McKenna Watch

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by calgarygringo

News flash, I am hearing many scouts and draft guys saying not so fast on Mckenna. There is another guy above him now on many lists.......

Is the guy above him on many lists in the room with us now?

[calgarygringo]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Is the guy above him on many lists in the room with us now?

Only a little but probably should be more.

[Enoch Root]

Is it a secret that you can't share?

[Fan69]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Is the guy above him on many lists in the room with us now?

Scouching early on has him at 4.

More than a few others question his off puck play, but haven’t change their status of him at number one. James Hagens was supposed to be special as well and ended up going four if I remember right. So it’s not exactly unprecedented.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Fan69

Scouching early on has him at 4.

More than a few others question his off puck play, but haven’t change their status of him at number one. James Hagens was supposed to be special as well and ended up going four if I remember right. So it’s not exactly unprecedented.

Hagens ended up 7th.

[This post is terrible]

Originally Posted by getbak

Sure, every team they play from now until the end of the season is ahead of them in the standings.

And they never get to play the Flames

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Who is playing well enough to put themself above McKenna on scouts lists?

[metroneck]

One concern I’d have about McKenna, is that there seems to be little discussion about his compete level.

All franchise or generational players are off the charts competitive.

If you look at hyped 1OA’s who didn’t meet expectations, they are usually not psycho competitive.

[Sandman]

Originally Posted by stemit14

It is interesting that McKenna has never been shifted to center. Usually players of his skillset (speed, elite playmaking ability, high hockey IQ) are developed as centers at some point if they look like generational talents. In the last 25 years, how many wingers have gone 1st overall that ended up being top 5 players in the league? I would say Patrick Kane, Alex Ovechkin, Rick Nash and Ilya Kovalchuk are the only wingers that went first overall and have lived up to their hype.

In the last 25 years, I would say 17 players have lived up to the hype of being 1st overall and turned into legitimate franchise players that could even be considered one of the top 5 at their positions at some point. The rest I would say have not lived up to the hype of where they were selected.

Lived up to their 1st overall hype:

Schaefer (so far), Celebrini, Bedard, Jack Hughes, Dahlin, Matthews, McDavid, Ekblad, McKinnon, Tavares, Stamkos, Patrick Kane, Crosby, Ovechkin, Marc-Andre Fleury, Nash and Kovalchuk

Did not live up to the 1st overall hype:

Slafkovsky, Power, Lafreniere, Hischier, Yakupov (E=NG), RNH (E=NG), Hall (E=NG), Johnson and Dipietro.

I don’t think it’s as simple as looking at those lists though. Some drafts just aren’t as good as others (eg. the Yakupov draft).

McKenna played C for at least a stretch when Lindstrom first went down to injury. I think playing wing is his own personal preference.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by metroneck

One concern I’d have about McKenna, is that there seems to be little discussion about his compete level.

All franchise or generational players are off the charts competitive.

If you look at hyped 1OA’s who didn’t meet expectations, they are usually not psycho competitive.

Owen Power comes to mind. All the tools, but lacks that drive. The difference between Dahlin and him is night and day.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by metroneck

One concern I’d have about McKenna, is that there seems to be little discussion about his compete level.

All franchise or generational players are off the charts competitive.

If you look at hyped 1OA’s who didn’t meet expectations, they are usually not psycho competitive.

Agreed.

Look at Bedard, he disappointed some, mainly due to lack of support players.

But we worked all summer on his speed and shot and look at him now.

That's compete level.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Agreed.

Look at Bedard, he disappointed some, mainly due to lack of support players.

But we worked all summer on his speed and shot and look at him now.

That's compete level.

https://www.nhl.com/news/gavin-mcken...2026-nhl-draft

This article prior to the season compares McKenna’s compete level to that of Crosby.

Recency bias of a dozen college games where he is still over a ppg. It feels like much of this thread is trying to discredit McKenna as much as others are longing to be able to draft a player like him

[JTech780]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

https://www.nhl.com/news/gavin-mcken...2026-nhl-draft

This article prior to the season compares McKenna’s compete level to that of Crosby.

