2026 NHL Draft

2026 NHL Draft scouts survey: Ranking top defenders, making sense of Villeneuve, Sokolovskii

Carson Carels is one of the top defense prospects in the 2026 NHL Draft class. Steve Dunsmoor / Getty Images

Welcome to my anonymous 2026 NHL Draft scouts poll.

This year-end annual project surveys NHL scouts with a different set of questions each year, granting them anonymity to encourage honest — and hopefully candid — answers.

This time around, 13 scouts (including multiple directors) participated, answering the same three questions on hot-button topics in the 2026 class. This year’s poll focused on the 2026 defenders, asking the scouts which of the big five they rank first and last, whether a sixth D belonged in that top group, and what to make of the diminutive Xavier Villeneuve and the hulking Maksim Sokolovskii.

Here are the full results, plus some of the back-and-forths I had with them on their answers.

Who would rank first and last among the top five D (Chase Reid, Carson Carels, Keaton Verhoeff, Alberts Šmits and Daxon Rudolph)?

This format for a question — asking for a first and last from a grouping in the draft, instead of a ranking — has become a regular of mine in my scout’s surveys because I find it’s more likely to produce willing respondents and creates for a good opportunity for a back-and-forth while still giving valuable insight into who the favorites are, who the least favorites are, and consequently, who sits in the middle of the pack. There’s also a natural group in this class to ask the question about with the big five D.

Notably, Keaton Verhoeff, who began the year as the consensus top D prospect in the class, was no longer viewed as such by any of the scouts. Only three of the five received first-place votes: Reid (8), Carels (4) and Rudolph (1). Rudolph was also close to first for another voter, which speaks to the belief in his offense and the way he won some people over in Prince Albert’s run to the WHL final.

Rudolph also got the most last-place votes, though, speaking to a wider range of opinions on him. Here’s the last-place count, which you’ll notice included at least one vote for all five: Rudolph (6), Šmits (3), Verhoeff (2), Carels (1), Reid (1).

On the whole, it’s fair to say that Reid and Carels are the two consensus top D in the class (in that order).

Scout 1: 1. Reid
2. Carels
3. Verhoeff
4. Šmits
5. Rudolph

Scout 2: First: Reid. Last: Rudolph.

Scout 3: Carels top, Rudolph bottom, but I’d be ecstatic with any of them and the order within this list is fairly fluid.

Scout 4: The group is very close, to me the biggest question is how much worse is the CHL this year? If you assume it is not meaningfully worse, then Rudolf and Carels are having really impressive seasons — have strong 200-foot games that should be in your top four in a couple seasons with top pair upside. Verhoeff likely is undervalued in all of this, given he was playing in (the) NCAA and was solid but not elite. He probably is closer to NHL-ready, but projection seems less variable and exciting. Šmits could play in (the) NHL next year and is a fun wild-card option, might not have the offense of the others but be a better minute eater. I don’t believe Reid’s season is as impressive as the others; OHL production is fine, but I don’t see game-breaking offense like some others have claimed. So I probably have Reid lowest. The other four, it really comes down to preference of handedness, playing style and risk tolerance — just trade back if you want a D in the top 10.

If you had to pick, who’s No. 1?

Rudolph is probably the guy I would bet on, but I am not taking him top five. I would trade back if in that situation and wanted a D. Rudolph is one of the better skaters, can play physical and makes really smart passes. Sometimes he looks lazy/too calm, but I think that is a product of his high-end brain and ability to make quick plays with the puck.

Scout 5: 1. Reid
2. Rudolph (but close!)
3. Carels
4. Verhoeff
5. Šmits

Curious: Why Šmits last?

I think we see a little lower production/PP ceiling there. Top four D, though, all day long. It’s a hard exercise to have to pick these guys apart.

Scout 6: First: Reid. Last: Carels.

You’re the first to have Carels last. Curious: Why?

It’s pretty close with all those guys. He just wasn’t quite as dominant as the others.

Scout 7: Reid first and Rudolph last.

Scout 8: Did not see Šmits, but Reid would be first for me. And Rudolph last.

Scout 9: 1. Reid
2. Carels
3. Šmits
4. Rudolph
5. Verhoeff

Why Verhoeff last?

Well, to be honest, it’s nearly a toss-up between all these D. I like Verhoeff as a potential top-two D but in modern hockey speed is essential and in the international games I have watched Verhoeff, I didn’t think that his overall speed (skating speed plus head speed) is top notch and in the physical department he plays sometimes a bit too much as a gentle giant. But all these are criticisms on a very high level. In the end, we are talking about a potential top-five pick, and personally, I have him top 12 but not top five. Maybe I watched the wrong games, but I stand by my observations.

Scout 10: First: Carels. Last: Rudolph (reluctantly, Verhoeff makes me nervous).

