That guy who scored 1.87 ppg vs NCAA as 17 year old

I could see him as good as Kessel, if not better, in his career. That would be a pretty impressive career.

The reason he drops is definitely not because of his numbers.
Eiserman has flaws that won’t get him at the NHL level if he doesn’t greatly work on them. But that’s ok, he’s not the only one like that. The problem is, he hasn’t really given scouts and managements the idea that he “wants” to improve. I completely see a reasoning behind thinking that he will have bad attitude with coaches and development staffs, and if he does, he won’t improve enough to be the player he was drafted to be

If you have a subscription to The Athletic, there is an interesting article on him:

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5353960/2024/03/22/cole-eiserman-nhl-draft-2024/

I also think sometimes we all forget (myself included) that these players are just teenagers. They still have the ability to learn, develop and mature from the time they are drafted until the time they are playing in the NHL. As a Habs fan I acknowledge that Slafkovsky's growth took time. Furthermore, some of his actions at the World Hockey Championship (https://dailyhive.com/montreal/canadiens-slafkovsky-mocks-opponents-mens-worlds) could be viewed as immature. But he is a young guy, like Eiserman. They can both do better.

This is not to say that Eiserman is as complete of a player as perhaps Celebrini is, but I think that the potential to be a star and a better overall player is there for Eiserman. Of course, only time will tell.

None of this is true though.

We know some lazy hockey writers say it...and fans like to pile on. But people who actually watch games...that is not what they are saying. There is not even any consistency to what the complaints are about his game. He is lazy....he is workhorse....his skating is bad...his skating is great...he doesn't shoot enough....he shoots too much.....



Scout: ""From the blue line, he's arguably one of the most dangerous and best prospects there is in this draft. But I noticed in the second half that he was working harder on the backcheck, was working harder in his defensive zone. It was really good to see that he was taking it to heart and trying to make that part of his game all the time and not just when people were telling him he needed to do it."

Writer: "The visual improvements are there. He’s more physical than he was a year ago and is much more engaged defensively. He’s a hard worker who can often make himself the best player on any given night."

Scout: “Off-puck play is so much better than it used to be, But is it a strength yet? No.”

Writer: "The off-puck movement in the offensive zone to find space and exploit his biggest strength is also a treat to watch."

Scout: "His defensive play is very good for someone with his skill set and age, as you can find him playing the 200 foot game often, but this could still improve over time."

Writer: "There’s a considerable lack of defensive that continues to plague Eiserman’s game"

Scout: "Eiserman's defensive game is better than advertised"

Writer: "There’s Lack of playmaking"

Scout: "An underrated part of Eiserman’s game is his playmaking."

Scout: "Enthusiasm and detail defensively have a long way to go. He will need to elevate his overall detail to consistently average as he matures."

Writer : "His skating is another major pain point in his game — he’s sporting neither quick acceleration nor high-end top speed"

Scout: : "He’s powerful and bursts down the wing with great aggression."

Writer: "Eiserman's skating needs refinement...lacks that extra gear...biggest concern at this time with his skating is in his edges"

Scout: "Pace and skill are in place and project to first line NHL upside...Has a gear, in transition, that can lead to aggressive zone entries off the rush."

Writer: "Perhaps the bigger issue here is his lack of ability in transition."


...and I could go on. The complaints about him are so wide-ranging....none are consistent.
They see one guy drop in rankings and they want a "FREE FALL"....so they invent reasons why his game is flawed.
But few have any idea what they are talking about.
Its all just noise.

Also, if Eiserman was born two weeks later, he would be part of the 2025 draft.

In my mind he is still a top 5 pick. I'm sure he will end up 6-10 though.

With you on both accounts. He is probably top-5 player...who may drop a little.

(but also could see someone trade up for him if he falls to 8-10)

I really like your point above about his birthday, I've been trying to explain this people, He's almost 1 year younger than guys getting drafted ahead of him. When you're a teenager around this age that does matter quite a bit.

confused about the whole NCAA comparison, im completely with you in that Eiserman could turn out to be an absolutely elite goal scorer, but he hasn't played in the ncaa

also the whole concern about him is that a few flaws in his game become a lot more prevalent at the NHL level, not at the collegiate, NTDP, or minors level