At the 2021 NHL Entry Draft, the Boston Bruins made a pair of early bets on offensive upside, selecting Fabian Lysell 21st overall in the first round and Brett Harrison 85th overall in the third. Both picks signaled a commitment to speed and/or skill as the organization looked to bolster its forward depth.
At the time, both picks were viewed as high-upside offensive swings—and rightly so. The Bruins bet on raw talent with Lysell and Harrison and that the rest of their game would develop in time, and I was firmly in favor of the selections, believing both had the foundational tools to grow into NHL-caliber players. Still, legitimate concerns lingered around their ability to adapt, particularly in areas like consistency and overall versatility. The potential was there, but the development curve was steep.
Following the draft, both Lysell and Harrison played their draft +1-year in the Canadian Hockey League to continue their development. Lysell suited up for the Vancouver Giants in the WHL, racking up 22 goals and 40 assists over 53 games. Harrison, meanwhile, delivered a strong campaign with the OHL’s Oshawa Generals, posting 27 goals and 34 assists across 65 contests.
The early returns offered promise, but lingering questions persisted.
Lysell would make the jump to the American hockey league for the 2022-23 season. Harrison would follow a year later.
While Lysell was afforded opportunities early on, Harrison had to earn his ice through persistence and development. Though his skill set was always intriguing, Harrison faced consistent scrutiny from myself—particularly in areas of his game that needed refinement, a critique that followed him from his junior days into the pro ranks.
Much of my criticism centered on consistency and compete level—areas that separated flashes of promise from sustained impact. Like many young players, he could be streaky, but compete is a controllable trait. It’s an intangible that can’t be coached; it has to come from within, and the player has to want it. It continued to resurface at critical moments, a lingering issue that refused to stay buried.
Now in his third full season with Providence—after spending much of his first two years as a healthy scratch—he’s beginning to earn more consistent opportunities, and the signs of progress are starting to show. It’s not flawless, but it’s a meaningful step forward in his development.
Lysell was tasked with carrying the offensive load for the Vancouver Giants—and to his credit, he delivered, and then some. However, his time in the WHL did little to round out his overall game, raising fair questions about whether that environment truly served his long-term development.
It was at the World Junior Championships, surrounded by a highly skilled Swedish roster, where the concerns truly came into focus. For me, it wasn’t the lack of offensive output that stood out—it was the near-total absence of defensive engagement. This wasn’t a new critique; I voiced it at the time, even if it wasn’t a popular opinion among fans.
His AHL production has been steady, if unspectacular. He’s on pace for his best productive season as a pro. But now in his fourth season, the same concerns that once shadowed his development continue to resurface. He’s still facing healthy scratches and occasional demotions—clear signs that the longstanding issues in his game remain unresolved.
Four and a half years after being drafted, the two Bruins prospects find themselves at a crossroads. One appears he may finally be turning a corner, while the other continues to flatline. With both players on expiring entry-level contracts, Boston faces a pivotal decision: cut ties, or offer one final chance to prove they belong.
Fans have every reason to question whether the Bruins are developing Lysell—and their broader prospect pool—the right way. From where I stand, playing with some sort of defensive responsibility isn’t optional at the NHL level; it’s a baseline expectation across all 32 teams. Under Head Coach Marco Sturm, that standard is even more pronounced. In his system, playing with defensive structure isn’t a suggestion—it’s a non-negotiable.
Harrison’s name seldom surfaces in prospect conversations, despite a track record of strong production at every level prior to the AHL. The challenges he faces aren’t rooted in skill—they’re the harder-to-fix, non-coachable traits. A lack of physical engagement, stick checks in place of battles, and frequent flybys have long been part of the critique. This season has shown signs of progress, but the Bruins are still looking for more.
But are they truly trending in opposite directions? At this stage, it certainly seems that way—when measured against the expectations the Bruins have set. I still believe both have some NHL talents.
This isn’t a slight toward either player—nor does it suggest that Harrison has overtaken Lysell in the organizational depth chart. They’re fundamentally different players with distinct skill sets, and aside from sharing a draft year, their developmental paths have little in common. Each faces unique challenges. That said, one appears to be turning the corner, while the other is still searching for traction.
Let’s shift the spotlight to Lysell. There’s no denying the skill and raw talent—traits that, frankly, are in short supply on Boston’s current roster. During a 12-game stint with the big club last season, he didn’t look out of place. It wasn’t flawless, but there were clear upsides to having him in the lineup. Of course, that was under a different coach and a different system—factors that can’t be overlooked.
But as I mentioned earlier, playing defense isn’t an option under Sturm, it is a necessity.
The Bruins’ track record with prospect development has come under fire—and with good reason. Their struggles to graduate young talent into meaningful NHL roles are well-documented. But at some point, the conversation has to shift. When does it stop being a developmental shortfall and start becoming a matter of individual accountability? How long can a player be excused for not executing what’s consistently asked of them?
On the flip side, it’s fair to ask: why would the Bruins draft a player like Lysell and then attempt to mold him into something he’s not? His game was no secret—speed, skill, and offensive flair were the calling cards. Boston knew exactly what they were getting, yet seemed intent on forcing a square peg into a round hole, banking on the idea that they could reshape his identity to fit their system.
It’s a question that needs asking: how much of the burden lies with the player for not executing what the coaching staff demands, and how much falls on the organization for attempting to mold a player into something they were never designed to be? At the heart of it all is a deeper issue—the fine line between genuine development and fundamental misalignment.
The phrase “Know Your Role,” made famous by WWE icon The Rock, has found new life in hockey circles—and for good reason. At its core, it’s a reminder of the shared responsibility between coaching staff and players: coaches must clearly define expectations, and players must deliver. At the AHL level, that dynamic appears to be slipping. Either the message isn’t landing, or the execution isn’t following.
However, there are signs that the approach may be paying off for Harrison. Whether that progress holds remains to be seen. In the case of Frederic Brunet, the development path has clearly yielded results—he’s added layers to his game that simply weren’t there on draft day. But on the flip side, the same formula appears to be faltering with Matthew Poitras.
Love it or hate it, Sturm’s blunt assessment of the John Beecher waiver placement speaks volumes. “As a new coach, I gave him a new opportunity,” Sturm said. “And quite frankly, I thought he would be a little bit better, more effective — and I thought he wasn’t. At some point we have to make a decision how to move forward.” It’s a telling quote that underscores the growing urgency around performance and accountability.
On Monday, the Bruins made their move, placing Beecher on waivers, where the Calgary Flames quickly pounced. Boston had long suspected he wasn’t a fit, and in the end, they let a former first-round pick walk for nothing.
At the same time, the Bruins have long understood that Lysell wasn’t going to morph into the player they envisioned. That disconnect has come at a cost. Rather than pivoting early or adjusting expectations, Boston watched his trade value erode to the point where it now hovers near zero—a once-promising asset reduced to a cautionary tale in roster management.
Is there still time? Absolutely. But if the Bruins hope to salvage any value from Lysell—be it on the trade market or within their own lineup—they need to act. That means giving him a legitimate run at the NHL level. Whether it’s to showcase his skillset for potential suitors or to see if he can thrive under Sturm, assistant coach Steve Spott, and the mentorship of David Pastrnak, the window to find out is narrowing. The clock is ticking, and indecision won’t do them any favors.
Dom - Hockey 