Jake Virtanen | #18 | RW

[guntrix]

5 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

People cherry pick examples that suit them.   I didn't stoop to that and instead simply offered my experience from over 15 years of professional hockey.   My way of responding - if it didn't work for you, apologies.

Using Doan to justify Virtanen's development so far is cherry picking. Fact of the matter is that PWFs don't magically take longer because they're bigger. The statistics are there. 

 

Its very hard to take a random claim on a forum seriously without proof. Someone can easily say something they're not. 

[The Lock]

How about this? Virtanen's evidently going into this year a little more maturely (based on evidence provided during the summer). It's not to say he'll make it. It's not to say he'll play poorly. It's to say he's hopefully taking things in a better manner than before.

 

This way we don't get both sides whining about the other side while being all hypocritical since both sides are doing the exact same thing just from a different perspective. People seem to want to cling to their opinions, whether positive or negative, and ignore anything that might shatter their own precious precious opinion.

[Toews]

I wouldn't call the "PWF take longer to develop" theory to be a myth. I just think it's outdated. It used to be that bigger guys who used to rely on their size to dominate in junior used to come to the NHL and get a culture shock due to how much bigger and stronger NHLers were. This was a time when not much emphasis used to be put on strength and conditioning in the junior game. Now days every junior team is equipped with the facilities and the coaching for players to start training for the pros from a very young age. This is the single biggest reason why players are starting to become ready to play in the NHL at younger age than ever before.

 

Virtanen's problems were never his physical attributes, the reason he made the NHL last year was because he was viewed as physically ready to play in the NHL. IMO Virtanen's problems stem from his relatively low hockey IQ and minimal vision. This is the reason why I think he is more suited to the kind of game that Tom Wilson plays.

[Phat Fingers]

2 hours ago, stawns said:

He played like that last season, the stat line just doesn't show it

By the end of the season in the AHL, I agree Stawns.   But it took all season to get there.  I am a supporter, but not unconditionally, Jake has start better than where he left off.  Which I believe he will do.  But if fir some reason he goes off script and isn't prepared again (from seeing his updates and current training weight, I don't see that happening) then I will be a pissed off fan.  

 

Its the the nature of my profession to be very skeptical of change in behaviour, either mostly see the people falling thru the cracks, likely, or that I need to see consistent proof for a while to truly believe that bad habits are truly corrected.  

 

EmW

[Phat Fingers]

4 hours ago, Ruxin'sVinegarStrokes said:

Im impressed we can say asshole on CDC.  My day is made.

Takes a bow.

[stawns]

5 hours ago, Eastcoast meets Westcoast said:

By the end of the season in the AHL, I agree Stawns.   But it took all season to get there.  I am a supporter, but not unconditionally, Jake has start better than where he left off.  Which I believe he will do.  But if fir some reason he goes off script and isn't prepared again (from seeing his updates and current training weight, I don't see that happening) then I will be a pissed off fan.  

 

Its the the nature of my profession to be very skeptical of change in behaviour, either mostly see the people falling thru the cracks, likely, or that I need to see consistent proof for a while to truly believe that bad habits are truly corrected.  

 

EmW

From January on, his game was pretty consistent I thought.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

15 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

12th and 14th out of 30 players in the first round (for NHL games and goals) is in the upper half.   Not sure what is so hard for you and Forsberg to admit that - both 12 and 14 are higher than 15 when it comes to an ordered list.

 

No one is comparing him to a bunch of cherry picked examples - at least I am not - I am simply saying, have have been, is that his NHL number of games and goals scored have been in the upper half of the first round picks in his draft year.   No, not 6th overall but 12th and 14th, respectively.   Moreover, the 5th and 7th picks in that draft have not had a minute in NHL yet.   My point was, is and will be, he is not a 'bust' but certainly is not living up quite yet to his draft slot BUT he is also the type of player that often takes longer to hit their stride.   

And what you're failing to see is that games played in the NHL at this point is a meaningless stat. 

 

9 players have played more games in the 2016 draft year than Juolevi, does that some how correlate or imply that they are better players, does that mean he's dropped in play? Does that mean Tkachuk is better?

