Komisarek Vs Hamhuis

[Kasparov*]

This should be good... both drafted in the same year, and brokeout at basicly the same time, who do you think will be better in the longrun? Give your answer and elaborate on it please

Who would you rather have on your team????

Click to read more...

 

[HuskyFlames]

Hamius has shwon more so far. He has had 1 season and already had 26 points (rookie year) in 80 games. he is also defensively sound as well.

basically I think both are about the same defensively but hamius has a huge lead in his offensive game over Komi.

 

[montreal]

This should be good... both drafted in the same year, and brokeout at basicly the same time, who do you think will be better in the longrun? Give your answer and elaborate on it please

Tough call. I found Komsiarek to be better in the AHL and Hamhuis better in the NHL.

 

[Kasparov*]

Tough call. I found Komsiarek to be better in the AHL and Hamhuis better in the NHL.

Yeah... Komisarek pretty much dominated in the AHL, it seems he just needs to adapt to the faster play in the NHL to become more sucessful.

 

[db23]

The main difference is that Nashville threw Hamhuis into the lineup and said "go ahead, sink or swim". Montreal has a lot more depth on defence, so they are bringing Komisarek along very slowly. Habs had about 10 defencemen with at least 3 or 4 years NHL experience the past two seasons.

Komisarek was a lot better in the AHL, when both were rookies. Mike had twice as many points and was an All Star starter when he was called up to Montreal in the 2002-03 season. He has the same offensive capability as Hamhuis, but far more all round upside.

P.S. - What is this elimination round "Survivor" starring Mike Komisarek?

 

[HuskyFlames]

The main difference is that Nashville threw Hamhuis into the lineup and said "go ahead, sink or swim". Montreal has a lot more depth on defence, so they are bringing Komisarek along very slowly. Habs had about 10 defencemen with at least 3 or 4 years NHL experience the past two seasons.

It can easily argue that Montreal had the defensive depth to allow Komi to develop better without the pressure Hamius had. I can even further say that Komi had more guys to learn from 9Souray, Markov, etc) than Hamuis had to develop and learn from.

The fact is hamius has shown a ton more than Komi at this point.

 

[417]

It can easily argue that Montreal had the defensive depth to allow Komi to develop better without the pressure Hamius had. I can even further say that Komi had more guys to learn from 9Souray, Markov, etc) than Hamuis had to develop and learn from.

The fact is hamius has shown a ton more than Komi at this point.

Perhaps, but there is no better way to learn and develop then to play...Hamhuis played a key role on the Nashville defense and responded quite well to his credit, however, Komisarek was brought along slowly, and was told to always use the safe play, he basically had a leash, he showed his potential during the playoffs and I assume he'll have a greater role once the NHl resumes it's activities...

 

[Marshall]

Hamhuis, easily.

 

[AJ1982]

Hamhuis, I firmly believe Hamhuis will be a top 2 defenseman in the NHL withing 5 years, and he could be one of the best in the league eventually. Komisarek will most likely have a longer development period, maybe as long as 8 years before he will peak. Hamhuis in his prime will bring more points to the table than Komisarek, imo, but Komisarek will be more the more intimidating player, in terms of the hitting. It's a fairly close call here but because I expect Hamhuis to develope more quickly and be better offensively, while being solid defensively, I give a solid edge to Hamhuis in terms of potential. I think in terms of peak upside, they are quite comparable players, both if they developed perfectly could be top defenseman in the NHL. As of right now, I don't think many will argue that Komisarek has been better in the NHL than Hamhuis because that simply isn't the case.

 

[Habdominal]

Hamhuis as shown way more habilities so far...I LOVE Komisarek

But on this one I gotta go with Hamhuis

 

[db23]

There is a huge difference in the situations they walked into in the NHL. When Komisarek turned pro, Montreal had the following defencemen on their rostor. Quintal, Brisebois, Dykhuis, Souray, Rivet, Traverse, Bouillon, Robidas, Markov and Hainsey. Nine defenceman with at least 4 years NHL experience, and a top draft pick who was an AHL All Star as a rookie pro. In total there was about 70 years worth of NHL experience that Komisarek had to overcome. Hamhuis stepped up to a defence that had about 20 years of NHL experience and only one legitimate starter in Kimmo Timmonen. I think that Hamhuis is a great prospect, but there is no way he would have been top 4 in Montreal.

