NHL Draft: Prospect Ranking Process

[BullBuchanan]

Does anyone have a recommended resource for how NHL scouts rank and evaluate players?

It seems like a huge mystery to me beyond the top few picks. I'm honestly not even sure how players are evaluated post draft. I was thinking about this watching Benson play this year. Obviously the discussion is forever changed after what we've seen in the playoffs, but I was wondering what the expectations were when we decided he should be the 13th overall pick, and if a guy with high compete who will give you 10-13 goals a year and 30-40 points would be considered a Good, bad, neutral return on that investment.

My completely uneducated opinion tells me, that unless you're drafting int he top 3-5, that any guy who carves out a full-time NHL career is probably some form of a hit, given how many fail to do so. Guys like Zemgus Girgensons have had long and productive NHL careers, but does an NHL scout look at a guy and say, we project him as a bottom 6 player with a high likelihood to be a full time NHL player for a long time, we're happy to take him 14th overall? Or do they believe that everyone they draft int he 1st round has the potential to be a top line/pair guy?

Benson again is interesting here. You draft a guy like him 13th, and seeing what he's doing now, was this the expectation when you drafted him? If so it's kind of wild to think about, because he plays like so few guys in the league. How do the scouts get there? Helenius was drafted just one slot later at 14th and he's a much more traditional looking player, who seems like he probably should have gone earlier.

Then you have 2nd third round players and that's just a total mystery to me. In the last 15 years, we've really only had three first round misses in terms of guys who didn't become full time NHL guys (Johnson, Nylander, Grigorenko, 4 if Rosen doesn't turn out), compared to 16 hits. Compare that to the 2nd round and we've had 5 hits to 11 misses and a couple of unknowns from 2023+, with 0 3rd round hits in 15 years and 2 4th round hits (I guess) in Bryson and Borgen. Is that typical or bad?

If you know more about this than I do, or know who does, would love to learn a bit.

[steveoath]

Paging @LGR4GM 

Since I’ve been here liger has been pretty much on the ball with their player assessments. 

Edited May 14 by steveoath

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, BullBuchanan said:

Does anyone have a recommended resource for how NHL scouts rank and evaluate players?

It seems like a huge mystery to me beyond the top few picks. I'm honestly not even sure how players are evaluated post draft. I was thinking about this watching Benson play this year. Obviously the discussion is forever changed after what we've seen in the playoffs, but I was wondering what the expectations were when we decided he should be the 13th overall pick, and if a guy with high compete who will give you 10-13 goals a year and 30-40 points would be considered a Good, bad, neutral return on that investment.

My completely uneducated opinion tells me, that unless you're drafting int he top 3-5, that any guy who carves out a full-time NHL career is probably some form of a hit, given how many fail to do so. Guys like Zemgus Girgensons have had long and productive NHL careers, but does an NHL scout look at a guy and say, we project him as a bottom 6 player with a high likelihood to be a full time NHL player for a long time, we're happy to take him 14th overall? Or do they believe that everyone they draft int he 1st round has the potential to be a top line/pair guy?

Benson again is interesting here. You draft a guy like him 13th, and seeing what he's doing now, was this the expectation when you drafted him? If so it's kind of wild to think about, because he plays like so few guys in the league. How do the scouts get there? Helenius was drafted just one slot later at 14th and he's a much more traditional looking player, who seems like he probably should have gone earlier.

Then you have 2nd third round players and that's just a total mystery to me. In the last 15 years, we've really only had three first round misses in terms of guys who didn't become full time NHL guys (Johnson, Nylander, Grigorenko, 4 if Rosen doesn't turn out), compared to 16 hits. Compare that to the 2nd round and we've had 5 hits to 11 misses and a couple of unknowns from 2023+, with 0 3rd round hits in 15 years and 2 4th round hits (I guess) in Bryson and Borgen. Is that typical or bad?

If you know more about this than I do, or know who does, would love to learn a bit.

Elite Prospects is really good. They use a fairly common method where players are ranked on a 1-9 (I think it's 9) scale. Average would be 5 and then Prospects are above or below that. Average is your 4th maybe 3rd line level. You break down different skills by that and then put the entire player together to see what they might be. Benson had like a 7 hockey iq and 7 for a Prospect is high. McDavid might have had a 7.5 for skating but he's nuts. The numbers give you a snapshot but how players put it all together really matters. Fancy stats and eye test help here. You want to know how offense is generated and how they defend. 

