HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk > Polls - (hockey-related only)

Phaneuf or Jackman

View Poll Results: Phaneuf or Jackman
Dion Phaneuf 105 66.04%
Barret Jackman 54 33.96%
Voters: 159. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-27-2004, 02:10 PM
  #101
MrMastodonFarm*
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 6,093
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jovanovski = Norris
Adam Foote has 234 points over 13 seasons for an average of exactly 18 points per season. Jackman scored 19 points in his rookie season. If Jackman can be an Adam Foote type of defenseman and put up more points - I think he can be a #1 defenseman in the league.
And Dion Phaneuf can be that same tough hard hitting blueliner, and put up points.

Advantage Phaneuf.

MrMastodonFarm* is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 02:56 PM
  #102
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm
And Dion Phaneuf can be that same tough hard hitting blueliner, and put up points.

Advantage Phaneuf.
What you flames fans aren't registering is that he hasn't done it yet... he can be that guy, or he can be Igor Ulanov circa 1995.

Jackman already is (key word... is, not can be) that defenseman... so Advantage Jackman.

Christ, it's like an idiot convention here... just because a poster would rather a guy who has actually done it, vs a guy who could be the next Scott Stevens, doesn't mean they are stupid.

Picking a guy who has proven himself at the top level, vs picking a guy because he beats up on teenagers in a level far lower isn't wrong... especially when they are only 3 years apart in age.

You flames fans have a bit of a complex. Phaneuf hasn't accomplished a damn thing yet at the NHL level, and it's about time you recognized that. Jackman has proven that he can be a very good NHL defenseman, and he did it at a very young age. Flames fans should be extatic if Phaneuf comes even close to what Jackman did in his rookie season...

For all the complaints that you guys have been spouting off about not having seen Phaneuf play or anything like that... take your own advice and watch Jackman...

With all that being said, I'd probably take Phanuef if my team wasn't very good, and Jackman if my team was doing good.

__________________
TheSpecialist - MacT thinks he was that good of a hockey player when in actuality he was no better then a Louie Debrusk.
dawgbone is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 03:01 PM
  #103
BlueBleeder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Looking for others
Country: United States
Posts: 1,677
vCash: 500
Watch Jackman vs Bertuzzi.

BlueBleeder is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 03:22 PM
  #104
Phanuthier*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Murder capital (Edm)
Posts: 10,675
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
What you flames fans aren't registering is that he hasn't done it yet... he can be that guy, or he can be Igor Ulanov circa 1995.

Jackman already is (key word... is, not can be) that defenseman... so Advantage Jackman.

Christ, it's like an idiot convention here... just because a poster would rather a guy who has actually done it, vs a guy who could be the next Scott Stevens, doesn't mean they are stupid.

Picking a guy who has proven himself at the top level, vs picking a guy because he beats up on teenagers in a level far lower isn't wrong... especially when they are only 3 years apart in age.

You flames fans have a bit of a complex. Phaneuf hasn't accomplished a damn thing yet at the NHL level, and it's about time you recognized that. Jackman has proven that he can be a very good NHL defenseman, and he did it at a very young age. Flames fans should be extatic if Phaneuf comes even close to what Jackman did in his rookie season...

For all the complaints that you guys have been spouting off about not having seen Phaneuf play or anything like that... take your own advice and watch Jackman...

With all that being said, I'd probably take Phanuef if my team wasn't very good, and Jackman if my team was doing good.
Actually, I have no problem with people voting Jackman, the only thing I find funny is that people would clearly say one is better then the other WITHOUT knowing who one of the guys is (Phaneuf); not to mention, he goes out and says Phaneuf is the MOST overrated prospect in ALONG time without ever seeing him play an entire game?

Pretty stupid if you ask me. Say you would rather have Jackman, fine. Start making comments about him, and how he's overrated without ever seeing him play? That's stupid.

Hootchie also makes absurd comments like Phaneuf being compared to Orr... I'd like to see some proof of that. I've NEVER seen anyone compare him to Orr. Scott Stevens I've seen many times (not just made by fans, by hockey scouts, junior and NHL officials, independent scouting services to name a few) but not Orr.

But if Hootichie really wants to play that game, and go around calling pot and kettle, maybe he might recall how the Edmontonian media called Hemsky the Gretzkey and Pouliet the next Beliveau? (Note: I am not saying he or that all other Oiler fans believe this)

Ready some of Hootchie's posts and you'll get an idea of what type of poster Hootchie is

Phanuthier* is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 03:25 PM
  #105
MrMastodonFarm*
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 6,093
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
Christ, it's like an idiot convention here... just because a poster would rather a guy who has actually done it, vs a guy who could be the next Scott Stevens, doesn't mean they are stupid.
.
Are you having fun with this rant of yours?

I didn't call anyone stupid for picking Barret Jackman. Go and look through the thread.

Wow.

MrMastodonFarm* is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 03:27 PM
  #106
Roughneck
Registered User
 
Roughneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Calgary
Country: Ireland
Posts: 8,610
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Roughneck
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
What you flames fans aren't registering is that he hasn't done it yet... he can be that guy, or he can be Igor Ulanov circa 1995.
Yes he can, and that's the risk behind prospects. Phaneuf however, isn't looking to be Ulanov circa 1995.

