2025 NHL Draft: Scouting reports on 120 prospects from U-18 World Championship
That’s it. That’s the last major international U-18 tournament of the season.
The U-18 World Championship took place over the past two weeks in Texas, with Canada taking home gold with a win over Sweden. It might not have been the highest-quality tourney that we’ve seen, but once things started to tighten up in the playoff round, it started to get intense.
Today, we’re breaking things down and looking at how 2025 NHL Draft eligibles performed. Players who didn’t play any meaningful minutes weren’t included, and others who had no real chance of getting selected were also excluded. We wanted to really focus on players who are on the NHL team’s radars, with most appearing on NHL Central Scouting’s final draft lists published just prior to the tournament. Many also appeared on Daily Faceoff’s top 75 draft list that was published last month, as well.
We’ll have a lot more draft coverage to come over the next few weeks. But get ready to dive in and check in how more than 100 draft prospects performed in Texas:
Canada
#1 Jack Ivankovic, G: Ivankovic was one of the best goaltenders from start to finish. Canada’s blueline didn’t make it easy for him – Ivankovic had to stay focused the entire time. Whether it be Sweden or Finland or Slovakia, they kept Ivankovic busy and he had outstanding numbers to boot. That’s exactly what we’ve come to expect from Ivankovic – he’s just a superb international goalie. If he were 2-3 inches taller, we’d be talking about a second-round prospect. Still, I’d take a chance on him due to his pure upside and skill.
#29 Lucas Beckman, G: Just like at the Hlinka, Beckman saw limited action. But he was good against Latvia and gave Ivankovic a rest in the final round-robin game against Norway. NHL Central Scouting actually has Beckman two spots ahead of Ivankovic (Beckman is bigger), but it was never going to be his net in Texas. All in all, another good – but brief – showing for the Baie-Comeau goaltender.
#3 Jackson Smith, D: Smith had his highs and his lows at this tournament. He had some poor mistakes with the puck and didn’t blow the doors off anyone offensively. But he was still Canada’s best draft-eligible defender most nights, making an impact at both ends. I think I’d like to see the decision-making improve, but he’s still a top-10 prospect, and many consider him to be the second-best blueliner in this draft class, thanks to his high-end offensive and physical upside.
#6 Alex Huang, D: Huang is a bit of a mystery for me. I loved his ability to move and chase the puck at the Hlinka and thought he was better than his numbers ultimately showed in the QMJHL. But he just didn’t really impress me much at this tournament. He had two of his three points in the blowout win over Slovakia and then was relegated to bottom-pairing duty the rest of the way. He was a good fit alongside Matthew Schaefer at the Hlinka but it felt like he was a bit more lost at this tournament. I still think he could be a second-round pick but I was hoping for more.
#10 Quinn Beauchesne, D: While his defensive game still needs work, his O-zone play was the best of any Canadian defenseman at this tournament. I think scouts like the way he moves and rushes the puck because he does it with so little fear. He also has some underutilized skill with the puck – although I think he holds back because it can get him in trouble at some points. I still think he’ll be a third or fourth-round pick.
#7 Cole Reschny, C: Reschny is one of the hottest prospects in the game right now, and it’s easy to see why. He seems to always be making something happen, especially in overtime against Czechia when he scored the goal to advance to the semifinal. Reschny had points in every single game and was often the guy giving his team the energy to take over a shift and change the momentum. Reschny might be a sure-fire top 15 prospect by the time draft day comes along – and I fully expect him to become a folk hero on Canada’s world junior team before too long.
#9 Ben Kindel, RW: Kindel joined the team against the Finns and kicked things off with a pair of two-point games. He was excellent on the power play, doing most of his damage in small areas around the net. The highly skilled WHLer had 99 points in Calgary this year, and he kept things rolling with a high-end showing in Texas. Kindel is a smart playmaker who should go in the first round, with some thinking he’ll go in the top 15. His rise up the rankings this year after a quiet Hlinka has been fun to watch.
#12 Ethan Czata, C: I love Czata’s energy. The penalty killer spent most of the tournament deep in Canada’s lineup, but he still had a decent four points to show for it. He didn’t shoot the puck much at all, but he did make a habit of chasing players all game long and doing the dirty work to retrieve pucks. He might not be flashy, but Czata is a good two-way forward who should get taken in the second or third round.
#13 Tyler Hopkins, RW: Hopkins is a potential mid-round pick who didn’t make a ton of noise at this tournament, but still deserves some attention. He didn’t register a single point but I thought he did a great job against Slovakia in particular, when he had four decent looks to score. In Kingston, he’s a smart, two-way center whom you can rely on in the D-zone. That’s essentially what we saw from him in the round robin and he played a bit more of an attacking role in the semifinal.
#14 Liam Kilfoil, LW: The Halifax Mooseheads forward is a competitive winger who plays a good defensive game. He’s always moving (although his skating is average at best, I’d say) and he always finishes his checks. In a depth role, I can see something there. But he didn’t do anything offensively, has limited overall offensive upside and I don’t know if there’s enough to his game to be anything more than a late-round pick.
#15 Lukas Sawchyn, RW: Once Canada got its full roster together, Sawchyn was sent to the sidelines. So it’s hard to tell what his true impact was, given he played just three games and only had one assist to show for it. It was a bit of a shame, because the Canadian/American dual-citizen had such a great rookie season with the Edmonton Oil Kings. He’s a good heads-up passer, and he skates well, too. I’m not sure if it’ll be enough for him to get drafted, but we’ll see.
#16 Lev Katzin, LW: I hope a team takes a chance on Katzin because he was one of the most skilled players in this tournament. And if you’ve watched him play in recent years, that’s not surprising. He was consistently one of Canada’s best players, especially on the power play. He’s been setting players up at speed and he’s got a decent shot as well, too. The biggest thing against him is his smaller frame – at 5-foot-8, he’s not strong or dynamic enough in the eyes of many scouts. But just about every time he’s at a showcase event, he’s making something happen.
