f1sh
Blue-Chip Prospect
Posts: 463
|
Post by f1sh on Jan 5, 2009 16:21:58 GMT -4
I'd rather Malka over Tesink but... While the Eagles have good size up front they are sorely lacking grit, toughness, physical play (whatever you want to call it) up front and on the team in general. CB while skilled was too easy to play against... they lacked what Clendenning, Lamontange and Prokopetz brought last year and Asselin, Fontaine, etc. in prior years. I guess one of the tough parts though is that you had to move one of your grittier guys to get him and Tesink wouldn't really be my top choice. I imagine a move like this seemed more necessary after seeing how things went vs. Halifax the other night. CB was hit hard all game and a few players were asking Malka to fight... they need someone who can step in in those type of games. The Eagles have been playing with 5 Ds while Piskacek and Ellis are away. They are on strict no fighting restrictions while shorthanded. Mario has a tight leash on fighting. My point is especially in that last Halifax game but also in any game this year if Malka declined a fight it was unlikely to be his decision. The kid has issues with his skating and his defensive play but no one can question his desire, grit and toughness. He took on a ton of older, bigger tough guys last year as a 17 YO under Vincent. The Gouchie trade and this one make no sense whatsoever. Not that surprised they traded Malka, if they bring in an offensive D he wouldn't have had any PP time left after that new D, Ward, Meilleur and Piskacek. That being said they haven't improved the team so what's the point of getting older and less skilled? First MacDougall, now Tesink. Ouch. Eagles need a real GM, Mario should stick to coaching.
|
|
|
Post by qmaniac on Jan 5, 2009 16:34:06 GMT -4
The Malka/Tesink deal is now posted on the site so all disbelievers better believe it. As much as I'd love to get rid of MacAskill in Halifax, I would just feel awful for the Eagles faithful if that also came true. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Clubber Lang on Jan 5, 2009 16:35:43 GMT -4
I'd rather Malka over Tesink but... While the Eagles have good size up front they are sorely lacking grit, toughness, physical play (whatever you want to call it) up front and on the team in general. CB while skilled was too easy to play against... they lacked what Clendenning, Lamontange and Prokopetz brought last year and Asselin, Fontaine, etc. in prior years. I guess one of the tough parts though is that you had to move one of your grittier guys to get him and Tesink wouldn't really be my top choice. I imagine a move like this seemed more necessary after seeing how things went vs. Halifax the other night. CB was hit hard all game and a few players were asking Malka to fight... they need someone who can step in in those type of games. The Eagles have been playing with 5 Ds while Piskacek and Ellis are away. They are on strict no fighting restrictions while shorthanded. Mario has a tight leash on fighting. My point is especially in that last Halifax game but also in any game this year if Malka declined a fight it was unlikely to be his decision. The kid has issues with his skating and his defensive play but no one can question his desire, grit and toughness. He took on a ton of older, bigger tough guys last year as a 17 YO under Vincent. The Gouchie trade and this one make no sense whatsoever. Not that surprised they traded Malka, if they bring in an offensive D he wouldn't have had any PP time left after that new D, Meilleur and Piskacek. That being said they haven't improved the team so what's the point of getting older and less skilled? First MacDougall, now Tesink. Ouch. Eagles need a real GM, Mario should stick to coaching. His coaching skills aren't the best either. I don't think there is a team in the league that juggles their lines like CB.
|
|
|
Post by canbeer on Jan 5, 2009 16:39:40 GMT -4
That's why it's good to have grit and toughness up front as well... tough losing Dmen to 5 minute penalties. So I see a guy like Tesink as a decent or needed addition to bring some grit up front... just too bad the price was Malka.
The Tesink deal isn't great but makes a bit of sense to me... the MacDougall deal just seems like a bad version of the Tesink deal... which makes it really bad.
