Confirmed with Link: Puustinen 2 way 775k

[AuroraBorealis]

Soon as I see 'on pace...***' it's like I'm ready to turn into the hulk and lose my mind.
Lowly players have a good spell and then what do ya know, they are on pace for 50 goals this season!
My most despised wording of a fictitious stat. Not a stat, a misconception that it is a stat...

Right, so you reward players with good rates until they do something to lose their spot, NOT before. That's how accountability in sports organizations should work.
You know what pisses me off? Guys getting successful chunks of games cut off, just to give those minutes to guys that will provide less.

This team employed that method and missed the playoffs by a few goals as a result. Congrats to Sullivan on supporting his vets.

 

[OtherThingsILike]

He only brought up blokes he coached and trusted. Sort of his shtick since then. He's rarely given youth a fair shot

100% of the youth who've actually earned a shot based on their play have gotten one.
It's not Sullivan's fault that Marino and perhaps DOC or Nylander are the last youths to have earned their spot solely on their own play.

He very well could be, but at least find out, no? We played guys who were atrocious at times, but it’s okay because they are vets

Correct. You play the slumping vet who's actually shown something at the NHL level instead of the player who has never shown anything at the NHL level and hasn't given any indication that they will.
You can quibble over which vet should've gotten the shot - Gaudreau vs. Jankowski, for instance - but yes, no coach is going to scratch a Bryan Rust just to play a random young body in the system.

And with all of this said - I like Puustinen. I could believe the argument that he could feasibly produce at the NHL level with NHL-quality linemates. I would not object to him getting a sustained, 5 game or so, look in the Top 6. I actively hope he gets the chance. But nonetheless, he hasn't earned it yet.

 

[Buddy Bizarre]

Right, so you reward players with good rates until they do something to lose their spot, NOT before. That's how accountability in sports organizations should work.
You know what pisses me off? Guys getting successful chunks of games cut off, just to give those minutes to guys that will provide less.

This team employed that method and missed the playoffs by a few goals as a result. Congrats to Sullivan on supporting his vets.

For me Exhibit A to this was Kap scoring like 4 goals in 2 games. Dude seemed to have his swagger back and he was having fun. I can't remember exactly what happened so my memory may be off, but I seem to recall his ice time dwindling immediately after that successful spell.

Can't have guys scoring goals out there!

 

[WickedWrister]

"The real answer is Puustinen is a 5'9" winger with average skating. Not necessarily from a pure speed perspective, from his stride fluidity and just overall athleticism, it's the small area stuff that he's not good at and it greatly reduces his ability. It's really noticeable in his skill chaining, it has to hit on the rhythm of his dominant foot in order for it to have any chance of success...otherwise, he's losing the puck or he's getting knocked off of it...

In WBS, where there are exactly 0 skill players that are worth a damn...he has to really pick his spots, while still being a play driver...that's too much for him to manage consistently. So, sometimes he slinks back into being a - I don't know - like a Teemu Pulkkinen type...which is fine, because he can shoot (not as well as Pulkkinen, but it's a good shot...) but he's way better if he can just focus on his "A" game because he really doesn't have a "B" game, that's why he was so effective with a playmaker like Petri Kontiola because Kontiola has pace control and Puustinen doesn't. So the game gets too fast for Puustinen and then he fails.

I found a note from July 2021 that I had made about him, it still holds for me...
"
It's weird, he's just not that impactful compared to his numbers. I like that he doesn't score a lot of "junior" goals. The goals that he scores have some pop to them, he scores from in-close or he scores PP one-timers or catch and release goals. But none of this really looks NHL quality. It's good, but it's not quite good enough for me.

We signed him, which you'd expect when you draft a 20 year old. You usually have a sense that you're gonna be able to bring him over. I think he'll do well in the AHL, but I have doubts about his NHL ability right now."

##

He was a 60/40 "sure, I'll qualify him because there's nothing else going on in WBS and he's not in anyone's way..." but when he goes back to Finland next year, I don't think I'm gonna burn a candle for him..."

Cc @Michael Farkas

Sounds like a fair, albeit slightly depressing review of his game.

Assuming he's not bought out or traded, I wonder how a 3rd line of DOC-Granlund-Puustinen would look. In theory you have a good mix of playstyles with a shifty pure passer (Granlund), a big physical guy with speed to lug the puck (DOC), and a hopeful triggerman in Puusty.