#19 Cameron Schmidt, RW: It was a disappointing tournament for Schmidt, who started off with a three-point game and then didn’t produce again. He made some great plays on the power play but just couldn’t snag anything. I was surprised to see him not on the ice for any of Canada’s eight goals against Norway – but he was on for the one against. It just didn’t feel like he had much of an impact offensively, even when he had a boatload of shots against Norway and Czechia. Defensively, though, I felt like he was more engaged than he was at points during the WHL season, when he was tasked with leading Vancouver’s offense.
#22 Jack Nesbitt, C: Nesbitt played all over the lineup, but I liked him where he spends most of his time – in front of the opponent’s net. His 6-foot-4 frame comes in clutch for that and he knows when to adjust his position to get himself ready for a rebound. He had a good tournament, and I think the talk about him being a top 15 pick won’t go away – even if I think that’s a bit too high for him. But it’s still easy to understand why teams like big centers.
#24 Braeden Cootes, C: Cootes continued to boost his value at the draft with another great showing. His two-way game was great, he played all over the lineup and found ways to impact the game positively no matter whom he lined up with. He’s not flashy but he works hard and sees the ice well. It’ll be interesting to see how teams view him at the draft because there’s not a ton of quality centermen after the top 10. Could a team take a chance on the hard-working forward earlier than expected?
#27 Matthew Gard, LW: Gard put up impressive numbers for someone who spent half the tournament playing under 10 minutes a night per game. Granted, three of his four points came in the opening two games. But given his job as a hard backchecker and defensive stalwart, I like what he brought to the table. He’s not flashy or anything, but he has a big 6-foot-4 frame and doesn’t give opponents much to work with. I think he’ll be a second or third-rounder.
#28 Brady Martin, RW: TSN’s Craig Button said multiple times he wouldn’t be surprised if Martin went top five in the draft. I don’t think he’s making that up, either, based on what I’ve heard. Martin was one of Canada’s best players, blending his mix of tenacity with his hockey smarts. He might not be the most skilled player, but he does so many great things at both ends of the ice that deserve recognition. I think Martin is going to be a fantastic NHLer, and someone every team needs.
Czechia
#2 Michal Orsulak, G: To be frank, it was a terrible tournament for Orsulak. He rarely looked comfortable in the net and allowed way too many weak goals. Granted, the team in front of him didn’t give him too much to work with. But Orsulak looked terrible against Sweden and was shaky against Switzerland despite facing just 10 shots. He’s an athletic, 6-foot-4 goaltender, but it feels like there were too many goals that just shouldn’t have gone in after starting strong against the United States.
#3 Radim Mrtka, D: Mrtka was Czechia’s best blueliner, and it wasn’t even close. He started it off with a great opening game that saw him score a nice goal against the United States. From there, he played heavy minutes – which might have actually not been the best thing for him, all things considered. Even though he was Czechia’s best defender, he often tried to make up for the team’s deficiencies by taking too many risks. He was good under pressure, but made too many unprompted mistakes the other way. Mrtka is still one of the best defenders in this draft class, but I feel like he was positioned to lose given the lack of support around him.
#4 Tomas Malinek, D: Malinek is a long shot to get drafted, and it was tough to get a read on him here. I thought he had a great game against Germany, but didn’t notice him too much beyond that. I liked his game at the Hlinka Gretzky Cup, especially after watching him start as the seventh defender before pushing his way up to key minutes. At this tournament, though, Malinek looked a bit inconsistent moving the puck.
#19 Stepan Cerny, D: Cerny is very small at 5-foot-9 and it shows in his lack of physical play. But, man, he can skate. I liked him early against the United States because he was trying to make things happen with the puck (but he was on the ice for all four goals against). He then had a decent showing against the Swiss, but had nothing to show for. Given his lack of size and his inability to generate many high-danger chances, I don’t see Cerny getting taken – even though I like his mobility.
#23 Tomas Mikel, D: Mikel is big at 6-foot-4, and he plays exactly like how you’d expect. He’s defensively minded and loves to compete along the boards. The University of Massachusetts defender didn’t play a ton this year due to injuries and had just two points between all his hockey action combined. I don’t see much offensive upside, but he knows how to play to his strengths to help maximize his value in his zone.
#8 Vit Zahejsky, RW: Injuries limited Zahejsky’s output in the WHL, but I thought he made up for it with a solid showing in Texas. He was especially good on the power play, which feels like the only time he really gets out of his perimeter-style game. That being said, he’s an excellent skater who boasts a ton of pure skill – channeling it for his own good is the next big step in his game. His own-zone game is a bit of a mixed bag but I think there’s enough raw talent for him to be a decent mid-to-late round pickup.
#9 David Rozsival, RW: Rozsival had a solid year internationally this season, putting up good numbers with the Czech U-18 team. He was also one of Bílí Tygři Liberec’s top players in the U-20 league this year, blending his hard shot with his knack for the net. He was just OK at this tournament, though – I was hoping for much more involvement on the puck. Granted, he didn’t play a ton, but it felt like he didn’t make the most of his opportunities, either.
#11 Matous Kucharcik, C: I’m not sure what to think about Kucharcik. He’s a great skater and has an excellent shot. On Czechia’s top line, he did a lot of dishing and was good in transition. But it feels like the effort isn’t always there, and his decision-making is still a true work-in-progress. I also think he lacks the defensive support needed to earn himself a bottom-six role in the NHL.
#15 Tomas Poletin, LW: Poletin isn’t big, but he’s got some real muscle behind him. He likes to push players around the net and makes things happen after winning close battles. I also think Poletin was one of Czechia’s better players in transition, although I wonder if the numbers would agree with me. He was one of Czechia’s best skaters with quick footwork and mobility, and he can play well at that pace, too. Poletin’s offensive game can be a bit too basic at times, but it felt more varied now compared to the Hlinka.
#18 Adam Benak, C: If it wasn’t for Benak, this tournament would have been an utter disaster. He joined in just hours before Czechia’s second game and registered assists on all three Czech goals in an eventual loss. The all-time Hlinka Gretzky Cup leading scorer is so crafty and skilled – but his 5-foot-8 frame will draw a lot of attention on draft day. But at a tournament like this, where size isn’t as important, his skill was able to shine through.
