Tge biggest criticism of Frindelk is lack of any transition game...He is great once in the o-zobe or the d-zone but lacks the ekite speed forca transition and neutral zone game..if others can transport the puck i tobthevo,zone then he can takeover with good boardvpkay and takubg it to the net or showing it or on hard foechrcking to re-gain possessions.. BUT he is just late die to lack of soeed inany sort of transition or neutral ice transport of tge puck.. You are nit getting 2on1s or rush pkays fron him.
The he has a major area of concern apart from the injury history.
Hagens has dropped out of any top 2 consideration but in my opinion has disappointed Ted in his freshman production given he played into January with Leonard and Oerreaukt ...Since latecJanuary Boston College changed up its lines and Hagens has 2 other wingers (exceot for the Po where he is with Leonard and Perraukt( in the 5x5 pkay.
In any case he shoukd have had a Celebrinni year as a freshman but is far of the oace Celebrinmi had last seasonand goal scoring hlevel has been unimpressive.
As an older player for this drsftxwith a November 2006,you wibdervif hevakready has pkateued. And tiscisxalk he can do vs. older bigger colkege payers?
I just do notcsee that much upside for improvement given he is another shrimp at center..
If there is 2 thing Hawks do not need it is another undersized ceter.
Sam Cosentino of Sportsnet now has Caleb Desnoyers at #3 ahead of Hagens ..but I woukdcdrop Hagens even out if the top 5 and certainlybout of the top 4 for any Hawks pick on this range.
Honestly there is a tier 1...that is a consensus Schaefer at #1andMisa now #2on most lists.
Tier 2 ..I think you put Desboyers at the top of this tier even though he probaly does nit have #1c level upside forcthe NHL...but hechas a floor ofgetyibgvto onebofvthe best 2C level oroscin the NHL because of his hockey I Q ,defebsive game and reliability...work ethic and pace ...transition ability...high cycle defending disruption ability,gaveoff excellence.. and projectsctoca Toews -like scoribgblevel = hogh 60s to mid 70s level in the NHL...Given thevall-roubd alk situations usefulness and knowing you getva very good even strength plus monus guy given such 2ceay surety...and that he shoukdveven get better as he adds weight to his 6'2 173 lb frame(he definitely will need more devevelopment time with another junior year to put on more muscle to hisftame, you are at least confident you get a very useful competent 2C who contributes well both ways all over thevice..Lije the compete and the Hockey intelligence to make the right plays..Whike lacking elite explosion, he makes up for it with hogh stridecrate..Gove me a competitor with all roubd skills and ability over a elite soeedcand does so little front (see Oliver Moore) where maybe 3rd liner is alk thise turn out to be.
So whike you might not fall out of your chair about gettibg Drsnoyers at #3,I think you can rely on avery positive impact 200ft 2Cwho will score off transition or use his libemates for scoring plays off rushes or by leading from hard work of being i tge right place at the right time and making smart hockey pkays..There also is deception I his attack game and his shotcaccuracybis goid .Tge ability to get to tgecroght open spots shoukd not be overlooked.
Sure ...another a 2C top gun and playmaker like Misa ..but there nobody else in this draft is either..So if HawkscdrFt at#3...take what you can get...go put more muscle onto the6'2 frame odds Drsnoyers and then try to help Bedard on line in other ways (free agency or trade or offer sheetcabRFA)...
Well IFthexwotstcscenario occurrs and Hawksxdraftvonly at#4..I still woukd not take Hagens.. if hevis still on the board...Again Hawks do not need another smallish center..and especially one who did not dominate college hockey like Celebrini did in his freshman sesson despite the privileged situation Hagens has pkaying on top rated Boston College and with all the talent they have on that team and given the minutes they give him and the top Pp tine too.
I might have Porter Martone at #4 ...but hiscpeiductuon fell off his first half pace..and like Hagebs he too is an older late 2006 guy so you wibdervifvhevhas hit hisvokateauvakready...Also I heard 1 scouting analyst criticize Martine for inconsistency and some lazy habits. So a bit of a red flag on hom too.
So if I was draftingat #4 I take a chance on Jake O'Brien...yes you want to to add muscle on his lanky 6"2 frame (maybe closer to 6'3 now)..but once he gets even stronger it could also add sone to gaining more soeed and explsion for his skating..if he adds That in developing further that should let him get to a higher ceiling...
As itvis now he already is tge brst passer and onevofvthe most creative playmaker in the draft...his shot accuracy is goid but hevis not so far been a high volume shooter as hus priority has been to set up others both on the PP and at 5x5...but even though he plays all situations ...5x5 ,pp and pk,for Brantford and plays big minutes for them,has a good work ethic too, he still is a bit raw in terms of his defensive game reads and his explosion and skating soeed need work to improve on..but we often see such improvements especially with lankier bigger forwards yet to fill out and get to mature proportions to reach their potential ceiling.
