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

Jake Virtanen | #18 | RW


Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said:

So, if it comes to that, whether or not he will want to stay will be determined if he wants to stay home at a cheap deal or if he wants a bigger payday. 

 

I could see Stecher coming back cheaper more so in this sort of scenario but IDK about Virtanen.

 

Still a risk to lose RFAs for nothing but we will have to see what the trade market is for these sort of guys. Perhaps it may come to us having to not qualify Stecher/Virtanen.

If he’s qualified but another team signs him then the Canucks get draft picks based on the salary don’t they? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm guessing Benning uses the 'we're disappointed'/lack of consistency/commitment/covid cap/you want to stay in your home town with your 'crew' leverages and signs him to a 'discounted' $2-$2.5m deal. Then when Podkolzin shows up a couple months in to next season when he's done in the K, he's HEAVILY shopped (barring a miraculous maturation)

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

I'm guessing Benning uses the 'we're disappointed'/lack of consistency/commitment/covid cap/you want to stay in your home town with your 'crew' leverages and signs him to a 'discounted' $2-$2.5mdeal. Then when Podkolzin shows up a couple months in to next season when he's done in the K, he's HEAVILY shopped (barring a miraculous maturation)

Agree with the bolded part. But don't agree that he will be heavily shopped next season, even if/when Pods shows up, unless his season is a big disappointment. I still remember Big Bert, who had shown no more consistency or production by this age than Jake has. And who started to break out the next year.

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

Agree with the bolded part. But don't agree that he will be heavily shopped next season, even if/when Pods shows up, unless his season is a big disappointment. I still remember Big Bert, who had shown no more consistency or production by this age than Jake has. And who started to break out the next year.

Barring miraculous maturation, I don't think management view him as 'Canuck material'.

 

On 9/14/2020 at 10:04 AM, aGENT said:

Yup.

 

I honestly think the organization is either out of, our damn close to, out of patience waiting for him to get it. You can only put so many resources, time, coaching etc in to a player that doesn't want to do their part. Particularly with other players steadily coming in both behind you (prospects), and ahead of you (adding Miller, Toffoli etc). If you're not going to put the work required in, your going to get squeezed out. Plain and simple.

 

They also seem to have a very firm idea of what makes for a championship calibre team. And that's character guys who will 'work harder than everybody else' to get any edge they can and be the best version of the player they can be. Jake has a lot of valuable tools and assets... But that's not him.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think Jake is going to get even stronger. He still has peach fuzz on his face. Some guys mature at a different rate. He has gotten better each year and I believe he is on the cusp of a 50+ point season.

Tuch was in his 3rd Playoffs, so that is not a fair comparison. The trade Jake stuff seems like a knee jerk fan reaction.

 

Don't trade Jake unless the return is a middle RHD or we will regret it.

  • Hydration 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Jared McCann signing for slightly under 3 million would probably be used as a benchmark if he goes to Arbitration.

 

Now, who here on this board, thinks that Jake is currently a 3 million per year player? I'm not talking about potential, I'm talking about current engage level and overall performance on the ice.

 

He has tons of potential, he just really needs to up his engage.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, VegasCanuck said:

Jared McCann signing for slightly under 3 million would probably be used as a benchmark if he goes to Arbitration.

 

Now, who here on this board, thinks that Jake is currently a 3 million per year player? I'm not talking about potential, I'm talking about current engage level and overall performance on the ice.

 

He has tons of potential, he just really needs to up his engage.

 

If you looked at his regular season, I'd say he's firmly in $3M territory, but his playoff performance was sorely lacking.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, -AJ- said:

If you looked at his regular season, I'd say he's firmly in $3M territory, but his playoff performance was sorely lacking.

If he was playing with any type of consistency, I'd agree with you. He has the capability, just lacks a 200 foot game and only really good offensively if he's in top 6. Put him on the 3rd line and he's ineffective. 

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, VegasCanuck said:

If he was playing with any type of consistency, I'd agree with you. He has the capability, just lacks a 200 foot game and only really good offensively if he's in top 6. Put him on the 3rd line and he's ineffective. 

That's like saying if you put BB6 or Petey on the 3/4th line or for similar big men, i.e. Bertuzzi, Pastranak, Tkachuk on the 3rd/4th lines, they will most likely be ineffective too (although Petey might be the exception thou, haha). I am not trying to compare Jake to anyone of the aforementioned players but I am just trying to say that some players are offensive players and only play better when given an offensive role. Although his body is fit for a 3/4th line role, it doesn't mean he has to play on that line. However, if he is put on the top 6 and doesn't even produce, then you can say we have a problem. However, he has played decent from being on the 1st line all to way to the 4th line while being better on the first two lines.

Edited by Law of Goalies
Link to post
Share on other sites

PSA: Come to terms with the fact that we are going to be getting rid of Virtanen this season and he will go on to have a 30 goal season. Be at peace with the fact that he didn't have the mental maturity to accomplish this in his hometown.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Law of Goalies said:

That's like saying if you put BB6 or Petey on the 3/4th line or for similar big men, i.e. Bertuzzi, Pastranak, Tkachuk on the 3rd/4th lines, they will most likely be ineffective too (although Petey might be the exception thou, haha). I am not trying to compare Jake to anyone of the aforementioned players but I am just trying to say that some players are offensive players and only play better when given an offensive role. Although his body is fit for a 3/4th line role, it doesn't mean he has to play on that line. However, if he is put on the top 6 and doesn't even produce, then you can say we have a problem. However, he has played decent from being on the 1st line all to way to the 4th line while being better on the first two lines.

If you put a fire hydrant with Petey,it probably scores 20 goals...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been frustrated by Jake's play for years, but it's still a scary thought trading him and him going on to really do something with another team. It's like he's on the cusp on becoming that player. He's not expensive, they need to get rid of Eriksson, Sutter and Roussel more so than Jake. I wonder about his attitude, coming to camps out of shape. Do his team mates really like him? I know that if I've been busting my butt training for the upcoming season and the young local star shows up unprepared, and then gets caught at a night club during the pandemic, I'd be pretty pi**ed. But still, he has that skill set. Canucks are caught between a rock and a hard place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree it’s a bit scary trading him but it’s not a Neely situation, back then it was easy to make a mistake because of lack of secondary coaching and development but today it’s not like u are gonna just get a gem in the rough. It obviously happens here and there but I believe JV has had his chance and it’s time to part ways. If he can turn it around it will not be with Vancouver so good riddance you lazy sack of ......

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, VegasCanuck said:

If you put a fire hydrant with Petey,it probably scores 20 goals...

For minimum NHL wage, I will stand it front of the net and screen, take the abuse. let EP bounce pucks off me and i can backcheck better than a hydrant, (I might not appear to be moving any faster than a hydrant next to a NHL player though) but when i get 20 goals i  get a good raise, and take the hometown discount too :)

  • Hydration 2
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...