Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * * - - 2 votes

Time to put Jan Bulis with the Sedins


  • Please log in to reply
44 replies to this topic

#1 whytelight

whytelight

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 80 posts
  • Joined: 23-March 12

Posted 01 January 2013 - 04:54 PM

There has been some talk recently about the potential performance of players playing with higher level talent.

Notably, I've read comments like "...too bad Grabner never got a shot at playing on the top line..." or "...if Shirokov had a better line mates, he would score 40 goals..."

Questions:

1. SHOULD a coach surround a player with better talent because he is "supposed" to be a top-line player?

2. The Sedins were 3rd liners at one time. Should ALL 1st line talent have to work themselves up?

3. If a player feels entitled to play with better players, how does coaching and management deal with that?

Thoughts?
  • 0

#2 Edge

Edge

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 72 posts
  • Joined: 29-June 10

Posted 01 January 2013 - 05:17 PM

Who the hell is Jan Bulis? ...
  • 0

#3 Snake Doctor

Snake Doctor

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,782 posts
  • Joined: 30-September 08

Posted 01 January 2013 - 05:19 PM

4. Should we listen to the demands of the players parents?

:bigblush:
  • 0
Posted Image


#4 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,214 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 01 January 2013 - 05:38 PM

Meh. Anyone can pass it to Bulis. It doesn't require much skill.
  • 0
Posted Image

#5 surtur

surtur

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,778 posts
  • Joined: 19-March 10

Posted 01 January 2013 - 05:40 PM

is this a CoHo, Kassian, or a Schroeder thread?
i am confused what is a Bulis?
  • 0

Release The KraKassian
Kassianthe_Krakensm.jpg


#6 etsen3

etsen3

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,569 posts
  • Joined: 02-July 10

Posted 01 January 2013 - 05:44 PM

1. No, the coach should put a line together that has good chemistry, regardless of potential
2. I think 1st liners should have to prove themselves capable of playing on the top line, which can be slightly different than working your way up in certain situations. For example say you have a situations where you have a crappy team and they draft a guy like Crosby or Stamkos who can immediately step in and be one of the best players. These players have already proven they are capable of the first line, while spending very little time working their way up.
3. Coaching and management needs to do what's best for the team. No one is entitled to better players, they have to prove themselves.
  • 0

#7 PlayStation

PlayStation

    XBox

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,280 posts
  • Joined: 12-April 08

Posted 01 January 2013 - 05:49 PM

Who the hell is Jan Bulis? ...


A young one I see, he was a a pure sniper for the Canucks, left us though, his demands were too much and we couldnt afford him. Went to Europe or something.



Anyways it totally depends on the player, putting a young prospect on the third line in a checking role may not be a option for a player who is meant to be a sniper, it depends on who the player is/what he brings to the table. Bringing a player up may help the kid play with players who make him better, and thus allowing him to transition into the game easier.

In the Hodgson case, he wasnt really allowed to excel to his full potential on the 3rd, he wasnt able to pass the puck to guys who could actually get it done like Kesler and Booth, or create good chances to improve his confidence, instead he was out on the ice and just expected not to be scored on. So it really depends.

Then again you can only have so much space open for them, although I do think the Canucks have a spot on the 2nd currently which should be used for a prospect when we feel they are ready to make the team and fit the role they would be put into, example Jensen on the 2nd. So it really all depends on how things are going, how the teams playing, and if there is chemistry.
  • 0
Posted Image


"Real Men" :bigblush:

#8 RAMBUTANS

RAMBUTANS

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,410 posts
  • Joined: 14-July 06

Posted 01 January 2013 - 06:07 PM

If I made this thread, I am crucified already. At least, they are kind to you.
  • 0
Mr. Reputable of the HFBoards

#9 Grapefruits

Grapefruits

    Fruit

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,390 posts
  • Joined: 18-March 08

Posted 01 January 2013 - 06:12 PM

*
POPULAR

If I made this thread, I am crucified already. At least, they are kind to you.


