Maki and Puustinen to Finland

[FlamesAddiction]

That's good.

He can develop over there for free. It has a bit of risk though... the Flames won't have any input on his development, and he could just decide to stay there after starting his professsional career there.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Let's face it -- take away the vowel-enchanced European name and consider a guy with two marginally-impressive seasons (the second of which showed decline) in the WHL as the sole criteria, and at best the Flames are luke-warm about Puustinen. If they were truly sure, the kid would be under contract. This extension of rights is more a product of an international agreement in limbo (the default position) than about buying time for Juuso Puustinen. I think he'll be largely forgotten about in a few years.

If his name were Kris Hogg we'd probably be spared the hand-wringing.

[Flame4Ever]

Problem is Reggie, Flames are thin on a winger who can put the puck in the net. That alone should give him at leat a shot in camp to play in QC.

[Tilley]

Cracknell has shown that he can put the puck in the net, but he can't keep up with the play and isn't responsible enough in his own end. Kolanos jump started the QC offense but he only met with Keetley, Lalande, and McElhinney at team dinners last year.

Right or wrong the Calgary organization has demonstrated a preference for players who are defensively responsible over those who are offensively skilled.

The Flames must believe the systems that are in place are good enough to generate offense or that there are enough defensively responsible players in the organization who can also contribute offensively.

With the 2008 and 2009 drafts looking like they are loaded with talent, it may be Sutter hedging his bets that he can draft a better player than Puustinen, so why fill a contract with a player who is not likely to play in the NHL. If Puustinen lights up the Finnish league he may be brought back over to ply his trade.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by Flame4Ever

Problem is Reggie, Flames are thin on a winger who can put the puck in the net. That alone should give him at leat a shot in camp to play in QC.

Problem is, Puustinen was 65th in the WHL scoring derby. This was against kids his own age -- it's not as if he was buried on the depth chart of some SM Liga team.

The one he does well, he doesn't do well enough at to offset other aspects of his game. Which is why he doesn't have an NHL contract. It's merely coincidence that his playing rights have been extended. With a contract, there still exists the option of loaning out a player.

Mikael Backlund's playing rights wouldn't have expired for another year under the old system, yet he has a contract.

[Flame4Ever]

True but he was the highest scorer on a mediocre team. This wasn't a guy who had a great linemate to work with all season like Santorelli and Moller, Wahl and Bowman, Fadden and Boychuk.
There's only one other player on the Kamloops roster to get 50 points. He's no Ovenchkin, but I don't think that it woulld be impossible for him to put up similar numbers in QC.
I also remember that last year his coach was saying that he was one of the blazers best players in pretty much every stat including +/- and SHG, so he clearly not just a one way threat. He didn't put up good numbers and I think the flames thought he was going to be a decen two presence in the Hagman (before this year's outburst) mold. The offense is just a nice bonus.
Personally, I think he could develop into a Lehtinen-lite kind of guy.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by Flame4Ever

True but he was the highest scorer on a mediocre team. This wasn't a guy who had a great linemate to work with all season like Santorelli and Moller, Wahl and Bowman, Fadden and Boychuk.
There's only one other player on the Kamloops roster to get 50 points. He's no Ovenchkin, but I don't think that it woulld be impossible for him to put up similar numbers in QC.
I also remember that last year his coach was saying that he was one of the blazers best players in pretty much every stat including +/- and SHG, so he clearly not just a one way threat. He didn't put up good numbers and I think the flames thought he was going to be a decen two presence in the Hagman (before this year's outburst) mold. The offense is just a nice bonus.
Personally, I think he could develop into a Lehtinen-lite kind of guy.

There could be some mitigating factors for his return to Finland. Fulfilling a compulsory military commitment would be one. Effectively taking two roster spots as an overager and European in Kamloops would be another.

However, it still comes down to the fact that he is not under NHL contract. Being under contract would be the strongest indicator that the organization felt he had NHL upside, regardless of where he plays in 2008-09.

I think given the events that have transpired, the Flames' interest in Puustinen is lukewarm at best.

[OzSome]

I thought I read somewhere that the Flames lost Puustinen's right because he was not signed. Something about Puustinen having played junior in Kamloops therefore the European rules about retaining player's right doesn't qualify Puustinen. I wish I can remember where I read it so I can post the link.

[OzSome]

I found it.... here's the link.

http://communities.canada.com/calgar...the-draft.aspx

The Flames have lost the rights to Finnish forward Juuso Puustinen. The Flames had suggested that the 2006 fifth-round pick was a defected player (because he was drafted out of Finland and has left North America to sign with a Finnish club) and that the club should retain his rights but the NHL has ruled otherwise. In any event, Sutter said the loss of the Finn, who spent the past two winters with the Kamloops juniors, "is not a big deal."

[Canada 02]

he wanted first round money; no wonder he wasnt signed

edit. to add to this, the Flames were going to sign just one of Puustinen, Carpentier and Didiomete