Jake Virtanen | #18 | RW

[DeNiro]

3 minutes ago, N7Nucks said:

Pearson didn't hit 30+ points until he was 23, Ferland didn't hit 20 points until he was 24, Tom Wilson was 23 when he first scored more than 10 goals in a season, Baertschi wasn't even a true top 6 player for us until the last couple seasons. All guys that appear to be decent complimentary top 6 forwards that came into their own around 23-25. Not saying Jake is going to reach that. But a lot of people are speaking of him as if he'll never reach it. Period. Like, he has no chance in hell of it. People speak more highly of Gaudette as a top 6 player. That guy isn't even a regular on the team and he's the same age as Virtanen. Lol. Y'all wild.

It all comes back to him being a 6th overall pick and being taken ahead of better offensive players.

 

None of this is fair to Virtanen. If you had listened to management from the beginning they said Virtanen would take time. Saying that power forwards take longer to develop is said for a reason.

 

If it were easy to develop power forwards every team would have one. But once you get one you don’t let them go.

[JeremyCuddles]

17 hours ago, DeNiro said:

It all comes back to him being a 6th overall pick and being taken ahead of better offensive players.

 

None of this is fair to Virtanen. If you had listened to management from the beginning they said Virtanen would take time. Saying that power forwards take longer to develop is said for a reason.

 

If it were easy to develop power forwards every team would have one. But once you get one you don’t let them go.

Well, people are idiots for holding Virtanen to those standards. He didn't choose to be taken 6th overall nor did he force the Canucks to draft him there. His development shouldn't be compared to or connected to his draft peers. Sooner people stop doing that the better.

 

It's not like any of the players taken immediately after him are world breakers anyway. Most everybody roasts Ehlers for his playoff no shows and lack of physical play and I see a ton of people laughing at Nylander and saying his contract is albatross level. Dal Colle is poop. Bennett is a bottom 6 forward. Ritchie is a bottom 6 forward. Fleury looks pretty meh. Fiala isn't much better but I'll give the edge there. Perlini is worse defensively and worse physically. Vrana is okay need to see him repeat his 40 point season first, Dallas can't find anyone that wants Honka. Larkin is a huge W, but nobody had him in their top 10.

 

Realistically who is definitively better than Jake in the first two rounds from that draft? Ekblad, Reinhart, Draisaitl, Larkin, Pastrnak, Nylander, Ehlers, Montour (6 of the 8 weren't realistically on the table for the 6th spot). Everyone else is either marginally better or on par with Jake. Vrana I am not entirely sure of yet, he had 47 points last year but I wanna see him do it again before I say he is "definitively better" than Jake.

Edited September 16, 2019 by N7Nucks

[Kanukfanatic]

48 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

I think Jake has more to give, but not much more, honestly. He's no spring chicken anymore. He's played 210 NHL games and while he's certainly improved over that time, I think I would be shocked if he becomes a regular top 6 player at this point. He's probably got more than 30 points like he's shown, but I don't see him scoring more than 40 points at any time during his career.

 

Sure, I can't be certain, but every one of those players you named were already top 6 forwards or better by 22, whereas Jake has solidified himself as a 3rd line, but not consistently any better yet. I think the only guys I've seen elevate from 3rd liners to 1st line players after this long would be the Sedin twins. I see Jake as a career middle six forward and I'm okay with that--he can be a great middle six guy for us for years down the road. I'm not saying it's impossible that he'll become a top 6 guy, but at this point, I'm thinking it's very unlikely. I'd love to be burned by this quote three years from now if Jake proves me wrong.

I think you are probably right.

 

Looking at the NHL forwards highest in scoring 187th in the league to 279th last year (mostly 3rd liners) they had between 21 to 33 points. Jake had 25 in 70 games for a ptspg of .36. If he plays all 82 and does not improve he gets 30 points. If he develops like most players his peak will be at about 25 years old so he still has 2 years to continue to get better.

