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

Jake Virtanen | #18 | RW


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Yung1 said:

This guy is either expert level troll or legitimately dumb. Either way I'm impressed.

Recently joined and almost all his few posts are about Virtanen.

Probably a guy who got banned and has returned under another name, or a regular poster who created another account to act like a dip$&!# on.  He has added nothing useful to any conversation so far.  Just name calling and being generally unpleasant.

 

Edited by Provost
  • Hydration 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Provost said:

Recently joined and almost all his few posts are about Virtanen.

Probably a guy who got banned and has returned under another name, or a regular poster who created another account to act like a dip$&!# on.  He has added nothing useful to any conversation so far.  Just name calling and being generally unpleasant.

 

You: calls me a name 

Also you: he just calls people names

 

Maybe you and your friend can insinuate my sexual preference some more, that was fun...

 

How you haven't been banned is beyond me. 3 personal attacks in as many days. 

 

Me: Disagrees with your opinion and shows you several stats disputing your thesis

You: He contributes nothing!

 

You: calls me a prick, dip**** and spends time creeping my profile, following my posts and bashing me

Also you: he's unpleasant!

 

eafd1fa508f573f4729ebac36c719c8a.jpg.fe5ae32404d6b5a2486f8330b82526b5.jpg

Edited by Moose Nuckle
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Moose Nuckle said:

You: calls me a name 

Also you: he just calls people names

 

Maybe you and your friend can insinuate my sexual preference some more, that was fun...

 

How you haven't been banned is beyond me. 3 personal attacks in as many days. 

love ya moosey

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

20 minutes ago, dpn1 said:

Hey Guys, if you keep talking to a fool, he won't stop.  Maybe we could return to talking about Jake. B)

More name calling Haha wow. Classy group of people here. 

 

Me: gives an opinion that goes against the grain, backs it up with evidence and stats.

You: He's a fool!

2t3a5p.jpg.853ff66b8242ae7744e9f38123d123d4.jpg

Edited by Moose Nuckle
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, stawns said:

That's my point.  People excuse Boeser's declining numbers, but chastise Virtanen's steady improvement.  

 

I sure hope there's better to come.

Yes, but that is MY point. Boeser has reasons which can excuse his numbers. Virtanen does not.

 

There will be better to come. Bank on it. I think we are going to see a very motivated team in a few days, and that includes Boeser.

  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, kloubek said:

Yes, but that is MY point. Boeser has reasons which can excuse his numbers. Virtanen does not.

 

There will be better to come. Bank on it. I think we are going to see a very motivated team in a few days, and that includes Boeser.

I can understand that perspective. From outside looking in, Boeser's stress is more legitimate but in the reality of how people work, stress is stress. 

 

Andrew Shaw's latest on spittin chiclets talking about Quenneville letting him make mistakes and putting him right back out there, that trust is what I think Green lacks and it negatively affects some players like Jake. 

Edited by Moose Nuckle
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Jake is immature and lacks certain professionalism. He will eventually mature and reach his potential. If Taylor Hall can mature I don't see why Jake can't. The problem is whether the Canucks can fit him under the cap while waiting for him to mature mentally. 

 

My personal preference is to trade Jake if he is asking for fair price this off season. If he wants to stay he better take a hometown discount. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont understand why you would want to move Virtanen. Some of the “immaturity” during COVID has been overblown and over dramatized. He’s a lot closer to growing up than never changing. He’s trending upwards and not downwards. He’s young and still has plenty of good years ahead of him where he could potentially hit 35+ goals. Power forwards take several years to hit their stride. Hes 23 and is 4-5 years away from being at peak prime years. He hit career numbers this season, 18g and 18a 36pts. He was on pace for 21g 21- 42pts playing an average of 13:05 5v5 and :53 on the PP.

If we can make it through the play-in round and get a round or 2 in the play off rounds, Virtanen and the Canucks will benefit greatly. The following season could be the year he really begins to emerge as the PWF he was drafted to be.

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, knucklehead91 said:

I dont understand why you would want to move Virtanen. 

Because he has trade value to hopefully be part of a package to get the young right D we lack and we have depth at forward both now (Ferland, MacEwan), and coming (Lind, Podkolzin, Hoglander) that are any combination of more committed/mature, potentially more talented and cheaper.

 

Podkolzin alone likely shows up looking a lot like last year's Virtanen (with less maturity etc issues), at the ripe old age of 19-20.

 

He's also likely to price himself out of a 3rd line spot while having no guarantee to correct the maturity/consistency/commitment issues currently keeping him out of a regular top 6 spot.