Benson for example is elite at precisely 3 things. First, he's a master manipulator. He fakes, sends false signals, and rapidly exploits any mistake. Second, is IQ. Benson understands the game and how everything flows. This is why his manipulation is so effective, he'll get a defender to shift left because he wants the space right. He'll shift you in a passing lane make the pass and then anticipate where the puck will go if saved. It's insane. 3rd is why the package works, motor. Zach Benson has the motor in an elite level. He's constantly turning. 

All of this was present when he was drafted. He was the 5th best prospect in his class. His comparable Isn't Marchand, it's Jarvis. Now 13g, 30a is good for a mid teens pick but you're going for more there. Benson, he's impo, an 80pt player in his prime. Something like 25g and 55a. 

As for later round guys, most teams are looking for 1 or 2 traits to hang their hat on. The hope is the other stuff will be good enough and that 1 special trait gets them to the NHL. 

[LGR4GM]

That's a short intro. Draft guides to a better job and have examples. If you sign up for Elite Prospects you can download their draft guide and the intro gives a good summary of how they do things. I've read mckeens, elite, hockey writers etc... and they all use the same or similar. 

They have an advantage though. They have access to software, I forgot the company, and can watch shift by shift for Prospects. 

[GASabresIUFAN]

2 hours ago, BullBuchanan said:

Does anyone have a recommended resource for how NHL scouts rank and evaluate players?

It seems like a huge mystery to me beyond the top few picks. I'm honestly not even sure how players are evaluated post draft. I was thinking about this watching Benson play this year. Obviously the discussion is forever changed after what we've seen in the playoffs, but I was wondering what the expectations were when we decided he should be the 13th overall pick, and if a guy with high compete who will give you 10-13 goals a year and 30-40 points would be considered a Good, bad, neutral return on that investment.

My completely uneducated opinion tells me, that unless you're drafting int he top 3-5, that any guy who carves out a full-time NHL career is probably some form of a hit, given how many fail to do so. Guys like Zemgus Girgensons have had long and productive NHL careers, but does an NHL scout look at a guy and say, we project him as a bottom 6 player with a high likelihood to be a full time NHL player for a long time, we're happy to take him 14th overall? Or do they believe that everyone they draft int he 1st round has the potential to be a top line/pair guy?

Benson again is interesting here. You draft a guy like him 13th, and seeing what he's doing now, was this the expectation when you drafted him? If so it's kind of wild to think about, because he plays like so few guys in the league. How do the scouts get there? Helenius was drafted just one slot later at 14th and he's a much more traditional looking player, who seems like he probably should have gone earlier.

Then you have 2nd third round players and that's just a total mystery to me. In the last 15 years, we've really only had three first round misses in terms of guys who didn't become full time NHL guys (Johnson, Nylander, Grigorenko, 4 if Rosen doesn't turn out), compared to 16 hits. Compare that to the 2nd round and we've had 5 hits to 11 misses and a couple of unknowns from 2023+, with 0 3rd round hits in 15 years and 2 4th round hits (I guess) in Bryson and Borgen. Is that typical or bad?

If you know more about this than I do, or know who does, would love to learn a bit.

I find it easier and reasonably accurate to let others do the rankings and then average a group of 8-10 different rankings from good sources

Edited May 14 by GASabresIUFAN

[BullBuchanan]

2 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Elite Prospects is really good. They use a fairly common method where players are ranked on a 1-9 (I think it's 9) scale. Average would be 5 and then Prospects are above or below that. Average is your 4th maybe 3rd line level. You break down different skills by that and then put the entire player together to see what they might be. Benson had like a 7 hockey iq and 7 for a Prospect is high. McDavid might have had a 7.5 for skating but he's nuts. The numbers give you a snapshot but how players put it all together really matters. Fancy stats and eye test help here. You want to know how offense is generated and how they defend. 

Benson for example is elite at precisely 3 things. First, he's a master manipulator. He fakes, sends false signals, and rapidly exploits any mistake. Second, is IQ. Benson understands the game and how everything flows. This is why his manipulation is so effective, he'll get a defender to shift left because he wants the space right. He'll shift you in a passing lane make the pass and then anticipate where the puck will go if saved. It's insane. 3rd is why the package works, motor. Zach Benson has the motor in an elite level. He's constantly turning. 

