Pulkkinen claimed by Minnesota Wild

[kickazz 5,459]

Careful Kip. There's members here who think the OMG line deserves to be put together because of their "phenomenal" preseason performance against AHL players. 

Edited October 13, 2016 by kickazz

[kliq 3,755]

6 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Time already HAS told.  It's not like this is speculation.  There's a reason why puck possession matters.  It has for years.  Everybody already realizes it.  Go look at the best possession teams in the league, by year, and you'll find a laundry list of playoff teams and Cup contenders.  Almost never will you find a bad possession team who's had any success (I can't really think of one).  

So intentionally icing a line which is astoundingly bad at possession is insane.  It makes no sense.  Unless you're a dumb ass old dinosaur which thinks having the puck and getting it out of your zone is less important than how hard you work while you're losing it.  Sadly Holland seems to be slipping into that camp. 

Man, calm down. I said I think your probably right, and I am not anti metrics by any stretch. The implication of my comment is that if we are forced to use these three as our 4th line, I hope you are wrong and they can contribute in their own way. I am not saying I think they are better then a line of say Glen-Helm-Sheahan.

5 minutes ago, kickazz said:

Careful Kip. There's members here who think the OMG line deserves to be put together because of their "phenomenal" preseason performance against AHL players. 

lol, that is not me.

[kickazz 5,459]

Just now, kliq said:

lol, that is not me.

No lol I know it's not you. You're one of the more level headed posters that actually understands what is considered good , bad and okay in hockey and management. 

[joesuffP 1,746]

What teams have four scoring lines anyways? Where is this notion coming from that the league has left us behind?

 

Holland and management are only protecting our promising young players. The way you feel about properly developing players may differ. Personally, I think being go to guys in the minors does a lot better then given sheltered, and scarce minutes

 

This board has already deemed the fourth line as the three worst hockey players on earth coming off a very strong preseason. Two years ago Glendening was putting up very strong numbers for a fourth liner.

 

I'm not saying this team doesn't have issues but it's well known. We are rebuilding. It's not going to be a seamless experience. It's funny because a lot of you would like the team to tank but have been crying all off season about these tiny issues compared to the big picture. Just keep thinking about the big picture and stop wasting your energy

Edited October 13, 2016 by joesuffP

[DickieDunn 2,571]

The only way Miller and/or Ott don't play is if Helm and/or Sheahan play on the 4th line. Sheahan shouldn't and Helm makes too much, playing him there will make Holland look worse than he does now.

[kipwinger 8,521]

33 minutes ago, DickieDunn said:

The only way Miller and/or Ott don't play is if Helm and/or Sheahan play on the 4th line. Sheahan shouldn't and Helm makes too much, playing him there will make Holland look worse than he does now.

Our "fourth" line last year played as much as our "third".  Glendening had more ice time than Tatar.  So play Helm and Sheahan on the fourth and call it the third, who really cares what they're called?

[romagoth 47]

3 hours ago, puckbags said:

Redwings blunder? Lol.  I would be willing to wager with anyone on this site that regardless of what line " Pookie" plays on this year he won't score more than 15 goals. 

15 goals would still be more than Ott/Glendening/Miller combined.

1 hour ago, joesuffP said:

What teams have four scoring lines anyways? Where is this notion coming from that the league has left us behind?

 

Holland and management are only protecting our promising young players. The way you feel about properly developing players may differ. Personally, I think being go to guys in the minors does a lot better then given sheltered, and scarce minutes

 

This board has already deemed the fourth line as the three worst hockey players on earth coming off a very strong preseason. Two years ago Glendening was putting up very strong numbers for a fourth liner.

 

I'm not saying this team doesn't have issues but it's well known. We are rebuilding. It's not going to be a seamless experience. It's funny because a lot of you would like the team to tank but have been crying all off season about these tiny issues compared to the big picture. Just keep thinking about the big picture and stop wasting your energy

In 2013-14 Glendening's Corsi was a whopping 45.7%. In 2014-15 his Corsi was a stellar 43.5%. Last year it was a fabulous 43.9%. Yeah, very strong numbers for a 4th liner.

 

This archaic idea that you still need a grinding 4th line to "shut down" the opposition (something this 4th line is not capable of doing in any case) is the reason the Wings are behind the curve in the NHL. If you watched any of the Pens games in the playoffs last year you would understand how and why the Wings are behind.