Quote:
Christ, it's like an idiot convention here... just because a poster would rather a guy who has actually done it, vs a guy who could be the next Scott Stevens, doesn't mean they are stupid.

Picking a guy who has proven himself at the top level, vs picking a guy because he beats up on teenagers in a level far lower isn't wrong... especially when they are only 4 years apart in age.
Yet said poster seems to think anyone who would take a defenseman who's younger, better than Jackman at the same age, bigger and has a higer upside is stupid and illogical. Jackman never dominated the same way Phaneuf is when he played in the WHL. Jackman was always a solid, rough defensive presence, but he was never 'feared' the same way Phaneuf is.

Quote:
You flames fans have a bit of a complex. Phaneuf hasn't accomplished a damn thing yet at the NHL level, and it's about time you recognized that. Jackman has proven that he can be a very good NHL defenseman, and he did it at a very young age. Flames fans should be extatic if Phaneuf comes even close to what Jackman did in his rookie season...
This was supposed to be his rookie season. Which would mean that he would have broke into the NHL 2 years before Jackman did, and onto a deeper blueline than the Blues had. If Darryl Sutter says he is good enough to play in the NHL, he is good enough to play in the NHL.

Quote:
For all the complaints that you guys have been spouting off about not having seen Phaneuf play or anything like that... take your own advice and watch Jackman...
What makes you think we haven't? We've seen Jackman. He's been in the NHL, in the playoffs, many saw him play in junior as well. I say without a doubt, Flames fans have seen Jackman play more than Blues fans have seen Phaneuf.

Roughneck is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 03:29 PM
  #107
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm
Are you having fun with this rant of yours?

I didn't call anyone stupid for picking Barret Jackman. Go and look through the thread.

Wow.
A). I never said anyone used the word stupid.

B). There have been some pretty defensive posts on here, that have also called into question a persons logic.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 03:30 PM
  #108
se7en*
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 3,737
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splatman Phanutier
Pretty stupid if you ask me. Say you would rather have Jackman, fine. Start making comments about him, and how he's overrated without ever seeing him play? That's stupid.
Like Flames fans who say Schremp is overrated without ever seeing him play?

Does seeing Phanuef play in the WHL give any indication about how he'll cope at the NHL level? No, and saying so is STUPID. Preferring an accomplished Jackman to an overrated Phaneuf isn't. Get it, got it, good.

Quote:
Hootchie also makes absurd comments like Phaneuf being compared to Orr... I'd like to see some proof of that. I've NEVER seen anyone compare him to Orr. Scott Stevens I've seen many times (not just made by fans, by hockey scouts, junior and NHL officials, independent scouting services to name a few) but not Orr.
I've heard the Orr comparison from a couple Flames fans. Maybe, like you, they simply weren't very knowledgeable about the subject.

Quote:
Scott Stevens I've seen many times (not just made by fans, by hockey scouts, junior and NHL officials, independent scouting services to name a few)
I'd like to see some proof of that.

Quote:
But if Hootichie really wants to play that game, and go around calling pot and kettle, maybe he might recall how the Edmontonian media called Hemsky the Gretzkey and Pouliet the next Beliveau? (Note: I am not saying he or that all other Oiler fans believe this)
I recall the Edm media saying Hemsky's passing skills were similiar to Wayne's, but Pouliot the next Beliveau? I would have heard about that anbd I didn't.

Quote:
Ready some of Hootchie's posts and you'll get an idea of what type of poster Hootchie is
What kind of poster am I exactly? You know, since you seem to know me so well and all.

Obviously you do have a complex and some strange vendetta against me (who are you, again?) so whatever you have to say just say it now.

se7en* is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 03:35 PM
  #109
MrMastodonFarm*
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 6,093
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hootchie Cootchie
I've heard the Orr comparison from a couple Flames fans. Maybe, like you, they simply weren't very knowledgeable about the subject.
Back it up. Because until you do, I think its total BS.

MrMastodonFarm* is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 03:35 PM
  #110
BlueBleeder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Looking for others
Country: United States
Posts: 1,677
vCash: 500
Actually Jackman almost made the Blues at 18. The Blues sent him back down to let him develop more, we had the luxury of a high payroll to sign FA and let our prospects take all the time to develop they needed. Backman is a good example, if not for the injuries he would have spent another season in the AHL. Blues don't have it that way anymore :cry

So it's not really fair to compare the age they would have come up. If it was reverse, Jackman probably would have made the Flames this year too.


Last edited by BlueBleeder: 10-27-2004 at 03:49 PM.
BlueBleeder is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 03:37 PM
  #111
se7en*
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 3,737
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm
Back it up. Because until you do, I think its total BS.
Look on Calgaryflames.com. It's in their forums somewhere (Flames Talk I believe), and if you think I'm going to dig around just to find a quote to satisfy a couple of Flamers, think again.

se7en* is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 03:44 PM
  #112
MrMastodonFarm*
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 6,093
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hootchie Cootchie
Look on Calgaryflames.com. It's in their forums somewhere (Flames Talk I believe), and if you think I'm going to dig around just to find a quote to satisfy a couple of Flamers, think again.
Wow, well there ya go.