#20 Dominik Pavlik, C: I really like Pavlik as a third-line center. He’s a two-way forward who isn’t huge, but has muscle and isn’t afraid to push players around to get to where he needs to be. He’s quick, attacks on the forecheck and is quite creative, too. I think it helps that he’s a good penalty killer, too. Pavlik does enough of the dirty work to make me think he’ll get taken.
#22 Vojtech Cihar, C: Cihar had a quieter tournament than I was hoping – and, honestly, he was just fine throughout most of the international hockey season. But that doesn’t change the fact that I think Cihar could be a second-round pick this year. He’s an all-around forward who doesn’t excel in anything particular, but has few true weaknesses. He can play all forward positions, battles hard and skates well. That work ethic should allow him to have a decent pro career.
#25 Matej Pekar, RW: I’ve loved a lot of Pekar’s previous international tournaments. This wasn’t one of them. Especially early, Pekar seemed to be invisible, and it didn’t matter what line he was on. Pekar has built a reputation of being tough around the net while showcasing a nice shot. We just didn’t see anything remotely like that in Texas.
#26 Vit Macek, RW: Macek plays a heavy game, holding his own physically and blocking shots. We mostly saw him on the penalty kill, but that’s about it. I’ve liked that Macek is willing to do whatever it takes to keep the puck away from his own zone, but I don’t see much offensive upside.
#27 Matej Mikes, C: Mikes fits the mold as a big, bottom-line center. He’s defensively sound but can also hit guys, too. He doesn’t play outside his strengths – instead, he glues himself to opponents and makes himself difficult to beat in 1-on-1 situations. There isn’t much offensive upside here and he probably won’t get drafted, but I like his commitment to what he’s good at.
#28 Simon Fasner, LW: Fasner had a disappointing tournament. He had a solid year back home with Vitkovice, but his impact in this tournament as a depth forward was insignificant. He was decent transitionally, but generally struggled to do anything once the puck left his zone.
Finland
#1 Patrik Kerkola, G: This tournament was a bit of a mixed bag for the 6-foot-3 goaltender. On one hand, I thought he started off great with a trio of great games against Slovakia, Norway and Latvia. But he struggled mightily against Canada and allowed three not-so-great goals against Sweden. His inconsistency was a concern of mine this year, but I thought he was one of the few good parts of the Hlinka Gretzky team in August. I think Kerkola will get drafted, but he needs to find a way to close some of the holes in his game.
#4 Jesper Kotajarvi, D: Kotajarvi is a smart, puck-moving defenseman who can play a lot of minutes if needed. He had two points in five games, averaging slightly over two shots per game. I thought he was fine – he was one of the few defenders who didn’t seem to struggle in his own zone. But beyond that, I don’t think he’s more than a late-round pick unless he figures out how to use his speed to his advantage more consistently.
#6 Julius Saari, D: So, if there’s one thing Saari struggles in mightily, it’s shooting. Like, dude, don’t even bother touching the puck. But that being said, he has some good translatable skills. He’s a decent skater and can be a shutdown guy, just like he was in this tournament. His defensive reads were among the best on Finland, and I think he’s got enough pure own-zone capabilities to earn himself a selection later in the draft.
#7 Ossi Sippola, D: Sippola is an undersized defenseman who played primarily as the seventh man. Despite that, he had two points in a game against Latvia – which doubled his 31-game output in the Finnish U-20 league. He’s a good skater who can block shots and get in the way of passing lanes, but he has so little offensive upside. At 5-foot-10, though, will teams take a chance on him based on how he defends? Feels like a bit of a longshot.
#22 Veeti Ruotsalainen, D: Ruotsalainen is a small defender, but he had some of the best skating of anyone on the Finnish blueline. With the puck, he’s typically pretty quite. But he fights hard to win battles and uses his speed to win puck races. Ruotsalainen’s 5-foot-10 frame will make it difficult to see him get drafted – he struggled against Finnish U-20 competition as it is.
#25 Lasse Boelius, D: He was the only Finnish defender I have much interest in and I really liked him at the Hlinka Gretzky, despite his team getting caved in every night. But from there, Boelius played some great hockey throughout the year, showing promise in his limited Liiga play with Assat and with the Finnish U-18 team in other competitions. Boelius had five points in four games in the round robin, highlighted by a three-point effort against Latvia. I think the coaching staff also did a good job of limiting his playing time and keeping him fresh. Boelius is a high-end puck-mover who loves the disk on his stick and I think he’d garner more attention if he was a few inches taller.
#10 Atte Joki, C: I can see Joki becoming a role player one day. He’s a hard-hitting center who is defensively responsible and can definitely shoot. But this was a disappointing tournament for a forward who produced big time at just about every other event this year. He failed to register a point despite some great games against Latvia and Canada. Some of it was him being snakebitten – other times, he was surprisingly quiet.
#12 Aapo Katavisto, RW: Katavisto had a quiet tournament, failing to register any points despite playing around 15-16 minutes on average. He had at least a few chances every game, but nothing to show for on the scoresheet. He brings a ton of energy to the table, but I’m not sure he’ll get drafted.
#13 Rasmus Kamarainen, LW: Kamarainen was mostly there to block shots and chase guys around, and he did just that. But the physical forward didn’t produce much more than that, with his lone point coming in a dominant one-sided effort against Norway. I don’t think he gets drafted.
#18 Matias Vanhanen, LW: Born just a few days before the 2025 NHL Draft cutoff, he’s one of the youngest players in this draft class. Vanhanen had a strong tournament, registering five points in five games to help cap off an impressive international campaign. Scouts like his offensive traits, but note that he’s not physically up to par with what you’d hope for a prospect to be. With some added muscle and improved skating, he might be something as a Draft+1 prospect.
#21 Max Westergard, RW: Westergard is a well-rounded forward, and with this Finnish team, he needed to do a bit of everything. He was often the one driving the play on his line and he was a catalyst on the power play. Offensively, there are a lot of good habits – he’s always driving to the net, and he gets his shots off quickly. But where things fall apart is when he needs to play any form of defensive hockey. It feels like he’s always out of position and doesn’t help out physically. He’ll get drafted because he’s a speedy winger who can exploit open space, but I don’t expect him to go before the midway mark of the third.