All of this was present when he was drafted. He was the 5th best prospect in his class. His comparable Isn't Marchand, it's Jarvis. Now 13g, 30a is good for a mid teens pick but you're going for more there. Benson, he's impo, an 80pt player in his prime. Something like 25g and 55a. 

As for later round guys, most teams are looking for 1 or 2 traits to hang their hat on. The hope is the other stuff will be good enough and that 1 special trait gets them to the NHL. 

very cool. I use elite prospects a lot to track guys we've drafted and see how they're doing. Of course that's mostly just checking stats and whatnot.

Hockey development is fascinating. You have a guy like Kozak who exploded for a PPG in his draft year in the WHL, after not doing much of anything before. Then he heads to Rochester where he puts up a high of 14 points over a 3 year span and somehow hes a competent NHL player. Then you have Rosen who has been dominating in the AHL for years and doesn't seem to have NHL goods. Then there's Thompson who seemed to fall right off after college and then suddenly explodes in his 6th year as a pro.

[GASabresIUFAN]

6 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

very cool. I use elite prospects a lot to track guys we've drafted and see how they're doing. Of course that's mostly just checking stats and whatnot.

Hockey development is fascinating. You have a guy like Kozak who exploded for a PPG in his draft year in the WHL, after not doing much of anything before. Then he heads to Rochester where he puts up a high of 14 points over a 3 year span and somehow hes a competent NHL player. Then you have Rosen who has been dominating in the AHL for years and doesn't seem to have NHL goods. Then there's Thompson who seemed to fall right off after college and then suddenly explodes in his 6th year as a pro.

On later rd picks, the pros are looking for guys that have an NHL level skill like a shot, speed or IQ and often feel they can develop the rest.  Kozak has good wheels and hi IQ.  In Juniors that lets him score 30, but it also a skill set that translates to being a useful depth NHLer. 
 

Tage plays a smaller mans game and needed to grow into his huge frame.  I think his breakout corresponded to his gaining physical maturity.  

Edited May 14 by GASabresIUFAN

[BillsShredder83]

Great thread! TY

[msw2112]

3 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

On later rd picks, the pros are looking for guys that have an NHL level skill like a shot, speed or IQ and often feel they can develop the rest.  Kozak has good wheels and hi IQ.  In Juniors that lets him score 30, but it also a skill set that translates to being a useful depth NHLer. 
 

Tage plays a smaller mans game and needed to grow into his huge frame.  I think his breakout corresponded to his gaining physical maturity.  

I agree with this and to some extent, the same applies to Owen Power.  Although not quite as tall, you could apply it to Samuelsson too, who is now finally realizing his full potential at age 26.  There are other really tall players over the years who took a few years to find their game and reach their potential.  Chara and Hedman come to mind.  6'7" Tyler Myers being really good out of the gate and becoming rookie of the year is definitely the exception and not the rule.  It will be interesting to see what the future holds for Stanley and Kesselring - two taller players who have shown flashes of good play in their careers, but have not had consistent success.  They're both north of 26, so they may not have a lot of time left for development.

Back to draft evaluation and player development in general (not just taller players), it's a crap shoot.  Every player develops at a different rate.  Benson, for example, may be a 10-12 goal scorer with high hockey IQ and compete right now, but I suspect he will continue to develop and could become a 25-30 goal scorer.  He's only 21!  How much better of a player could he be at age 26 - FIVE years from now!  Look at Doan this season compared to his previous years in AZ/UT.  Krebs looks like he's turning into a 20 goal scorer.  Even Quinn may end up a 30+ goal scorer.  The forgotten man - Kulich - could still develop into a significant scorer.  Dahlin looked lost his first couple of seasons and now he's a Norris finalist.  They're not all going to hit, but for those that do, some guys are great at 18, 19, 20 and others don't peak until their mid-to-late 20s.

[DarthEbriate]

My process is how cool a Star Wars name or reference I can get from their name.

[Punch]

5 minutes ago, DarthEbriate said:

My process is how cool a Star Wars name or reference I can get from their name.

[gilbert11]

It’s similar to baseball.  Once in a while a player or two are drafted that just have it already and are effective right after being drafted. Usually though they need more development at lower levels before they’re ready.

 

After the first round it’s all potential.