 

What you ignore is that in terms of progress from the 2014 draft year is that Jake has fallen well past the 12th and 14th, respectively. he's dropped past the top 30.  I'd challenge to you to name 2 players taken in the 1st round of 2014 that had a worse year than Jake last year?  I'll even gift you a head start, Connor Bleackley is one, can you name another?

 

 

.....

I know you probably wont follow up with an answer so I'll just do the work.  Bored Monday morning.

There were 9 players from the 2014 draft that played full time in the NHL last year.  All of them produced over .30 ppg

Ekblad    ppg= 0.31
Reinhart    ppg= 0.59
Draisaitl    ppg= 0.94
Bennett    ppg= 0.32
Nylander    ppg= 0.75
Ehlers    ppg= 0.78
Ritchie    ppg= 0.36
Larkin    ppg= 0.40
Pastrnak    ppg= 0.93

21 players (the rest of the 2014, first round draft class) all played games in the AHL. Only two players produces under .30 ppg at the AHL:

Dal Colle    ppg= 0.55
Virtanen    ppg= 0.29
Fleury    ppg= 0.38
Fiala    ppg= 0.86
Perlini    ppg= 1.12
Vrana    ppg= 0.73
Honka    ppg= 0.62
Milano    ppg= 0.75
Sanheim    ppg= 0.49
Tuch    ppg= 0.65
DeAngelo    ppg= 0.64
Schmaltz    ppg= 0.75
Fabbri    ppg= 0.75
Kapanen    ppg= 1.00
Bleackley    ppg= 0.22
McCann    ppg= 0.60
Scherbak    ppg= 0.62
Goldobin    ppg= 0.92
Ho-Sang    ppg= 0.72
Kempe    ppg= 0.43
Quenneville    ppg= 0.79

Now Jake isn't the only powerforward in his draft class (Perlini/Ritchie/Tuch) and they haven't struggled as much, so we can throw that theory out the window.  The facts that don't lie is that it's not that Jake isn't living up to some loft expectation of being a generational talent or that he's not in the NHL being a top 6 forward, it's that Jakes development the last two years has stalled, while all his peers (as shown above) have continued to progress to the point that 99% of them have surpassed him. His development can't be summarized any other way than being called a disappointment.

Now yes Jake can turn it around, but that brings up the other concern.  When and if he does will it be on the roster of the Vancouver Canucks?  Because we rushed Jake into the NHL, not only did it hurt his development, it's removed another year of ELC. Where a player like Dal Colle can spend 2 more years in the AHL developing without having to worry about getting claimed, Jake only has this year of that freedom.  That means that Jake has 12 months to prove he's a full time NHLer.  Jake has an intriging skill set so I don't see a 22 year old like him making it through waivers without being claimed.  That puts a ton of pressure on the canucks org to make sure another set back like last years start doesn't happen.

There's a lot to be concerned over of our 2014 6th overall pick.  His progress upto this point has not been good, his maturity has faltered and the timeline we have him under an ELC is against him.  At the end of last year he took his first steps forward.  We will find out in less than a month if these steps turn into a sprint or if we end up taking a few steps back. 

Edited September 11, 2017 by ForsbergTheGreat

[Ihatetomatoes]

10 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

People cherry pick examples that suit them.   I didn't stoop to that and instead simply offered my experience from over 15 years of professional hockey.   My way of responding - if it didn't work for you, apologies.

They are not cherry picked examples though. You can find plenty of examples of big guys that peaked at a later time in their career. However there is an equal amount of smaller players that peaked later in their careers as well. Some players take longer to develop for plenty of reasons. Often smaller guys take longer because they have to learn how to perform against larger competition. Big guys often take longer because they have to learn how to play against guys their size after being able to dominate in lower leagues because they were bigger. Its not cherry picked examples.

[Rob_Zepp]

11 hours ago, guntrix said:

Using Doan to justify Virtanen's development so far is cherry picking. Fact of the matter is that PWFs don't magically take longer because they're bigger. The statistics are there. 

 

Its very hard to take a random claim on a forum seriously without proof. Someone can easily say something they're not. 

