Rumor: Habs Have Shown Interest in Puljujarvi

[Gaylord Q Tinkledink]

Yeah, I said as much about Jarmo in an earlier post in this thread. Jarmo, a fellow Finn, bypassed him. What did he know that we don't?

That there was a big centre there as well ?

I'm sure he saw something he didn't like in him, but that chance to get that centre....

 

[admiralcadillac]

You pulju’in a jarvi mate?

 

[Miller Time]

I've always thought that players with low hockey IQ tend to bust as it's not fixable. How accurate is this type of thinking?

It's a bum answer, but..... Depends.

Take it from the other side... A guy like Corey Locke had extremely high "IQ", but not the physical tools & mindset to translate it to a NHL career...
Chipchura imo had a pretty high hockey IQ, but the injury impact on his game or just inability to transition it to pro level, took away his top 9 potential...

"IQ", physical tools, mindset & confidence... I don't know that anyone has, or can, map out an exact formula, but for each elevation to a higher competitive level, some combination of these factors needs to come together for an athlete to make it, let alone thrive.

JP obviously has a good amount of physical tools.
His success at various other levels, suggests he has at least the capacity for an effective mindset. Confidence doesn't seem to be the issue (though ego/arrogance can easily be a sign of a lack of confidence).

That he was an unstoppable force in WJC's one year & then held scoreless a year later at the Senior WC's, points perhaps to a reliance on physical edge for success, which is not a great sign....

Player progression is far to complex to simplify to 1-2 variables in terms of why/how it works out...

Dan Cleary is another great example. He was McDavid-esque in his pre-draft hype... Completely failed to live up to that height (admittedly lacked professionalism & relied too heavily on "natural talent" for too long and it ruined his chance at stardom)... But, caught himself, changed his mindset & ego, and reinvented himself as a great middle-6 player (likely due to his great hockey IQ) and ended up having a good career even if well short of the potential he had... A transition guys like Daigle & Stefan weren't able to pull off.

Imo, JP either figures out how to be an impact top 6 NHL offensive contributor, or plays out his career in Europe... At this point, he's young enough and has the right physical tools that, if he can find the right mindset or be supported into growing it, the ceiling is still attainable

 

[Runner77]

It's a bum answer, but..... Depends.

Take it from the other side... A guy like Corey Locke had extremely high "IQ", but not the physical tools & mindset to translate it to a NHL career...
Chipchura imo had a pretty high hockey IQ, but the injury impact on his game or just inability to transition it to pro level, took away his top 9 potential...

"IQ", physical tools, mindset & confidence... I don't know that anyone has, or can, map out an exact formula, but for each elevation to a higher competitive level, some combination of these factors needs to come together for an athlete to make it, let alone thrive.

JP obviously has a good amount of physical tools.
His success at various other levels, suggests he has at least the capacity for an effective mindset.

That he was an unstoppable force in WJC's one year & then held scoreless a year later at the Senior WC's a year later, points to perhaps a reliance on physical edge for success, which is not a great sign....

Player progression is far to complex to simplify to 1-2 variables in terms of why/how it works out...

Dan Cleary is another great example. He was McDavid-esque in his pre-draft hype... Completely failed to live up to that height (admittedly lack professionalism & relied too heavily on "natural talent" for too long and it ruined his chance at stardom)... But, caught himself, changed his mindset & ego, and reinvented himself as a great middle-6 player (likely due to his great hockey IQ) and ended up having a good career even if well short of the potential he had... A transition guys like Daigle & Stefan weren't able to pull off.

Imo, JP either figures out how to be an impact top 6 NHL offensive contributor, or plays out his career in Europe... At this point, he's young enough and has the right physical tools that, if he can find the right mindset or be supported into growing it, the ceiling is still attainable

Thanks for the detailed reply. Some great examples in there.

When posters use “hockey IQ” as a valuative tool, makes me wonder if we even have consensus on its scope.

If a player can still figure things out with more time, was his hockey IQ misleading? Still evolving? Sounds like a malleable concept.

 

[Miller Time]

Thanks for the detailed reply. Some great examples in there.

When posters use “hockey IQ” as a valuative tool, makes me wonder if we even have consensus on its scope.

If a player can still figure things out with more time, was his hockey IQ misleading? Still evolving? Sounds like a malleable concept.

Bang on... I suspect it means vastly different things for most, and for some, probably nothing actually coherent.

For me, I interpret it to the ability to understand how plays evolve... From that understanding, one can make better decisions vis a vis the opposition and either accentuate advantages or mitigate weaknesses.

It shows up as "vision", "anticipation", and "good decision-making"...