[LGR4GM]

13 hours ago, msw2112 said:

I agree with this and to some extent, the same applies to Owen Power.  Although not quite as tall, you could apply it to Samuelsson too, who is now finally realizing his full potential at age 26.  There are other really tall players over the years who took a few years to find their game and reach their potential.  Chara and Hedman come to mind.  6'7" Tyler Myers being really good out of the gate and becoming rookie of the year is definitely the exception and not the rule.  It will be interesting to see what the future holds for Stanley and Kesselring - two taller players who have shown flashes of good play in their careers, but have not had consistent success.  They're both north of 26, so they may not have a lot of time left for development.

Back to draft evaluation and player development in general (not just taller players), it's a crap shoot.  Every player develops at a different rate.  Benson, for example, may be a 10-12 goal scorer with high hockey IQ and compete right now, but I suspect he will continue to develop and could become a 25-30 goal scorer.  He's only 21!  How much better of a player could he be at age 26 - FIVE years from now!  Look at Doan this season compared to his previous years in AZ/UT.  Krebs looks like he's turning into a 20 goal scorer.  Even Quinn may end up a 30+ goal scorer.  The forgotten man - Kulich - could still develop into a significant scorer.  Dahlin looked lost his first couple of seasons and now he's a Norris finalist.  They're not all going to hit, but for those that do, some guys are great at 18, 19, 20 and others don't peak until their mid-to-late 20s.

No he didn't. Dahlin was excellent his 1st year and then had Krueger, a man so useless and incompetent at his job he made Dahlin bad. The very second Krueger was fired, Dahlin got better. 

[LGR4GM]

Players peak between 24 and 28 on average. It's why I'm very leery of paying Tuch for 8yrs, you're paying for past production. When drafting though, you're evaluating players based on what you think they can be in their prime and the likelihood they'll get there. 

Nikita Klepov is going to go underdrafted in this year's draft because he's not 6'4" and that's silly. 6'1" is fine for size but recent cup winners influence the league and Florida and Tampa convinced teams they need 6'4" bruisers even though that's the wrong lesson. 

[msw2112]

6 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

No he didn't. Dahlin was excellent his 1st year and then had Krueger, a man so useless and incompetent at his job he made Dahlin bad. The very second Krueger was fired, Dahlin got better. 

There's no doubt that Dahlin hit rock bottom under Krueger and he began to flourish under Granato.  That said, he was nowhere the player he is today pre-Krueger.  He was an 18-year-old kid who was very talented but still raw and developing.  He was not the type of player that Matthew Schaefer was as a rookie this past season.  I will concede that there's a lot of room between "looked lost" and Matthew Schaefer (and "looked lost" was very applicable under Krueger), but Dahlin was far from a developed player in first couple of seasons.  He definitely made a huge jump when Krueger was canned and Granato took over and he's continued to ascend since then.  He's truly one of the best, hence the Norris nomination, but he does need to stop taking stupid penalties in the current playoff series.

Edited May 15 by msw2112

[Two or less]

On 5/14/2026 at 12:10 PM, BullBuchanan said:

Benson again is interesting here. You draft a guy like him 13th, and seeing what he's doing now, was this the expectation when you drafted him? If so it's kind of wild to think about, because he plays like so few guys in the league. How do the scouts get there? Helenius was drafted just one slot later at 14th and he's a much more traditional looking player, who seems like he probably should have gone earlier.

 

Benson fell in the draft for whatever reason (size). Kevyn Adams even said it that he just dropped right into their laps. 

Whats interesting is the year before Benson's draft class, WGR (the instigators i think) was having guests like coaches, scouts, ect to discuss potential Sabres prospects. To discuss Matt Savoie, they had his coach James Patrick on, and after talking about Savoie they asked if hes got anything else to add about anyone else, and Patrick said not really but will say in the 2023 draft class, keep the name Zach Benson in mind, said he'll be a top 5 pick and one of the best players in that class. 

 

[Taro T]

15 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

No he didn't. Dahlin was excellent his 1st year and then had Krueger, a man so useless and incompetent at his job he made Dahlin bad. The very second Krueger was fired, Dahlin got better. 

Krueger didn't make Dahlin bad.  Dahlin was never "bad."  He suffered a bit of a sophomore slump and making Secretariat play as a Clydesdale didn't help any, but he was always going to become what he is.  (And he's just barely into his prime.  Sooooo happy he's a Sabre.  How different could the tragectory of this team have been if O'Reilly's brakes worked or he'd've put his brother behind the wheel?)

Reinhart, O'Reilly, Eichel, Dahlin, Montour, Ullmark.  That's a pretty darn good core to build around.