[joesuffP 1,746]

So Glendening's point totals and plus minus are now irrelevant because his possession numbers are bad

 

pens never had 4 scoring lines they won with a balanced top 9. That's not to say that the only recipe for success in the NHL either. Kings won two years ago they had defensive players shockingly. Every year fans think there is some recipe for success in the NHL just because a team won a cup with a certain strategy or build the most recently. 

 

Btw not saying possession isn't important but Corsi numbers have fundamental flaws when compared with sheltered and shut down players...like obviously

 

honestly I think match up hockey is the new thing in today's NHL and especially in the playoffs. Allows lesser teams to have a chance to win a series with lesser talent

Edited October 13, 2016 by joesuffP

[nyqvististhefuture 1,002]

11 hours ago, DickieDunn said:

Kindl was moved at the deadline to a team that really needed a defenseman.  Apples and oranges.

And do you REALLY believe that Holland is lying, and that he didn't try to trade them?  I've been as anti-Holland as anyone, I can't believe that. m The fact is Pulk and Frk have limited upside and virtually no value, but because they were Red Wings prospects, fans view them as better than similar players in other organizations.  It's like a mom with an ugly baby who doesn't realize it's an ugly baby, because it's HER baby.

Yes because it's that hard to believe that holland would rather take a chance and send him down to Grand Rapids and hope he clears and we keep him in the organization  rather than pick up a 7th which we all know are rarely successful 

 

ya it's far fetched 

[romagoth 47]

27 minutes ago, joesuffP said:

So Glendening's point totals and plus minus are now irrelevant because his possession numbers are bad

 

pens never had 4 scoring lines they won with a balanced top 9. That's not to say that the only recipe for success in the NHL either. Kings won two years ago they had defensive players shockingly. Every year fans think there is some recipe for success in the NHL just because a team won a cup with a certain strategy or build the most recently. 

 

Btw not saying possession isn't important but Corsi numbers have fundamental flaws when compared with sheltered and shut down players...like obviously

 

honestly I think match up hockey is the new thing in today's NHL and especially in the playoffs. Allows lesser teams to have a chance to win a series with lesser talent

plus/minus is far more flawed than corsi and is not really a relevant indicator of player ability anymore. Both the Kings and Pens (and Blackhawks/Bruins for that matter) won cups with 4 balanced lines. Bergeron in Boston, Kopitar in LA are two examples of 1st line players used in shutdown roles. Luke Glendening, Drew Miller, and Steve Ott are examples of how the NHL looked 20 years ago with a grinding 4th line. It just isn't needed anymore.

 

I would much rather match up Sheahan/Pulkkinen/Jurco or something similar against a line of Glendening/Miller/Ott. Guess which line wins that battle?

[DickieDunn 2,571]

5 hours ago, kipwinger said:

I don't think anybody is saying that Frk or Pulkkinen are future stars, or top line material.  In a nutshell my argument for why losing them sucks is that this lineup (Blashill and Hollands):

Tatar-Neilsen-Z

Abby-Larkin-Sheahan

Nyquist-Helm-Vanek

Ott-Glendening-Miller

AA

Jurco

 

Is worse (AND more expensive) than something like this:

Tatar-Larkin-Abby

Z-Neilsen-Vanek

Nyquist-AA-Mantha

Jurco-Helm-Sheahan

Pulkkinen

Frk

 

So why lose those guys when the alternative is better and cheaper?

 

 

But are Frk and Pulk really better as reserves than 
Miller and Ott?  They're certainly not cheaper, at least not enough to make any kind of difference.  And in a reserve forward, if have a vet who can come in and play smart hockey and not hurt you, that's decent value.  Pulkkinen and Frk really need to be playing on a scoring line to have any value at all, plugging one of them on the 4th line when someone else is hurt isn't really going to do much positive.

 

[joesuffP 1,746]

14 minutes ago, romagoth said:

plus/minus is far more flawed than corsi and is not really a relevant indicator of player ability anymore. Both the Kings and Pens (and Blackhawks/Bruins for that matter) won cups with 4 balanced lines. Bergeron in Boston, Kopitar in LA are two examples of 1st line players used in shutdown roles. Luke Glendening, Drew Miller, and Steve Ott are examples of how the NHL looked 20 years ago with a grinding 4th line. It just isn't needed anymore.

 

I would much rather match up Sheahan/Pulkkinen/Jurco or something similar against a line of Glendening/Miller/Ott. Guess which line wins that battle?