Calgaryflames.com is visited by your typical 12-14 year old hockey fan. To use what they say in an argument is truely hilarious.

MrMastodonFarm* is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 03:48 PM
  #113
MrMastodonFarm*
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 6,093
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hootchie Cootchie
I'd like to see some proof of that.
.
If you've never heard a Stevens-Phaneuf comparision you must have had your head buried pretty far in the sand the last couple of years.

After looking for all of.. seconds I found this. I can easily find more.
Playing a style that many say reminds of a young Scott Steven
http://www.hockeyjournal.com/bruins/200306/draft11.html

MrMastodonFarm* is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 03:51 PM
  #114
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roughneck
Yes he can, and that's the risk behind prospects. Phaneuf however, isn't looking to be Ulanov circa 1995.
And Alexandre Daigle wasn't looking to become one of the biggest draft disappointments of all time either... funny how that works.

Quote:
Yet said poster seems to think anyone who would take a defenseman who's younger, better than Jackman at the same age, bigger and has a higer upside is stupid and illogical. Jackman never dominated the same way Phaneuf is when he played in the WHL. Jackman was always a solid, rough defensive presence, but he was never 'feared' the same way Phaneuf is.
'Feared' does not mean better. He is feared because he is a very heavy hitter... that doesn't automatically mean you will be a better NHL defenceman than another player. Yeah, Phaneuf has a significantly better shot, and is a heck of a lot meaner and a harder hitter than Jackman... but Jackman is lightyears ahead of Phaneuf in terms of defensive positioning, and on ice decision making, and that is far more important to an NHL defenceman that a hard shot and being a big hitter. Not saying Phaneuf can't learn them (most defensemen need to), but Jackman had it his first year.

Quote:
This was supposed to be his rookie season. Which would mean that he would have broke into the NHL 2 years before Jackman did, and onto a deeper blueline than the Blues had. If Darryl Sutter says he is good enough to play in the NHL, he is good enough to play in the NHL.
Is Phaneuf going to play a top role on defense like Jackman did in St. Louis (where he and MacInnis were 1/2 in ice time for ES and PK)? Deeper my butt... is there much of a difference between Commodore and Montador Jeff Finley and Bryce Salvador? No... They are bottom pairing defencemen.

And a lot of that is speculation... it's not he would have broken into the NHL, it's he might have broken into the NHL. We all saw Fleury last year... he looked like he would be in the NHL all year in October... Goalies and defencemen require the most patience.

Quote:
What makes you think we haven't? We've seen Jackman. He's been in the NHL, in the playoffs, many saw him play in junior as well. I say without a doubt, Flames fans have seen Jackman play more than Blues fans have seen Phaneuf.
I can tell you haven't by the arguments being put forth... Phaneuf is better offensively, Phaneuf dominated physically more than Jackman did, Phaneuf is more feared... Considering none of those are the main strength of Jackman's game, nor are they the most important part of being an NHL defenceman, it's a pretty weak argument.

Jackman's positioning is un-matched by any recent rookie defencemen to the NHL... that's a fact. His decision making and maturity out on the ice makes him look like a 10 year veteran. Phaneuf does not have those skills yet... and until he either shows what he can do physically at the NHL level, or he develops some NHL calibre defensive instincts, he is going to have his detractors.

It doesn't make them any more right or wrong than you, but don't compare the strengths of one guy, to the weaknesses of another guy, and say "I'm done, there's your proof."


Last edited by dawgbone: 10-27-2004 at 03:58 PM.
dawgbone is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 03:53 PM
  #115
Roughneck
Registered User
 
Roughneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Calgary
Country: Ireland
Posts: 8,610
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Roughneck
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hootchie Cootchie
Look on Calgaryflames.com. It's in their forums somewhere (Flames Talk I believe), and if you think I'm going to dig around just to find a quote to satisfy a couple of Flamers, think again.
1) If its on calgaryflames.com, its hardly something worth using as a source. The Stevens comparisons actually come from credible hockey writers and scouts.

2) Since you aren't getting it as a source, then we are just left to assume that you are full of BS.

Roughneck is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 03:57 PM
  #116
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm
If you've never heard a Stevens-Phaneuf comparision you must have had your head buried pretty far in the sand the last couple of years.

After looking for all of.. seconds I found this. I can easily find more.
Playing a style that many say reminds of a young Scott Steven
http://www.hockeyjournal.com/bruins/200306/draft11.html
Who is many?

Possibly 12-14 year old flame fans?

Sucks when your own attitude gets used against you, doesn't it?

Hootch says he heard flames fans saying it, you ask him to prove it, he does, then you dismiss it as 12 year old flame fans... but you go out and get the very reliable "many" source...


dawgbone is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 04:21 PM
  #117
Roughneck
Registered User
 
Roughneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Calgary
Country: Ireland
Posts: 8,610
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Roughneck
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
'Feared' does not mean better. He is feared because he is a very heavy hitter... that doesn't automatically mean you will be a better NHL defenceman than another player. Yeah, Phaneuf has a significantly better shot, and is a heck of a lot meaner and a harder hitter than Jackman... but Jackman is lightyears ahead of Phaneuf in terms of defensive positioning, and on ice decision making, and that is far more important to an NHL defenceman that a hard shot and being a big hitter. Not saying Phaneuf can't learn them (most defensemen need to), but Jackman had it his first year.
Defensive positioning can be learned. Jackman learned it in his extra years in junior and the AHL. Being a meaner hitter and having the killer instinct to level somebody cannot. Phaneuf's defensive positioning and defensive discipline are far greater than you think if you think that the difference is "lightyears." It is a product of being a Sutter coached player.


