---

One Thing I Love: Svechkov is a clever passer with on-puck creation ability far above the usual standard in the MHL. This is really strong here– gets the defender to drop to the ice, then tucks it around him for a tap-in goal.

Pulls the puck out to his backhand to create this passing lane and threads it through the defender.

This play ends up looking a little awkward, but this is good work from Svechkov (nearest to the bottom of the frame). This is a sort of broken give-and-go action here with the goalscorer moving towards the back post. I think the instinctive move here is to play that puck directly towards the back post, where the scorer would be looking to make a backhand tip finish. But Svechkov correctly recognizes the traffic in front of the net, most notably the slot defender dropping down towards the crease, and instead counts on his teammate’s ability to adjust and passes behind him.

One-touch passes between the skates of a defender all while adjusting your feet to open up to a play– not an easy thing to do.

Another Thing I Love: I pulled up Svechkov’s assists on Instat and got to see this beauty. This is not Svechkov, he picked up the helper on the play. But it’s fun and the MHL is wild.

Swing Skill: Scoring. Svechkov scores the majority of his goals from sniffing around the net and the rest from the high slot, using an accurate shot and quick release to beat goaltenders. At times, scoring looked a little easy for him. But he really doesn’t do it all that much: Svechkov had 4 goals in 15 MHL games and 5 in 38 VHL games. He’s a very pass-oriented player, choosing to defer much more often than shoot on odd-man rushes and doing his damage with passes into the slot from out on the perimeter. And when he did score, it’s important to remember that he did so against MHL and VHL defences– the MHL especially is known for absolutely porous defence. Here’s Svechkov jumping on a loose puck in the slot.

Now watch that again and focus on the defender that ends up behind the net. Team might as well just play 4v5 in the d-zone with that kind of defence. More consistent scoring and a more consistent attack mindset could round out Svechkov’s offensive profiles and increase his options as an attacker.

Development: Svechkov scored the majority of his goals finishing opportunities around the net, and seems to be quite capable doing so, but yet he didn’t score very often. How can the Russian more frequently put himself in spots where he’s a threat to score? I’d have two notes:

1. The most straightforward way to get more scoring opportunities to increase your effective shooting range. If you’re only consistently dangerous from high-danger opportunities, you might be able to scrounge up a moderate amount of legitimate chances by hanging around that area quite a bit. If you can expand that range to include medium-danger opportunities, then it becomes a little easier to get to that area and you’ll have a wider range of legitimate chances to generate for yourself. And of course, the further you get from the crease the easier it becomes to get to that area.
   

2. The off-puck offensive game didn’t seem to be much of a focus for Svechkov this past year, considering his suite of on-puck tools and his pass-first mentality. He’s at his best at this level when he’s holding the puck himself while looking to pass, not when he’s lurking around the net without the puck on his stick. As he ascends towards stronger competition (the KHL should be next up, most likely), off-puck play will become more of a focus by necessity. And as that happens, we may naturally see Svechkov begin to spend more time looking for scoring opportunities (and less time possessing the puck himself, unfortunately). No intervention may really be required here, but I’d focus on adding power and range to the shot nonetheless.
   

Projection:
Top-end: Top-six centre with on-puck creation and a stellar two-way game (really good look at that in David St Louis’ breakdown, which you can find below). Pass-first, but adds a greater scoring element.
Mid-level: Middle-six forward that can play both centre and wing. Still an excellent defensive forward, but might struggle at times to get the slot. Very pass-first with little scoring ability.
Low-end: Development stalls in transition to KHL, never gets to North America.

