2025 World Juniors Scouting Reports: How every NHL prospect performed

OTTAWA – For the first time ever, the United States has won gold in consecutive years.

The gold medal game was an exciting one between the United States and Finland, with the Americans coming back in overtime to win gold 4-3. Czechia took home the bronze, beating Finland 3-2 in overtime earlier on Sunday.

It was a wild tournament, to say the least. One of the biggest stories of the tournament was the early exit for Team Canada on home ice. Many expected the Canadians to challenge for gold – but a myriad of issues on and off the ice plagued the team from the very start.

On top of that, Kazakhstan became local heroes, Latvia stunned the home team, and needing extra time to decide the two title games is as good as you could ask for.

Around 90 NHL prospects participated in the annual international showcase – the top junior tournament in the world. Players who were named to the roster but didn’t play were not included in today’s write-up.

So, let’s look at’s wrap up the tourney by looking at how every NHL prospect performed:

Anaheim Ducks

Vojtech Port, D (Czechia): The Lethbridge Hurricanes defender had a big three-point effort against Kazakhstan, tying his output from the 19 games he spent with Moose Jaw earlier in the season. Not known for his offensive prowess, Port was one of Czechia’s better defensive defenders and was tasked with shutdown duties against Sweden and Slovakia in particular. I thought he was better than I expected.

Carey Terrance, C (USA): Terrance was more noticeable in this tournament than I was expecting. The Erie Otters captain had goals against Germany and Finland and generally made himself difficult to play against. He’s an excellent skater who I think outworked most lines he matched up against. A solid showing for a forward who didn’t get a chance to crack the American lineup as an alternate last year.

Austin Burnevik, RW (USA): It’s not every day a player essentially gets demoted from the U-18 USNTDP and re-appears on USA Hockey’s radar for the U-20s. Burnevik turned a good first half at St. Cloud State into a bottom-six roster spot with USA, where he mostly played a shutdown, checking forward role. He also had a couple of decent scoring chances against Latvia.

Darels Uljanskis, D (Latvia): Uljanskis had some tough matchups most nights, and played his best hockey against Canada, specifically. The mobile defender played a decent physical game and was good at keeping opponents to the outside. I wish we saw him do more with the puck, though.

Boston Bruins

N/A

Buffalo Sabres

Konsta Helenius, C (Finland): It’s funny – Helenius put up some excellent numbers, but he didn’t particularly wow scouts in Ottawa. Maybe because all his points were assists, but he didn’t get the same love some others at this tournament did. That didn’t change the fact that he was one of the primary reasons why the Finns got to the final in the first place – especially with that four-assist night in the semifinals. His ability to pick out passes and set up just about anyone on the rush makes him so dangerous.

Norwin Panocha, D (Germany): Panocha was steady but quiet for the most part. As 2025 NHL Draft prospect Carlos Handel seemingly took the spotlight on Germany’s back end, Panocha’s game was more about simplifying the puck game and playing heavy minutes. He looked fine.

Maxim Strbak, D (Slovakia): Strbak has been a stalwart at this tournament for the past four years, and he’s finally able to put the cap on his international junior career. He finished with six points, which included two-point efforts against Sweden and Kazakhstan. He kept on looking better with every game, and was one of the few Slovak defenders who thrived against Finland in the quarterfinal. I think Strbak could be a decent third-pairing defender once he’s done at Michigan State University – his play away from the puck is solid.

Adam Kleber, D (USA): When the Americans left EJ Emery off the lineup, it seemed like they were going to use Kleber a lot more. Instead, he played top-four minutes against the Finns and then served as the seventh defender essentially the rest of the way. There wasn’t much to write home about there – he was good defensively but didn’t have many tough matchups.

Brodie Ziemer, RW (USA): Ziemer had a great round-robin in particular, scoring twice against Germany and again later against Finland. The middle-six forward was one of the better complementary forwards the Americans had and was promoted to USA’s second line against Canada in an effort to make the top six a bit tougher to play against. Overall, a solid showing for someone I think is quite underrated.

Calgary Flames

Axel Hurtig, D (Sweden): Hurtig primarily lined up as Sweden’s seventh defender and had an overall quiet showing. The big, physical blueliner did a solid job of pushing opponents to the perimeter and laying the body, but I thought he struggled with the pace at points as the tournament wore on. Nothing special, but Hurtig played his role.

Carolina Hurricanes

Bradly Nadeau, LW (Canada): Nadeau had two goals in the final two games while bouncing around the lineup. I didn’t like him on the top line, and he didn’t bring the spark Canada needed from someone on pace for just under 50 points as a 19-year-old AHLer. Felix Unger Sorum, who also plays in the AHL, was so good for the Swedes, but Nadeau looked a bit too invisible for someone with big-time pro experience.