#24 Jere Somervuori, RW: Somervuori skates fast and shoots hard. He was one of Finland’s best forwards, registering at least a point in all but the 1-0 loss to Slovakia. He’s not big and he can struggle in battles in front of the net but he gets himself into scoring lanes often and can make things happen. This was his best hockey of the season – but I’m not sure he’s rounded or skilled enough to earn anything more than a late-round selection.
#28 Rasmus Pakarinen, LW: Pakarinen had a fantastic start to the tournament, scoring two goals in each of his first two games. But then he stopped shooting much and had nothing to shoot for as his ice time increased. I like his release and his ability to battle in front but he’s not a good skater and had just an OK draft season overall.
#29 Aapo Vanninen, C: Vaaninen had his ups and downs this season. On one hand, he’s smart and quick, often making effective small-area plays. As a playmaker, there’s a lot to like – and that’s where he shined this year. I didn’t notice him at the Hlinka but he was much better in Texas, registering a point in all but the 1-0 shootout loss to Slovakia. He had decent shot volume and contributed nicely defensively. I don’t think he’s got the pure skill to get drafted and he’s not big, but it was a good way to end the year.
#34 Jasu Mensonen, LW: From an offensive standpoint, there isn’t much Mensonen has to offer. But I like his energy and willingness to chase all game long. That was especially true later in the tournament, where it looked like the teams were getting frustrated with him. He does a good job of chasing guys and making them accountable – and that’s what you look for out of a bottom-liner player. The only thing is, that’s unlikely going to be an NHL bottom line.
#37 Eetu Orpana, C: I didn’t have much of a book on Orpana before the tournament (he didn’t play at the Hlinka) but that quickly changed. The hard-nosed center had a great couple games against Latvia (four points) and Norway (two) and I thought he battled really hard against Canada, too. The 6-foot-1 forward brings a lot of energy to the table and has a bit more skill than his limited Finnish U-20 production would suggest. I like him more as a setup guy, but he’s also strong defensively. I think he did enough in the first four games of this tournament to receive some extra attention.
Germany
#30 Lukas Stuhrmann, G: Stuhrmann played three games and looked great in all of them. He was a big reason why the Germans beat Czechia and was so good against the Swiss, despite allowing four goals in the end. He then kept his team in it until the very against Slovakia in the quarterfinal. I think it’s a bit of a longshot he gets drafted because he’s only six-foot, but I like how he battles in the crease and never gives up on a play.
#1 Aaron Kaiser, G: Kaiser only made one start and was asked to carry the load against a high-flying American team. He played excellent, keeping USA to a one-goal lead until the very end. Kaiser had a rough show at the Hlinka but his game against the Americans was the best I’ve seen from him. He didn’t play much hockey as a whole this year so I don’t think he’ll get drafted.
#7 Carlos Handel, D: Handel, almost always, was one of Germany’s most impressive players at this tournament. He was best against Switzerland, where he had a two-goal, three-point performance. He’s just so slick on the blueline, moving fluently and shooting only when it makes sense. He’s good at using screens in front of the net to generate offense, and he knows when it’s best to just get the puck to someone else. I loved him at the World Juniors and I liked him even more in Texas. I think he should be a third-rounder at worst.
#11 Max Bleicher, D: Bleicher had a quiet season in Owen Sound but I felt like he broke through a bit more at the U-18s. He only had two points but I think he’s more creative than his numbers might suggest. He does a good job on the breakout and is a solid shooter, although I wish he’d do it more. Bleicher’s best attribute is his speed – but his worst might be his defensive awareness. He gets caught watching way too much for my liking.
#9 Elias Schneider, C: Schneider wasn’t on many radars heading into the tournament, but maybe he should be. He was Germany’s top center and led the way with six points. He was the only German forward to register at least one point in each of the round-robin games, which was highlighted by goals against both USA and Switzerland. In that game against the Americans, he led the way with seven shots – and nearly had two good goals in the quarterfinal. He’s not overly strong I’m not sold on his hockey sense. But I liked Schneider’s tournament overall.
#10 Maxim Schafer, RW: The internet scouting community loves Schäfer, and it’s easy to understand why. He’s a 6-foot-4 forward who moves well and is impossible to budge in front of the net. He spent more time playing against pros in the top German league this year after absolutely torching the U-20 ranks. Internationally, he was great at the World Juniors, and even better at the U-18s – his two goals against Czechia in the opener helped them pull off an upset victory. Schäfer doesn’t play a heavily physical game – and that’s because he beats players with his speed and mobility. I know he rose up some draft boards at this tournament.
#19 Dustin Willhoft, LW: Willhoft was one of Germany’s most consistent players during the round robin, registering five points in a three-game stretch. That includes two points against both USA and Sweden – he was one of the best play drivers in both of those outings. Willhoft had a productive year with Germany’s U-18 team and continued to look more and more confident every time I watched him. I hope he comes to North America next year because he has no reason to head back to the German junior ranks given the output he had this year.
#22 David Lewandowski, LW: Lewandowski was excellent at the World Juniors and I thought he was good in Texas. Albeit, I was hoping for a bit more offense – but his off-puck play was great, at least. He’s good around the net, using his muscle to outwork players and get into scoring lanes. The Saskatoon Blades forward feels like a future breakout candidate – someone who has the raw talent, but just needs to put it to use every single night. I like him a lot, and think he could be a decent mid-round pick.
#27 Rihards Griva, RW: Griva is a ball of energy out there, isn’t he? Both he and his brother had a great Hlinka and carried that out throughout year with Mannheim’s U-20 team. But while Gustavs was registering all the points, Rihards was much quieter on the scoresheet with just one assist. More importantly, though, I thought he was a good support player who battled hard at both ends and was good in transition. If he gets drafted, it’ll likely be with his brother – and near the end.
