• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
HockeytownRules19

Pulkkinen re-signs.... 1 year deal

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I wouldn't trade pulk for buff (and you can count me as cautiously optimistic re: pulk) simply because we likely wouldn't be able to re-$ign him with the amount of raises players will command in the next couple off seasons.. granted Quincey comes off the books next year and of course Richards, so it's certainly possible but we'd have to make sure any player signed long term is a great fit. Getting rid of pulk isn't worth that kind of a one season or less gamble, imo. You just don't deal his kind of potential for a possible rental.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly Dabura! People keep complaining about the fact that Pulkkinen is "one-dimensional" (which he isn't nearly as people claim...), but I'd love to have a guy that concentrates mainly on the offensive side of the puck. Like you said, we have more than enough two-way, defensively sound forwards, give me a guy that can put the puck in the net. Pulkkinen IS that guy. I truly believe that he couldn't have been used much worse last season. The fact that he was playing the middle of the ice the majority of his power-play minutes is mind-boggling to me. Blashill used him on the left side of the ice, whether it be the left point, left halfboards or left faceoff dot, he was always there waiting to get off that nasty one-timer. Assuming he will continue to be used in that same fashion, he will be a weapon on the power-play. Give him 3rd line-minutes with the likes of Sheahan and Jurco and he will figure out how to produce 5 on 5 as well. He has produced at every level of hockey he's ever played. The fact that people are doubting he can get it done in the NHL with a measly 34 games under his belt, producing at a similar clip as Tatar and Nyquist when they entered the league, after tearing up the AHL, is a little disturbing to me... Like I've said before, I'm rooting for the kid, I think he has the potential to be a very good Red Wing. Time will tell...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pav is 2 dimensional and easily put up 26 goals last season in only 63 games. As a 36 year old.

I dont buy the whole "one dimensional = okay because he can score"

Just sounds like an excuse to me.

But with that said, if it doesn't hurt our team then sure. But at the same tIme I wouldnt want a one dimensional player being out on ice for too long unless its the powerplay or up against much easier matchups. 19 minutes a night for a one dimensional player is a huge liability in current day hockey. I can probably go back and pull out a plethora of posts of people complaining about nyquist or tatar not backchecking and how it cost us this goal or that goal. And nyquist and tatar's back check is actually not too bad either. So imagine someone who is even worse.

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait, was Pulk just compared to Datsyuk in regards to point production in order to support the reasoning that he stinks?

...Ok then.

Well, IF the package of Pulk and Ouellet would get us Buff, it may be worth the gamble IF its done now (so we have Buff the entire season and not just a one month rental) and having him for the entire season may just get him liking the organization enough that it gives us a better chance at signing him. But, it still creates a huge logjam next season at D, because now you have 5 out of 6 positions filled longer term (Kronner, Ericsson, Green, Dekeyser and Buff.) Add Smith and Kindl to that mix for their one more season and you have zero room for 3 more of your kids. Sure Kindl could be dealt with, but I just don't see how Holland could make it work beyond just being a rental...and now we are talking no thank you for a one season, or worse, a one month, rental. Not at the price of Pulk and Ouellet. I know Pulk and Ouellet are yet to be proven just how good (or bad some say if he doesn't outscore Datsyuk) they will be, but unless Holland can move a roster defenseman or two, it wouldn't make sense to do it.

He'd have to move the likes of Kindl, Ericsson and Smith as well as trading Ouellet for Buff just to have enough room to re-sign Buff and keep the kids losses to a minimum...or trade more of the kids instead of waiving them.

Kronwall - Buff

Dekeyser - Green

Sproul - Marchenko

Jensen

I just don't see how it would work beyond a rental, and I think trading your kids, especially Ouellet in this case, for a rental, would not be worth it. Because next season, not only do you not have Buff, but you also do not have Ouellet.

Edited by LeftWinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait, was Pulk just compared to Datsyuk in regards to point production in order to support the reasoning that he stinks?

...Ok then.

Again with your make belief assumptions and made up theories. Who exactly is trying to prove that he "stinks"?. Show me. I challenge you to pull out proof that this is what the intension is. You can't because most of the stuff you say comes out of your wild assumptions.

And why exactly should he not be compared to Datsyuk? Is Pulk seen is a future bottom 6 player or a top 6 player? Do we simply turn our cheeks to every player that walks thru and say "well you can't compare them to Datsyuk or Zetterberg". No actually you can and you should because this is the teams future as the aging stars depart they need replacements.