 

So if we assume he does develop a bit more maybe he ups his points per game to the higher level 3rd line players which is about .42 ptspg meaning Jake would up his overall points per 82 games to around 33-34. 

 

All this is really moot though because players all develop differently. For all we know Jake ends up just getting it this year and becomes more of a 40 point + guy. Man I hope that happens lol.

 

 

Edited September 16, 2019 by Kanukfanatic

[stawns]

1 hour ago, N7Nucks said:

Well, people are idiots for holding Virtanen to those standards. He didn't choose to be taken 6th overall nor did he force the Canucks to draft him there. His development shouldn't be compared to or connected to his draft peers. Sooner people start doing that the better.

 

It's not like any of the players taken immediately after him are world breakers anyway. Most everybody roasts Ehlers for his playoff no shows and lack of physical play and I see a ton of people laughing at Nylander and saying his contract is albatross level. Dal Colle is poop. Bennett is a bottom 6 forward. Ritchie is a bottom 6 forward. Fleury looks pretty meh. Fiala isn't much better but I'll give the edge there. Perlini is worse defensively and worse physically. Vrana is okay need to see him repeat his 40 point season first, Dallas can't find anyone that wants Honka. Larkin is a huge W, but nobody had him in their top 10.

 

Realistically who is definitively better than Jake in the first two rounds from that draft? Ekblad, Reinhart, Draisaitl, Larkin, Pastrnak, Nylander, Ehlers, Montour (6 of the 8 weren't realistically on the table for the 6th spot). Everyone else is either marginally better or on par with Jake. Vrana I am not entirely sure of yet, he had 47 points last year but I wanna see him do it again before I say he is "definitively better" than Jake.

I'd take Virt over Ehlers every single time, Nylander as well.

[Alflives]

5 minutes ago, stawns said:

I'd take Virt over Ehlers every single time, Nylander as well.

Especially is the goal is to win a Cup.  Six and seven million dollar cap hits for two super soft wingers, who do nothing in hard circumstances.  

[JeremyCuddles]

55 minutes ago, stawns said:

I'd take Virt over Ehlers every single time, Nylander as well.

I'd be hard pressed to agree to that, but it does support my point that the pick isn't as bad as people claim. Most taken after him either have question marks or are worse than he is.

[Jasin23]

Did anyone actually listen to the interview Jake gave after day 1?

 

I think he missed his weighted, but he was right there...so maybe 0,5 pound out of the weight he was supposed to be..but he missed it...doesn't mean he didn't train hard...

 

TG seems to be black/white ( things are black or white) things coach....so Jake missed it, took the punishment and reposibility and it's done...

 

Also, I hate how reporters asked the same question in 10 different ways, trying to catch Jake with some more info...geeez, move on, nothing to see here...

 

 

Jake will be fine, 15-20 goals predicted...

[ForsbergTheGreat]

 

15 hours ago, N7Nucks said:

It's not like any of the players taken immediately after him are world breakers anyway. Most everybody roasts Ehlers for his playoff no shows and lack of physical play and I see a ton of people laughing at Nylander and saying his contract is albatross level. Dal Colle is poop. Bennett is a bottom 6 forward. Ritchie is a bottom 6 forward. Fleury looks pretty meh. Fiala isn't much better but I'll give the edge there. Perlini is worse defensively and worse physically. Vrana is okay need to see him repeat his 40 point season first, Dallas can't find anyone that wants Honka. Larkin is a huge W, but nobody had him in their top 10.

 

 

15 hours ago, N7Nucks said:

Realistically who is definitively better than Jake in the first two rounds from that draft? Ekblad, Reinhart, Draisaitl, Larkin, Pastrnak, Nylander, Ehlers, Montour (6 of the 8 weren't realistically on the table for the 6th spot). Everyone else is either marginally better or on par with Jake. Vrana I am not entirely sure of yet, he had 47 points last year but I wanna see him do it again before I say he is "definitively better" than Jake.

