Question about Wild prospects

[stardog]

This is mainly for Wild fans, but of course anybody can chime in with thier opinions.
First let me state that the Wild is one of the teams that i dont follow to closely, thus my ignorance in asking the following.
Do you feel that the Wild is erring on the way they have brought along some of there high end prospects? Specifically Bouchard and Burns?
In bringing them along slowly, and playing them not as often as they may have played in juniors, do you feel it has hindered thier development by losing crucial playing time?
Statisticaly speaking, Bouchard hasn't improved from last year. And I believe Burns has been injured, but when healthy, did they follow the same mold as they did with Bouchard?
I am not attacking the Wild managment in any way. It is just an unusual way to go about things, and perhaps it could develop into a trend if it proves to be succesful.
I am wondering primarily what the fand of the team feel. Stoned Koala is the only one I know of that posts regularly on here, so i hope to get an answer from him and others.
I'll ask on the Wild board as well.
Do you feel that they are erring in how they brought the two of these guys along? And why do you feel either way?
Thanks.

Click to read more...

 

[Bookman]

Your question is practically impossible to answer, because we don't know what would have happened if Bouchard and Burns had gone back to juniors. However, my gut tells me that they both should have gone back, especially Burns. I think there's a part of every player that develops when they are the man, leadership qualities, that are lost when you sit these guys in the NHL press box. I would have been curious to see what kind of numbers Burns would have put up being a 1st line winger - right now, all we know is that he's capable of 15 goals.

The Wild method stems from Nick Schultz - they sent him back to juniors, and the following camp they thought he had regressed from the previous camp. Schultz also benefitted greatly from his experience in the world juniors, which is something they hoped for Bouchard and Burns as well. With Schultz, the Wild weren't too happy with the coach at Prince Albert at the time; however, isn't Brampton's coach (Stan Butler?)considered a good one? We're all puzzled by the Burns experiment I guess.

We'll see how O'Sullivan fares next season, having been sent back to juniors.

 

[Brock]

Your question is practically impossible to answer, because we don't know what would have happened if Bouchard and Burns had gone back to juniors. However, my gut tells me that they both should have gone back, especially Burns. I think there's a part of every player that develops when they are the man, leadership qualities, that are lost when you sit these guys in the NHL press box. I would have been curious to see what kind of numbers Burns would have put up being a 1st line winger - right now, all we know is that he's capable of 15 goals.

The Wild method stems from Nick Schultz - they sent him back to juniors, and the following camp they thought he had regressed from the previous camp. Schultz also benefitted greatly from his experience in the world juniors, which is something they hoped for Bouchard and Burns as well. With Schultz, the Wild weren't too happy with the coach at Prince Albert at the time; however, isn't Brampton's coach (Stan Butler?)considered a good one? We're all puzzled by the Burns experiment I guess.

We'll see how O'Sullivan fares next season, having been sent back to juniors.

Burns should have definitely been sent back to Junior. Stan Butler is an outstanding coach, especially when it comes to doing the same thing Lemaire is trying to do, teach a complete game. So essentially Burns could have been improving his overall game, while gaining lots of icetime, improving his leadership qualities and just being the man in the OHL.

 

[NyCoN]

We're all puzzled by the Burns experiment I guess.

I think it had to due with Gaborik and Dupuis(sp?) holding out. I think that after that long playoff run the year before, the "Brain Wizards(Wild Management)" wanted the fans to have something to be excited about. Because it was an embarrasment that we had 2 of our main scorers from the year before holding out. That's why I think they kept Burns here.

 

[Damien]

Five words: Doug Risebrough is a moron.
I'm suprised he hasnt traded Gaborik, Schultz, Bouchard, Koivu and Brunette for Vrbata, Adams, Adams, Wesley and Murray yet...

 

[NyCoN]

Five words: Doug Risebrough is a moron.
I'm suprised he hasnt traded Gaborik, Schultz, Bouchard, Koivu and Brunette for Vrbata, Adams, Adams, Wesley and Murray yet...

OK...

 

[Mizral]

OK...

You didn't get it? I thought it was pretty funny

(Doug Gilmour anyone?)

 

[Mizral]

Since I double-posted, I'll edit and say that I don't think the Wild should be concerned.

They are very very young players, and they weren't expected to come in and blow the doors off anyways. Bouchard has astounding skill, and I think has the ability to be a 1st line centreman in this league. Burns is a favorite of mine too.

I personally love the Wild prospects, but don't count them out at 20 years of age. Wait another year or two and you'll get a better idea of what they can do.

 

[NyCoN]

You didn't get it? I thought it was pretty funny

(Doug Gilmour anyone?)

Oh I got it. As a Wild fan, I didn't find it funny.

 

[Jacob]

Since I double-posted, I'll edit and say that I don't think the Wild should be concerned.

They are very very young players, and they weren't expected to come in and blow the doors off anyways. Bouchard has astounding skill, and I think has the ability to be a 1st line centreman in this league. Burns is a favorite of mine too.

I personally love the Wild prospects, but don't count them out at 20 years of age. Wait another year or two and you'll get a better idea of what they can do.

I don't think anybody's counting them out. But you have to wonder how a guy like Burns is going to develop playing 24 games as a 19 year old.