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

Jake Virtanen | #18 | RW


Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Moose Nuckle said:

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. 

I do not for a second believe "stress is stress". The bad injury and rehabbing it (don't think he came back 100%) combined with his father's situation are two exceptionally difficult situations to deal with, making expectations to focus his mind entirely on hockey and give his 110% difficult. What's Jake's big distraction? Seeing a chick he met at the bar in the stands?

 

I also agree with the "put him back out there and let him make mistakes" for many players. You would do that with a mature player like Petey, Quinn, or Brock, because you know they will learn from their mistakes. You put Jake out there and he will make the same mistake next shift. Green has taken the tough love approach because he feels it helps fire Jake up. Your thought is to just let him float around out there, giving up goals and learning little from it? It doesn't work that way when you are trying to reach the playoffs and certainly not in a playoff environment.

 

Jake will get his chance at some point. And when that comes, he better make the most of it.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, knucklehead91 said:

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

I never even mentioned Toffoli FWIW.

 

And by all means, I'm not saying this trade has to happen the day after this season ends. Particularly if we don't re-sign Toffoli (whom again, I didn't mention). By all means, if he didn't re-sign, moving can wait until Podkolzin arrives next spring (or someone else makes him expendable).

 

We also have Roussel, Ferland MacEwan and Sutter who all can play 3rd line RW until then. Possibly Leivo as well if he's well enough to bother re-signing for cheap/need the depth.

 

So no, not really a hole.

Edited by aGENT
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Yung1 said:

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

Legitimately dumb.  Not nearly good enough to garner votes for your alternative proposal.

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

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.

I was thinking more along the lines of he would get you a projected top 4 dman prospect, which is a high risk prospect, like Juolevi. You'd prob also get a 3rd or 4th round pick coming back as well. Defensemen have shown to cost a fortune to acquire. You need a topline centre to trade for a good defenseman a 1/2 guy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, aGENT said:

I never even mentioned Toffoli FWIW.

 

And by all means, I'm not saying this trade has to happen the day after this season ends. Particularly if we don't re-sign Toffoli (whom again, I didn't mention). By all means, if he didn't re-sign, moving can wait until Podkolzin arrives next spring (or someone else makes him expendable).

 

We also have Roussel, Ferland MacEwan and Sutter who all can play 3rd line RW until then. Possibly Leivo as well if he's well enough to bother re-signing for cheap/need the depth.

 

So no, not really a hole.

No I know you didnt mention Toffoli. I just mentioned him as he is currently in our top 6 and his future uncertain. Moving out a RW in Virtanen, losing a RW in Toffoli and moving a RW in Eriksson would leave the right side thin. If we cannot hold onto Toffoli, could be an opportunity for Virtanen to slide in and prove his worth if we cannot retain Toffoli. Eriksson will be taken out of the equation at some point as well. Moving Jake is too soon and his potential/trade value could skyrocket

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kloubek said:

I do not for a second believe "stress is stress". The bad injury and rehabbing it (don't think he came back 100%) combined with his father's situation are two exceptionally difficult situations to deal with, making expectations to focus his mind entirely on hockey and give his 110% difficult. What's Jake's big distraction? Seeing a chick he met at the bar in the stands?

 

I also agree with the "put him back out there and let him make mistakes" for many players. You would do that with a mature player like Petey, Quinn, or Brock, because you know they will learn from their mistakes. You put Jake out there and he will make the same mistake next shift. Green has taken the tough love approach because he feels it helps fire Jake up. Your thought is to just let him float around out there, giving up goals and learning little from it? It doesn't work that way when you are trying to reach the playoffs and certainly not in a playoff environment.

 

Jake will get his chance at some point. And when that comes, he better make the most of it.

You hate Jake and refuse to give him a chance is what you meant to say. 

Edited by Moose Nuckle
Link to post
Share on other sites

Virt was drafted at Num 6 to be a first line rw or at worst a 2nd line rw.

