LD Jackson Smith - Edge School Prep, CSSHL U15 (2025 Draft)

[Gregor Samsa]

With the Avs being the worst drafting team in the league that's basically a good thing for him lol. Avs don't pick until the 4th anyway. I mean depends how he worded it because Smith doesn't project as an offensive dman he's a two guy. Now if he meant Smith won't produce offense in the NHL then he's just blind. Might not be a ideal PP1 guy but 30-40 even strength points is realistic

As someone who’s watched hockey for almost 3 decades, I’m a little embarrassed to ask but I must: what is a number 2 defenseman? The leader on the second pair or the sidekick on the 1st pair? I’ve seen it used both ways so I’m always unsure

 

[Gnashville]

As someone who’s watched hockey for almost 3 decades, I’m a little embarrassed to ask but I must: what is a number 2 defenseman? The leader on the second pair or the sidekick on the 1st pair? I’ve seen it used both ways so I’m always unsure

I have seen it referred to either way. It depends on how team deploy their D. Sometimes the 2 best are on the top pair or top PP unit others they spilt them up with weaker off Dmen.

 

[josra33]

As someone who’s watched hockey for almost 3 decades, I’m a little embarrassed to ask but I must: what is a number 2 defenseman? The leader on the second pair or the sidekick on the 1st pair? I’ve seen it used both ways so I’m always unsure

That’s a fair question

 

[Barry Amsterdam]

As someone who’s watched hockey for almost 3 decades, I’m a little embarrassed to ask but I must: what is a number 2 defenseman? The leader on the second pair or the sidekick on the 1st pair? I’ve seen it used both ways so I’m always unsure

both

 

[tomd]

Strikes me as a Broberg type before he got really good...

 

[landy92mack29]

As someone who’s watched hockey for almost 3 decades, I’m a little embarrassed to ask but I must: what is a number 2 defenseman? The leader on the second pair or the sidekick on the 1st pair? I’ve seen it used both ways so I’m always unsure

meant to have two in there for two-way guy but I do also see Smith as a future #2. #2 is basically not a franchise dman on the level of a Doughty/Hedman/Josi and now Makar/Hughes but still a guy who can play 25+ minutes a night and a coach can be comfortable putting out against anyone. On weak teams they can play in the #1 role but on true cup contenders you'd want them as #2s like Toews/Pietrangelo at this stage of career/Sergachev when he was in Tampa/etc

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

Has really struggled through the first two games of the playoffs. Outmatched vs Victoria's offence thus far and is relied on too much by his coaches. One thing I have noticed is that for as good as he is through the neutral zone his timing on the rushes often end with him not having options at zone entry. Too often he begins his rush without any wave coming with him and he ends up isolating himself. Thats just in my very small sample size.

Also, interesting tidbit. I spoke with a scout who was clearly not impressed. Went out of his way to highlight Reschny and Verhoeff in our short conversation and barely wanted to mention Smith as a footnote. Said he was terrible in game 1 (which he was) and was quite dismissive of him overall. The interesting part was that he said he doesn't project Smith as an offensive Dman at the NHL level. I found that odd considering he is quite obviously a mobile Dman with elite skiing and offensively minded. (spoiler- don't expect Colorado to draft Smith....)

He is still quite raw. Big guy who skates great, but he seems to struggle in defensive zone. Every time I watch him I’m less impressed. Reschny on the other hand..

 

[CheckingLineCenter]

As someone who’s watched hockey for almost 3 decades, I’m a little embarrassed to ask but I must: what is a number 2 defenseman? The leader on the second pair or the sidekick on the 1st pair? I’ve seen it used both ways so I’m always unsure

When I hear/say “this guy could be a number 2” — I think Noah Hanifin tier haha

Idk how to explain it anyway else

 

[jiboy]

Please update thread title

 

[MS]

As someone who’s watched hockey for almost 3 decades, I’m a little embarrassed to ask but I must: what is a number 2 defenseman? The leader on the second pair or the sidekick on the 1st pair? I’ve seen it used both ways so I’m always unsure

It's what dumb people call a #1 defender who doesn't play PP1 so doesn't meet the hockey card stats they expect from a 1D.

 

[Captain Clutch]

#2 D usually refers to the more defensive oriented player who plays on the first pair. More often, instead of PP1 time, they are PK1, but often play heavy minutes 5V5 and on the PK. The league continues to evolve with basically all teams only playing one defender on the PP and so teams to deploy their most offensively capable Defender on PP1, many times it will be a specialist. a good example would be a guy like Adam Fox or Lane Hutson, who are adequate defenders but elite offensive defensemen. I would say that the modern prototype for a #2 D these days is probably a guy like Jaccob Slavin, though others on this board will obviously have differing opinions.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

#2 D usually refers to the more defensive oriented player who plays on the first pair. More often, instead of PP1 time, they are PK1, but often play heavy minutes 5V5 and on the PK. The league continues to evolve with basically all teams only playing one defender on the PP and so teams to deploy their most offensively capable Defender on PP1, many times it will be a specialist. a good example would be a guy like Adam Fox or Lane Hutson, who are adequate defenders but elite offensive defensemen. I would say that the modern prototype for a #2 D these days is probably a guy like Jaccob Slavin, though others on this board will obviously have differing opinions.

Can’t believe people still don’t recognize this after like 6 years in the league, but Adam Fox is elite defensively. He’s closer to a defensive defenseman than offensive defenseman.

 

[Captain Clutch]

You know something Buchnevich, it never fails to amaze me how people like you are choosing to express themselves on these boards. Adam Fox is a #1 defenseman and a great player. He also benefits from some of the most sheltered minutes in the NHL among #1 defensemen because of his OFFENSIVE prowess. He's not on either of the Rangers PK units because they're trying to preserve his legs for O zone opportunities, which he is suited for in an elite way. The top #1 defenders in the league play, on average, about 25 minutes per game. Despite being a #1 defenseman, Fox doesn't rank in the top 25 for minutes per game. Why? Because he doesn't play as much defense. Why is that? Because he's not elite at it and the Rangers realize that. He's great at puck control, zone exits and entries and has outstanding Corsi ratings for that reason (in addition to being paired with K'Andre Miller) All good decisions. So maybe next time, if you are going to be wrong about something, you could at least choose to be polite about it. The rest of the posters here would appreciate that as well.