Ryan Whitney,Cam Barker, Andre Mezaros

[Letang fan 58]

If you weren`t impressed by Barker at the WJCs, it would seem to me that you aren`t watching carefully enough. Barker is not one of those guys that will grab your attention and get you out of your seat. He is not one of those guys that is going to throw the highlight reel hit, score on a rocket slapshot from the point or fly at full speed from end to end. He is extremely calm, very patient with the puck, would rather the throw a quick wrister on net than take a huge slapshot, and does not waste any energy out on the ice. You really have to watch him to truely appreciate how good he is. Believe me I was not a huge Cam Barker fan after the Hawks drafted him. But after watching him quite a bit in the last year I have really come to appreciate what he brings. The WJCs last year were what really made me a believer. There was a reason he wasn`t on the ice for any goals against. This kid is one of the best players positionally I have ever seen. Watch him very closely the next time you see him and you will see what I mean.

As I mentioned........ive seen him aprox 40 times.........thats live.........not even including the world juniors........he really looks like hes overrated to me........if your going to tell me its his defensive game that has you horned up for him then ill tell you there are TONS of better prospects defensively............he wasnt on the ice for even strength goals........not no goals........he was on for a few pp goals.........he is pretty good positionally.........he isnt tough..........wont hit........doesnt skate that well.........has a decent wrist shot but not a great slap shot.........and he did next to nothing offensively for canada in the juniors..........his draft year was his best year IMO..........he went downhill from there........it seemed once drafted he just didnt care as much.

 

[Chelios]

As I mentioned........ive seen him aprox 40 times.........thats live.........not even including the world juniors........he really looks like hes overrated to me........

Well I guess that is your opinion, but it really sounds to me that you aren`t watching him very closely. There is a difference between watching a game he is playing in, and watching him in the game. I challenge you to watch him play the game, I can guarentee you will come away with a different opinion.

if your going to tell me its his defensive game that has you horned up for him then ill tell you there are TONS of better prospects defensively............he wasnt on the ice for even strength goals........not no goals........he was on for a few pp goals.........he is pretty good positionally.........he isnt tough..........wont hit........doesnt skate that well.........has a decent wrist shot but not a great slap shot.........and he did next to nothing offensively for canada in the juniors..........his draft year was his best year IMO..........he went downhill from there........it seemed once drafted he just didnt care as much.

What is so bad about his defensive game? It seems that the only criticism you have is that he isn`t physical. How physical is Nik Lidstrom? I`ll say it again, he is as good positionally as any player I have seen his age. He doesn`t skate well? Are you kidding me? The fact that you can say he doesn`t skate well just strengthens my suspicion that you have not watched this guy much at all, either that or you simply have something agaist him. As far as his shot goes, he has an amazing wrist shot, when your wrist shot is that good there is no point in taking slapshots. His wrist shot is incredibl hard and very accurate. He did next to nothing offensively for Canada at the juniors? So 2 goals, 4 assists for 6 points in 6 games is nothing eh? Give me a break.

 

[Letang fan 58]

Well I guess that is your opinion, but it really sounds to me that you aren`t watching him very closely. There is a difference between watching a game he is playing in, and watching him in the game. I challenge you to watch him play the game, I can guarentee you will come away with a different opinion.



What is so bad about his defensive game? It seems that the only criticism you have is that he isn`t physical. How physical is Nik Lidstrom? I`ll say it again, he is as good positionally as any player I have seen his age. He doesn`t skate well? Are you kidding me? The fact that you can say he doesn`t skate well just strengthens my suspicion that you have not watched this guy much at all, either that or you simply have something agaist him. As far as his shot goes, he has an amazing wrist shot, when your wrist shot is that good there is no point in taking slapshots. His wrist shot is incredibl hard and very accurate. He did next to nothing offensively for Canada at the juniors? So 2 goals, 4 assists for 6 points in 6 games is nothing eh? Give me a break.

