Top 10 Defencemen Prospects

Status
Not open for further replies.

Dave is a killer

Dave's a Mess
Oct 17, 2002
26,507
18
Cumming GA
Flames Draft Watcher said:
You know I used to believe that as well. But I could give you countless examples of how stats can be extremely misleading. Nothing substitutes for watching the players exclusively and scouting them. Stats are a weak attempt to prove anything in hockey IMO. Unfortunately on a messageboard there's no way to prove anything. There's subjective opinions and every poster has to decide how much stock to place in anyone's opinions.

But scouts certainly don't prove players are better than other players by looking at the stat sheet and if you believe that you really don't have a clue.

so throw all stats out the window, even if it is a stat of not allowing a goal on your watch in a 6 game tournament?...ooookay
 

Flames Draft Watcher

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
4,793
0
Calgary
Visit site
Seven_Nation_Army said:
so throw all stats out the window, even if it is a stat of not allowing a goal on your watch in a 6 game tournament?...ooookay

That's correct. And my post gives some compelling arguments as to why that should be the case. On a messageboard where not a lot of posters can see the players live on the ice multiple times stats are going to be overused.

Nothing replaces watching a player live and scouting his performance in every game. If you think looking at some stat does then you really don't have a clue about evaluating young players.
 

borro

Registered User
Oct 8, 2002
3,141
0
Texas
Visit site
Jay Thompson said:
Don't mistake one hit or one game to be a judge of a players aggressiveness. I saw him play for Portland last year and talked to some Portland fans and the prevailing thought is that he's a p***ycat most nights. I even talked to a scout in HF Chat who said he was the most overrated defenseman of the 2003 draft. His skillset is quite underwhelming, too. A lot of folks expected a lot more, but he just doesn't have the high level of puck skills that Atlanta was hoping he'd develop more.

You know it's funny you say that. People claim the same thing about Witt. Also Valabik, another Atlanta prospect is cut from the same cloth. I don't believe in all aggressive players, a mix is nice.
 

Mizral

Registered User
Sep 20, 2002
18,187
2
Earth, MW
Visit site
borro said:
You know it's funny you say that. People claim the same thing about Witt. Also Valabik, another Atlanta prospect is cut from the same cloth. I don't believe in all aggressive players, a mix is nice.

Oh I agree, but when you've got a defenseman with size, a modicum of skating and passing, and not much else, you really wonder why he was selected so high. Yes he's not bad, I think there's a good chance he'll end up something like a Hal Gill-sort of defenseman (big man in the #4 slot who can make decent plays out of his own zone). But that does not really reflect the great draft status he had. The prevailing thoughts with Coburn going into 2003 was that he had good skill and was going to break out offensively soon. Well, it didn't really happen as much as Portland or the Thrashers had hoped, and if you compare him to other top defensemen in 2003, even the ones beyond Suter and Phaneuf (Seabrook, Stuart, etc..), I'm not sure he's much better at this point. Or if better, not by a hell of a lot.

It wouldn't bother Winterhawks fans so much if Coburn wasn't already huge. Or if he had more offensive skill. Atlanta fans are really going to go crazy over how soft this guy is compared to how big he is. That said, he'll play 10 - 15 years in the league, and that's nothing to scoff at.
 

borro

Registered User
Oct 8, 2002
3,141
0
Texas
Visit site
Jay Thompson said:
Oh I agree, but when you've got a defenseman with size, a modicum of skating and passing, and not much else, you really wonder why he was selected so high. Yes he's not bad, I think there's a good chance he'll end up something like a Hal Gill-sort of defenseman (big man in the #4 slot who can make decent plays out of his own zone). But that does not really reflect the great draft status he had. The prevailing thoughts with Coburn going into 2003 was that he had good skill and was going to break out offensively soon. Well, it didn't really happen as much as Portland or the Thrashers had hoped, and if you compare him to other top defensemen in 2003, even the ones beyond Suter and Phaneuf (Seabrook, Stuart, etc..), I'm not sure he's much better at this point. Or if better, not by a hell of a lot.

It wouldn't bother Winterhawks fans so much if Coburn wasn't already huge. Or if he had more offensive skill. Atlanta fans are really going to go crazy over how soft this guy is compared to how big he is. That said, he'll play 10 - 15 years in the league, and that's nothing to scoff at.