The proposition was that Pulk's one-dimensional play is ok as long as he puts up 15-25 goals. I say that's an excuse because a 2-way aging player put up 26.

Pulk should and probably will work on his defensive game. That is my opinion and probably the Red Wings opinion since the organization is all about 2-way style of play.

I'm not supportive of not working on fixing your flaws in your play. There's no reason not to improve.

Yzerman fixed his defensive game many years into the NHL. It's not impossible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

kickazz, as I stated above, Pulkkinen isn't nearly as one-dimensional as some people claim. He works his ass off in all three zones, and he absolutely does back-check. Chances are he's not going to be a Selke candidate or anything, but it's not like he watches the play go the other way and just coasts back... All of this "one-dimensional" bullsh*t is exactly that... bullsh*t. People think just because he was an offensive machine in the American League, he doesn't get involved on the defensive side of things. That simply isn't true...

Not a single person is saying that Pulkkinen should get 19 minutes a night against the other teams top lines. As far as I know, everyone including myself think he should and are expecting him to get 3rd line minutes and along with the power-play. My bet is, Pulkkinen is no worse than Nyquist or Tatar defensively or on the back-check when they first entered the league. Both are probably better at this point, and like them, Pulkkinen will improve in that area as well...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again with your make belief assumptions and made up theories. Who exactly is trying to prove that he "stinks"?. Show me. I challenge you to pull out proof that this is what the intension is. You can't because most of the stuff you say comes out of your wild assumptions.

And why exactly should he not be compared to Datsyuk? Is Pulk seen is a future bottom 6 player or a top 6 player? Do we simply turn our cheeks to every player that walks thru and say "well you can't compare them to Datsyuk or Zetterberg". No actually you can and you should because this is the teams future as the aging stars depart they need replacements.

The proposition was that Pulk's one-dimensional play is ok as long as he puts up 15-25 goals. I say that's an excuse because a 2-way aging player put up 26.

Pulk should and probably will work on his defensive game. That is my opinion and probably the Red Wings opinion since the organization is all about 2-way style of play.

I'm not supportive of not working on fixing your flaws in your play. There's no reason not to improve.

Yzerman fixed his defensive game many years into the NHL. It's not impossible.

Good example but to be clear and I am sure you agree, Yzerman and Pulks is like comparing catalope to spaghetti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To compare Pulk season last year to Pavs season last year is just funny. Maybe compare Pavs FIRST 31 games to Pulks, even though Pav played on perhaps the greatest team in NHL history, may be a closer comparison.

Yes, Pulk is hopefully a top 6 player, hopefully a top 3. If indeed he cannot become a little more 2-dimensional, then I agree, he won't be as good as some of us hope, but I still believe if he plays with two very defensively responsible players, his one dimension wont be that bad of a thing. Especially if he (down the road) puts up 40+ goals. I am not saying he will, nor am I comparing him to Hossa, but we haven't had that in a long time.

That being said, I agree with you, he needs to be at least a little better 2-dimensional, even Hossa learned to do that.

Edited by LeftWinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good example but to be clear and I am sure you agree, Yzerman and Pulks is like comparing catalope to spaghetti

Yeah. Just pointing out though that you can improve your game. I guess I could even bring up recent players like Tatar. Tatar has slowly been getting better on the defensive side of things.

To compare Pulk season last year to Pavs season last year is just funny. Maybe compare Pavs FIRST 31 games to Pulks, even though Pav played on perhaps the greatest team in NHL history, may be a closer comparison.

No one compared Pulk's first season with Pavs season last year. Stop making arguments up that don't exist please.

That being said, I agree with you, he needs to be at least a little 2-dimensional, even Hossa learned to do that.