I differentiate that from "mindset" for two reasons.
1- hockey IQ = deep & intuitive understanding of the dynamics of hockey. Time & space are the currency of all team sports... Hockey has its own unique dynamics that one can intuitively and/or with dedicated practice, integrate to a degree that allows for superior real-time (or autonomous) decision-making.

2- mindset = ability to learn and improve/adapt/overcome.
Like the Cleary example, with the right mindset, players can adapt and maximize their current tool set.

So while there is likely ongoing "learning" in high hockey IQ players, I differentiate the two in that IQ is the knowledge/intuition available or on hand, whereas mindset is the ability to learn & adapt effectively, thus maximizing whatever current levels of physical or "IQ" are.

And then confidence differs from both in that it reflects the aggressiveness, willingness, courageousness an athlete can muster in applying their tool box.

Something like:
Physical = body toolbox (relevant to hockey)
IQ = mind toolbox (relevant to hockey)
Mindset = ability to improve/adapt toolbox (not hockey specific)
Confidence = willingness to use push the limits of toolbox (not hockey specific).

 

[Runner77]

Bang on... I suspect it means vastly different things for most, and for some, probably nothing actually coherent.

For me, I interpret it to the ability to understand how plays evolve... From that understanding, one can make better decisions vis a vis the opposition and either accentuate advantages or mitigate weaknesses.

It shows up as "vision", "anticipation", and "good decision-making"...

I differentiate that from "mindset" for two reasons.
1- hockey IQ = deep & intuitive understanding of the dynamics of hockey. Time & space are the currency of all team sports... Hockey has its own unique dynamics that one can intuitively and/or with dedicated practice, integrate to a degree that allows for superior real-time (or autonomous) decision-making.

2- mindset = ability to learn and improve/adapt/overcome.
Like the Cleary example, with the right mindset, players can adapt and maximize their current tool set.

So while there is likely ongoing "learning" in high hockey IQ players, I differentiate the two in that IQ is the knowledge/intuition available or on hand, whereas mindset is the ability to learn & adapt effectively, thus maximizing whatever current levels of physical or "IQ" are.

And then confidence differs from both in that it reflects the aggressiveness, willingness, courageousness an athlete can muster in applying their tool box.

Something like:
Physical = body toolbox (relevant to hockey)
IQ = mind toolbox (relevant to hockey)
Mindset = ability to improve/adapt toolbox (not hockey specific)
Confidence = willingness to use push the limits of toolbox (not hockey specific).

Now I get how there could still be progress made to overcome a perceived bust factor. Your post also helps explain how different posters are arriving at different assessments about the player — which means that if certain switches flick on, some or most of his potential can still be realized.

 

[Miller Time]

Now I get how there could still be progress made to overcome a perceived bust factor. Your post also helps explain how different posters are arriving at different assessments about the player — which means that if certain switches flick on, some or most of his potential can still be realized.

That's the magic isn't it...

The best organizations are good at both creating a culture that nurtures & supports an environment conducive to "flicking on the switch", and identifying low-rise/high-reward assets that will thrive in that culture.

Spurs, Steelers, Patriots, Barcelona FC... Some of the few pro sports organizations that have expressed this imo

 

[Rapala]

That's the magic isn't it...

The best organizations are good at both creating a culture that nurtures & supports an environment conducive to "flicking on the switch", and identifying low-rise/high-reward assets that will thrive in that culture.

Spurs, Steelers, Patriots, Barcelona FC... Some of the few pro sports organizations that have expressed this imo

Yeah it's called finding a role said player can buy into and supporting the player's belief system i.e. that their specific tool-kit is exactly what is needed to fulfill that role on a TEAM. Then again when you have character none of this matters.

 

[barbu]

I am amazed to see so many habs fans offering established roster players for what is most likely a bust. And then probably go on to complain about Bergevin.

 

[Habs4Life]

Hope not hes garbage

 

[Kudo Shinichi]

If we get him and he develops well, in a couple of years:

Domi - Kotkaniemi - Caufield
Drouin - Poehling - Puljujarvi
Suzuki - Danault - Gallagher

That is so much talent in our top 9

 

[Rico Suave]

If we get him and he develops well, in a couple of years:

Domi - Kotkaniemi - Caufield
Drouin - Poehling - Puljujarvi
Suzuki - Danault - Gallagher

That is so much talent in our top 9

dont sleep on Ylonen,hes gonna be a top 6 forward in the NHL

 

[ZUKI]

I am amazed to see so many habs fans offering established roster players for what is most likely a bust. And then probably go on to complain about Bergevin.