To be expected with all of the trolling threads you create.
  • 6

13yl1g7.jpg


#10 RAMBUTANS

RAMBUTANS

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,410 posts
  • Joined: 14-July 06

Posted 01 January 2013 - 06:25 PM

To be expected with all of the trolling threads you create.


See what I mean?

In reply to the thread, no, Bulis wasn't that good when he was here. Anson Carter worked though. But Burrows is good enough for the twins.

Oh and don't expect anything from the poster above me, 013, he'll either personally attack you or someone or post nothing substantial at all.


  • 0
Mr. Reputable of the HFBoards

#11 DownUndaCanuck

DownUndaCanuck

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,223 posts
  • Joined: 28-July 07

Posted 01 January 2013 - 07:15 PM

I'd prefer Tommi Santala.
  • 0
Posted Image

#12 Mountain Man

Mountain Man

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 386 posts
  • Joined: 18-January 12

Posted 01 January 2013 - 07:38 PM

See what I mean?

In reply to the thread, no, Bulis wasn't that good when he was here. Anson Carter worked though. But Burrows is good enough for the twins.

Oh and don't expect anything from the poster above me, 013, he'll either personally attack you or someone or post nothing substantial at all.


All this everyone is always against me stuff won't get you far here.

I think any player could consistently gain goals and assists playing with the twins. Even Jan Bulis, although he proved may times that he could screw anything up.

Edited by Mountain Man, 01 January 2013 - 07:39 PM.

  • 0
virtus junxit mors non separabit.

Hockey season must be back on, the crazies are coming out again....


#13 BananaMash

BananaMash

    xX_qUiCkScOpEz_Xx

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,202 posts
  • Joined: 23-May 10

Posted 01 January 2013 - 07:39 PM

All this everyone is always against me stuff won't get you far here.

I think any player could consistently gain goals and assists playing with the twins. Even Jan Bulis, although he proved may times that he could screw anything up.


All Bulis wanted was a piggy-back ride. Is that too much to ask?
  • 3

FWYIerW.png


#14 SkeeterHansen

SkeeterHansen

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,140 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 11

Posted 01 January 2013 - 07:40 PM

See what I mean?

In reply to the thread, no, Bulis wasn't that good when he was here. Anson Carter worked though. But Burrows is good enough for the twins.

Oh and don't expect anything from the poster above me, 013, he'll either personally attack you or someone or post nothing substantial at all.


The ironing is delicious.
  • 0

/=S=/


#15 Mountain Man

Mountain Man

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 386 posts
  • Joined: 18-January 12

Posted 01 January 2013 - 07:41 PM

All Bulis wanted was a piggy-back ride. Is that too much to ask?


I can't remember if I screamed more at my TV towards Bulis or Cloutier.
  • 0
virtus junxit mors non separabit.

Hockey season must be back on, the crazies are coming out again....


#16 Edge

Edge

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 72 posts
  • Joined: 29-June 10

Posted 01 January 2013 - 07:50 PM

A young one I see, he was a a pure sniper for the Canucks, left us though, his demands were too much and we couldnt afford him. Went to Europe or something.



Anyways it totally depends on the player, putting a young prospect on the third line in a checking role may not be a option for a player who is meant to be a sniper, it depends on who the player is/what he brings to the table. Bringing a player up may help the kid play with players who make him better, and thus allowing him to transition into the game easier.

In the Hodgson case, he wasnt really allowed to excel to his full potential on the 3rd, he wasnt able to pass the puck to guys who could actually get it done like Kesler and Booth, or create good chances to improve his confidence, instead he was out on the ice and just expected not to be scored on. So it really depends.

Then again you can only have so much space open for them, although I do think the Canucks have a spot on the 2nd currently which should be used for a prospect when we feel they are ready to make the team and fit the role they would be put into, example Jensen on the 2nd. So it really all depends on how things are going, how the teams playing, and if there is chemistry.


Ohh ... I know who Bulis is, and I'm not all that young lol. I just thought it was odd that someone would throw Jan Bulis out there for the twins to play with. Why not Anson Carter, or Greg Adams, or Murray Bannerman?
  • 0

#17 rawkdrummer

rawkdrummer

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,197 posts
  • Joined: 27-August 09

Posted 01 January 2013 - 08:23 PM

See what I mean?

