Jake Virtanen | #18 | RW

[BoeserSnipe]

12 minutes ago, The Lock said:

That's all hindsight though and I tend to wonder how a lot of these people who use hindsight as "proof" what they actually would have done at that time WITHOUT knowing what they know now.

 

It's easy to say things now. It's history. It's right there in front of us and it reads like a book, but can you tell me exactly what to expect from whatever blockbuster trade we try in the next couple of years? I remember when people got excited about getting David Booth, or Keith Ballard, or (insert player here). I also remember us trading for players like Dorsett and people went "who?"

 

Don't get me wrong. Hindsight can be fun to look back on things with, but way too often does it get used as a way of defamation by people who want to believe they are somehow "hockey experts" and that's where hindsight gets used in the wrong way.

I remember the Neely trade. most who understood the game saw the deal as a rape by Boston when it happened.

 

perhaps you’re too young, but I remember how angry I was. Neely came into the league as a rookie and was hitting, scoring at a decent pace, intimidating, and beating the crap out of anyone. You could see he was a force and was going to at worst be (comparatively) someone like What he had in Bert after him. He was breaking out offensively in his third year with the Nucks and to trade him at 21 plus our first round pick, when we sucked, for a 27 yr old small center was absurd.

 

it was an awful trade even at that time, not knowing what he would become. It’s a VERY different situation than Virt. 

 

Virt is in his Draft + 3? year and has shown no signs of being even a solid AHLer yet. 

[Hairy Kneel]

He wasn't hitting and his passing was for $&!#e.

Just skating around fast then back to the bench. 

 

[The Lock]

28 minutes ago, BoeserSnipe said:

I remember the Neely trade. most who understood the game saw the deal as a rape by Boston when it happened.

 

perhaps you’re too young, but I remember how angry I was. Neely came into the league as a rookie and was hitting, scoring at a decent pace, intimidating, and beating the crap out of anyone. You could see he was a force and was going to at worst be (comparatively) someone like What he had in Bert after him. He was breaking out offensively in his third year with the Nucks and to trade him at 21 plus our first round pick, when we sucked, for a 27 yr old small center was absurd.

 

it was an awful trade even at that time, not knowing what he would become. It’s a VERY different situation than Virt. 

 

Virt is in his Draft + 3? year and has shown no signs of being even a solid AHLer yet. 

As far as Neely goes, I'm not going to get into that too much. That's obviously your opinion on that situation and you're right in I'm fairly young in that regard. However, I also tend to look at things as people's opinions tend to be skewed so I'm going to take that with a grain of salt more than anything. Nothing against you, it's just it's your word vs other people. *shrug* I think drafts and trades are a crapshoot often times. In fact, not matter what a GM does, it's a crapshoot often time. Unfortunately we clearly got the bad end of that trade in a big way.

 

With the statement I bolded: personally, I don't think we have a large enough sample size of him in the AHL andd don't really see the point in coming to such conclusions. He showed improvements under Green in the AHL, albeit not on the score sheet. We also saw those changes at the start of this season on the Canucks where he looked like he wanted to belong. He's died off a bit obviously, but maybe that's a sign he'll get better too. What's really the point in being pessimistic about it in the end?

 

I think, in the end, it's up to Jake to figure himself out. Hindsight obviously shows Ehlers would have been better but again, that's hindsight. Having said that, I do know there were people who were high on Ehlers during the 2014 draft as I'm sure there are people who were against the Neely trade back then. However, I look at it as you are one person and one person does not necessarily mean the majority of the fanbase (and way too often than not on this board I've seen people make the claim that "everyone thinks the way they do")

Edited January 21, 2018 by The Lock

[BoeserSnipe]

18 minutes ago, The Lock said:

As far as Neely goes, I'm not going to get into that too much. That's obviously your opinion on that situation and you're right in I'm fairly young in that regard. However, I also tend to look at things as people's opinions tend to be skewed so I'm going to take that with a grain of salt more than anything. Nothing against you, it's just it's your word vs other people. *shrug* I think drafts and trades are a crapshoot often times. In fact, not matter what a GM does, it's a crapshoot often time. Unfortunately we clearly got the bad end of that trade in a big way.

 

With the statement I bolded: personally, I don't think we have a large enough sample size of him in the AHL andd don't really see the point in coming to such conclusions. He showed improvements under Green in the AHL, albeit not on the score sheet. We also saw those changes at the start of this season on the Canucks where he looked like he wanted to belong. He's died off a bit obviously, but maybe that's a sign he'll get better too. What's really the point in being pessimistic about it in the end?