Felix Unger Sorum, RW (Sweden): Had Sweden won gold, Unger Sorum might have been able to win MVP honors. For anyone watching closely, they saw how he attacked plays, forced turnovers and made opponents work extra hard to come out on top against him. He racked up some points along the way too, but it was his off-puck play that really excited me. I don’t think Unger Sorum will be a surefire top-six NHLer, but he’s got the skill to play anywhere in a lineup and look good.

Oskar Vuollet, LW (Sweden): Vuollet didn’t play a ton, but I loved his energy. I’ve always known him as a shooter who can cause a ton of damage in open space. But he really excelled as a backchecker who forced opponents to have to make quick moves. Vuollet reads and plays well, and he always seems to be in the right spot when he needs to.

Chicago Blackhawks

Oliver Moore, LW (USA): It’s hard not to love his speed. Moore started as USA’s third center but moved to the second line, and his footwork was an excellent complement to Danny Nelson’s two-way acumen. Even when Moore isn’t producing, he’s making things happen away from the puck. Given you spend more time away from it than with it, that’s important.

Jiri Felcman, C (Czechia): Felcman was good in the first two games against Switzerland and Kazakhstan but then saw his ice time fluctuate the rest of the way. He drove the net hard and had some good plays through traffic, but otherwise, he was just fine.

Colorado Avalanche

Cal Ritchie, C (Canada): I was hoping for a lot more from one of the few players in the tournament with NHL experience. He held the No. 1 center job from the start of the pre-tournament and played decently well against Latvia and Germany. But the two-way center struggled to get things going on a top line that Canada the coaching staff probably relied a bit too much on. I’m not sure if it was Ritchie’s fault, but I’ve seen him play significantly better hockey.

Columbus Blue Jackets

Luca Pinelli, RW (Canada): I understood Pinelli’s inclusion on Canada, even if he wasn’t the most effective. His job was about taking opponents away from the net to give his own players the best chance possible to skate in and score. Pinelli scored in the opening game against Finland on a nice tip, but I also felt like he was playing way too high in the lineup from the get-go. He wasn’t a good complement to Berkly Catton and Gavin McKenna, no matter how much Dave Cameron liked him.

Dallas Stars

Aram Minnetian, D (USA): Minnetian had a quiet tournament, with his ice time bouncing all over the place. The defensive defender is best when he keeps things simple and prefers to set guys up rather than take a shot himself. As a depth defender, he did his job.

Emil Hemming, RW (Finland): The Barrie Colts forward was nearly invisible throughout the round-robin but stepped up in a big way in the medal round. That’s good, because scouts were worried with how he played early before he started to generate scoring chances and make plays happen around the net. I do like how his improved engagement away from the puck improved as the tournament wore on – I just wish we saw a bit more of that in the preliminary round.

Detroit Red Wings

Axel Sandin-Pellikka, D (Sweden): At his best, ASP was a star at this tournament once again. It all started with a four-point effort against Slovakia and another three points against the Swiss. He generated a lot of shots, and when Sweden needed him to perform, he often did. The one knock against him was some of the mistakes he made in transition. But on the flip side, he was always one of Sweden’s best shot-creators and was rarely not one of Sweden’s best individual players every single night. So even if scouts wanted to see a bit more from him, they still had a lot to like. It’s hard to truly explain, but basically: he was good, but I – and many others – wanted to see him dominate more than he did.

Trey Augustine, G (USA): Augustine struggled after allowing eight goals over his first two games but quickly turned the tide. But after that, Augustine was rock solid, stealing the show in the games against Canada and Czechia. He’s now the winningest American goaltender in tournament history, and it’s easy to tell why. Sure, it’s his third tournament, but he covers the bottom of the net so well and remains so relaxed and focused in the crease.

Jesse Kiiskinen, RW (Finland): Kiiskinen started the tournament with a quiet showing against Canada before registering goals in each of the next three round-robin games. He had his best game against Slovakia in the quarters when he had two points, but he also had his best backchecking game that day, too. Kiiskinen was noticeably vibrant in the final, too. I really liked Kiiskinen’s play away from the puck – I thought he was always moving and making something happen. Overall, he got better with every passing game.

Max Plante, LW (USA): Plante had a solid showing with three points, but he also rarely lost a battle on a shift. That’s because he’s always moving and forcing you to make quick decisions on the fly. He’s a high-end playmaker who should play serious minutes next year – his ability to play with anyone and generate opportunities makes him solid.

