HELSINKI, Fin. – What a two weeks of hockey we just witnessed.

The IIHF U-18 Men’s World Hockey Championship concluded on Sunday with an instant classic between North American rivals Canada and the United States. USA led the game for a good majority of it, but when Trevor Connelly received a five-minute major for a hit to the head, everything changed. Gavin McKenna capped off the tournament with a four-point night, with his hat-trick leading the way for a wild 6-3 Canadian win.

The sheer reality of the tournament was that many of the best players, by far, aren’t even draft-eligible. USA’s James Hagens (2025) broke the all-time scoring record and deserved MVP honors. Porter Martone (2025) and McKenna (2026) were megastars for Canada. Sweden was led by Viggo Nordlund and Victor Eklund, both of whom are available in 2025.

That doesn’t change the fact we saw many great performances from guys looking to get drafted next month in Vegas. And I spent the past two weeks in Espoo and Vantaa, Finland checking out what the best draft prospects in the game had to offer, which is always a treat.

Today, we’re looking at more than 100 draft prospects for 2024. It’s not every player that’s eligible, with Kazakhstan, Norway, Slovakia and Latvia unlikely to produce many notable prospects in the draft.

So, strap in and enjoy:

Canada

*Henry Mews (Steven Ellis/Daily Faceoff)*

#30 Carter George, G: George was one of the top goalies from the get-go. Although he didn’t always need to be special, he was integral in both games against Sweden and played great against Latvia. Even though he allowed four goals against Sweden, I thought he was the primary reason the Canadians held on. And then there was that huge diving stick save in the second period of the gold medal game – that was a championship-saver. I’m not sure if he’ll end up being the first goalie taken, but he was rock solid.

#1 Ryerson Leenders, G: Leenders played just one round-robin game, beating Switzerland 8-1. I thought he looked great, even if most of his work was done in the first period. It’s not easy to stay focused when the game starts to get as lopsided as it does, but he made a few big breakaway saves and was arguably the reason the game was so interesting in the first period to begin with. Other than that, it’s hard to evaluate him, given his lack of playing time.

#4 Harrison Brunicke, D: There’s been a lot of interest in Brunicke as a potential late first-round pick in 2024. He’s an all-around defenseman who uses his speed and general fluid skating to win battles and rush the puck. I liked that he was willing to try riskier plays in games that were a bit more one-sided to push the limits of his passing, but he got himself into trouble at points, too. There aren’t many big flaws in his game, but he’s not spectacular in anything, either. Still, I know some scouts think there’s more to his game than he’s showing right now and that he could be a long-term riser in the next few years.

#27 Charlie Elick, D: I like Elick, I really do. He’s got good size at 6-foot-3 and can move well enough, too. He’s a fluid skater who can transition well and competes hard. I think this tournament really highlighted how little impact he’ll have offensively at the next level and that you’re looking at him to be a pure defensive defenseman in the NHL. You still need guys like that, and there are few in this draft as good as him. His physicality and competitiveness are well above average, but he needs to simplify his game – stop trying to do too much with the puck and focus on positioning. Do that, and he can be a solid bottom-pairing defenseman.

#20 Spencer Gill, D: Gill’s an interesting one because he’s not one of the guys I really followed too closely this year. The 6-foot-3 defenseman didn’t produce a whole lot in a year that saw him put in 12 goals and 46 points with Rimouski this year, but he showed good competition and defensive awareness. I think he would work best as a shutdown defenseman in the NHL because I don’t think he’s offensively gifted enough to do more in the NHL, so I hope to see him focus on that a bit more.

#8 Frankie Marrelli, D: I like Marrelli’s obvious chemistry with his Ottawa 67s teammate, Henry Mews. Marrelli is an excellent skater who moved the puck quite well under pressure, especially in viewings against Czechia and Switzerland. His consistency is a problem for me, though. One shift, you love him. The next, he’s skating around confused about his positioning. At the worst, he can run a power play, but will those opportunities show up in the NHL? We’ll see.

#5 Henry Mews, D: This was a solid showing for Mews, someone I have mixed feelings about. I love his offensive abilities, and he put them on full display. But defensively, I feel like he was physical, cut off angles well and did a good job of keeping the puck in the zone in all situations. Mews made some smart decisions with the puck and was the team’s top power-play quarterback, a role I expect him to thrive in once he’s an NHLer. The decision-making with the puck still needs to work, even if I felt it was a bit more refined here.

#28 Cole Beaudoin, C: What a player. Beaudoin primarily served as Canada’s fourth-line center, but he was also the team’s best penalty killer and got some power-play time, too. Beaudoin is built like a beast and that allows him to overpower opponents around the net, and it helps that he’s so competitive. One of my biggest gripes is Beaudoin’s playmaking can be real hit-or-miss, but he’s at least got the motor to make himself relevant even if he’s having a rough day with the puck

#26 Liam Greentree, RW: It was a quiet tournament for Greentree, someone with top-20 potential in the draft. He had his moments but was silent against Czechia and Switzerland and played his best game against Kazakhstan in an 11-3 whomping. For someone who had 36 goals and 90 points this year, I expected Greentree to step up more offensively this year but it just never seemed to happen. I’m not sure it’ll hurt his draft ranking, but I don’t think it helped.

#24 Tij Iginla, LW: Iginla had a good, yet unspectacular round-robin, but I really liked his game against the Swedes. The medal round, though, he was tremendous. Even when he wasn’t scoring, he found ways to get really active both physically and on the forecheck. Sitting close to the ice to watch him, it was clear how much he used his speed and relentless attack to his advantage out there. What an end for him.

#16 Ollie Josephson, C: Look, you’re not drafting Josephson for scoring. But in terms of someone who’ll lay his life on the line to win a battle of any kind? Josephson does that. He knows his role, knows his strengths and knows how to utilize them. All things considered, I thought he was fine, but he flew under the radar a lot on Canada’s third line – their least effective grouping.