Yeh, look at how much Leetch and Poti helped the Rangers! The fact is these offensive minded guys forget to hit and wind up being more minus guys. You couldnt GIVE me Poti. Coburn is rated correctly. I don't care if he scores 0 goals. If he keeps hitting like he did on Fehr, he plays for my team. Same reason Witt is so underrated and been consistently underpaid. Give him a Regeher linemate and he would be +20 or more.
 

FlyerFire

Registered User
Feb 16, 2003
1,781
194
Visit site
all this bickering

and noone is truly RIGHT.IF they reach their potential and IF they are not hurt and IF they are developed properly, they might be like CHRIS THERIEN(writer turns to side and laughs until he pukes) LOL lets just see what shakes out :lol
 

borro

Registered User
Oct 8, 2002
3,141
0
Texas
Visit site
Jay Thompson said:
Oh I agree, but when you've got a defenseman with size, a modicum of skating and passing, and not much else, you really wonder why he was selected so high. Yes he's not bad, I think there's a good chance he'll end up something like a Hal Gill-sort of defenseman (big man in the #4 slot who can make decent plays out of his own zone). But that does not really reflect the great draft status he had. The prevailing thoughts with Coburn going into 2003 was that he had good skill and was going to break out offensively soon. Well, it didn't really happen as much as Portland or the Thrashers had hoped, and if you compare him to other top defensemen in 2003, even the ones beyond Suter and Phaneuf (Seabrook, Stuart, etc..), I'm not sure he's much better at this point. Or if better, not by a hell of a lot.

It wouldn't bother Winterhawks fans so much if Coburn wasn't already huge. Or if he had more offensive skill. Atlanta fans are really going to go crazy over how soft this guy is compared to how big he is. That said, he'll play 10 - 15 years in the league, and that's nothing to scoff at.

Coburn and Valabik need to take care of Kovalchuck and Heatley first. They need guys who stand up for their stars.
 

Flames Draft Watcher

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
4,793
0
Calgary
Visit site
nomorekids said:
charmin-soft coburn is the one to do that?

Regehr didn't have much of a mean streak until the last year or so.

Twould be pretty shortsighted to think Coburn might not improve in that area, especially when he turns pro and the Thrashers have direct control over his development.
 

SmokeyClause

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
9,999
0
Miami, FL
Visit site
Flames Draft Watcher said:
Twould be pretty shortsighted to think Coburn might not improve in that area, especially when he turns pro and the Thrashers have direct control over his development.

It would also be pretty illogical to think he would develop that area of his game when so many players haven't. It's very difficult to change who you are as a person on or off the ice. It's not some that comes about because the coach asks you to work on it. If it was that easy, many big Dman would have a Pronger-esque mean streaks.
 

chris39bong

Registered User
Jay Thompson said:
#1 - Dion Phaneuf: The surest bet to be an NHL star outside of Kari Lehtonen & Alexander Ovechkin among prospects. Top pairing potential.

#2 - Ryan Suter: A close second. While he is not the 'sure thing' Phaneuf is, you could argue that Suter's potential to be a better player is perhaps better. Still, until Suter shows his offensive game is not in statis, he's #2. Top pairing potential.

#3 - Fedor Tyutin: He's pretty well already an NHL player, and his overall skill level is very high. Big guy who does just about everything right. Could be a top 3 man someday.

#4 - Cam Barker: A great prospect, but I want to see more. Some nights you go see Barker and you're just really dissapointed. That happened for me last year. Had a 'meh' Memorial Cup until the final game where he was just crazy-good. Kid has a lot of potential, but still a ways from the NHL so that's why he's not #3. Top 3 potential.

#5 - Ladislav Smid: Excellent two-way player who might be like fellow Czech Roman Hamrlik. Has to work on his aggressiveness, but overall is a very, very smart kid who has size and skill to work with. Top 3 potential.

#6 - Carlo Colaiacovo: Does everything on the ice pretty darn well, nothing wrong with this kid in the least. Has the potential to dominate games, but has to be more consistant. Top 4 potential for sure.

