Hockeyprospect.com draft rankings. (Viggo Bjorck #1 edition)

[SwedishFire]

This will be one of the most interesting drafts to do a redraft on in the future.

McKenna, Malhotra, Reid, Björck/Stenberg same tier, Carels, Belchetz, Cullen.
I belive in that order.

 

[RoadWarrior]

This will be one of the most interesting drafts to do a redraft on in the future.

Don’t bank on Bjork being number 1 in a redraft.

 

[TimeZone]

Bjorck is currently the best player in the draft. He is better than Stenberg and Mckenna right now.

Better at what? Being a center? Both are objectively better offensively than him right now.

 

[Castle8130]

Better at what? Being a center? Both are objectively better offensively than him right now.

If all 3 are available for an NHL team to use in a competitive game right now, Bjorck would be played the most because he is the best player. He is the most reliable and can hold his own against top competition. Even recently at the IIHF tournament, Bjorck earned more ice time than Stenberg every game

 

[My3Sons]

Man they were really low on that NTDP crew, aside from Perreault. That's not aging great.

I'll never understand the hype Barlow got. Dude had lead feet and was already built like a 28 year old.

What if you are over 50 and built like a 90 year old? Asking for a friend.

 

[My3Sons]

Better at what? Being a center? Both are objectively better offensively than him right now.

Can you define this? I'm not arguing with you and you may very well be correct but I'm curious what qualifies as objectively better? To me a lot of this sort of thing is subjective.

 

[TimeZone]

If all 3 are available for an NHL team to use in a competitive game right now, Bjorck would be played the most because he is the best player. He is the most reliable and can hold his own against top competition. Even recently at the IIHF tournament, Bjorck earned more ice time than Stenberg every game

Based on what? Stenberg was objectively better than Bjorck on the same team mere weeks ago, was better and more productive in the world juniors, better and more productive in the world U18's last year and better in the SHL this season.

He plays the more important position, however I don't think there's much of a case he's superior to Stenberg right now, who isn't as good as McKenna.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Based on what? Stenberg was objectively better than Bjorck on the same team mere weeks ago, was better and more productive in the world juniors, better and more productive in the world U18's last year and better in the SHL this season.

I don't think you can say Stenberg was objectively better. More productive in both the WC and WJC but I think there is an argument for Bjorck being just as impactful, especially in the WC where he matched up against tons of NHL caliber centerman and didn't look out of place.

He plays the more important position, however I don't think there's much of a case he's superior to Stenberg right now, who isn't as good as McKenna.

If you polled scouts about who the better player is right now, I think most would say Stenberg is better than McKenna. That doesn't necessarily make him a better prospect, but Stenberg's all around game is just so much more polished.

McKenna should immediately be a fairly productive player due to PP points alone, but it's going to take him some time before he's not a net negative at 5v5, just like it did for Bedard. While Stenberg and Bjorck both look like their ready to step into the NHL tomorrow without being a liability.

 

[TimeZone]

I don't think you can say Stenberg was objectively better. More productive in both the WC and WJC but I think there is an argument for Bjorck being just as impactful, especially in the WC where he matched up against tons of NHL caliber centerman and didn't look out of place.

If you polled scouts about who the better player is right now, I think most would say Stenberg is better than McKenna. That doesn't necessarily make him a better prospect, but Stenberg's all around game is just so much more polished.

McKenna should immediately be a fairly productive player due to PP points alone, but it's going to take him some time before he's not a net negative at 5v5, just like it did for Bedard. While Stenberg and Bjorck both look like their ready to step into the NHL tomorrow without being a liability.

I'm not necessarily convinced that is the case, I do think it's close and that Stenberg is the more well rounded player, but I think McKenna is still the superior offensive player right now, so it'll really come down to subjective values.

My biggest concern with Bjorck is that he's a 5'8-5'9 player with very limited skating ability, doesn't really possess any true elite qualities.