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

There is a huge difference in the situations they walked into in the NHL. When Komisarek turned pro, Montreal had the following defencemen on their rostor. Quintal, Brisebois, Dykhuis, Souray, Rivet, Traverse, Bouillon, Robidas, Markov and Hainsey. Nine defenceman with at least 4 years NHL experience, and a top draft pick who was an AHL All Star as a rookie pro. In total there was about 70 years worth of NHL experience that Komisarek had to overcome. Hamhuis stepped up to a defence that had about 20 years of NHL experience and only one legitimate starter in Kimmo Timmonen. I think that Hamhuis is a great prospect, but there is no way he would have been top 4 in Montreal.

As a counterpoint:
Dykhuis/Traverse - not NHL caliber d-man
Bouillon - fringe 6/7 d-man
Hainsey - totally unproven

If Komi wasn't playing over those 4 guys, something is seriously wrong. Add in that Quintal was toast at that point in time of his career, and it's not looking good.

I do agree that MON brought Komi along slowly. I would say though that if he had shown more, he should of been behind Markov, Rivet, Brisebois, and Souray (who has been hurt for much of Komi's NHL time). If Komi is kept off the ice by the guys you talk about above, I think that is a MAJOR problem.

Along those lines - Nashville felt confident enough in Hamhuis (and Zdilicky) that they moved guys like Skrascins & York. Just something to consider.

 

[outKast*]

Dykhuis/Traverse - not NHL caliber d-man
Bouillon - fringe 6/7 d-man
Hainsey - totally unproven

Haha that's very true.

Komisarek is supposed to be heads and shoulders better than those players. Hamhuis already is better than those players.

 

[Blackshad]

Hamhuis for me, and i'm an hab fan hehehe.

 

[db23]

As a counterpoint:
Dykhuis/Traverse - not NHL caliber d-man
Bouillon - fringe 6/7 d-man
Hainsey - totally unproven

consider.

Traverse was just drafted by Dallas and signed when the Habs let him go. Dykhuis was playing ahead of Traverse. Robidas and Bouillon were both picked up by other NHL teams when the Habs put them on waivers. Robidas has been a regular on two other NHL teams since. Bouillon played for Canada at the World Championships a couple of years ago. Hainsey was an NCAA All American as a soph, and an AHL All Star as a 20 year old rookie.

 

[Enoch]

As a counterpoint:
Dykhuis/Traverse - not NHL caliber d-man
Bouillon - fringe 6/7 d-man
Hainsey - totally unproven

If Komi wasn't playing over those 4 guys, something is seriously wrong. Add in that Quintal was toast at that point in time of his career, and it's not looking good.

I do agree that MON brought Komi along slowly. I would say though that if he had shown more, he should of been behind Markov, Rivet, Brisebois, and Souray (who has been hurt for much of Komi's NHL time). If Komi is kept off the ice by the guys you talk about above, I think that is a MAJOR problem.

Along those lines - Nashville felt confident enough in Hamhuis (and Zdilicky) that they moved guys like Skrascins & York. Just something to consider.

Excellent counter points.

I'm a Nashville fan, so I doubt people would take any of my thoughts seriously. I will say, though, that Hamhuis's play in the NHL speaks for itself. He was a player from the get go, and was strong in the playoffs as well. While Komisareks, IMO, was extremely suspect. Personally, I see this as a battle between Komisarek's percieved potential and Hamhuis's percieved potential. Some believe he will be a huge intimidating, no. 1 dman, with loads of offensive potential. I believe his peak and potential is/will be significantly lower than that, but even IF we set his potential extremely high....Hamhuis has roughly the same upside as Mike, save for the hulking figure. Dan is not afraid to be physical and made the highlight reel several times for his hip-checks...Therefore, I would logically choose Hamhuis because he emerged from the past season looking even better than before and is easly on pace to meet his potential, whereas Komisarek, who MIGHT have higher potential, did not. In summary, why wait when you already know one of the players is living up to the expectations, when the other, who could likely only be marginally better, at best, is not?