Quote:
Is Phaneuf going to play a top role on defense like Jackman did in St. Louis (where he and MacInnis were 1/2 in ice time for ES and PK)? Deeper my butt... is there much of a difference between Commodore and Montador Jeff Finley and
Bryce Salvador? No... They are bottom pairing defencemen.
Yes there is a difference. Commodore and Montador are/were a minor leaguer and a 7th defenseman. Finley and Salvador were regulars on the St. Louis blueline. Calgary now has 9 NHL caliber defensemen and Phaneuf would be playing in the top 6.

He will not however be playing with one if the best defensemen of this generation. If Jackman's common partner was Finley as opposed to MacInnis, would his rookie season been as good? Hard to say. But I have a feeling that it wouldn't have, nor would his positioning been as amazing as you lead on. The effectiveness of his positioning is as much a result of MacInnis' good positioning as well.

Quote:
And a lot of that is speculation... it's not he would have broken into the NHL, it's he might have broken into the NHL. We all saw Fleury last year... he looked like he would be in the NHL all year in October... Goalies and defencemen require the most patience.
It may be speculation but not really. Sutter said that last year the main reason he was so comfortable at sending Phaneuf back to juniors was because he was going to Red Deer. That means that Sutter would have considered keeping Dion as part of the Flames for as long as possible as an 18 year old. That is how impressive he was. Considering the numbers the Flames had at last years training camp, that says something. And this year, if Phaneuf was old enough, he would be in Lowell.

Quote:
I can tell you haven't by the arguments being put forth... Phaneuf is better offensively, Phaneuf dominated physically more than Jackman did, Phaneuf is more feared... Considering none of those are the main strength of Jackman's game, nor are they the most important part of being an NHL defenceman, it's a pretty weak argument.
If physical strength and intimidation aren't considered Jackman's strenghts, what kind of defensive defenseman is he? And they are not an important part of an NHL defenseman? Pretty much all NHL defenseman can position themselves well these days, it is the factors that Phaneuf poseses which make him such an exciting prospect. Instead, you have cheapened the value of Jackman by trying to downplay the factors that sperate good defensemen from excellent defensemen. When talking about guys like Rob Blake, Scott Stevens or even Chris Pronger, is the first thing people say about them "Man, he has good positioning?" No, its usually something along the lines of "Man, he's a killer out there"

Quote:
Jackman's positioning is un-matched by any recent rookie defencemen to the NHL... that's a fact. His decision making and maturity out on the ice makes him look like a 10 year veteran. Phaneuf does not have those skills yet... and until he either shows what he can do physically at the NHL level, or he develops some NHL calibre defensive instincts, he is going to have his detractors.
Phaneuf DOES have the instincts. He has Scott Stevens-esque instincts. These are instincts that cannot be taught. Positioning can, and it is. All young defensemen need to learn it, Jackman did too. If you think that he would have shown the same great positioning?

Quote:
It doesn't make them any more right or wrong than you, but don't compare the strengths of one guy, to the weaknesses of another guy, and say "I'm done, there's your proof."
Well what have you done? You're comparing their defensive positioning. Apparently it is a weakness of Phaneuf, so then it doesn't count by this wierd logic. What can we compare then? Since their strengths are not the same thing, apparently nothing.


I don't like arguing this way because I am a fan of Jackman. But the argumetns being brought up seem to downplay the importance of the qualities that make Phaneuf such a great prospect. He has qualities that the special players have, which is why he would be cosidered such a great player. Take into account how far he is ahead of those taken in the same year (save Suter) and those in his league and players his same age, why is it so outlandish to think that Jackman is really so superior to him?

Roughneck is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 04:31 PM
  #118
Roughneck
Registered User
 
Roughneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Calgary
Country: Ireland
Posts: 8,610
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Roughneck
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
Who is many?

Possibly 12-14 year old flame fans?

Sucks when your own attitude gets used against you, doesn't it?

Hootch says he heard flames fans saying it, you ask him to prove it, he does, then you dismiss it as 12 year old flame fans... but you go out and get the very reliable "many" source...
The Phaneuf/Stevens comparison isn't something that Flames fans just made up (as the "source" from calgaryflames.com message boards would suggest). When Flames fans use that comparison it is because it was a comparison given to him by hockey writers and scouts. I could say Yuri Trubachev is a Gordie Howe clone but I'm not a source that one should be bringing up. People seem to be dismissing Phaneuf as an excellent prospect (some for the sole reason that they don't like the hype surrounding him) because a couple fans get excited at the potential he posesses.

Roughneck is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 05:02 PM
  #119
Phanuthier*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Murder capital (Edm)
Posts: 10,675
vCash: 500
Like Flames fans who say Schremp is overrated without ever seeing him play?
Yes. I do think whoever calls him (or another example in years past, Hudler) overrated is stupid.

