Jake Virtanen | #18 | RW

[guntrix]

17 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

I am "purposefully taking away his point production"?   What on earth are you talking about?   I haven't taken anything from him.    I can talk points or goals or whatever - he is an example that is a good one as he is a perfect example of a power forward who didn't enter NHL until 22 and took about six or seven seasons to really hit his stride.   He is an anomaly in how long he took as most will be the four to five years (e.g. Bertuzzi) but as he is playing now and playing so well, he is a great example.

Sure, you can talk "points or goals or whatever" you want but it doesn´t do any of us any favors to ignore his assist column. 

 

If you´re going to cherry pick a PFW and use him as an example for Jake, it´s probably not in your best interest to pick a guy like Wheeler. Just saying. If he doesn´t score another goal for the remainder of the eight games, he would be having a setback season by your criteria since he wouldn´t be breaking the 20-goal mark (even though he´s got 83 points already). 

 

24 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

If Virtanen is 26 and stuck in the 10-15 goal, 30 point range and playing 12 to 14 minutes then he will be a solid NHL player but far from what he projected to be.   If he is a 20 plus scorer int he top 25-30 for hits and maintains his solid TA/GA and can get 15-18 minutes per game, he is a solid top 6 player for any team.   I see that in him and suggest it may come as early as him being 23 or 24 versus the later blooming many others have shown.

Quote

Projection: an estimate or forecast of a future situation or trend based on a study of present ones.

This is giving me migraines. I´m honestly trying to understand your reasoning for projecting and lumping a 0.24 PPG player with guys who have quantifiably shown much more production in their early years. The only conclusion I can get to is homerism. 

[Bissurnette]

2 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

In order to get a point across one might not want to use cherry picked stats.  And when one does use stats, one should probably check if they are accurate.  Posting fake news doesn't do anything to supporting a point.  

 

Good have patience with our 21 year olds, I can't speak for everyone but I don't see too many people calling him a bust and trade him away for scraps, what i do see is people posting concerns about his progress and others jumping in to defend him, even when those concerns have legit logic behind it. As is said in the last page, i'm glad he's showing more signs this year, because patience runs out when players are no longer waiver eligible and teams are forced to make a decision.  Kind of like we are going to have to do with Goldi this summer.,

I guess the bigger concern for me is that a Canucks fan needs stats to prove to them that we have to be patient with our young players.

 

Also, don't play innocent when someone calls you out. Yes very few people explicitly call Virtanen a bust, but there are many of you on here who are implying it. Case in point, here's a quote from a poster, why only an hour ago:

1 hour ago, Jägermeister said:

The whole power forwards develop later thing is a straight up myth.  Very few of these guys went from being 4th liners at 21 to top 6 forwards at 26.  Look at the best power forward wingers in the league the past few years, and look at their best statistical year by the time they started their age 22 season (which Jake will be doing next season).  

 

Iginla - 28G and 51P

Benn - 22G and 56P

Lucic - 17G and 42P

Perry - 17G and 44P

Neal - 24G and 37P (77 games)

Simmonds - 16G and 40P

Saad - 19G and 47P

Kane - 30G and 57P

Hartnell - 14G and 41P (75 games)

 

Even the "late-bloomers" were all very productive by the conclusion of their age 22 season.  

Wheeler - 21G and 45P

Stone - 26G and 64P

Kreider - 17G and 37P (66 games)

Brown - 17G and 46P

 

Brown is the only of those 4 who had played a full NHL season prior to his breakout.

 

Heck, even everyone's "late-bloomer" poster boy Bertuzzi had a 18G and 39P season under his belt by 22 (as a rookie as well).

 

Virtanens best season is this year, 8G and 17P (69 games).

 

Almost every single NHL power forward was productive at 22.  They were scoring around 15 goals and putting up around 40 points at minimum. 

The "late-bloomers" were all doing this at 23, and most of them were in their first full NHL season.

