|
|
Post by Porkchop on Aug 31, 2007 10:26:30 GMT -4
Well Tesink is a flop if you think about it...the same way Lund and MacAskill and Carle are flops. Sure Carle is out of the league, much like Poulin and Escott...but Lund/MacAskill/Tesink were expected to be much better players..although all are serviceable. I guess it depends what your definition of flop is. I don't think Tesink could be considered anywhere near a flop yet, especially with the way he has been used.........he started as a dman, Gatineau made him into a forward, then switched back to a dman after coming to Bathurst........IMO, you don't write anybody off after their 17 year old season........a bit early ain't it?....maybe after this year, but not yet. |
|
|
|
Post by chsb on Aug 31, 2007 10:45:53 GMT -4
It is ludiucrous to include Tesink in the same bag as Gabriel Carle.
It is ratther obvious that he has what it takes to at least become a steady #4 stay-at-home D....
I would say that his upside at 19 is higher than Karl Chamberland (let's say for comparison sake)...
At that time, he will have 3 Q years experience under his belt and will be much stronger.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmy on Aug 31, 2007 12:06:16 GMT -4
I would say that his upside at 19 is higher than Karl Chamberland (let's say for comparison sake)... At that time, he will have 3 Q years experience under his belt and will be much stronger. And right there is why people sare arguing that, from Gatineau's perspective, he is a flop ... he was there first round pick ... and most organizations would expect much more out of a first round pick than a 5th or 6th defenseman at 19 ... further proof - after a year and a half, they opted to cut their losses and deal him to you for much less than a 1st rounder in return ... so from there perspective, he was a flop ... you guys got him cheaper ... a 3rd I think, which may yet prove to be a good buy if he can be a top 6 d-man for 2.5 years for you guys. Just because he flopped in Gatineau doesn't mean he will be a flop forever wherever he goes .. |
|
|
|
Post by chsb on Aug 31, 2007 12:13:39 GMT -4
I would say that his upside at 19 is higher than Karl Chamberland (let's say for comparison sake)... At that time, he will have 3 Q years experience under his belt and will be much stronger. And right there is why people sare arguing that, from Gatineau's perspective, he is a flop ... he was there first round pick ... and most organizations would expect much more out of a first round pick than a 5th or 6th defenseman at 19 ... further proof - after a year and a half, they opted to cut their losses and deal him to you for much less than a 1st rounder in return ... so from there perspective, he was a flop ... you guys got him cheaper ... a 3rd I think, which may yet prove to be a good buy if he can be a top 6 d-man for 2.5 years for you guys. Just because he flopped in Gatineau doesn't mean he will be a flop forever wherever he goes .. Actually Tesink is top-6....not eventually... I also dislike the way you distort my post, saying that he may eventaully turn into a top-6 when I specifically mention top-4. |
|
|
|
Post by Porkchop on Aug 31, 2007 12:14:18 GMT -4
I would say that his upside at 19 is higher than Karl Chamberland (let's say for comparison sake)... At that time, he will have 3 Q years experience under his belt and will be much stronger. And right there is why people sare arguing that, from Gatineau's perspective, he is a flop ... he was there first round pick ... and most organizations would expect much more out of a first round pick than a 5th or 6th defenseman at 19 ... further proof - after a year and a half, they opted to cut their losses and deal him to you for much less than a 1st rounder in return ... so from there perspective, he was a flop ... you guys got him cheaper ... a 3rd I think, which may yet prove to be a good buy if he can be a top 6 d-man for 2.5 years for you guys. Just because he flopped in Gatineau doesn't mean he will be a flop forever wherever he goes .. Gatineau didn't give him time to see whether he was a flop........trading him halfway through his 17 year old season is too soon to tell that. |
|
|
|
Post by lou on Aug 31, 2007 13:11:15 GMT -4
And right there is why people sare arguing that, from Gatineau's perspective, he is a flop ... he was there first round pick ... and most organizations would expect much more out of a first round pick than a 5th or 6th defenseman at 19 ... further proof - after a year and a half, they opted to cut their losses and deal him to you for much less than a 1st rounder in return ... so from there perspective, he was a flop ... you guys got him cheaper ... a 3rd I think, which may yet prove to be a good buy if he can be a top 6 d-man for 2.5 years for you guys. Just because he flopped in Gatineau doesn't mean he will be a flop forever wherever he goes .. Gatineau didn't give him time to see whether he was a flop........trading him halfway through his 17 year old season is too soon to tell that. Not sure about that though. Without fanning any flames here, I believe an organization expects a first round draft pick to make the team, and already be contributing when they are 17. Obviously not your top guy, but should be contributing, and be a factor. But that's just me  |
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Aug 31, 2007 13:39:19 GMT -4
Well Tesink is a flop if you think about it...the same way Lund and MacAskill and Carle are flops. Sure Carle is out of the league, much like Poulin and Escott...but Lund/MacAskill/Tesink were expected to be much better players..although all are serviceable. I guess it depends what your definition of flop is. I don't think Tesink could be considered anywhere near a flop yet, especially with the way he has been used.........he started as a dman, Gatineau made him into a forward, then switched back to a dman after coming to Bathurst........IMO, you don't write anybody off after their 17 year old season........a bit early ain't it?....maybe after this year, but not yet. They moved him to forward because his feet were too slow to play defense at that level. ...but I agree it's too early to call him a bust, some guys only break out at 18 or 19. |
|
|
|
Post by mikeb on Aug 31, 2007 14:30:44 GMT -4
Too many Titan fans with thin skins who are missing the point.
Gatineau considered Tesink a "disappointment" as they expected more from him seeing as he was a first round pick. They expected a dman that would have a big impact and they gave up hope that he would.
