There were big swings taken on Day 2 of the 2025 draft — and just as many missed chances. These five teams made significant impacts on their future.
By taking high-reward swings, filling key pipeline needs, or — on the flip side — adding redundancies and missing opportunities, teams defined their next steps. NHL managers leaned heavily into size at the 2025 draft, but teams that weren’t afraid of less NHL-ready builds were able to mine untapped potential. Conversely, a few teams ignored the state of their pipelines and drafted into surplus when they needed to prioritize other areas — or simply left a lot of value on the table. Draft rankings referenced in this article will be from DobberProspects, Elite Prospects, and TSN — three majorly visited public outlets.
This analysis highlights those successes and failures: three losers and two winners from Rounds 2 through 7 of the 2025 NHL Entry Draft.
*****
Losers
Colorado Avalanche
Depleted of high-end ceiling prospects after years of using them as trade chips, Colorado could use more talent in its pipeline — especially up front after dealing away Calum Ritchie.
There were better bets available when their first pick was on the clock at #77, like Cameron Schmidt (#94 by DAL), a name you may end up hearing a lot. Management could have taken a swing on upside by moving up a few spots in rounds 3 or 4. Will Reynolds (#68 by PHI) offers offensive upside and a projectable two-way game as a centre — exactly the kind of player Colorado lacks. Instead, they took re-entry defenseman Dell’Elce (#77), who showed promise in his NCAA rookie season but still lacks the ceiling to become a second-pairing staple or valuable trade chip.
With the next two picks, they again leaned into a mix of floor and ceiling — a target that often ends up missing both. L.J. Mooney, a high-upside forward, was taken five spots earlier than their fourth-round selection, Swedish two-way defenseman Linus Funck, out of the J20 league. Their final pick was another re-entry, once again betting on a blend of moderate floor and modest upside.
Filip Ekberg (#221 by CAR) was still on the board during both of those picks — an offensively gifted Swedish forward with pro-level production who outclassed his peers in international play. His diminutive size dropped him to the very end of the draft, but that’s exactly the kind of upside swing Colorado’s system needed. Their final selection, Nolan Roed (#214), is a two-way centre who had a much stronger D+1 than D+0, finishing just under a point per game in the USHL. But at 19, junior numbers like that need to be a lot louder to signal real upside and runway.
Colorado had the assets and the motivation to move up and take a big swing. Instead, they stuck with safe bets in a system that’s begging for upside.
****
Columbus Blue Jackets
This organization has taken big swings in the later rounds before and seen mixed results. Jordan Dumais looked like a great value pick at the time, but off-ice hurdles have dimmed his trajectory. This year, management veered away from their usual hunt for hidden upside.
Columbus has a young core, with players like Denton Mateychuk graduating into full-time NHL roles. Insulating that group with prospects who could rise alongside them — or serve as depth insurance for top-end pieces — was a more pressing need than stacking more young defensemen into an already loaded system.
Malte Vass, their third-round pick at #76, is a sturdy, mobile, left-shot defenseman. If his game translates, it’ll be one of snarl and shutdown value — but little offensive impact. He put up just 11 points in 40 games in Sweden’s U20 league.
Their fifth-round selection, Owen Griffin (#160), fits more of the high-ceiling reach we are used to seeing from Columbus. His jump from six points to 51 in a single junior season signals real trajectory. If that mindset had been applied earlier, they might’ve landed a higher-quality bet when it mattered more.
Lindstrom, Fantilli, Voronkov, Sillinger — these are forwards who’ll need support. And few options are more cost-effective than hitting on late-round depth. Free agents cost more — Columbus knows that better than most.
****
Nashville
Day two could have looked a lot different for Nashville. Owning the third pick of Round 2 and another later in the same round gave them real leverage. With #35 and #58 in hand — and judging by the trades made — those two picks together could have landed a first anywhere from the low-20s to 30.
The Preds have been patient with their youth. Tanner Molendyk shows top-four potential at both ends. Joakim Kemell is on the verge of the NHL, and David Edstrom is taking big strides in Sweden, set to share top-six pivot duties with Brady Martin. The ceiling is high, but this group needs complementary impact players to ease the load.
Instead, Nashville took a defensive defenseman, Jacob Rombach at #35, and a goalie, Jack Ivankovic at #58. Both address needs — but are they as pressing as giving your young forwards support? Play-driving skill is the rarest asset, and proper support is how a core flourishes.
Plenty of high-end skaters slid in this unpredictable draft. Packaging #35 and #58 — plus a sweetener — could’ve secured a true blue-chip swing. Justin Carbonneau (#19) finished second in QMJHL scoring, even ahead of Desnoyers (#4, UTA); he plays with pace and bite that would mesh with Martin and Nashville’s forward group. Lynden Lakovic (#27, WSH) is a towering power forward who changes a line’s dynamic instantly. Sasha Boumedienne (#28, WPG) is a fluid, high-IQ two-way defender with tantalizing offensive tools and could explode as an NCAA sophomore.
Those swings might’ve put Nashville in the winners column. Playing it safe keeps them on the wrong side of Day 2.