The only real exception I could find was Andrew Ladd who broke out in his age 23 season to 15G and 49 P.

 

If you are looking at statistical history there is every reason to be concerned that Jake is not going to be a top 6 forward based on his production so far.  This would ring especially true if he doesn't break out next year.  The stats are simply not on Jakes side right now.

 

Now does it mean he certainly won't be a top 6 forward?  Of course not.  Every players path is different and stats aren't infallible.  But basing your argument on some notion that power forwards take a long time to develop into scoring threats is just plain false.  

To me, that is a post of someone who is all but saying Virtanen is a bust. And of course just like the rest of you, he throws in an offhand disclaimer at the end, just in case. Personally, I'm not prepared to look at a stat line and determine the future of a 21 year old player just yet. Though what I am struggling to figure out is, why? Do you just want to be able to say "I told you so" if Virtanen never amounts to anything more than a 4th liner? Would it really bring you that much joy? We are all very well aware that any player, even Boeser, can bust but that doesn't mean we jump on the "I-can-tell-the-future-but-also-have-the-wherewithal-to-backtrack-in-case-I-need-to" bandwagon. The venomous media are doing fine on their own sh**ting all over the team, I guess I just had hopes that fans would stand up for our players as opposed to joining the media circus.

 

But listen - and this goes to all the rest of you @The 5th Line @Jägermeister @Toews and any others as well - if it's important to you, you can quote me, you can call me an idiot, say "I told you so", or whatever you want at any point now or in the future, for supporting Jake Virtanen. I think he's a valuable asset on this team, and he brings a skillset that the Canucks, and many other teams around the league are dearly missing.

[Jägermeister]

1 hour ago, Vanuckles said:

I guess the bigger concern for me is that a Canucks fan needs stats to prove to them that we have to be patient with our young players.

 

Also, don't play innocent when someone calls you out. Yes very few people explicitly call Virtanen a bust, but there are many of you on here who are implying it. Case in point, here's a quote from a poster, why only an hour ago:

To me, that is a post of someone who is all but saying Virtanen is a bust. And of course just like the rest of you, he throws in an offhand disclaimer at the end, just in case. Personally, I'm not prepared to look at a stat line and determine the future of a 21 year old player just yet. Though what I am struggling to figure out is, why? Do you just want to be able to say "I told you so" if Virtanen never amounts to anything more than a 4th liner? Would it really bring you that much joy? We are all very well aware that any player, even Boeser, can bust but that doesn't mean we jump on the "I-can-tell-the-future-but-also-have-the-wherewithal-to-backtrack-in-case-I-need-to" bandwagon. The venomous media are doing fine on their own sh**ting all over the team, I guess I just had hopes that fans would stand up for our players as opposed to joining the media circus.

 

But listen - and this goes to all the rest of you @The 5th Line @Jägermeister @Toews and any others as well - if it's important to you, you can quote me, you can call me an idiot, say "I told you so", or whatever you want at any point now or in the future, for supporting Jake Virtanen. I think he's a valuable asset on this team, and he brings a skillset that the Canucks, and many other teams around the league are dearly missing.

Yeah... I would love it if Virtanen became a top 6 player.  I would absolutely love to have to eat crow.  Just because I personally don't think he will be based on what he has achieved so far, doesn't mean I don't want him to exceed my expectations.

 

It's also interesting to note that you think the stats are a way of implying that he would be a "bust".  I was only comparing him to top 6 power forwards, the players we all want Virtanen to become like.  I re-iterated that fact many times..  Never once did I even remotely imply that he wasn't going to play another role.  I personally happen to think that he will be a solid 3rd/4th line player for many years.  Is that what I want to happen?  No.  But it wouldn't be horrible at all.

 

The reason for the disclaimer?  Because I don't know, and I'm not pretending that I do know.  All I did was provide some statistics for people to consider that I personally found to be interesting and relatable to the discussion at hand.  I'm sorry you didn't like them.