Edmonton Oilers

Beau Akey, D (Canada): Akey saw action in every round-robin game but only played more than 2:48 once in the 3-2 loss to Latvia. I liked his game even when he barely played – I wish he had more opportunities out there given they cut Zayne Parekh to help make space for Akey.

Paul Fischer, D (USA): Fischer played single-digit minutes in two games, but he did register an assist against Germany. Beyond that, though, Fischer was primarily the team’s eighth blueliner, averaging around five minutes a night when he did play.

Florida Panthers

Linus Eriksson, C (Sweden): Eriksson is expected to play a big role on this team next year. This time, though, he showed everything that makes him dangerous: his two-way ability, his net-front presence, and his commitment to making the right play. He didn’t play a lot but he started the tourney with a pair of goals and rarely was caught making a mistake.

Los Angeles Kings

Jakub Dvorak, D (Czechia): Dvorak was defensively sound while patrolling his own zone all tournament. Not many high-danger opportunities made it past him – and he was especially good at getting the puck out of his zone. As the tournament wore on, I noticed him getting beat by speedier, stronger players a bit too much for my liking – especially against the United States – but he wasn’t afraid to lower the boom and often found ways to make a decent play after losing a battle.

Carter George, G (Canada): Canada could have easily lost all three of George’s round-robin starts had he not held his end of the bargain. He started off with two shutouts and wasn’t at fault in the loss to the Americans. George was one of the best goaltenders in the tournament and was easily Canada’s MVP – and he can come back for a second go next year.

Hampton Slukynsky, G (USA): The Western Michigan goaltender won his lone round-robin start, a 25-save effort against Latvia. It was a tougher game than most would have thought on paper, but Slukynsky gave the Americans a reason to celebrate after a difficult first game from Augustine. He then backed it up with a quiet victory over Switzerland in the quarterfinal, a game that was never going to be close to begin with. Many think Slukynsky would have been a starter in most other years for the Americans, but that was never going to happen with Augustine in the fold.

Minnesota Wild

Zeev Buium, D (USA): Buium is going to be a game-changer in the NHL. Even when he’s not absolutely dominating the game with his puck-moving, he’s making excellent defensive decisions and rarely finding himself out of position. Buium rarely had an off shift, and he played all situations for the Americans. Look for him to challenge for a roster spot with the Wild next year – this is a kid playing with so much confidence.

Rasmus Kumpulainen, LW (Finland): Kumpulainen played his best game of the tournament against the Slovaks, scoring twice on three shots. I like his game around the net, although I’m worried about his consistency. He’s a decent two-way forward, and I think he did a solid job of banging shoulders along the boards with his 6-foot-4 frame.

Sebastian Soini, D (Finland): Soini served as the eighth defenseman but he took on a bit more responsibility when Emil Pieniniemi was injured. But, truthfully, Soini wasn’t overly noticeable outside of some decent work around his own net. Smart, simple hockey – that’s his thing.

Aron Kiviharju, D (Finland): The game-breaking puck play that made him so fascinating at a young age started off slow, but I felt he played really good hockey in the playoff round. It felt like he was almost a bit too tepid with and without the puck and lacked the high-value plays that he would pull off at the U-18 level. When the games started to matter more, though, I thought Kiviharju played some of his best hockey at both ends of the ice. You love to see that.

Montreal Canadiens

Rasmus Bergqvist, D (Sweden): Bergvist started off hot with a goal in the opening game against Slovakia but eventually saw his ice time drop as he moved from the top pairing with Sandin-Pellikka to the third. That was a better fit for him, anyway – he was excellent defensively and didn’t need to be eating heavy minutes. The three minor penalties against Switzerland that led to goals didn’t help him, though, but he did make his way back to the top pair.

Nashville Predators

Tanner Molendyk, D (Canada): Molendyk might have been Canada’s best skater at this tournament. I had some issues with his defensive game at points, but he was the only defender who seemed committed to making an impact at both ends of the ice as often as possible. He was good with the controlled entries and was one of the more dynamic, creative players Canada had. Even when Canada fell flat, you could count on Molendyk standing tall.

David Edstrom, C (Sweden): Edstrom never plays a flashy game, but he’s very dangerous as a two-way threat. That’s why he was named as one of Sweden’s top three players – the effort was there every single game. Even when he wasn’t doing dangerous things in scoring situations, he was keeping the puck away from opponents and getting it where it needed to be. Edstrom is going to be a good NHLer – someone every team wants because he gets the job done at both ends of the ice.

Teddy Stiga, RW (Nashville): Stiga was tasked with bringing the energy deeper in USA’s lineup and he delivered. Between the assists against Latvia and Finland and the way he almost never lost battles for the puck, Stiga made his limited ice time count. That’s especially true in the gold medal game, where he scored on his one shot he took all tournament long, making himself the hero. Look for him to play a more prominent middle-six role with USA next year.