Methodology:
Svechkov is probably a top candidate to surprise and potentially go as high as the top 10, because there are probably more than a few teams that find his ultra well-rounded style really, really appealing. Personally, I’m not extremely high on Svechkov’s offensive game. I think he could be an above-average 3C in terms of offence, but I’m not sure he has the scoring or the slot presence to produce enough to function as, say, a reliable 2C. Getting to the slot enables all offence, whether it be scoring or passing. I’m not sure Svechkov will be able to do so enough to enable top-six level offence. He isn’t a good enough shooter to threaten from outside, so Svechkov’s offence will be limited to perimeter assists if he can’t. Still though, he’s a very good defensive centre that brings enough playmaking ability to be offensive solid in a 3C role, and a good top-9 player is not a bad pick in this range of the draft. Lysell’s got more upside and a reasonably similar mid-level projection. Riley Kidney, ranked one spot below, also brings more upside but is a far more fragile bet than a well-rounded centre like Fyodor.

---

One Thing I Love: Zellweger can really skate. He has a fluid, quick stride and accelerates very well, allowing him to create separation from forecheckers and capitalize on space given to him by the forecheck. He is very eager to utilize skating lanes on the breakout.

I also saw some nice flashes of puck retrieval ability, jumping on loose pucks and using his feet to find space to make an outlet pass.

Swing Skill: I’m not sure if it’s an Everett scheme thing– I suspect that it’s at least part of the equation– but Zellweger seems to make these long passes to the offensive blueline on the breakout that really don’t put the forwards in a good spot to make a play at all. Often, the forward will be facing Zellweger, with their back turned from where they need to go after receiving the puck, and a defender will be so tight on their back that it’s practically a 50-50 chance at the puck for either guy.

The Silvertips seem to emphasize this in their system, I have no clue why because it does not work well at all (and it should really just be common sense that your team should be striving for more than 50-50 battles as an entry strategy); for that reason, I don’t think I’d label it as a decision-making issue on Zellweger’s part (I would absolutely label it a decision-making issue on the coaching staff’s part– Everett’s been a good team so I don’t want to go after them too hard but they’ve also had both Carter Hart and Dustin Wolf in recent years, so that’s a pretty massive safety net). Nonetheless, I think Zellweger should focus on achieving a greater focus on possession in his game: he should be looking to make tape-to-tape, 100-0 passes on the breakout to teammates with up-ice speed and I’d also like to see him attempt to find passes in plays like these rather than dumping the puck in.

Development: If you’re a team that has just drafted Olen Zellweger and has identified these plays on the breakout as something you don’t want him to do within your organization (as most teams probably would), it becomes a bit of an interesting position. This is a CHL defenceman, very young for the draft, who is not Bowen Byram or Jamie Drysdale level player: he’s got two more years in Everett (most likely). Odds of a coaching change are low– Everett’s a good team– so Zellweger’s probably gonna be in this system, making these plays, for two more seasons. There’s not a lot you can do about that other than waiting it out, sticking him in the AHL in a more possession-oriented system, and let him adapt.

Projection:
Top-end: Top-four defenceman with an excellent transitional game and some offensive ability. Uses his skating, focuses on making tape-to-tape plays, and excels at puck retrieval.
Mid-level: Fringe #4 defenceman with great mobility, but doesn’t handle a tough forecheck particularly well and still makes too many plays into pressure.
Low-end: Regresses after his small-sample breakout, struggles in the WHL next year, and eventually has issues converting to a smarter, possession-based AHL game.

Methodology:
Zellweger is a very, very interesting player. He’s also very, very difficult to rank. By his performance this season, he’s probably nearing the Carson Lambos tier of defencemen– not quite one of the big guys, but a really effective and solid puck transporter who seems likely to be a good top-four defenceman. I mean, he was over a point per game and is only 5 days away from not being eligible until 2022, AND he checks off important tools like mobility and passing. Just terrific results across the board and very, very strong in transition. That’s exactly what you want to see (this, again, is from Mitch Brown). And remember, 5 days away from 2022!!! Unreal. Saw someone on Twitter say they’d consider him in the top 5 and my initial reaction was ’I like the guy, but that’s waaay to high”. And my reaction if that were to actually happen in the draft would probably be similar. But, if you’re fully buying into this season’s results as who Zellweger is, I don’t think it’s crazy. Unfortunately for the reactionary part of me, I try to approach these rankings with a probabilistic approach. And I don’t think we can fully buy into Zellweger just quite yet– sadly, he only played 11 games this year (18 if you count the U18s, where he was also excellent and also above a point per game). We’re gonna hedge this bet and not go top ten with it, but 11-18 games of very, very strong hockey from Zellweger is enough for me to launch him into the teens.