#14 Jett Luchanko, C: Luchanko has a point in nearly every game, with his quietest night being the 6-0 drubbing over Czechia. However, I’d argue it wasn’t a great showing, mostly because he looked like a liability defensively and lost puck battles he shouldn’t have. I know some scouts think he’s a first-round pick – I just don’t see it. I don’t think he’s rounded enough. But with the puck, it was hard to complain about his performance in Finland.

#12 Maxim Masse, RW: Massé had a decent tournament, registering points in three of the four round-robin games as his time doubled from the first two games to the next two games. He didn’t register a shot in his first two games but was actually one of the better generators as the tournament went on. It wasn’t a huge tournament by any means, but as a fringe first-rounder, you can use any help you can get.

#21 Ryder Ritchie, LW: Ritchie was much more impactful at the Hlinka Gretzky, where his scoring prowess was on display. I did like how he attacked the puck when on the ice and felt he was defensively responsible, at least, but his play here was nothing special. At the very least, he improved as the tournament wore on, and his opportunities grew, especially with Iginla by his side.

#10 Marek Vanacker, RW: An injury limited Vanacker’s playing time and was quiet on the scoresheet. He had 82 points during the OHL regular season so that was disappointing, but we saw him showcase the more scrappy, hard-working playing style we saw from him as a rookie before he found his scoring touch. Vanacker has a decent stride, so I wouldn’t call his skating bad, but he’s missing the top speed you’d hope from someone tasked with bringing a spark in the bottom six. That’s where I see him playing if he makes the NHL, which I think he can do with some more refinement.

#23 Carson Wetsch, RW: I loved the energy Wetsch brought, especially early against the Czechs. He scored a goal off some good work with linemates Beaudoin and Malcolm Spence, working his tail off to make it happen. While he’s not the most skilled player, he seems like a strong bottom-six candidate who’ll give you a full effort every single night.

Czechia

*Jakub Milota (Steven Ellis/Daily Faceoff)*

#1 Jakub Milota, G: Milota went the distance for the Czechs, minus the second half of the blowout loss to Canada. He’s an athletic goaltender who anticipates shots well and doesn’t give up on a chance. But he allowed too many poor goals for my liking and his rebound control was a nightmare against the teams that were skilled enough to take advantage. he was average at best compared to his Hlinka Gretzky performance.

#6 Jakub Fibigr, D: I liked Fibigr’s game this year, but didn’t really stick out to me beyond some odd situations against Sweden and Switzerland. He doesn’t have any standout qualities and didn’t showcase the same confidence with the puck he had in Mississauga – almost like he was a bit too hesitant to make a mistake out there. What I liked that he was still willing to make his aggressive pinches, which made me interested in his game back at the Hlinka last summer.

#15 Tomas Galvas, D: He was a bit too inconsistent for my liking. He’s an undersized defenseman who can move the puck well but would often lose battles in front of the net against stronger competition. I did like the way he moved with the puck along the offensive blueline, generating some decent opportunities on the man advantage.

#8 Adam Hlinsky, D: Czechia’s captain has one playing style – defense first. That was evident here where it just seemed like he never had the puck and was always having to clear space around his own net. He’s good at that, but his lack of dynamism doesn’t really interest me.

#10 Adam Kral, D: Kral played about 11 minutes a night, mostly in a shutdown role. He blocked a ton of shots and it feels like he has figured out how to control his physicality a bit more than in previous outings. For a 6-foot-2 defenseman, Kral can move out there, which could interest some teams as a late-round pick.

#7 Aleš Zielenski, D: One of Czechia’s better defenders, Zielenski was the most effective blueliner in the team’s zone. He’s physical, blocks shots and looks afraid of nothing out there. Seriously, send your team’s top guys, and he’ll push heavily until there’s nothing left to give. I could see a team taking him late but with weak puck skills, he’s still a long shot.

#22 Maxmilian Curran, C: He didn’t put up a ton of points, but Curran was one of Czechia’s better forwards out there. He’s not physically dominant, and I wish he’d throw more meaningful hits, but he did use his 6-foot-3 frame to knock pucks away and help start a scoring chance. He was one of Czechia’s best players against Switzerland despite only playing 12 minutes a night – it jumped up drastically after that.

#16 Marek Danicek, RW: Danicek can play on the edge, and it got him into trouble by getting kicked out of the game early against Canada. He had a two-point opener against Switzerland but was held off the scoresheet after that, bringing more of an energy game to the bottom six. But beyond that, there wasn’t much to write home about.

#27 Samuel Drančák, LW: Drančák was one of the guys I really liked against Switzerland because it seemed like he was able to generate some high-quality chances. But then, as the tournament wore on, his ice time started to decrease, and his role fell as he just stopped doing much of anything with the puck.

#25 Jakub Heš, C: He saw his opportunities increase incrementally throughout the tournament, but he was just more of a two-way forward without the offensive numbers to back it up. His job was to shut guys down and he was fine, but nothing too memorable.

#19 Adam Jecho, RW: Jecho was my favorite Czech player, looking great against Sweden and Czechia. He also had a nice showing against Canada despite his team getting pummeled, playing in all situations. The 6-foot-5 forward got beat against some of the faster skaters in Canada and Sweden, but he didn’t win many 1-on-1 fights for the puck and was great in front of the net. He helped man the point on the power play, too. This was easily Jecho’s most effective U-18 tournament showing of significance.

#20 Ondrej Kos, LW: Given Kos played on the first line for almost the entire tournament, I was disappointed in his production. He had just one goal and didn’t even register a shot in the quarterfinal game when Czechia needed him most. He’s still intriguing because he’s a decent all-around player with good speed and a big frame, but this felt like a letdown compared to his play at the Hlinka.

