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

Jake Virtanen | #18 | RW


avelanch

Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, Toews said:

Doesn't matter if it is over the top criticism or head stuck in sand syndrome, the only opinion that actually matters is Benning's. Virtanen was his first pick as GM and at #6 overall the franchise has invested significantly into him. That does buy you some cache in this league historically speaking, and he is a local kid to boot. There is no doubt in mind that just from an optics perspective moving on from Virtanen reflects poorly on Benning, especially as Juolevi hasn't quite lived up to expectation either.

 

But while its difficult to move on from Virtanen I don't think he would hesitate to do so if he believed that Virtanen was done growing both in terms of his play on the ice and maturity off of it. With that said I would advise Jake that there are limits to everyone's patience. 

 

I think this summer and the contract that Virtanen gets will be a big indicator of where he stands in organization's eyes. 

I think we should also take into consideration the amount of strides he's taken as a player and a person, on and off the ice. We see these unflattering social media situations, yet he has improved in every season he's been in. Granted, yes, he's been given a lot of chances to do so. Character wise, he's not a bad person, but sometimes makes some questionable decisions. Some people take longer to grow up and I suspect the Canucks understand this better than anyone. On the other hand, for the fishing tournament, he donated all of his winnings, just like the previous winner. You gotta give credit where it's due.

 

If Virtanen doesn't bring his A game in the next season, he's gonna get dumped, that's for sure. As you said, optics wise, it wouldn't be as desirable to trade him; however the team has shown a tremendous amount of patience. You really can't fault the team at that point if he doesn't progress more.

Edited by Dazzle
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, shayster007 said:

Huh, didn't expect that. Was totally expecting you to go with the recent altercation between the Blues, but sure a 15 year old story from Boom works too.

 

Regardless, nice interview. Man I loved Bieska when he played for us. Guy has a bright future in media too.

Only thing is even the "current" Bieksa would do the same thing he did 15 years ago.  I think he was on at some point this past season talking about that altercation, pretty much said he'd do it again...lol. Love him for it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dazzle said:

You've had some credibility issues for a while but this last sentence probably takes the cake. What are you even talking about here?

I know I have to use smaller words for you, or type slower so you can follow more easily. 

Jake is getting outplayed by a bunch of folks who are barely NHL calibre... an aging veteran who can barely get around the ice; an undrafted rookie; and a fringe 4th liner who has a grand NHL total of 38 points.  All three of them are trusted by the coach, especially defensively.

Motte has been fine on our 4th line, but is barely an NHL player... he is like Biega, a depth guy who gets slotted into a roster for some depth or because of a really weak roster that leaves a spot open for him.  They are similar player in that they are undersized guys with really limited skill but just work hard to claw into the bottom of a roster ahead of more talented but less motivated players.  No good team with any expectations of being a contender has either of them as an every day roster player.

The coach seems to see things the way I do as he demoted Jake to the Black Aces skating group... I didn't invent it, I am just going based on literally what is happening in reality... so I wonder who has the credibility issues here?  

Unless he manages to change the narrative, Jake won't be in the lineup for the first game... or he will have a really short leash and be replaced by MacEwan.

Edited by Provost
  • Cheers 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Provost said:

I know I have to use smaller words for you, or type slower so you can follow more easily. 

Jake is getting outplayed by a bunch of folks who are barely NHL calibre... an aging veteran who can barely get around the ice; an undrafted rookie; and a fringe 4th liner who has a grand NHL total of 38 points.  All three of them are trusted by the coach, especially defensively.

Motte has been fine on our 4th line, but is barely an NHL player... he is like Biega, a depth guy who gets slotted into a roster for some depth or because of a really weak roster that leaves a spot open for him.  They are similar player in that they are undersized guys with really limited skill but just work hard to claw into the bottom of a roster ahead of more talented but less motivated players.  No good team with any expectations of being a contender has either of them as an every day roster player.

The coach seems to see things the way I do as he demoted Jake to the Black Aces skating group... I didn't invent it, I am just going based on literally what is happening in reality... so I wonder who has the credibility issues here?  

