StealthNuck

Jake Virtanen | #18 | Right Wing

2,058 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

23 minutes ago, CoolCanucklehead said:

Again, Virtanen is 20 years old.

 

...

Age is not the only factor. You're totally ignoring the natural development curve. All those players may have entered the NHL after turning 20 but, as I pointed out, they progressed every year for the most part regardless of what level they were at (college, junior, AHL). If Jake stayed in junior for both years after being drafted and improved his numbers each year, then had a decent AHL rookie campaign (or even the same one he had this season), it'd be a whole different story.

 

What if Virtanen put up literally zero points every year in his D+1, D+2 and D+3 years? Would you still say "he's only 20 and still has a lot of time to grow"?

 

Now obviously he's put up more than zero points, but he's clearly been on the bad side of production line, and again that is concerning given the typical development curve we see from most successful NHLers.

Edited by kanucks25
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

4 hours ago, kanucks25 said:

Age is not the only factor. You're totally ignoring the natural development curve. All those players may have entered the NHL after turning 20 but, as I pointed out, they progressed every year for the most part regardless of what level they were at (college, junior, AHL). If Jake stayed in junior for both years after being drafted and improved his numbers each year, then had a decent AHL rookie campaign (or even the same one he had this season), it'd be a whole different story.

 

What if Virtanen put up literally zero points every year in his D+1, D+2 and D+3 years? Would you still say "he's only 20 and still has a lot of time to grow"?

 

Now obviously he's put up more than zero points, but he's clearly been on the bad side of production line, and again that is concerning given the typical development curve we see from most successful NHLers.

He's not going to have a natural development curve when he's practically handed a spot in the NHL at the beginning. As a result, there's no way he's going to have a normal development curve when part of it's going to be skewed no matter if he's doing well or not. While I see what you're saying regarding such a curve, because it's skewed in this case, it's not going to be good data regarding his development.

 

I'd actually argue that it's a big question mark at this point because of this change in development. It doesn't mean he's performing poorly. It also doesn't mean he'll make the NHL. It's just.... a question mark.

 

But to compare his curve at this point with other prospects is kind of pointless at this point. He has to find his own.

 

Also, your second paragraph is kind of silly. Rhetorical questions that don't really add anything to the argument are kind of pointless. lol

Edited by The Lock
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 2017-07-14 at 7:37 PM, The Lock said:

This is literally high school stuff dude. For the record, I'm not trying to troll or anything. It just gets frustrating when people who seem smart don't understand what an opinion and what a fact actually is. Claiming your opinion is fact is nothing more than giving yourself a false sense of ego. It's fake.

Dave Pratt acolyte.  Whenever he states his opinions, he tags them with "the fact is" or "there's no question" or "there's no doubt about it", as if saying that magically transforms his opinions into facts.

 

"The fact is, Jake Virtanen is a sure-fire superstar, there's simply no question.  No doubt about it, he'll be a 100-point first-team allstar."  So easy to declare reality, by simply inventing it!  Amazing how that works.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/13/2017 at 5:47 AM, CoolCanucklehead said:

Complete garbage?

hockeydb done just for you. :P

 

Most of them were already putting up decent numbers in the NHL at Virtanen's current age.?

REALLY. :wacko:

 

 

 

Bertuzzi - Born 1975. Never showed anything in NHL until 1999/2000. (25 YEAR OLD) :shock:

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=369

 

Primeau - Born 1971. Never showed anything in NHL until 1993/1994. (23 YEARS OLD) :shock:

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=725

 

Kreider - Born 1991. Never showed anything in NHL until 2013/2014. (23 YEARS OLD) :shock: 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=120939

 

Otto - Born 1961. Never showed anything in NHL until 1985/1986. (25 YEARS OLD) :shock: 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=4095

 

Stevens - Born 1965. Never showed anything in NHL until 1989/1990. (25 YEARS OLD) :shock:

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=5177

 

LeClair - Born 1969. Never showed anything in NHL until 1992/1993. (24 YEARS OLD) :shock:

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=3036

 

 

 

Virtanen Born 1996. ONLY 20 YEARS OLD:shock::shock:

 

:towel:

 

 

 

I think the only relevant comparison there is Kreider. 

 

Bertuzzi did score 18 goals in the NHL as a rookie, Primeau was a PPG in the NHL (if this was the case with Virtanen this discussion wouldn't be happening). 

 

Kreider came from the college route and had a good amount of seasoning before stepping into the AHL. As an AHL rookie he scored less than .5 PPG and almost nothing in the NHL. 