My experience is not random.   It is what it is - empirical at best and I guess only something that matters to me.  Seen so many later blooming big guys but if you haven't, fair enough.

[dpn1]

I am always cautious with trying to compare one players development to another's because  no two people are alike.  I see these kinds of comparisons as being very broad strokes.  Jake needs to be evaluated on his own merit.  His development has been slow up to the mid point of last season but then seemed to make some positive strides forward.  Green , Linden and Jimbo all spoke highly of his progress.  It will be interesting to see what he does at camp with the improvements he has made.

[DrJockitch]

4 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

And what you're failing to see is that games played in the NHL at this point is a meaningless stat. 

 

9 players have played more games in the 2016 draft year than Juolevi, does that some how correlate or imply that they are better players, does that mean he's dropped in play? Does that mean Tkachuk is better?

 

What you ignore is that in terms of progress from the 2014 draft year is that Jake has fallen well past the 12th and 14th, respectively. he's dropped past the top 30.  I'd challenge to you to name 2 players taken in the 1st round of 2014 that had a worse year than Jake last year?  I'll even gift you a head start, Connor Bleackley is one, can you name another?

 

 

.....

I know you probably wont follow up with an answer so I'll just do the work.  Bored Monday morning.

There were 9 players from the 2014 draft that played full time in the NHL last year.  All of them produced over .30 ppg

Ekblad    ppg= 0.31
Reinhart    ppg= 0.59
Draisaitl    ppg= 0.94
Bennett    ppg= 0.32
Nylander    ppg= 0.75
Ehlers    ppg= 0.78
Ritchie    ppg= 0.36
Larkin    ppg= 0.40
Pastrnak    ppg= 0.93

21 players (the rest of the 2014, first round draft class) all played games in the AHL. Only two players produces under .30 ppg at the AHL:

Dal Colle    ppg= 0.55
Virtanen    ppg= 0.29
Fleury    ppg= 0.38
Fiala    ppg= 0.86
Perlini    ppg= 1.12
Vrana    ppg= 0.73
Honka    ppg= 0.62
Milano    ppg= 0.75
Sanheim    ppg= 0.49
Tuch    ppg= 0.65
DeAngelo    ppg= 0.64
Schmaltz    ppg= 0.75
Fabbri    ppg= 0.75
Kapanen    ppg= 1.00
Bleackley    ppg= 0.22
McCann    ppg= 0.60
Scherbak    ppg= 0.62
Goldobin    ppg= 0.92
Ho-Sang    ppg= 0.72
Kempe    ppg= 0.43
Quenneville    ppg= 0.79

Now Jake isn't the only powerforward in his draft class (Perlini/Ritchie/Tuch) and they haven't struggled as much, so we can throw that theory out the window.  The facts that don't lie is that it's not that Jake isn't living up to some loft expectation of being a generational talent or that he's not in the NHL being a top 6 forward, it's that Jakes development the last two years has stalled, while all his peers (as shown above) have continued to progress to the point that 99% of them have surpassed him. His development can't be summarized any other way than being called a disappointment.

Now yes Jake can turn it around, but that brings up the other concern.  When and if he does will it be on the roster of the Vancouver Canucks?  Because we rushed Jake into the NHL, not only did it hurt his development, it's removed another year of ELC. Where a player like Dal Colle can spend 2 more years in the AHL developing without having to worry about getting claimed, Jake only has this year of that freedom.  That means that Jake has 12 months to prove he's a full time NHLer.  Jake has an intriging skill set so I don't see a 22 year old like him making it through waivers without being claimed.  That puts a ton of pressure on the canucks org to make sure another set back like last years start doesn't happen.

There's a lot to be concerned over of our 2014 6th overall pick.  His progress upto this point has not been good, his maturity has faltered and the timeline we have him under an ELC is against him.  At the end of last year he took his first steps forward.  We will find out in less than a month if these steps turn into a sprint or if we end up taking a few steps back. 

Not sure anyone ever thought of him as a generational talent.  Concern of most people going into the draft was that he had speed and size but no hockey sense, that lack of sense by outward appearance extends beyond hockey.

