Juraj Slafkovsky vs Logan Cooley: No. 1 Pick Comparison three years later

The 2022 NHL Draft presented one of the more intriguing debates in recent memory, with the Montreal Canadiens facing a pivotal decision at first overall. While Slovak winger Juraj Slafkovsky ultimately heard his name called first, American center Logan Cooley went third to the Arizona Coyotes, and the Juraj Slafkovsky vs Logan Cooley No. 1 pick comparison has intensified with each passing season. Now, three years into their professional careers, both players have carved distinct paths in the NHL, making this comparison more fascinating than ever.

The debate transcends simple statistical analysis. Slafkovsky brought Olympic pedigree and a rare combination of size and skill, while Cooley arrived as a dynamic playmaker from the USA Hockey National Team Development Program with elite hockey sense. As both young stars continue to develop with Montreal and Utah respectively, evaluating the Juraj Slafkovsky vs Logan Cooley No. 1 pick comparison offers insight into different team-building philosophies, player development timelines, and what truly defines success for a first-overall selection.

The pre-draft profiles in the Juraj Slafkovsky vs Logan Cooley No. 1 pick comparison

Leading up to the 2022 NHL Draft, Slafkovsky emerged as an unconventional choice for first overall. Standing 6-foot-4 and weighing 218 pounds, the Slovak winger captured global attention with his dominant performance at the 2022 Beijing Olympics, where he scored seven goals and earned tournament MVP honors at just 17 years old. His combination of prototypical size, powerful skating stride, and high-end offensive skills made him an enticing prospect, though he spent most of his draft year playing professional hockey in Finland’s Liiga with TPS.

Cooley, meanwhile, represented the more traditional path to NHL stardom. The Pittsburgh native excelled with the NTDP, posting impressive numbers against collegiate competition while showcasing exceptional vision, puck skills, and hockey IQ. At 5-foot-10, size questions lingered, but scouts consistently praised his dynamic playmaking ability and two-way awareness. Many draft analysts viewed Cooley as possessing the highest offensive ceiling in the class.

The Canadiens faced organizational needs that complicated their decision. Despite Shane Wright being the consensus top prospect for much of the season, Montreal’s desire for a power forward with star potential led them to Slafkovsky. Kent Hughes and the Habs’ management team also addressed their center depth by trading for Kirby Dach that same night, a move that seemingly justified passing on both Wright and Cooley.

This divergence in draft philosophy set the stage for one of hockey’s most watched development races. Slafkovsky offered projection and physical dominance, while Cooley brought polish and immediate offensive impact. The contrasting styles made the Juraj Slafkovsky vs Logan Cooley No. 1 pick comparison inevitable from draft night forward.

Career statistics reveal different timelines in the Juraj Slafkovsky vs Logan Cooley No. 1 pick comparison

The early returns on both players show dramatically different development curves. Slafkovsky’s rookie season in 2022-23 proved tumultuous, as he managed just 10 points in 39 games before being returned to the AHL. The Canadiens’ decision to rush him into NHL action without proper seasoning drew criticism, and questions about the pick intensified throughout that difficult first year.

Cooley, conversely, spent his draft-plus-one season at the University of Minnesota, posting 60 points in 40 games and earning Big Ten Freshman of the Year honors. When he finally arrived in the NHL for 2023-24, he immediately demonstrated his readiness with 44 points in 82 games as a rookie, showing the playmaking instincts and skating ability that made him a top-three selection.

Slafkovsky’s sophomore campaign told a different story. After a full AHL stint and summer of development, he exploded for 50 points in his second NHL season, proving the Canadiens’ patience was warranted. His third season in 2024-25 saw continued growth with 51 points in 79 games, including 18 goals, as he established himself as a legitimate top-line power forward alongside Nick Suzuki and Cole Caufield.

The dramatic improvement in Slafkovsky’s game reflects Montreal’s commitment to proper development despite early struggles. Meanwhile, Cooley’s 2024-25 campaign showcased another leap forward, as he posted 65 points in 75 games for Utah, firmly establishing himself as a premier young center with franchise player potential. Through October 2025, Cooley has maintained that momentum with 12 points in 11 games to start the new season.

When examining career totals through their first three professional seasons, Cooley holds the statistical edge with 121 career points compared to Slafkovsky’s 111. However, Slafkovsky’s points-per-game rate has steadily climbed, and his unique physical presence creates value beyond traditional box score metrics. The statistical portrait demonstrates two players on different timelines approaching similar levels of production.