Pulkinnen and Jurco suck so yes I'd take our fourth line. Glendening actually outscores both of them while playing as a shut down center

 

lets not forget we've yet to play a game and AA is with the big team. I think out of that fourth line Glendening is the only lock to be playing every night and deservedly so. Blash's comments on line usage and playing time appears to be all positive. The M-G-O line lit it up in preseason and deserves a chance to start the season

Edited October 13, 2016 by joesuffP

[romagoth 47]

16 minutes ago, joesuffP said:

Pulkinnen and Jurco suck so yes I'd take our fourth line. Glendening actually outscores both of them while playing as a shut down center

 

lets not forget we've yet to play a game and AA is with the big team. I think out of that fourth line Glendening is the only lock to be playing every night and deservedly so. Blash's comments on line usage and playing time appears to be all positive. The M-G-O line lit it up in preseason and deserves a chance to start the season

I know now that I am wasting my time when the argument descends into so and so sucks. But here goes anyway:

 

Tomas Jurco Corsi is 56.7%, 55.2%, and 51.3% since 2013. He has 143 games played, 15 goals, 24 assists, and 39 points. He averages 0.27 points per game.

Teemu Pulkkinen Corsi is 60.0%, 57.9%, 57.8% since 2013. He has 70 games played, 11 goals, 9 assists, and 20 points. He averages 0.29 points per game.

Conversely...

Luke Glendening Corsi is 45.7%, 43.5%, and 43.9% since 2013. He has 219 games played, 21 goals, 25 assists, and 46 points. He averages 0.21 points per game.

Drew Miller and Steve Ott are...well...Drew Miller and Steve Ott and their numbers are even worse than Glendening. Jurco and Pulkkinen were put in the wrong role for what they do and bring to the team.

The OMG line lit it up in the preseason against mostly AHL players, goodie for them. It won't happen in the regular season against fast, skilled players and that line will continue to be the black hole it was last year.

We can agree to disagree and leave it at that.

[Buppy 1,720]

8 hours ago, kickazz said:

Is that exactly what you're going though? Guy gets the least defensive zone starts and starts his shifts against weak opponents and you're labeling him as a "strong possession" player. If we dig into his usage he really did have the least defensive zone starts. Tatar was starting in the defensive zone around 40% of the time while Pulk was starting around 30%. That's very very low. Mostly likely below league average. It doesn't take much to take a faceoff in the offensive zone and shoot on the net to increase your corsi rating. It's much harder to do that when you spend 40 or 50% (like Tatar, Datsyuk)  of the time in your own zone and have to bring the puck to the other end. In fact, Pukkinen has a worse Corsi against per TOI than Tatar and even with LESS defensive zone starts. 

So no, he isn't a "strong possession" player by any means as you say he is. He simply spends most of his time starting his shift on the offensive zone against weaker opponents and happens to shoot a lot. And when looking at corsi against, he's actually worse. So to me that doesn't really translate to strong possession overall. It would be one thing if he had more defensive zone starts and still maintained those corsi for numbers and had better numbers for corsi against. Then one can definitely say that he actually does have the ability to move the length of the ice and has dominant possession, rather than just starting on offensive side and throwing a shot on goal - which I believe is what ends up happening in his case causing his numbers to look good on paper. 

Take a loot at Brenden Smith's defensive zone starts and his corsi rating, then take a look at Niklas Lidstrom's defensive zone starts and his corsi rating. Smith has as good, if not better Corsi than Lidstrom did in his career. Are you telling me Smith is a stronger possession player than Lidstrom was? Or does it mean Smith likely has sheltered minutes? One played 29 minutes a night against the toughest opponents, the other barely plays 16 minutes a night against weaker opponents (whenever possible, because we know quality of competition tends to balance out over the course of the season).

It's likely the latter. Just as with Pulkinnen. Less minutes, sheltered, better opportunities at the start of a shift. 

First, your numbers are wrong.

Tatar DZ% last year was 25.5, vs Pulk at 21, OZ% was 38.9 for Tatar, 43.6 for Pulk. CA/60 was 43.78 for Tatar, 42.98 for Pulk. 

Secondly, study on the subject shows that zone starts have only a small impact on shots. Quality of competition also looks to have less impact than many think. All told, and as I said before, his stats are certainly inflated somewhat, but not nearly to the degree people want to think.

So no, I'm not doing the same thing. I'm basing my opinion on the data as is. I'm not saying he's one of the best possession players in the league (though Tatar might be, and Datsyuk certainly was), but everything currently understood about the subject suggests he's significantly better than average. Maybe someday some new analysis will change that, or maybe not.