Quote:
Does seeing Phanuef play in the WHL give any indication about how he'll cope at the NHL level? No, and saying so is STUPID. Preferring an accomplished Jackman to an overrated Phaneuf isn't. Get it, got it, good.
Where did I say that?

You really make alot of assumptions to help support your (weak) arguments

Quote:
I've heard the Orr comparison from a couple Flames fans. Maybe, like you, they simply weren't very knowledgeable about the subject.
Again, who?

Yes, I'm not very knowledgable on the subject of who Phaneuf is. You really know me well!

Quote:
I'd like to see some proof of that.
Well,
http://www.chicagoblackhawks.com/tea...cont_id=185315
http://www.hockeysfuture.com/prospect.php?pid=3674
http://www.calgaryflames.com/cgi-bin...num=0000000096
http://www.wowhockey.com/article1709.html
http://www.wildonice.net/archives/20...mockdraft.html
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/hoc...03/mock_draft/
http://magazine.tsn.ca/magazine/stor...ength=1&page=1

Is that good enough?

Quote:
I recall the Edm media saying Hemsky's passing skills were similiar to Wayne's, but Pouliot the next Beliveau? I would have heard about that anbd I didn't.
It was along time ago, and yes it was there. (Not that I'd catagorize that writer with all Oiler fans, just showing how there are some stupid people out there that make outragiuos comparisons like comparing Phaneuf to Bobby Orr.)

Quote:
What kind of poster am I exactly? You know, since you seem to know me so well and all.
It's just an opinion. Relax, don't take it personally.

Quote:
Obviously you do have a complex and some strange vendetta
Just because I respond to threads that you post in (are you that surprised that I participate in a thread about a Flames prospect?) you think I have a vendetta on you? Wow.

Quote:
who are you, again?
Just like everyone else here, a hockey fan who posts on a message board. I didn't think it would be that tough to figure it out, but apperently it is!

Phanuthier* is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 05:05 PM
  #120
Phanuthier*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Murder capital (Edm)
Posts: 10,675
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
Hootch says he heard flames fans saying it, you ask him to prove it, he does, then you dismiss it as 12 year old flame fans... but you go out and get the very reliable "many" source...

Actually... no he didn't.

Besides, I think there's quite a difference between TSN hockey analysts / THN hockey writers / hockey scouts / WHL coaches and GM's / NHL coaches and GM's, vs. 12 year old Flame fans on a message board.

Since your taking notes, take this down: I, a Flames fan, do NOT think Dion Phaneuf will become a Bobby Orr.

Happy?

Phanuthier* is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 05:11 PM
  #121
HellsBells
Registered User
 
HellsBells's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: PEI
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,541
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hootchie Cootchie
Pot, meet kettle. You're black.
I don't mind the part about Phaneuf being overrated, thats fine if you feel that way. You're certainly welcome to feel anybody is overrated, thats your choice, as it is mine.

The fact that you would honestly choose Jackman over Phaneuf is what puzzles me. To me, Perry/Schremp is a closer comparison than Phaneuf/Jackman.

I honestly would pick Perry over Schremp regardless of who drafted them. I will not have any bias against Schremp until I see him playing in the NHL with an Oilers jersey. Until then, who cares who owns his rights.

So the only reason you posted that is because of my post in regards to Schremp ??


Last edited by HellsBells: 10-27-2004 at 05:20 PM.
HellsBells is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 07:02 PM
  #122
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roughneck
Defensive positioning can be learned. Jackman learned it in his extra years in junior and the AHL. Being a meaner hitter and having the killer instinct to level somebody cannot. Phaneuf's defensive positioning and defensive discipline are far greater than you think if you think that the difference is "lightyears." It is a product of being a Sutter coached player.
Jackman was also one of the best positional defencemen the CHL has ever produced. Go read past scouting reports on him... all of them rave glowingly about his incredible awareness and positioning defensively.

No, mean-ness and the killer instinct cannot be taught... but not every defensemen learns the fine art of positioning. Can Phaneuf learn it? Sure he can... I won't put it past anyone to learn a technical skill. Is he guaranteed to learn it? No he isn't, and until he does, he won't be as good as Jackman is. Because being mean does not translate into top pairing NHL defenceman...

Quote:
Yes there is a difference. Commodore and Montador are/wee a minor leaguer and a 7th defenseman. Finley and Salvador were regulars on the St. Louis blueline. Calgary now has 9 NHL caliber defensemen and Phaneuf would be playing in the top 6.
Please oh please tell me these 9 NHL calibre defensemen... btw... if you mention Montador or Commodore, you will have proven my point.

Quote:
He will not however be playing with one if the best defensemen of this generation. If Jackman's common partner was Finley as opposed to MacInnis, would his rookie season been as good? Hard to say. But I have a feeling that it wouldn't have, nor would his positioning been as amazing as you lead on. The effectiveness of his positioning is as much a result of MacInnis' good positioning as well.
Of course defensive partner matters... and it certainly did benefit Jackman to have MacInnis as his partner. That being said, it certainly wasn't like MacInnis carried Jackman all season. And it won't be like Lydman won't help Phaneuf alot when he gets to the NHL. That being said, all having a good defensive partner did for Jackman is allow him to play his game, without having to worry about covering for big Al, like he might have if paired with say Finley.

