I'm really baffled by this suggestion that guys should get playing time based on their potential and not based upon what they've earned. Teemu Pulkkinen got a look on the scoring lines because at lower levels he scored well. He's being sent to the minors because he didn't do anything with those opportunities. I'm sure the coaching staff will give him some feedback, tell him what to work on, and he'll get another shot later. But some of you think he should be given MORE opportunities and not less? That's not how accountability works.
It seems like some folks would rather see their favorite players, rather than the better players, given time. That's not how good organizations work. If you're a fan of giving promoting guys based on their potential, and not their production, I'd recommend watching the Oilers. I'm sure they need the support.
Unlike Jurco, if Pulkkinen isn't scoring he isn't doing much. I like it. He's not ready to consistently contribute in the NHL. Particularly for a team that's looking to finish strong and position itself for a playoff run.
Well two things to remember, helm and marchenko out for a week to ten days, two we have no limit on the players we carry on roster, soo with that said when marchenko gets back expect kindl and quinsy to be waived or scratched, kronner-e,D-zidSmith, marchenkoSent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I like marchenko but I think he'll be the odd man out
Why? Part of the reason we didn't have to go big at the deadline is because Mike Babcock wanted "Marchenko to be our deadline acquisition". He's up for good. And they're not going to put him with another righty. And if they're smart, they're not going to put Zidlicky in the top four. So I don't see how else it works.
Petry was just traded for a 2nd and a conditional 5th to the Habs.
The type of player they were hoping to get, a basic upgrade on Alexi
Holland gives up two, players that could have at least added depth or grown in trade value AND a second for a player 10 years older who is arguably as good as Cleary when you have decent depth to begin with...
Not saying it was a damaging trade... it just is another example where another team is able to get more for less.
Cole is arguably as good as Cleary?
Zero credibility after saying that.
"@Bill_Roose: Erik Cole will wear No. 72 in Detroit. He'll be first #RedWings player to don that number since Motor City Smitty (Brad Smith) in 1984-85."
Why O Why isn't Brendan Smith nicknamed "Motor City Smitty"? I'd cut him some slack if this could catch on.
According to THN, the Leafs want Smith for Phaneuf...any takers?
If Illitch really wanted Yzerman to replace Holland, you don't think he could have done this? Pretty sure a franchise that has helped Russians defect, could force a current GM to step aside. To me, Ilitch was trying to do some damage control when Yzerman left (for the sake of fans like you) by saying "I love Stevie, I did everything I could to get him to stay", when really he was probably thinking "I love Stevie, but Kenny's the best GM in the NHL, so I probably shouldn't force him to give up his job to a rookie GM"
Just my opinion, of course.
Not to mention, I'm not sure that giving former players important jobs within the organization is such a good thing. Especially if they haven't proven themselves. I don't care if Maltby is a scout, or Draper is an assistant. But I would be very reluctant to make a former player the GM or Coach or President of the team just because it would be popular with the fans.
Sooooo, the Cole trade was a good one then? Or bad? I'm confused by this thread?
Does Holland suck for the Cole thing or no? I mean, I already know he sucks for not giving his job to a less qualified dude, just because said dude is a feel good story. But does he suck for the trade?