#7 - Denis Grebeshkov: I personally really like this Russian, I know some don't but he really does it for me. I like his hustle, I think he works so hard that there's no way he'll fail. Top 4 potential.

#8 - Christian Ehrhoff: Boom or bust, but the boom is so high on this young man. He could be a HELL of a defenseman, or he won't play much at all. Maybe the fastest defenseman the NHL has every seen, or at least the quickest, and very skilled with the puck. I am a big fan, and he could be a top 3 man. And considering the Sharks great track record with working with young prospects, I'd say the boom is fairly atainable for him.

#9 - Anton Babchuck: Not sure if he's still a prospect by HF standards, but I really like this kid. Top 4 potential.

#10 - Braydon Coburn: Not a lot of skill, but doesn't embarass himself either. Had a stretch for a month or so where he looked all-world, but came down again. Probobly shouldn't have been drafted as high as he was, but he WILL make the NHL, but at what capacity, who knows. Probobly a top 4 man though.

Notable Ommissios: Meszaros, Lynch, Stuart, Koltsov, Whitney, Woywitka - all very good, but not quite good enough to make my list.

Great list. Good to see someone mention Christian Ehrhoff other than another Sharks fan. You're absolutely right about his skating ability and skill with the puck. At worst he'll probably end up as a strong PP specialist, but similar to a young Ozolonish at full strength. He's weak but has a projectable frame that he's starting to add some muscle too. One thing about him that you didn't mention is that he's able and willing to throw huge hits. As he gets more confident in his abilities in NA i'd expect to see a little more of that little known aspect of his game. Strength and positioning are his two biggest weaknesses right now, and due to SJ's depth at D, he'd probably be better playing another year in Cleveland. In 05-06 i expect him to have a very good year, but we'll see.

Some people are mentioning Woywitka as overrated. I don't think so. He's so solid in every aspect of the game. To point to Pitkanen as beating out Woywitka as reasoning for him being overrated makes no sense. Pitkanen has #1 potential, whereas Woywitka will be hardpressed to become a #2 on a good defensive squad, so of course Pitkanen beat him out. Does that make Woywitka any less of a player or overrated? Of course not. The only way that Woywitka could be overrated is in reguards to his junior and AHL teamate, Doug Lynch. I think Woywitka is more of a known commodity being a former 1st rounder and being the centerpiece of the Comrie deal, but Lynch is very much the same player Woywitka is.

One name i'd like to add to the group of prospects being thrown around is Mark Popovic. He had a great training camp last season only to be beat out for a roster spot by a utility type player. I found out through a Ducks official the reasoning was due to Lance Ward's physical play (which Anaheim was lacking) and his ability to line up at forward or defense. But the team is still high on Popovic, who oozes two-way ability, and should be a 2nd pairing defenseman for the Ducks in only a couple seasons.
 

Mizral

Registered User
Sep 20, 2002
18,187
2
Earth, MW
Visit site
borro said:
Yeh, look at how much Leetch and Poti helped the Rangers! The fact is these offensive minded guys forget to hit and wind up being more minus guys. You couldnt GIVE me Poti. Coburn is rated correctly. I don't care if he scores 0 goals. If he keeps hitting like he did on Fehr, he plays for my team. Same reason Witt is so underrated and been consistently underpaid. Give him a Regeher linemate and he would be +20 or more.

My point is, borro, that hit on Fehr (I didn't see it personally) may have been great, but the guy does not hit much for his size. I'm not saying he'll never change, but as of right now he's a big defenseman when a modicum of skill, and that's all. Not very aggressive, not much offensive upside (so far as I can tell). The only really nice part I like about Coburn is that considering his size, he can skate decently.
 

Mizral

Registered User
Sep 20, 2002
18,187
2
Earth, MW
Visit site
SmokeyClause said:
It would also be pretty illogical to think he would develop that area of his game when so many players haven't. It's very difficult to change who you are as a person on or off the ice. It's not some that comes about because the coach asks you to work on it. If it was that easy, many big Dman would have a Pronger-esque mean streaks.

That's my concern about Coburn. Even if he doesn't change, he'll be okay. But I can't see any way he'll be a top pairing man in the least.

There have been a few players who 'change their attitudes' on the ice. Zdeno Chara is one off the top of my head. However, they are few and far between.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->