Jake Virtanen | #18 | RW

[spook007]

15 hours ago, Toews said:

I have been asking for a while now who are the ones that referring to him as a "bum" or a "bust". I have been told "they are out there". I have also been told that people want him to "fail hard" but I haven't seen anyone saying anything of the sort. Projecting where he ends up doesn't mean people want him to fail. I am sure we would all love it if he surpassed McDavid but obviously that isn't realistic. It doesn't mean people hate him, it's just a prediction based on his performance and development. Some seem to be against any discussion of that sort though and screech "PATIENCE!" and cite his age as a reason why we are not allowed to have that discussion. "How dare you write him off!" 

 

A poster earlier described it as "picking on Virtanen" as if people who are criticizing him are somehow engaging in cyberbullying. In this case the supposed "victim" is someone who likely does not even know about the presence of this thread and likely would not give a rat's posterior what we think anyway.

 

Unlike some on here I cannot read people's "feelings" through text. I can only go by what they are posting on here. It seems people read what they want to read in posts and create straw man arguments to attack rather than actually address real posts and refute them with counterarguments. Argue what you want to believe that people are saying rather than what is actually being said. Unfortunately the result is that there is no productive discourse just sniping back and forth.

 

Virtanen is still at this point an unestablished NHLer, he will have his ups and downs and in the meantime people from both "sides" will get in their "I told you so"s when he goes through periods where he is productive or when he has a slump. Its ironic that a poster referred to certain posts as "defecating", his only contributions to this thread are attacking those he does not agree with. There hasn't been one post of substance, just a bunch of (as Hippy would put it) wet shart.

@Toews this is from a another thread yesterday about McDavid scoring a hat on opening night.... 

Maybe I'm wrong, but speaking of JV as a Pylon, doesn't sound too endorsing. 

Don't want to enter the debate about JV's qualities, but there sure are posters out there, who doesn't see a player in him at all.

 

17 hours ago, spook007 said:

Like him or loathe him...I can't wait to see JV hammer him into the next century...

 

14 hours ago, The Vancouver Connection said:

dude JV is a pylon - McDavid would dance around that kid blind - learn hockey BUD!

 

[guntrix]

18 hours ago, Hutton Wink said:

Gotta load up on that straw now, to have ammo for knocking it down later.

 

#brutalIQ

 

9 hours ago, The Lock said:

Predicting the future is one thing. Expecting an outcome to happen as if you just came from the future puts you in about the same amount of reasoning as the very people who you claim are expecting "the world" from Virtanen. It amuses me sometimes how hypocritical people can be on these boards. lol

 

Why can't we just wait and see how well Virtanen plays or doesn't play rather than expecting silly outcomes, hmm?

The problem here is that CDC has been saying that using 3 years to

gauge Jake's development is too small a sample size and that we're coming to conclusions. 

 

... CDC then uses less than 10 games to come to their own conclusions when it clearly flatters Jake. 

 

That's hypocrisy in a nutshell. 

 

But then again, CDC cherry picking arguments when it suits them and calling people with other POVs "trolls" is nothing new. This board will continue to create its own artificial narratives despite what anyone else says. 

[canuckistani]

So is Jake actually gonna be right wing ?? I haven't watched the pre-season, so i don't know if his 'left wing' position from Utica is still where he plays

 

[Scottish⑦Canuck]

I really hope that he comes good after all the bust talk of the last year or so.

[Rob_Zepp]

3 hours ago, guntrix said:

 

The problem here is that CDC has been saying that using 3 years to

gauge Jake's development is too small a sample size and that we're coming to conclusions. 

 

... CDC then uses less than 10 games to come to their own conclusions when it clearly flatters Jake. 

 

That's hypocrisy in a nutshell. 

 

But then again, CDC cherry picking arguments when it suits them and calling people with other POVs "trolls" is nothing new. This board will continue to create its own artificial narratives despite what anyone else says. 

Says the guy who ignores that those thinking JV is headed in a positive direction (few are saying he is there yet) include his year in Utica as part of that process.   What you say is "CDC" is your own bias against this player and a general lack of patience with development from what your posts indicate.   On balance, the vast majority who have supported the patience approach are saying "good progress, far from done" but you don't seem to appreciate that as it interferes with your "narrative".   

[aGENT]

3 hours ago, guntrix said:

... CDC then uses less than 10 games to come to their own conclusions when it clearly flatters Jake. 

That's hypocrisy in a nutshell. 

Nobody's basing this solely on his preseason games.