Related
• The Little Engine That Could: Why Olen Zellweger Should Be a First-Round Pick (Josh Mallory, Mallory’s Playbook)

---

One Thing I Love: Kidney isn’t a particularly well-known name nor does he always wow an observer with raw skill, but his intelligence and habits as a playmaker powered him to an incredibly successful DY season. He topped all QMJHL first-year draft-eligibles, including L’Heureux and Bourgault, in primary points per game at even-strength. Only four QMJHL players had more than Kidney’s 14 primary assists at evens, and all four of those forwards are at least two years removed from their first year of draft eligibility. I’d classify this play as Kidney’s flashiest assist of the season– at 168 pounds, he squeezes through a pair of checks and makes a great backdoor feed for the easy finish.

Bouncing this puck off the wall behind his linemate to create a passing lane is so smart.

Swing Skill: Kidney is not a particularly good scorer– his mobility and intelligence often buys him good opportunities, but he lacks the quickness or power as a shooter to consistently make good on his chances. The centre’s 2.63 shots per game reflect his pass-first mentality and inability to challenge goaltenders from beyond the immediate slot.

Development: As you can see above, Kidney doesn’t particularly struggle to get to the slot– in fact, his ability to get off the wall into the centre lane is one of his larger strengths. But once there, he can’t finish. From a developmental standpoint, this is really quite promising– Kidney’s problem isn’t a mental or tendency one, it’s a technical issue. An inability to finish in tight means an ability to get in tight, and that’s really a good problem to have when so many players have the inverse issue. Kidney won’t be an above-average finishing talent guy at the NHL level, and that will be clear from beyond the immediate slot, but he could be an average one from right around the crease and that could be all he needs to supplement his playmaking, which will ultimately drive his value. For that, I’d prescribe the experience that he’ll get over time and a lot of battle/small-area drills with a scoring objective.

Projection:
Top-end: Pass-centric #1 centre that works off his teammates exceptionally well and can effectively drive play as part of a cohesive unit. I see real upside here.
Mid-level: Middle-six winger that gets punted out wide by a team that misjudges the extent of his playmaking talent and sees him as too small for the middle. Great passer and a PP weapon but the scoring is a non-factor.
Low-end: Tops out in the AHL, struggles to develop chemistry as he moves up to unfamiliar levels and doesn’t receive a full leash as a passer.

Methodology:
It is absolutely obscene how underrated Mr. Kidney is. What more could the guy have done? 38 points in 33 games is generally a little better than a projected 2nd-3rd rounder. Especially when his teammate is ranked higher on Bob’s list despite being (just) below a point per game? I don’t get it. May it be because Mr. Huckins (who is a good player himself who I have nothing against) is four inches taller? Possibly. Kidney isn’t flashy out there, absolutely, but his intelligence is apparent and it shows in his statistics. I rank Kidney very highly because I think he could be an extremely valuable player if drafted by a team that recognizes his skill and brings him up accordingly. That starts with keeping him at centre– you want him in open ice where he can work as a playmaker. Doesn’t matter that he’s 5’11”– Kidney handles himself well enough in traffic for a prolonged shot at centre. And none of the ’prove yourself in grinder minutes” shit either; you let the smart playmakers do their thing. There’ve been a few players already who I think you only draft if you’re confident in the dev system. I think we add Kidney to that list; if your NHL/AHL coaches are dinosaurs, I’d probably go for another one of these players instead (you should probably modernize your coaching staff instead, but whatever). Bet on intelligence? If you do, the high-percentile yield could be higher than some of the other guys ranked around this range, but you might also end up with an inconsistent-impact winger if you don’t handle Kidney effectively.

