well, I'm comparing them as prospects rather than comparing a 18-year-old elick to a 26-year-old peeke.
as a prospect, peeke was seen as more of a two-way puck mover who had some athletic tools. elick's tools are very one-way (mobility + physicality + reach).
in the NHL, peeke developed (out of necessity) into a defense-only guy, but his strengths defensively are different than elick. peeke is more of a netfront/down low defender. elick looks like a potentially elite rush defender, but the other parts of his game (particularly offensively) are not inspiring.
again, comparing elick to a young gudbranson rather than present day. particularly in the "lights dudes up in open ice" stuff. he loves to step up and make huge hits.
I'm sure they'll try to work on improving his puck game, but I don't think it's ever going to be a true NHL level asset. that was how things were with gudbranson, too. part of me wonders if they're going to instead focus on getting him to be an elite shutdown guy rather than rounding out his game. his ability to defend the rush at a high level makes him a good eraser next to someone like mateychuk or even werenski.
if you put the 2024 draft version of charlie elick into the draft 15 years ago he wouldn't profile much differently than erik gudbranson or griffin reinhart. his skating is at a higher level than those guys were, and he has the size/mean streak that teams overvalued back then.