You have to consider what Jake is today, not what you think he could be.  It’s not really fair to just claim guys like Bennett and Ritchie are “just third liners” when that’s exactly what Jake is…and at this point are those two players are the more effective 3rd line players.  Sure Jake could become more, but if he can, why aren’t others being held to the same hopes.  While you may not be sold on Vrana, what has Jake shown to sell you that he’d be worth more?

 

If you are comparing players to what you think they could be it’s really any ones game.  Players like Ryan Donato, Kamenev and Fabbri all have high ceilings that are still being developed.   But if we are comparing players based what they’ve currently accomplished, I’d say in the first 60 picks

 

Hands down better than Jake – Draisaitl, Pastrnak, Larkin, Reinhart, Tuch, Vrana, Kapanen, Fiala, Ehlers, Ekblad, Sanhiem, Montour, Schmaltz, Nylander

Slightly better than Jake -  Ritichie, Bennett, McCann, Dvorak, DeAngelo, Kempe

[Alflives]

3 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

 

 

 

You have to consider what Jake is today, not what you think he could be.  It’s not really fair to just claim guys like Bennett and Ritchie are “just third liners” when that’s exactly what Jake is…and at this point are those two players are the more effective 3rd line players.  Sure Jake could become more, but if he can, why aren’t others being held to the same hopes.  While you may not be sold on Vrana, what has Jake shown to sell you that he’d be worth more?

 

If you are comparing players to what you think they could be it’s really any ones game.  Players like Ryan Donato, Kamenev and Fabbri all have high ceilings that are still being developed.   But if we are comparing players based what they’ve currently accomplished, I’d say in the first 60 picks

 

Hands down better than Jake – Draisaitl, Pastrnak, Larkin, Reinhart, Tuch, Vrana, Kapanen, Fiala, Ehlers, Ekblad, Sanhiem, Montour, Schmaltz, Nylander

Slightly better than Jake -  Ritichie, Bennett, McCann, Dvorak, DeAngelo, Kempe

Ehlers, Nylander, and McCann are not better, even slightly, than Jake.  Points are not the only way to measure a player.  I'd argue there are several other players on your list who are not better than Jake.  Montour the munchkin would certainly be another.  

[Timråfan]

32 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Ehlers, Nylander, and McCann are not better, even slightly, than Jake.  Points are not the only way to measure a player.  I'd argue there are several other players on your list who are not better than Jake.  Montour the munchkin would certainly be another.  

Alf, you would be drooling if Nylander played with Petey... Ferland can help both of them. 

[ForsbergTheGreat]

16 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Ehlers, Nylander, and McCann are not better, even slightly, than Jake.  Points are not the only way to measure a player.  I'd argue there are several other players on your list who are not better than Jake.  Montour the munchkin would certainly be another.  

Stop sniffing glue Alf. While you are right that you need role players that play physical, just being physical doesn’t mean you have more value than a player who’s pure skill and can produce 60+ points. Rosters need all types of players in order to win and players like jake become important components. But don’t confuse being an important component with being a key components. 

 

Value is primarily based on production, just look at the leagues top paid players all players who can put up points. It’s because scoring is the hardest thing to do. Any joe blow can run around hitting guys but very few can produce. There’s a reason why Matt Martin has never made more than 2.5 million per season. 

[Bure_Pavel]

Very disappointed he missed his offseason goals for fitness. He does not looked ripped and toned like he should from a long summer with no playoffs. Most of his best tools are physical, so to not come in looking faster, stronger, and with better conditioning is silly. I had high hopes of a breakout year this year, but more likely he keeps inching forward with a few more goals and assists. Still a very good third liner, but I think he will leave us wondering what could have been.   

[Jtutino]

Jake's going to be fine. Its like people forget he was 4th on the team in goals last season, while playing on the 3rd line with no powerplay time. 5 v 5 he had 23 points. Ferland had 27. Miller had 27. Nobody knows the goals Travis set for the kid. Id like to know where his testing was compared to last year at camp.