---

One Thing I Love: Two anecdotes: First, Matthew comes from a terrific hockey family. Melissa Samoskevich was the second overall pick in the 2018 NWHL draft after a very successful four-year stint at Quinnipiac University, and Matthew’s twin sister Madison is in her first year at the same school. Second, dude goes by Mackie. That’s fucking sick.

Another Thing I Love: Samoskevich has some real on-puck creation ability. He checks off a lot of offensive tools: quick hands, skates well, strong vision, and a good shot. Really like how he not only manages to command the attention of two defenders here, but is careful not to telegraph this pass to the forward sneaking in behind to ensure he doesn’t give the defender a split-second to recover.

Nasty toe drag off the wall and a totally-planned crossbar pass to the backdoor (shot looked pretty good, don’t think he’ll mind picking up an assist rather than a goal for his efforts).

Some speed and a quick little outside move to lose this not-very-good defender.

Anddd… he can go inside too, losing another not-so-good defender and making a beauty of a backhand pass for the primary assist.

Swing Skill: For Samoskevich, it’s a lack of any particularly standout skill that he can lean on as an offensive method that seems to put a cap on his production potential at the USHL level and potentially his ceiling at higher levels. As I said, Mackie has a lot of tools: the skating, hands, passing, and shot are all there at above-average levels. But elite-level players usually have one thing that they do so well that they can utilize it over and over and still be very difficult to stop. I don’t think Samoskevich has any one skill that does that. Matthew Coronato destroyed the USHL because he’s an ultra-talented scorer that is so good at finding space around the net at that level. Samoskevich hovered around a point per game, good but unspectacular numbers, while producing in a variety of ways, but he didn’t have that one tool that he could turn to on a consistent game-to-game basis and know that he’ll get at least one opportunity to get on the scoresheet in that game because of that one skill. He’s not an elite skater nor scorer. He was a high-level playmaker through a versatile and well-rounded approach, recording assists in a variety of ways spanning sick passes, smart passes, and rebounds. When things get tough, will Matthew have a reliable offensive source to lean upon?

Development: If you’re a player with above-average grades across the offensive board looking to define a set-apart skill, I think you gotta start with the skating. It’s an essential, valuable, and improvable skill. The goal should be more than just show speed– we want functional speed with matching hand speed, allowing a player to possess the puck at high velocity and actually put pressure on the defence with their mobility. How do we do that? A variety of rush drills, I would think. Curl around a pylon in the neutral zone, gain speed, receive a pass, go in for a one-on-one. A real fun variation to isolate different skills: you start at one point, you get a few meters to take hard strides and try to gain as much speed as possible. Once you use those meters (mark em with a pylon), your feet are glued to the ground. Gotta use your edges with c-cuts from here on out. Receive a pass, go into that one-on-one; still not allowed to lift those feet. Could mix it up with some ways to keep the defender from dominating those battles: don’t let the defender lift their feet either, or make them play without their stick. Now the forward gets to work on the puck skills at mid-speed while simultaneously getting some edge practice in. Working three different skills in succession here: quickness/first steps, edgework, then hands. That’s on-puck creation right there.

Projection:
Top-end: Legit 2C who likely shows even more growth in his mobility and playmaking to drive offence at a higher level.
Mid-level: Middle-six centre whose wide array of offensive skills makes him a solid offensive contributor against mid-level competition.
Low-end: Can’t figure out what works in the NCAA and AHL, topping out before the NHL.

