Jake Virtanen | #18 | RW

[Squamfan]

7 hours ago, messier's_elbow said:

I think jake is a bit mentally fragile. It seems with him, it's all between the ears. He's got some confidence back, after looking like he had none. He has an elite physic with big strong legs. Speed for a big man is rare. Hits like a truck. Great shot, just needs to put it all together. Green will mould him into a player. 

 

Did the Canucks tell him to hit less? He hit way more last season it seems like. 

yup they told him not to hit

[Sean Monahan]

2 hours ago, baumerman77 said:

Yes. I think he should've went back to junior last year, not only for his on ice development but also because of his maturity (some young players just develop differently that way). I would like to see him stay in the AHL all season if possible, but I doubt that will happen. 

If maturity is/was an issue then I think he would've been better served in the NHL, at least for that reason. He couldn't pull that kind of stuff off around some of the vets we have, namely Burr and the Sedins. Bieksa would've been great for that reason.

[bohoforpresident]

3 minutes ago, Sean Monahan said:

If maturity is/was an issue then I think he would've been better served in the NHL, at least for that reason. He couldn't pull that kind of stuff off around some of the vets we have, namely Burr and the Sedins. Bieksa would've been great for that reason.

It would be the Canuck version of scared straight. Jake virtanen coming in the locker room acting all hard and then Bieksa walks over and gets virtanen to "hold his pocket"

[kylecanuck]

Willy being insistent on Jake playing a sound two way game hurt Jake in my opinion. The NHL isn't a easy league to play in at that age let alone expected to learn the defensive game at. Jake has always been a naturally big offensive kid who has never really had to worry about D too much growing up. He could over power smaller players both offensively and defensively. 

 

Green and the AHL will be the best thing for Jake this year, less pressure and a better coach will do wonders. It'll still be a long season down in the AHL while he figures things out, but it'll happen and Jake will start turning heads. 

[Canorth]

1 hour ago, Off_The_Schneid! said:

The sites I look at show it as jakes goal last night

 

anyone can confirm this?

 

 

Its Jakes goal,  according to AHL.com 

 

Link

[TheOgRook]

1 hour ago, J.R. said:

 

So you have a list of one, correct? 

 

Regardless, individual players develop at different rates.

 

Different types of players do as well. I mean is anybody upset that Demko wasn't contributing at the NHL level at 18 because 'so many kids are contributing at the NHL level at 18'?

 

Of course not, because people are aware goalies tend to take longer to develop. Just like most power forwards. 

 

I keep posting this... Anything he does in the NHL before he's about 23-24 is pure gravy. People shouldn't be expecting any significant contributions from him until then. That's 3+ years away folks. Patience. 

 

 

 

Not to mention Anaheim had the luxury of sending nick to the AHL.  Something I think we can all agree would have benefited Jake greatly

[aGENT]

27 minutes ago, TheOgRook said:

 

Not to mention Anaheim had the luxury of sending nick to the AHL.  Something I think we can all agree would have benefited Jake greatly

 

Yup. Different players, different teams, different developments. Also, while he's looked promising, it's s bit early to say he's gone all 'Matthews' in ANA.

[TheOgRook]

19 minutes ago, J.R. said:

 

Yup. Different players, different teams, different developments. Also, while he's looked promising, it's s bit early to say he's gone all 'Matthews' in ANA.

 

I think this fact is lost on some.  For me personally, this is the fun part.  To sit back relax and enjoy the million different ways a team players/teams can have success/failures. How boring would the NHL be if it was one way for all.

 

Agree about Ritchie, he could just as easily end up being Pyatt 2.0

[SamJamIam]

9 hours ago, canuktravella said:

 any coach developing him other than willie is a good thing  the guys clueless watch green turn this guy into a pro so he has a long good career for us 

Yup, he sure did screw up Hutton, Horvat, Granlund, Baertschi, Tryamkin...oh wait, I'm out of young guys not named Virtanen that have thrived on the Canucks.

[RetroCanuck]

1 hour ago, SamJamIam said:

Yup, he sure did screw up Hutton, Horvat, Granlund, Baertschi, Tryamkin...oh wait, I'm out of young guys not named Virtanen that have thrived on the Canucks.

McCann... Also if you haven't noticed Hutton, Granlund, Baertschi and Tryamkin still haven't shown enough to be called NHLers permanently and we don't know if they will hit their potential. Horvat is the only one that has absolutely proven he's an NHLer and will be on this team for years to come.

[SamJamIam]

1 minute ago, RetroCanuck said:

McCann... Also if you haven't noticed Hutton, Granlund, Baertschi and Tryamkin still haven't shown enough to be called NHLers permanently and we don't know if they will hit their potential. Horvat is the only one that has absolutely proven he's an NHLer and will be on this team for years to come.

 

Thankfully your personal, arbitrary metric for "permanent NHLer" is not relevant to whether players actually succeed in the NHL.