#14 Matej Kubiesa, RW: You’re not watching Kubiesa for his scoring touch, especially since he had just six goals and 14 points in the WHL this year. But he’s a good support player who likes to hit, defends well, and has a good active stick. He can also be a net-front presence if needed, too.

#28 Oskar Lisler, RW: Lisler was just the 13th forward who saw action in just two games. It’s too bad because I actually really liked watching him this year, but he was relegated to minimal duty throughout the tournament. That was disappointing.

#23 Petr Sikora, C: One of the oldest players in this draft class, I thought Sikora had his moments. He was quite physical against Canada, which ultimately led to an ejection. He played his best game against Sweden, scoring his lone goal, but then was quieter against Kazakhstan and Switzerland. Sikora can play on the edge but he needs to calm things down a bit there and just focus on simplicity like he did in the Czech U-20 league.

#17 Adam Titlbach, LW: The points didn’t really follow him around, but I thought Titlbach was one of Czechia’s most dangerous scorers. Helping out on the top line alongside good buddy Adam Benak, Titlbach needed three games to register his first point, which, after putting up excellent numbers at the Hlinka, was disappointing. But I thought his mix of speed and skill showed nicely against even some of the faster teams Czechia had to deal with.

#21 Martin Vaculik, RW: Vaculik was Czechia’s fourth-line winger, mostly specializing in bringing speed and defensive commitment. He didn’t score, didn’t do much in the offensive zone but I thought he was one of Czechia’s hardest-working wingers out there. It didn’t result in anything tangible, but you still need guys like that.

Finland

*Emil Hemming (Steven Ellis/Daily Faceoff)*

#1 Petteri Rimpinen, G: What an up-and-down tourney for a guy who started off so well. Rimpinen was excellent in the first game against Latvia but had a rough go against Latvia. I thought he was solid against the Swedes in the quarterfinal, but he allowed a poor, bouncing goal in the second that ended up eliminating the hosts. Rimpinen looked flustered a few times, but when he was in the zone, he was a tough nut to crack.

#30 Kim Saarinen, G: One of Europe’s top goalie prospects this year, we didn’t see much out of Saarinen at this event. He shut out Norway, and then there wasn’t much he could have done on the one goal against the USA, but that’s all we saw from him. At 6-foot-4, he covers so much of the net, but he’s also athletic enough to easily stretch out to make more difficult stops when needed.

#2 Onni Amhamdi, D: A strong, physical defender, I feel like Amhamdi played too safe of a tournament for me – like he wasn’t interested in being too adventurous and playing outside of his comfort zone. He’s good defensively and can be difficult to beat along the boards, but I was hoping to see him shoot a bit more than he did.

#3 Daniel Nieminen, D: After loving Nieminen at the Five Nations tournament in Plymouth a few months back, I was excited to see what Nieminen could do here, albeit in a lesser role with Kiviharju back in the fray. But he was almost invisible offensively and was a bit more reserved than I remember from watching earlier. I wouldn’t say it was a bad tournament for him – I thought he looked great in a tight battle against Latvia – but the “wow” factor wasn’t there.

#4 Mitja Jokinen, D: It’s kind of funny that the standout performance from a Finnish defender came in an 8-4 loss, but I loved Jokinen in particular against the Americans. He looked much more like Aron Kiviharju than Kiviharju did, controlling the puck with little difficulty. Jokinen is a smart, skilled defender who loves having the puck on his stick, and he makes it look so easy.

#10 Veeti Väisänen, D: There are enough times when I completely forget that Väisänen is even on the ice. Whether that’s because he plays with the flashier Kiviharju or that he just wasn’t as impactful as I hoped, I’m not sure. But his skating is even better than I remember a year ago and I feel like he’s less mistake-prone in his own zone. Beyond that, though, I’m not sure about his long-term NHL impact. He’s talented, but there’s nothing that really helps him stand out above the rest in my opinion.

#12 Aron Kiviharju, D: I didn’t have high expectations for Kiviharju, given he missed nearly the entire season with an ACL injury. But the 18-year-old showed early he still knew how to move the puck before eventually seeing his ice time increase later on. It looked like he struggled keeping up with the speed a little bit, which is uncommon for him, but that’s to be expected when you go half a year without any meaningful game action.

#15 Niklas Nykyri, D: The number of times I saw Nykyri give away the puck unprompted was concerning. He plays a simple, defense-first game and typically keeps things safe. But he rarely won a 1-on-1 skill battle and got caught having to play a bit of catch up. Defensively, he did a solid job of blocking shots and breaking plays in the neutral zone, which is his bread and butter.

#19 Konsta Helenius, C: Entering the tournament, Helenius was one of the guys everyone was circling. Given his play with the men’s team, and it being in Finland, it seemed like the perfect opportunity for Helenius to take over. But he never did; he was good, but nowhere near one of the better players in the tournament. By all accounts, it was a disappointment. Still, you could see the maturity, the skill, the vision, everything packed into one. He might be the most NHL-ready prospect at this tournament, but this felt like a disappointment – like he didn’t want to be there.

#32 Emil Hemming, RW: I much preferred Hemming in his bottom-line role with the Finns back at the World Junior Championship, and I think he’ll be great in that role in the NHL one day. But he wasn’t generating scoring chances or doing enough to help make that top Finnish line dangerous every time they hit the ice. That’s just not his style, even though I like the guy.

#22 Anton Kettunen, C: Kettunen was mostly on the ice to shut guys down and provide defensive support. He brought energy, physical play and some decent two-way play. But that’s about it.

#27 Aatos Koivu, C: Frankly, I was a bit disappointed here. Koivu was one of the biggest standouts at the Five Nations tournament in February but didn’t really factor into Finland’s offense. In Michigan, he had to be “the guy.” In the round-robin, his lone point came in a massive win over Norway. I don’t know, it just felt disappointing from someone I thought looked great midway through the season.

