Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Jake Virtanen | #18 | RW


avelanch

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, 4petesake said:
Hearing the Canucks have talked to the Panthers about a possible trade scenario involving Jake Virtanen & one of Florida’s depth D— possibly Markus Nutivaraa. 26 year old D carries 2.7M AAV next season but $3.3M actual dollars. Almost mirrors Virtanen’s $3.4M dollars in 21-22.
 
 


 

Would this really be good value?

 

Id rather keep pushing for Debrusk or Bennett if that’s still possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If JV wasn't a Benning pick, he would have been gone long ago.  

 

Remember Brendan Gaunce?  A late 1st rounder, got size, defensively reliable and with better stats in the AHL compared to Virtanen, thus should have earned a spot on the Canucks more than Jake.  Probably could have easily been retained as a 4th line winger/centre since he already know the Canucks system.  But he was a Gillis pick, thus when he reached RFA, he was gone.  Not saying his career would have been better or whatever, but when you're a prospect from the previous regime, you have minimal leeway.  

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Would this really be good value?

 

Id rather keep pushing for Debrusk or Bennett if that’s still possible.

I don’t know enough about Nutivaraa to say but he wouldn’t be my preference. If JB wants a defenceman I’d rather someone with a little toughness I think. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Lancaster said:

If JV wasn't a Benning pick, he would have been gone long ago.  

 

Remember Brendan Gaunce?  A late 1st rounder, got size, defensively reliable and with better stats in the AHL compared to Virtanen, thus should have earned a spot on the Canucks more than Jake.  Probably could have easily been retained as a 4th line winger/centre since he already know the Canucks system.  But he was a Gillis pick, thus when he reached RFA, he was gone.  Not saying his career would have been better or whatever, but when you're a prospect from the previous regime, you have minimal leeway.  

Really. Then why is Gaunce not in the NHL then? What about Horvat? 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/21/2021 at 8:15 AM, Law of Goalies said:

That's exactly it. Everyone turns a blind eye to other players. Even though Miller has been scoring clutch goals, he has been giving away the puck way too many times (esp with blind passes and up the middle) while when Jake does it once (even if he tries hard to steal it back) people complain and say he is the worst player ever. 

Because Miller can carry a line, make plays and score. If Jake could do it, we would not be complaining but he can't, so we are. Got it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, runtzguy said:

Really. Then why is Gaunce not in the NHL then? What about Horvat? 

Horvat isn't a fringe player, Gaunce is.  

Virtanen is barely above a fringe player now.  

 

Think of how many opportunities JV received and how many opportunities Brendan received.  

Effort, discipline and defensive reliability has never been an issue with Gaunce.  

How often has many kept harping about Jake's compete level, his inability to read the play, how he's rarely ever on the ice for key situations?

If it's based on merit, Brendan definitely got the short-end of it.  

 

Gaunce's ceiling and skill level is arguably lower than Jake's, but if Gaunce was acquired or drafted by Benning, he would have been given a longer leash.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Would this really be good value?

 

Id rather keep pushing for Debrusk or Bennett if that’s still possible.

Tbh i don’t know enough to say it’s good value but if he’s a good d man who is steadily improving, at 26 that’s not bad. I think if we do trade him we’d be better off getting a defencemen for him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

You seem to be suggesting that management was down on Guance from the get go? He didn’t have Virtanen’s speed or shot. He never produced offence and had no serious physical game. I think he got a look in Boston but couldn’t stick. I suspect that Jake can stay in the NHL even if it isn’t with Vancouver. 
 

The idea that management teams would downgrade assets because they didn’t draft them makes no sense. 

I agree with you that Jake is a better talent than Gaunce, his occasional flashes prove that. But a GM’s reputation is tied directly to players that he drafts as we know all too well here,  consequently they tend to get a little longer leash.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Lancaster said:

Horvat isn't a fringe player, Gaunce is.  

Virtanen is barely above a fringe player now.  

 

Think of how many opportunities JV received and how many opportunities Brendan received.  

Effort, discipline and defensive reliability has never been an issue with Gaunce.  

How often has many kept harping about Jake's compete level, his inability to read the play, how he's rarely ever on the ice for key situations?

If it's based on merit, Brendan definitely got the short-end of it.  

 

Gaunce's ceiling and skill level is arguably lower than Jake's, but if Gaunce was acquired or drafted by Benning, he would have been given a longer leash.  

Except if this were the case, Benning wouldn't have traded McCann. That's an even shorter leash than Gaunce and McCann has proven to have a higher ceiling than Gaunce as well.

 

While I see what you're saying, I don't know if the speculation you're providing has enough of a base to stand on. There's just too much evidence to the contrary and Gaunce, whiile I really wanted him to work out, he just didn't have the skill needed that players such as Virtanen and McCann have to at least slot an NHL role. (and yes, I do think Virtanen could have a long career, just unlikely to be in the top 6)

Edited by The Lock
  • Cheers 2
  • Upvote 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vesey and Virtanen could do some good things on 3rd line. 

i would be so disapointed if Virtanen would be traded for someone like Nutivaraa who address only our requirement to expose a D under contract for next year instead of Myers.

i could listen a trade 1 on 1 involving DeBrusk or Bennett, but thats it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I think that Jake has been playing better of late, he's still producing nothing. 

 

Do people think that the addition of Vessey and Boyd make it possible for Jake to wave bye bye's without anybody noticing?

 

Vessey is the equivalent and while he's playing for a raise on his 900,000 (which is much lower than the year before) he's not going to spring back to over $2M unless he proves he can pot 15-20 goals again.  A bargain compared to JV imo. 

 

Roussel, the boat anchor, is going nowhere.  They could buy him out but Jake is a better candidate for a buy out imo.