#28 Gustavs Griva, C: Griva was one of Germany’s most productive players with five points, including four assists. He was Willhoft’s primary setup man, just like he was in the German U-20 league. I’m not sure he’s skilled enough to challenge for a spot at the next level, but his ability to lead Germany at just about every event can’t be ignored – and just like his brother, he always plays with unbound energy.
Latvia
#15 Reinis Auzins, D: Auzins might be a total longshot to get selected, but I liked his showing. He had all the difficult matchups for the Latvians and looked competent enough to handle anything thrown his way. He had a few points to boot, too. I liked his play with the puck and I think he’s smart enough to play a decent level professionally.
#24 Daniels Serkins, C: Serkins is small, which definitely doesn’t help his case to get drafted. But he scored the lone goal against Canada on the power play and was one of the few players who seemed engaged in the blowout loss to Finland. There’s some budding skill there, and he had a good tournament – but the odds aren’t in his favor.
Norway
#3 Alexander Moltu Kiønig, D: I’m not sure if Kiønig is on anyone’s radar, but I liked his game. He’s a physical defenseman who came alive in the relegation game. He scored a goal and registered seven shots while playing more than 25 minutes. He seemed to get better as the tournament wore on, playing some tough matchups against quality teams.
#21 Tinus Luc Koblar, C: As a 6-foot-3 center, there’s a lot to like from his physical attributes. He’s not a crushing presence, but he’s competitive and strong enough to win out most individual battles. Mix in good skating and good hockey IQ and I think there’s definitely some late-bloomer potential if he can unlock another level in his offensive game. I’m definitely not sold on him by any means and feel like he had a much quieter tournament than we’re used to seeing him. But he’s not a nothing prospect, either.
#16 Mikkel Eriksen, C: Eriksen was consistently Norway’s best forward. His mix of speed and skill proved lethal at points, and while he didn’t rack up a ton of points, it wasn’t due to a lack of effort. I think he’s good enough with the puck to earn some draft consideration (he’s also one of the youngest players in the draft), and I know scouts liked his play in the Swedish U-20 league. No question about it, he’s a mid-pack pick, and someone I expect to play a big role internationally moving forward.
Slovakia
#2 Michael Pradel, G: Pradel was one of the best goaltenders from start to finish, and a big reason why the Slovaks played for a medal for the third straight year. The 6-foot-5 goaltender takes up a ton of the net, and he’s also so quick and agile, too. He was applauded for his ability to steal games in the USHL and he carried that over to this tournament, too. Pradel battles hard, sees cross-crease passes well and doesn’t let a bad goal bother him. Pradel will be one of the first goaltenders taken this summer.
#6 Michal Capos, D: I know Capos’ NHL potential is extremely limited, but I actually don’t mind him too much. He’s big at 6-foot-4 and likes to hit. But his overall game just isn’t there yet. His shot isn’t great, he can get caught being a bit flat-footed and his decision-making is way too questionable at times. But he’s also great defensively and has a pro-game build. Maybe we’ll see him sign an NHL contract 7-8 years down the line.
#7 Adam Kalman, D: I actually didn’t mind Kalman in this tournament, even if he didn’t have much to show for. He’s a good puck rusher and has quick hands, too. But he also struggled defensively and didn’t do much to overshadow that. It was just a “fine at best” showing from Kalman.
#8 Patryk Zubek, D: I liked Zubek at the Hlinka, so I was disappointed to see him not get much ice time this time around. I think part of that stems around his rough showing against Canada on the second day of the tournament, because he never played more than 3:20 after that. His size, mobility, and puck play intrigue me and I think he has good hockey sense at both ends of the ice, too.
#17 Matus Lisy, D: I sort of see something there. Lisy doesn’t drive much play but he’s competitive and can shut guys down. I thought he made a good first impression against Finland but wasn’t nearly as effective after that. I wish he’d engage more on the puck because he’s actually not bad at getting the puck where it needs to be.
#26 Luka Radivojevic, D: As expected, Radivojevic was Slovakia’s best defenseman. From the way he creates offense to the way he pushes players to the outside, Radivojevic is one of the most promising blueliners to come out of Slovakia in some time. It felt like he played a bit better at the World Juniors, where he had better players to pass to. But in just about every Slovak victory, I found myself impressed with the way Radivojevic was involved at both ends. We’ll see where he lands in the NHL Draft – I’m thinking late second, early third just because he’s undersized.
#27 Patrik Rusznyak, D: My biggest knock against Rusznyak at the Hlinka was that it felt like he got knocked down too much for a 6-foot-4, 203-pound defender. I thought he did a better job of handling his own physically but still felt like he could have been more aggressive. As a shutdown D, he can get the job done, though. He can also kill penalties and block shots. So, he plays his role and sticks to it. That’s fine.
#10 Michal Svrcek, LW: After hoping to watch him be a big contributor for this team, Svrcek was a bit quieter than I was hoping for. I understand the excitement about him – he’s an outstanding skater who never stops moving. But it felt like he would get the puck and run himself out of space. I like him as a third or fourth-round pick – and I can see him becoming a depth NHLer. I don’t understand those who think there’s first-round potential there.
#11 Alex Misiak, Misiak doesn’t have as much energy or skill as his brother, Chicago Blackhawks prospect Martin Misiak. But he’s still a decent playmaker. After his decent season with the USHL’s Waterloo Black Hawks, I thought Misiak was a good middle-six threat for Slovakia. He didn’t score, but he was involved in creating plays just about everywhere. I really liked how hard he battled against Norway, in particular.
#15 Andreas Straka, RW: I loved Straka’s first game, and it happened to be one of his quietest on the forecheck. I didn’t notice his ferocity as much as the tournament played on, but he had a pair of points against Norway and looked good against Canada and Latvia. He’s more of a complementary piece, but I fully expect him to get drafted. At his best, Straka is a tough SOB to contain because he plays with so much force and attack.
#18 Martin Kalis, C: Kalis’ job was to try and shut guys down, and I thought he was fine. He’s smart and works hard to get to both ends of the ice. I don’t see him getting drafted this year, but one scout I talked to thinks he’ll be one of those guys who figures out how to use his strength as he gets older and becomes a decent pro because of it.