Recency bias of a dozen college games where he is still over a ppg. It feels like much of this thread is trying to discredit McKenna as much as others are longing to be able to draft a player like him

Look at what Celebrini and even Fantili did at the NCAA in their draft year, and what McKenna is doing in his draft year, it’s not even close. I think McKenna is going to be a very good player, I just don’t think he is on the same level as Schaefer, Celebrini or Bedard.

I think Calgary would be lucky to get McKenna, he just isn’t a player I would build around, he would certainly be an important building block, just not the cornerstone.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by JTech780

Look at what Celebrini and even Fantili did at the NCAA in their draft year, and what McKenna is doing in his draft year, it’s not even close. I think McKenna is going to be a very good player, I just don’t think he is on the same level as Schaefer, Celebrini or Bedard.

I think Calgary would be lucky to get McKenna, he just isn’t a player I would build around, he would certainly be an important building block, just not the cornerstone.

Seems like a pretty thin position you’re taking here.

Is this based on several first hand viewing and whatever the scouting community has had to say to you?

It’s also curious how Bedard went from generational talent to huge flop and now back to superstar/elite status.

I think it’s far too early to start making the sort of claims you’re making here. Is McKenna worth building around? Well, the widely held consensus is and has been for about two years now is he’s the best of his class. So, is that worth building around? There’s no gaurantee’s but he’s as good as any, I’d say.

If you want to poke holes in the balloon, then I’d ask if the Flames have any players to build around? And if they don’t who is the next player worth building around if it isn’t McKenna? DuPont? Maddox? What are the chances the Flames end up with either of those two? Relatively small, I’d say. Even if they’re at the bottom of the league.

At the end of the day, you play the hand you’re dealt and you absolutely build around the best players you have. In this context, you build around Wolf, your build around Parekh, and you build around McKenna if you’re lucky enough to get him. Also, you build around a team, not one player.

[sureLoss]

eliteprospects has a free article analyzing McKenna's college play so far:

https://www.eliteprospects.com/news/...-at-penn-state

Though McKenna is generating less offence as the primary carrier off the rush versus the WHL, he remains an elite rush playmaker. When he gets a puck inside a bit of space, he draws in every possible defender and quickly finds an option with those same deceptive and adaptable passing skills. Plus, the delay game continues to be a weapon.

Combined, these skills have made McKenna a special playmaker in the NCAA already, even at 5-on-5.

In a hand-tracked six-game sample (that excludes games against Independent programs), McKenna is setting up scoring chances at a historic rate. His expected primary assists at 5-on-5, a metric that measures the likelihood of a player’s shot assists becoming a goal based on location, type, quality, etc., is 2.5 per 60, the same rate as his last season in the WHL.

That’s not just a higher rate than Macklin Celebrini and Adam Fantilli’s only NCAA seasons – it’s higher than both combined. In fact, it’s higher than every NCAA season I’ve ever tracked, Trevor Zegras, Gabe Perreault, Ryan Leonard, Will Smith, Jackson Blake’s 60-point season, and Frank Nazar’s deceptively incredible draft-plus-two year, and hundreds more. And he's shot or set up a higher percentage of his team's 5-on-5 offence than any other NCAA draft-year player by a gap that would be larger had it been compared to their results at the same stage of the season versus the end.

For fun, if McKenna’s linemates were converting at the same clip as Penn State’s top line – Charlie Cerrato, Matthew DiMarsico, and J.J. Wiebusch – he’d have 22 points and lead the entire NCAA in scoring.

In either of these scenarios, the narrative around McKenna would sure look a lot different, wouldn’t it?

But the NCAA season is shorter than most other leagues. Teams play around 40 games – if they’re great. Players can ride heaters all season long – and icy cold streaks, too. It’s why the NCAA has tons of one-season wonders, and why the scoring race doesn’t reflect NHL outcomes as much as other leagues.

[Calgary4LIfe]

All back-aboard the McKenna train!

[devo22]

[jg13]

Gavin McKucherov?

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Agreed.

Look at Bedard, he disappointed some, mainly due to lack of support players.

But we worked all summer on his speed and shot and look at him now.

That's compete level.

He’s always played with assassin attitude, the kids got it for sure.

[Tbull8]

Mckenna is gonna go dominate the WJC and everyone will be calling him generational again