Joey Willis, LW (USA): He had two assists in about nine minutes of total ice time in the round-robin. When he was in the lineup, he was USA’s 13th forward – but they kept him out when the games mattered the most.

Felix Nilsson, C (Sweden): Nilsson was one of Sweden’s best players, recording points in nearly every game. His slick playmaking came up clutch against the Czechs, with his two-assist effort being his best performance. He worked so hard, and the results followed. The Preds have a solid one here in Nilsson – someone who likes to impact the game in multiple ways.

Andrew Gibson, D (Canada): Gibson started off with a decent game against Finland and then proceeded to struggle with the pace and the decision-making needed from a top-pairing defender. Gibson was one of Canada’s better defenders during the pre-tournament but he seemed lost a bit too often for Canada. His ice time fell ever so slightly every game, too. Just an overall disappointing showing for a defender who started off looking good.

Viggo Gustafsson, D (Sweden): The puck-moving defenseman had an OK tournament. He joined in on the scoring fun against Kazakhstan with a pair of assists but mostly specialized in his zone play. He took a couple of ill-advised penalties but he did a good job of clearing the crease and stopping plays from getting into high-danger areas.

New Jersey Devils

Herman Traff, RW (Sweden): Traff didn’t play much in the round-robin, with his ice time falling into single-digit territory against Switzerland and Czechia. But he made it count on New Year’s Eve, scoring twice to drag the Swedes to victory over the Czechs to win Group B. When Traff was on the ice, it was mostly to throw hits and push back in the defensive zone – and he did.

New York Islanders

Cole Eiserman, LW (USA): I understand Eiserman’s defensive shortcomings, but he still was able to generate offense consistently. I especially liked him with Danny Nelson when the pair were on the second line. At the same time, the Americans never gave him difficult lineup matches and he ultimately had the puck the most on the power play.

Danny Nelson, RW (USA): Nelson has always been somewhat of an underrated goal-scorer. His game is built more around two-way reliability and a relentless forecheck, but he was USA’s top player against Latvia and scored goals against Canada and Switzerland, too. The two-way play was still excellent as you’d expect, but I liked how involved he was with the puck, no matter who he lined up with.

Jesse Nurmi, C (Finland): Nurmi was quieter than I expected him to be. He had an assist against Germany and three points against Slovakia, but he didn’t do anything else offensively beyond that. his ice time improved as the tournament wore on and he started generating more chances, but not a ton of high-quality opportunities outside of the the quarterfinal. Simply put, I wanted to see more.

Marcus Gidlof, G (Sweden): Gidlof wasn’t very busy in his one game against Kazakhstan, stopping 15 of the 16 shots sent his way. I thought he did a good job of tracking pucks and showed how athletic he was. He played well in the bronze medal game, but ultimately got outdueled by Czechia’s Michael Hrabal. Still, he had a .938 save percentage over his two games – which, despite being a small sample size, was tops in the tournament.

New York Rangers

Drew Fortescue, D (USA): Fortescue was fine. His game is best when he’s not making big mistakes with the puck and instead focusing on his own zone game. From that perspective, he did the job. But there just wasn’t really too much to write home about here. Fortescue never really pushed the envelope and instead just kept his game uber-simple.

Gabe Perreault, LW (USA): Perreault entered the tournament as one of USA’s most important players and he delivered. He had three multi-point efforts, including a two-point game to help get the team’s offense jumpstarted against the Czechs. The built-in chemistry with Ryan Leonard and James Hagens made them a dangerous trio, but it was Perreault who often found himself setting his teammates up for success. He’s always in the right spot at the right time.

Rico Gredig, LW (Switzerland): Gredig saw his ice time improve with each game, with his best showing coming against Sweden – especially on the power play. He seemed actively engaged without the puck and battled hard along the boards, but didn’t do a whole lot else.

Ottawa Senators

Vladimir Nikitin, G (Kazakhstan): It was a tough go for Nikitin, who was absolutely peppered all tournament long. With limited support in front of him, Nikitin consistently faced high-quality opportunities. At the same time, he didn’t give the team some of the big saves you need for a smaller country, either. He played fine in the first game, stopping 44 shots against a high-powered Swedish team. But he allowed too many stoppable goals in the second game against Czechia, where he had a .654 save percentage after allowing nine goals on 26 shots and would have liked one or two back against Slovakia and Switzerland. I was hoping to see more Linards Feldbergs-style performances from him, but it was still an OK tourney for Nikitin.