I think there's a really good case to take him over Malhotra, I wouldn't take him over McKenna, Stenberg or Reid...and I wouldn't have to think about it either.

 

[My3Sons]

I'm not necessarily convinced that is the case, I do think it's close and that Stenberg is the more well rounded player, but I think McKenna is still the superior offensive player right now, so it'll really come down to subjective values.

My biggest concern with Bjorck is that he's a 5'8-5'9 player with very limited skating ability, doesn't really possess any true elite qualities.

I think there's a really good case to take him over Malhotra, I wouldn't take him over McKenna, Stenberg or Reid...and I wouldn't have to think about it either.

Is his skating limited or just not upper echelon?

 

[ZEBROA]

Don’t bank on Bjork being number 1 in a redraft.

I would not bank anything in this draft. And absolute not Bjorck being nr1.

 

[majormajor]

I'm not necessarily convinced that is the case, I do think it's close and that Stenberg is the more well rounded player, but I think McKenna is still the superior offensive player right now, so it'll really come down to subjective values.

My guess is that serious analysts aren't going to think it's subjective or close for the next couple years, that Stenberg will be the much better overall player until maybe year 3.

 

[TimeZone]

My guess is that serious analysts aren't going to think it's subjective or close for the next couple years, that Stenberg will be the much better overall player until maybe year 3.

Just to clarify you expect Stenberg to come into the league next season and be a clear tier or two ahead of Gavin Mckenna?

I've got to be honest, I haven't heard this take from anyone yet, it's very interesting...doesn't match what I've been hearing from guys I trust like Scott Wheeler, but I'm definitely interested to see how this ages.

By all accounts I've read Stenberg is closer to his ceiling now, he's more polished...but he doesn't have the high end offensive upside that McKenna possesses.

This also matches what I've seen from the two.

 

[TimeZone]

Is his skating limited or just not upper echelon?

It's pretty mediocre for his size and projected draft position.

I don't think it's necessarily bad, but it's certainly limited for a 5'9 C.

 

[majormajor]

Just to clarify you expect Stenberg to come into the league next season and be a clear tier or two ahead of Gavin Mckenna?

I've got to be honest, I haven't heard this take from anyone yet, it's very interesting...doesn't match what I've been hearing from guys I trust like Scott Wheeler, but I'm definitely interested to see how this ages.

My guess is that Stenberg will be clearly preferred based on overall game. If they both score 50 pts next year or even if McKenna has fifteen more than Stenberg, every serious analyst will prefer Stenberg.

I am surprised that you haven't heard that, I think that is closer to the consensus among scouts. I think Wheeler shares my view not yours.

I believe I also heard Mike Johnston (who was the analyst for WJC and men's worlds) say that he expects Stenberg to be the much better player for the next couple years.

 

[Hale The Villain]

If anyone is interested to see how HockeyProspect.com's previous rankings fared, I took a look at their previous Black Book rankings from 2015-2022 and compared them to Bob McKenzie's NHL scout rankings to see which players they were significantly higher/lower on compared to the consensus.

The @ sign indicates where the HockeyProspect team ranked the player and the +/- sign in brackets showed how much higher/lower they ranked said prospect compared to Bob's List:

2015
Good: Marner @ 3 (+1), Connor @ 5 (+8), Eriksson Ek @ 15 (+8), Boeser @ 18 (+8) Roslovic @ 24 (+10), Zboril @ 25 (-11), Bittner @ 30 (-10), Hintz @ 44 (+14)

Bad: Juulsen @ 22 (+15), Kovacs @ 35 (HM), Cernak @ 80 (-39)

2016
Good: A.Nylander @ 12 (-5), Clague @ 45 (-14), Laberge @ 48 (-21)

Bad: Parsons @ 31 (+21), DeBrincat @ 33 (-10), Dahlen @ 24 (+26), Fox @ 67 (-22), Kyrou @ 69 (-37)