#37 Markus Loponen, LW: Loponen played a depth role for the Finns, mostly helping out in his own zone. And, honestly, he wasn’t really noticeable. From watching him play domestically, he struggled to adjust to changing situations in games and his effort level was all over the place. That felt like the same thing here, even if he showed spurts of real skill.

#29 Kasper Pikkarinen, RW: Pikkarainen entered the tournament drawing some potential top-75 interest. Not for his offense, though – more so for his physicality and power-forward nature. That’s what we saw here, someone who wanted to get the crowd going and bring the excitement. I do see a future NHLer here – being a mobile, energetic 6-foot-3 forward helps.

#36 Heikki Ruohonen, C: Ruohonen was one of Finland’s most consistent players, registering a point per game through the round-robin. He was best against Norway, but managed to score on his only shots against both Latvia and Slovakia. He’s an intelligent forward who doesn’t do anything particularly great but is average in just about everything.

#24 Joona Saarelainen, LW: Saarelainen was one of my favorite Finnish players, maybe even more than Helenius. He worked so hard to win battles, which he had to do often as a 5-foot-9 winger. He didn’t put up explosive numbers but he rarely had an off period and was the one that most often brought the energy on the top line. He’ll be a mid-round pick, but I can see him being one of the smaller guys that carves a role in the NHL.

#28 Lauri Sinivuori, LW: If there’s one thing Sinivouri is good at it, it’s his work ethic. He’s busting his butt out there most shifts and loves to finish his checks with pure violence. He’s also a good support winger who helps out defensively and is rarely caught just watching the puck. But his work with the puck? That’s where he falls short. He’s not a good enough skater to offset that, either.

#33 Tuomas Suoniemi, LW: I love Suoniemi’s game. I really do, I think he could be a decent support player if he cracks the NHL. The 5-foot-10 two-way winger has outstanding puck skills and offensive creativity and can control the puck in tight spaces. I think Suoniemi impressed me the most early on before being less noticeable in the quarterfinal, but I like his pure skill. Will it be enough for him in the NHL? I’m not sure.

#21 Natan Teshome, RW: With the puck, there’s not much happening here. But Teshome moves like his life depends on it, and he brings competitiveness to every shift. If he was bigger, I could see him being a nice energy forward one day. But as it stands, he’s too physically weak.

#34 Roope Vesterinen, LW: It’s been a tough year for the undersized forward, who I did like at the Five Nations. He’ll grind you down and bring energy, with his quick top speed and hard compete level being what help him stand out. He was the best player against Norway but was otherwise quiet on the scoresheet – but his speed at least made him noticeable. Unfortunately, at 5-foot-9, he needs to be more than just fast.

#23 Ville Väärälä, LW: Väärälä knows his role and sticks to it. He had no offense to show for, but he contributes pretty effectively in both zones and plays at a good pace. The coaching staff liked to throw him out on the ice to generate some energy and make the opposition a bit harder on a given shift, and I liked that.

Kazakhstan

*Roman Bolshedvorsky (Steven Ellis/Daily Faceoff)*

#1 Abylaikhan Toleubai, G: Toleubai had a good season back home, and his U-18 national team debut was impressive. He was the third-stringer who was thrown to play against Czechia in a game that looked like a throwaway before the relegation around, only for the Kazakhs to shock the hockey world. His technique was… interesting, to say the least, but I haven’t seen a goaltender flop around as much as Toleubai and still make the saves count as often as he did.

#4 Roman Bolshedvorsky, D: I was a bit surprised to see how intimidating of a presence he was at points out there. From talking to scouts, a few think this tournament could be what gets him drafted. By looking at his season numbers, he’s not much of an offensive threat – he scored his first goal of the year during the game against Czechia. Compared to his MHL play this year, I felt like he was more in control with the puck and was willing to get more active outside of his own zone. I know a few NHL teams liked him, but is there enough upside beyond his 6-foot-3, 212-pound frame? That’s the question.

#5 Mstislav Shipilin, D: Like most of the Kazakhs, Shipilin stood out the most against the Czechs, registering 23 minutes of ice time and scoring the game-winner. Shipilin was more of a stay-at-home defender in the MHL but he played a more mobile, aggressive game than we’ve seen from him.

#10 Abzal Alibek, LW: Alibek showed a good mix of speed and defense while playing a solid two-way game. He even showed some physicality while contributing goals against Switzerland and Sweden. Ironically, his best game was against Czechia, when he didn’t actually score but generated a few solid high-danger chances. I don’t think he’ll get drafted, but he’s tough to play against.

#11 Asanali Sarkenov, LW: It was incredible watching Sarkenov take over against Canada, scoring all of Kazakhstan’s three goals after earning himself a one-game suspension after Game 2 against Sweden. Sarkenov was so slick with the puck and was a big part of the team’s comeback effort against Norway. I don’t think he’s as balanced as Alibek, but Sarkenov was the most skilled Kazakh player almost every single night. Who knows? Maybe a team takes a chance on the 6-foot-4 forward with quick hands.

Latvia

*Mikus Vecvanags (Steven Ellis/Daily Faceoff)*

#1 Mikus Vecvanags, G: Vecvanags intrigued me as a 6-foot-3 keeper who was no stranger to high workloads. He was good against the Slovaks but ultimately lost before letting in six goals against the USA. Vecvanags then stopped all 12 shots in a relief effort against Norway before putting on his best performance of the tournament against Canada in the quarterfinal round. Vecvanags has good size and moves well in his crease, but his rebound control is a bit shaky. He didn’t play a lot this year, but put up nice numbers in Finnish U-18 league play. Who knows? Maybe someone takes a chance here.

#25 Darels Uljanskis, D: Uljanskis was consistently Latvia’s best player, and I feel like he’s a better skater than he was at the World Junior Championship in the winter. He isn’t a good skater by any means, but he’s a bit quicker and wasn’t caught getting flat-footed often. He’s 6-foot-2 and knows how to use his body along the boards but he also has good hockey IQ. I could see him being a pickup late in the draft for a patient team.