Playing styles and team impact in the Juraj Slafkovsky vs Logan Cooley No. 1 pick comparison

Perhaps the most significant difference between these two players lies in how they impact the game. Slafkovsky has developed into a prototypical power forward who uses his 6-foot-4 frame to win puck battles, create space for teammates, and establish net-front presence on the power play. His 194 hits during the 2024-25 season demonstrate his physical commitment, while his improving shot and hockey sense have made him a legitimate scoring threat.

On Montreal’s top line, Slafkovsky serves as the complementary piece who allows Cole Caufield and Nick Suzuki to thrive. His ability to retrieve pucks along the boards, protect possession in traffic, and drive to the net creates the offensive opportunities his linemates convert. Analytics suggest Montreal’s top line ranks among the NHL’s most effective when Slafkovsky plays his power game, utilizing his size advantage consistently.

Cooley operates as a different type of weapon entirely. His elite skating allows him to attack with speed through the neutral zone, while his vision and passing creativity make him a constant playmaking threat. At 5-foot-10 and 192 pounds, he compensates for size limitations with exceptional anticipation and evasiveness. His eight goals through the first 11 games of 2025-26 also demonstrate growing confidence as a finisher, not just a distributor.

For Utah, Cooley functions as a primary offensive catalyst who drives play 5-on-5 and orchestrates power-play units. His hockey IQ allows him to process the game at NHL speed, and his two-way reliability makes him trustworthy in all situations. Where Slafkovsky imposes his will physically, Cooley dissects defenses with skill and creativity. Both approaches prove effective, just through vastly different methods that reflect their unique physical tools and playing philosophies.

Team contexts shape the Juraj Slafkovsky vs Logan Cooley No. 1 pick comparison

Understanding this comparison requires acknowledging the different organizational situations these players inhabit. Montreal’s rebuilding timeline and veteran leadership structure provided Slafkovsky with ideal linemates in Suzuki and Caufield, two established offensive players who could shoulder primary scoring responsibility while he developed. The Canadiens’ patience through his struggles demonstrated long-term thinking about his potential ceiling.

Utah’s franchise transition from Arizona created uncertainty but also opportunity for Cooley. As one of the organization’s cornerstone young players, he’s received significant ice time and responsibility, accelerating his development through high-leverage minutes. The team’s relocation to Salt Lake City coincided with Cooley’s emergence, positioning him as the face of hockey in a new market.

Montreal’s decision to trade for Kirby Dach on draft night remains central to evaluating the Slafkovsky selection. The Canadiens believed they could acquire a center to address positional needs while taking the best fit at first overall. Dach’s injury struggles have complicated that calculation, though his recent four-goal performance in three October 2025 games offers hope for his revival. Had Dach reached his projected ceiling, Montreal’s draft night strategy would appear visionary rather than questionable.

The organizational philosophies also differ significantly. Montreal prioritized building a balanced lineup with defined roles, while Arizona/Utah focused on accumulating high-end skill regardless of position. Neither approach is inherently superior, but they produce different team compositions and individual player responsibilities that shape development trajectories and statistical outputs.

Advanced metrics in the Juraj Slafkovsky vs Logan Cooley No. 1 pick comparison

Beyond traditional statistics, advanced analytics provide additional context for evaluating these players. Slafkovsky’s points-per-60 minutes rate of 1.85 ranks nearly identically to Cooley’s 1.82, suggesting equivalent offensive production when accounting for ice time. This metric indicates their scoring rates are remarkably similar despite different playing styles and linemate quality.

However, Slafkovsky’s minus-28 career plus-minus compared to Cooley’s even rating through 2024-25 highlights Montreal’s early struggles and Slafkovsky’s difficult rookie season. Team context heavily influences plus-minus, but the disparity reflects Cooley’s steadier development curve and his immediate defensive reliability upon entering the NHL.

Slafkovsky’s 133 shots on net during 2024-25 demonstrate his growing shoot-first mentality, while Cooley’s 40 assists that same season showcase his playmaking focus. These tendencies align with their respective skill sets and team roles. Slafkovsky functions as a complementary scorer who creates havoc around the net, while Cooley operates as a primary facilitator who makes his linemates better through creative passing.

Possession metrics paint Slafkovsky’s line as one of the NHL’s most dominant when healthy, suggesting his physical presence and board work contribute significantly to sustainable offensive pressure. Cooley’s individual impact on shot generation and scoring chance creation rank among Utah’s highest, confirming his role as the team’s primary offensive engine. Both players drive results through different mechanisms, making direct statistical comparison challenging without considering playing style and deployment.

What the experts say about the Juraj Slafkovsky vs Logan Cooley No. 1 pick comparison

The hockey analytics community remains divided on this comparison, with arguments supporting both players as the superior selection. According to recent re-draft analyses, many experts now favor Cooley at first overall based on his consistent production and higher offensive ceiling. His 65-point sophomore season exceeded expectations and demonstrated star potential that Slafkovsky hasn’t yet matched statistically.