Edited by aGENT
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Because he has trade value to hopefully be part of a package to get the young right D we lack and we have depth at forward both now (Ferland, MacEwan), and coming (Lind, Podkolzin, Hoglander) that are any combination of more committed/mature, potentially more talented and cheaper.

 

Podkolzin alone likely shows up looking a lot like last year's Virtanen (with less maturity etc issues), at the ripe old age of 19-20.

 

He's also likely to price himself out of a 3rd line spot while having no guarantee to correct the maturity/consistency/commitment issues currently keeping him out of a regular top 6 spot.

Virtanen will get you a high risk defensive prospect. He is not landing a top 4 dman. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, peaches5 said:

Virtanen will get you a high risk defensive prospect. He is not landing a top 4 dman. 

A high risk defensive prospect? I think he has proven he has at least a solid floor that is worthy of a good potential Top 4 D prospect. I'm not sure where you are pulling that comment out from. He is at the very least a career 20 goal power forward with speed. That with another 4-5 years of prime development makes him worthy of something more guaranteed then a high risk, potentially not making it nhl D. Rasmus Andersson would be an ideal target imo. But he is more defensive.

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Because he has trade value to hopefully be part of a package to get the young right D we lack and we have depth at forward both now (Ferland, MacEwan), and coming (Lind, Podkolzin, Hoglander) that are any combination of more committed/mature, potentially more talented and cheaper.

 

Podkolzin alone likely shows up looking a lot like last year's Virtanen (with less maturity etc issues), at the ripe old age of 19-20.

 

He's also likely to price himself out of a 3rd line spot while having no guarantee to correct the maturity/consistency/commitment issues currently keeping him out of a regular top 6 spot.

So out of the RWs we have currently there is one uncertainty and a second one who is bound to go.

Toffoli we cannot guarantee for certain we will be able to afford resigning him. Eriksson’s time is done in Vancouver, its just a matter of when and how soon, That leaves us with Boeser and Virtanen as NHL quality RWs. Lind, Podz and Hogs are unproven, untested and inexperienced at the NHL level. Moving Virtanen will leave a hole on the RW. acquiring a young RHD whom is to fit in the top 4 will only have implications on the team down the road. Depending on the players current contract or next pay raise. We will have Petey and Hughes to resign at some point and juggling contracts will be a real task for Benning. 


We need to be patient and see what we have in some of the young D coming up before trying to search for an instant answer. Let young guys develop and graduate into the roster, not be thrown into the wolves. It may take a year or two for Hoglander and Podz to adjust to North American lifestyle and game

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Rush17 said:

A high risk defensive prospect? I think he has proven he has at least a solid floor that is worthy of a good potential Top 4 D prospect. I'm not sure where you are pulling that comment out from. He is at the very least a career 20 goal power forward with speed. That with another 4-5 years of prime development makes him worthy of something more guaranteed then a high risk, potentially not making it nhl D. Rasmus Andersson would be an ideal target imo. But he is more defensive.

giphy.gif

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Jake had 18 goals in 69 NHL games this season. He would of eclipsed 20 probably hitting 22-23.  Jt Miller who we acquired this past summer.. his best goal totals in his career prior to this year were back to back 22 goal campaigns. Miller is now 27 and hitting his stride. Jake is still 23 for another 3 weeks soon to be 24. His speed, size, in of itself would be attractive to teams. Add in he can pot you 20+ a season for the foreseeable future I don't see how he doesn't get you a future top 4 D.  Perhaps the disconnect is in how I interrupted "A high risk defensive prospect". Jake isn't JT Miller - he lacks the hockey IQ but his skating and shot make him a desirable asset. We could easily get a 1st Round Pick for him +. I don't see how a more guaranteed top 4 D is out of the question. He doesn't have the reputation of a duclair or some other problem kid. He just needs to mature more. 

 

Sorry if I came off a bit hot lol. But I think we can manage to get more than how I interrupted what you said. Could you provide some example of defenseman you mean that fit that high risk definition?  Are you thinking like a Ryan Merkley? or someone with a lower end ceiling? Please help me understand with some context.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As a true Canuck fan I am always cheering for the team.  I am tired of this bickering narrative between Virtanen and Boeser.  They are the future and they are very much different types of players with their own unique attributes that will help the team win.  

 

Certainly Virtanen had a tough camp; however, Virtanen's performance during his regular season games this year has been promising.  I am positive Jake will bring it during the playoffs and we will see his true value.  

 

There is a strong possibility that we may not be able to re-sign Toffoli.  If that occurs both Boeser and Virtanen will have their place on this team.   

 

This comparison talk between Boeser and Virtanen is divisive and disgusting.  

  • Thanks 1
  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...