#20 Samuel Murin, C: I loved Murin’s first game – he was all over the ice against Finland. He was creating chances, hitting guys and bringing the energy every opportunity he could. But then I barely noticed after that. I don’t think there’s any high-end skill here but he definitely knows how to bring the boom when he needs to.
#23 Kristian Kriska, C: Kriska was there to get into scoring lanes and block the odd shot or two. He also played a bit at every forward position throughout the tournament. His versatility is nice, but I don’t see a forward with much offensive upside and he’s just OK defensively.
#25 Jan Chovan, C: Chovan was one of my favorite Slovak players, even though almost all his offense came in one game. He’s a detail-oriented player who can win faceoffs and play all situations. He was also quite involved around the net – more so than I remember at the Hlinka. Being 6-foot-3 doesn’t hurt, either – and he’s flexible as a center and a winger. I think he’ll get taken in the third or fourth round because he has some obvious upside as a net-front presence.
#28 Jakub Dubravik, RW: Dubravik had a quietly good tournament. He had a pair of assists against Germany and was surprised he didn’t score with a few of the looks he had in the round-robin outing against Canada. He might have fallen down in Slovakia’s lineup but I think he looked good yet again in national team colors. But as an undersized forward with just OK skating, I don’t think he’ll get selected.
Sweden
#1 Måns Goos, G: Goos had a tough showing in his first start against Germany, allowing four goals on 24 shots. He was great in that pre-tournament game against Canada but had one of the worst showings I’ve seen from him this year in his first real start. Thankfully, he turned things around with a nice effort against Czechia. At 6-foot-5, there’s obvious potential there from a size perspective. I just want him to move quicker and use his size better.
#30 Love Härenstam, G: There’s no doubting Härenstam’s pure skill. Few goalies are better at making reactionary saves, and he’s as athletic as they come. But he allows goals on too many simple, weak shots for my liking, and that was especially true against the United States in the round robin. The butterfly goaltender never seemed to look confident in his crease – the same issue we saw at the Hlinka Gretzky Cup and the World Junior A Challenge. At this point, I’m nervous about his NHL potential.
#3 Oliwer Sjostrom, D: I thought Sjostrom had a good showing against the United States, where he had an assist and five shots while playing a personal best 21:29 that night. He’s not big, but he skates well and doesn’t make many mistakes under pressure. He doesn’t do much physically and while he moves well, it doesn’t seem to translate in the way he rushes the puck. He often looks too confused with the puck – so much so that I don’t think there’s much of a pathway for him getting selected.
#4 Karl Annborn, D: There’s nothing flashy about Annborn’s game, and his willingness to keep things simple is what makes him most dangerous. He’s smart, can rush the puck up and has good hockey sense. But his shot isn’t strong, he doesn’t crush guys along the boards and can be caught watching a bit too often. I do think he’s got that competitive gene to give himself a decent pro career somewhere.
#5 Sascha Boumedienne, D: Boumedienne disappointed me at the Hlinka – he didn’t in Texas. After a good showing in the Frozen Four, the potential first-round pick had a six-point opening game against Switzerland. His hard shot was on full display, as was his excellent puck-moving ability. With the disc, he’s never dull – he always makes interesting plays. Sometimes it doesn’t work out – but I’ve come to appreciate his willingness to make aggressive moves. This was an outstanding showing from him.
#7 Joe Wahlund, D: Wahlund had a pair of points in Sweden’s first two blowout wins but eventually fell out of the lineup. He’s a bit too hot and cold for my liking – he sometimes can pull off great moves with the puck. Other times, he’s prone to bad mistakes. His physical play, plus his fluid skating, could make him an interesting project pick in the final two rounds. But I’m not totally convinced he’ll be taken.
#8 Theo Hallquisth, D: The best way to describe Hallquisth’s tournament was… fine. He’s better when he’s not being noticed because it means he’s keeping things simple. He’s physical, can play a shutdown game and controls his gaps well while play a lot of minutes. But he was also prone to some bad mistakes in that game against the United States in the round robin, which left a sour taste in my mouth. It was an overall step down from his play at the World Junior A Challenge back in December.
#13 Malte Vass, D: Vass’ game is all about shutting guys down. He only played in the second half of the tournament, but he played on Sweden’s fourth pair and made life difficult for the Czechs. He moves well laterally and takes up a lot of space, although he’s not the quickest. He’s not massive by any means, but Vass hits hard and can be miserable to go up against. Some scouts think there’s top 100 potential – I’m not convinced, but I see the allure. He’s got the size and shutdown tendencies that scouts are going to love.
#11 Jakob Ihs Wozniak, LW: I’ve been critical about JIW’s play this year because he’s been a bit too inconsistent for my liking. But we saw a bit of everything that makes him intriguing at this tourney – he’s a good skater with great hands and a knack for the net. His own-zone play is still ugly, and he can give the puck away from trying to do too much. But his impact in the offensive zone was as good as we’ve seen it this year. He can play center and the wing, and he’s got pro-level footwork already. I’m not sure I’d label him a high-risk, high-reward winger – even though I want to sometimes. But the highs are promising.
#14 Filip Ekberg, RW: My biggest complaint about Ekberg’s season was how underutilized he was by Ottawa 67’s coach Dave Cameron. Ekberg then seemed to be launched out of a cannon in Sweden’s opening game, scoring four goals and five points. He was easily one of the best players on the ice on any given night, and deserved all the MVP love he got. I think he’s one of the more pure-skilled forwards in this draft class, and that he just needed the right opportunity to prove that. For me, mission accomplished.
#16 Anton Frondell, C: Frondell flew over from Sweden after winning the Allsvenskan title and was immediately thrust into action against a high-flying American team. He struggled there, but was much more involved as the tournament wore on. You can see the natural gifts he has with the puck, and his ability to affect the game around the net is tremendous. He’s still a bit too inconsistent away from the puck for my liking, though, but I won’t put too much stock into his performance in Texas, given he was added so late.