 

It's a hockey forum, the entire point is to discuss things and share opinions.  I have an opinion and I'm just as entitled to share it as you are, even if you don't agree with it.

 

 

 

Edited March 24, 2018 by Jägermeister

[TheYjUstMaKeYoUwooZy]

1 hour ago, Vanuckles said:

I guess the bigger concern for me is that a Canucks fan needs stats to prove to them that we have to be patient with our young players.

 

Also, don't play innocent when someone calls you out. Yes very few people explicitly call Virtanen a bust, but there are many of you on here who are implying it. Case in point, here's a quote from a poster, why only an hour ago:

To me, that is a post of someone who is all but saying Virtanen is a bust. And of course just like the rest of you, he throws in an offhand disclaimer at the end, just in case. Personally, I'm not prepared to look at a stat line and determine the future of a 21 year old player just yet. Though what I am struggling to figure out is, why? Do you just want to be able to say "I told you so" if Virtanen never amounts to anything more than a 4th liner? Would it really bring you that much joy? We are all very well aware that any player, even Boeser, can bust but that doesn't mean we jump on the "I-can-tell-the-future-but-also-have-the-wherewithal-to-backtrack-in-case-I-need-to" bandwagon. The venomous media are doing fine on their own sh**ting all over the team, I guess I just had hopes that fans would stand up for our players as opposed to joining the media circus.

 

But listen - and this goes to all the rest of you @The 5th Line @Jägermeister @Toews and any others as well - if it's important to you, you can quote me, you can call me an idiot, say "I told you so", or whatever you want at any point now or in the future, for supporting Jake Virtanen. I think he's a valuable asset on this team, and he brings a skillset that the Canucks, and many other teams around the league are dearly missing.

This.

 

How is all the goal scoring power doing for the Oilers. 

 

Its about having a complete team.... and having as many different kinds of weapons and tools as possible,  And using ponts as a stand alone metric for Virtanen is silly

 

Should we judge Malhortra's value by the amount of goals he scored in a season?

 

Im on the Virtanen train as well.  When he puts it all together watch out... he will be a one man wrecking train in the playoffs.  Go Canucks

[Bissurnette]

47 minutes ago, Jägermeister said:

Yeah... I would love it if Virtanen became a top 6 player.  I would absolutely love to have to eat crow.  Just because I personally don't think he will be based on what he has achieved so far, doesn't mean I don't want him to exceed my expectations.

 

It's also interesting to note that you think the stats are a way of implying that he would be a "bust".  I was only comparing him to top 6 power forwards, the players we all want Virtanen to become like.  I re-iterated that fact many times..  Never once did I even remotely imply that he wasn't going to play another role.  I personally happen to think that he will be a solid 3rd/4th line player for many years.  Is that what I want to happen?  No.  But it wouldn't be horrible at all.

 

The reason for the disclaimer?  Because I don't know, and I'm not pretending that I do know.  All I did was provide some statistics for people to consider that I personally found to be interesting and relatable to the discussion at hand.  I'm sorry you didn't like them.

 

It's a hockey forum, the entire point is to discuss things and share opinions.  I have an opinion and I'm just as entitled to share it as you are, even if you don't agree with it.

 

 

 

Yeah we get it, trust me we have all heard your concerns. Some of us are just getting tired of them that's all. I guess I should blame myself. I get tired of your collective stats vomit so I stay away for a while but then I come back thinking maybe some of you have taken a sabbatical and then I run into the same BS everytime... And the cycle continues.

 

But you should take some blame too. Virtanen was never going to be the type of player to create plays out of nothing and put up a ton of points on his own. Even if you watched him in junior, he was never that player. So not only did you set yourself up for disappointment, but you're also putting unfounded expectations on the kid.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

2 hours ago, Vanuckles said:

I guess the bigger concern for me is that a Canucks fan needs stats to prove to them that we have to be patient with our young players. Also, don't play innocent when someone calls you out.

You no what, you're right, why use historical data when we can all just use our imaginations.  And when we decide to use data, lets just make them up, because who needs accuracy.    