Take urself away from being a hawk fan for a second......first thing ill comment on is that he is absolutely not compareable to nick lidstrom so if you think he is your in for a HUGE disappointment.......he might be a smooth skater......hes not a fast one though.........how many dmen do you know who are big scorers from the point because of a nice wrist shot? or how many have good hard slap shots..............ive seen him get caught out of position plenty........he doesnt compete hard.......maybe thats what it is.......he will skate up to the offensive zone and then not bust nut going back to his own zone........I just think hes vasty overrated.

 

[GaryU]

Take yourself away from being a 'nobody will ever measure up to Phaneuf' fan for awhile. Barker doesn't run anyone thru the boards, he just takes them off the puck. Not as sexy, just as effective. Seabrook doesn't normally drill too many guys either & he's pretty damn good. Of course, you've probably seen him a hundred times & weren't too impressed...

 

[Gardebut30]

first thing ill comment on is that he is absolutely not compareable to nick lidstrom so if you think he is your in for a HUGE disappointment

It was a rhetorical question.

I think its safe to say that in no way was he comparing Barker to Lidstrom in their overall game.

 

[Chelios]

Take urself away from being a hawk fan for a second......first thing ill comment on is that he is absolutely not compareable to nick lidstrom so if you think he is your in for a HUGE disappointment.......he might be a smooth skater......hes not a fast one though.........how many dmen do you know who are big scorers from the point because of a nice wrist shot? or how many have good hard slap shots..............ive seen him get caught out of position plenty........he doesnt compete hard.......maybe thats what it is.......he will skate up to the offensive zone and then not bust nut going back to his own zone........I just think hes vasty overrated.

Don`t put words in my mouth, nowhere did i say anything about Barker being the next Lidstrom. I was just pointing out that you can be good defensively without being overly physical, which seemed to be your only criticism of Barker`s defense. Again, you have your opinion, but I think most people will agree with me that your opinion is simply not right.

 

[Letang fan 58]

Take yourself away from being a 'nobody will ever measure up to Phaneuf' fan for awhile. Barker doesn't run anyone thru the boards, he just takes them off the puck. Not as sexy, just as effective. Seabrook doesn't normally drill too many guys either & he's pretty damn good. Of course, you've probably seen him a hundred times & weren't too impressed...

Neither one of them are near Phaneuf.........Barker is much closer as far as good prospects go........I did see Seabrook a ton as he was also in the East of the dub........I dont think hes going to be some huge star........he has a chance to be a solid 2nd line dman though.

 

[Russian_fanatic]

In terms of short term point I see it as
Meszaros
Weber
Withney
Barker

In terms of long term point
Barker
Meszaros
Withney
Weber

In term Of Overall Game
WEBER (Is a Monster)
Barker
Meszaros
Withney

That being said I like them all... but Weber...

Agree Weber is just a pure monster. He is just NASTY on the defensive side of things.

 

[Chelios]

Neither one of them are near Phaneuf.........Barker is much closer as far as good prospects go........I did see Seabrook a ton as he was also in the East of the dub........I dont think hes going to be some huge star........he has a chance to be a solid 2nd line dman though.

So Barker is much closer to Phaneuf than Seabrook, and yet Barker "Lacks work ethic", "doesnt skate hard", "isn`t physical", "takes bad penalties", "is overrated", "did nothing for canada offensively at the WJCs", "Isn`t tough", "won`t hit", "has a bad slapshot", "is a poor skater", "went downhill since his draft year" and "gets caught out of position plenty". So what does that say about Seabrook? Just quit now phaneuf_fan_3, you are making yourself look like a fool.

 

[Roy G Biv*]

Meszaros is going to be one of those d-men that always go without notice because he isn't very flashy. He doesn't have the overrated BIG shot, or BIG hitting ability... he just plays the position great, both ways.

I think he'll be overlooked for many years, but then get recognition later in his career.

Players of his ilk:
-Wade Redden
-Nik Lidstrom
-Kim Johnsson

 

[Sammy*]

So Barker is much closer to Phaneuf than Seabrook, and yet Barker "Lacks work ethic", "doesnt skate hard", "isn`t physical", "takes bad penalties", "is overrated", "did nothing for canada offensively at the WJCs", "Isn`t tough", "won`t hit", "has a bad slapshot", "is a poor skater", "went downhill since his draft year" and "gets caught out of position plenty". So what does that say about Seabrook? Just quit now phaneuf_fan_3, you are making yourself look like a fool.