[Off_The_Schneid!]

1 hour ago, SamJamIam said:

Yup, he sure did screw up Hutton, Horvat, Granlund, Baertschi, Tryamkin...oh wait, I'm out of young guys not named Virtanen that have thrived on the Canucks.

 

Willy doesn't have much to do with the defence so I would say Doug lidster has more to do with the development of Hutton and Tryamkin 

 

baertchi started to shine after most of the season and a playoff run with green 

 

granlund came to the team fairly developed as well I guess I can kinda give you that one but I'd lean towards a strong offseason of training on granlunds behalf 

 

and Horvat is a special player I wouldn't give a lot of credit to Willy on that one 

that's like saying McLennan did a great job with mcdavid

maybe a bad example I know Horvat is no mcdavid 

 

[elvis15]

6 minutes ago, Off_The_Schneid! said:

 

Willy doesn't have much to do with the defence so I would say Doug lidster has more to do with the development of Hutton and Tryamkin 

 

baertchi started to shine after most of the season and a playoff run with green 

 

granlund came to the team fairly developed as well I guess I can kinda give you that one but I'd lean towards a strong offseason of training on granlunds behalf 

 

and Horvat is a special player I wouldn't give a lot of credit to Willy on that one 

that's like saying McLennan did a great job with mcdavid

maybe a bad example I know Horvat is no mcdavid 

 

So you're saying the coach had little to no impact on a bunch of players but had all the impact on another one? There was a good post in the Utica Comets thread talking about Green and how he's been coaching the team. It was 90% reminding me of Desjardins and his approach. Very few Canucks fans have any idea that Green really will be better and couldn't quantify why even if they tried.

 

Here it is so you don't have to go searching for it:

 

[SamJamIam]

35 minutes ago, Off_The_Schneid! said:

 

Willy doesn't have much to do with the defence so I would say Doug lidster has more to do with the development of Hutton and Tryamkin 

 

baertchi started to shine after most of the season and a playoff run with green 

 

granlund came to the team fairly developed as well I guess I can kinda give you that one but I'd lean towards a strong offseason of training on granlunds behalf 

 

and Horvat is a special player I wouldn't give a lot of credit to Willy on that one 

that's like saying McLennan did a great job with mcdavid

maybe a bad example I know Horvat is no mcdavid

 

Coach has players succeed and you say they did so despite him.  Coach has players fail and you say it's because of him.  It's clear here that the question you ask yourself is not "Did Willie help or hurt the development of players?" but rather "Willie hurt player development and what examples can I draw upon to justify it?"

 

Arguing with someone who has already made up their mind is like trying to headbutt your way through a brick wall.  I've got better $&!# to do with my time.

[RetroCanuck]

1 hour ago, SamJamIam said:

 

Coach has players succeed and you say they did so despite him.  Coach has players fail and you say it's because of him.  It's clear here that the question you ask yourself is not "Did Willie help or hurt the development of players?" but rather "Willie hurt player development and what examples can I draw upon to justify it?"

 

Arguing with someone who has already made up their mind is like trying to headbutt your way through a brick wall.  I've got better $&!# to do with my time.

Exactly why your on CDC right now hahaha

[Odd.]

Virtanen snipes one for his 4th goal

 

 

 

[DeNiro]

Put a guy with a great shot on the powerplay and he produces. Gee who woulda thought?

[CRAZY_4_NAZZY]

Just now, DeNiro said:

Put a guy with a great shot on the powerplay and he produces. Gee who woulda thought?

Nah Willie D and Perry Pearn love their two way players and cycling. No time for players who shoot.

[DeNiro]

1 minute ago, CRAZY_4_NAZZY said:

Nah Willie D and Perry Pearn love their two way players and cycling. No time for players who shoot.

 

Tonight there was a perfect example of why the powerplay is failing. Sutter was alone in the slot tapping his stick for a shot and Henrik cycles it along the boards to the D instead.

 

Amazing that professionals can fail to realize where the vast majority of goals are scored from. Maybe they need to be shown a shot chart of all their goals to wake them up.

[Bruce Boudreau]

4 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

 

Tonight there was a perfect example of why the powerplay is failing. Sutter was alone in the slot tapping his stick for a shot and Henrik cycles it along the boards to the D instead.

 

Amazing that professionals can fail to realize where the vast majority of goals are scored from. Maybe they need to be shown a shot chart of all their goals to wake them up.

 

Same goes for pk it's amazing in the pro game how few teams pressure the puck on the pk like Pittsburgh and Toronto do and then the "experts" marvel over how great their pk is.

 

Well no $&!# Sherlock!

 

It's not rocket science. Don't sit back pressure the puck carrier and don't give them a chance to set up instead of sitting back in a passive box and waiting for them to cross you up.

 

I really do think pro players respect their opposition and playing their system too much. They need to get back to aggressively playing d the way kids do.