Top 15 D prospects

Status
Not open for further replies.

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,015
11,021
Murica
Jason MacIsaac said:
Physical game and sound positional play, and much younger and more room to improve.


Yeah, he is two years younger so he does have that on Whitney. As for his play, he's no banger and doesn't have near the offensive upside as Whitney does. I see Coburn as a very safe, but unspectacular top four D-man.
 

Roughneck

Registered User
Oct 15, 2003
9,609
1
Calgary
Visit site
Rabid Ranger said:
Yeah, he is two years younger so he does have that on Whitney. As for his play, he's no banger and doesn't have near the offensive upside as Whitney does. I see Coburn as a very safe, but unspectacular top four D-man.

This is dead on my view of Coburn, unspectacular is the perfect word.

Will he be a good D-man, yes, but he won't be anything special, Whitney will probably become one of the better offensive d-men in the league.
 

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,015
11,021
Murica
Roughneck said:
This is dead on my view of Coburn, unspectacular is the perfect word.

Will he be a good D-man, yes, but he won't be anything special, Whitney will probably become one of the better offensive d-men in the league.

I see Coburn as the kind of guy who will play 15 years in the NHL but you'll hardly notice him. Valuable in his own way, but not a stand-out. I think Atlanta could have done better with their pick that year.
 

MrMastodonFarm*

Registered User
Jul 5, 2004
6,207
0
Rabid Ranger said:
Fair enough, but what does Coburn do that makes him superior to Whitney? Nothing IMO.
Nice throw in of the word superior there, don't recall using it, but thanks.

Coburn is physical, big, and is developing a nice mean streak. Whitney offensive, but not "best passing in the NHL" as one Pittsburg fan said the other day.
 

God Bless Canada

Registered User
Jul 11, 2004
11,793
17
Bentley reunion
TransportedUpstater said:
2nd best D-man in the tournament? Seriously?
Did you watch that tournament? He did everything you could every ask of a defenceman: he played smart, steady defensive hockey, he made smart passes and heads-up plays coming out of his own zone, he rushed the puck well, and he continued to showcase his elite skating ability. If he can play that type of consistent, heads-up hockey (which has long been his biggest deficiency), he will be a No. 2 defenceman. He's not the first player to struggle in his first year of pro.
 

Roughneck

Registered User
Oct 15, 2003
9,609
1
Calgary
Visit site
Rabid Ranger said:
I think Atlanta could have done better with their pick that year.

Well that goes without saying considering the defenseman picked after him, but at the time of the draft Coburn probably had the highest ceiling, being a big, smooth skating defenseman with a good first pass, it was very hard to not hope he could be a poor-man's Pronger (there were also the Bouwmeester comparisons), unfortunetely, average years in the Dub and not being a standout in the WJCs also showed that he didn't have the edge that seperated the likes of Phaneuf and Suter.
 

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,015
11,021
Murica
MrMastodonFarm said:
Nice throw in of the word superior there, don't recall using it, but thanks.

Coburn is physical, big, and is developing a nice mean streak. Whitney offensive, but not "best passing in the NHL" as one Pittsburg fan said the other day.


Isn't that what you were implying, that Coburn is superior to Whitney? I don't agree with you, but it's your opinion and that's fine. All of the things you ascribe to Coburn I can ascribe to Whitney, plus he's much more adept offensively. I wouldn't say he's the best passing defenseman in the league, but he's gifted in that regard.
 

God Bless Canada

Registered User
Jul 11, 2004
11,793
17
Bentley reunion
Rabid Ranger said:
I see Coburn as the kind of guy who will play 15 years in the NHL but you'll hardly notice him. Valuable in his own way, but not a stand-out. I think Atlanta could have done better with their pick that year.
There's a philosophy in hockey circles that I am a firm believer in: you know a defenceman has had a great game when you don't notice him. If you notice a defenceman, more often than not it's because he made a mistake.
 

Roughneck

Registered User
Oct 15, 2003
9,609
1
Calgary
Visit site
GSG said:
I think the fact that Lee was drafted ahead of Bourdon and Staal has some importance, especially when a good drafting team like the Sens makes that pick.

I don't think we will see an accurate view of what Lee can become for another season or so, definitely an intriguing pick and one to watch. Lets hope there's an improvement at the WJCs, it will be the first big test of how he really stacks up (last year would be an unfair assemssment).
 

