After months of talks with more than two dozen NHL scouts, scouting directors and front-office executives, the consensus for the 2026 NHL Draft is that we have a very tight group at the top, led by a deep crop of defensemen.“I wouldn’t want to be picking 1 this year,” said a scouting director. “There’s a very good chance the best player in this draft doesn’t even go in the top five. I also think whoever goes 1 will have unrealistic expectations put on them. None of these guys are (Matthew) Schaefer, (Macklin) Celebrini (or Connor) Bedard.”That lack of a singular, defined tier has created a fractured landscape across the league.“There’s no clear guy this year. There’s a group,” said another scout. “And I could see that group go in almost any order, although I think Gavin McKenna should be in the top two somewhere.”“There are six, seven guys for me, and they are all very close: McKenna, (Chase) Reid, (Ivar) Stenberg, (Carson) Carels, (Caleb) Malhotra, (Alberts) Šmits, (Keaton) Verhoeff,” said one scout.Another director said he has a group of nine players that he could put in any combination, adding Viggo Björck and Daxon Rudolph to the above-mentioned players. “There’s no A’s this year, just a bunch of B+’s.”“When you’re debating between wingers and centers or defensemen, the wingers can’t just be close; there needs to be some separation,” another NHL executive noted. “I’m not completely convinced that McKenna or Stenberg showed that separation this season from guys like Reid, Verhoeff, Malhotra, etc.”Here’s what the people making the picks are saying about the prospects at the top of the 2026 class.Draft defined by debate at No. 1For the better part of three years, McKenna has been the presumptive No. 1 pick. His offensive toolkit, elite skill level and scoring track record are among the very best we’ve seen in recent years from a prospect. But projecting players comes down to more than just points. Evaluators are forced to weigh his immense scoring upside against real questions about how his game will translate to heavy, playoff-style hockey.“McKenna is the most talented player in the draft. But is he the most likely guy to win a championship?” one scouting director asked. “That’s what we’re going to be talking about in meetings.”“He’s an excellent player,” said a veteran scout. “In the middle of the season, I’m sure you’ll see some highlight-reel plays, and some four- or five-point nights. But when things get tough, if that’s the guy you’re leaning on in the playoffs, our guys would be so excited to play against him. I would take Stenberg, Reid (and) Malhotra ahead of him.”“He’s going to score a ton in the NHL. He’s special with the puck and on the power play,” said an executive. “My concern is he’s like Artemi Panarin. He’ll get his accolades, but he’ll also be on three to four teams and never make real noise in the playoffs.”“He’s got to be one of the most unusual top Canadian prospects I’ve seen,” said a scout. “You can’t find him some nights, and he can be so frustrating, but his talent is freakish. He can not really try and still have three points.”Still, passing on a player with McKenna’s raw talent and elite offensive brain is a terrifying proposition for a general manager.“I would have a really hard time passing on the special skill,” said a veteran scout. “That’s the kind of stuff that gets you fired.”“People are overthinking this one,” said a scouting director. “His scoring track record is special. His offensive brain and stick are special. He rips up the WHL for years and then rips up college hockey and was a top scorer at the World Juniors.”“I don’t think McKenna is separated from the pack,” said a scout who had him at 1, “but I would still just take the guy with 100-point potential.”“I’m normally the first one who puts centers and defensemen ahead of wingers on my list,” said another scout, “but I think there’s a separation between McKenna and the rest.”“I get the concerns, and I have them as well, but there is a realistic chance he’s Patrick Kane or Nikita Kucherov. His brain and hands are that special,” said another scouting director. “This isn’t a Shane Wright situation with McKenna, where (Juraj) Slafkovský pulled away from Wright and Wright didn’t have a great draft season. McKenna had a great season. He deserves to be in this conversation. The issue is his profile isn’t amazing, and there are guys who are close to him. But if you don’t take him and he becomes what some think he can, you look like an idiot.”“I think his development will go similarly to Jack Hughes,” added an executive. “It may take a minute in the NHL for him to adjust physically, but he’s so good that eventually he will become a premier scorer. Even if you’re not a huge McKenna believer, at some point this conversation gets ridiculous, and I say that admitting that he drives me crazy. Maybe you like Stenberg or Reid more, but very quickly he becomes dramatically more skilled than the next best player.”Because the gap between McKenna and the rest of the top tier is perceived to be narrow, the ultimate decision might be taken out of the scouting department’s hands entirely, even with some of the concerns they may have.“It doesn’t matter what the scouts think when you win the lottery,” one veteran evaluator said. “The GM can wipe their ass with your list. At that point, it becomes a management, if not even an ownership call.”Is Stenberg the smarter bet?As we approach the draft, there’s a growing debate between McKenna and Stenberg. The gap in dynamic talent between the two wingers is distinct, but teams are deeply divided on who possesses the more translatable NHL game.“Only two right answers to who to go 1. McKenna or Stenberg, don’t get cute,” a scouting director said.“I love Stenberg. He’s been so good this season,” raved a scout. “In the medal round of the World Juniors, the way he elevated was very impressive. He’s very talented, and the way he grinds for pucks will translate to the NHL. I would take him at 1.”Stenberg is a 5-foot-11 winger, but his compete level, direct style and willingness to play inside the dots appeal to evaluators who worry about McKenna’s perimeter tendencies.“He’s not as smart or skilled as McKenna, but the way he plays and how he generates his offense translates better to the NHL,” said a director. “He’s direct, he gets to the net, he gets the puck on net, he can make high-end plays, but he’s not looking to be fancy when the play isn’t there.”Another scout pointed out the stylistic difference: “He doesn’t have McKenna’s hockey sense, but his shot is elite, and he gets to the net to score, which McKenna doesn’t.”However, drafting a sub-6-foot winger high always carries inherent risk. If the offense doesn’t pop at an elite level, the value plummets quickly.“If Stenberg doesn’t score a lot, I don’t love his backup game,” cautioned a scout. “If he’s a 50-point, 5-11 wing, it’s not a very valuable piece. For those D like Šmits, Reid, Verhoeff or Carels, even if they’re not running a power play at the end of the day, they can be useful parts of a playoff lineup. There’s more B-game there.”Because of that limited B-game, several evaluators pushed back on the idea that Stenberg is a lock for the top two.“The media talks about him and McKenna like they’re the consensus top two guys, but I don’t think teams have it that way,” an executive revealed. “My guess is most teams have one of those guys in their top 2, and then a defenseman or Malhotra. I could honestly see Stenberg get closer to 5 than to 1; he’s not the same type of talent as McKenna.”