 

We haven't seen Boyd yet and he's probably more of a 4th liner fighting it out with Hawyrluk and MacEwen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/23/2021 at 4:56 PM, Lancaster said:

If JV wasn't a Benning pick, he would have been gone long ago.  

 

Remember Brendan Gaunce?  A late 1st rounder, got size, defensively reliable and with better stats in the AHL compared to Virtanen, thus should have earned a spot on the Canucks more than Jake.  Probably could have easily been retained as a 4th line winger/centre since he already know the Canucks system.  But he was a Gillis pick, thus when he reached RFA, he was gone.  Not saying his career would have been better or whatever, but when you're a prospect from the previous regime, you have minimal leeway.  

hmmm... I think this is a bit of a rosy backward look here. Gaunce was frustratingly unwilling to engage physically. He did not generate offence. He was good at reading the play but he was easily passed over. It had nothing to do with it being someone else pick, he just wasn't engaged enough at the NHL level, as the rest of his career path has shown. 

 

Jake had/has far more potential than Gaunce, that should be obvious. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

hmmm... I think this is a bit of a rosy backward look here. Gaunce was frustratingly unwilling to engage physically. He did not generate offence. He was good at reading the play but he was easily passed over. It had nothing to do with it being someone else pick, he just wasn't engaged enough at the NHL level, as the rest of his career path has shown. 

 

Jake had/has far more potential than Gaunce, that should be obvious. 

I am no Virtanen fan... but Gaunce was just a less skilled version of him.  There is a reason he didn't stick in the NHL even after leaving the Canucks and is now playing in Sweden

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Provost said:

I am no Virtanen fan... but Gaunce was just a less skilled version of him.  There is a reason he didn't stick in the NHL even after leaving the Canucks and is now playing in Sweden

Gaunce was slow in terms of giving himself the time to get his shot away at the NHL level.  He had good AHL numbers (0.61 ppg) and ineffectual NHL numbers in 118 games (0.14 ppg).  So with over 100 NHL games, one could hardly say he didn't get a shot at the bigs.  A better parallel would be Reid Boucher although Boucher has a helluva release and did manage 20 goals in 133 games but Gaunce has a more average shot

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Provost said:

I am no Virtanen fan... but Gaunce was just a less skilled version of him.  There is a reason he didn't stick in the NHL even after leaving the Canucks and is now playing in Sweden

 

7 hours ago, Crabcakes said:

Gaunce was slow in terms of giving himself the time to get his shot away at the NHL level.  He had good AHL numbers (0.61 ppg) and ineffectual NHL numbers in 118 games (0.14 ppg).  So with over 100 NHL games, one could hardly say he didn't get a shot at the bigs.  A better parallel would be Reid Boucher although Boucher has a helluva release and did manage 20 goals in 133 games but Gaunce has a more average shot

I found him very frustrating to watch. I thought he had the tools to be an elite bottom 6 but just didn't seem to want to engage physically. But a lot of guys have a hard time making that kind of change, frankly its amazing we got anything out of Loui in that role. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

 

I found him very frustrating to watch. I thought he had the tools to be an elite bottom 6 but just didn't seem to want to engage physically. But a lot of guys have a hard time making that kind of change, frankly its amazing we got anything out of Loui in that role. 

here is the funny hting about Gaunce

in his last 4 games in the NHL he had 4 points and was +4

in his final season in Vancouver his +3 was behind only Stetcher +9 and Leivo +4

for all the love of Ty Motte he was only a + player in his first season in Chicago

Gaunce kind of reminded me of Manny Malhotra

Manny was supposed to be a big strong scorer

but he did not score very good and was a - player early in his career

by the time he came to Vancouver he learned the defensive side of the game but was never a physical player

If Gaunce were still here, would he be a better fit than Graovac or Gaudette with our current injury situation?

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, lmm said:

here is the funny hting about Gaunce

in his last 4 games in the NHL he had 4 points and was +4

in his final season in Vancouver his +3 was behind only Stetcher +9 and Leivo +4

for all the love of Ty Motte he was only a + player in his first season in Chicago

Gaunce kind of reminded me of Manny Malhotra

Manny was supposed to be a big strong scorer

but he did not score very good and was a - player early in his career

by the time he came to Vancouver he learned the defensive side of the game but was never a physical player

If Gaunce were still here, would he be a better fit than Graovac or Gaudette with our current injury situation?

Even in Gaunce's final year before his last 4 games, his offensive production was increasing, but sometimes it seems like once you have a certain reputation, it can be very hard to shake.

  • Huggy Bear 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

Even in Gaunce's final year before his last 4 games, his offensive production was increasing, but sometimes it seems like once you have a certain reputation, it can be very hard to shake.

True

in the year before he scored at a point a game for 3 games

he put up 6 points in 37 games as a 23 year old

Gaudette has 7 points in 33 games this year as a 24 year old career -28

Graovac is a year older than Gaunce and has 11 points in 72 games 

don't see a whole lot of difference between Gaunce and Grao tbh

Gaunce just seems like a Gillis guy Jim had to jettison 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, lmm said:

True

in the year before he scored at a point a game for 3 games

he put up 6 points in 37 games as a 23 year old

Gaudette has 7 points in 33 games this year as a 24 year old career -28

Graovac is a year older than Gaunce and has 11 points in 72 games 

don't see a whole lot of difference between Gaunce and Grao tbh

Gaunce just seems like a Gillis guy Jim had to jettison 

I'm not sure there was anything to do with him being a Gillis guy, but I felt and still do feel that Gaunce wasn't given a fair chance. His defensive game was excellent and his offense was improving. His physicality left a bit to be desired given his frame, but I feel he would've grown into a very solid 4th liner for many NHL teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...