Halifax has had great toughness and physical play all year but they still added Boland. I think they wanted to make sure they had size up front and to make sure that when toughness was needed that they didn't always lose a Dman... O'Connor and Pender bring great grit but they're also important top 4 D for the Moose.
|
|
|
Post by caperguy on Jan 5, 2009 16:40:35 GMT -4
I'm no expert, but...... True - that 'experiment' of trying everyone with everyone else should be over by now...we're half way through the season (I think there's another thread on this, so I'll stop there)
|
|
|
Post by gongshow on Jan 5, 2009 16:43:34 GMT -4
The Malka/Tesink deal is now posted on the site so all disbelievers better believe it. As much as I'd love to get rid of MacAskill in Halifax, I would just feel awful for the Eagles faithful if that also came true. ;D Definitely the worst part of this deal is that Malka was probably dealt to make room for MacAskill ....if that deal is true(I still can't imagine any contender wanting MacAskill). It'd be even funnier if CB then used a current roster player to acquire him.
|
|
f1sh
Blue-Chip Prospect
Posts: 463
|
Post by f1sh on Jan 5, 2009 16:46:23 GMT -4
That's why it's good to have grit and toughness up front as well... tough losing Dmen to 5 minute penalties. So I see a guy like Tesink as a decent or needed addition to bring some grit up front... just too bad the price was Malka. The Tesink deal isn't great but makes a bit of sense to me... the MacDougall deal just seems like a bad version of the Tesink deal... which makes it really bad. Halifax has had great toughness and physical play all year but they still added Boland. I think they wanted to make sure they had size up front and to make sure that when toughness was needed that they didn't always lose a Dman... O'Connor and Pender bring great grit but they're also important top 4 D for the Moose. You think he was brought in to play forward? Eagles have about a billion forwards right now. Not sure he can crack the lineup up front. I think he'll likely be the 6-7 D.
|
|
|
Post by Clubber Lang on Jan 5, 2009 16:47:57 GMT -4
That's why it's good to have grit and toughness up front as well... tough losing Dmen to 5 minute penalties. So I see a guy like Tesink as a decent or needed addition to bring some grit up front... just too bad the price was Malka. The Tesink deal isn't great but makes a bit of sense to me... the MacDougall deal just seems like a bad version of the Tesink deal... which makes it really bad. Halifax has had great toughness and physical play all year but they still added Boland. I think they wanted to make sure they had size up front and to make sure that when toughness was needed that they didn't always lose a Dman... O'Connor and Pender bring great grit but they're also important top 4 D for the Moose. We could have packaged Goochie and Malka and got back a return better then Tesink and MacDougall. I think Goochie and Malka may have got us a Macenauer to be quite honest. I would have thought a fifth rounder for Tesink would be giving a lot. So far we got hosed on two deals!
|
|
f1sh
Blue-Chip Prospect
Posts: 463
|
Post by f1sh on Jan 5, 2009 16:48:07 GMT -4
The Malka/Tesink deal is now posted on the site so all disbelievers better believe it. As much as I'd love to get rid of MacAskill in Halifax, I would just feel awful for the Eagles faithful if that also came true. ;D Definitely the worst part of this deal is that Malka was probably dealt to make room for MacAskill ....if that deal is true(I still can't imagine any contender wanting MacAskill). It'd be even funnier if CB then used a current roster player to acquire him. Just ask Mario and you shall receive. ;D Spare parts for solid 18 YO players at the Eagles yard sale.
|
|
|
Post by brec7 on Jan 5, 2009 16:49:03 GMT -4
I also would NOT be a fan of acquiring MacAskill. We already have a glut of dmen as is, and have a lot of guys who can filler the lower end of the D quite nicely- it's the higher end we need help at.
Of course, the fact that trading for MacAskill WOULDN'T make much sense seems to indicate that it will happen if the previous moves are any indication.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jan 5, 2009 16:50:10 GMT -4
That's why it's good to have grit and toughness up front as well... tough losing Dmen to 5 minute penalties. So I see a guy like Tesink as a decent or needed addition to bring some grit up front... just too bad the price was Malka. The Tesink deal isn't great but makes a bit of sense to me... the MacDougall deal just seems like a bad version of the Tesink deal... which makes it really bad. Halifax has had great toughness and physical play all year but they still added Boland. I think they wanted to make sure they had size up front and to make sure that when toughness was needed that they didn't always lose a Dman... O'Connor and Pender bring great grit but they're also important top 4 D for the Moose. You think he was brought in to play forward? Eagles have about a billion forwards right now. Not sure he can crack the lineup up front. I think he'll likely be the 6-7 D. By my count he'd be our 14th forward or 6th/7th D. Piscacek, Brodeur, Ward, Meilleur, Ellis are all ahead on the depth chart. Malka could play the same role and be back next year as a 3yr vet.