Quote:
It may be speculation but not really. Sutter said that last year the main reason he was so comfortable at sending Phaneuf back to juniors was because he was going to Red Deer. That means that Sutter would have considered keeping Dion as part of the Flames for as long as possible as an 18 year old. That is how impressive he was. Considering the numbers the Flames had at last years training camp, that says something. And this year, if Phaneuf was old enough, he would be in Lowell.
And KP said before the draft that Rob Schremp is one of a few players from this draft who could play in the NHL this season, and that Hunter in London is good for his development... do they mean it, or is it just to throw the player a bone? If Dion was truely ready last year for the NHL, and it would have served him to be in the NHL, he would have been there. That isn't a slight, it takes a special player to be in the NHL as a 18 year old, and it usually only happens on bad teams.

Quote:
If physical strength and intimidation aren't considered Jackman's strenghts, what kind of defensive defenseman is he? And they are not an important part of an NHL defenseman? Pretty much all NHL defenseman can position themselves well these days, it is the factors that Phaneuf poseses which make him such an exciting prospect. Instead, you have cheapened the value of Jackman by trying to downplay the factors that sperate good defensemen from excellent defensemen. When talking about guys like Rob Blake, Scott Stevens or even Chris Pronger, is the first thing people say about them "Man, he has good positioning?" No, its usually something along the lines of "Man, he's a killer out there"
If you aren't going to bother even reading the posts, we aren't going to get anywhere. Firstly, I never said physical strength wasn't a strength of Jackman, I said it he didn't dominate physically like Phaneuf because it wasn't part of his game. Yes he is strong, but it's not his primary weapon on defense. Intimidation is a very effective tool... but it certainly isn't a priority for being a defenseman. Yeah, most defensemen can position themselves well... but most don't start to really get good at doing it for several years. Jackman's first year he was doing it like he'd been in the league for a decade. Ask a general manager or a scout or a coach what skill is the most difficult for a young defensemen... the answer is positioning, and adjusting their speed and strength to an NHL game.

I haven't cheapened Jackman at all... you just don't have any clue what playing defense means. Jackman is what he is... a physical defenseman, with excellent positioning and incredible anticipation. There are lots of physical defensemen in the NHL who aren't killers... it certainly doesn't diminish their abilities. Jackman will never be known as Scott Stevens, but it doesn't mean he won't be a damn good defenseman, and it doesn't cheapen Jackman at all. He's going to have a long career (providing he doesn't get hurt), and he will continually play top minutes against the oppositions best players.

No, alot of fans don't talk about Pronger, Blake or Stevens as being good positionally... but fans don't win games or make decisions do they? Your casual fan doesn't watch for "the little things". What makes Stevens so good? Yes, he is one mean SOB... but watch everytime he hits someone hard... these players skate right into him because he's anticipated the play, and he's put himself in position to react to it. Same with Blake and Pronger. You never see these guys chase anyone around trying to kill them (which you still see Phaneuf doing in the WHL). Go read scouting reports on these guys... words like positioning, awareness, etc... are all words used.

Quote:
Phaneuf DOES have the instincts. He has Scott Stevens-esque instincts. These are instincts that cannot be taught. Positioning can, and it is. All young defensemen need to learn it, Jackman did too. If you think that he would have shown the same great positioning?
:lol Holy crap, I can't beleive you just said that. Phaneuf has a long way to go before you can say he has Stevens-esque instincts. Sure, Phaneuf is mean and likes the big hit like Stevens does... but that isn't all Stevens is. Anticipation and incredible positioning is a huge part as well... Stevens rarely misses and rarely makes mistakes in covering and battling a player. Even in the WHL, Phaneuf isn't like that. There is more to being a defenseman than killing someone when he has his head down... something you don't seem to understand.

Quote:
Well what have you done? You're comparing their defensive positioning. Apparently it is a weakness of Phaneuf, so then it doesn't count by this wierd logic. What can we compare then? Since their strengths are not the same thing, apparently nothing.
Well we've seen enough of comparing Phaneuf's strengths with things that aren't Jackman's strength (Offense, meanstreak/intimidation) and coming to conclusions that Phaneuf is clearly better... it's about time someone compared the other side... Jackmans strengths against the things Phaneuf isn't good at. Pretty stupid to draw conclusions based on that... but yet, that's been most of the reasoning.

Quote:
I don't like arguing this way because I am a fan of Jackman. But the argumetns being brought up seem to downplay the importance of the qualities that make Phaneuf such a great prospect. He has qualities that the special players have, which is why he would be cosidered such a great player. Take into account how far he is ahead of those taken in the same year (save Suter) and those in his league and players his same age, why is it so outlandish to think that Jackman is really so superior to him?
That's because that is how you choose to view it... I don't know how many times I need to say it, but I'll say it again. Phaneuf does have some of the tools to be a dominant defenseman. His potential is higher than Jackman's because of those tools. The mean streak and the shot are all part of the package of a dominant defenseman. But that package has to focus around positioning... which yes can be taught, but there are different levels of it. Guys like Stevens are at an elite level when it comes to positioning and anticipationg... not many players get to that level. Not every guy with mean streak and can hit is good positionally. Sure, Phaneuf could be as good as Stevens, but he may not be better than Kasparitis... a mean player who loves open ice hits put spends so much time out of position it hurts the rest of his game.