 

I think, in the end, it's up to Jake to figure himself out. Hindsight obviously shows Ehlers would have been better but again, that's hindsight. Having said that, I do know there were people who were high on Ehlers during the 2014 draft as I'm sure there are people who were against the Neely trade back then. However, I look at it as you are one person and one person does not necessarily mean the majority of the fanbase (and way too often than not on this board I've seen people make the claim that "everyone thinks the way they do")

poll some of those who were around at the time and who were Canucks fans- Neely was seen as a game changer through his physical and intimidating play alone as a rookie  - not to mention the 21 goals he scored as a rookie  in 56 games buddy - it was seen as an awful trade right at that time, choose to accept that or not but asking around will tell you something.

 

and the point was, Virtanen is not close to Neely in ANY manner irrespective of your choice to accept my analysis or not, simply look at the point totals, pims, go look at some of the youtube videos of his play as a canuck etc, and see for yourself.

 

No one saw Neely becoming a 50 goal player, but those of us around saw a unique talent that was already PROVING he was a game changer as a rookie. Virtanen has not shown he even wants to be in the game in his D+3 year.

[The Lock]

1 minute ago, BoeserSnipe said:

poll some of those who were around at the time and who were Canucks fans- Neely was seen as a game changer through his physical and intimidating play alone as a rookie  - not to mention the 21 goals he scored as a rookie  in 56 games buddy - it was seen as an awful trade right at that time, choose to accept that or not but asking around will tell you something.

 

and the point was, Virtanen is not close to Neely in ANY manner irrespective of your choice to accept my analysis or not, simply look at the point totals, pims, go look at some of the youtube videos of his play as a canuck etc, and see for yourself.

 

No one saw Neely becoming a 50 goal player, but those of us around saw a unique talent that was already PROVING he was a game changer as a rookie. Virtanen has not shown he even wants to be in the game in his D+3 year.

Well, if your point is that Virtanen's not Neely, then that I would agree with. That's pretty obvious. I just also think Virtanen's at least shown stints of wanting to be around. Even if it's not all the time, at least it's better than even a year ago at this time.

[BoeserSnipe]

7 minutes ago, The Lock said:

Well, if your point is that Virtanen's not Neely, then that I would agree with. That's pretty obvious. I just also think Virtanen's at least shown stints of wanting to be around. Even if it's not all the time, at least it's better than even a year ago at this time.

That's a very low hurdle/ benchmark. And my comment was in response to the idea that trading him would risk another neely type situation. It won't . This kid is on the path of Kassian and will be lucky to even reach the level Kassian has, with his indifference to being a  pro

 

It seems he's happier to be 'seen as a pro athlete', vs actually doing the hard work to actually be one. That is evident by his effort on the ice. I suspect if he doens't find a way to start contributing this year, it may be his last as a Canuck as he wont be able to clear waivers next year, and he certainly hasn't earned a spot in the lineup and each year, hungrier players step in and are willing to compete for spots.

 

Jake plays the game like he thinks he's earned the rope the twins have.

Edited January 21, 2018 by BoeserSnipe

[Sedinyoureyesontheprize]

Jake will need to pick it up if he wants to stay in the lineup. Where is the fire we saw in him at the beginning of the season?

 

 

[PuckYa]

On 1/31/2017 at 7:46 PM, terrible.dee said:

You really think he's that good? Put away the Homer goggles for a minute, totally serious question...and I don't know the answer.....He's REALLY that good?

 

On 1/31/2017 at 7:49 PM, Alflives said:

Craig Button, this weekend, said Boeser is currently the best player not in the NHL.  That combined with a much weaker than recent drafts coming up, and I see Boeser as having a really good chance for the Calder.  

 

On 1/31/2017 at 7:57 PM, Alflives said:

Boeser is going to score 30+ next season, and be over 50 points.  

 

On 2/1/2017 at 5:50 AM, MJDDawg said:

I don't get you sometimes.

 

How the heck do you go from a statement by Button about being a top prospect to Calder and 30 goals in his first pro season? 

 

Stop raising expectations on a kid yet to play a minute in the NHL. It's poster's like you that will be back here in a year expressing your disappointment at him not meeting YOUR expectations or at management and the coach for not developing him properly. 

 

 

 

Alf your Homer glasses have met Expectations. 