The guy is 21 years old since May . It's early to call him a bust .
Established roster player ? Hudon ?
Probably go on to complain about Bergevin ? the usual suspects are going to complain whatever Bergevin do .

 

[barbu]

The guy is 21 years old since May . It's early to call him a bust .
Established roster player ? Hudon ?
Probably go on to complain about Bergevin ? the usual suspects are going to complain whatever Bergevin do .

Of course not Hudon. I am referring to lehkonen and Byron which were mentioned early in the thread. And to make it real short since there's been countless Poolparty threads and the topic has been beaten to death, yes I think he looks 99% like a bust.

 

[ECWHSWI]

If we get him and he develops well, in a couple of years:

Domi - Kotkaniemi - Caufield
Drouin - Poehling - Puljujarvi
Suzuki - Danault - Gallagher

That is so much talent in our top 9

at their current pace, Danault and Gallagher would be 3rd liners making over 5M$, maybe over 6M$ even...

 

[Treb]

at their current pace, Danault and Gallagher would be 3rd liners making over 5M$, maybe over 6M$ even...

Which is fine when Caufield, Suzuki and Poehling are still on a ELC/cheap RFA contract. Trade whoever you want when cap become a problem. Just like TB did with JT Miller, Pittsburgh did with Kessel, Jets with Trouba etc.

 

[Canadienna]

If we start the season poorly and playoffs seems out of reach, I'd trade Byron for Pulju.

Its a big risk, but Byron's next deal won't go over well and I don't think Puljujarvi is done yet. Moving Byron out also opens up a spot in the forward group.

 

[Tabarouette]

I get that it's early to call him a bust, but man Juulsen or Byron or whatever... i'm not sure if i'm willing to pay that much

These guys have next to no leverage, and eventho Chiarelli is gone we're still talking about the Oilers. I wouldn't be surprised to see him get moved for a 3rd pick and some C grade young gamble. Give them McCarron and a 3rd

 

[Fazkovsky]

I would give them a 2nd MAX

 

[BLONG7]

The Oilers have to sell this guy, and they are selling low, they have no choice...or they let him play in Europe. No way should anyone offer anything for this self entitled kid who proved nothing at this point. He is the Oilers problem...don't make him ours MB by rading anything of value!

 

[Scriptor]

If we start the season poorly and playoffs seems out of reach, I'd trade Byron for Pulju.

Its a big risk, but Byron's next deal won't go over well and I don't think Puljujarvi is done yet. Moving Byron out also opens up a spot in the forward group.

Give not, get not...

I see a rather impressive lineup if Pool-Garbage works out after a change of scenery, especially since it adds much need size to the lineup, along with (alleged) skill.

I wouldn't trade Juulsen for Garbage-Boy, because I think we can throw in young, skilled depth at RD in a trade for young talent at LD, along with a roster player, prospects or draft picks.

Byron, as much as I love his spunk and unexpected impact on the roster, I think can be easily replaced by a cheaper Ylonen within a couple of years.

How does the following lineup in two years look to you:

Domi - Kotkaniemi - Caufield
Drouin - Poehling - Puljujarvi
Tatar - Suzuki - Gallagher
Lehkonen - Danault - Ylonen

Afterwards (sooner than later) choices will need to be made, but still, for a year or two...

I really think Tatar re-signs at a reasonable Cap hit with Montreal since he was able to reignite his career here. I much prefer that concept of two veterans on the wing of Suzuki than Suzuki playing his off wing at LW.

I also think that, early on, size with Poehling and Pool-Garbage would certainly help Drouin be a productive top-6 LW.

 

[Milhouse40]

I get that it's early to call him a bust, but man Juulsen or Byron or whatever... i'm not sure if i'm willing to pay that much

These guys have next to no leverage, and eventho Chiarelli is going we're still talking about the Oilers. I wouldn't be surprised to see him get moved for a 3rd pick and some C grade young gamble. Give them McCarron and a 3rd

McCarron, Hudon, Peca, Lindgren, Evans, Peca, Reilly…..doubt we will use any of these guys in the future.

 

[ECWHSWI]

Byron for Pool ? sure

by the time Byron hang up the skates, he will be forgotten already, not a BAD player, but has very little impact in the game.

 

[admiralcadillac]

Byron for Pool ? sure

by the time Byron hang up the skates, he will be forgotten already, not a BAD player, but has very little impact in the game.

How does Byron have very little impact in a game?

 

[Milhouse40]

Byron for Pool ? sure

by the time Byron hang up the skates, he will be forgotten already, not a BAD player, but has very little impact in the game.

True, but is this trade improve the team?
Maybe and that's a giant maybe.
From what we've seen so far, it would make the team worst.