 

I have said before that most of the mistakes made by this group of management are not terrible, and at the time at least sort of made sense, but the mistakes made in the handling of Jake were egregious.  He missed most of his draft +1 season because of shoulder surgery.  Benning even admits it was a mistake keeping him the next year, I think part of the issue was a poor relationship with his junior club and him not being eligible for the AHL.  When it was obvious that WD wasn't going to play him, he should have been sent back to Calgary and probably would have been better for them to eat a year of the ELC at that point.  To then have him working out in Vancouver and not keep an eye on his training was ludicrous.  Some of the members of this board noted how heavy he was looking in some of the promo videos of other players where he was working out in the background.  How does the club miss this.

 

I hope we have gotten past the hiccoughs and that he can continue his development from here.  I hope he spends a year tearing up the AHL with a more talented Utica team and finds a place on the club the next year.  He could be a great compliment to the Dahlen and Pettersen types.  If he can create room for these guys to work he will be doing his job even if he doesn't turn into great scorer.

[Honky Cat]

12 hours ago, Toews said:

I wouldn't call the "PWF take longer to develop" theory to be a myth. I just think it's outdated. It used to be that bigger guys who used to rely on their size to dominate in junior used to come to the NHL and get a culture shock due to how much bigger and stronger NHLers were. This was a time when not much emphasis used to be put on strength and conditioning in the junior game. Now days every junior team is equipped with the facilities and the coaching for players to start training for the pros from a very young age. This is the single biggest reason why players are starting to become ready to play in the NHL at younger age than ever before.

 

Virtanen's problems were never his physical attributes, the reason he made the NHL last year was because he was viewed as physically ready to play in the NHL. IMO Virtanen's problems stem from his relatively low hockey IQ and minimal vision. This is the reason why I think he is more suited to the kind of game that Tom Wilson plays.

I think its pretty much confirmed at this point that Virtanen was not a good pick at #6...I think that he can/and will be an NHL player in some form,but from his draft year,he's really done nothing but regress..There's been no indication he's going to be an 'impact' player at the NHL level.

 

After players are drafted you hope to see them kick it up another notch in their draft +1 years..and separate themselves from the rest of the pack..Not regress,or flat line (Juolevi) in their development.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

20 minutes ago, DrJockitch said:

Not sure anyone ever thought of him as a generational talent.  Concern of most people going into the draft was that he had speed and size but no hockey sense, that lack of sense by outward appearance extends beyond hockey.

 

I have said before that most of the mistakes made by this group of management are not terrible, and at the time at least sort of made sense, but the mistakes made in the handling of Jake were egregious.  He missed most of his draft +1 season because of shoulder surgery.  Benning even admits it was a mistake keeping him the next year, I think part of the issue was a poor relationship with his junior club and him not being eligible for the AHL.  When it was obvious that WD wasn't going to play him, he should have been sent back to Calgary and probably would have been better for them to eat a year of the ELC at that point.

I don't really by the hitmen being that bad for his development. They were the team that built up his hype to begin with.  He would have got plenty of ice time as that team was weak on offense upfront. The first line from the year before (Tambellini, Rankin and Lang) all had moved on so Jake along with line mate from the year before Fazleev and Stukel would have been the teams top offensive production. 

 

20 minutes ago, DrJockitch said:

 

 To then have him working out in Vancouver and not keep an eye on his training was ludicrous.  Some of the members of this board noted how heavy he was looking in some of the promo videos of other players where he was working out in the background.  How does the club miss this.

 

The club can't do anything about a players summer training, it's in the CBA that the club has no rights to a players off season decisions.  They can provide access to the work out facility but that's really all they can do. 

 

20 minutes ago, DrJockitch said:

I hope we have gotten past the hiccoughs and that he can continue his development from here.  I hope he spends a year tearing up the AHL with a more talented Utica team and finds a place on the club the next year.  He could be a great compliment to the Dahlen and Pettersen types.  If he can create room for these guys to work he will be doing his job even if he doesn't turn into great scorer.

I hope he takes this year seriously and is able to break out, because if he doesn't JB likely isn't holding a roster spot open to find out. 