****
Winners
Utah Mammoth
In their first draft as the Utah Mammoth, management stocked the pipeline with a mix of value-savvy and high-upside picks. Upside and production weren’t sacrificed for timeline or size — those elements were balanced across multiple selections in premium positions. It is a strategy that tends to pay off more than chasing both floor and ceiling in a single player.
With their first pick of Day 2, a second-rounder at #46, Utah selected Max Psenicka, a 6-4 right-shot defenseman out of Czechia. DobberProspects ranked him #34, Elite Prospects had him at #31, and TSN the lowest at #44. Psenicka brings a tenacious, intelligent, and physical game to the blue line. His season was split between three leagues — 16 games in Czechia’s top pro league, 20 games in the U20 league (where he put up 11 points), and 24 games in the WHL. Getting Psenicka at #46 gives Utah a coveted piece: a right-shot defender with top-four upside who can either complement a core or carry value in trade — at a fairly low cost.
Utah did not stop there.
Management wasn’t afraid to place bets off the board either — taking players mostly unranked by those same three outlets. Stepan Hoch, a two-way forward, was selected in the third round. Another Czech prospect, Hoch played most of his season in the U20 league, notching 29 points in 30 games. He also logged meaningful pro experience: 23 games and three points in Czechia’s top league, and two games (two points) in the second-tier pro league. It’s a strong bet on a versatile, tools-y player who — if developed properly — could grow into an impactful third-liner. The kind of support Utah’s young core will need to compete.
Yegor Borikov — another name DobberProspects, EP, and TSN left off their pre-draft rankings — was taken at #110. The Belarusian winger (6-0) went undrafted in both his D+0 and D+1 years, but Utah snagged him after he posted a very respectable 25 points (12G, 13A) in 67 KHL games. He is under KHL contract through 2025–26 — by then, he could be more than ready to join Utah’s pro ranks. This swing could be a home run — with Borikov developing into a middle-six NHL forward — or a total miss that keeps him in Russia. Utah will find out soon enough.
The Mammoth’s final pick (#152) was used on Russian goalie, Ivan Tkach-Tkachenko — a reasonable place to draft a netminder for a team with a deep goalie pipeline.
All in all, Utah saw the areas of weakness within their prospect pipeline relative to their current team structure, and made selections to address those needs.
***
Vegas Golden Knights
The expansion draft kings — sorry — Vegas Golden Knights had a strong Day 2, balancing projectable scoring upside, physicality, and NHL-readiness. With picks in the second, third, and sixth rounds, they found value and potential impact assets where other teams forgot to look.
Their first selection — and biggest win — came at pick #55. Vegas drafted Australian-born Jakob Ihs-Wozniak, a 6-2 right-handed forward who’s been developing in Sweden since 2021–22. Ihs-Wozniak was a projected first-rounder at the start of his draft year, but stagnant production in the J20 league saw him slide down rankings. Ahead of the draft, DobberProspects ranked him #41, Elite Prospects #53, and TSN #38 — still outside the first round, but strong value at #55.
They swung on a big-bodied, physical sniper with a heavy shot. Ihs-Wozniak dominated Sweden’s J20 league in his D-1 season but did not show major statistical growth in his draft year. After logging 13 SHL games this season, he is likely to remain in Sweden’s pro ranks until at least 2026–27, at which point he could be ready for a North American leap. His rare tool-set gives him a real shot at developing into a top-six NHL forward.
Vegas was not done.
With their third-round pick (#85), Vegas doubled down on upside, selecting Mateo Norbert — a 6-0 playmaking centre who drives offense with cerebral instincts. He was taken two rounds later than fellow QMJHL forward Justin Carbonneau (#19 by STL), who put up 1.44 points per game; Norbert posted 1.18. That pace gap matters — but Norbert is nearly a full year younger, born August 12, 2007. That extended runway gives his production an extra layer of significance. If developed properly, he could become a steal.
They balanced those home-run swings with high-floor depth adds. Their final two picks came back-to-back in the sixth round: Alexander Weiermair, a second time re-entry centre who struggled in the NCAA but rebounded in the WHL with smart, responsible, bottom-six style play; and Gustav Sjoqvist, a one-year re-entry defenseman playing in Sweden’s second-tier pro league. Sjoqvist is a 6-3 defensive specialist who posted seven points in 39 games — a respectable mark for a player known for shutting things down. He safely projects as a third-pairing D, with potential to grow into a 4/5D who can handle second-unit power play time.
Vegas didn’t spend future capital to move up or reach far off the board to fill holes. Instead, they identified needs early, weighed floor vs. upside, and stuck to best-player-available logic. The result: a class that blends long-term upside and value appreciation with short-term support and organizational depth.
***
Wrapping up…
Day 2 of the 2025 NHL Entry Draft showed just how differently teams approach scouting and development. This article evaluated five teams — and the three losers and two winners highlight the differences that can decide whether a draft actually moves a team forward.
Teams that drafted into surplus didn’t position themselves to grow internally. The ones that assessed their pipelines — and decided whether each pick made more sense for upside or projection — walked away with assets that support the core now and gain value later.
It’s the teams that draft with a wider lens — beyond just the next few years or one-dimensional priorities — that tend to end up on the right side of Day 2.
Arden McLeod