Philadelphia Flyers

Oliver Bonk, D (Canada): To keep it blunt, that was some of the worst hockey I’ve seen from Bonk. Between his misplacement on the power play to start things off and the awful showing against the United States, it was tough to watch. Even when he was paired with his usual London Knights D-partner in Sam Dickinson, Bonk just looked out of place and uncoordinated.

Jett Luchanko, C (Canada): I don’t get why Canada’s coaching staff refused to give Luchanko more time. I’m not talking about the top six minutes, but given how Dave Cameron rolled the lines, they didn’t need to use him primarily for the penalty kill. His speed killed opponents, especially against Latvia when he scored a shorthanded breakaway goal (and then wasn’t selected for the shootout, for some reason). Luchanko was also one of the best players against the United States, forcing the power play to move all night in a way no other penalty killer was able to do.

Heikki Ruohonen, C (Finland): I liked the 18-year-old a lot more at the U-18s, but Ruohonen still played his role well. He was a defensive forward who could handle his own on the penalty kill and create some decent plays in tight. He was also one of Finland’s best skaters, too.

Pittsburgh Penguins

Kalle Kangas, D (Finland): The big rangy defenseman was hard to play against – his bread and butter. Mostly playing in a second-pairing role, the 6-foot-4 defenseman moved the puck well, but also handled defensive zone assignments with ease. I think his skating still needs work because it takes him too many strides to get up to speed, but his competitiveness can help him overcome that in certain situations.

Emil Pieniniemi, D (Finland): Pienniemi was, as expected, one of Finland’s best blueliners. He had a couple of points and played aggressively – and it earned him a game misconduct against Slovakia – but he was engaged with the puck and played all situations. I like him as a long-term project for the Penguins.

Tanner Howe, LW (Canada): Howe had a great showing at selection camp, and his ability to grind hard and chase after pucks made him an easy pick in the eyes of coach Dave Cameron. But between the pre-tournament and the round-robin, Howe struggled to generate anything noteworthy. He took some poor penalties against the Finns and then didn’t have much to do on the offensive side of things. It was a bit disappointing after the hot start he had when he joined Team Canada.

San Jose Sharks

Sam Dickinson, D (Canada): Dickinson started the tournament with little responsibility and limited opportunities on the power play. But once he earned the promotion in the wake of Matthew Schaefer’s injury, his play suffered. Dickinson struggled alongside his usual defensive partner in Bonk against the United States, taking two minor penalties. In fact, discipline was an issue for Dickinson throughout the tournament. For somebody who is on pace for more than 100 points in the OHL, Dickinson seemed to really struggle with the puck, especially as a distributor.

Brandon Svoboda, C (USA): Svoboda opened the tournament with a nice two-point effort against Germany and then had another assist against the Finns. His job was primarily to kill penalties and block shots, and any extra offense was gravy. Svoboda was solid in his role.

Christian Kirsch, G (Switzerland): Switzerland’s goaltending usage was interesting, to say the least. The 6-foot-4 goaltender was great against Slovakia and struggled during the second period after he took over in net in the game against Sweden. Kirsch then wasn’t tested in the game against Kazakhstan, but that effort helped him claim the starter’s gig for the medal round. I’m not too high on Kirsch overall, but I thought he started off strong against Canada during the pre-tournament and played decently enough the rest of the way on a team with very little scoring talent. Kirsch will likely be the team’s starter next year, too.

Kasper Halttunen, RW (Finland): I’ll always have time to watch Halttunen play. He started off slow, needing four games to get his first goal. He also struggled to generate shots – something that typically isn’t an issue for him. But what I noticed was how much harder he hustled back to help out on defense compared to a year ago. It’s still not a strength – his skating still isn’t great – but he’s not getting beat trying to defend as easily anymore.

Seattle Kraken

Zeb Forsfjall, C (Sweden): The undersized, two-way forward gave the team some excellent scoring depth in the middle of the lineup. He likes playing in open spaces and has the speed to beat bigger opponents on the outside. Forsfjall gave the team some secondary scoring assistance, especially early, and I know scouts liked his game with and without the puck.

Eduard Sale, LW (Czechia): The Czechs weren’t making the medal round without Sale. He had points in every round-robin game and scored against Canada in the quarterfinal. He was shut down against the Americans, but he had 24 shots over a three-game span against Slovakia, Sweden and Canada. Sale was in the all-star team conversation all tournament long for how important he was to the Czechs as their No. 1 playdriver.

Carson Rehkopf, LW (Canada): Oh, what could have been. Rehkopf played just two games as Canada refused to play him alongside his usual linemate in Porter Martone. Rehkopf didn’t register a shot against Germany and took two penalties against the United States, although I did like how he pushed guys around, at the very least. Still, we barely got to see the returning forward this year and it just didn’t make much sense.

