart and soul.

I could be overly optimistic and trying to find us something at pick #14 that just isn't there. Maybe Lakovic will always feel disappointing to watch. But there are some scouts I like that have him closer to top 5.

Click to expand...

Reminds me of Sonny Milano, which is enough for me to stay away from that lottery ticket. I was sure he was a winner and its probably the biggest whiff opinion I've ever had.
 
www.eliteprospects.com

Cam Robinson's Final Top 85 for the 2025 NHL Draft

Cam Robinson shares his final board ahead of the 2025 NHL Entry Draft.
www.eliteprospects.com www.eliteprospects.com

1. Schaefer
2. Misa
3. Hagens
4. Martone
5. O’Brien
6. Desnoyers
7. McQueen
8. Eklund
9. Martin
10. Frondell
11. Bear
12. Carbonneau
13. Mrtka
14. Aitcheson
15. Smith
16. Lakovic
17. Reschny
18. Hensler
19. Kindel
20. Reid
21. Cootes
22. Spence
23. Fiddler
24. Ravensbergen
25. Psenicka
26. Vansaghi
27. Rombach
28. Nestrasil
29. Zonnon
30. Potter
31. Brzustewicz
32. Murtagh
33. Nilson
34. Lee
35. Limatov
36. Horcoff
37. West
38. Schmidt
39. Gastrin
40. Kevan
41. Boumedienne
42. Wang
43. Moore
44. Nesbitt
45. Behm
46. Stockselius
47. Ihz-Wozniak
48. Frolov
49. Bedowski
50. McKinney
51. Genborg
52. Gard
53. Zharovsky
54. Czata
55. Romano
56. Epperson
57. Mooney
58. Kettles
59. Tretheway
60. Rheaume - Mullen
61. Paupanekis
62. Prokhorov
63. Osmanis
64. Ryabkin
65. Amico
66. Svrcek
67. Veilleux
68. Hopkins
69. Simpson
70. Nordlund
71. Klingsell
72. Ekberg
73. Andreyanov
74. Hallquisth
75. Griffin
76. Vass
77. Sawchyn
78. Phillips
79. Benak
80. Mutryn
81. Rimpinen
82. Medvedev
83. Loranger
84. Engle
85. Beauchesne
 
  • Like
Reactions: tunnelvision
majormajor said:
So with a soft player like Lakovic, who is more apt to do a fly by than engage along the boards, do folks think he can be trained to play the right way?

Obviously kids spend most of their training time working on handling and passing and shooting in open ice scenarios. Can you correct Lakovic's deficiencies in puck battles simply by training with battle drills? Like battle drills every day with technical instruction? In that view, poor engagement in puck battles is just another matter of technique, not about heart and soul.

I could be overly optimistic and trying to find us something at pick #14 that just isn't there. Maybe Lakovic will always feel disappointing to watch. But there are some scouts I like that have him closer to top 5.

Click to expand...

Mindset is a hard thing to change and impossible to fake. Not impossible but I'd be on the negative side of the fence if we draft Lakovic. Undeniable skill but I've watched him a decent amount for 2 years now and I've never come away from it thinking I hope we get this guy.

Maybe more of a challenge both in skill and physicality unlocks it for him but... I'm probably not betting on it
 
  • Like
Reactions: majormajor
www.dailyfaceoff.com

2025 NHL Draft Rankings: Final Top 120

With another draft season in the books, these are the best of the best available heading into Los Angeles.
www.dailyfaceoff.com www.dailyfaceoff.com

On Lynden Lakovic:

Lakovic is so much fun to watch, and while he’s not putting up explosive offensive numbers, he reads plays so well and has an excellent shot. Things just seem to happen whenever he has the puck on the rush, and at 6-foot-4, he’s got tremendous size. Some scouts think he’s going to be more of a second-liner at best. He drives the play a bit like Dmitri Voronkov, but I’d like to see it more consistently. Some scouts think he’s not a good enough skater to go high in the draft, but I see the potential.
 
Pronman Mailbag on Ravensbergen:

Joshua Ravensbergen has been the top-rated goaltender this draft season, but his play was inconsistent. He’s big and highly athletic, and tracks pucks well enough, but his game was a bit chaotic at times. First-round goalies are always a gamble, and organizational philosophy often plays a role. Some teams simply don’t take goalies early, and Ravensbergen lacks the pedigree of other goalies who have gone high in recent years.

Still, with few elite goalie prospects in recent years, someone may decide to secure their crease of the future in Round 1. If that happens, look for it to be in the 20-32 range.

Basically sums up why I’m not all that on board for Ravensbergen if we were to hypothetically pick him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

  • ... and 3 more.
    • Total: 14 (members: 9, guests: 5)

    Latest posts

    Ad

    Ad

    Top Bottom