Norway

*Ludvig Lafton (Steven Ellis/Daily Faceoff)*

#5 Ludvig Lafton, D: I thought Lafton was Norway’s most consistent player. I liked him at the WJC, too, because I felt like he played a good, steady defensive game without making many own-zone mistakes. The 6-foot-2 defender remarkably was only on the ice for two of the first 15 goals scored against the team, mostly thanks to how well he kept the puck away from the crease. He was also quite active on the puck, which surprised me, given how few points he produced in Sweden this year.

#17 Mathias Dehli, C: I really liked the way he moved around the ice – he’d get caught watching a bit too much, but he had a high top speed. He has a powerful shot he showed off on occasion, highlighted by a two-goal game against Latvia. His accuracy needs work, but he worked as hard as anyone to create high-danger opportunities.

#22 Elias Straume Vatne, LW: Vatne was one of Norway’s top scorers all tournament long after putting up great numbers the past two years. He’s an excellent playmaker and one of the best among minnow teams. He sees the ice well and moves quickly, and doesn’t mind the rough stuff. But at 5-foot-9, I still think he’s a real longshot, anyway. But for Norway, I can see him being a long-term scoring threat internationally.

Sweden

*Valter Lindberg (Steven Ellis/Daily Faceoff)*

#2 Nikodemus Wernquist, D: Wernquist didn’t play a lot early but got thrust into duty against Canada in the semifinal. I thought he looked good there, blocking a couple of good shots and playing an overall solid defensive game. But with limited ice time throughout the tournament, it was hard to get a good read in any meaningful way.

#3 Felix Öhrqvist, D: Öhrqvist scared me with how often he gave the puck away, especially against the Czechs. But I felt like he got better as the tournament wore on and was actually one of my standout performers against the Swiss, in which he scored. He’s a bit too inconsistent for my liking but he did play better as the tournament wore on, showing good defensive awareness and mobility.

#4 Leo Sahlin Wallenius, D: LSW has offense on his mind all the time, and it’s why he’s one of the better puckhandling defensemen around outside the top 10. He’s good on the power play, finds open lanes, and has good hands, too, something that allows him to out-maneuver attackers on the rush. But he’s not big, his defensive game lacks and he can get caught watching too much and being out of position. He needs to round his game out to prove he’s more than just a mid second-rounder at this point, so the next few year development years will be crucial.

#8 Gabriel Eliasson, D: I know teams will love him for his 6-foot-6 frame, and he’s also got a great motor. He’s very mobile for a big defender and can shut guys down on the blueline. But man, the undisciplined penalties plagued him all tournament long. If he’s going to be an NHLer, it’s going to be because of his mean streak, but he needs to find a way to contain it and not take so many roughing penalties. There wasn’t a more disappointing player at this tournament than Eliasson, who had 20 PIM in just minors.

#20 Alfons Freij, D: I really like Freij’s puck game. He’s smart, smooth and relaxed and doesn’t make many bad passes. He can skate around guys easily and generate high-quality chances, but defensively, he’s too inconsistent for my liking. He needs more refinement in his own zone, especially against quicker players, but he has a decent foundation that’ll need the right coaching.

#27 Viggo Gustafsson, D: There’s a chance I liked Gustafsson more than others, but I thought he was one of the most difficult players to battle against on the Swedes. He was best against Czechia, where it seemed like nobody could get past him, and he showed good puckhandling skills with a good shot. As a September birthday, Gustafsson is on the younger side of the 2024 NHL Draft, but he’s physically and mentally mature and got better as the tournament wore on. He played with a bit of an edge that got him into trouble in the latter stages, and his skating is still not great, but I think this tournament should help him rise up the rankings in the eyes of some teams.

#16 Jack Berglund, C: I’ve watched a lot of Jack Berglund this year, and this wasn’t a particularly experience-changing tournament for him, in my eyes. He had a few points, but like usual, it’s his two-way game and physicality that get you excited. Berglund is difficult to move in front of the net and has quick hands, too. I thought he was better at the Five Nations in Michigan but he still proved to be difficult to contain. I think he’ll go in the third or fourth round.

#24 Linus Eriksson, C: I continue to find new ways to like Eriksson’s game the more I watch him. A potential second-round pick, Eriksson is a smart forward who builds his game on speed and offensive awareness. He’s great with the puck, has excellent hockey IQ and can grind shifts out like a bottom-six player. I don’t think he’s got the scoring touch to play a bigger role in the NHL, but I could see him becoming a third-line player who can step up if needed. He’s just so well-rounded.

#11 Lucas Pettersson, C: Pettersson was almost consistently Sweden’s best draft-eligible forward in Finland. He was fast, a smart play supporter who worked hard at both ends of the ice and he produced at more than a point-per-game, too. Pettersson was one of Sweden’s most dynamic forwards in all U-18 action this year, with his big three-point effort to overpower Switzerland in the final round-robin game being his most impressive. I even liked his effort level against Canada in that loss, too.

#12 Melvin Fernstrom, RW: I love the hands, he’s really creative. I can see him being a PP specialist but not sure he’s rounded enough to be a realistic NHLer. That’s because he can get caught trying to do way too much and doesn’t have the IQ or awareness to turn it into anything tangible. I did think Fernstrom attacked the play very well in the medal round and deserved that 2-0 goal that helped Sweden wrap up the bronze.

#14 Mans Toresson, LW: I think Toresson is a longshot to make the NHL, but he does have some solid fourth-line potential. He does a good job of staying in position and battles hard. He’s not overly skilled but he plays his role well and brings energy and speed. The prototypical bottom-line winger, so to say.

#22 Karl Sterner, RW: The big thing here is his size. He’s 6-foot-3, strong and mobile. I could see a team looking for some bottom-six muscle to take a chance on him but I’m not sure he’s an NHLer. He just hasn’t done anything with the U-18 national team after putting up nearly a point per game with the U-17 squad as a setup guy last year. Once considered someone many teams were circling, I don’t think he’s anything more than a late-rounder, and this tournament didn’t do anything to help his cause.