How many times have you seen Barker play? It really seems to bother you that phaneuf fan doesnt fawn all over Barker, & notices some negative aspects of his game. Given that he has seen him a whole bunch of times live, I would tend to think that his opinion may have merit, particularly as compared to a hawk fan who has barely seen him play.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

I wish people would get back to talking about what this is about: point production amongst the defensemen listed.

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

Neither one of them are near Phaneuf.........Barker is much closer as far as good prospects go........I did see Seabrook a ton as he was also in the East of the dub........I dont think hes going to be some huge star........he has a chance to be a solid 2nd line dman though.

Just MO, but if Barker turns out to be better than Seabrook, the Hawks are incredibly lucky. Not sure if you actually suffered through a Hawks game last year, but Seabrook was the only ray of sunshine. He looked great being the #1 d-man on a bad team. Unlike Phaneuf, he didn't have guys like Regehr and Warrener to lean on. He was a + player on a brutal team, and the team went something like 1W & 12L the 13 games he missed.

Back to the thread:

Short Term (strictly points)

Whitney = pretty much guaranteed 1st line PP time in PITT - this alone puts him in front and the others and they aren't even close IMO

Weber = very underrated shot - guy will score goals. I think that NASH will score more goals this year, but don't think that Weber will be on the 1st PP unit (Zidlicky & Timonen or forward playing the point) which puts him behind Whitney IMO. It's not in the original questions, but I think that SW will be the best overall d-man in the group long term.

Meszaros = not certain - but w/ OTT adding Preissing, I would think that AM get's pushed to the 2nd PP unit. Still, will play with a ton of talent and I would expect 45+ points

Barker = not even certain he'll be playing in CHI because his high cap # (rumored to be $2.7M) due to the bonuses. Also, it's tough to project any Hawks d-man to be in the other guys class point wise as the team will in all likelyhood score MANY fewer goals than the other teams listed.

Long term (4-5 years):

Whitney
Barker
Weber
Meszaros

 

[Chelios]

How many times have you seen Barker play? It really seems to bother you that phaneuf fan doesnt fawn all over Barker, & notices some negative aspects of his game. Given that he has seen him a whole bunch of times live, I would tend to think that his opinion may have merit, particularly as compared to a hawk fan who has barely seen him play.

I have seen him live about 10 times, seen every World Junior game and have talked to numerous scouts about him. I am not looking for anyone to fawn all over Barker, I just can`t understand how someon can be so negative about him unless they a) haven`t watched him closely or b) have some sort of bias against him. Read phaneuf_fan_3`s posts, they are incredibly negative without giving any real insight into why he is so negative. My guess would be that phaneuf_fan_3 is one of those people who seem to think that unless a defenseman has a huge slapshot and runs around the ice throwing huge hits, he isn`t any good. As I said before, I have never been a huge Barker fan until the World Juniors. I agree sometimes he seemed to be mailing it in in the dub, but he really impressed me with the way he stepped it up on the world stage. If anything I think he might have been a little bored with the dub after starting the season in the NHL.

 

[Letang fan 58]

I have seen him live about 10 times, seen every World Junior game and have talked to numerous scouts about him. I am not looking for anyone to fawn all over Barker, I just can`t understand how someon can be so negative about him unless they a) haven`t watched him closely or b) have some sort of bias against him. Read phaneuf_fan_3`s posts, they are incredibly negative without giving any real insight into why he is so negative. My guess would be that phaneuf_fan_3 is one of those people who seem to think that unless a defenseman has a huge slapshot and runs around the ice throwing huge hits, he isn`t any good. As I said before, I have never been a huge Barker fan until the World Juniors. I agree sometimes he seemed to be mailing it in in the dub, but he really impressed me with the way he stepped it up on the world stage. If anything I think he might have been a little bored with the dub after starting the season in the NHL.