Berkly Catton, C (Canada): It was a highly disappointing showing for Catton, whom many expected to challenge for the tournament scoring lead like he has so before at other international events. Instead, Catton had just one assist despite leading the team in shots. It felt like he was almost always shooting from the perimeter and couldn’t get into the high-danger areas. He needed a real, dangerous shooter on his line, because while Gavin McKenna was a solid winger, he wasn’t scoring, either.

Caden Price, D (Canada): While most Canadian defenders had at least one off game, Price seemed to have steady showings throughout. His primary job was to stop opponents from getting into high-danger areas, and he mostly succeeded. He even scored against the Germans – although it was a bit fluky, bouncing off the boards and off the goaltender. Price wasn’t a standout defender, but he didn’t actively hurt the Canadians at any point – something few of their defenders could have said.

Jakub Fibigr, D (Czechia): Fibigr made a huge impact early in the tournament, registering five points in two games. His puck-moving game is solid, even when he’s not generating plays. He still had the odd lapses of judgment trying to rush the puck and it got him hurt under pressure. Still, a decent showing for a guy who tends to play well for the Czechs.

Julius Miettinen, C (Finland): The big 6-foot-4 Miettinen played a lot early in the tournament but failed to generate anything noteworthy. He fell down deeper in the lineup but did score against the United States. Overall, it was a quiet showing for him, but I look forward to Miettinen playing a bigger role next year as a returning forward.

St. Louis Blues

Dalibor Dvorsky, C (Slovakia): Dvorsky was outstanding for the Slovaks, finishing his tournament in a tie for first in scoring after the quarterfinals with nine points. Dvorsky didn’t have a ton of skill around him (besides fellow Blues prospect Juraj Pekarick) but still made an impact with and without the puck. This felt like Dvorsky’s best international showing (out of many) because while it wasn’t his most explosive effort, I don’t recall him being as effective at both ends of the ice as he was for this.

Juraj Pekarcik, LW (Slovakia): Dvorsky wouldn’t have been as effective if it wasn’t for Pekarcik. Their chemistry was so lethal, with Pekarcik being the master of short, effective passes. He anticipates passes and scoring opportunities very well, and he looks a bit stronger than I remember him from his draft year. He likes to play with speed and skill – and I hope we get to see him play with Dvorsky in the NHL one day.

Otto Stenberg, LW (Sweden): Stenberg never really took over in any one game like he did when he scored a hat-trick last year, but he was consistently one of Sweden’s best players. He tried to take the team on his back in the semifinals with a two-goal game, and he also had another two multi-point efforts along the way. I like that Stenberg can be a deceptive shooter – he’s known more as a playmaker, but he’ll make you think he’s setting a guy up before ripping home a nice shot. Stenberg was easily one of Sweden’s best players in his final junior hockey tournament for his country.

Theo Lindstein, D (Sweden): Lindstein had a quieter showing than he did a year ago when he was named to the tournament all-star team. Defensively, though, he was more effective. He played more than 27 minutes against Finland in the semifinal in probably his best defensive game from the past two years and he was rarely beat on bad play reads. There just wasn’t as much offense this time around – and that’s fine, I thought his mobility and ability to kill plays were good enough.

Colin Ralph, D (USA): Ralph is best when you don’t notice him too much. The 6-foot-5 defender had just one assist, but his job was to shut guys down and give guys like Buium and Hutson a bit of a break. Can’t say he didn’t do that. He’s never really going to be more than a shutdown defender but he’s got the size and mobility of someone who can be very effective at it.

Adam Jecho, RW (Czech): I really liked Jecho’s tournament. His highlight was scoring the game-winning goal against Canada to advance to the semifinals, but that came after registering at least one point in every round-robin game. He was always involved in the play, even when he was averaging around eight to nine minutes a night early on. His ice time improved as the tournament wore on, and he deserved it.

Jakub Stancl, LW (Czechia): Stancl was named to the tournament all-star team, and it was easy to see why. He finished second in tournament scoring with seven goals and 10 points. Half of that came in a three-goal, five-point battle against Kazakhstan. But he didn’t have many off nights, even in the games he was left off the scoresheet. He scored a big goal against Canada, helped put things away against Switzerland and was the lone goal-scorer against the United States. He drove the net consistently, displayed a fantastic shot release, and loved to get physical. Overall, I really liked his performance.

Adam Jiricek, D (Czechia): Jiricek had a quiet tournament. He has missed a lot of the time the past two years, and some scouts felt he just didn’t have the pace of some of the others at this tourney. Personally, I thought he looked really good against Canada, where he had two assists and four shots and was Czechia’s best own-zone player. He was a bit inconsistent for my liking, but I’m still not concerned about him as a prospect yet – he’s still making up for missed time.