But whatever, he's not a Wing anymore. If people want to keep hating him, I'm done caring.

 

[amato 3,210]

10 hours ago, kickazz said:

Careful Kip. There's members here who think the OMG line deserves to be put together because of their "phenomenal" preseason performance against AHL players. 

I think they deserve to be together because of their phenomenal nickname!  

[e_prime 1,936]

Quote

James Mirtle: Have heard that Maple Leafs coach Mike Babcock wasn’t a huge fan of Teemu Pulkkinen, which could be why the Leafs never put a waiver claim in on him.

Reallllly James?  You don't say.

[toby91_ca 620]

10 hours ago, joesuffP said:

pens never had 4 scoring lines they won with a balanced top 9.

Not sure about that.  I don't know who played all the time on the 4th line, but I do know it included Cullen and Fehr.  I'd say those two were certainly well above your average 4th liner in terms of offensive ability.

I do think people get caught up a little too much in what made other teams successful the year before (including GMs) though.  That said, there is some truth to the comments that the league has changed, you need guys that can skate on all lines, a simple grinding defensive 4th line is a thing of the past I think.

[WingedWheel91 271]

13 hours ago, kipwinger said:

Ken Kal is just carrying water for the organization.  First of all, Ott-Glendening-Miller isn't all that tough.  We're not talking about Clutterbuck-Cizikas-Martin here.  They're only marginally more "gritty" than average and probably LESS gritty than a line of Sheahan-Helm-Callahan/Bertuzzi/Jurco/Nestrasil would be.  Secondly, who cares about "grit" if it means you're getting trapped in your own zone and getting scored on all the time.  Ott, Miller, and Glendening are AWFUL at getting the puck out of their zone.  Quantitatively.  They're amongst the worst players in the entire league in terms of CA/60.  So unless someone can tell me how to "grit" the puck out of the back of your net I'd say that's just a bulls*** excuse to agree with the status quo by Ken Kal. 

While I agree that analytics are an integral part of building a contending team, it can very difficult to apply them to 4th line players.

For Instance, Drew Miller isn't on this roster to score goals or drive possession, nor would most consider him to be a "gritty" player. He kills penalties and blocks shots better than almost anyone else we have... so he makes this team as a 4th line winger.

I haven't looked myself but I'll take your word that Glendenning and Ott rank amongst the worst players in CA/60, but they are also 4th line players who are historically charged with individual matchups/defensive zone faceoffs/to provide energy and/or penalty killing. I don't know if you remember, but when Luke Glendenning got injured in the 2015 Playoffs (Round 1/Game 4) against Tampa, we had a 2-0 lead in the game (with a 2-1 lead in the series), and then the entire momentum shifted. Our 4th line (anchored by Glendenning) had dominated our home matchups against "the kid line" and when he went down in that 3rd period, Tyler Johnson took over the game and finished 2 G AND 1 assist (including the OT winner on a 2 on1) to tie the series.

I have no idea what Glendenning's CA/60 would have shown up to that point - but I am sure that his injury cost us that series.

 

[kliq 3,755]

7 minutes ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kris_Draper

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirk_Maltby

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darren_McCarty

 

95 pts in 1998 out of our 4th line.  Pretty easy to see what a great 4th line looks like.  The one we have right now is embarrassing.

You're comparing pre-cap vs post-cap, when you have zero salary restrictions its a completely different world.

[e_prime 1,936]

26 minutes ago, kliq said:

You're comparing pre-cap vs post-cap, when you have zero salary restrictions its a completely different world.

...the only expensive one in the bunch is Maltby.  I mean, he was hot fire in juniors.

http://www.hockeyzoneplus.com/search/salaries-search.cgi?template=nhl-salaries-search-detail.htm&dbname=NHL-Salaries-test.txt&key2=2400&action=searchdbdisplay

No, to be honest:  If we're talking 97-98 or 98-99 Maltby and Draper were making less than $750k and McCarty was 900K/$1million.  Drapes and Maltby didn't get their paydays until much later.

What you can't compare is the style of play in 97-99 and today.

Edited October 13, 2016 by e_prime

[kliq 3,755]

14 minutes ago, e_prime said:

...the only expensive one in the bunch is Maltby.  I mean, he was hot fire in juniors.

http://www.hockeyzoneplus.com/search/salaries-search.cgi?template=nhl-salaries-search-detail.htm&dbname=NHL-Salaries-test.txt&key2=2400&action=searchdbdisplay

No, to be honest:  If we're talking 97-98 or 98-99 Maltby and Draper were making less than $750k and McCarty was 900K/$1million.  Drapes and Maltby didn't get their paydays until much later.