#20 Eddie Genborg, LW: Genborg loves to hit everyone in sight and that tenacious energy is going to take him far. He’s more of a support player than a playdriver, but he still had a great start to the tournament with three points in his first two games. He quieted down a bit, but I still think there’s a ton of pro-level attributes there from the way he thinks the game and plays in transition. I like him as a third-rounder, but I know some scouts think he could go higher.
#22 Milton Gastrin, C: I love Gastrin’s game. I think he’s a legit first-round prospect. He’s so smart, cradles the puck well and competes as hard as anyone. Mix in above-average skating and great defensive zone awareness and I’m seeing a player that reminds me of David Edstrom from two years ago. I have absolutely no concern about Gastrin not becoming an NHLer because he thinks and operates at such a high level.
#25 Viktor Klingsell, LW: Klingsell was never Sweden’s best player in any game, but he was ALWAYS involved. The undersized winger blends skill and hockey sense together to get himself into scoring lanes more often than not. I think he’s a better playmaker, but he’s equally dangerous just about anywhere on the ice. I think teams will look past his 5-foot-10 frame and bet high on him based on his great skill with the puck.
#26 Eric Nilson, C: While I’ve seen Nilson play better before, it was still a solid tournament on his end. He’s a decent skater who can shoot the puck, get to the front of the net and can outthink opponents at both ends of the ice. I just felt like he was a bit too timid in board battles and didn’t fight for pucks like I know he’s capable of. I wish he had a bit more top speed, and I wish he tried to engage physically. Overall, I was a bit disappointed.
#27 Melvin Novotny, RW: I think Novotny might be a nice, hard-working pickup for someone in the middle of the draft. He’s a hard-working forward with good hands, quick feet and an innate ability to get himself into open lanes. His ability to read plays quickly makes him effective. He was one of Sweden’s better players at getting the puck to the net. He didn’t always convert, but Novotny did it with a good enough frequency to mostly offset any shortcomings. His own-zone game could use a bit of work, though.
#28 Theo Stockselius, RW: Stockselius played some of his most effective hockey at this tournament. Primarily in a bottom-six role, Stockselius used his 6-foot-3 frame to win battles, and it paid off on the scoresheet. He had a great round robin, highlighted by a three-point effort against Germany. Beyond that, I liked his own-zone awareness and his commitment to shutting guys down whenever he could. Stockselius has earned some love as a potential second-rounder in the draft, and I think it’s because he’s blooming with upside.
Switzerland
#11 Mike Aeschlimann, LW: I only saw him a little bit throughout the year and he never stood out to me. But in Texas, he was one of the few forwards actually trying to make things happen for Switzerland, and that’s why he finished second in team scoring. He’s good around the net and is as close to a skilled power forward as Switzerland has in this draft class. I’m not sure he’ll get taken but I like that he became a heart-and-soul player for the Swiss.
#18 Jeremiah Mundy, RW: Mundy is a prototypical power forward. He’s a hard-hitting, 6-foot-3 forward who wins battles with brute force. He’s also good in front of the net, and can be especially valuable on the power play. His footwork isn’t great, though, and it limits his overall production. But with four points, I thought he looked significantly better than he did back in August. Maybe a team chases after him in the seventh.
#21 Florian Schenk, C: Schenk was by far Switzerland’s best player. With him, this team would have been even more of a disaster than they were. He scored four of Switzerland’s 13 goals while also being the team’s most aggressive forward. It was easily the best hockey I’ve seen from him over the past three years of watching him develop, and it’s partly because he just looked more determined and dangerous to make things happen whenever he got near the net. Will it be enough to get him drafted? I’m not sure, especially after an underwhelming start to the year with the Saint John Sea Dogs.
USA
#1 Joey Slavick, G: Slavick is a longshot to get drafted, given he’s 5-foot-10. But I’d be wrong if I said I wasn’t impressed with his game against Switzerland. Sure, it was a one-sided 10-0 win, but he seemed laser-focused and moved quite well, too. His rebound control left a bit to be desired but he never looked too far out of position. Still, I think he’s way too small for a team to take a chance on him, unfortunately.
#29 Patrick Quinlan, G: Quinlan had his moments in this tournament, and I thought he played particularly well against Sweden. There were a few moments in the tournament where I felt like he gave the shooter too much to work with, and he doesn’t have the size to make up for that. But at a tournament like this, where goaltending wasn’t a strength heading in, I thought Quinlan played fine. I’m just not sure he’s going to get drafted because he’s not particularly big, can be beaten a bit too easily at points and his numbers haven’t been good over the past two years. But in Texas, I thought he was fine.
#2 Garrett Lindberg, D: Lindberg is a small defenseman who could be a difficult player to read at points. The future Univ. of North Dakota defender is more of a shutdown defender, although he doesn’t have the ideal frame for it. I will say that I think he does a great job of bouncing back after a bad shift – he rarely has two in succession. He had very little to show for on the scoresheet but he did his job well as a top-four defender who can take the pressure off his linemates and effectively play in his zone.
#3 Blake Fiddler, D: Fiddler slipped into the top pairing from the Edmonton Oil Kings and gave the American blueline a huge boost. His combination of size and competitiveness made him notable, and his goal in the first game helped spark USA’s comeback against Czechia. He played on the penalty kill, but I actually think his puck game was what really stood out to me. I think he’s more of a second-pairing defender in the NHL, but he’s going to be a tough one to beat thanks to his good defensive awareness and big 6-foot-4 frame.
#6 Maceo Phillips, D: Phillips rarely played, skating in just three games and only hitting the five-minute mark once. That was a bit disappointing because I like what the 6-foot-6 defenseman brings to the table. He has good gap control, takes up a ton of space and can play a good shutdown game.
#10 Drew Schock, D: The primary thing that stands out about Schock’s game is his skating. He moves well, and uses his footwork to help him cradle the puck at speed. He’s a good playmaker, although I wish he’d shoot harder. Defensively, he can be a bit of a mixed bag. He has two-way potential, but it’s not always evident. I think he played his best game against Sweden, although he was still prone to defensive mistakes. Schock’s lack of consistency will prevent him from going in the top three rounds, but he has enough raw talent to potentially become a bottom-pairing defender.