2017
Good: E.Pettersson @ 5 (+2), Rasmussen @ 15 (-6), Oettinger @ 20 (+6), Vesalainen @ 34 (-19)

Bad: Liljegren @ 10 (+6), Vaakanainen @ 11 (+11), Ratcliffe @ 13 (+14), Brannstrom @ 15 (+14), Tippett @ 22 (-12), Norris @ 45 (-22), Hague @ 46 (-21), Timmins @ 62 (-34)

2018
Good: Hayton @ 18 (-7), Marchenko @ 26 (+18), Veleno @ 37 (-23). McIsaac @ 45 (-19), Foudy @ 51 (-22)

Bad: Kravtsov @ 6 (+6), Albin Eriksson @ 28 (+40), R.McLeod @ 46 (-23)

2019
Good: M.Robertson @ 35 (-10), Kaliyev @ 34 (-13), Dorofyev @ 27 (+55)

Bad: Krebs @ 6 (+4), Cozens at 14 (-8), Kolyachonok @ 22 (+17)

2020
Good: Sanderson @ 5 (+3), Jarvis @ 7 (+11), Drysdale @ 12 (-8), Evangelista @ 21 (+29), Lapierre @ 27 (-12)

Bad: Raymond @ 8 (-2), Guhle @ 22 (-8), Holloway @ 29 (-12), Robins @ 13 (HM), Gunler @ 17 (+11), Brisson @ 19 (+11), Lundell @ 25 (-13), Mysak @ 26 (+8), Johannesson @ 31 (NR)

2021
Good: Knies @ 13 (+49), Lysell @ 25 (-11), Ceulemans @ 43 (-21), Tuomaala @ 46 (-16)

Bad: Eklund @ 2 (+2), Sillinger @ 5 (+6), Cossa @ 7 (+8), Heimosalmi @ 18 (+38), Fedotov @ 22 (+50), Olausson @ 24 (+10), Grushnikov @ 29 (+31), Stankoven @ 53 (-26)

2022

Good: McGroarty@ 11 (+26), Kemell @ 12 (-5), Lambert @ 29 (-13), Bichsel @ 17 (+9), Casey @ 31 (+20), Chesley @ 35 (-8), Gaucher @ 39 (-11), Hughes @ 58 (-23), Havelid @ 63 (-25)

Bad: Jiricek @ 4 (+2), Nemec @ 6 (-2), Gauthier @ 15 (-10), Trikozov @ 18 (+39), Lutz @ 26 (+23), Odelius @ 28 (+8), Sykora @ 30 (+33), Neuchev @ 38 (HM), Ostlund @ 41 (-19), Luneau @ 52 (-20), Bystedt @ 75 (-25), Minten @ NR (47 on Bob's list)

I stopped at 2022 since most of the players drafted from 2023-2025 are not finished developing and it's probably a bit too early to come to conclusions with them.

Also I should note that it was difficult to find McKenzie's full rankings for 2016, 2018 and 2019, so I mainly just compared the 1st round rankings for those years.

Overall their track record is pretty mixed IMO. They definitely starting going more off-the-board with their rankings from 2020 onward, which is another reason why there are a lot more names listed in those years.

 

[TimeZone]

My guess is that Stenberg will be clearly preferred based on overall game. If they both score 50 pts next year or even if McKenna has fifteen more than Stenberg, every serious analyst will prefer Stenberg.

I am surprised that you haven't heard that, I think that is closer to the consensus among scouts. I think Wheeler shares my view not yours.

I believe I also heard Mike Johnston (who was the analyst for WJC and men's worlds) say that he expects Stenberg to be the much better player for the next couple years.

I highly, highly doubt this, especially if Stenberg is playing on a talented team like San Jose, he's a well rounded player but he's certainly no selke level player, he's an undersized winger with a solid but not elite B game.

Scott Wheeler absolutely does not believe Stenberg is a clear tier above McKenna right now, that's simply not true. Even if I were to be charitable and grant that Wheeler views Stenberg as the better player right now, he absolutely does not view Stenberg as being far ahead of McKenna, he views Stenberg as a future 70-80 point winger, he views McKenna as a 100+ point winger.