Methodology:
Samoskevich played with Matthew Coronato for the Steel and was not quite dominant like Coronato was for stretches, but demonstrated a well-rounded, offensively-talented skillset of his own. Skill-wise, I don’t think the gap between the two Matthews is significant; the gap in production is probably mostly a result of Coronato being placed in a situation for the Steel that fit very well with his playstyle. That said, I believe Coronato is a tier ahead– that’s largely because Coronato is more proven in a top offensive role whereas Samoskevich played less of a driving role for Chicago. The two are actually very similar: both named Matthew, both have very good puck skills, both are 2002 birthdates (older side of the class), and both have very well-rounded offensive skillsets. I think Coronato’s increased success at the Steel level originated from a little more ability to play in traffic and a little more ability to work off his teammates through clever blending of on-puck and off-puck play. Samoskevich is not quite as polished at combining the different elements of his bag. This here is from Mitch Brown. Transition is most interesting here. We can see that Coronato generates a lot of controlled entries/exits per 60, which can be expected for a good player on a dominant line of a dominant team. But his efficiency on those entries and exits is only a little above average. Samoskevich is actually more efficient, but wasn’t playing in as favourable of a role, so his magnitude of entries is similar (actually a little higher than Coronato) and his magnitude of exits is lesser. I think it’s a pretty good example of how skill levels can be similar, but differences in roles can affect surface production.

---

One Thing I Love: Pinelli played 13 games this year in Jesenice, the Slovenian town Anze Kopitar is from.

Another Thing I Love: It didn’t show up a whole lot in Pinelli’s Slovenian sample, but he has some serious playmaking chops. He’s a deceptive, manipulative passer that can work the puck into the slot and move defenders around to create space for his teammates. It’s a shame that we didn’t get to see him continue to grow in that area in a comfortable environment this year. Unaffected by pressure here– really encouraging.

And he can blend puck skills with passing to create lanes and bypass defenders.

Swing Skill: Where does Pinelli play at higher levels? He’d probably tell you that his natural position is centre, but he’s spent time on the wing and could be booted back out there at the AHL level. A player’s ability to stick at centre during the transition from junior to (high-level) pro is usually initially dependent on a trio of factors: size, two-way play, and faceoffs. If a player passes that test, they might eventually lose the centre position due to more relevant playstyle factors like ability in traffic, playmaking & transitional tendencies, and puck support. Pinelli does have a real shot as an NHL centre, I think: he’s 6’1, defensively-sound, can blend his hands and passing to make plays through dense areas in the middle of the ice, and he’s more puck support oriented rather than trying to stretch the ice and get out ahead of the play in transition. On the other hand, he’s skinny, not particularly good at faceoffs (or wasn’t in his last OHL season, at least), and he’s a proficient but not excellent skater.

Development: Bulk up: strength coach. Faceoffs: not that important, but NHL coaches generally think they are. I mean, theoretically all you should need to get good at them is another player and someone to drop the puck (could even go N.H.L. style with only another player), so Francesco could give that a good try. Skating: Pinelli moves fairly well, but he’s not particularly balanced or comfortable on his edges. That’s gonna hurt his ability to play through checks in the middle of the ice; you want to be able to lean into opposing players and anchor on your edges while you do so without giving way. You also want to be agile enough to step around, spin off, and do all sorts of fancy things to defenders in open ice. A fun balance drill is to send a forward skating with the puck down the wall while a defender matches speed, angles off, and tries to really lay the body on them shoulder-to-shoulder. Encourage the forward to accept and try to play through the contact rather than avoid it. Forces them to try to put their own shoulder into the defender and really lean on those edges to gain the power to do so. Could be pretty fun.

Projection:
Top-end: Top-line centre with high-level playmaking and a really strong all-around game. Pinelli has some big time upside with ideal development.
Mid-level: Top-nine winger that can create for others, mostly off the rush, and play an important powerplay role. Could run the second unit or play a secondary role with the top group; wherever he is, that playmaking is gonna be an asset when he has space and time.
Low-end: Bottom-six centre who manages to lean on his all-around, responsible game to carve out a career, but struggles to live up to NHL physicality and get into spots to put his playmaking to use on a consistent basis.

