uselessstats

Ya his shot's been wonky all season. Seemed to struggle to hit the net after the surgery (coincidence?) but hopefully he can work on that over summer. If half his shots that currently miss were on net he'd have 2 or 3 goals by now.

I don't disagree. Being a high pick is a double edged sword. It will give you extra opportunities and patience beyond what a 3rd or 4th rounder would be given. It also invites greater scrutiny and criticism along the way.

High picks will always get longer looks / more attention. Makes sense as the team has more invested and expects a greater return. Makes no sense to compare Virts to Kenins considering the age/experience gap (favours Kenins) and the ceiling/potential gap (favours Virts). They will each make the team for different reasons.

I'm sure he played well - lots of players usually do if they get to the SCF - but there is 0% chance he was their "best player" with 4 goals and 8th in scoring. You can hit, back check, and play great D all you want but some offense is required to get into the conversation of "best player".

With 4 goals and tied for 8th in team scoring? Considering Jake already hits everything in sight, it shouldn't be hard for him to surpass those lofty offensive totals and become a rich-man's Torres

This is so true. Anyone will look "low" when you compare them to the best in the game. Does Jake have low hockey sense/vision compared to Sam Reinhart or Henrik Sedin? Hell ya. So does Ryan Kesler who scored 41 goals mainly through being big, fast, having a big shot, and working like a demon every time he hit the ice. Basically the only thing Kesler had over Virtanen is that insane hustle. Oh and good deployment on the PP with the Sedins back in 2010-11. Hockey IQ isn't a light switch that is "on" or "off". You don't "have it" or "don't have it". And what the hell is a 3/5 anyway? Certainly some guys have more and some have less but they all have it enough to get very far in their hockey development. Besides there are several facets to "Hockey IQ"... vision and passing, what you do when you have the puck, where you go when you don't, when to pass vs shoot, anticipating plays, etc. Some of those Jake is good at, others maybe less. But he has enough to score 45 goals with scrubs with second line ice time as a young 17 year old. If you think that doesn't require a solid degree of hockey IQ (esp. goal scoring IQ) then I don't know what to tell you. Maybe Stamkos and Ovie have low hockey IQs too because all they do is score goals with their elite skating and shooting skills. Cause that's how you determine hockey IQ it seems ...

Bolder is so true and something that always gets lost by Hockeydb scouts. Sure high production is a good sign, but it isn't the only thing that matters. Horvat scored at a significantly lower rate than Drouin last year yet closed the gap immensely at the NHL level. Simply put, Drouin is far more talented and that talent resulted in huge differences in junior. But in the NHL pure talent matters less and the characteristics that Bo has matter more. I believe the same will prove true of Virtanen relative to guys who ripped up junior (Ehlers, Fabbri). While they may still out score Jake, the gap will close immensely.

Sure mate, wasn't really here to talk about Cassels anyway. It's a Virtanen thread and was merely responding to someone who said they expect more out of Cassels at the NHL than Virtanen. Regardless of how much Cassels improves his skating, it still won't be anywhere near Virtanen's level. So by all means get all defensive and take your little shots at me if it helps. Point is simply Jake has tools - speed being one of them - that will likely allow his game to work at the faster paced NHL level that Cassels doesn't (and likely never will) have. Yes he's gritty, yes he's a good passer, yes he's smart. But he's also an average skater, has a weak shot, and isn't overly big. He's got a lot to work on if you expect him to make it in the NHL. Oh and don't bother with the Bo comparisons on me. I didn't post on CDC until recently but I was one of Bo's biggest supporters on HFBoards and was one of the few arguing that he wasn't limited to being a 3C who was good at face offs. There's a world of difference between Bo and Cassels, hence why one went 9th and one in the 3rd round.

Eh, maybe he can correct it but Bo was always a "good" skater and even had top end speed. It was merely his acceleration (first 3 steps) that were considered average. I haven't seen enough of Cassels to say but reports seem to be that his skating even at almost 20 is still fairly average. I don't think he is on par with Bo even before this year and Bo has improved greatly since then. Maybe Cole can get there too but I don't think it's a given that he will.

Ya he was one of the best scorers relative to minutes played. TOI was closer to 16-17 minutes while a lot of top CHL scorers play 22-25 minutes. Also Jake's PPG is a lot closer at even strength. His ES PPG was .72, the same as Cole Cassels. A lot of guys like Reinhart, Draisaitl, Ritchie are only slightly higher, around 0.8-0.9 ES PPG. It's on the PP where a lot of the other players really racked up the points whereas Jake didn't play as big a role in Calgary's PP.