#29 Adam Hesselvall, RW: Hesselvall’s game continues to grow on me. He’s not much of a point-producer at an event like this but he might have been the most energetic forward on the Swedish team. He was always grinding away for pucks and made a few genuinely impressive passes every single game. I think he’s a mid-round pick, but someone you can nurture into a bottom-six role if he can add a bit more top speed and playing to his strengths more.

#15 Valter Lindberg, RW: Lindberg entered the tournament on a total hot streak with Skelleftea but the offense didn’t seem to follow him here. I do appreciate that he took a bigger role once Alex Zetterberg suffered his injury, bouncing around the lineup in a variety of roles. He puts in the two-way effort, but I don’t think his skating is good enough right now.

#25 Hugo Orrsten, C: It was a quiet showing for Orrsten, but I thought he had strong defensive commitment and protected the puck well. Trait-wise, nothing really stands out, but he puts in the effort and can play a variety of different situations, depending on the matchup. But for a 6-foot-2, 190-pound forward, it felt like he lost too many puck battles along the boards.

#26 Alex Zetterberg, C: Zetterberg suffered a concussion during the round-robin, knocking him out of play as the team went on its run to the medal round. That’s partly what made Sweden’s result so surprising – he was easily one of Sweden’s top scoring pieces yet again, especially with a point on all three of Sweden’s goals against Canada. The 5-foot-8 forward is very small and he doesn’t have the physical attributes to change that, but he has scored at such a high rate every time he’s worn the Tre Kronor colors. He’s the all-time Swedish U-18 national team single-season scoring leader for a reason, possessing a great shot and excellent hands.

Slovakia

*Martin Haronik (Steven Ellis/Daily Faceoff)*

#1 Martin Haronik, G: It was a rough showing for Haronik, who entered the tournament as the fifth-ranked European goaltender by NHL Central Scouting. He struggled against Latvia but played a bit better against Finland, making 37 saves, including a few high-end opportunities from the top Finnish line. Haronik’s played some good games heading into the tournament, including the shutout in half a game against Switzerland in pre-tournament action and his play in the second Slovak league last month. Most scouts are banking on his 6-foot-5 frame, but he still needs to figure out how to contain his movements in the crease to maximize his size.

#31 Alan Lendak, G: After allowing nine goals in his first game against USA, he was utilized for Slovakia’s must-win game against the Norwegians and played well. It wasn’t a busy night, but it could have gone sour quite quickly in the second period when Norway started to push the envelope. He allows too many weak goals for my liking, though, something that plagued him against Switzerland in the pretournament as well.

#27 Adam Belusko, D: He was quiet on the scoresheet, but I thought Belusko was one of Slovakia’s better puck-movers following the USA game. He’s a 5-foot-11 defender, but he’s got some muscle on him, and I thought he held his own against some of the American attackers and better so against Latvia. I’m not sure there’s much here from an overall standpoint, but I thought he handled himself well after a quiet year for him internationally.

#7 Andrej Fabus, D: A defense-first defender, Fabus had a rough first game against the Americans but was deployed late against Latvia. His positioning is good, but he needed to move with a bit more urgency in puck races. For what it’s worth, I liked him in at the World Junior A Challenge more.

#3 Samuel Huzevka, D: At 6-foot-5, Huzevka is intriguing – even if I don’t see him getting drafted. He doesn’t have much offensive impact but he’s a good straight-line skater and is difficult to take the puck off of under pressure. Right now, though, I’m not sure he’s anything – maybe he’ll be an overage pickup in a year or two if he can develop his game a bit past just being big.

#4 Samuel Kupec, D: Kupec was the guy I was most interested in seeing on the Slovak back end. He’s quite mobile for a 6-foot-3 defender but he’s still a defense-first guy who spends most of his time taking space away in his own zone. He’s calm and doesn’t make many mistakes with the puck when the pressure’s off, but he can get caught throwing the puck to no one when someone’s chasing him. If he can improve his decision-making in the neutral zone, I think he’ll be in better shape.

#5 Fabian Licko, D: For a team that got killed in their own zone, the Slovaks have a real defensive-minded group. Licko hasn’t shown me much to like with the puck, but he’s a decent skater who competes his tail off and is solid positioning in his own zone. He’s a long shot to get drafted, though.

#18 Miroslav Satan Jr., C: Satan is definitely big at 6-foot-7, but is he good? Maybe scouts take a chance on him late because of his pedigree and his size, and he does move well enough in bursts. But I don’t think he has the conditioning to really push himself for a full shift consistently or eat minutes. If he focused on being more of a matchup defensive forward, he could have a shot, but we don’t see guys with his profile in the NHL often.

#25 Jan Chovan, RW: Chovan had his good moments, especially in a two-goal game against Norway. He’d get caught trying to do a bit too much at times, and his effort could improve, but he battled hard around the net, at least. Having the puck on his stick is something that’s important to him, and I felt like he got better as the tournament wore on.

#17 Ondrej Maruna, LW: At 6-foot-4 and around 200 pounds, Maruna is a pure power forward. I appreciate how hard he works out there, working well as a two-way forward who can excel on the penalty kill. But like many bigger players, I don’t think he has the speed or the hands to make a real impact – he struggled to keep up the pace against faster teams like USA or Finland. Fortunately, he came up huge against Czechia, scoring twice to help the team advance to the semifinal.

Switzerland

*Leon Muggli (Steven Ellis/Daily Faceoff)*

#1 Christian Kirsch, G: It was an eventful showing for Kirsch, who had a rough outing against Canada. I thought he looked good against the Swedes to force overtime and was part of the comeback effort to beat Kazakhstan on Day 2. I even thought Kirsch was good in the 3-0 loss to the Czechs as he had a decent 30-save showing. The University of Massachusetts commit had a rough year on the international front, statistically, but it’ll be interesting to see how he adapts to North America in the future.