In reply to the thread, no, Bulis wasn't that good when he was here. Anson Carter worked though. But Burrows is good enough for the twins.

Oh and don't expect anything from the poster above me, 013, he'll either personally attack you or someone or post nothing substantial at all.


Burrows belongs on the first line because he slays dragons!
  • 0

#18 thehamburglar

thehamburglar

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,282 posts
  • Joined: 21-April 10

Posted 01 January 2013 - 08:25 PM

Let's hope Shirokov comes back.
  • 0
Posted Image

#19 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,214 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 01 January 2013 - 08:35 PM

Let's hope Shirokov comes back.

On a Yak-42.


What? Too soon? Never? Oh.
  • 0
Posted Image

#20 beer&meat

beer&meat

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 915 posts
  • Joined: 09-February 09

Posted 01 January 2013 - 08:37 PM

Let's hope Shirokov comes back.


:picard:
  • 0
I don't ride with the band, I roll with the team.

I've been a Canuck fan since 2004-05 when the team was going through a huge transition phase, missed the playoffs


#21 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 70,611 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 01 January 2013 - 08:43 PM

Jeff Cowan!!
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#22 BananaMash

BananaMash

    xX_qUiCkScOpEz_Xx

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,202 posts
  • Joined: 23-May 10

Posted 01 January 2013 - 08:44 PM

Let's hope Shirokov comes back.


He was the next Bure for a bit.
  • 0

FWYIerW.png


#23 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,063 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 01 January 2013 - 08:56 PM

There has been some talk recently about the potential performance of players playing with higher level talent.

Notably, I've read comments like "...too bad Grabner never got a shot at playing on the top line..." or "...if Shirokov had a better line mates, he would score 40 goals..."

Questions:

1. SHOULD a coach surround a player with better talent because he is "supposed" to be a top-line player?

2. The Sedins were 3rd liners at one time. Should ALL 1st line talent have to work themselves up?

3. If a player feels entitled to play with better players, how does coaching and management deal with that?

Thoughts?


Players deserve what they earn. Burrows is a very good example for your questions.

1. If a line or individual is struggling the coach should try different combinations regardless of what a player should be. Burrows was a 3rd/4th line player given an opportunity to play on the top line as he was playing very well at the time.

2. Yes. It's up to the player to seize his opportunities when they're presented. When Burrows was handed a golden opportunity he took full advantage and earned the right to stay there.

3. A player is entitled to what he earns. If he feels differently he's more about himself than the team and should be traded. Burrows earned the chance to play with better linemates through his own good play. He's embraced every role he's been given since joining the team.

Raymond beat out Grabner for a roster spot two years running. Then Shirokov beat out Grabner and Hodgson for a spot. Players should get the opportunities they earn. Then it's up to them to not only keep the spot but to earn more opportunities. Once a player is well established in a role he's earned the benifit of the doubt to some extent when he struggles as every player has ups and downs through the course of a season. The only thing a player is entitled to is what he has earned.
  • 0
Posted Image

#24 Common sense

Common sense

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,724 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 06

Posted 01 January 2013 - 09:16 PM

I'd prefer Tommi Santala.


Ahh yes...Mr 4th line.
  • 0

#25 Common sense

Common sense

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,724 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 06

Posted 01 January 2013 - 09:19 PM

Ohh ... I know who Bulis is, and I'm not all that young lol. I just thought it was odd that someone would throw Jan Bulis out there for the twins to play with. Why not Anson Carter, or Greg Adams, or Murray Bannerman?


To be fair, we did throw Anson Carter onto the Sedins' line for one season. He was very successful in the 05-06 season, going 33-22-55pts in 81 GP.

Unfortunately for him, he got greedy and left as a UFA after a contract dispute, eventually settling with the CBJ, and later HC Lugano in Switzerland. The rest is history.
  • 0

#26 spliced

spliced

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,156 posts
  • Joined: 31-January 03

Posted 01 January 2013 - 10:10 PM

That's part of what a coach is for. It's up to him to juggle and make things work.