 

Jake showed signs of 'getting it' in Utica last year. Despite the lack of offensive production (due largely to bad luck and no play drivers to play with on a beyond crappy Utica team).

 

Combine his 'getting it' with his natural tools (size/grit/skating/shot) and you have what looks like the promising young player we picked 6th overall a few years back. Albeit, still with work to do and consistency to build on.

 

Yup, he had a bad year +/- in there and in particular a bad off season last year where he was clearly doing the wrong things and not preparing like a pro. Because of that, his development has been far from linear. Preaching patience in that situation rather than diving head first in to reactionary panic mode is not something you can really fault people on. Hard as you may try.

 

 

[Angry Goose]

4 hours ago, guntrix said:

 

The problem here is that CDC has been saying that using 3 years to

gauge Jake's development is too small a sample size and that we're coming to conclusions. 

 

... CDC then uses less than 10 games to come to their own conclusions when it clearly flatters Jake. 

 

That's hypocrisy in a nutshell. 

 

But then again, CDC cherry picking arguments when it suits them and calling people with other POVs "trolls" is nothing new. This board will continue to create its own artificial narratives despite what anyone else says. 

Of course it would be short sighted to proclaim Jake as a NHL star already.  People are happy (like myself) because we saw the raw talent Jake has, and the potential he has to develop that into something very useful for the team.  I continue to believe he can keep getting better.

I take it your one of the types who wrote Jake off early?  Feelin a little salty?

[Alflives]

Just now, SILLY GOOSE said:

Of course it would be short sighted to proclaim Jake as a NHL star already.  People are happy (like myself) because we saw the raw talent Jake has, and the potential he has to develop that into something very useful for the team.  I continue to believe he can keep getting better.

I take it your one of the types who wrote Jake off early?  Feelin a little salty?

JV, now in shape and at a proper weight, is showing his true NHL abilities, including a good hockey Q.  The kid is behind (through his own fault) some of his peers in development and maturity in his person and his performance, but I know he will pass many of them.  JV will become a difference maker in games in a variety of ways.

[gameburn2]

59 minutes ago, Alflives said:

JV, now in shape and at a proper weight, is showing his true NHL abilities, including a good hockey Q.  The kid is behind (through his own fault) some of his peers in development and maturity in his person and his performance, but I know he will pass many of them.  JV will become a difference maker in games in a variety of ways.

If Kassian can turn things around, then this kid has every chance in the world of being one of the best players on this team.  He might have been rushed a bit; same with McCann -- and so many of us couldn't wait to get the future team in place as soon as possible.  Live and learn for all of us. 

 

I also think that being free of injury really helped him: gave him a chance to train ambitiously in the summer.

 

[kloubek]

1 hour ago, SILLY GOOSE said:

Of course it would be short sighted to proclaim Jake as a NHL star already.  People are happy (like myself) because we saw the raw talent Jake has, and the potential he has to develop that into something very useful for the team.  I continue to believe he can keep getting better.

I take it your one of the types who wrote Jake off early?  Feelin a little salty?

I was one of the ones to rag on JV, but I was also one of the ones to believe that he WOULD be an NHL player... though not at the level we were all hoping when he was drafted.

I haven't exactly changed my tune, except to say that I'm happy to see him start to play with confidence and a seemingly newfound sight while on the ice.  Quite honestly - he didn't strike me as having much of either.  Yes, I did see him improve in Utica but looking at the stats I didn't feel that was enough without adding even more to his game.

 

So far, it looks like he worked hard to make strides during the offseason and so far it is paying off.  It is still a VERY small sample size and one that is perhaps skewed with less-than-nhl-quality opposition.  I'll be watching him closely for the next couple dozen games for sure.  If he is able to compete and contribute properly on the third or even the 4th line, I will consider that tremendous progress.

As I said, I'm not changing my tune though.  At least not yet.  I pegged him before as an elite third liner and that's still the ceiling I see for him at this time.  I hope over the course of the season he will prove me wrong.  

[Angry Goose]

1 hour ago, kloubek said:

I was one of the ones to rag on JV, but I was also one of the ones to believe that he WOULD be an NHL player... though not at the level we were all hoping when he was drafted.

I haven't exactly changed my tune, except to say that I'm happy to see him start to play with confidence and a seemingly newfound sight while on the ice.  Quite honestly - he didn't strike me as having much of either.  Yes, I did see him improve in Utica but looking at the stats I didn't feel that was enough without adding even more to his game.