#29 Phileas Lachat, G: It was an ugly showing for Lachat, who got crushed in his two games played. He was pulled after allowing two goals on five shots against Kazakhstan before allowing another two goals in a relief effort against Canada. It didn’t feel like a fair opportunity for Lachat, but I was concerned with how slowly he reacted on a lot of chances and how it seemed like he was out of position too often.

#3 Ludvig Johnson, D: Johnson made his tournament debut against the Swedes and I thought he was fine. He nabbed an assist, showing some of the offensive chops he developed in the Swiss U-20 league this year. He’s a better puck-mover than a defender, though, which doesn’t really help him.

#4 Gian Meier, D: Meier was one of my favorite defensemen in the tournament, no doubt about it. He didn’t do much offensively heading into the tournament, but he score three goals in the round-robin to help get the Swiss where they ended up. He’s so strong defensively, and felt like he put up a good effort again in a game where Switzerland spent significant time chasing guys around. Meier might be one of my biggest risers out of this tournament.

#7 Basile Sansonnens, D: Compared to Meier, Sansonnens was the more defensively responsible option for the Swiss. Many I talked to loved how grounded he was, showcasing size, mobility and physicality. Sansonnens was best on the penalty kill, and while I don’t know if he’s rounded enough to be an NHL defenseman, you still need guys committed to their own zone like Sansonnens is.

#8 Joel Kurt, D: Kurt rarely played, with his appearance against Canada being the only one of note. He’s a long-shot to get drafted, but he’s quick, big and likes to shoot the puck. I don’t think this tournament did anything to change Kurt’s draft stock, which was low to begin with.

#21 Mischa Geisser, D: Geisser’s tournament was a mixed bag. I liked him against the Kazakhs but I felt like he couldn’t keep up with Canada or Sweden. He has good reach at 6-foot-2 and plays physically for the Swiss, but didn’t show a ton of offensive upside for a former winger. He’s a real longshot to get selected but I feel like he’s the type of guy that’s going to do well in NL one day.

#23 Leon Muggli, D: Muggli was the guy scouts wanted to watch the most and he didn’t disappoint. He was clearly ahead of the pack when it came to dealing with the puck and generating chances. He’s a modern two-way defender with great skating and puck skills in open ice, turning quickly with and without the rubber disk. I love how calm he is, yet can make a highlight-reel play on a dime. It’s a shame he was injured against Canada because he had been playing well prior to that.

#26 Daniil Ustinkov, D: There’s a common theme with Ustinkov’s play – everyone sees the evident talent out there, but the execution? That’s the problem. He’s so skilled with the puck and can allude attackers better than most. But he’ll deke himself out trying to be too fancy with the puck and that’s not a spot you want one of your biggest defenders to be in. Once considered a first-round talent, I don’t think he’ll go until midway through the third given how mistake-prone he is.

#6 Jamiro Reber, C: One of the few Swiss players of note, Reber was invisible compared to this tournament a year ago. In fact, internationally, it was a bit of a rough year across the board. He’s one of Switzerland’s best players, but his lack of dynamic ability meant he was just a body out there when he was shut down. Reber earned a one-game suspension following the opener and never found his groove after that.

#17 Loris Wey, C: At 5-foot-9, Wey was one of the more energetic, feisty forces out there. He didn’t score, but you noticed him, and he didn’t make many mistakes out there. I wish he did more on the scoresheet because I’ve liked him internationally the last few years, but he hasn’t had anything to show for.

#18 Robin Nico Antenen, LW: RNN showcased his defensively responsible playing style that allowed him to earn some time in the Swiss National League this year. He looked good against Kazakhstan and Sweden despite not registering a point, and was one of Switzerland’s more active shot generators against Slovakia in the final pre-tournament game. Antenen is defensively responsible with a decent motor and good size – I could see a team taking a chance on him in the sixth or seventh round.

#20 David Bosson, RW: Bosson’s biggest strength is his skating, winning races to the puck and deceiving opponents in the offensive zone. I counted at least four really impressive instances against Canada where he escaped the viewpoint of a Canadian defender and got himself into a scoring position. I think he was one of the better Swiss forwards in this tournament, but I don’t see enough there to be a serious draft threat.

#22 Yannik Ponzetto, LW: I know he had a difficult season in the QMJHL, but I still expected much more. He controlled the puck with pace but was nearly invisible any time it mattered. He was the 13th forward against Sweden, and he got a few minutes in the third, but otherwise, it’s clear the coaching staff didn’t like what they saw here.

#25 Noe Tarchini, C: It was a decent showing for Tarchini, one of Switzerland’s top scorers. He needs to up his defensive commitments, but the center had a few decent chances late in the game against Sweden and generally cycled the puck well on the power play.

USA

*Teddy Stiga (Steven Ellis/Daily Faceoff)*

#30 John Parsons, G: Parsons saw limited action in the tournament, allowing one goal on four shots against Finland and two on 18 shots against Norway. It’s hard to judge with just 22 shots against, and the stats weren’t that great, either. He’s got size at 6-foot-4, but the Providence College commit often struggled to get consistent opportunities to really shine in the net this year. I wouldn’t be surprised if he went undrafted.

#31 Nicholas Kempf, G: The goal of USA’s goaltending? Just don’t cost your team a game. Kempf was perfect against the Slovaks, nearly perfect against Latvia and mostly survived a barrage of opportunities against Finland in the final round-robin game. He was then perfect against Switzerland in perhaps his best game of the tournament. Kempf moves well in the net, is very positionally sound and has an excellent glove hand. Goaltending is a wild card for the 2024 NHL Draft and nothing particularly makes Kempf stand out, but there was nothing really to complain about here after an excellent showing.