#13 Asher Barnett, D: The Americans lack a high-end producer like the Hutson brothers of days past. But Barnett helped fill the gap at this tourney. He’s good as a distributor, and seems to always be looking to create something. He’s not big, but he’s got some muscle to him. The U-18 captain put up modest numbers with the USNTDP this year but this felt like some of his best hockey – especially against Switzerland where he looked unstoppable by the blueline. I could see a team banking on his upside in the middle rounds.
#19 Charlie Trethewey, D: I was hoping for so much more from the 6-foot-2 defender. He has good offensive instincts but it’s like he was playing too reserved. He does a nice job of activating plays up the ice and he doesn’t get caught trying to do too much. But some poor giveaways and slow reaction times didn’t help him. Overall, I was hoping for much more.
#23 Donny Bracco, D: Bracco is a good skater who pulls off a few high-end skill moves every game. He has good vision and I think he’s a better offensive defenseman than his numbers would suggest. If he was to get taken in the NHL Draft, though, it’s more likely as a shutdown defender. I don’t think he has the high-end skill or top speed to be anything much more than that, but I did like how effective he was in the O-Zone at this tournament.
#4 Richard Gallant, LW: Gallant might not be much of a producer at the next level, but he battles harder than anyone. He skates like his life depends on it and his competitive nature was second to none. Gallant is a heart and soul guy who has to outplay his 5-foot-8 frame and it pays off with the production he managed to put up this year. Gallant could end up going mid-to-late in this draft thanks to his pure energy.
#7 Jacob Kvasnicka, RW: Kvasnicka was especially good in the game against Sweden, finding so many ways to make plays with the puck. The mid-sized winger is a tremendous skater and is as competitive as they come. He has to be, though, because his puckhandling can be a bit suspect at times. He can score in close, but his shot from afar needs work. That one specific game against the Swedes, though, was the best game I’ve seen him play. He seems to elevate his play when the USA needs him the most.
#9 Jack Murtagh, RW: Murtagh did most of his damage in the onslaught against the Swiss. Beyond that, though, it felt like we were waiting for him to explode offensively, only for it to just not happen. He played on USA’s top line but it felt like he was overshadowed by both Cole McKinney and Richard Gallant most nights. I still think Murtagh is a great prospect who should go in the top 40, but I wanted to see more dominance on the puck.
#11 Cole McKinney, C: McKinney was great in this tournament, often generating energy around the opposing team’s net. McKinney is a mid-sized, two-way center who can play on the penalty kill, block shots and win a ton of faceoffs. He’s not going to be a playdriver in the NHL, but he’s detail-oriented and exceptionally smart. Lots of scouts think he can go early in the second round.
#12 Cullen Potter, C: Potter joined the Americans after spending the year at ASU and it took him little time to catch up with his old teammates. A projected top 20 pick, Potter went from playing nearly 20 minutes a night in college to looking like one of USA’s most rounded players. He’s an excellent skater, and he uses that speed to beat opponents to the middle to create chances. Potter is also much better defensively than he was at the same point last year – a testament to his work at ASU. I thought Potter was one of the most impressive forwards in this tournament, and while his lack of pure strength is definitely a concern, I see all the upside.
#14 William Moore, RW: Moore started most games on the wing, but was ultimately USA’s best middleman in the dot. He’s smart, plays a great two-way game and got more involved as the tournament wore on. I wish he would impact the game more in the offensive zone, but you could always rely on Moore playing a smart, strong game every time he hit the ice. I think there’s some teams that’ll target him in the first round – but at the very least, he won’t need to wait long if he makes it to Day 2.
#17 Andrew O’Neill, C: O’Neill was someone I really started to like throughout the season. He’s a fourth-liner, but he’s excellent defensively and shows a ton of pro-level traits. He processes the game quickly and is committed to winning every shift. But he didn’t play a lot, and, ultimately, didn’t get much fanfare. The University of North Dakota commit should receive NHL attention due to his work ethic but it feels like he’s one of those guys who will open eyes once he leaves the program.
#18 LJ Mooney, C: Mooney was one of USA’s better players at this event a year ago, and he was even better this time around. As one of the smallest players in this draft class, Mooney has had to work even harder to make sure he gets noticed. Between his playmaking and skating on display, Mooney was one of USA’s top forwards every time he hit the ice. I love how he exploits open ice and he’s got the quick hands to make both great passes and great shots. I think he gets drafted regardless because his skill is undeniable, but at 5-foot-7, anything higher than the third round is a tough sell.
#21 Teddy Mutryn, LW: For Mutryn, you need to look at the projectibles. He didn’t play much on USA’s fourth line, and, honestly, he wasn’t noticeable with the puck. Without it, though, he was more involved. He’s a good skater who excels defensively and brings a ton of energy to every shift. But I don’t see much offensive upside and I think he needs to get physically stronger.
#22 Will Horcoff, LW: Horcoff is going to be a good pro. He isn’t flashy and won’t play in your team’s top six. But he hits hard, plays with a ton of power and can be difficult to contain anywhere on the ice. He had a productive end to the year with the Univ. of Michigan, and I’m excited to see what he can do in a full season. I might not have him as a top 75 prospect in the draft, but I think there’s an NHL future here.
#24 Ben Kevan, RW: As one of the fly-in players out of the USHL, it felt like Kevan was doomed to fail. He either played on the fourth line or as USA’s 13th forward, never playing more than 12 minutes in a game. He had a goal and an assist in the two games he played over 10 minutes, but was otherwise used as an energy forward the rest of the way. Given his ability to impact games with the puck, it was a bit disappointing to see – and it wasn’t really his fault.
#26 Matthew Lansing, C: I liked Lansing at the Hlinka Gretzky, where he seemed to play a significant middle-six role. Here, though, he was just a depth forward. Lansing’s stock fell as the season wore on, so I wouldn’t be surprised if he didn’t get selected. But from an overall standpoint, he’s smart, defensively responsible and blocks shots. I just can’t pretend I noticed him too much in Texas.
SPONSORED BY bet365