THN Archive: Gavin McKenna vs. Ivar Stenberg

The Hockey News has released its archive to all THN subscribers: 76 years of history, stories, and features.

Subscribe now to view the full THN Archives here

Also, go to thn.com/free to subscribe.

Gavin McKenna vs. Ivar Stenberg – May 22, 2026 – Vol. 79, Iss. 11  – Ken Campbell

EVEN THOUGH THEY WERE born and grew up 4,041 miles apart – give or take a mile – there’s probably less separating Gavin McKenna and Ivar Stenberg than you’d think. They’re both left wingers, they both have late birthdays, and they both adapted to a higher level of hockey for a full season.

So it should come as no surprise that McKenna and Stenberg have been on a collision course for the 2026 draft, with most pundits having them ranked either No. 1 or 2 for most of the season.

There isn’t a lot separating the two players who, like all elite teenagers, have been tantalizing hockey watchers for the past couple of years. One scout compared McKenna to Patrick Kane and Stenberg to Nikita Kucherov, brilliant solo players who have won multiple Stanley Cups and are headed to the Hall of Fame. Here’s how McKenna and Stenberg compare in some of the key areas of the game.

NEITHER PLAYER HAS CONNOR McDavid-type speed, but then again, who does? What both have is that Kane/Kucherov-level of elusiveness, which makes them dangerous. “Each has high-level edgework and the ability to cut back in confined spaces,” one scout said. “They are both in the upper tier of quickness and agility. Stenberg has a little more quickness, and McKenna might be a little more nimble.” In terms of flat-out speed, McKenna has a slight edge, which makes him a little more effective off the rush. Neither player’s calling card is skating, but it’s not a disadvantage, either. EDGE: MCKENNA

AGAIN, THERE’S NOT MUCH of a gap between the two in this area. Both are willing to pay a price to produce offense, and they both drive the net and can play in confined areas. It’s on the other side of their games where both are going to need to improve. “They both compete for offense; there’s no question,” another scout said. “If you were going on a 1-to-10 scale, if there’s an offensive opportunity, they’re both an eight-and-a-half or nine.” It’s important to note, however, that both players were forced to elevate their games this season – Stenberg in the SHL and McKenna in the NCAA. EDGE: EVEN

SCOUTS DESCRIBED BOTH PLAYERS as having “magic hands.” McKenna is a little more dynamic with the puck, while Stenberg has more finesse and nuance to his game with the puck on his stick. Both drive their offensive games with their vision and hockey sense, which translates through their hands and down to their sticks. “Stenberg can stickhandle in a phone booth, and he can handle the puck inside the opponent’s triangle,” one scout said. He’s also more likely to hold onto the puck for that extra second to find a better option. EDGE: STENBERG

SCOUTS WERE DIVIDED ON this category. Off the rush, McKenna has the edge, but the puck comes off Stenberg’s stick quicker, and there’s a bigger element of deception in his shot, hence the Kucherov comparisons. “They can both score in tight, and they both have a really quick and disguised release,” one scout said. “McKenna shoots a little better in stride, and he can score from further out.” EDGE: EVEN

BOTH PLAYERS HAD ROUGHLY twice as many assists as goals this season, so they are more inclined to distribute the puck. They’re both creative with the puck, and they can each find and create passing lanes, which is so important for a setup man. Both players project to have a similar disparity in their goal and assist lines as NHLers. “They both draw coverage, and they’re really good at moving the pieces around,” one scout said. “McKenna’s passing has a little more of a dynamic element to it, and he can make that sense-based play just a little quicker.” EDGE: MCKENNA

THE TEAMS TAKING EITHER player aren’t doing so because of their defensive prowess. But with players this talented, that is something that can be taught. That being said, Stenberg played in a pro league where you simply don’t get the ice time and the opportunity to produce if you can’t play a modicum of defense. “Stenberg was a one-way guy going into this season,” a scout said. “But playing in the SHL, he showed he can play with structure. And Stenberg was held to a higher defensive standard than McKenna was. Unless you’re at North Dakota, Wisconsin, Denver or Minnesota-Duluth, you don’t have any defensive accountability in college.” EDGE: STENBERG

THE CASE COULD BE made that neither player is ready to step into the NHL next season. But there’s a far better chance McKenna does over Stenberg. “They’re both Michael Misa-ready,” one scout said. “We’re not talking about Macklin Celebrini or Matthew Schaefer here.” McKenna was surprised by how difficult his transition to the college game was. But once he found his footing, he might have been the NCAA’s best player in the second half of the season. “McKenna will figure out the NHL a little quicker, because he’s had his eyes opened already,” another scout said. EDGE: MCKENNA

BOTH MCKENNA AND STENBERG have demonstrated for the past couple of years why they are in this position right now. They are winners who have the rare quality of being able to drive their teams while not taking up all the oxygen in the room. McKenna was a force of nature at the U-18 World Championship two years ago, and both players were standouts at the latest edition of the world juniors. And combined with the fact they both played above their traditional levels and excelled this past season, it’s clear they have the mental makeup to be impact players. “What impresses me about them is they both have a big profile but don’t put themselves above the team,” one scout said. “And that’s big when you talk about character.” EDGE: EVEN