Ondrej Kos, LW (Czechia): Kos scored in the opener against Switzerland but never played more than 12 minutes in a game. He was a depth defensive center, which I thought he did a fine job of. He mostly just tried to get into lanes and take space away and he did that – but that’s about it. I’ve seen him play prominent offensive roles for Czechia in the past and we should see that next year when he returns.

Tampa Bay Lightning

Ethan Gauthier, RW (Canada): Gauthier had nothing to show for on the scoresheet and took some ill-timed penalties in the round-robin. But I actually thought Gauthier was fine. He killed penalties and backchecked like his life depended on it. The effort was there – although he was a bit redundant with some of the other bottom-six forwards they had.

Joona Saarelainen, C (Finland): Saarelainen has typically been productive internationally but saw limited minutes all tournament long in the 13th forward role. I actually really liked his game against the Americans, even though he played six minutes. Saarelainen might be small at 5-foot-9, but he’s speedy and skilled. He’ll be back next year.

Toronto Maple Leafs

Easton Cowan, RW (Canada): Cowan finished the tournament tied for first in scoring on Canada with a measly three points. But what he’ll be remembered for most was the difficult play in his own zone, his consistent giveaways at both ends and his lack of high-end ability to get the top line going. The final game against Czechia was his worst of the tournament. We’ve seen a lot of good from Cowan over the past two years, but this tournament – where he was expected to be an offensive leader – was not part of it.

Miroslav Holinka, C (Czechia): Holinka bounced all around the lineup after starting the tournament with two points. He eventually made it back on to Eduard Sale’s line and he gave the team a decent two-way presence. This tournament showed how responsible he is in all situations, even if he’s not an offensive play-driver. Still, he took the pressure off some of the more skilled players he played with, which is good.

Utah Hockey Club

Vojtech Hradec, C (Czech): Hradec had an outstanding tournament for the Czechs, highlighted by a five-point effort against Kazakhstan. But he also played all situations and was one of Czechia’s better playdrivers from the get-go. Even though he didn’t score in that one game against Sweden, I loved how involved he was on the puck – and he played more than 25 minutes.

Cole Beaudoin, LW (Canada): Beaudoin played a bit all over the lineup, and while I really like him as a prospect, I thought his usage made little sense. What was Dave Cameron thinking when they had him on the first line for two games? I understand his physicality brought a new element to the top line, but that trio needed scoring, not grit. He was put back on the fourth line which made more sense for his style of play – hit everyone and bring the energy.

Veeti Vaisanen, D (Finland): I thought Vaisanen was best in his own zone, which isn’t overly surprising if you’ve watched him before. Vaisanen played steady minutes and was given plenty of opportunities to start in his own zone. He’s not big, but he’s mobile and did a good job of taking time and space away.

Michael Hrabal, G (Czechia): This was a much better tournament for Hrabal, who, beyond a few iffy moments against Sweden, was fantastic for the Czechs. He still has issues covering shots down low but he rarely got beat in 1-on-1 situations and wasn’t baited into making bigger movements than he needed. I thought Hrabal was good in the semifinal, and while it ultimately didn’t pay off for him, he gave Czechia a chance to win every single night.

Melker Thelin, G (Sweden): Thelin wasn’t bad, but Sweden needed him to be better. He struggled through traffic on the power play against Sweden and allowed two goals on just 13 shots against Latvia. His worst start came in the semifinal when he should have arguably stopped two of the goals in the 4-3 loss. It just felt like he was a bit too leaky at points, especially when he’d go longer periods of time without much action.

Noel Nordh, LW (Sweden): Nordh joined the Swedes late as an injury replacement and barely played. He played a tournament-high 4:29 against Sweden, but most of it came in the first period. Beyond that, he barely touched the ice.

Vancouver Canucks

Tom Willander, D (Sweden): Willander had his ups and downs defensively but was arguably Sweden’s best defender. His best game came against Switzerland when he took control with two goals and an assist. He wasn’t the primary shot-generator at the point for the Swedes but he seemed to be involved on the rush quite frequently. And defensively, again, I thought he was better than Axel Sandin-Pellikka. His actual own-zone play was solid, too. The Canucks had to be happy with his play with and without the puck.

Sawyer Mynio, D (Canada): Mynio was activated after the second game to fill in for Matthew Schaefer, joining the team at a rough time. Mynio had a rough go against the Americans but did nab an assist against Germany. He didn’t play enough to get a deep view of his potential but for a guy who can be in your face in the defensive zone, I was left wanting more.