Sure potential is a nice tool to use... Scott Stevens sounds like a fantastic high end potential... but not everyone reaches their high end potential. Can Phaneuf be a Scott Stevens? Sure, he's got the physical tools and that meanstreak... but that's not all. The difference between Stevens and Kasperitis is all in positioning and defensive awareness... things that Phaneuf needs to develop (and things Jackman already has). Jackmans top potential isn't anywhere near that of Phaneuf's, but we know a few things... he can eat up valuable minutes agaisnt top NHL players... at 23 years old.

There needs to be a little realization here. Yes, Phaneuf can be great... but Jackman is already very good. It may very well take Phaneuf 6 or 7 years to be able to play the minutes Jackman does... and 3 years later he is the next Scott Stevens. I am certainly not ruling that out. But there is also the possibilty he's the next Kasperitis, or Ulanov, or hundreds of other defensemen with mean streaks who struggled at the key parts of the game. It's in all the scouting reports... he gets out of position alot. Positioning can be taught, but not everyone learns it, and it can be the same as a mean streak... if it's 100% natural instinct, you are better off. For Jackman it seems to be all instinct... he's always had it. Yes he had to adapt to the difference in strength and speed, but he did it without a hitch (and going from the A to the N is no small feat).

Phaneuf can be an elite level defenseman, Jackman doesn't quite have that... but as of right now, I'd feel safe putting Jackman out agaisnt a Hejduk-Sakic-Tanguay line for 25 minutes than I would Phaneuf. Jackman's a much safer bet to reach his top potential (20+ minutes per night, ES/PK and against the top lines of the opposition), because he's already reached it. You know what you get in him. Phaneuf you like what you see, and the potential is there, but there is a lot more work that needs to be done.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
10-27-2004, 10:43 PM
  #123
Vlad The Impaler
Registered User
 
Vlad The Impaler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 11,716
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
Jackman was also one of the best positional defencemen the CHL has ever produced. Go read past scouting reports on him... all of them rave glowingly about his incredible awareness and positioning defensively.
He must have had bad nights most games I saw of him. I didn't follow him in the AHL but when he came out of there, he was a much different player to me.

Before the AHL he was often erratic, prone to impulse and to me, it didn't look like he was the soundest defensively. The only difference was that he gave me the impression to be more of a hard-nosed battler. That didn't make him less of a defensive liability than Phaneuf, just a less glaring one for the casual fan.

All the reports I've had is that he picked up his play greatly in the AHL, which definitly corresponds to my own experience seeing him emerged a smarter player. I find Phaneuf to be everything Jackman ever was in Junior and more. Much, much more.

Vlad The Impaler is offline  
Old
10-28-2004, 12:30 AM
  #124
loadie
Official Beer Taster
 
loadie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: New Brunswick
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,843
vCash: 500
I'll go with Jackman til Dion gets to play in the NHL, then we'll see.

loadie is offline  
Old
10-28-2004, 08:28 AM
  #125
Roughneck
Registered User
 
Roughneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Calgary
Country: Ireland
Posts: 8,610
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Roughneck
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
Jackman was also one of the best positional defencemen the CHL has ever produced. Go read past scouting reports on him... all of them rave glowingly about his incredible awareness and positioning defensively.
If he was when he was in the CHL, he would have been drafted higher. He learned his good positioning just like everyone else. Give Phaneuf 4 more years, and he'll make huge leaps as well.

Quote:
No, mean-ness and the killer instinct cannot be taught... but not every defensemen learns the fine art of positioning. Can Phaneuf learn it? Sure he can... I won't put it past anyone to learn a technical skill. Is he guaranteed to learn it? No he isn't, and until he does, he won't be as good as Jackman is. Because being mean does not translate into top pairing NHL defenceman...
You seem to lead on that Phaneuf is a free role, uncontrollable defenseman when he's out on the ice. He's the guy who is front of the net, the guy hanging back when his partner skates up into the play. In the junior leagues, he is rarely beaten. Almost unbeatable 1-on-1. Yes it is junior, but its the same level that Jackman was playing at 19 and Phaneuf is far ahead of where Jackman was at the same age.

Quote:
Please oh please tell me these 9 NHL calibre defensemen... btw... if you mention Montador or Commodore, you will have proven my point.
Regehr, Warrener, Leopold, Lydman, Ference, Eriksson, Montador and Commodore (my mistake, there are 8. Phaneuf is the 9th). And what point have I proven, that as of right now, Phaneuf is higher on the depth chart than 2 defensemen who stepped it up when the blue-line was battered by injuries.