 

I would say next season is pivotal, whether Jake comes into the NHL and scores 10 or sticks around the AHL and scores 25 he has to show some progress. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

16 hours ago, kanucks25 said:

Age is not the only factor. You're totally ignoring the natural development curve. All those players may have entered the NHL after turning 20 but, as I pointed out, they progressed every year for the most part regardless of what level they were at (college, junior, AHL). If Jake stayed in junior for both years after being drafted and improved his numbers each year, then had a decent AHL rookie campaign (or even the same one he had this season), it'd be a whole different story.

 

What if Virtanen put up literally zero points every year in his D+1, D+2 and D+3 years? Would you still say "he's only 20 and still has a lot of time to grow"?

 

Now obviously he's put up more than zero points, but he's clearly been on the bad side of production line, and again that is concerning given the typical development curve we see from most successful NHLers.

And again, even if the examples given of Neely, Bertuzzi, Primaeu were accurate, those are cherrypicking the very best case scenerios for Virtanen. There are hundreds of examples of players that put up similar numbers to Virtanen (thus far, he can still turn it around of course) and don't amount to much at the NHL level. In fact, given his production so far, it's far more likely he turns out to be a 4th liner than he is to become a Bertuzzi/Neely type player. That isn't hating on Virtanen, that is using comparables to judge that there is a far greater likelihood of Virtanen being a 4th liner than Bertuzzi just by the shear numbers of his closest production comparables. 


Take a look at Oskar Lindbolm, Philly prospect taken in the same draft as Virtanen (http://www.eliteprospects.com/player.php?player=86181) same age as well.

HIs production suggests he is much more likely to become a top 6 forward than Virtanen. Point being for every Bertuzzi, there is 10 or more powerforwards that don't pan out. 

Edited by GoBoGo53
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, GoBoGo53 said:

And again, even if the examples given of Neely, Bertuzzi, Primaeu were accurate, those are cherrypicking the very best case scenerios for Virtanen. There are hundreds of examples of players that put up similar numbers to Virtanen (thus far, he can still turn it around of course) and don't amount to much at the NHL level. In fact, given his production so far, it's far more likely he turns out to be a 4th liner than he is to become a Bertuzzi/Neely type player. That isn't hating on Virtanen, that is using comparables to judge that there is a far greater likelihood of Virtanen being a 4th liner than Bertuzzi just by the shear numbers of his closest production comparables. 


Take a look at Oskar Lindbolm, Philly prospect taken in the same draft as Virtanen (http://www.eliteprospects.com/player.php?player=86181) same age as well.

HIs production suggests he is much more likely to become a top 6 forward than Virtanen. Point being for every Bertuzzi, there is 10 or more powerforwards that don't pan out. 

Absolutely true. 

 

The most simplistic approach is to compare ppg between players and forecast comparables as they mature. So many influences come to bear. Was Neely stifled in Van by coaching, were his line mates complimentary, were there personality conflicts? Physical or emotional issues? Some players benefit from a change in teams other view it as failure and regress. Fans never know the full story and often management doesn't either.    

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Boudrias said:

Absolutely true. 

 

The most simplistic approach is to compare ppg between players and forecast comparables as they mature. So many influences come to bear. Was Neely stifled in Van by coaching, were his line mates complimentary, were there personality conflicts? Physical or emotional issues? Some players benefit from a change in teams other view it as failure and regress. Fans never know the full story and often management doesn't either.    

I would rather we kept Jake though, and see what he becomes for us.  Trading him would not be a good idea IMHAO. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Alflives said:

I would rather we kept Jake though, and see what he becomes for us.  Trading him would not be a good idea IMHAO. 

it would be a terrible idea. You wouldn't get much for him anyway. Keep him, coach him, and hope it works out.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Hutton Wink said:

 

Dave Pratt acolyte.  Whenever he states his opinions, he tags them with "the fact is" or "there's no question" or "there's no doubt about it", as if saying that magically transforms his opinions into facts.

 

"The fact is, Jake Virtanen is a sure-fire superstar, there's simply no question.  No doubt about it, he'll be a 100-point first-team allstar."  So easy to declare reality, by simply inventing it!  Amazing how that works.

I actually found a good quote in a picture, but it's rather large so I'll just post it here:

 

"You are completely entitled to opinions that are not supported by evidence. But the moment you spread that opinion as fact, you are a liar. And if you spread is as fact knowing it is not supported by evidence, you are both a liar and a fraud." Occam's Barber

 

It's unfortunate, but I can think of a few people on this board that could use a little wisdom from that quote....