I like lidstrom a ton and he does not have a heavy shot or hit ppl..........I like Staal a ton as a prospect, way higher then I like Barker..........I just think that Barker is the type who is hyped huge because he went third overall and will never live up to a 3rd overall pick.........For the other guy who mentioned Seabrook..........he was taken way later in the draft so Barker should be signifigantly better.........Barker was getting massive hype during his draft year and there was even talks by some scouts that he was better then Malkin and would be taken by the Pens.

The best example of a good D prospect that doesnt really hit doesnt have a huge shot but is great positionally to me is Mark Staal in New York......IMO he was much better for Canada last year then Barker was.

 

[Dempsey]

The best example of a good D prospect that doesnt really hit doesnt have a huge shot but is great positionally to me is Mark Staal in New York......IMO he was much better for Canada last year then Barker was.

His....name....is.....Marc.....Staal

 

[God Bless Canada]

-Whitney: I think he has great upside, but I think he's the least likely to reach it. He's the type who'll dazzle you one night, and confound you the next. Is he going to be a poor-man's Chris Pronger? Or will he be Vladimir Malakhov the sequel. So much skill, so much size. He's the type who, if he's going to hit his potential, he'll do it at 28 or 29.
-Barker: You have to love his combination of size and mobility. He might start the year anchoring Chicago's PP, but he won't finish it. And Chicago's going to have a stinker of a PP. I think he'll wind up in the AHL at some point. He needs to play with more desperation. After a few error-filled games early in the year, he'll be dispatched to the minors, and he'll learn his lesson.
-Meszaros: The temptation is to have massive expectations after his stellar rookie season. But the label "mature beyond his years" is very fitting for Meszaros. Those types of players tend to reach their peak sooner than others. Has he reached his peak already? No. But I don't know how much better he's going to get. But he'll be a really, really good defenceman for years to come.
-Weber: Big, strong with all the tools to be a No. 1 defenceman. I'm not certain he'll be a big point producer, as his numbers have never been eye-popping. But he has a heavy shot. Plays a sturdy, physical game and is more than adequate defensively. He'll be a cornerstone for years for the wealth of riches that is Nashville's defence.

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

I like lidstrom a ton and he does not have a heavy shot or hit ppl..........I like Staal a ton as a prospect, way higher then I like Barker..........I just think that Barker is the type who is hyped huge because he went third overall and will never live up to a 3rd overall pick.........For the other guy who mentioned Seabrook..........he was taken way later in the draft so Barker should be signifigantly better.........Barker was getting massive hype during his draft year and there was even talks by some scouts that he was better then Malkin and would be taken by the Pens.

The best example of a good D prospect that doesnt really hit doesnt have a huge shot but is great positionally to me is Mark Staal in New York......IMO he was much better for Canada last year then Barker was.

So your in-depth analysis of Seabrook basically starts and stops with "Seabrook..........he was taken way later in the draft so Barker should be signifigantly better"? Does that mean that Suter and Coburn should both be better than Phaneuf (and Seabrook) because they were drafted earlier? And since when was the difference between 3 & 14 "way later in the draft". Did you even watch Seabrook play in the NHL last year? Did you also happen to know that Seabrook & Marc Staal were drafted in basically the same spot in the draft?

(Before you spaz out - I personally don't think that draft position has ANYTHING to do with how a guy will turn out in the NHL - but it does seem from your post that you do.)

I also don't remember 1 credible source saying the Barker should go in front of Malkin.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