1. I would say usually yes especially for younger players. You want your best players to fulfill their potential.
2. Should or shouldn't isn't really the issue it's more about what gets results. If a guy can come in and play 1st line hockey he'll be on the 1st line. A guy like Ovechkin was so good he didn't need a long process of working his way up from the 3rd or 4th line.
3. They use him in the way that gets the best results for the team and him. The goal for any NHL team is to extract performance and win games, it's not to win ego battles. Unfortunately sometimes you have to put up with a few egos to have success.
  • 0

#27 Ghostsof1915

Ghostsof1915

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,281 posts
  • Joined: 31-January 07

Posted 01 January 2013 - 10:18 PM

I hear Linden is available...
  • 0
GO CANUCKS GO!
"The Canucks did not lose in 1994. They just ran out of time.." Barry MacDonald Team1040

Posted Image

#28 Nino

Nino

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,550 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 01 January 2013 - 11:50 PM

There has been some talk recently about the potential performance of players playing with higher level talent.

Notably, I've read comments like "...too bad Grabner never got a shot at playing on the top line..." or "...if Shirokov had a better line mates, he would score 40 goals..."

Questions:

1. SHOULD a coach surround a player with better talent because he is "supposed" to be a top-line player?

2. The Sedins were 3rd liners at one time. Should ALL 1st line talent have to work themselves up?

3. If a player feels entitled to play with better players, how does coaching and management deal with that?

Thoughts?


I think I see a little zack in this? No?

1. No

2. Yes and no. There are exceptions but in most cases they should have to work there way up. It is better for there development teaches them they have to work. The exception is extreamlly talented players that have a high drive.

3. Trade?
  • 0

#29 Kyosama

Kyosama

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 602 posts
  • Joined: 26-June 09

Posted 01 January 2013 - 11:56 PM

If I made this thread, I am crucified already. At least, they are kind to you.


A few days ago you made 4 threads in just over an hour. One of them was about how we should patent a mouth sound.

Edited by Kyosama, 01 January 2013 - 11:57 PM.

  • 0

#30 Derp...

Derp...

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,150 posts
  • Joined: 25-September 12

Posted 02 January 2013 - 12:48 AM

WE SHOULD ALWAYS PUT PLAYERS IN THEIR ROLES! Why take someone out of their comfort zone to see if they can make it as a checker/fighter if they are a scorer. If we don't need a scorer leave em in minors till we do or we know they are ready to make a difference with what we drafted and or traded them for... Seems pretty simple. Experience is great when your playing on the third line with your brother who is also terrific at boardplay and can hem a team in their own zone even though you are still a young line. Not everyone are the Sedins and can work their way up from the 3rd line using the talent they have with good work ethic. We should keep guys in minors until we have a legit role for them to fill that suits their individual abilities. Just cause someone is doing well in the minors as a scorer doesn't necessitate a move up to fourth line and 7 mins a game in a checking role. Maybe a call up here or there into a legit position with good players is a good idea, but forcing them into an unknown place does not seem wise. Very few NHLer's perform well outside of their comfort zones. The few that are extremely versatile can play anywhere on a 3rd or fourth and push their way up to a top 6 role with time. Other star's are just put into the role they know and they have to succeed. It's their only option if they want to play in the NHL and we deserve to give them that chance and that confidence to succeed. Then there are the checkers that simply bounce around from team to team for energy, fighting, and hitting skills etc. There is a large enough variety of skill and role players in the league to have a balanced team with people in their correct positions. People can do it in nhl13 by just looking at simple attributes for gosh sakes! Not ever sniper we draft is going to get the chance to be a sniper on a top nhl line, thats not how it works, but if they show well in the AHL and a chance is given then the opportunity is theirs to take or miss and fall back to the minors.

How many people want to see Jensen on a 3rd or fourth line in first year? The guy is pure Offense in a Danish form and should be honing his skills at the AHL level or playing some good mins with good players in the NHL. Just saying Gaunce on the other hand is a third line center as soon as he's NHL ready, super steady player who will work his way up and be a top 6 when he get's there, good and ready for his role.
  • 0
linden Vey Sig

 





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.