Why Carels first?

I just think Carels does a bit of it all. Hard to play against. I think the skating and defensive game is advanced. Don’t see him as a PP1 guy, but the offensive game is certainly solid enough.

Scout 11: I’d have Carels first (with the caveat that I haven’t watched Reid). Total package. A lot of Jake Sanderson there. Verhoeff last. Not a fan of his IQ or feet.

Scout 12: 1. Carels
2. Verhoeff
3. Reid
4. Rudolph
5. Šmits

Scout 13: First: Reid. Last: Šmits (somewhat by default as I did not see Šmits live this year).

Does another D belong in that top group (Malte Gustafsson, Ryan Lin, Tommy Bleyl, etc.)?

There has been a lot of talk about Malte Gustafsson now entering that group of five and making it a group of six, so I thought it would be valuable to test that theory. It was split almost exactly down the middle, with seven scouts saying they don’t have a sixth D in that group and six saying that Gustafsson is now in that group for them. Among the six who had Gustafsson in that group, a majority said they’d rank him sixth, with only a couple saying they’d slot him ahead of any of the other five D. One other D got a vote for that group as well: Tommy Bleyl. A couple of scouts did wonder if their fifth-ranked D actually belonged in a tier with the other names instead of with the four in front of them as well.

Scout 1: Gustafsson could go in that grouping, maybe ahead of Šmits or Rudolph. Lin is a no for me.

Scout 2: No. In fact, Rudolph fits better with the Gustafsson and Lin group than with the top group for me.

Scout 3: No … (time passes) Actually, I’m going to amend my answer for sport: Tommy Bleyl. I do think there’s a clear-cut line between the five D and the others (but) Bleyl is the one that, from a profile perspective, reminds me of others that weren’t talked about that high that should have been when you look back in time.

Scout 4: No, Gustafsson and Lin are the next two for me, but they are not in that group. A little less top four projection certainty, although I think both could have that potential. With this many D available in the draft, I could see those two sliding into the 20s.

Scout 5: Yes, Gustafsson, but he is last.

Scout 6: No.

Scout 7: I think Gustafsson is closer to knocking on the door of that group than Lin.

Scout 8: I don’t think the others are in that group, but close.

Scout 9: Yes, personally, I would put Gustafsson also in the mix.

Scout 10: I think Gustafsson is right in that mix. Technically would be sixth behind those top five for me, but it’s close, and I don’t think people would be “wrong” to have him in the top 4-5. Like you, I really like Lin still, but he’d be a notch below those guys.

Scout 11: I’d even consider Gustafsson ahead of Verhoeff, so either they both belong in that group, or neither does.

Scout 12: Yes. Gustafsson. I like Lin a lot, but he’s not quite with that top group. Bleyl had a great season as well.

Scout 13: I think Gustafsson and Lin are just behind those top five. Gustafsson knocking on that door.

What do you make of Xavier Villeneuve and Maksim Sokolovskii?

Here, I was looking for opinions on two players at opposite ends of the spectrum: the diminutive and undeniably talented Villeneuve and the giant and raw Sokolovskii. Predictably, there were folks who both had a lot of time and no time for each. Everyone is talking about them, though, and I wanted to pull back the curtain on what those conversations look like.

Scout 1: Villeneuve is super skilled; the size and lack of willingness to defend scares the hell out of me. Sokolovskii is huge, mean, can skate, puck skills need major improvement. (Haoxi “Simon”) Wang was not on our list. Sokolovskii is a second-rounder for me.

Scout 2: Both are very polarizing. Villeneuve has so much talent and puck skill. Doesn’t play with much defensive structure five-on-five. So if you believe he’s a PP game-changer, he goes high. But he could move down based on risk-reward five-on-five.

Sokolovskii is very intriguing because he’s advanced so much the last two years. Has size obviously and a toughness element that is very rare. He will go late first/early second to a team willing to be patient as he learns the game. Has the skating, physical size, and compete to get better. He’s a machine physically and comes from a great organization, so will be taught how to play and has been to date. He and Villeneuve are the two most interesting D for risk-reward.

Scout 3: Sokolovskii is not for me, although I expect him to go early, given the tools. Very similar to Haoxi Wang situation last year. That said, given the profile, I can’t see how he’d be more than Logan Stanley if he hits his ceiling

Villeneuve was very much a player I expected to be top 10 if not top five going into the draft despite the size, but the lack of progression has given me a bit of pause as he arguably put together a stronger season in 2024-25. He’s good, and I still have him as a first-rounder, and we do have to take the injury lost time into account, but the lack of substantive progress from (draft-minus-one) to his (draft year) is a flag, as he’ll have to progress at a much faster rate in order to become an impact NHLer with his size profile.

