2024 NHL Draft: Right Handed Defense Options (Elick, Brunicke, Emery, Danford, Kleber, Pitner)
Next up is a cohort of interesting right handed defensemen. Outside of Corson Ceulemans, the Blue Jackets don’t really have a right handed dman in their system. While you shouldn’t draft for outright position needs at high positions in the draft, as you move away from the high value picks rounding out the prospect pool or targeting defensive potential becomes more desirable.
In this case, the prospects featured here are mostly intended to represent the more defense focused options. At this point, we don’t have a good idea about how Waddell intends to prioritize later round picking or whether he wants to continue leaning into mobile and puck moving defensemen. Still, I think it’s a good idea to look at potential 2nd round or later defensemen because there’s an interesting group.
The first two are WHL defensemen who are the only “A” rated prospects according to EliteProspects. That means that, according to their grading criteria, both of these players belong in the first round. More on that later.
As far as defensemen go, neither are high level producers. There isn’t too much to write home about offensively. Elick settles for a high volume of low value shots. Brunicke sometimes improves his shot position but isn’t a fantastic contributor from the blueline.
Brunicke has better passing data but nothing that suggests and offensively dynamic player. He’s more in-zone leaning which is probably a good sign.
Both are good at pinching in the offensive zone but Elick appears to be far more eager and successful. Elick, however, really only produces offense on the rush. While his pinching may suggest offensive zone activity it doesn’t look like he’s using that activation to create offense.
In transition, both grade out at responsible puck movers who aren’t particularly involved in generating entries but look good in comparison to their team. Both are excellent and rounded exit generators which suggests they are primarily puck-moving and not necessarily transition offense creating defenders.
Brunicke’s pure volume and quality of exits generated is simply exceptional in the tracked data. He’s better than his team while taking on an exceptional workload. Combined that volume with his ability to move the puck crosslane and to the inside and you’ve got he makings of a potential game-controlling puck mover.
Charlie Elick is no slouch in this regard either. He’s not only a defenseman who gets the puck out but someone who is helping his team create danger in transition (though the downstream offense doesn’t come off of his stick).
Defensively, both grade out well but have different strengths. Brunicke and Elick grade out as solid neutral zone defenders who can create turnovers in their own zone. They aren’t prolific neutral zone turnover generators.
Elick is much better at getting a stick on cross seam passes in his own zone whereas Brunicke protects the slot a bit better.
Brunicke has more retrievals but Elick is more efficient in lower volume. That could mean that Elick simply had less of a workload.
For their more advanced space creation metrics, Brunicke once again looks exceptional. He’s quite good in almost every regard. Elick can deliver the puck at the right time and use his body to create advantages but not to the consistent degree that Brunicke can.
Caveats
Brunicke, especially, looks quite exception in this tracking data. What isn’t being captured, necessarily, is that he’s chaotic and risky. There are plenty of turnovers of risks along the way to his success.
One of the flaws of only looking at the microstats is that they can’t possible capture the whole picture.
Similarly, different viewings and different philosophies can have dramatically different opinions of even the same process. I’ll use two scouting reports from the EliteProspects Draft Guide as an example. If you haven’t purchased it yet, definitely do it. It’s worth every penny and will give you significantly better insight than just stats.
I’m reminded of Damon Severson here. Does a high volume of things that win hockey games and set his teammates up for success but can also have massive turnover or mistakes. The difference being that Brunicke is 18 and has the potential to correct these issues with time.
These two defensemen project to be excellent shutdown defensemen though their offensive upside is potentially limited.
Danford’s playmaking from the blueline stands out, especially in his ability to access the slot. That he does so without exclusively rush production could bode well for his future.
While Emery looks completely uninvolved defensively, he also played on the USNTDP which can silo players into their roles. His primary partner was Cole Hutson who would certainly vacuum up many of the more offensively generating puck touches.
Emery has better quality exits, though Danford excels relative to his team, whereas Danford has more high value transition plays.
Where both of these defensemen stand out are in their own zone. Emery is a complete defender without weak points in any metrics. Danford isn’t a neutral zone or passing play killer but his Entry Prevention, DZ Breakups and Slot Protection says he takes care of his business.