|
|
|
Post by hal on Jan 5, 2009 16:55:27 GMT -4
Great, so now we'll have 2 huge Dmen (Brodeur) that don't effectively use their size. You'd think someone in the org'n would recognize this and help them improve. Gee wiz, Brodeur was with Pho camp for a while - you'd think someone in that org'n would notice that in him. Brodeur's problem is his Strength ! He couldn't lift 125 lbs ! When he gets stronger then watch out ! he probably will be in the AHL by then though !
|
|
|
Post by EagleFan2009 on Jan 5, 2009 17:08:14 GMT -4
o my, maybe he looks it this as gettin bigger on d, but like said, he is another d that does not use his size. Maybe i may get ripped on this, but i was never really a fan a huge fan of malka. He did take that concussion and probably does not want to fight anymore.
Maybe there were off ice problems and i doubt if they make a move for brennan or someone else, he wouldn't see much ice time either unless of course a top d goes. I dono, Mario is very questionable so far.
My question is, is Macaskill really that bad or is it the case of being on a low end team this year?
|
|
|
Post by Murph on Jan 5, 2009 17:15:37 GMT -4
o my, maybe he looks it this as gettin bigger on d, but like said, he is another d that does not use his size. Maybe i may get ripped on this, but i was never really a fan a huge fan of malka. He did take that concussion and probably does not want to fight anymore. Maybe there were off ice problems and i doubt if they make a move for brennan or someone else, he wouldn't see much ice time either unless of course a top d goes. I dono, Mario is very questionable so far. My question is, is Macaskill really that bad or is it the case of being on a low end team this year? MacAskill is ok. He probably shouldn't play on the top 2 pairings (ie: against other teams scoring lines) but he's fairly safe, and brings a lot of experience, and is good in the room so I hear. He's better than Malka. So if all he does is come in and replace his minutes, you've upgraded. Halifax is looking to dump older bodies to make room for new, younger ones, so he can probably be had for cheap. You'll still need a TJ Brennan type, and that should be priority #1. But if you can come out of the trade period with Brannan/Ward, Brodeur/Piscacek, and MacAskill/Meilleur as your D, then you're in good shape.
|
|
|
Post by Deer on Jan 5, 2009 17:18:55 GMT -4
While I'm not surprised that we traded Malka, I'm as puzzled as the rest of you by this particular move........
Today the other contenders added big parts. Obviously if we traded 17 yo Finn for 19 yo Ward we too fancy ourselves a team that's looking to make noise this year. But I don't quite see how lateral-ish movements like this and the Gouchie-for-MacDougall trade are consistent with the idea of running with the big dogs.
I'm not saying you need necessarily to make huge trades in order to win the league - Lewiston proved two years ago that's not always the case. But they did nothing - not lateral movements.
However there is a reason not to panic yet. This time last year, everyone was blasting Vincent for similar-looking moves when we acquired Lavigueur, Payment, and MacLellan at the deadline. Many posters predicted doom and gloom, but the rest of the year ended up turning out just fine. (Of course some posters have argued that if there are any negative repercussions from not doing more than that last year, they would be felt further into the future, but I'm simply talking about the impacts of trades within the year that they're made. If we're "going for it" as the Finn-for-Ward deal would seem to indicate, that's our main concern right now)
The one thing that seems pretty clear, for better or for worse, is that Mario is going after size. Ward, MacDougall, and Tesink are all very big bodies. I always kind of liked the fact that our team was based on speed, even if we were a bit small, but obviously size was an area Mario felt needed addressing. Whether or not that was really the main hole to focus on filling, time will tell I guess.
|
|