 

Again, we ARE all canucks fans,  we'd all love for Jake to turn into the next Wayne Gretzky, and for the Canucks to win the cup next year, but at the same time those are unrealistic expectations and that's all people are doing is providing logic for "their" expectations.  If I state my expectations are for Jake to have a similar career as Raffi Torres, some might take offence to that simply because it might be lower then their expectations... and that's all that people are discussing, their expectations for a player...

 

 

2 hours ago, Vanuckles said:

 

Yes very few people explicitly call Virtanen a bust, but there are many of you on here who are implying it. Case in point, here's a quote from a poster, why only an hour ago:

Where was that implied?.  if you actually read he clearly stated;

 

"Now does it mean he certainly won't be a top 6 forward?  Of course not.  Every players path is different and stats aren't infallible.  But basing your argument on some notion that power forwards take a long time to develop into scoring threats is just plain false"

 

He's just debunking a theory that gets thrown out here a lot.  It also doesn't purely apply to only Jake, it would be to all PWF's, he's just stating his expectations are that Jake likely doesn't turn into a top 6 forward and provided reasoning behind it. Just because his expectations don't meet your doesn't mean he's calling the kid a bust.

[MrCanuck94]

Can we all just agree that Jake took a very big step this season. He's improved a lot at his play and consistency. With more opportunity in future seasons we should see his production go up as well. I'll be happy with a consistent 20/20 point production from him while being a force physically.

[Odd.]

I would think next year would be Virtanen's make or break season. His contract will be up next season, and he's going to need to prove himself if he wants any sort of raise. Many can agree these last two seasons have been huge developmental curves for Virtanen. I haven't really paid attention to Virtanen's stats this season, although he'll probably end up having 20 points this season which is decent for a guy who majority of the season played with sheltered minutes and limited roles.

 

With some of the increased roles and ice time he's getting near the end of this season, let's hope Virtanen can continue to bring that. He's going to need to come in and bring the same level of effort he brought in training camp before the start of this season. 

 

He has the speed and physicality, two important things you need to stay alive in the NHL. Yes he wont live up to what a 6th overall pick should be like, but he's still going to be a real useful player if he can figure out the goal scoring part.

 

Next year is going to be an important year for him.

[Gaudette Celly]

45 minutes ago, Odd. said:

I would think next year would be Virtanen's make or break season. 

After a couple of shakey development years he's now on a solid trajectory.  Sure he could stagnate, but he's starting to look like the player he was in junior.  He'll get probably a two year bridge then we'll see where he's at and whether we go long term.

[Bissurnette]

1 hour ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

You no what, you're right, why use historical data when we can all just use our imaginations.  And when we decide to use data, lets just make them up, because who needs accuracy.    

 

Again, we ARE all canucks fans,  we'd all love for Jake to turn into the next Wayne Gretzky, and for the Canucks to win the cup next year, but at the same time those are unrealistic expectations and that's all people are doing is providing logic for "their" expectations.  If I state my expectations are for Jake to have a similar career as Raffi Torres, some might take offence to that simply because it might be lower then their expectations... and that's all that people are discussing, their expectations for a player...

 

 

Where was that implied?.  if you actually read he clearly stated;

 

"Now does it mean he certainly won't be a top 6 forward?  Of course not.  Every players path is different and stats aren't infallible.  But basing your argument on some notion that power forwards take a long time to develop into scoring threats is just plain false"

 

He's just debunking a theory that gets thrown out here a lot.  It also doesn't purely apply to only Jake, it would be to all PWF's, he's just stating his expectations are that Jake likely doesn't turn into a top 6 forward and provided reasoning behind it. Just because his expectations don't meet your doesn't mean he's calling the kid a bust.

Ok great, you keep staring at a stat line to evaluate the future of a 21 year old, and I'll just keep trying to watch the games to see how he's doing on the ice.