 

So far, it looks like he worked hard to make strides during the offseason and so far it is paying off.  It is still a VERY small sample size and one that is perhaps skewed with less-than-nhl-quality opposition.  I'll be watching him closely for the next couple dozen games for sure.  If he is able to compete and contribute properly on the third or even the 4th line, I will consider that tremendous progress.

As I said, I'm not changing my tune though.  At least not yet.  I pegged him before as an elite third liner and that's still the ceiling I see for him at this time.  I hope over the course of the season he will prove me wrong.  

That's fair.  I dont like to be too harsh on people right away, but perhaps the fan criticism coupled with Travis Green's coaching actually really helped Jake get to this point.  He strikes me as an honest and caring person, and I'm happy he has seemed to thrive from criticism rather than buckle which would really sucked for him, us fans, his teammates etc.

 

Nothing wrong with you being undecided- I think that's the smart thing for a player like Jake.  He still has a long ways to go.  What excites me most is his commitment to how he plays without the puck.  IMHO if he can keep that up, I see no reason why him and Horvat couldn't have great chemistry together.

[Gaudette Celly]

3 hours ago, J.R. said:

Nobody's basing this solely on his preseason games.

 

Jake showed signs of 'getting it' in Utica last year. Despite the lack of offensive production (due largely to bad luck and no play drivers to play with on a beyond crappy Utica team).

 

On 10/5/2017 at 2:07 PM, Hutton Wink said:

Gotta load up on that straw now, to have ammo for knocking it down (now and) later.

 

[higgyfan]

10 hours ago, guntrix said:

 

The problem here is that CDC has been saying that using 3 years to

gauge Jake's development is too small a sample size and that we're coming to conclusions. 

 

... CDC then uses less than 10 games to come to their own conclusions when it clearly flatters Jake. 

 

That's hypocrisy in a nutshell. 

 

But then again, CDC cherry picking arguments when it suits them and calling people with other POVs "trolls" is nothing new. This board will continue to create its own artificial narratives despite what anyone else says. 

Who is this CDC guy anyways.  Is HF Boards his negative twin?

[PhillipBlunt]

6 hours ago, J.R. said:

Nobody's basing this solely on his preseason games.

 

Jake showed signs of 'getting it' in Utica last year. Despite the lack of offensive production (due largely to bad luck and no play drivers to play with on a beyond crappy Utica team).

 

Combine his 'getting it' with his natural tools (size/grit/skating/shot) and you have what looks like the promising young player we picked 6th overall a few years back. Albeit, still with work to do and consistency to build on.

 

Yup, he had a bad year +/- in there and in particular a bad off season last year where he was clearly doing the wrong things and not preparing like a pro. Because of that, his development has been far from linear. Preaching patience in that situation rather than diving head first in to reactionary panic mode is not something you can really fault people on. Hard as you may try.

 

 

Those discounting Jake are the same that call Gudbranson a bust. 

[luckylager]

It appears I've just stepped into an argument... Uhh, Ijust came here to say:

I'm stoked for Virtanen, he earned that 13 spot.

 

He's saying all the right stuff to the media. He's playing hungry.

 

Lots of real good foundation there.

 

Go get em Jake. Give us hope

 

[dpn1]

Green sure is sneaky.  He had everyone thinking Jake was sitting but announces today he is in.  I like the intrigue. 

[Vinny in Vancouver]

23 minutes ago, dpn1 said:

Green sure is sneaky.  He had everyone thinking Jake was sitting but announces today he is in.  I like the intrigue. 

Green was shown the following 2 videos and changed his mind:

 

 

[N4ZZY]

how did jake look tonight? 

[Butters Stoch]

.
 

Edited October 8, 2017 by Butters Stoch
delete

[The Lock]

On 10/6/2017 at 8:23 AM, guntrix said:

 

The problem here is that CDC has been saying that using 3 years to

gauge Jake's development is too small a sample size and that we're coming to conclusions. 

 

... CDC then uses less than 10 games to come to their own conclusions when it clearly flatters Jake. 

 

That's hypocrisy in a nutshell. 

 

But then again, CDC cherry picking arguments when it suits them and calling people with other POVs "trolls" is nothing new. This board will continue to create its own artificial narratives despite what anyone else says. 

Come on dude. You yourself have been arguing with these people for more than a year and you somehow claim they're basing it off of "10 games"? I don't think I need to go on to point out how silly (and ironically hypocritical) that sounds. Your post does pretty much the same thing you're accusing other people of doing.

Edited October 8, 2017 by The Lock