What you can't compare is the style of play in 97-99 and today.

I should always fact check before posting lol. I usually do.

Either way, I think in 2016 unless you have 3 guys all on ELC's playing extremely well, it would be very hard to duplicate those kinds of numbers, especially when you take into consideration your good point there in the style of play.

I have zero issue with people criticizing the OMG line, personally I am not a fan (but I will give them a chance to make me one). But if someone is going to criticize them, using the grind line is not really fair as we are talking a legendary 4th line. If anything compare them to the 4th lines of the Hawks, Pens, Kings etc.

[WingedWheel91 271]

17 minutes ago, e_prime said:

...the only expensive one in the bunch is Maltby.  I mean, he was hot fire in juniors.

http://www.hockeyzoneplus.com/search/salaries-search.cgi?template=nhl-salaries-search-detail.htm&dbname=NHL-Salaries-test.txt&key2=2400&action=searchdbdisplay

No, to be honest:  If we're talking 97-98 or 98-99 Maltby and Draper were making less than $750k and McCarty was 900K/$1million.  Drapes and Maltby didn't get their paydays until much later.

What you can't compare is the style of play in 97-99 and today.

Draper in his prime was a 30-40 Point Per Season player. In perspective, last season we didn't have a single player who scored over 50 points.

The point is that Draper was not a typical 4th line player in 1997-98, but played that low on our team because of the depth we had at forward ahead of him - which would be financially impossible to replicate in today's NHL.

 

 

[Echolalia 2,961]

11 hours ago, romagoth said:

plus/minus is far more flawed than corsi and is not really a relevant indicator of player ability anymore. Both the Kings and Pens (and Blackhawks/Bruins for that matter) won cups with 4 balanced lines. Bergeron in Boston, Kopitar in LA are two examples of 1st line players used in shutdown roles. Luke Glendening, Drew Miller, and Steve Ott are examples of how the NHL looked 20 years ago with a grinding 4th line. It just isn't needed anymore.

 

I would much rather match up Sheahan/Pulkkinen/Jurco or something similar against a line of Glendening/Miller/Ott. Guess which line wins that battle?

Plus/minus and corsi are flawed for similar reasons.  Corsi is essentially a +/- of shot attempts.

[DickieDunn 2,571]

Yeah you can't compare teams before the cap to modern teams.  There's no way a team now would be able to have enough players better than those 3 to make them the 4th line, unless they had three rookies making peanuts on scoring lines.  Even then they wouldn't stay together long.

 

Miller-Glendening-Ott isn't a terrible 4th line.  I might prefer Bertuzzi on one of the wings instead, but like I've said before, with what they have and where they are as a team, it should be Helm, Sheahan, and Glendening, with AA and Mantha on the 3rd line.  Right now, I don't care if Mantha's "earned" it, sometimes the best way to help a kid improve is play him and give him some confidence.  This isn't a Cup contender where dealing with a rookie's growing pains is going to be a deal breaker, it's a rebuilding team and keeping Mantha in GR for even a half season is stupid.

[Buppy 1,720]

17 hours ago, kipwinger said:

Time already HAS told.  It's not like this is speculation.  There's a reason why puck possession matters.  It has for years.  Everybody already realizes it.  Go look at the best possession teams in the league, by year, and you'll find a laundry list of playoff teams and Cup contenders.  Almost never will you find a bad possession team who's had any success (I can't really think of one).  

So intentionally icing a line which is astoundingly bad at possession is insane.  It makes no sense.  Unless you're a dumb ass old dinosaur which thinks having the puck and getting it out of your zone is less important than how hard you work while you're losing it.  Sadly Holland seems to be slipping into that camp. 

Pittsburgh in both 08 and 09 was not a good possession team. And plenty of other examples of good teams with mediocre to bad possession metrics and vice versa. There is an apparent correlation, but there's also something of a chicken/egg relationship. A good team, with strong top-end players and good depth, seems more likely than not to be at least decent in terms of possession. Whereas a good possession team, which may primarily be a result of coaching philosophy, is less likely to be a good team. There's more to the game than possession.

Sure it sucks to lose Pulk while keeping Miller and Ott. But hardly a difference maker.