Cassels average foot speed is going to hold him back IMO. You don't have to be a burner in junior and you can get away with slowing the play down to suit your pace at that level but that goes away at the NHL level. I love a lot of things about Cassels and think he'll eventually make it to the NHL but I do think he'll be lucky to carve out a career like Burrows (sans the Sedins). Jake may not score on as many wrap arounds but his speed and strength/balance will allow him to create those types of chances that either he'll score on or others will bang home. Again you can't look only at the number of points but rather how the tools to score those points project at a faster, more physical level. At this point Jake's tools look like a better bet (to me) to translate than Cassels gritty, smart play.

Or perhaps because Cassels points aren't expected to translate to the NHL while Jake's are. Again too much fixation on PPG when it comes to prospects. Every one of these kids has a different situation on their junior teams. Cassels plays big minutes on Oshawa's top line and top PP, often with Dal Colle. He's also nearly 20 years old and in his 4th season of junior. If you think his numbers are comparable to Jake who is still 4 months shy of 19 and who gets bounced between the first and second line constantly, well I can only suggest that many of Cassel's "advantages" will disappear once both players reach the NHL. But if you think it is only because Jake is a Benning pick then there isn't much anyone can say that will change your mind.

Sure there are always outliers - the 2-3% who are almost certainly going to be top NHL players. But that is far different from looking at an 18 yo kid who 10 months ago the majority of the scouting world agreed was among the 10 best 17 year olds in the world and saying that his future is as a borderline 2nd liner. How many people moaned and cried that we had drafted a third line checking centre who was good at face offs with the 9th pick in 2013? How many of those same people arrived at that conclusion with no more insight about how Bo actually played the game than they have about how Jake plays? My guess is most did nothing more than looking at both players stats on Hockeydb and decided what their future was. The reality is that player progression and development is simply too fuzzy to say what he will or won't be with much certainty. For now I would simply say that Jake has some things he still needs to work on and other things that still look borderline elite. How well he addresses his weaknesses over the next 2-3 years and how he applies his strengths at the higher level is really the key, not how he looks in one single season of junior.

Everyone's entitled to their opinion but I think prognostications like "Jake is looking like an energy 3rd liner" are quite unfounded. First of all no one looks like anything when they are 18 and still in junior. So much developing to still do, not to mention the massive change in speed and physicality once you reach the NHL. Beyond that, one really needs to watch Jake play to understand why his game looks so much like it will work in the NHL. Very direct player who gets around so quickly and easily. Good (not elite) puck handling and strong, fast shot (though did look better last year tbh). Seeks out physical contact and doesn't shy away in the least (see Nylander). That said, Jake isn't a play driver. He can gain the blue line quite easily but he needs someone to give and go with. Watching Brandon tonight their forwards knew exactly where to go on the ice because someone was always delivering the puck. I watch Calgary and they haven't got a playmaker on the entire team. Tambellini is a shooter, as is Rankin, Lang, etc. Despite their record they aren't an overly skilled team up front and I think that hurts Jake's numbers a fair bit. If he had a centre like Petan, Reinhart, Merkely, or even Hawryluk where he could develop some real chemistry with I think you'd see a lot of those so-called "IQ" issues disappear. Because from the games I've watched in the playoffs so far, Jake certainly doesn't suffer from not seeing the ice or reading the game well. He *is* a shooter so he does pass up some opportunities to move the puck - he's no Hank Sedin - but that is what you want in a goal scoring winger. His problem is he doesn't know where to go with his linemates as numerous times I see him in soft ice and the forward doesn't see him. I'd like to see Jake with NHL quality linemates before concluding what his ultimate NHL upside is. IMO he's easily got top 6 upside though I expect it will take him a few years to reach that level.

Add in a much better shot/release and you would have a pretty good player. Don't forget Raymond was a half decent player before his injury (legit 2nd liner) so if you take that and make it stronger, meaner, and a better shooter I don't believe you would have a fringe second/third liner. You'd have a very good 2nd liner with upside to play on a top line. Don't forget 25 goals is top line production these days.

And everyone who likes Virtanen is? Kind of a convenient argument for your point of view. I liked Virtanen long before we actually selected him so I'm not sure it explains me but maybe it's true for some, who knows. Still kind of a dumb assumption to make.