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,015
11,021
Murica
Roughneck said:
Well that goes without saying considering the defenseman picked after him, but at the time of the draft Coburn probably had the highest ceiling, being a big, smooth skating defenseman with a good first pass, it was very hard to not hope he could be a poor-man's Pronger (there were also the Bouwmeester comparisons), unfortunetely, average years in the Dub and not being a standout in the WJCs also showed that he didn't have the edge that seperated the likes of Phaneuf and Suter.

Hind-sight certainly is 20/20.
 

abracanada

Registered User
Aug 29, 2004
5,574
0
God Bless Canada said:
There's a philosophy in hockey circles that I am a firm believer in: you know a defenceman has had a great game when you don't notice him. If you notice a defenceman, more often than not it's because he made a mistake.

Kind of lets Bobby Orr out. :confused:
 

MrMastodonFarm*

Registered User
Jul 5, 2004
6,207
0
Rabid Ranger said:
Isn't that what you were implying, that Coburn is superior to Whitney? .
How the hell was I implying that?

Please, point that out to me.

I prefer Whitney over Coburn personally, but I'm not going to sh*t a brick like whatshisname if someone says differently.
 

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,015
11,021
Murica
God Bless Canada said:
There's a philosophy in hockey circles that I am a firm believer in: you know a defenceman has had a great game when you don't notice him. If you notice a defenceman, more often than not it's because he made a mistake.


I agree...to an extent. I think a truly great defenseman brings a bit of attention to himself from either his offensive skills or hitting ability.
 

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,015
11,021
Murica
MrMastodonFarm said:
How the hell was I implying that?

Please, point that out to me.

I prefer Whitney over Coburn personally, but I'm not going to sh*t a brick like whatshisname if someone says differently.


That's cool. I guess I misinterpreted your post. No big deal.
 

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,015
11,021
Murica
God Bless Canada said:
Did you watch that tournament? He did everything you could every ask of a defenceman: he played smart, steady defensive hockey, he made smart passes and heads-up plays coming out of his own zone, he rushed the puck well, and he continued to showcase his elite skating ability. If he can play that type of consistent, heads-up hockey (which has long been his biggest deficiency), he will be a No. 2 defenceman. He's not the first player to struggle in his first year of pro.


I would agree that Belle has the potential to be that kind of player. However, you also said something about scoring 50-60 points. Do you honestly think Bell could do that?
 

God Bless Canada

Registered User
Jul 11, 2004
11,793
17
Bentley reunion
Rabid Ranger said:
I would agree that Belle has the potential to be that kind of player. However, you also said something about scoring 50-60 points. Do you honestly think Bell could do that?
I never said he would score 50-60 points. I said he would be a top-pairing NHL defenceman, which essentially puts him as a top 50-60 NHL defenceman. Even at the WJC, when he played so incredibly well, he had one assist in six games. He'll never be a big point producer, but a defenceman doesn't have to put up points to be a top-pairing player.
 

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,015
11,021
Murica
God Bless Canada said:
I never said he would score 50-60 points. I said he would be a top-pairing NHL defenceman, which essentially puts him as a top 50-60 NHL defenceman. Even at the WJC, when he played so incredibly well, he had one assist in six games. He'll never be a big point producer, but a defenceman doesn't have to put up points to be a top-pairing player.


My apologies. I need to learn to read a bit more carefully. I would agree that if Belle reaches his potential he would fit your description.
 

OrrNumber4

Registered User
Jul 25, 2002
15,716
4,975
God Bless Canada said:
Did you watch that tournament? He did everything you could every ask of a defenceman: he played smart, steady defensive hockey, he made smart passes and heads-up plays coming out of his own zone, he rushed the puck well, and he continued to showcase his elite skating ability. If he can play that type of consistent, heads-up hockey (which has long been his biggest deficiency), he will be a No. 2 defenceman. He's not the first player to struggle in his first year of pro.

However, its questionable if he can maintain that level of play. Belle played very well in the tournament, and showed his hockey sense; he looked a lot like Sergei Gonchar. However, he hasn't done well since then. There are a lot of questions surrounding him. Did he just get on a hot streak during the tournament? Is he a player that needs the right motivation to succeed? Is he a lazy player who played well because of the tournament's importance? Or was he motivated by the pressure of the tournament? Did he improve his play because he enjoyed the challenging competition or because he had extremely skilled line-mates? He has tremendous upside, but he is extremely raw. He should be putting up high numbers in the AHL considering his main asset is his offensive abilities. He's not bad defensively, and he is not reckless with the puck. He is a very high risk, high reward defenseman.