 

I would gladly take Raffi Torres on my team, especially in the playoffs over an Andrew Cogliano. Points only get you so far, and if that's how you measure a player's success then you and I just have very different philosophies about hockey.

 

Yes I actually read what he said, but I didn't quite fall for the cop-out at the end. You guys accuse us of being like millennials because apparently we are "sensitive" about everything, but then you make your statements and hide behind the fine print in your claims. So you're going to regurgitate a bunch of numbers in my face, tell me Virtanen isn't projecting to put up points like the rest of them and then expect me to NOT to comment on your assertion?

 

But hey since you're looking to debunk the power forwards are late bloomers theory: Patrick Maroon, Dustin Penner, Josh Bailey, oh and the most painful one of all, Cam Neely.

 

 

Edited March 25, 2018 by Vanuckles

[Rob_Zepp]

4 hours ago, guntrix said:

Sure, you can talk "points or goals or whatever" you want but it doesn´t do any of us any favors to ignore his assist column. 

 

If you´re going to cherry pick a PFW and use him as an example for Jake, it´s probably not in your best interest to pick a guy like Wheeler. Just saying. If he doesn´t score another goal for the remainder of the eight games, he would be having a setback season by your criteria since he wouldn´t be breaking the 20-goal mark (even though he´s got 83 points already). 

 

This is giving me migraines. I´m honestly trying to understand your reasoning for projecting and lumping a 0.24 PPG player with guys who have quantifiably shown much more production in their early years. The only conclusion I can get to is homerism. 

You can conclude what you want - I could give a whatever comes out of your butt crack.   At this stage of his life, Wheeler was a 0.00 PPG player in the NHL so not sure how he had "quantifiable shown more production" but will leave that you to come up with what I am sure will be a remarkably puerile response.  I am not ignoring his assists as that is how he got to the point totals I believe but if you must go by assists for your evaluation, over his first 7 seasons never once hit 50 assists and now has two of three seasons with this year already a career high at 64.    Henrik Sedin broke through at 26 to get 57 assists and had his best years ages 29 to 32.    Bertuzzi broke through at 26.   Sedin is not a "big guy" in way Wheeler and Bertuzzi are but all are but the myriad of examples of players that took some time.    

 

You can continue to doubt Virtanen and continue to poke fun at those who see the base of what he is as a hockey player and what he projects to still become at NHL level.   I certainly don't mind (others I cannot speak for) as the more some of you poke, the more it confirms my projections (and those of others) given other perspectives you make very clear.

 

Have fun.   Looking forward to your insights about this time next year again when I project he (Virtanen) will have taken another solid step forward and I also project you will come up with some reason it is an anomaly only Homer Simpson (or whatever that term means) could grasp.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

21 minutes ago, Vanuckles said:

Ok great, you keep staring at a stat line to evaluate the future of a 21 year old, and I'll just keep trying to watch the games to see how he's doing on the ice.

Because the stat line plays an important role on a player being considered a top 6 player.  

 

Quote

I would gladly take Raffi Torres on my team, especially in the playoffs over an Andrew Cogliano. Points only get you so far, and if that's how you measure a player's success then you and I just have very different philosophies about hockey.

 

And  at this point I'd be really happy with Jake being a Raffi 2.0.  But raffi (who was a 5th overall) wasn't a top 6 winger, something you'd expect from a top 6 pick.  If Jake was a 4th round pick, i think people would be thrilled about his progress, his expectations come from where he was drafted and the players we passed on.  Yes points only get you so far, but scoring is essential to win, goals are more valuable than hits

 

Quote

Yes I actually read what he said, but I didn't quite fall for the cop-out at the end. You guys accuse us of being like millennials because apparently we are "sensitive" about everything, but then you make your statements and hide behind the fine print in your claims. So you're going to regurgitate a bunch of numbers in my face, tell me Virtanen isn't projecting to put up points like the rest of them and then expect me to NOT to comment on your assertion?