However, Slafkovsky’s defenders point to his unique physical profile and the scarcity of true power forwards in modern hockey. Finding skilled 6-foot-4 wingers who can score, hit, and drive possession represents a market inefficiency that Montreal exploited. His development timeline may prove longer, but the potential payoff of a 60-point power forward who dominates physically carries enormous value.

The recent article from The Hockey Writers argues that Slafkovsky “unjustifiably remains in the shadow” of other top picks despite being a legitimate top-line NHL player. The piece notes that while Cooley has pulled ahead statistically, Slafkovsky’s contributions extend beyond points, particularly in playoff-style hockey where physicality and puck protection become paramount.

Several scouts who spoke anonymously to various outlets maintain that Slafkovsky’s projection still exceeds Cooley’s, suggesting his combination of size, skill, and improving hockey sense could eventually make him the better player. Others counter that Cooley’s elite skating and playmaking represent more valuable commodities in today’s NHL, where speed and creativity drive offensive success more than physicality. The debate reflects broader philosophical differences about what constitutes an ideal first-overall selection.

Future outlook shapes the Juraj Slafkovsky vs Logan Cooley No. 1 pick comparison

Projecting where these players land five years from now introduces significant uncertainty. Cooley appears closer to his ceiling, having already demonstrated the playmaking brilliance and offensive production expected from a top-three pick. His hot start to 2025-26 with eight goals in 11 games suggests he may be entering his prime earlier than anticipated, potentially reaching the 70-80 point range that defines franchise centers.

Slafkovsky’s trajectory remains more difficult to predict. His year-over-year improvement suggests continued growth is likely, and his physical tools provide a foundation that could support star-level production once his hockey sense and decision-making fully mature. If he reaches a 60-65 point pace while maintaining his physical edge, Montreal will have secured exactly the power forward they envisioned on draft night.

The arrival of Ivan Demidov in Montreal complicates Slafkovsky’s situation somewhat, as the Russian prospect projects as a dynamic offensive talent who could eventually claim Slafkovsky’s spot on the top line. However, Slafkovsky’s unique skill set may prove complementary to Demidov rather than redundant, potentially allowing both to thrive in Montreal’s top six. The organizational depth speaks to successful drafting beyond the first-overall selection.

For Utah, Cooley represents the centerpiece of a young core that includes other promising prospects. His development has exceeded expectations, and his trajectory suggests legitimate number-one center potential. If he continues improving his goal-scoring while maintaining his elite playmaking, he could evolve into a perennial All-Star and franchise cornerstone who validates the third-overall investment.

The verdict on the Juraj Slafkovsky vs Logan Cooley No. 1 pick comparison

Three seasons into their careers, declaring a definitive winner in this comparison remains premature. Cooley has produced more points and demonstrated a higher offensive ceiling to this point, making strong arguments for those who believe he should have gone first overall. His 65-point sophomore season and excellent start to 2025-26 suggest he’s approaching elite status among NHL centers, a trajectory that validates top-three pick status and raises questions about Montreal’s decision.

Yet Slafkovsky’s development arc tells an equally compelling story. After struggling through a difficult rookie campaign, he’s emerged as a legitimate top-line power forward whose physical presence and improving skill set create unique value. His fit alongside Suzuki and Caufield has helped create one of the NHL’s most effective lines, and his steady improvement suggests he hasn’t approached his ceiling. The player he’s becoming may not produce 70 points annually, but his combination of size, skill, and physicality remains exceptionally rare.

The Canadiens’ draft night strategy of selecting Slafkovsky while trading for Dach deserves evaluation beyond simple hindsight. If Dach fulfills his potential as a second-line center, Montreal’s approach validates taking the best fit rather than best player available. However, Dach’s injury struggles have left Montreal without the center depth they sought, making the decision to pass on Cooley more questionable regardless of Slafkovsky’s individual success.

Ultimately, this comparison illustrates how different paths can lead to similar destinations. Slafkovsky and Cooley represent contrasting player types who impact games through different mechanisms, making direct comparison challenging. Both have established themselves as legitimate NHL contributors with star potential, even if Cooley’s statistical edge and consistent development suggest he may reach greater offensive heights. The Juraj Slafkovsky vs Logan Cooley No. 1 pick comparison will continue evolving throughout their careers, but both organizations secured franchise-caliber talents in the 2022 draft’s top three. For Montreal, the question isn’t whether Slafkovsky was a mistake—he clearly wasn’t—but rather whether Cooley’s superior production proves he should have been the choice all along.