Kris Kreider is a 3rd liner? Huh, no wonder you're disappointed in Jake, you clearly have inflated expectations for every single player in the NHL. What's a 1st liner? 130 points Selke winner? And no, junior PPG isn't a straightforward progression from junior to NHL. If it was then Derek Brassard would be an NHL superstar and Andrew Ladd would be a 4th liner. Players grow and change their games from junior to pro. You have no idea how Jake's game will translate once he makes that jump though you clearly believe you do.

Key differences: Shot - Jake has a gun, Booth's shot is a muffin and has a slow release. There's a reason Booth drives the net so consistently and it's because he can't score from distance with any regularity. Jake is much closer to Carter in his shot. Aggressiveness - Booth hits and drives the net but is a fairly restrained player otherwise. Jake is an absolute dick on the ice. Not dirty, but gets into every scrum, bumps goalies, gloves in face, etc. Not much Carter there but certainly some Dustin Brown style play. Otherwise I guess Jake and Booth have some general similarities (strong skaters, direct players, physical) but for me the top two differences make the comparison off, and not just because I don't like Booth. It's just not all that good.

That should remind you of dozens of NHLers considering it's an incredibly general and oversimplified description of Jake's playstyle.

Good call on the Carter comp, as I was watching last nights game and thinking the exact same thing. Granted Carter doesn't spend nearly as much time trying to blow up the other team with big hits but in terms of his offensive tendencies I see a lot of similarities, especially in the "straight ahead" way Carter plays as well. Like Jake he isn't a very "elusive" player and prefers to go through or around defenders with speed and a wide wingspan. Jake doesn't have Carter's wingspan but probably has better speed. And of course both like to shoot on net (first) or make fairly simple, direct plays (second). Think Carter is a blueprint for how Jake's game *could* translate at the NHL level, though he does have some work to do still to get there.

It was posted on rumour sites and those names were tossed around by various media members. I'm not going to vouch for their accuracy as I have no idea but that is simply what I had heard at the time. And if you don't go on what was rumoured, what do you base "wishing we'd made the trade" on? Did Benning ever say exactly what he offered or are you just making up your own deal and then wishing it'd actually happened? Edit: K, Seems two different offers reported with details. Friedman speculated on 6th + Shink + Tanev while Dreger reported 6th + Shink + 24th. Both better than the 4 piece deal that I thought I had heard (maybe I blended the two?) but still not sure I do either for Reinhart alone and def don't do the Tanev deal. For Ekblad yes, but not Reinahart. But YMMV I suppose.

Not a bad debut by Baertschi, showed good wheels and some good vision on a couple of plays. That said, he does play like a typical "small, skilled" player, meaning you aren't going to get a ton out of them if they aren't scoring. Considering we only have up a mid-2nd I think it is a good gamble to take but every time people lose their minds over taking Virtanen instead Ehlers or Nylander, just remember that Baertschi also put up 2 PPG in his draft+1 year and is as purely skilled as either of those players. Just because they can dazzle and dangle through junior aged kids or even at the AHL level doesn't mean they are all slated to be the next Patrick Kane at the NHL level. Baertschi may still end up a top 6 player just as Ehlers and Nylander may, but it isn't as much a sure thing as people like to think.

It wasn't skilled line mates. The Hitmen's top scorers last year were Greg Chase and Brady Brassart, neither of whom played with Jake on a regular basis. In fact on Jake's 45 goals that year, Chase assisted on just 1 while Brassart did assist on ~10 but most of these were PP or situational pairings. Like this year Jake was moved all around the line up and had a revolving door of line mates but rarely the top line. That should quell your fears that his production was "driven" by other, more talented players. It absolutely was not.

In hindsight knowing how well Ekblad has played, 100% agree. But considering we were reportedly looking to take Reinhart who hasn't had an amazing year either I'm not sure we didn't luck out when Florida rejected our offer (which was reported as 6th+24th+Tanev+Shinkaruk). That would've decimated our pipeline for a good-but-not-elite prospect.

You don't need to sell me on Jake, I'm already a fan. Was merely saying 45 - even 40 - in the NHL is *unlikely* as there is only about 2-3 players a year who crack 40 goals anymore. It's no insult to suggest he won't score that many. 30+ would make him a stunning success for a #6 pick.