Cheers. 

 

[Boudrias]

59 minutes ago, BoeserSnipe said:

poll some of those who were around at the time and who were Canucks fans- Neely was seen as a game changer through his physical and intimidating play alone as a rookie  - not to mention the 21 goals he scored as a rookie  in 56 games buddy - it was seen as an awful trade right at that time, choose to accept that or not but asking around will tell you something.

 

and the point was, Virtanen is not close to Neely in ANY manner irrespective of your choice to accept my analysis or not, simply look at the point totals, pims, go look at some of the youtube videos of his play as a canuck etc, and see for yourself.

 

No one saw Neely becoming a 50 goal player, but those of us around saw a unique talent that was already PROVING he was a game changer as a rookie. Virtanen has not shown he even wants to be in the game in his D+3 year.

The Neely trade was a typical Vancouver deal IMHO. Trade for today and forget about tomorrow. Petersen was supposed to put the team into contention. To bad he came up lame in the stable. (do you think the Bruins trainers shot him up before they shipped him?) The deal should never have been made. 

 

No, Virtanen is not close to Neely. Virtanen is a better skater but that is about it so far. No point in comparing the two. I am not giving up on Virtanen yet. He has all the tools to be a NHL'er. His struggle is in his head.   

[GritGrinder]

2 hours ago, The Lock said:

So far, the 2014 draft is not looking as strong as other drafts. Period. Therefore, I think there's way to much focus on where he was drafted. At least he's doing better than over half of the first round of that draft still, including MDC who was drafted 4th.

Either you and I have a very different definition of "doing better" or you're not strong at math and don't know what half means. I count 9 players that some might say are doing "worse" than JV but 5 of those are defencemen and take longer to develop and one of the 9 is Goldobin. Not to mention other players taken in later rounds like Barbashev, Montour, Dvorak, Point, Arvidsson, Heinen, Labanc, Kase; heck even Forsling that are outperforming JV so far.

Edited January 21, 2018 by GritGrinder

[rekker]

42 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

The Neely trade was a typical Vancouver deal IMHO. Trade for today and forget about tomorrow. Petersen was supposed to put the team into contention. To bad he came up lame in the stable. (do you think the Bruins trainers shot him up before they shipped him?) The deal should never have been made. 

 

No, Virtanen is not close to Neely. Virtanen is a better skater but that is about it so far. No point in comparing the two. I am not giving up on Virtanen yet. He has all the tools to be a NHL'er. His struggle is in his head.   

Struggles in his head for sure. But with battle consistency as well. He's strong as an ox but you hardly notice sometimes.

[The Lock]

18 minutes ago, GritGrinder said:

Either you and I have a very different definition of "doing better" or you're not strong at math and don't know what half means. I count 9 players that some might say are doing "worse" than JV but 5 of those are defencemen and take longer to develop and one of the 9 is Goldobin. Not to mention other players taken in later rounds like Barbashev, Montour, Dvorak, Point, Arvidsson, Heinen, Labanc, Kase; heck even Forsling that are outperforming JV so far.

I didn't even mention later rounds and the later rounds aren't even my point. Obviously you have a different opinion than I do regarding who's doing better, but if you look at who's in the NHL and who isn't, Virtanen's been more successful in that regard than over half the picks in that particular first round.

 

But hey, if you want to continue to dish out the "insults" that's your call. It doesn't exactly support your case considering you didn't say anything else about the 1st rounders and only the later rounds, which tells me you don't agree with me but aren't willing to prove me wrong without bringing in things that aren't even what I was talking about to begin with.

 

If you know more about the 1st rounders of that draft, then please, do tell.... specifically. If I'm wrong then fine, but don't just go around dodging with points about the later rounds and bringing up random insults (people who can't think of reasons are the ones who come up with such insults out of their own weak-mindedness). Come directly at me.

Edited January 21, 2018 by The Lock

[Vinny in Vancouver]

1 hour ago, Setyoureyesontheprize said:

Jake will need to pick it up if he wants to stay in the lineup. Where is the fire we saw in him at the beginning of the season?

Apparently, it stayed in Vegas. ;-)

[ForsbergTheGreat]

2 hours ago, The Lock said:

So far, the 2014 draft is not looking as strong as other drafts. Period. Therefore, I think there's way to much focus on where he was drafted. At least he's doing better than over half of the first round of that draft still, including MDC who was drafted 4th.

This year, he's not in the top 15 players drafted in the first round of 2014.