Methodology:
I didn’t think that there was a whole lot to draw from Pinelli’s time in Slovakia this season, simply because it’s an unfamiliar environment where I didn’t think Pinelli was forced to play in traffic often nor did he really have an opportunity to really try to bust out his skills to their fullest potential. The clips from those games were not populated by many meaningful sequences. But we shouldn’t let that affect our view of Pinelli too much, because we’ve seen in Kitchener and at international events like the U18s that there is a lot of playmaking skill here. Pinelli is a deceptive, intelligent playmaker that can make plays in traffic; that alone could take him to a middle-six NHL role. One factor that will impact Pinelli’s value is whether he plays centre or wing. Of course, centre trumps winger, and we discussed some of the components that will decide where Pinelli plays in the swing skill section. I like Pinelli’s playmaking over another strong passer in Xavier Bourgault because Pinelli is a little more mobile and better equipped to play in dense areas.

---

One Thing I Love: L’Heureux doesn’t stand out as a particularly flashy or even highly-skilled player (sorry, Zach!), but he’s a well-rounded offensive player with plus hands, instincts, and vision. Every once in a while, those tools can culminate in some pretty sweet plays like this one.

Swing Skill: L’Heureux has excellent scoring instincts, always buzzing around the net and puck. But from beyond the immediate slot, his shot seems to lack the power and quickness to really threaten the goaltender on a consistent basis. This effectively places a ceiling on his scoring game– L’Heureux will only really score as much as he can generate high-danger opportunities, which are difficult to come by. That’s apparent from his shot map (thank you Instat): only three of L’Heureux’s goals came from the faceoff dots or further (excluding one long empty-netter, visible at the very bottom of this image).

This clip is of the lone goal from beyond the tops of the circles.

Pretty decent shot, hey? Nice catch-and-release snipe from the high slot, that’s a beauty. So how come that’s the only goal L’Heureux scored from that area all season long? The issue, I think, is that Zachary has very little deception prefacing his shots. Every time he shoots the puck, the goaltender knows that it’s coming a good second before the puck ever moves; not just because the forward’s release isn’t particularly quick, but also because he rarely makes an effort to feign a pass with his eyes or spice things up with a toe drag or other fake before his attempt. Watch Connor McDavid on a two-on-one like this and you’ll see him open up, get that puck in a position that he can either shoot or pass out of, and stare down his winger before pivoting to a shot.

Please Zach, I don’t need a fancy move or a toe drag or anything like that– just do something else with your eyes other than look right at the puck as you pull it back and then right at the net as you begin your shooting motion. It’s blatantly obvious what the next move is.

Development: Anyone remember that ultra-simple Auston Matthews release drill that made the rounds on Twitter a couple years ago? Literally just skate towards the net, receive a pass on your forehand, and try to shoot all in one motion. L’Heureux could benefit– not only is it good practice for a quick release, but that catch-and-shoot motion usually necessitates some pre-shot puck movement as you receive the pass, pull it into your shooting pocket, and then shoot. Matthews and other top scorers love to shoot out of a toe drag because it looks sick, you can really load up on your stick, and most importantly, you’re both concealing and adjusting your release angle as you do it. L’Heureux needs to find some strategies to create a little more doubt in the mind of the opposing goaltender when he shoots– that right there is a starting point.

Projection:
Top-end: Top-six winger with a well-rounded offensive game that can thrive alongside a strong playmaker, finding open space around the net and finishing in tight. 20+ goal upside and even more assists.
Mid-level: Middle-six centre, capable distributor that can chip in ~15 goals. Decent, but unspectacular playdriver because of so-so skating and transition game.
Low-end: AHL guy that doesn’t have the high-end skill or physical elements for even a low-level NHL role.