Cop out?  Sorry but how is using facts of other top 6 PWF a cop out?  He stated his expectation and provide reasoning as to his beliefs.  Just because you don't agree with his expectation or think it's lower than yours doesn't mean he's,

a ) not supportive of him and, b ) calling him a bust.  those are your own assumptions.  

 

Quote

But hey since you're looking to debunk the power forwards are late bloomers theory: Patrick Maroon, Dustin Penner, Josh Bailey, oh and the most painful one of all, Cam Neely.

 

 

Ah so you named a few big power forwards that were late bloomers, that must mean it's the giving rule for all power forwards that they develop slower right? Wait a minute, Hank didn't break 45 points till he was 25, Marchessault didn't crack 20 points till 26, Karlsson didn't crack 30 points till 25, Baertschi didn't hit 35 points till 24, does that mean skilled players are also late bloomers?  Anyone can find a few late bloomers, it doesn't make it the accepted rule.  

[Smashian Kassian]

On 3/10/2018 at 9:41 AM, SingleThorn said:

Keep repeating this mantra as you watch Nathan MacKinnon brush by Troy Stecher with ease. Like all things NHL, you can't overload in any one area.

 

In 2014, we were overloaded in the Euro/ Swede area. We absolutely needed bigger players. The California teams were killing us. Nylander ( and to a far lesser degree, Ehlers ) was NOT an option. There were no prime d-men available. The choice was Virtanen or Ritchie.

1

That's no way to build a hockey team. in 2014 the team had come off a dreadful offensive season and had just traded its top goal scorer. There was nothing coming as far as legitimate high level ability/offense besides Horvat. We needed skill, we needed talent, we needed BPA. 

[Smashian Kassian]

On 3/10/2018 at 11:15 AM, aGENT said:

Awful lot of CDC'ers posting about themselves and other players...and not so much about Jake. 

 

So... Jake is still playing well it seems. Starting to look more like a confirmed  trend than am inconsistent blip. Good for him. Hope he can keep it up and keep building on it. Glad the team was patient.

This is the most promising he's looked since he was drafted. Green has done a good job with him the last 2 years. Hopefully he can come in next season and realize the team badly needs him to step up and be a legit player. It would be great if he was a productive/contributing 2nd or 3rd line winger next year.

Edited March 25, 2018 by Smashian Kassian

[N4ZZY]

11 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:

This is the most promising he's looked since he was drafted. Green has done a good job the next 2 years. Hopefully he can come in next season and realize the team badly needs him to step up and be a legit player consistently. It would be great if he was a productive/contributing 2nd or 3rd line winger next year.

I get the sense (nothing official, just personal feeling) that Jake will have a strong off-season, and come in in top shape, and mentally ready to go. Consistency though, I think it would be too much to demand that he be consistent every game (a point every other game? probably not happening folks). But I think if he can hit 20 points this season, it's very  possible that he gets to 30 points next season. I see a slow progression in terms of points, and yes, I do agree as well that he will likely get a 2 year bridge contract. He doesn't really have any leverage to demand anything more than that. And if he doesn't continue to get better, than, by the time he's 25-26 years old, might be time to cut bait with the man. Cut your losses, and move on. Or, he becomes a staple on the third or even fourth line, and a footnote, until the next guy comes in (which woud be unfortunate. Out of all the Canucks, I do want Virtanen to succeed the most). 

 

Boeser's already succeeding, and Pettersson most likely will follow suit in Boeser's steps, I can't see Pettersson "busting" - he's too smart of a hockey player to do that, and his skillset is just simply off the roof to bust, AND he's had a remarkable season in the SHL (not an easy league for a teen). He's trending upwards very well indeed. If between the off-season, and Canucks training camp, he can put an additional 5-10 pounds, I think he's got a chance. If not, another season at the SHL wouldn't hurt him either. 

 

[Gaudette Celly]

On 3/10/2018 at 11:15 AM, aGENT said:

Awful lot of CDC'ers posting about themselves and other players...and not so much about Jake. 