I couldn't care less what Mike Johnson says, I don't take him seriously as an analyst, he's full of hot takes and rarely provides proper nuance the way somebody like Scott Wheeler does.

 

[majormajor]

I highly, highly doubt this, especially if Stenberg is playing on a talented team like San Jose, he's a well rounded player but he's certainly no selke level player, he's an undersized winger with a solid but not elite B game.

Scott Wheeler absolutely does not believe Stenberg is a clear tier above McKenna right now, that's simply not true. Even if I were to be charitable and grant that Wheeler views Stenberg as the better player right now, he absolutely does not view Stenberg as being far ahead of McKenna, he views Stenberg as a future 70-80 point winger, he views McKenna as a 100+ point winger.

I couldn't care less what Mike Johnson says, I don't take him seriously as an analyst, he's full of hot takes and rarely provides proper nuance the way somebody like Scott Wheeler does.

Wheeler's views about where these guys are going to be in five years are different from where he thinks they're going to be next year. I think you've misinterpreted him. He's not that bullish on McKenna for the next couple years.

Stenberg's defensive game is not really noteworthy, he's just solid. That still makes him much better than McKenna, who has a missing motor and doesn't seem to understand what the other team is doing with the puck. You're going to have a lot of ugly goals against in the next couple years.

 

[TimeZone]

Wheeler's views about where these guys are going to be in five years are different from where he thinks they're going to be next year. I think you've misinterpreted him. He's not that bullish on McKenna for the next couple years.

Stenberg's defensive game is not really noteworthy, he's just solid. That still makes him much better than McKenna, who has a missing motor and doesn't seem to understand what the other team is doing with the puck. You're going to have a lot of ugly goals against in the next couple years.

No, I'm not. At worst Scott sees these players as extremely close right now with McKenna having a notable edge in regards to long term upside, I feel I've been very clear and concise with this.

I've watched numerous games from McKenna, I don't see a motor issue, I see inconsistencies and reason for concern away from the puck but I don't have any issues with his motor, and I certainly would never say he's missing a motor nor would I say that's a popular opinion among credible scouts.

What I do know is Scott Wheeler objectively does not view Ivar Stenberg as being a tier ahead of Gavin McKenna right now, that's simply objectively false nonsense, he's never said that, ever. At the absolute worst he views it as close, as does every other scout I've listened to this year.

 

[Castle8130]

Based on what? Stenberg was objectively better than Bjorck on the same team mere weeks ago, was better and more productive in the world juniors, better and more productive in the world U18's last year and better in the SHL this season.

He plays the more important position, however I don't think there's much of a case he's superior to Stenberg right now, who isn't as good as McKenna.

Stenberg has been more productive, yes, but that doesn't mean he is better. Stenberg was getting played on the 4th line in the SWEHL playoffs. Bjorck was the #1C for Djurgarden and more impactful across the board than both Frondell and Eklund in their playoff games.

If you are going merely off points, you are going to come to a completely different conclusion. Bjorck was the better player than Stenberg at the worlds and arguably WJC-20. He was relied upon more than Stenberg. Bjorck won all the battles and took the defensive responsibilities. Stenberg capitalized and made plays, but Bjorck had a stronger impact on the games as a whole.

 

[majormajor]

If anyone is interested to see hockey HockeyProspect.com's previous rankings fared, I took a look at their previous Black Book rankings from 2015-2022 and compared them to Bob McKenzie's NHL scout rankings to see which players they were significantly higher/lower on compared to the consensus.