Yes, that's my point. No reason not to develop your game. If I were Blashill I wouldn't be telling him "Pulk you got that slapshot just float on ice and take it when yeh got the chance"

Then again I'm not Blashill and have no idea how the guy will coach in two months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I admit I never watched Pulks play in Grand Rapids where he seemed to score at will. I can only go by the games he played in Detroit and while I admit, he has one he'll of a shot, he was not very noticeable. He was easily knocked off the puck and seemed to lack confidence when he was out there. I chalk up some of it to being a rookie and it's only fair to see what he can do over a full season. I'm in the middle I guess. I'm excited for his potential to be a solid goal scorer but I can agree with what other posters here say about him. He needs work on his overall game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UH.....so you didn't use Pav's stats last season in a discussion talking about Pulk's season and where he projects to be? You may want to re-read your post, or edit it, because when the discussion is Pulk is a 1-dimensional player and he should be able to put up points and you come in a say in that discussion, that Pav is a 2-dimensional player and he put up 26 goals as a 36 year old, and then go right back to talking about Pulk as a player, it sure sounds like you are comparing the two players.

if that was not the point, then it sure read like it.

Edited by LeftWinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UH.....so you didn't use Pav's stats last season in a discussion talking about Pulk's season and where he projects to be? You may want to re-read your post, or edit it, because when the discussion is Pulk is a 1-dimensional player and he should be able to put up points and you come in a say in that discussion, that Pav is a 2-dimensional player and he put up 26 goals as a 36 year old, and then go right back to talking about Pulk as a player, it sure sounds like you are comparing the two players.

if that was not the point, then it sure read like it.

Pulks 'first season' was last year with 31 games and 5 goals. Haven't mentioned it in comparison to Pav.

But if you mean comparing his upcoming FULL season to Pavs last season, I don't see why even that can't be justified? Pulk has 34 games under his belt.

And like you said it yourself. He is a "pure goal scorer" right? So why is it blashphemous to compare a pure goal scoring rookie with a "Brett Hull-like potential" (like you say), to a non goal scorer that is slow, aged and injury prone? (Datsyuk).

Not like I'm comparing Zetterberg who is an ex-goal scorer (43, 39, 33, 31 goals in prime) to Pulk's first full season.

I'm comparing a slowed aged veteran who is 2 dimensional NON goal scorer and still put up 26 goals to a rookie "pure goal scorer" with an incredible slap shot that is 1-dimensional

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So there it is, if Pulk doesn't outscore Pavel this upcoming season, he is not good enough to keep.

Just so we know the score and where you stand.


...and no, I am not those other users, careful though, you may have just offended those two by saying they are me! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Helmethead, no shame in admitting you haven't watched Pulkkinen in Grand Rapids, I just wish some others would do the same, because this one-dimensional, no back-checking garbage is getting old pretty quick... Watch a few games of Pulkkinen in the American League and decide how "one-dimensional" he is...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So there it is, if Pulk doesn't outscore Pavel this upcoming season, he is not good enough to keep.

Just so we know the score and where you stand.

Nope didn't say that actually. It's more like "Just so I know where I ASSUME you stand". Too much making up theories in your head my friend.

Personally I would be happy if Pulk scored even 15 goals his first year and did a good job on the defensive side. An rookie that exceeds expectations on his flaws gains more respect from me and a lot of people than one that remains stagnant.

But if he blows defensively (which realistically he probably will this first season). I'm expecting a very good reason to keep him. Either show us you're an asset on the power play. Or that you have the potential to be a 40+ goal scorer.

Or show us that you can outplay the defense.

Tatar and Nyquist did their first full seasons. Hell I still remember Tatar going around the defense and falling and getting back up and scoring a goal 2 years ago.

Helmethead, no shame in admitting you haven't watched Pulkkinen in Grand Rapids, I just wish some others would do the same, because this one-dimensional, no back-checking garbage is getting old pretty quick... Watch a few games of Pulkkinen in the American League and decide how "one-dimensional" he is...

I have watched him in the AHL (been to a few games actually) and watched his prospects reports and updates and all indicate that he is garbage defensively.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL yup, his defensive game is atrocious, probably the worst I've seen... I cannot wait for this season to start...

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/prospects/teemu_pulkkinen/

Pulkkinen has first-class, high end talent with a very dangerous shot, as it is both heavy and accurate. He also has a very quick release. Pulkkinen has some playmaking skills to go with his scoring ability. He is not the best skater but makes up for it with his ability to hang onto the puck. His defensive awareness is spotty at times, not uncommon for young players who were dominant scorers at the junior levels.

I'm not a big fan of HF but this is pretty much what you read everywhere about Pulks, at least for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup, I hate a player that wears the uniform of my favorite team. That was clearly what I was getting at in my post. God forbid anyone has a dissenting opinion about a player on a discussion board.

Obviously you're a hater because you don't think that he's going to score 30 goals this year like the real fans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this