Unless he manages to change the narrative, Jake won't be in the lineup for the first game... or he will have a really short leash and be replaced by MacEwan.

what-if-i-hr4jt3.jpg.3e234cd8a9c2d1df5493620c36eb15d6.jpg

tell-me-again-nameb9.jpg

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, The Lock said:

Do you have evidence on how punching a teammate makes all the difference?

 

If you're going to just go with "do you have evidence" you need to provide a clear example yourself about how it made a teammate better in the end. ;)

 

If you need an example from me. Byfuglien and Kane. Was just words more or less but was a pretty bad situation for the entire organization.

 

Now are you going to hide behind this "do you have evidence?" wall or are you going actually debate? Come "punch me" with actual evidence your method works. ;)

this makes no sence,

 

you say words are better except when its Buff and Kane

 

I don't need to hide because I say "I think" while you and Shay say things liek "Most of the time it harms the team"

If you are going to say "Most of the time..." you should have some story to back it up.

or you can be like Shay and say, "I AM NOT GIVING YOU PROOF" 

and that  makes for a really strong arguement

 

Anyway I noticed in yesterdays vids that Jake and bo were playing together (for at least one shift)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Provost said:

I know I have to use smaller words for you, or type slower so you can follow more easily. 

Jake is getting outplayed by a bunch of folks who are barely NHL calibre... an aging veteran who can barely get around the ice; an undrafted rookie; and a fringe 4th liner who has a grand NHL total of 38 points.  All three of them are trusted by the coach, especially defensively.

Motte has been fine on our 4th line, but is barely an NHL player... he is like Biega, a depth guy who gets slotted into a roster for some depth or because of a really weak roster that leaves a spot open for him.  They are similar player in that they are undersized guys with really limited skill but just work hard to claw into the bottom of a roster ahead of more talented but less motivated players.  No good team with any expectations of being a contender has either of them as an every day roster player.

The coach seems to see things the way I do as he demoted Jake to the Black Aces skating group... I didn't invent it, I am just going based on literally what is happening in reality... so I wonder who has the credibility issues here?  

Unless he manages to change the narrative, Jake won't be in the lineup for the first game... or he will have a really short leash and be replaced by MacEwan.

All this is sadly true, at least at this point (he could very well play his way back onto the team, though didn't he have a similar showing last off-season too?)

If MacEwen permanently wins coach's trust next to Gaudette then Jake could be in tough since the top-three wing spots for each position seem pretty set (Miller, Pearson, one of Roussel/ Ferland; Boeser/ Toffoli, and possibly MacEwen).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Phil_314 said:

All this is sadly true, at least at this point (he could very well play his way back onto the team, though didn't he have a similar showing last off-season too?)

If MacEwen permanently wins coach's trust next to Gaudette then Jake could be in tough since the top-three wing spots for each position seem pretty set (Miller, Pearson, one of Roussel/ Ferland; Boeser/ Toffoli, and possibly MacEwen).

... and it appears that the 4th line is set with Motte-Beagle-Eriksson as a shut down line.  They have been together the entire training camp.

 

This isn’t a normal camp with 40 guys trying out for spots.  All but two roster spots seem to be absolutely set, and the rest of the black aces are just jockeying for how high they rate for injury call ups.

 

3rd like RW is either Jake or MacEwan

3rd pairing LD is also up for grabs.  With Benn going to Dallas and returning quarantine to get back, it could be wide open.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Love the competition.

 

I disagree that Jake just "has crappy training camps". Training camps are vitally important and even moreso since the pause. If you aren't in game shape or don't give it your all, both speak loudly as to the kind of player you are likely to be without snapping out if it.

 

In Jake's case, I feel he hasn't snapped out of being a kid yet. They haven't got through to him yet. He has the tools to be borderline excellent but not the maturity. So how long do you hold out that he will smarten up? You would have figured a contract year would have done it. Nope.

 

If we had all our players at the best they -could- be, this team would be dominant. Jake could absolutely play a game similar to what Ferland did to us with Calgary. Ferland himself -could- still play like his former self. Good lord - if Loui could figure out how to play hockey again?