[Alflives]

1 hour ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Stop sniffing glue Alf. While you are right that you need role players that play physical, just being physical doesn’t mean you have more value than a player who’s pure skill and can produce 60+ points. Rosters need all types of players in order to win and players like jake become important components. But don’t confuse being an important component with being a key components. 

 

Value is primarily based on production, just look at the leagues top paid players all players who can put up points. It’s because scoring is the hardest thing to do. Any joe blow can run around hitting guys but very few can produce. There’s a reason why Matt Martin has never made more than 2.5 million per season. 

there is a salary cap now.  These overpaid soft perimeter guys, who produce very little (if at all) when the games get hard actually hurt their teams.  Take Ehlers for example.  6 million for that guy is hurting the Jets filling in role players much needed to win playoff games.  

[ForsbergTheGreat]

3 minutes ago, Alflives said:

there is a salary cap now.  These overpaid soft perimeter guys, who produce very little (if at all) when the games get hard actually hurt their teams.  Take Ehlers for example.  6 million for that guy is hurting the Jets filling in role players much needed to win playoff games.  

Ehlers is 22. Blake wheelers first post season at 22 he played 8 games and also put up zero points. It takes time to learn how to adjust play in that different type of environment. Ehlers will be fine and a few years that 6 mill cap hit will be considered a steal. 

 

What role do you think jets were missing?  They have plenty of size and grit. What they really need is a guy with a skill set like Ehlers to pull his weight.

 

Yes or No.

Teams structure their cap with the intentions of signing their most valued players to the highest salary?

 

Yes or No

A player earns his contract based on the shown/perceived value the team believes he brings to the team?

 

if depth role players are better players than pure skilled guys why do they take up significantly less cap?

[GoBoGo53]

Are people seriously trying to argue that Virtanen is better than Ehlers/Nylander? Those two are elite first line forwards. Quite embarrassing that someone would even think Virtanen is better

[guntrix]

23 minutes ago, GoBoGo53 said:

Are people seriously trying to argue that Virtanen is better than Ehlers/Nylander? Those two are elite first line forwards. Quite embarrassing that someone would even think Virtanen is better

It’s CDC. Same people who said they wouldn’t trade Tanev for Marner. 

[Nucker 67]

Have to agree with 112. Jake's played 4 seasons in the NHL, he's not a kid anymore. I don't believe we'll see a breakthrough of sorts, but perhaps Jake rounds out his game with the speed and size he has. Maybe he learns to make better decisions quickly, work on his play-making, etc. He could still be a force (pain in the a**) during the playoffs, with his speed and size. But I'm not holding my breath for a 25 goal season.

[Alflives]

46 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Ehlers is 22. Blake wheelers first post season at 22 he played 8 games and also put up zero points. It takes time to learn how to adjust play in that different type of environment. Ehlers will be fine and a few years that 6 mill cap hit will be considered a steal. 

 

What role do you think jets were missing?  They have plenty of size and grit. What they really need is a guy with a skill set like Ehlers to pull his weight.

 

Yes or No.

Teams structure their cap with the intentions of signing their most valued players to the highest salary?

 

Yes or No

A player earns his contract based on the shown/perceived value the team believes he brings to the team?

 

if depth role players are better players than pure skilled guys why do they take up significantly less cap?

Ehlers is the same draft as Jake.  I'd much rather have a complete miss from my first round pick, then get a guy like Ehlers who drains way too much cap, and hurts his team as a result.  Ehlers has negative value.  Jake has positive value.  

[RowdyCanuck]

Geez talking about who's better....nylander and ehlers or Jake.....lets put it this was who's better Sedins or burrows? ....they needed each other.... Guys like Jake arnt in every draft but guys like nylander and ehlers are..... I would still take Jake in a heart beat...if Jim took nylander or ehlers then the same pushover Sedins culture would still be going......instead Jim decided it was time for a change and I agree with him.....Jim even mention how taking Jake was the first step towards change.....

Green said we won't know what Jake is until his 24, I agree.....

nylander and ehlers arnt franchise wingers , they both lack what Petey has or even P Kane has.....they lack fight/ battle in their game, something Jake has.....