[stawns]

5 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

And what you're failing to see is that games played in the NHL at this point is a meaningless stat. 

 

9 players have played more games in the 2016 draft year than Juolevi, does that some how correlate or imply that they are better players, does that mean he's dropped in play? Does that mean Tkachuk is better?

 

What you ignore is that in terms of progress from the 2014 draft year is that Jake has fallen well past the 12th and 14th, respectively. he's dropped past the top 30.  I'd challenge to you to name 2 players taken in the 1st round of 2014 that had a worse year than Jake last year?  I'll even gift you a head start, Connor Bleackley is one, can you name another?

 

 

.....

I know you probably wont follow up with an answer so I'll just do the work.  Bored Monday morning.

There were 9 players from the 2014 draft that played full time in the NHL last year.  All of them produced over .30 ppg

Ekblad    ppg= 0.31
Reinhart    ppg= 0.59
Draisaitl    ppg= 0.94
Bennett    ppg= 0.32
Nylander    ppg= 0.75
Ehlers    ppg= 0.78
Ritchie    ppg= 0.36
Larkin    ppg= 0.40
Pastrnak    ppg= 0.93

21 players (the rest of the 2014, first round draft class) all played games in the AHL. Only two players produces under .30 ppg at the AHL:

Dal Colle    ppg= 0.55
Virtanen    ppg= 0.29
Fleury    ppg= 0.38
Fiala    ppg= 0.86
Perlini    ppg= 1.12
Vrana    ppg= 0.73
Honka    ppg= 0.62
Milano    ppg= 0.75
Sanheim    ppg= 0.49
Tuch    ppg= 0.65
DeAngelo    ppg= 0.64
Schmaltz    ppg= 0.75
Fabbri    ppg= 0.75
Kapanen    ppg= 1.00
Bleackley    ppg= 0.22
McCann    ppg= 0.60
Scherbak    ppg= 0.62
Goldobin    ppg= 0.92
Ho-Sang    ppg= 0.72
Kempe    ppg= 0.43
Quenneville    ppg= 0.79

Now Jake isn't the only powerforward in his draft class (Perlini/Ritchie/Tuch) and they haven't struggled as much, so we can throw that theory out the window.  The facts that don't lie is that it's not that Jake isn't living up to some loft expectation of being a generational talent or that he's not in the NHL being a top 6 forward, it's that Jakes development the last two years has stalled, while all his peers (as shown above) have continued to progress to the point that 99% of them have surpassed him. His development can't be summarized any other way than being called a disappointment.

Now yes Jake can turn it around, but that brings up the other concern.  When and if he does will it be on the roster of the Vancouver Canucks?  Because we rushed Jake into the NHL, not only did it hurt his development, it's removed another year of ELC. Where a player like Dal Colle can spend 2 more years in the AHL developing without having to worry about getting claimed, Jake only has this year of that freedom.  That means that Jake has 12 months to prove he's a full time NHLer.  Jake has an intriging skill set so I don't see a 22 year old like him making it through waivers without being claimed.  That puts a ton of pressure on the canucks org to make sure another set back like last years start doesn't happen.

There's a lot to be concerned over of our 2014 6th overall pick.  His progress upto this point has not been good, his maturity has faltered and the timeline we have him under an ELC is against him.  At the end of last year he took his first steps forward.  We will find out in less than a month if these steps turn into a sprint or if we end up taking a few steps back. 

I watched almost every Utica game from December on and jake was a force in almost every one.  Did it translate into points?  Nope and that was the disppointing thing because it makes it seem like he was an impact player, when on most nights he was.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

14 minutes ago, stawns said:

I watched almost every Utica game from December on and jake was a force in almost every one.  Did it translate into points?  Nope and that was the disppointing thing because it makes it seem like he was an impact player, when on most nights he was.

I think that's a bit of an over exaggeration, i watched enough games in utica to know that he was extremely inconsistent, even in the last half.  He would play 3-5 games working hard creating chances and then he'd the next 3-5 games off.  This happens right up until the end of the year.  The last 10 games when Utica was right in the middle of the push, i thought he didn't play that great, He was noticeable in maybe 3 games but disappeared on other nights, Kassian esq. 