Where Danford takes the advantage over Emery is in retrievals. Danford looks quite exceptional in his ability to convert loose pucks into possession whereas Emery isn’t totally involved here.
In the next section, though, we see that Emery can get off the wall and move the puck into the middle of the ice. Both players are good at beating the defense with passes but Danford is better at doing it himself.
This, too, could be a role or system difference. As we’ve seen with certain defensemen like Levshunov, Dickinson and Werenski, sometimes the activator works to get first touch after the killer (in this case Emery) slows nz play down. Then, once first touch and retrieval is established, the activator is tasked with moving the puck back to the weakside or up the ice.
If this is the case, Hutson is focused on retrieving so that he can bump pucks to Emery and start heading up ice. In his NHL career, Emery will certainly need to be the primary retriever but if can continue to make the first pass he could be an excellent “rover” complementing defenseman.
Outside of microstats, it should be mentioned that EJ Emery is an exceptional athlete who torched the NHL combine and has plenty of room to add weight to his frame. D anford, then, may be the already contained and savvy defenseman but that doesn’t mean he projects better to the NHL, necessarily.
These last two are USHL defensemen who project to defensive roles. They are nearly opposities in that Kleber is 6’5” and toolsy whereas Pitner is smaller, has fewer raw tools but has a highly advanced understanding of the game.
Offensively, Pitner’s shooting grades out exceptionally well but it doesn’t necessarily feature as a weapon in his NHL projection. He only scored 8 goals in 50 games.
For the most part, these players are also not significant players in transition. There are some potential flags for Pitner. His Rush Offense along with volume of entries and could suggest he’s an activator that finds high volume shots in 4th man’s ice or that his team is prolific in rush offense and plays along with him.
Where Pitner has a high volume of exits, Kleber has him beat in more rounded performance. Neither look particularly exceptional in transition but both aren’t incompetent at finding cross-lane plays either. Each player has potential but will likely require a lot of work to find NHL quality puck moving.
Defensively, both stand out. Pitner is the most well rounded defender in the entire data set. His rush defending and capacity to generate breakups in all facets is absolutely exceptional. It speaks to his highly refined habits and exceptional sense.
He’s a student of the game and it’s perhaps the only reason many people in the draft are onto him at all.
For Kleber, his primary strength is in using his body and length to be a talented rush defender. He forces dump-ins and creates breakups as well. In-zone he also finds ways to protect the slot and create breakups.
Kleber also grades out as a better puck retriever than Pitner, though neither is all that great at getting the puck to the inside. Pitner is better at giving the puck to his teammates in advantageous positions but Kleber is significantly more advanced at using his size and creating advantages for himself.
Development Pipelines
While it’s possible that Charlie Elick and EJ Emery are selected prior to the Blue Jackets’ 36 overall pick (provided they elect to keep it) the rest are likely to be available with some potentially also around in the third where the Blue Jackets have 2 picks.
Charlie Elick, Ben Danford and Harrison Brunicke will all remain in Canadian Junior whereas Kleber, Pitner and Emery are already committed to different NCAA teams.
When drafting a player, their follow up development path should be something to consider. Since they are all likely to become defensive defensemen, the NCAA is the highest level of competition and the surest pathway to learning defense against higher level competition.
Elick, Danford and Brunicke will all have to let their junior rights expire prior to getting AHL experience and are potentially less likely to jump directly to the NHL. Largely, that’s fine. The Blue Jackets shouldn’t
In any case, the respective defensemen commitments are as follows: Tory Pitner- University of Denver, EJ Emery - University of North Dakota, Adam Kleber - University of Minnesota Duluth.
Tory Pitner and EJ Emery are going to schools with a history of developing NHL talent. Jake Sanderson went from the USNTDP to UND, where Emery will be joined by Sacha Boisvert, Mac Swanson and CBJ draft pick Andrew Strathmann. Zeev Buium, Shai Buium and Sean Behrens area all currently developing at the school under head coach David Carle.