The @ sign indicates where the HockeyProspect team ranked the player and the +/- sign in brackets showed how much higher/lower they ranked said prospect compared to Bob's List:

2015
Good: Marner @ 3 (+1), Connor @ 5 (+8), Eriksson Ek @ 15 (+8), Boeser @ 18 (+8) Roslovic @ 24 (+10), Zboril @ 25 (-11), Bittner @ 30 (-10), Hintz @ 44 (+14)

Bad: Juulsen @ 22 (+15), Kovacs @ 35 (HM), Cernak @ 80 (-39)

2016
Good: A.Nylander @ 12 (-5), Clague @ 45 (-14), Laberge @ 48 (-21)

Bad: Parsons @ 31 (+21), DeBrincat @ 33 (-10), Dahlen @ 24 (+26), Fox @ 67 (-22), Kyrou @ 69 (-37)

2017
Good: E.Pettersson @ 5 (+2), Rasmussen @ 15 (-6), Oettinger @ 20 (+6), Vesalainen @ 34 (-19)

Bad: Liljegren @ 10 (+6), Vaakanainen @ 11 (+11), Ratcliffe @ 13 (+14), Brannstrom @ 15 (+14), Tippett @ 22 (-12), Norris @ 45 (-22), Hague @ 46 (-21), Timmins @ 62 (-34)

2018
Good: Hayton @ 18 (-7), Marchenko @ 26 (+18), Veleno @ 37 (-23). McIsaac @ 45 (-19), Foudy @ 51 (-22)

Bad: Kravtsov @ 6 (+6), Albin Eriksson @ 28 (+40), R.McLeod @ 46 (-23)

2019
Good: M.Robertson @ 35 (-10), Kaliyev @ 34 (-13), Dorofyev @ 27 (+55)

Bad: Krebs @ 6 (+4), Cozens at 14 (-8), Kolyachonok @ 22 (+17)

2020
Good: Sanderson @ 5 (+3), Jarvis @ 7 (+11), Drysdale @ 12 (-8), Evangelista @ 21 (+29), Lapierre @ 27 (-12)

Bad: Raymond @ 8 (-2), Guhle @ 22 (-8), Holloway @ 29 (-12), Robins @ 13 (HM), Gunler @ 17 (+11), Brisson @ 19 (+11), Lundell @ 25 (-13), Mysak @ 26 (+8), Johannesson @ 31 (NR)

2021
Good: Knies @ 13 (+49), Lysell @ 25 (-11), Ceulemans @ 43 (-21), Tuomaala @ 46 (-16)

Bad: Eklund @ 2 (+2), Sillinger @ 5 (+6), Cossa @ 7 (+8), Heimosalmi @ 18 (+38), Fedotov @ 22 (+50), Olausson @ 24 (+10), Grushnikov @ 29 (+31), Stankoven @ 53 (-26)

2022

Good: McGroarty@ 11 (+26), Kemell @ 12 (-5), Lambert @ 29 (-13), Bichsel @ 17 (+9), Casey @ 31 (+20), Chesley @ 35 (-8), Gaucher @ 39 (-11), Hughes @ 58 (-23), Havelid @ 63 (-25)

Bad: Jiricek @ 4 (+2), Nemec @ 6 (-2), Gauthier @ 15 (-10), Trikozov @ 18 (+39), Lutz @ 26 (+23), Odelius @ 28 (+8), Sykora @ 30 (+33), Neuchev @ 38 (HM), Ostlund @ 41 (-19), Luneau @ 52 (-20), Bystedt @ 75 (-25), Minten @ NR (47 on Bob's list)

I stopped at 2022 since most of the players drafted from 2023-2025 are not finished developing and it's probably a bit too early to come to conclusions with them.

Also I should note that it was difficult to find McKenzie's full rankings for 2016, 2018 and 2019, so I mainly just compared the 1st round rankings for those years.

Overall their track record is pretty mixed IMO. They definitely starting going more off-the-board with their rankings from 2020 onward, which is another reason why there are a lot more names listed in those years.

Nice work. One quibble is that I think being a little lower on Nemec in 2022 (6th) is in the good category, not the bad.