#4 John Whipple, D: Whipple is best when you’re not worrying about him, and I truly think this was some of his best hockey of the season. The 6-foot-1 defender is a steady presence for the run-and-gun style the Americans like to play. He’s a fluid skater who can pivot well and get to where he needs swiftly, and he loves separating a player from the puck. I think his lack of offensive ability will hurt him at the next level, but he could be a decent AHLer with call-up potential.

#6 EJ Emery, D: I’ve made it clear this year I like Emery. He was one of the best pure defensemen – if not THE best – in this tournament. He makes great reads and simple plays and can shut guys down just about anywhere. In contrast to Cole Hutson, who’s more of the puck-rushing, all-skill blueliner, Emery is best when he goes 1-on-1 with a player because he rarely loses in those scenarios. I thought he was one of the most consistent defensive defensemen at this tournament.

#13 Sam Laurila, D: I don’t think Laurila gets drafted, truthfully. Not much offense, just decent defense. A bottom-pairing defender for the United States, he’s still smart enough to make good passes and shut guys down around the net. But Laurila isn’t rounded enough for me to think much about his game right now.

#23 Cole Hutson, D: Hutson always seemed to fly out of the gate, making great plays to generate early scoring chances. He’s a dynamic offensive defenseman who set the record for most points in USNTDP history. Hutson dealt with a minor injury he didn’t divulge any details on heading into the tournament, but he still looked like his high-flying, puck-handling master self. I still think his D-zone flaws were evident there, but he led all defensemen in scoring for a reason – he’s damn skilled with the puck.

#27 Will Skahan, D: Standing tall at 6-foot-4 and over 200 pounds, there’s one thing that Skahan does well – slowing the pace down. He’s very calm, not over-committing or trying to outplay his own skill set. Skahan knows his style and plays to his strengths and that’s being a competitive defensive defenseman. He’s an excellent skater for his size, which is why I think teams could take a chance on him as early as the second round. There’s not much offensive upside here, but I have consistently been impressed with him this season.

#34 Cole Eiserman, LW: It was nice to see him break the USNTDP record in the final game after wondering if it was going to be possible all year long. He had a few quiet games as it looked like he was trying a bit too hard to score goals, but when he was on his game, he was so hard to contain. His shot was excellent, but it was actually his physical game and his hard backchecking that really stood out, especially later in the tournament. I was happy with his performance from an overall standpoint, even if he still got caught making bad passes in the offensive zone.

#2 Brodie Ziemer, RW: You can always count on a full effort from Ziemer, even when he’s not getting the attention his linemates are. Ziemer is an excellent support player, battling hard on the boards, playing with speed and always looking for the best passing option. He plays a solid two-way game, committing hard to defense and taking pucks away from unsuspecting opponents.

#8 Teddy Stiga, LW: Stiga was one of the highest-scoring forwards in the tournament, and it largely came due to James Hagens’ unbelievable run. But Stiga was paired with him for a reason – he has the speed, the drive and the ability to play with high-caliber talent. Stiga brings the energy that USA’s top six needs while also showing high hockey IQ and a nose for the net. I don’t think he’ll go in the first round, but I think some teams would make the right choice targeting him.

#9 Austin Baker, C: He was aggressive, forced a few turnovers and gave some defenders fits in their own zone. Baker doesn’t do much on the scoresheet, but he brings so much speed to the table and forces opponents to make decisions quickly – and, in some cases, turn those into mistakes. But with limited ice time, it was really nothing to write home about.

#10 Kamil Bednarik, C: It’s funny, because Bednarik put up some points, but he just never felt impactful. He had three points against Slovakia in the opener but then had just two points the rest of the way. It didn’t help that Cole Eiserman’s offense started to dry up on his wing, but Bednarik didn’t do enough on his own to really spice things up. I just expected more from someone who had more than 60 points this season.

#17 Trevor Connelly, LW: The big question for me was whether Connelly could shine while not being “the guy” like he was at the Hlinka Gretzky or the World Junior A Challenge. He was the driving piece of USA’s third line, with his highlight being the lacrosse goal against the Latvians. Unfortunately, his great play will be overshadowed by the game misconduct in the final. Given the level of competition, pace of play and the role Connelly had, I thought he was one of the more impressive draft-eligibles in this tournament, but that penalty was inexcusable.

#19 Lucas Van Vilet, LW: LVV was USA’s 13th forward, but he fits the role well. He moves quickly, can get aggressive and blocks shots. But he also didn’t play much or contribute anything, either. I think teams could draft him late as a project guy that can be that energetic fourth-liner one day, but this tournament didn’t really show us anything new or special.

#21 Brendan McMorrow, LW: McMorrow isn’t big, but he’s strong and might be the hardest-working player the Americans brought. He’s a great skater who battles for every square inch. At a higher level, I can see him becoming more of a pest for the way he’s always in someone’s grill, trying to throw them off their game. McMorrow doesn’t have the puck skills to be an offensive producer, but I think he’s got the energy, compete, skating and forechecking to earn himself a shot on a fourth line one day.

#24 Christian Humphreys, C: Watching him play beside Connelly and LJ Mooney made it really clear how good those two are, and how just average Humphreys is. He’ll be a mid-rounder because he plays an excellent two-way game and is a decent support piece, but he didn’t have the pure talent his two linemates did. You can always count on him hustling out there, even if his skating is average at best.

#26 Max Plante, RW: Plante isn’t a flashy player and his output could get ignored because he gets a handful of secondary assists. But he’s actually one of USA’s top playmakers, and, dare I say, one of the better passers in this 2024 NHL Draft. The University of Minnesota-Duluth commit is also a great skater and gets aggressive for someone standing at just 5-foot-10 – and after growing about two inches this year, he’s still figuring out how to fill out his frame. His weak shot doesn’t do him many favors, though. You can’t just rely on high-end playmaking in the NHL these days.