 

The shortcomings he has as a young guy being slow to mature have meant that he has not reached that level.  Currently he has been beat out of a 3rd line spot and may have a tough time being on the 4th line cuz that's not who he is and others are better suited for that role.

 

The knocks people make on him are that his personal shortcomings have hampered his development into a 1st or second line rw. Those are fair comments. He has not displayed the maturity and drive and dedication that our actual first and second line players demonstrate.  He's not really a third line guy and for sure  not a 4th line guy.  So he is a victim of his own immaturity to not be where he was drafted to be - on the first or second lines.

 

Can he change that?  I don't know.

 

 

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

No I know you didnt mention Toffoli. I just mentioned him as he is currently in our top 6 and his future uncertain. Moving out a RW in Virtanen, losing a RW in Toffoli and moving a RW in Eriksson would leave the right side thin. If we cannot hold onto Toffoli, could be an opportunity for Virtanen to slide in and prove his worth if we cannot retain Toffoli. Eriksson will be taken out of the equation at some point as well. Moving Jake is too soon and his potential/trade value could skyrocket

 

 

If we do re-sign Toffoli:

 

Miller, Pettersson, Toffoli/Boeser

Pearson, Horvat, Boeser/Toffoli

Ferland, Gaudette, MacEwan/Sutter

Motte, Beagle, Sutter/MacEwan

 

Roussel also traded. Lind, Bailey, Jasek available as call ups. Podkolzin available a couple months in and Hoglander a possibility on a wing as well. Leivo still a potential, cheap option.

 

 

 

If we don't re-sign Toffoli:

 

Miller, Pettersson, Boeser

Pearson, Horvat, Ferland

Roussel, Gaudette, MacEwan/Sutter

Motte, Beagle, Sutter/MacEwan

 

Roussel not traded (his cap not needed for Toffoli). Lind, Bailey, Jasek still available as call ups. Podkolzin available a couple months in and Hoglander a possibility on a wing as well. Leivo still a potential, cheap option.

 

Either way, we add an inexpensive, young right D with top 4 potential. No 'holes'.

Edited by aGENT
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, aGENT said:

If we do re-sign Toffoli:

 

Miller, Pettersson, Toffoli/Boeser

Pearson, Horvat, Boeser/Toffoli

Ferland, Gaudette, MacEwan/Sutter

Motte, Beagle, Sutter/MacEwan

 

Roussel also traded. Lind, Bailey, Jasek available as call ups. Podkolzin available a couple months in and Hoglander a possibility on a wing as well. Leivo still a potential, cheap option.

 

 

 

If we don't re-sign Toffoli:

 

Miller, Pettersson, Boeser

Pearson, Horvat, Ferland

Roussel, Gaudette, MacEwan/Sutter

Motte, Beagle, Sutter/MacEwan

 

Roussel not traded (his cap not needed for Toffoli). Lind, Bailey, Jasek still available as call ups. Podkolzin available a couple months in and Hoglander a possibility on a wing as well. Leivo still a potential, cheap option.

 

Either way, we add an inexpensive, young right D with top 4 potential. No 'holes'.

Would that young RD step in right away? Meaning we let Tanev walk?

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

Would that young RD step in right away? Meaning we let Tanev walk?

If it was that good enough of a D prospect where he could step into a top 4 role it could cost Virtanen+. It would be a somewhat touted prospect in that case

 

Ideally said prospect would start as a top 6 RD or with a veteran like Tanev. Probably want each young guy to have a solid veteran to play with. Example being Rathbone/OJ-Tanev, Edler-Said prospect in 5v5 play. Hughes can play with Myers and probably bring the best in Myers.

 

One of Tanev/Stecher would be going. Depending which one it would change how we work our D around.

Edited by Junkyard Dog
Link to post
Share on other sites

A good reason to trade Virtanen over Boeser is that we are in a better position to have a younger cheaper and promising RD on our roster rather than a top 4 D for Boeser since we have Tanev/Stecher available to sign. 