-Whitney: I think he has great upside, but I think he's the least likely to reach it. He's the type who'll dazzle you one night, and confound you the next. Is he going to be a poor-man's Chris Pronger? Or will he be Vladimir Malakhov the sequel. So much skill, so much size. He's the type who, if he's going to hit his potential, he'll do it at 28 or 29.
-Barker: You have to love his combination of size and mobility. He might start the year anchoring Chicago's PP, but he won't finish it. And Chicago's going to have a stinker of a PP. I think he'll wind up in the AHL at some point. He needs to play with more desperation. After a few error-filled games early in the year, he'll be dispatched to the minors, and he'll learn his lesson.
-Meszaros: The temptation is to have massive expectations after his stellar rookie season. But the label "mature beyond his years" is very fitting for Meszaros. Those types of players tend to reach their peak sooner than others. Has he reached his peak already? No. But I don't know how much better he's going to get. But he'll be a really, really good defenceman for years to come.
-Weber: Big, strong with all the tools to be a No. 1 defenceman. I'm not certain he'll be a big point producer, as his numbers have never been eye-popping. But he has a heavy shot. Plays a sturdy, physical game and is more than adequate defensively. He'll be a cornerstone for years for the wealth of riches that is Nashville's defence.

Pretty fair read on all four players, although I wonder what you think Whitney's upside is? Are you referring to just points or to all-around ability? I ask, because as a rookie defenseman he had 38 points in 68 games on a pretty bad Penguins team which is pretty impressive, and I see him adding to that quite a bit this year.

 

[Transported Upstater]

-Whitney: I think he has great upside, but I think he's the least likely to reach it. He's the type who'll dazzle you one night, and confound you the next. Is he going to be a poor-man's Chris Pronger? Or will he be Vladimir Malakhov the sequel. So much skill, so much size. He's the type who, if he's going to hit his potential, he'll do it at 28 or 29.
-Barker: You have to love his combination of size and mobility. He might start the year anchoring Chicago's PP, but he won't finish it. And Chicago's going to have a stinker of a PP. I think he'll wind up in the AHL at some point. He needs to play with more desperation. After a few error-filled games early in the year, he'll be dispatched to the minors, and he'll learn his lesson.
-Meszaros: The temptation is to have massive expectations after his stellar rookie season. But the label "mature beyond his years" is very fitting for Meszaros. Those types of players tend to reach their peak sooner than others. Has he reached his peak already? No. But I don't know how much better he's going to get. But he'll be a really, really good defenceman for years to come.
-Weber: Big, strong with all the tools to be a No. 1 defenceman. I'm not certain he'll be a big point producer, as his numbers have never been eye-popping. But he has a heavy shot. Plays a sturdy, physical game and is more than adequate defensively. He'll be a cornerstone for years for the wealth of riches that is Nashville's defence.

I agree with your assessment on Weber.

I'd take him, personally, before the other three, and that is no slight to any of them.

 

[God Bless Canada]

Pretty fair read on all four players, although I wonder what you think Whitney's upside is? Are you referring to just points or to all-around ability? I ask, because as a rookie defenseman he had 38 points in 68 games on a pretty bad Penguins team which is pretty impressive, and I see him adding to that quite a bit this year.

One thing to keep in mind with Whitney's rookie season: he's already five years removed from his first shot at draft eligibility. (Picked in 2002, but he decided not to "opt in" for the 2001 draft so he could retain his college eligibility). So he's already 23, the same age as Dan Hamhuis, Carlo Colaiacovo, Fedor Tyutin and other defencemen selected in 2001.

As for Whitney's potential: I think he could be a "poor man's" Chris Pronger. That's not meant as a slight in any way, much like THN didn't slight Matt Carle when they referred to him as a "poor man's Scott Niedermayer" in this year's Yearbook. I think there's a ton of upside in Whitney: he's big, he has mobility, he moves the puck well, he can work the power play, and if the PIM numbers are any indication, he's not afraid to be involved physically. (He might not be as physical as you might want for someone his size, but he'll atone for it in other ways). He had the great start, then went through the peaks and valleys associated with being a rookie offensive defenceman, then had the big finish points-wise.

Even taking production away, I do have concerns about his consistency. It's always been Whitney's biggest foe. He strikes me as the type who could be ripe for the sophomore jinx, even though he's 23. He also strikes me as the type who'll need a few years to figure out what it takes to be the defenceman he's capable of being. If he does, look out - he'll be a No. 1 defenceman, at worst a top-pairing guy who QBs your PP. He's not going to be that Seabrooke/Meszaros type who is so poised, so steady, so NHL-ready that he reaches he peak at early age, and maintains that peak for a really long time.