Basile Sansonnens, D (Switzerland): I’ve liked my in-person viewings of Sansonnens the past two years. He’s a big, mobile defender who does an excellent job of stopping speedsters on the rush. I thought he had his moments – he was great against Slovakia and Sweden – but I also thought he had a few more brainfarts than we saw from him at the U-18s last year. Still, it was a solid showing for someone who doesn’t have a ton to offer on the offensive front.

Vegas Golden Knights

Tuomas Uronen, RW (Finland): Uronen was tasked to be more of a two-way player for Finland and he had some interesting deployments. His best game came against the Americans – it felt like he was buzzing around all game and he was rewarded with a goal. I like his work ethic and his ability to positively affect the game by chasing after pucks and winning battles along the boards.

Trevor Connelly, LW (USA): Connelly has always been productive for the Americans but his ice time kept falling as the tournament wore on. I liked him against Germany, and he was fine against Canada, but he was a bit too invisible for most of the rest of the way. This was the first time Connelly wasn’t one of USA’s best forwards – that’ll change when he returns for a bigger role in 2026.

Mathieu Cataford, RW (Canada): Cataford’s poor skating was noticeable at this tournament, but he made up for it with the way he battled. Cataford is known for his offensive abilities in the QMJHL but was never given that opportunity for Canada – which, to be fair, he never was going to. His best game came against the United States in the round-robin, but it was still a quiet tourney for him from a puck possession perspective.

Washington Capitals

Ryan Leonard, RW (USA): Leonard had points in nearly every game in this tournament as he put up his best case for the MVP title. He was an absolute menace around the net, getting into skirmishes with anyone who dared get near him – including Canadian goaltender Carter George. His chemistry with Gabe Perreault and James Hagens was great as expected, and while we didn’t see any truly dominant scoring performances from Leonard, he showed – as a complete package – why he’ll have no issue adjusting to the NHL sooner rather than later.

Cole Hutson, D (USA): Hutson was one of the tournament’s top defenders, impacting the game in so many ways. Hutson’s five-point effort against Germany was incredible – and important, as the Germans still managed to score four times. He scored a nice goal against Finland, but had some iffy moments defensively. That game against Canada, though, was icing on the cake – he did a bit of everything: scoring a goal, taking lanes away, and getting feisty. He’s not exactly like his brother, but Hutson can out-maneuver opponents with ease and his ability to impact the game in open ice was second to none at this tourney.

Eriks Mateiko, LW (Latvia): Mateiko was Latvia’s best skater, scoring the game-winning goal against both Canada and Germany. The big winger landed some decent hits and was one of Latvia’s primary playdrivers. His footspeed wasn’t great, but he made up for it with what he did with the puck in the offensive zone. Had Latvia made it out of the quarterfinal, Mateiko would have had a serious argument for MVP honors.

Leon Muggli, D (Switzerland): Muggli had three assists in the big comeback effort that ultimately fell short against Sweden. But all of those came on the power play, and he really struggled at 5-on-5. His unprovoked giveaway against the Slovaks on Dec. 27 meant Switzerland had to play desperately to advance to the quarterfinal. I’ve seen a lot of good hockey from Muggli over the past two years – this tournament wasn’t part of that sample size.

Miroslav Satan Jr., C (Slovakia): Satan was injured against Czechia and didn’t play the rest of the way. He mostly played on the bottom line, using his large 6-foot-7 frame to win battles and keep opponents to the perimeter. It’s unfortunate his tournament ended the way it did.

Petr Sikora, C (Czechia): What a tournament for Sikora, who was among the tournament leaders in Corsi-for and expected goals for, according to SportContract. He had a great three-point effort against Kazakhstan but also scored goals against Switzerland and Sweden. He started deeper down Czechia’s lineup but his impressive play kept opening up more opportunities as the tournament wore on, including on the power play. He also became Canadian public enemy No. 1 – and scoring in that quarterfinal game only strengthened his case.

Winnipeg Jets

Brayden Yager, C (Canada): Yager was listed as Canada’s fourth-line center throughout most of the tournament but he was near the top in ice time almost every game. He hustled hard and was a big-time way-threat. Many scouts considered the returning forward to be Canada’s best skater throughout the five games, and that’s because they appreciated his effort.

---

SPONSORED BY bet365

Recently by Steven Ellis

• What could Canada’s team look like for the 2026 World Juniors?
• Canada has no one to blame but themselves for 2025 World Junior failure
• Hockey Canada’s management after 2025 World Junior elimination: ‘We can’t accept it’
• Capitals’ Cole Hutson looks like a magician at the World Juniors
• Sabres’ Konsta Helenius adjusting to delicious life in America – but World Junior gold would taste better