 

It helps our roster long-term more so.

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

A good reason to trade Virtanen over Boeser is that we are in a better position to have a younger cheaper and promising RD on our roster rather than a top 4 D for Boeser since we have Tanev/Stecher available to sign. 

 

It helps our roster long-term more so.

Don't know if it helps our roster more, but it certainly helps our cap management.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to trade for a 'Parayko' :wub: but the cap he's going to require to retain...:wacko:

Edited by aGENT
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, peaches5 said:

I was thinking more along the lines of he would get you a projected top 4 dman prospect, which is a high risk prospect, like Juolevi. You'd prob also get a 3rd or 4th round pick coming back as well. Defensemen have shown to cost a fortune to acquire. You need a topline centre to trade for a good defenseman a 1/2 guy. 

That makes more sense. Top 4 D are very difficult to find. Hard to find an exact replica of Juolevi given his pedigree but I get your overall point you are making.  There are some young D maybe like a Jake Bean or I would say Travis Sanheim but he's proven to be a very effective player already. Hmm. I would hate to move Jake for someone that doesn't pan out. Almost need someone with a high floor to make a comfortable swap without fear. We need a high end RHD to play with Hughes. A Merkley would be a fun gamble but he has character issues apparently and this regime is very clearly against players with that reputation. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Don't know if it helps our roster more, but it certainly helps our cap management.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to trade for a 'Parayko' :wub: but the cap he's going to require to retain...:wacko:

Helps with the roster moving forward, long-term. Adding a promising RD would help balance out our future at D. The kid would have to pan out though. We'd probably get a good pick too.

 

Overall Trading Virtanen for a younger cheaper D with potential is the only logical move given our options with Tanev/Stecher as a stop gap top 4 RD, circumstances with the cap and with the lack of promising RH shots on our D pool.

 

If we decided to trade someone.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Rush17 said:

That makes more sense. Top 4 D are very difficult to find. Hard to find an exact replica of Juolevi given his pedigree but I get your overall point you are making.  There are some young D maybe like a Jake Bean or I would say Travis Sanheim but he's proven to be a very effective player already. Hmm. I would hate to move Jake for someone that doesn't pan out. Almost need someone with a high floor to make a comfortable swap without fear. We need a high end RHD to play with Hughes. A Merkley would be a fun gamble but he has character issues apparently and this regime is very clearly against players with that reputation. 

Good place to start would be to look at teams bound to lose a D in the upcoming expansion draft but lacking forwards ;)

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, aGENT said:

Good place to start would be to look at teams bound to lose a D in the upcoming expansion draft but lacking forwards ;)

 

Very good point. Capfriendly would be a good resource! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Good place to start would be to look at teams bound to lose a D in the upcoming expansion draft but lacking forwards ;)

 

 

Nashville might be a target for some sort of deal like this. With both right wingers Smith(4.25M) and Granlund(5.75M) being UFAs they could use a cheaper option at RW in the top 9.

 

They got two similar D in Fabbro and Carrier. Both offensive/smaller right handers. Fabbro has more potential but Carrier has gotten better statistically year by year in the AHL. I would definitely target Fabbro. They have another RD prospect in Allard too, overall good pool and they might be able to afford to ship a guy like Fabbro out.

 

Preds and Canucks could be good partners.

Edited by Junkyard Dog
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

 

Nashville might be a target for some sort of deal like this. With both right wingers Smith(4.25M) and Granlund(5.75M) being UFAs they could use a cheaper option at RW in the top 9.

 

They got two similar D in Fabbro and Carrier. Both offensive/smaller right handers. Fabbro has more potential but Carrier has gotten better statistically year by year in the AHL. I would definitely target Fabbro. They have another RD prospect in Allard too, overall good pool and they might be able to afford to ship a guy like Fabbro out.

 

Preds and Canucks could be good partners.

Cheers. A guy like Fabbro would work nicely!

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...
×
×
  • Create New...