Bathurst, who traded a pick of lesser value than a 1st round pick for Tesink, have lesser expectations of him. For them he is not a disappointment at all as they don't expect him to be an impact dman like Carle or Bourdon or Sawyer etc..
|
|
|
|
Post by lou on Aug 31, 2007 14:35:47 GMT -4
Too many Titan fans with thin skins who are missing the point. Gatineau considered Tesink a "disappointment" as they expected more from him seeing as he was a first round pick. They expected a dman that would have a big impact and they gave up hope that he would. Bathurst, who traded a pick of lesser value than a 1st round pick for Tesink, have lesser expectations of him. For them he is not a disappointment at all as they don't expect him to be an impact dman like Carle or Bourdon or Sawyer etc.. Yep, agree with that. |
|
|
|
Post by chsb on Aug 31, 2007 14:37:03 GMT -4
Too many Titan fans with thin skins who are missing the point. Gatineau considered Tesink a "disappointment" as they expected more from him seeing as he was a first round pick. They expected a dman that would have a big impact and they gave up hope that he would. Bathurst, who traded a pick of lesser value than a 1st round pick for Tesink, have lesser expectations of him. For them he is not a disappointment at all as they don't expect him to be an impact dman like Carle or Bourdon or Sawyer etc.. A little semantics here would not hurt.... Huge difference between "disappointment" and "flop" |
|
|
|
Post by perefoura on Aug 31, 2007 14:52:55 GMT -4
Groulx and the coaching staff saw no progression in Tesink in his second year, so, having depth at forwards, they traded him. Had they wait, his stock could have rise, or fall. Who knows. It was out of question for him to return as d-man, cause we felt he was way too slow, and the mobility was the biggest flaw on our D.
I wish him all the best in Bathurst. He is a great kid and could very be a team captain in this league soon. Great work ethic, team player, and want to learn. Unfortunately, I don't think he has the skills to be a top D-man.
Since this thread talks a lot about the Gat's draft, just let me say something: We replaced the scouting team, and now, skills and attitude are over size. We didn't draft a lot of big kids this year, and everybody is looking fine at the camp. In fact, the first 6 picks could very well make the squad this year.
|
|
|
|
Post by InsideScoop on Aug 31, 2007 15:08:50 GMT -4
I would say that his upside at 19 is higher than Karl Chamberland (let's say for comparison sake)... At that time, he will have 3 Q years experience under his belt and will be much stronger. And right there is why people sare arguing that, from Gatineau's perspective, he is a flop ... he was there first round pick ... and most organizations would expect much more out of a first round pick than a 5th or 6th defenseman at 19 ... further proof - after a year and a half, they opted to cut their losses and deal him to you for much less than a 1st rounder in return ... so from there perspective, he was a flop ... you guys got him cheaper ... a 3rd I think, which may yet prove to be a good buy if he can be a top 6 d-man for 2.5 years for you guys. Just because he flopped in Gatineau doesn't mean he will be a flop forever wherever he goes .. Well Alex Grant was the first overall pick, and he was far from a top 4 d-man for the first 4months of last season...he turned it around very quickly and got drafted to the NHL. I am not sure Tesink is as good as grant, but the sea dogs waited and it panned out...I just he turns it around and Bathurst can laugh at GAtineau |
|
|
|
Post by chsb on Aug 31, 2007 15:41:31 GMT -4
And right there is why people sare arguing that, from Gatineau's perspective, he is a flop ... he was there first round pick ... and most organizations would expect much more out of a first round pick than a 5th or 6th defenseman at 19 ... further proof - after a year and a half, they opted to cut their losses and deal him to you for much less than a 1st rounder in return ... so from there perspective, he was a flop ... you guys got him cheaper ... a 3rd I think, which may yet prove to be a good buy if he can be a top 6 d-man for 2.5 years for you guys. Just because he flopped in Gatineau doesn't mean he will be a flop forever wherever he goes .. Well Alex Grant was the first overall pick, and he was far from a top 4 d-man for the first 4months of last season...he turned it around very quickly and got drafted to the NHL. I am not sure Tesink is as good as grant, but the sea dogs waited and it panned out...I just he turns it around and Bathurst can laugh at GAtineau I would not go as far as saying that Tesink was as good as Grant coming into his draft year, but I remember distictively scouts saying in the papers that he was THE reason that the Saint-John Vitos went to the final prior to his draft..... I do not expect Tesink to be a Alex Grant, but he could very well turn out into Guillaume Lépine type of Dman for example. |
|
|
|
Post by lalalaprise on Aug 31, 2007 19:40:36 GMT -4
Well Alex Grant was the first overall pick, and he was far from a top 4 d-man for the first 4months of last season...he turned it around very quickly and got drafted to the NHL. I am not sure Tesink is as good as grant, but the sea dogs waited and it panned out...I just he turns it around and Bathurst can laugh at GAtineau I do not expect Tesink to be a Alex Grant, but he could very well turn out into Guillaume Lépine type of Dman for example. Doubt it... Lepine is a top pairing dman... |
|
crossbar
Draft Pick
Long Live The Vees!
Posts: 108
|
Post by crossbar on Aug 31, 2007 20:34:51 GMT -4
I suppose, except being from SJ and playing against him one could always argue Gaitneau made a bad choice drafting him that high. Or you could make the case they didn't develop him properly... Its possible he needed more time to mature? I mean if i draft a kid to play D, who has played D for 16 years...Putting him as a depth forward (and i'm pretty sure he got more then depth minutes up front) isn't a great way to help him to move a long? imho Gatineau missed the boat on a lot of players in the last few years....Walker,Brophy,Morrison,Graham,Escott,Tesink....and they were all from the East. I for one do not consider them as the gospel of hockey development. Yet they continue to be competitive year after year after year...someone there knows what they're doing. |
|