Quote:
Of course defensive partner matters... and it certainly did benefit Jackman to have MacInnis as his partner. That being said, it certainly wasn't like MacInnis carried Jackman all season. And it won't be like Lydman won't help Phaneuf alot when he gets to the NHL. That being said, all having a good defensive partner did for Jackman is allow him to play his game, without having to worry about covering for big Al, like he might have if paired with say Finley.
And if Phaneuf plays with Rhett Warrener, that should give him the freedom to use his explosiveness on the blueline more freely rather than having to cover for his lacklustre partner. And it will give him more time to learn his good positioning.

pquote]If you aren't going to bother even reading the posts, we aren't going to get anywhere. Firstly, I never said physical strength wasn't a strength of Jackman, I said it he didn't dominate physically like Phaneuf because it wasn't part of his game. Yes he is strong, but it's not his primary weapon on defense. Intimidation is a very effective tool... but it certainly isn't a priority for being a defenseman. Yeah, most defensemen can position themselves well... but most don't start to really get good at doing it for several years. Jackman's first year he was doing it like he'd been in the league for a decade. Ask a general manager or a scout or a coach what skill is the most difficult for a young defensemen... the answer is positioning, and adjusting their speed and strength to an NHL game.[/quote]

Jackman had a year in the AHL playing alot and learning alot before making his jump. If he had the positioning of a 10 year vet when he came out of the WHL, he would have gone straight to the NHL. Like all young defensemen, he had stuff to learn. Yes maturity has always been a plus of Jackman and that helped him along, but if you think Phaneuf's positioning and adjustment is less, if a downgrade at all from when Jackman was still in the WHL, you are mistaken.
The question of the thread is which player is/will be better. Anybody is stupid to think Phaneuf is better now, but he does have far higher upside than Jackman in pretty much every facet of the game. As said, positioning and adjusting to speed and strength is learned. Something Phaneuf WILL learn because seeing how much he has progressed throughout junior, he learns fast, and learns well. Intimidation, that killer instinct is what sperates good and solid defensemen and great defensemen.

Quote:
I haven't cheapened Jackman at all... you just don't have any clue what playing defense means. Jackman is what he is... a physical defenseman, with excellent positioning and incredible anticipation. There are lots of physical defensemen in the NHL who aren't killers... it certainly doesn't diminish their abilities. Jackman will never be known as Scott Stevens, but it doesn't mean he won't be a damn good defenseman, and it doesn't cheapen Jackman at all. He's going to have a long career (providing he doesn't get hurt), and he will continually play top minutes against the oppositions best players.
I know what playing defense means, but by reading this it seems you don't think Phaneuf can. At 18, Dion was never scored against in the WJCs, where he won top defenseman. At 18, he led his junior team, that always allows some of the fewest goals against, in ice time and points. Phaneuf plays defense better than anybody in the WHL. Yes Jackman is good, may even be a great defensive defensemen, but as I keep trying to say, these are things that Phaneuf can do, it is the other things that make him so special. If Phaneuf couldn't play defense, he wouldn't be a defenseman for a Sutter, nor would he be drafted by the Flames as a defenseman by a Sutter and he wouldn't be considered a top 5 prospect for his defensive abilities.

Quote:
No, alot of fans don't talk about Pronger, Blake or Stevens as being good positionally... but fans don't win games or make decisions do they? Your casual fan doesn't watch for "the little things". What makes Stevens so good? Yes, he is one mean SOB... but watch everytime he hits someone hard... these players skate right into him because he's anticipated the play, and he's put himself in position to react to it. Same with Blake and Pronger. You never see these guys chase anyone around trying to kill them (which you still see Phaneuf doing in the WHL). Go read scouting reports on these guys... words like positioning, awareness, etc... are all words used.
Fans don't watcht eh little things because it is what all NHL defensemen do. The biggest difference is that the Stevens', Prongers and Blakes of the league dont make mistakes in the little things. But its not the little things that make them great NHL defensemen. And if you think Jackman never made mistakes when he was 19, or a 20 year old in the AHL, you are mistaken.

Quote:
:lol Holy crap, I can't beleive you just said that. Phaneuf has a long way to go before you can say he has Stevens-esque instincts. Sure, Phaneuf is mean and likes the big hit like Stevens does... but that isn't all Stevens is. Anticipation and incredible positioning is a huge part as well... Stevens rarely misses and rarely makes mistakes in covering and battling a player. Even in the WHL, Phaneuf isn't like that. There is more to being a defenseman than killing someone when he has his head down... something you don't seem to understand.
As stated MANY times in posts ahead of me, the Stevens/Phaneuf comparison was made by NHL SCOUTS, something you don't seem to understand. It is Phaneuf's positioning and anticipation that give him this comparison (as well as devastating hits to M.A. Pouliot and Rostislav Olesz in the Prospects Game and WJCs).


Quote:
Phaneuf can be an elite level defenseman, Jackman doesn't quite have that... but as of right now, I'd feel safe putting Jackman out agaisnt a Hejduk-Sakic-Tanguay line for 25 minutes than I would Phaneuf. Jackman's a much safer bet to reach his top potential (20+ minutes per night, ES/PK and against the top lines of the opposition), because he's already reached it. You know what you get in him. Phaneuf you like what you see, and the potential is there, but there is a lot more work that needs to be done.
Well when we are comparing these players, we have to go on potential. If they were the same age and not 4 years apart then it would be much easier to make this distinction. And the thing that makes Phaneuf such a great prospect is that alot of work doesn't hav to be done. He has the size, the instincts, the shot, the strength. All that needs to be worked on are the same things that Jackman had to work on when he came out of the WHL and needed to adjust to the new defensive game of the NHL, which wasn't much. But he also didn't have as much to work with as Phaneuf does.

Roughneck is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:04 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.