In regards to Daley: He'd make my top 25, but I think he's too small to be effective. His size will always prevent him from being better He is doing well right now, and is actually solid defensively, but I want to see more from him. He has a future as a power-play quarterback, but he does not have the max top-end of players like Suter, Whitney, or Nisakanen. I'd compare him to Tom Preissing.

Coburn-Whitney: A lot of posters nailed it about Whitney being a more prominent defenseman while Coburn will be a more quiet defenseman. Interestingly, Coburn is similar to Flyer defenseman Mike Rathje in that both had offensive potential but refined their games into rock solid, quiet, defensive-defensemen. Coburn is not a big hitter, like Mike Rathje, and possesses a long reach. Coburn does have a great point shot and is an underrated pp-quarterback; I hope he can realize his potential. Its very possible that he becomes better than Whitney.

However, Whitney can be a special defenseman like Gonchar, flying over the ice and acting like a fourth forward. Unlike Gonchar, he is adequate defensively, and if he can fine tune his abilities could be a Scott Niedermayer. He has great size like Coburn, and is not afraid to hit. He has stopped making so many rookie mistakes, and it looks like the NCAA developed him into a very mature player. His progress has been very good. I believe he has a higher ceiling offensively than Coburn and is more likely to reach that potential.

What makes Whitney slightly more valuable is the fact that there will be many defensemen like Coburn. But if Whitney reaches just his offensive potential, there will be very few people at his level of talent.
 

The Mars Volchenkov

Registered User
Mar 31, 2002
49,604
3,421
Colorado
Roughneck said:
I don't think we will see an accurate view of what Lee can become for another season or so, definitely an intriguing pick and one to watch. Lets hope there's an improvement at the WJCs, it will be the first big test of how he really stacks up (last year would be an unfair assemssment).
The WJC's will certainly be huge for Lee this year, he'll be one of the top defenseman on the team. That being said, he's already passing his first big test in College Hockey. He's taken on a big role on a good team in North Dakota and has played very well. He has 9 points in 12 games, which is tops on his team for defenseman (Only 1 less point than Travis Zajac).
 

Porn*

Registered User
Mar 6, 2002
36,386
5
In your nightmares
GSG said:
I think the fact that Lee was drafted ahead of Bourdon and Staal has some importance, especially when a good drafting team like the Sens makes that pick.
i'm pretty sure cereda was picked before havlat... and look at how that ended ;)
 

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,015
11,021
Murica
Porn* said:
i'm pretty sure cereda was picked before havlat... and look at how that ended ;)

Yeah. it pretty much confirms the fact that the Sens know what they're doing and the Leafs don't...........
 

jmelm

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 27, 2002
13,412
3,822
Toronto, Canada
superroyain10 said:
Coburn-Whitney: A lot of posters nailed it about Whitney being a more prominent defenseman while Coburn will be a more quiet defenseman. Interestingly, Coburn is similar to Flyer defenseman Mike Rathje in that both had offensive potential but refined their games into rock solid, quiet, defensive-defensemen. Coburn is not a big hitter, like Mike Rathje, and possesses a long reach. Coburn does have a great point shot and is an underrated pp-quarterback; I hope he can realize his potential. Its very possible that he becomes better than Whitney.

However, Whitney can be a special defenseman like Gonchar, flying over the ice and acting like a fourth forward. Unlike Gonchar, he is adequate defensively, and if he can fine tune his abilities could be a Scott Niedermayer. He has great size like Coburn, and is not afraid to hit. He has stopped making so many rookie mistakes, and it looks like the NCAA developed him into a very mature player. His progress has been very good. I believe he has a higher ceiling offensively than Coburn and is more likely to reach that potential.

What makes Whitney slightly more valuable is the fact that there will be many defensemen like Coburn. But if Whitney reaches just his offensive potential, there will be very few people at his level of talent.

Not a bad post, but people need to realize that, unlike Gonchar or Poti (to whom Whitney has oftern been compared), Whitney is rock-solid defensively. The whole reason why he is so good is because he is amazing defensively in addition to being great offensively.

And while I don't want to go overboard about Whitney (although some may say I already have ;) ), I think I might have to agree with Master Shake in thinking that Whitney is already the best passer out of any defenseman in the league.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->