 

In the end, he needs to translate things into some form of points,  That doesn't mean being a point per game but it does need to be better.  He's at the age when we need to see consistent results not just consistent effort (that's what you expect in years 1 and 2 post draft).

 

The point of my post is to show how really far behind in offense he really was compared to the rest of his peers.  Every player was almost double their percent of production compared to him.  That's a bit more than a bounce or two here and there going his way. 

 

The good news for him, is he has this year to get off on a good start.  Expectation need to be clear and set from the outset for him by mgmt.  None of this dragging him along in the NHL playing min minutes and then sitting him in press box.  The start of last year was a set back and it made him play catch up all year long.  I hope we've learned from those mistakes and start him off on the right track. 

[stawns]

55 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

I think that's a bit of an over exaggeration, i watched enough games in utica to know that he was extremely inconsistent, even in the last half.  He would play 3-5 games working hard creating chances and then he'd the next 3-5 games off.  This happens right up until the end of the year.  The last 10 games when Utica was right in the middle of the push, i thought he didn't play that great, He was noticeable in maybe 3 games but disappeared on other nights, Kassian esq. 

 

In the end, he needs to translate things into some form of points,  That doesn't mean being a point per game but it does need to be better.  He's at the age when we need to see consistent results not just consistent effort (that's what you expect in years 1 and 2 post draft).

 

The point of my post is to show how really far behind in offense he really was compared to the rest of his peers.  Every player was almost double their percent of production compared to him.  That's a bit more than a bounce or two here and there going his way. 

 

The good news for him, is he has this year to get off on a good start.  Expectation need to be clear and set from the outset for him by mgmt.  None of this dragging him along in the NHL playing min minutes and then sitting him in press box.  The start of last year was a set back and it made him play catch up all year long.  I hope we've learned from those mistakes and start him off on the right track. 

The lack of offense was too bad, but was, mainly, due to the fact that there just was the depth to counteract all the call ups that left Utica as a borderline ECHL team.  as for jake's performance, we just see things differently.  On most nights his line spent the majority of their shifts in the offensive zone......of course he had off games, but everyone does and shouldn't be used as a means to judge his season as whole.  I consider last years season an unqualified step forward for Virtanen

[Phat Fingers]

On September 10, 2017 at 5:50 PM, Boudrias said:

What I took from EastCoast's comment was that he was writing Virtanen off if he did not put up significant AHL points. IMHO Virtane even after the upcoming season is still young enough to adjust his game. Like you I do expect improvement this season. He absolutely has enough NHL quality tools to make the NHL. He could be a 25 point player and still be a major contributor to a Canuck team. 

 

Yes. I like Gaunce's game as well and will preach the same line of patience. I see both Gaunce and JV as 3rd line players. 

Not writing Jake off, but not giving him a unlimited amount of chances either.  I think we both want to see what a properly motivated, prepared and fit Jake can do this season.  

Edited September 11, 2017 by Eastcoast meets Westcoast

[CanuckGAME]

Question:  why is jake never apart of any prospect event?   Wasn't at the past 2 prospect tourneys and hasn't been at the past 2 development camps.  Why?  Jake would have benefited big time being at these camps.  

 

I'm sure there must be a reasonable answer.  I'm just curious as to why as Jake should be getting as much solid training in and team bonding in as possible. 

[Alflives]

3 minutes ago, CanuckGAME said:

Question:  why is jake never apart of any prospect event?   Wasn't at the past 2 prospect tourneys and hasn't been at the past 2 development camps.  Why?  Jake would have benefited big time being at these camps.  

 

I'm sure there must be a reasonable answer.  I'm just curious as to why as Jake should be getting as much solid training in and team bonding in as possible. 

Really good point.  Does it have anything to do with the number of NHL games he played already (especially in his first pro year) defaulting him out of the tournament?  

[DrJockitch]

The first one was recovering from shoulder surgery.  Not sure about second.

 

edit: Oops flipped the timeline in my head.  Yes, was number of games played in NHL.

Edited September 12, 2017 by DrJockitch