I personally wouldn't draft Wright over Cooley, so there's that, and I personally can't see why teams would want Wright over Cooley. But, I will say that the gap isn't really huge, and with the upside that Cooley brings, there's also more risk. With Wright, you know what you're getting. You are going to get around a 30-30-60 center who can hold his own defensively and be a great 2nd line center or low end 1st line center. Think Nico Hischier with a better shot and slightly worse playmaking. Although you can be pretty confident you're going to get that kind of player, with the way he has progressed, I don't see him having the offensive skill needed to really be a dominant offensive player. He doesn't have that one thing that, when you watch him, makes you see that he's going to be a dominant offensive player. He's good at everything, great at nothing. This is not bad, as you're going to get an impactful top 6 center, but you're more than likely not going to get the best player in the draft. Some people think his upside his higher than this, but I just don't see anywhere near enough offensive skill to think he could reach a higher level than this.
Cooley is much more raw, and thus has a little bit more risk with him but also a bit more reward. He's got a couple of things he needs to work on: off puck play, bad decision making, overhandling the puck, physicality and being a perimeter player, consistency. If he doesn't break his bad habits, he won't be as good a player as Shane Wright, plain and simple. His game won't adapt to the NHL level as well, and he will probably be a skilled middle 6 center whose solid in transition. If he does, he should have no problem being a more impactful player, at least in my eyes. He has game changing skill with the puck on his stick and does things that shouldn't be possible with the puck. His elite playmaking ability generates ridiculous amounts of high danger scoring chances. He's real solid defensively, arguably moreso than Shane Wright who gets hyped more than he should for being highly inconsistent defensively. He could develop in the mold of a Pavel Datsyuk styled player (style, not level), a potential 70-75 point, 200 foot 1C who could garner a Selke nomination or two for his defensive play while consistently making jaw dropping plays in the offensive zone. That's his ceiling based on the raw tools I have seen.
As you mentioned in your post, sometimes, the safe pick is the right pick. For Montreal, getting a player who is a safe bet to be a Nico Hischier level of player is fantastic for them. Any team would love to get a consistent, 60-65 point high end 2C, low end 1C who can provide solid defense. He's not a game changer, but you know what you're going to get with him, and that's quite valuable to a team. For a team with little going for them like Montreal right now, it might be in their best interest to take a safe bet. But I am not big on safe bets. I want a game changer for my team. I want the best player for my team possible while balancing the risk of them not hitting on their potential. Logan Cooley can be a game changer all over the ice. People bet against players like Logan Cooley every year and every year they come and prove people wrong. Players with as much raw skill as Cooley just seem to always find ways to be highly successful players in the NHL. Guys like Trevor Zegras and Jack Hughes of late come to mind of players who just oozed puck skill and playmaking like Cooley does and then went and dominated. When I watch Cooley, he just has too much skill to not be successful. Sure, Wright is a "safer" bet, and I wouldn't fault Montreal for making the safe bet. I disagree, though, that the safe bet is the right bet.
