Can't say I'm all that excited about the comparisons between Mike Komisarek and Dion Phaneuf, nor do I agree. The thread has essentially become a pissing contest but I'll throw in my urine for fun.
The biggest difference between Komisarek and Phaneuf is the offensive side of things; Komi has never been all that smart when making decisions in the offensive zone/on offensive transistion whereas Phaneuf has shown that he is as steady in the offensive facets of the game as he is in the defensive side, and at times is downright creative. His passing game is not as strong as it should be, but that's the only thing that could qualify as a weakness for him. Natural born leader, warrior on the ice, a bullet of a shot, and a defensive fortress; these are qualities not found very often in an NHL defenceman.
I had Phaneuf, and still do obviously, as the best defenseman in the '03 draft. He has been on a steady rise through the rankings since the CHL Prospects game of that year when he absolutely ravaged Marc-Antoine Pouliot who was skating with his head down. I don't think that Phaneuf will be a Norris trophy winner during his career, but a certain gentleman that he is often compared to hasn't won any Norris' either and he has made quite a career of being a physically punishing two-way defenceman, and is a leader on and off of the ice.
If you can, I suggest tuning into the Eastern Conference Finals of the WHL and watching #3 on the Red Deer Rebels and then decide whether you think he'll be the next Komisarek or not. Once you do, I'm pretty confident that "Phaneuf is over-hyped" will certainly not be your final answer.