Edited by The Lock
3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017-07-16 at 9:46 PM, The Lock said:

I actually found a good quote in a picture, but it's rather large so I'll just post it here:

 

"You are completely entitled to opinions that are not supported by evidence. But the moment you spread that opinion as fact, you are a liar. And if you spread is as fact knowing it is not supported by evidence, you are both a liar and a fraud." Occam's Barber

 

It's unfortunate, but I can think of a few people on this board that could use a little wisdom from that quote....

Just looking at the stats for another sniper in Junior, who didn't figure out being a professional until 23/24.  He was even called "pudgy", lazy, out of shape (oh, and not smart enough.). He had a pretty good career.  

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=2410

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/16/2017 at 6:39 AM, GoBoGo53 said:

And again, even if the examples given of Neely, Bertuzzi, Primaeu were accurate, those are cherrypicking the very best case scenerios for Virtanen. There are hundreds of examples of players that put up similar numbers to Virtanen (thus far, he can still turn it around of course) and don't amount to much at the NHL level. In fact, given his production so far, it's far more likely he turns out to be a 4th liner than he is to become a Bertuzzi/Neely type player. That isn't hating on Virtanen, that is using comparables to judge that there is a far greater likelihood of Virtanen being a 4th liner than Bertuzzi just by the shear numbers of his closest production comparables. 


Take a look at Oskar Lindbolm, Philly prospect taken in the same draft as Virtanen (http://www.eliteprospects.com/player.php?player=86181) same age as well.

HIs production suggests he is much more likely to become a top 6 forward than Virtanen. Point being for every Bertuzzi, there is 10 or more powerforwards that don't pan out. 

So you're saying there's a chance.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/15/2017 at 1:27 PM, CoolCanucklehead said:

 

Again, Virtanen is 20 years old.

 

Kunitz was 27 years old before he played a season in the NHL.

 

Maroon was 26 years old when he made the NHL.

 

Kassian was 23 years old when he played his 1st NHL season.

 

Penner was 25 years old in his 1st NHL season. 

 

Along with all the other dozen players I named you that didn't make the NHL until mid 20's.

All these players have something in common. They took more time than most of their piers did to make it to the show & once they did most have became as valuable or more than the ones who got there earlier than them.

 

I'm not saying he's a guaranteed NHL player but I'm also not going to say that he has no chance to be a top 6 player or something in the middle YET. Way too much development time still on Jakes side.

He could easily be a big part of the puzzle here in years to come whether it's in the top 6 or bottom 6.

 

Jake still has at least 3 more years before you can label him as a failure if we actually go by history of all these players & many many more. 

 

Further to that, the great Johnny Bower never became a full time NHLer until age 34 and went on to win several Stanley Cups and player into his mid forties.

 

I'm saying there's a chance.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/16/2017 at 5:46 PM, The Lock said:

I actually found a good quote in a picture, but it's rather large so I'll just post it here:

 

"You are completely entitled to opinions that are not supported by evidence. But the moment you spread that opinion as fact, you are a liar. And if you spread is as fact knowing it is not supported by evidence, you are both a liar and a fraud." Occam's Barber

 

It's unfortunate, but I can think of a few people on this board that could use a little wisdom from that quote....

Um, Jason Botchford?  Any truth to the rumour that the Canucks will sign Thomas Vanek?  To play with the twins......:lol:

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Crabcakes said:

Um, Jason Botchford?  Any truth to the rumour that the Canucks will sign Thomas Vanek?  To play with the twins......:lol:

Come on man, gotta go all out and get Jagr just so we get those random Jagr-wig wearing fans in the building. Gotta fill those seats somehow!

 

 

 

 

 

(Don't tell this to the Aquilinis, They might get an idea)

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Virt gets it this year. Not so much on the score sheet, but...I feel he will make the team and play 4th line minutes most of the year. Somewhere around game 50, he will start to be able to fill in on 2nd-3rd line, and will end the year on the 3rd line. He'll get 10-12 goals, around 10 assists, just over 20 points.
 

I don't think he will ever score 30 goals or 60 points, unless he REALLY finds some hockey IQ out of nowhere. Now...using the 6th overall for a career 2nd/3rd line winger that gets 20-25 in a good year...that wasn't a good use of the pick. But, he has a chance to be a good player, and an integral piece of the team for years.

 

Playing him year before last was a disservice to him (and to McCann, but...that story is over). Playing him in Utica last year, all year, without a call up, was probably the best thing we could have done for him. Green, if I remember, was starting to use him in a few different times than just on his line.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why he isn't listed as a left winger when so many here seem to believe he plays better on his off wing.  I am pretty sure he only played on the left in the WHL. Is it just because he is right handed or are they seeing something we don't.  I may be wrong but are left wingers harder to come by?  Is it like trying to find that hard to come by right handed d-man?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.