Scout 4: Two very different types of swings. Villeneuve could be a Hutson-style defender with his elite puck possession skills, but size and willingness to engage physically could limit his impact. There are a lot of D in this bucket this year; Lin and Bleyl being two very similar options. Looking historically, this is a risky style pick in (the) first two rounds (think Ty Smith versus Rasmus Sandin or Seamus Casey versus Lane Hutson). You have to be really confident or wait until they become a value pick. I think I would be patient on this group of players and pick one in the second or third round.

Sokolovskii is the exact opposite. His size and willingness to play physical is fairly unique to this draft. He showed good development through the year, but is still behind his peers in terms of hockey skill and skating. So, you are really betting on improvement in critical areas of his play to have a chance to be a positive impact NHL player. The thing is, whoever drafts him is going to value size at a premium and give him the benefit of the doubt when allocating opportunity, so he should play NHL games. Probably the next Logan Stanley in that way; not a true difference-maker, but not a pick that gets labeled a bust. I’m not jumping early for him, but someone else certainly will.

Scout 5: Villeneuve’s a bit scary. Like the desire to impact, but couple the playing style with frame/medical, and there’s some reason to pause.

Sokolovskii’s a huge projection, but there’s some reason to think he’s not as limited as others in that player type. Will be a long wait on a project, but do think he’s one of the better in this lane in recent years.

Scout 6: Should both be first-round picks.

Scout 7: Villeneuve is a high-risk/high-reward type player and pick. Talent is there, but his late-season and playoff viewings were mediocre, possibly due to injuries. Should go late Round 1/early Round 2 range.

Sokolovskii is a huge riser this year, and I wouldn’t be surprised if he goes late first. Physical specimen with toughness, surprising mobility, and sneaky puck poise.

Scout 8: Soklovskii is interesting for sure. Hard to find. Injuries and size (heaviness) might hurt Villeneuve. Could see Bleyl going before him, but who knows.

Scout 9: Villeneuve (is) a late first-rounder in my books, a bit one-dimensional and still questionable risk management, but with high upside. Sokolovskii also could become a late first-rounder, although his offense is not there yet, but I like him as a towering defensive defenseman and with (Zdeno) Chara, we also didn’t think that he could improve his offense that much in later years. As scouts used to say: “Big men take longer to develop.” He is quite mobile for his size!

Scout 10: Villeneuve might be as much of a boom/bust as I can remember in recent years. On the high end, he’s extremely talented, dynamic. He can play risky there, but the high moments are very high. When he’s a step behind, he can look like a mess. Bad defensive reads. A lack of strength to defend in small spaces. He has slid on my list as the year has gone on. Between the injury and his play in the playoffs, there are definite flags and concerns. But everyone has flaws and reasons why they might not make it, so you still need to keep his ranking fair considering the positives he could potentially offer.

I like Soko. Very good athlete for the size. Freak physically. So long. And maybe the most naturally aggressive player in the class. He’s raw. The puck game can be a bit of a mess. But if you can get him to a place where he just makes a first pass in a repeatable fashion — the upside is there as a matchup defender and a very mean one at that. I think he plays, so there is also just a floor there that is attractive even if I don’t like thinking about floor as much as ceiling. Could buy him as a late first-round pick.

Scout 11: Villeneuve is really bad defensively. Sokolovskii is really bad with the puck. I wish you could combine the two.

Scout 12: Not a fan of Villeneuve. Don’t know Sokolovskii.

Scout 13: Villeneuve could be a steal in the right spot. Liked his interview, full of energy and good self-evaluation of his game. Dynamic offensive traits. Like the path he’s on.

Sokolovskii: Think he has chance to be an elite defender. Impressed with his mobility for a guy his size. Adds a punishing physical element that comes natural to him. Showed more poise with the puck and improved execution as he gained more confidence in his play.

The Athletic and FloHockey have partnered to bring fans a live 2026 NHL Draft show. Hosted by Max Bultman and featuring experts Corey Pronman, Scott Wheeler and Chris Peters, The Athletic x FloHockey NHL Draft Live will livestream during the entire first round. Tune in June 26 at 7 p.m. ET on The Athletic Hockey Show’s YouTube channel, across FloHockey’s platforms, and on Amazon Prime (U.S.) and Fubo (Canada).

May you like

 

Prediction markets / Tennis / ATP Challenger NewportMilavsky vs BuD. Milavsky5412987654321098765432109876543210¢—90987654321098765...

 

Prediction markets / Tennis / ATP Challenger BogotaMejia vs Rodriguez TavernaN. Mejia20981987654321098765432109876543210¢—19987654...

 

Prediction markets / Tennis / WTA 125K NewportBrantmeier vs MandlikR. Brantmeier6941987654321098765432109876543210¢—60987654321098...

Connections: Sports Edition

Spot the pattern. Connect the terms

Find the hidden link between sports terms