 

So... Jake is still playing well it seems. Starting to look more like a confirmed  trend than am inconsistent blip. Good for him. Hope he can keep it up and keep building on it. Glad the team was patient.

That the consistency is settling in means he may finally have got it, and seen not only that he can play at this level but how to do it as the proverbial "every-day player".  A good off-season and he should be geared up to come strong out of the gate in the Fall, and just in time as I expect we'll have 3-4 rookies joining at that time.

[Alflives]

11 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said:

That the consistency is settling in means he may finally have got it, and seen not only that he can play at this level but how to do it as the proverbial "every-day player".  A good off-season and he should be geared up to come strong out of the gate in the Fall, and just in time as I expect we'll have 3-4 rookies joining at that time.

Mark me down now for this prediction.  I see Jake scoring 20+ goals in 2018/2019.  More than the goals though will be Jake’s impact on each game.  He will be a force on the forecheck, and create a lot of turnovers.  

[aGENT]

13 hours ago, Hutton Wink said:

That the consistency is settling in means he may finally have got it, and seen not only that he can play at this level but how to do it as the proverbial "every-day player".  A good off-season and he should be geared up to come strong out of the gate in the Fall, and just in time as I expect we'll have 3-4 rookies joining at that time.

And hopefully more play drivers for him to compliment. 

[canuckledraggin]

17 hours ago, Smashian Kassian said:

That's no way to build a hockey team. in 2014 the team had come off a dreadful offensive season and had just traded its top goal scorer. There was nothing coming as far as legitimate high level ability/offense besides Horvat. We needed skill, we needed talent, we needed BPA. 

Is this thread still about the 2014 draft? There's no way to get into the heads of management, but maybe they figured they could have drafted a player with skill at #24 that year, which they did. Maybe they figured they needed that player with elite speed who was obliterating guys with his hitting, who was definitely going top 10 that year. Who knows but why does it matter anymore?

 

As far as team building goes... I'm all but certain we're taking a defenceman this year. If we get the 2nd pick, Svechnikov is a clear #2 and would make things very difficult, but even then I bet they trade down and take a D-man.

 

If you just took the BPA and never drafted for position or considered trading down to acquire assets, you're the Oilers.

[khay]

19 hours ago, N4ZZY said:

I get the sense (nothing official, just personal feeling) that Jake will have a strong off-season, and come in in top shape, and mentally ready to go. Consistency though, I think it would be too much to demand that he be consistent every game (a point every other game? probably not happening folks). But I think if he can hit 20 points this season, it's very  possible that he gets to 30 points next season. I see a slow progression in terms of points, and yes, I do agree as well that he will likely get a 2 year bridge contract. He doesn't really have any leverage to demand anything more than that. And if he doesn't continue to get better, than, by the time he's 25-26 years old, might be time to cut bait with the man. Cut your losses, and move on. Or, he becomes a staple on the third or even fourth line, and a footnote, until the next guy comes in (which woud be unfortunate. Out of all the Canucks, I do want Virtanen to succeed the most). 

 

Boeser's already succeeding, and Pettersson most likely will follow suit in Boeser's steps, I can't see Pettersson "busting" - he's too smart of a hockey player to do that, and his skillset is just simply off the roof to bust, AND he's had a remarkable season in the SHL (not an easy league for a teen). He's trending upwards very well indeed. If between the off-season, and Canucks training camp, he can put an additional 5-10 pounds, I think he's got a chance. If not, another season at the SHL wouldn't hurt him either. 

 

I think Virtanen-Pettersson-Boeser could be a line at some point down the road. 

 

Virtanen is more dangerous on his off wing and if his puck handling skill improves, he can gain the zone with his speed. Drive to the net, get a shot off, or pass off to Pettersson/Boeser. He can also use his speed to fetch the puck for Pettersson and Boeser on dump and chase plays. 

 

Virtanen could score 20 goals and 50 points playing with these two smart players.