bleublancrouge
Registered User
Hi, I want to know if you think that Komisarek will be a Regehr type of player. If yes, will he be as good as Regehr? If no, who will you compare him to?
db23 said:Putting Komisarek's name out on the prospects board is like throwing well aged meat into an alley. It attracts all the rats. Too bad there is no way of nuking them while they're all in one spot.
Not this stupid arguement where he started hockey at a younger agedb23 said:Mike is years away from realizing his full potential. It always takes defensemen longer than forwards or goaltenders, it takes big players longer than smaller players, it takes U.S. college products longer than Canadian juniors or Europeans, and it definitely takes players who started playing hockey at the age of 12 in New York longer than anyone else.
I've said it before, I'll say it again, Komisarek's development curve is at the point of most 18 or 19 year olds who came up in Canadian or European junior ranks. He is the equivalent of someone coming directly out of the draft to be an AHL All Star and part time NHLer. So, you can extrapollate his potential from there.
It doesn't? Didn't Jovanovski start playing hockey late too? And didn't he take a long time to develop?19bruins19 said:Not this stupid arguement where he started hockey at a younger age
IT DOESN'T MATTER!!
Age matters when your a kid. It doesnt matter more than a wit when you are in your early 20's. His point is frankly stupid. If Komisarek is no good now (not to sayhe isnt or he wont be later) it has nothing to do with the when he started playing hockey, though it could have something to do with his size.Postman said:It doesn't? Didn't Jovanovski start playing hockey late too? And didn't he take a long time to develop?
I'd imagine it matters somehow.
Postman said:It doesn't? Didn't Jovanovski start playing hockey late too? And didn't he take a long time to develop?
I'd imagine it matters somehow.
It took Jovanovski 6 years to crack the 40 point mark. Is that average? I don't think I've ever stopped to do the calculations.Vlad The Impaler said:Ed Jovanovski didn't take any more time to develop once drafted than the average defenseman. In fact, I'd say he compares well or better to most of them.
I agree with you, but like Jovanovski, he has the tools to make his mistakes somewhat bearable.Vlad The Impaler said:This is just one myth where people expected Jovo to be less dumb as time goes by. Which he has done but not much.
Some numbnuts can continue to see Komisarek as the next Pronger but it's not going to happen. He has limitations that he will not get away with no matter if he spends 5 or 10 years in this league.
Vlad The Impaler said:Ed Jovanovski didn't take any more time to develop once drafted than the average defenseman. In fact, I'd say he compares well or better to most of them.
This is just one myth where people expected Jovo to be less dumb as time goes by. Which he has done but not much.
Some numbnuts can continue to see Komisarek as the next Pronger but it's not going to happen. He has limitations that he will not get away with no matter if he spends 5 or 10 years in this league.
Postman said:It took Jovanovski 6 years to crack the 40 point mark. Is that average? I don't think I've ever stopped to do the calculations.
Postman said:I don't see the Pronger upside, but at the same time, I don't see the Aki Berg downside either. I think he can end up somewhere in the middle (obviously that's a big gap) as a 2nd pairing defenseman.
Is this the same criteria that puts Matt Nickerson in your list of top-10 defensive prospects?db23 said:Komisarek developed in an atmosphere that focussed on fundamnetal skills without a lot of game time. He averaged about 40-50 games a year as a teenager, which is about half of what the Canadian kids play. So he is an exceptional athlete with great fundamental skills but not the game time and hockey sense that his peers have. It is only in the past two years, since he turned pro that Mike has played a lot of games. Defencemen like Hamhuis, Colaiacovo, Morrisson etc. from the same draft have likely played 5 times as many competitive hockey matches in their lifetime. Komisarek just needs time and he WILL continue to improve long after the others have levelled out.
flyers guy said:Is this the same criteria that puts Matt Nickerson in your list of top-10 defensive prospects?
db23 said:Nickerson was the best defenceman at the U.S. U20 tourney camp among a group that included Suter and Thelen. He scored more points than either of them and could crumple up Suter like a paper bag and drop him in the nearest dumpster.
Leafaholix said:He's North America's answer to Aki Berg.
SmokeyClause said:Just curious, did you watch the camp? I ask this because quite a bit of your opinions have little foundation in visual scouting. Was he better because he scored more points? Was he better because someone of note said he was better? Or was he better because he was bigger?
I've seen the big guy play, he's impressive physically, but if he continues to outplay either of those two, they might want to rethink their careers.
No doubt, its a gimmee. Thats why he was picked 99th overall, cause hes such a sure thing to not only play in the NHL, but to be a top D-man.db23 said:I didn't see it first hand, but all the comments I read, including quotes from pro scouts, were that Nickerson and Jack Johnson were the two best defencemen for the U.S. at the tourney. If Matt can play for the U.S. national junior team under international rules on the big ice surface, given his size and style, then he is going to be a top NHL defenceman.