 

Our team on paper has massive scoring potential from the top six and veteran names in the bottom six who by all rights SHOULD be able to play better than we have come to expect. Sutter, Ferland, Loui, Beagle, Rouse - and Jake if he chooses to play his heart out. If even a couple of those guys return to form, we are gonna look good. 

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

6 hours ago, kloubek said:

I disagree that Jake just "has crappy training camps". Training camps are vitally important and even moreso since the pause. If you aren't in game shape or don't give it your all, both speak loudly as to the kind of player you are likely to be without snapping out if it.

Not at all.

 

Every year, year after year, we see mediocre players rip it up in training camp and by week 3 you barely see them again for the year. Conversely, you see really good players just kinda float around all training camp with panicky fans frothing at the mouth how bad they are.

 

Then the season starts and those same good players rip it up all year.

 

So training camp does not mean much at the end of the day other than to let the professional athletes get into the rhythm of things.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CanuckCup2022 said:
8 hours ago, kloubek said:

I disagree that Jake just "has crappy training camps". Training camps are vitally important and even moreso since the pause. If you aren't in game shape or don't give it your all, both speak loudly as to the kind of player you are likely to be without snapping out if it.

Not at all.

 

Every year, year after year, we see mediocre players rip it up in training camp and by week 3 you barely see them again for the year. Conversely, you see really good players just kinda float around all training camp with panicky fans frothing at the mouth how bad they are.

 

Then the season starts and those same good players rip it up all year.

 

So training camp does not mean much at the end of the day other than to let the professional athletes get into the rhythm of things.

I think it's a bit of both.  Training camps are vitally important for the bubble players battling for a spot in the lineup, for the newbies that the coaching staff may not be familiar with and gives them a chance to show what they can do and how much they want it and are willing to work for it.  For the shoe in players (there are usually 6 - 10 on a team) it's their opportunity to get their skating legs under them and avoid injury.  

 

I'd argue Jake is more of a bubble player and the coaching staff would want to see how much he wants the position.  They know what he CAN do, what they need to see is whether he's taken the time away from the game seriously and worked hard and is he willing to work hard now.  Or, are there other players that want it more and bring a similar skill set.  A team needs the best of all the players in the role they need to play in order to succeed.  

  • Like 1
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, kloubek said:

Love the competition.

 

I disagree that Jake just "has crappy training camps". Training camps are vitally important and even moreso since the pause. If you aren't in game shape or don't give it your all, both speak loudly as to the kind of player you are likely to be without snapping out if it.

 

In Jake's case, I feel he hasn't snapped out of being a kid yet. They haven't got through to him yet. He has the tools to be borderline excellent but not the maturity. So how long do you hold out that he will smarten up? You would have figured a contract year would have done it. Nope.

 

If we had all our players at the best they -could- be, this team would be dominant. Jake could absolutely play a game similar to what Ferland did to us with Calgary. Ferland himself -could- still play like his former self. Good lord - if Loui could figure out how to play hockey again?

 

Our team on paper has massive scoring potential from the top six and veteran names in the bottom six who by all rights SHOULD be able to play better than we have come to expect. Sutter, Ferland, Loui, Beagle, Rouse - and Jake if he chooses to play his heart out. If even a couple of those guys return to form, we are gonna look good. 

We should have kept Megna and put him on the first line then eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, lmm said:

this makes no sence,

 

you say words are better except when its Buff and Kane

 

I don't need to hide because I say "I think" while you and Shay say things liek "Most of the time it harms the team"

If you are going to say "Most of the time..." you should have some story to back it up.

or you can be like Shay and say, "I AM NOT GIVING YOU PROOF" 

and that  makes for a really strong arguement

 

Anyway I noticed in yesterdays vids that Jake and bo were playing together (for at least one shift)

So basically you have no evidence in the same sense that you're accusing other people. *slow clap*

 

All I'm saying is, if you expect other people to "have evidence" you need to also provide evidence, otherwise you just sound like a kid going "provide evidence, provide evidence, provide evidence" as if it's a new word you just discovered. lol

Edited by The Lock
  • Haha 1
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...