 

[TimeZone]

Stenberg has been more productive, yes, but that doesn't mean he is better. Stenberg was getting played on the 4th line in the SWEHL playoffs. Bjorck was the #1C for Djurgarden and more impactful across the board than both Frondell and Eklund in their playoff games.

If you are going merely off points, you are going to come to a completely different conclusion. Bjorck was the better player than Stenberg at the worlds and arguably WJC-20. He was relied upon more than Stenberg. Bjorck won all the battles and took the defensive responsibilities. Stenberg capitalized and made plays, but Bjorck had a stronger impact on the games as a whole.

I am going off production as well as the eye test, I thought Stenberg was clearly better than Bjorck in both the world championships and the World Juniors, that doesn't mean I think Bjorck was bad, I just thought Stenberg stood out as the superior player and was certainly more dangerous in the offensive zone.

I think Bjorck looks like a fine prospect, I just don't see the high level upside that I see with Stenberg and especially Gavin McKenna, I also have concerns about his skating as a 5'9 C.

I would have issues with my team selecting Bjorck at 4th overall, I wouldn't be happy seeing him selected ahead of the two wingers or Reid.

 

[majormajor]

No, I'm not. At worst Scott sees these players as extremely close right now with McKenna having a notable edge in regards to long term upside, I feel I've been very clear and concise with this.

I've watched numerous games from McKenna, I don't see a motor issue, I see inconsistencies and reason for concern away from the puck but I don't have any issues with his motor, and I certainly would never say he's missing a motor nor would I say that's a popular opinion among credible scouts.

Scott Wheeler prefers McKenna based on long term upside. That's not his opinion about how they're going to play next year. His ballpark expectation for McKenna's points next year is arguably too low, he's saying 40 points.

And he's said many times that McKenna's compete level is too low. Yes McKenna's lack of motor is something you'll hear from scouts over and over again. You can't turn this into a credible vs non-credible discussion because it is the dominant view among most of them. I don't know how you could miss that.

What I do know is Scott Wheeler objectively does not view Ivar Stenberg as being a tier ahead of Gavin McKenna right now, that's simply objectively false nonsense, he's never said that, ever. At the absolute worst he views it as close, as does every other scout I've listened to this year.

It looks like you're still mixing up what they're saying about long term with what they're saying about next year. Most have Stenberg as being the more NHL ready player.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

I'm not necessarily convinced that is the case, I do think it's close and that Stenberg is the more well rounded player, but I think McKenna is still the superior offensive player right now, so it'll really come down to subjective values.

My biggest concern with Bjorck is that he's a 5'8-5'9 player with very limited skating ability, doesn't really possess any true elite qualities.

I think there's a really good case to take him over Malhotra, I wouldn't take him over McKenna, Stenberg or Reid...and I wouldn't have to think about it either.

Bjorck is 5'9 and will likely be listed 5'10 when he enters the league. And his elite qualities are is his brain, motor, and lower body strength / puck control.His skating isn't limited either, it's very reminiscent of Parise's at the same age.

 

[Castle8130]

I am going off production as well as the eye test, I thought Stenberg was clearly better than Bjorck in both the world championships and the World Juniors, that doesn't mean I think Bjorck was bad, I just thought Stenberg stood out as the superior player and was certainly more dangerous in the offensive zone.

I think Bjorck looks like a fine prospect, I just don't see the high level upside that I see with Stenberg and especially Gavin McKenna, I also have concerns about his skating as a 5'9 C.

I would have issues with my team selecting Bjorck at 4th overall, I wouldn't be happy seeing him selected ahead of the two wingers or Reid.

I guess we all see things differently. Pronman has also said scouts thought he was better than Stenberg in the games they've played together.

For teams competing for cups right now, you better hope Bjorck doesn't fall to 9th oa. Bjorck is making an NHL roster this fall and if Florida gets him, that just adds to their center depth. They can rest Bennett and put him on the fourth line in the regular season. Then have a healthy 4 headed monster in the playoffs