 

[hockeyfan125]

Hamhuis very easily.

 

[Kasparov*]

Hamhuis very easily.

Really??? very easily? we'll see....

 

[Freaky Habs Fan]

Haha that's very true.

Komisarek is supposed to be heads and shoulders better than those players. Hamhuis already is better than those players.

He didn't play in front of them because he's a right handed D...He had Brisebois, Rivet and Quintal in front of him. Bouillion and Hainsey don't play on the same side.

And for the main question, I will say Hamhuis for now and maybe Komisarek next year. I say that because Hamhuis had the chance to show his talent. Not the same case with Komi but he have his spot in Montreal so we have to wait...

 

[Thundermare]

Really??? very easily? we'll see....

Right now... I think so too... and I'm a Habs fan

 

[Tuggy]

Hamhuis very easily.

yes...good point.

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

Traverse was just drafted by Dallas and signed when the Habs let him go. Dykhuis was playing ahead of Traverse. Robidas and Bouillon were both picked up by other NHL teams when the Habs put them on waivers. Robidas has been a regular on two other NHL teams since. Bouillon played for Canada at the World Championships a couple of years ago. Hainsey was an NCAA All American as a soph, and an AHL All Star as a 20 year old rookie.

Are you actually trying to tell me that Dykhuis and Traverse are legit NHL defenseman? I have a hard time calling the Hawks a NHL level team last year (and I like Robidas). Fact is that he's a #6/7 type of d-man in the NHL. You seem to give Komi the edge over every other d-man because he's 6-4 & weighs 240lbs, but Bouillion at 180 isn't a problem?

The bottom line is that if you are trying to say that the Komi progression is being hampered because the blueline is so full of talent, I question your hockey judgement. That argument might work if you're talking about DET's or OTT's blueline, but surely not MON's. If Bouillon, Traverse, Dykhuis or Robidas is keeping you from getting PT, that's raises a question in my mind.

 

[HuskyFlames]

He didn't play in front of them because he's a right handed D...He had Brisebois, Rivet and Quintal in front of him. Bouillion and Hainsey don't play on the same side.

And for the main question, I will say Hamhuis for now and maybe Komisarek next year. I say that because Hamhuis had the chance to show his talent. Not the same case with Komi but he have his spot in Montreal so we have to wait...

The Flames HAVE 1 RH defenseman besides Commodore and Montador. Commy was a minor league player last year and Montador was a press box guy. If Komi had talent and was playing well, players would easily be changed no matter WHAT hand they played with. That is a very poor arguement.

 

[Freaky Habs Fan]

The Flames HAVE 1 RH defenseman besides Commodore and Montador. Commy was a minor league player last year and Montador was a press box guy. If Komi had talent and was playing well, players would easily be changed no matter WHAT hand they played with. That is a very poor arguement.

They tried to swapt side but it didn't work...

Quintal was sooo awfull
Komi was sometimes O.K.
Brisebois wasen't able to play on the left side
Rivet was O.K but he is way better on the right side


So that's what happend...things change when you know the situation of a team. My argument isn't so bad after all

 

[HuskyFlames]

They tried to swapt side but it didn't work...

Quintal was sooo awfull
Komi was sometimes O.K.
Brisebois wasen't able to play on the left side
Rivet was O.K but he is way better on the right side


So that's what happend...things change when you know the situation of a team. My argument isn't so bad after all

Pretty bad for professional players to not be able to play both sides. Besides 1 pairing, the Flames played 2 pairings with al LH shot defenseman. I still consider the "but they can't play on their off wing" a very weak arguement as to why Komi didn't get more time, etc.