Right now O'Brien makes the Brantford Po lethal as his vision and passing and creativity are elite...but hisc5x5 play needs more rounding out to convert to a better more consistent 200 game foot game such that the plus monus number gets better..the thing is you can imagine hos areas to work on improving will get better as his runway is long given his relatively young age for the draft (not turning 18 yet till June)..
So I would bet on an upside ceiling as a 1C for O'Brien if he improves on aspects of his game not yet present.
Also..consider he is not the #1C for Brantford ...is nit playing 5x5 with Lardis (but is a PpmP driver witb Lardis on their lethal PP)...
Next season O'BRIEN will get the 1C role but Brantford will lose top pkayers Lardis and Thomas and might not be as strong a team..but with both O'Brien and Vanacker moving upto the top line ,maybe they doninate the league anyway.
So 1 benefit of takibg O'Brien at #4 if Hawks shoved down to that spot is that they already have shown good chemistry on a line together on the Brantford 2nd line...Vanacker will be a go to guy for them next season as he will get a bigger role not only on the top line in 5x5 but will join O'Brien on thie PP1..
Anyway ..I think this is my top 4 targets Hawks Should be ranking.
1 Scaefer
2 Misa
3Desnoyers
4 O'Brien
Hagens= avoid/another small C is not
the right fit for the Hawks...and concern healready has plateaued
Martone= too inconsistent and some lazy habits
despite the size and physicality and production
Also older...October 2006 bithdate ...so 8 months older than O'Brien ..also woukd be a winger nit a Center in the NHL.
Disappointed at Workd Juniors ...expected better.
Play dropped from his hot 1st half ..it looked like he was getting better..but then slowed in 2nd half. Unless carrying some hampering injury,I wanted to see more donination/improvement as a force I games but that did not hapoen i 2nd half.
So I think if Hawks do get shoved down to tier 2 at #3or#4 I would bet on Drsnoyers or O'Brien for those picks..
Obviously,Schaefer and Misa have the highest impact star potential but you can project Drsnoyers and O'Brien could help the Hawks 2nd line in future in different ways and O'Brien coukd make the PP even better than now .
As to our Leafs 1st rounder (#22-25 ?)and our likely early 2nd (#34)..maybe KD packages them to move up higher in round 1 again ..not not sure there is enough of a reason for assurance such an an early timid teens pick in a relatively weak draft depth wise at forward is worth doubt that...maybe KD would have tried to move up for Carter Bear..but after his horrible sesson ending I jury;you wonder if they take the medical risk ona full recovery to what he had been...it could go either way...career -ending/never the same again ...Or full recovery to his former level..hard to gamble 2 picks on that kind of risk for that kind of injury..
So if Hawks keep both picks who to take?
One of 2nd half risers has to be Rusdian C Alexander Zharovsky ...Do not knowcin a weak draft of hechas impressed enough to rise as high as a later first in the 22-25 range (our likely Lefs pick)But given the unexciting options,maybe bet ygat he does pan out?He has been hot lately 16vpoibtscin last 10Gp ..you can see 2ndchalf improving play....but hexwssconly a 3rdcriubder or late2nd at best at mid-season by some rankings..
Maybe takes a bet on homat #34?
Otherwise I doubt we get top 2vkone guy with the Leafs pick or after given this relatively weak draft in depth..
One of the most intriguing Russians is huge Kzd Artyom Vinchinsky not 6'6 243 lbs...
Very littke offense from Hom..but leads the MHL in +/- at +47...Hevisxa dfebsive shutdown dman...Very little creativity in the o-zone ..but he skates well for such a big guy..and can transport a puck from the d-zon o-zone..is psychically dominant on the boards and in puck separation from. Opponents...has goid puck control and hands co-ordibation =hard-to-get pucks him...greatcreachvandca good stick ...could improve on pivots but they can work on that ...Is an older first tine draft eligible with axlatex2006 birthdate ...woukdvlokecto see hom i the KHL not just in the MHL level..butcstill that size with good speed with a powrr stride ...well youthink maybe he coukd be a shutdown dman in the NHL..and woukd beca fearsome guy to plays agaisst for opposing foreatds.Physical domination on the boards already.. if notveven greater as he matures ..
As 1 scout I heard on a podcast say (paraphrasing) : if you are an team with a lot of 2025 draft picks in the early round = this is Not the draft to be in. ...probably true unless tou were targeting goalie prospects ...But cannot imagine Hawks prioritizing that even for pick #34 . ..
It seems only 1 goalie will go in round1
..bitvthetevcoukd be an early run on several goalies early to mod round 2
..
