2018 NHL Draft: Top 100 Prospects Consensus Ranking
11. Joel Farabee, LW
62 gp, 33 g, 43 a, 76 p. National U18 Team, USDP.
Excellent two-way forward, one of the best from the USDP. Solid mind and is quick thinking, but his best attribute is a 100% work ethic on every shift. Plays with his heart on his sleeve.
Ideal player comparison: Brad Marchand.
12. Joe Veleno, C
33 gp, 16 g, 32 a, 48 p (10 pgp, 5 g, 6 a, 11 p). Drummondville Voltigeurs, QMJHL.
Veleno is likely not going to be a top-line center, but he’s got the assets to be a reliable, hard-working, two-way upper-end middle-six center. Good playmaker who can be elite at times, but his ability to change a game is in question.
Ideal player comparison: Erik Haula.
13. Jesperi Kotkaniemi, C
57 gp, 10 g, 19 a, 29 p (7 pgp, 0 g, 1 a, 1 p). Assat, Liiga.
Perhaps the center with the most potential in this draft, there’s a lot to work on with Kotkaniemi (he desperately needs to work with a skating coach to fix his form) but he can be spectacular in the offensive zone and in transition. Great at controlling the puck and keeping play alive.
Ideal player comparison: Anze Kopitar.
14. Barrett Hayton, C
63 gp, 21 g, 39 a, 60 p (24 pgp, 8 g, 13 a, 21 p). Sault Ste. Marie Greyhounds, OHL.
One of the best two-way forwards in the draft, someone who can see the ice very well at both ends. Lacks top gear as a skater, but makes up for it in other ways.
Ideal player comparison: Nazem Kadri.
15. Rasmus Kupari, C
39 gp, 6 g, 8 a, 14 p (6 pgp, 0 g, 0 a, 0 p). Karpat, Liiga.
All potential, Kupari is a great skater, could be world class. Not elite as a passer, but can use his skating to create chances and can create room at high speeds. Still needs a bit of work to round out his game.
Ideal player comparison: Andrew Cogliano.
16. Bode Wilde, D
61 gp, 12 g, 29 a, 41 p. National U18 Team, USDP.
Wilde is the riskiest high-end defenseman in this draft. He makes a lot of high-end plays, is an excellent skater, and a great player in transition. He also uses his speed effectively in the defensive zone and is stout there. There are times when he looks like Russell Westbrook or James Harden, however – an elite level player who makes more than a few mistakes and leads his team in turnovers. May need help to simplify his game.
Ideal player comparison: Keith Yandle.
17. Grigori Denisenko, LW
31 gp, 9 g, 13 a, 22 p (12 pgp, 5 g, 2 a, 7 p). Loko Yaroslavl, MHL.
Capable of making the highlight reel and has a playmaking mindset. Creative and can be an asset defensively. Dynamite with the puck, but has a few areas (including off-ice) where he could use a little work.
Ideal player comparison: Johnny Gaudreau.
18. Isac Lundestrom, C/LW
42 gp, 6 g, 9 a, 15 p (3 pgp, 0 g, 0 a, 0 p). Lulea HF, SHL.
He’s great defensively and can help out offensively. Has been excellent at the professional level in Sweden and does everything well. He’s a playmaker and a defensive center and has been throughout his career, and that’s because of his hockey IQ.
Ideal player comparison: Mikael Backlund.
19. Vitali Kravtsov, RW
35 gp, 4 g, 3 a, 7 p (16 pgp, 6 g, 5 a, 11 p). Traktor Chelyabinsk, KHL.
Great skillset led to an excellent postseason for Kravtsov, when he stepped up when his team needed him to. Was a secondary driving force on a team that made the final four. Kravtsov is a finishing wing, somebody who could combine good hands with great skating for a lethal combination.
Ideal player comparison: Jason Zucker.
20. Ryan McLeod, C
68 gp, 26 g, 44 a, 70 p (6 pgp, 2 g, 3 a, 5 p). Mississauga Steelheads, OHL.
Has excellent potential, but concerns about his chances realizing it. Is the best combination of size, speed, skill, and smarts in this draft. Has the ability to get into the offensive zone easily and calmly pass the puck well, but he far too often is caught meandering once in the zone. Has decent defense to make up for it, but if McLeod wakes up and turns into the professional player he could be with a little work, he won’t need it.
Ideal player comparison: Eric Staal.