 

[Buddy Bizarre]

Sounds like a fair, albeit slightly depressing review of his game.

Assuming he's not bought out or traded, I wonder how a 3rd line of DOC-Granlund-Puustinen would look. In theory you have a good mix of playstyles with a shifty pure passer (Granlund), a big physical guy with speed to lug the puck (DOC), and a hopeful triggerman in Puusty.

I don't think I've seen enough of Granlund to like him as a C. But pretty much the only place I liked Granlund last year was on the bench

 

[Peat]

Sounds like a fair, albeit slightly depressing review of his game.

Assuming he's not bought out or traded, I wonder how a 3rd line of DOC-Granlund-Puustinen would look. In theory you have a good mix of playstyles with a shifty pure passer (Granlund), a big physical guy with speed to lug the puck (DOC), and a hopeful triggerman in Puusty.

In theory that seems very easy to play against because that line is full of midgets and the puck carrier in that is the least skillful player, which means there's a good chance the puck isn't making its way to the other two guys. If Puustinen could be the puck carrier, that'd change a whole lot.

 

[Big Friggin Dummy]

Sounds like a fair, albeit slightly depressing review of his game.

Assuming he's not bought out or traded, I wonder how a 3rd line of DOC-Granlund-Puustinen would look. In theory you have a good mix of playstyles with a shifty pure passer (Granlund), a big physical guy with speed to lug the puck (DOC), and a hopeful triggerman in Puusty.

Awful, imo.

Sullivan's gonna need to play a line as his defensive specialist/cycling trio, and I don't think 3rd line with those guys is that, nor is a 4th line with Jeff Carter and Poehling.

 

[3ladesof5teel]

Sounds like a fair, albeit slightly depressing review of his game.

Assuming he's not bought out or traded, I wonder how a 3rd line of DOC-Granlund-Puustinen would look. In theory you have a good mix of playstyles with a shifty pure passer (Granlund), a big physical guy with speed to lug the puck (DOC), and a hopeful triggerman in Puusty.

I think you would come away pretty disappointed.

Not really a threat to score and aren't shutting anyone down.

 

[Al Smith]

I bet to a lot here Hallander was a "promising potential third liner who is near NHL ready" a year ago, though.

And don't be sassin' Tankov.

Tankov would already be in our top 6 but for his broken neck.

 

[Honour Over Glory]

100% of the youth who've actually earned a shot based on their play have gotten one.
It's not Sullivan's fault that Marino and perhaps DOC or Nylander are the last youths to have earned their spot solely on their own play.

Correct. You play the slumping vet who's actually shown something at the NHL level instead of the player who has never shown anything at the NHL level and hasn't given any indication that they will.
You can quibble over which vet should've gotten the shot - Gaudreau vs. Jankowski, for instance - but yes, no coach is going to scratch a Bryan Rust just to play a random young body in the system.

And with all of this said - I like Puustinen. I could believe the argument that he could feasibly produce at the NHL level with NHL-quality linemates. I would not object to him getting a sustained, 5 game or so, look in the Top 6. I actively hope he gets the chance. But nonetheless, he hasn't earned it yet.

Smells like a Sullivan apologist, smells like something I need to rinse off the bottom of my sneakers.

 

[Honour Over Glory]

100% of the youth who've actually earned a shot based on their play have gotten one.
It's not Sullivan's fault that Marino and perhaps DOC or Nylander are the last youths to have earned their spot solely on their own play.

Correct. You play the slumping vet who's actually shown something at the NHL level instead of the player who has never shown anything at the NHL level and hasn't given any indication that they will.
You can quibble over which vet should've gotten the shot - Gaudreau vs. Jankowski, for instance - but yes, no coach is going to scratch a Bryan Rust just to play a random young body in the system.

And with all of this said - I like Puustinen. I could believe the argument that he could feasibly produce at the NHL level with NHL-quality linemates. I would not object to him getting a sustained, 5 game or so, look in the Top 6. I actively hope he gets the chance. But nonetheless, he hasn't earned it yet.

2-5mins on the 4th line, of course what was I thinking.

Nylander got a decent shot and looked good. Imagine if Doc got the same usage.