Methodology:
It somewhat feels like L’Heureux could potentially go higher than expected at the draft because he’s got a little bit of that Marchand archetype to him– a physical pest with real offensive talent. The scouts making up Bob McKenzie’s list, however, seem to view him right around the public consensus as a late first rounder. That’s interesting to me, because I think L’Heureux can attack defences in a wider variety of ways than quite a few players ranked higher on Bob’s list: players like Xavier Bourgualt, Aatu Raty, Brennan Othmann, Oskar Olausson, and even Mason McTavish, who was 11th on Bob’s list and is not nearly as high on mine (all of those guys are in my top 35 and you can read about them below). L’Heureux versus Bourgault is a natural comparison as two QMJHL forwards: Bourgault’s a better passer, but I think Zachary is a better scorer, a better skater, and better in traffic (and still a good playmaker himself).

---

One Thing I Love: Bourgault is an intelligent and manipulative playmaker, moving defences around and patiently waiting for seams to part. This is a high-level play here– look at how Bourgault’s patience and confidence as he decides to circle back in the direction of his own net pays off as it spreads the defence and creates space for the Shawinigan defenceman to activate. It shows excellent understanding of passing lanes and space creation as a playmaker.

Patience is a theme in Bourgault’s game– he likes to look for these tap-in plays on the doorfront and is generally a pass-first player around the slot.

Swing Skill: Bourgault is a heavy-footed skater that moves quite well in straight lines, but can struggle with lateral motion and his movements while in close proximity to defenders. He’s fast, sure, but he isn’t shifty like so many of the NHL’s top attackers are. He likes to attack in direct patterns and can be very predictable to defend in quick-developing situations. Watch him try to attack right into the heart of the opponent’s two defencemen here.

Bourgault goes straight down the wall to enter the zone here, quickly encountering trouble and falling as he tries to cut to the inside out of traffic.

Development: Shiftiness is often attributed to edgework, but it stretches beyond that one trait; one thing that a lot of ’shifty” players have in common is the ability to separate their upper body from the lower body as they move. The feet can carry a player one way while their upperbody faces and makes plays in another, creating deception and additional options within a player’s movement patterns.

Let’s revisit this clip here. Bourgault attempts to decelerate, trying to squeeze between the two defenders in close proximity. As such, the puck remains in front of him and the defender there easily takes the puck off of him. The shifty, higher-level play might be to first swivel the upperbody to face towards the middle of the ice, taking the puck with you looking to step around the first defender. He could then shift his upper body back up-ice after getting the puck off the boards, sealing off the back-pressuring defender behind him after assuming a more central position on the ice. It’s hard to explain, but this type of flexibility between the upper and lower body would lend Bourgault options in plays like this without needing to decelerate like he tries to do here first.

Projection:
Top-end: Top-six winger, perhaps more suited to the slightly slower pace that the second forward line might offer as opposed to a #1W role with what would be a faster centre on most teams. His playmaking off the wall will drive his impact, supplemented by a good shot from low-to-medium danger spots.
Mid-level: Middle-six winger with some mobility issues that could hold him back from a consistent role on the top two lines, but his playmaking should make him valuable on the powerplay and in certain situations at evens, and he’ll be a capable finisher around the net too.
Low-end: AHL guy who doesn’t present enough of a threat off the rush to be too impactful in the high-paced NHL.

Methodology:
Bourgault has some similarities to Pinelli as a manipulative passer, but also some mobility issues that could limit his transitional value and ability to play through checks. He looks a little clunky out there and doesn’t change directions particularly well– that generally is not ideal when it comes to stepping around defenders and trying to navigate your way into the middle of the ice. He’s less likely to play centre and more importantly, less likely to be able to consistently create slot opportunities. And so, as an extension, he’s less likely to create offence. Bourgault’s redeeming quality is that he’s a very good playmaking and can function from the perimeter, using his vision to strike into the slot from the wall. Even if the slot chances aren’t there consistently, he should still have a method of offensive production. However, his offensive game isn’t as versatile as players above him like Samoskevich, Svechkov, and even Pinelli and Kidney, who I feel are more comfortable in the middle lane. Players with a range of offensive creation methods tend to be better translatable bets, I think Bourgault’s range is unfortunately fairly limited at this point in time. That’s why he’s placed a little lower than his QMJHL results would probably dictate.