In terms of offensive points he sits 19th, Ice time he sits at 24th.

 

I'd say he's closer to the bottom 9 of the first round in his draft year.

 

[The Lock]

1 minute ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

This year, he's not in the top 15 players drafted in the first round of 2014.

In terms of offensive points he sits 19th, Ice time he sits at 24th.

 

I'd say he's closer to the bottom 9 of the first round in his draft year.

Thank you for not throwing a random insult like the other guy.

 

This was what I was hoping to see if I was wrong.

[The Lock]

8 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

This year, he's not in the top 15 players drafted in the first round of 2014.

In terms of offensive points he sits 19th, Ice time he sits at 24th.

 

I'd say he's closer to the bottom 9 of the first round in his draft year.

Thank you for not throwing a random insult like the other guy.

 

This was what I was hoping to see if I was wrong.

 

EDIT: I'm considering staying out of Virtanen discussions for a while anyway. More of a "wait and see" mode sort of thing. I know he hasn't progressed like a lot of people have but I also see he has progressed over the past year and people seem extreme one way or another. I think I'll just fence sit. lol

[ForsbergTheGreat]

20 minutes ago, The Lock said:

Thank you for not throwing a random insult like the other guy.

 

This was what I was hoping to see if I was wrong.

I had to do a quick look up to clarify.

 

This years stats:

Pastrnak has 44 points in 45 games

Draisaitl sits with 38 points in 43 games

Larkin sits with 36 points in 45 games

Ehlers had 19 goals and 35 points in 47 games

Schmaltz is averaging over 18:30 per game and has 33 points in 42 games

Nylander, Fiala, Kempe, Ho Sang and Tuch all have over .50 ppg.

Perlini has 12 goals already this season, that's one less than Jake has in his career total.

Ekblad plays over 23 minutes a game.

Bennett and Reinhart have has slow starts this year but still are producing at a decent 3rd line rate.  .35ppg.  

Milano was having a decent rookie season putting up .37 ppg,  sadly he just got an injury and will be out for the next 6 weeks

Fabbri also suffered an injury that's kept him out all year this year but last year he put up .56ppg and has a career 66 points in 123 games.

 

Sanhiem, Fleury are having decent rookie season, both playing over 15 min per game.

In the next tier i'd have Jake, McCann and Ritchie.  All playing limited minutes, with limited offensive numbers.

Honka is the only other player in the draft year that has over 20 games this year.  

Then in the last tier you got the AHL players (here are their AHL numbers)

Scherbak - 26p in 21gp (1.23ppg)

Goldobin - 25p in 22gp (1.13ppg)

Kapanen - 22p in 26gp (.84ppg)

Dal Colle - 18p in 34gp (.53ppg)

Quenneville - 21p in 29gp (.72ppg)

DeAngelo - 13p in 29gp (.44ppg)

Bleakley - 1p in 7gp (.14ppg)

 

 

 

Edited January 22, 2018 by ForsbergTheGreat

[captainhorvat]

Trade this dead weight to buffalo for Kane. 

[ForsbergTheGreat]

5 minutes ago, The Lock said:

EDIT: I'm considering staying out of Virtanen discussions for a while anyway. More of a "wait and see" mode sort of thing. I know he hasn't progressed like a lot of people have but I also see he has progressed over the past year and people seem extreme one way or another. I think I'll just fence sit. lol

Just saw this,  yeah, I agree, that it's a slow wait and see approach, i think there is still more to him than we see.  The only issue i have is that time is starting to run out.  Over the next 2 years, as some of our other prospects start to push for roster spots, he's going to really earn his spot or we he will be in a similar situation Gaunce is.  This is Jakes last year he can't be claimed if we waive him,

 

 

 

[The Lock]

3 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Just saw this,  yeah, I agree, that it's a slow wait and see approach, i think there is still more to him than we see.  The only issue i have is that time is starting to run out.  Over the next 2 years, as some of our other prospects start to push for roster spots, he's going to really earn his spot or we he will be in a similar situation Gaunce is.  This is Jakes last year he can't be claimed if we waive him,

Yeah. He's shown flashes of what he is capable of. He just needs to mature in my opinion. Some people are late to mature. (Some people never mature but that's another story)

 

Whether or not that happens, I guess we'll find out one way or another. I also look at it as it was Benning's first draft and since then I've been impressed overall by the players he has drafted. You can tell come draft time he's like a kid in a candy store. lol