Jake Virtanen | #18 | RW

[CANUCK-EXPRESS]

21 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Can we stop using the term hockey iq?

 

Seriously...it's old.  It's bad and it's dumb.  It's used to reference a player that has done a move pass or shot so many times in their life it is second nature.  To some people it looks like a "smart hockey play" but it isn't.  It's a hockey play that they've been doing their entire lives which was seen doen or perfected by a player before them.

 

Hockey IQ

 

Let's list 5 great players with true hockey IQ shall we

 

Gordie Howe

Wayne Gretzky

Bobby Orr

Sidney Crosby

Niklas Lidstrom

Bonus players* Hank/Daniel Sedin.

 

Aside from orr all of these guys are averagely built hockey players.  They all have what most would say are high hockey IQ for reading the play etc.  You set the bar there and then trend downwards.  Now do yourself a favour.  Name 5 more current players with that insane near clairvoyant sense of knowing where the puck will be, where a player will be for a pass where the goalie will move.

 

You'll be hard pressed too because the myth of hockey IQ is just that a myth.  90% of all hockey players make it in the league by honing reflexes, plays and specific muscle memories to ensure they compete at that highest levels.  But truly intelligent hockey players are ridiculously rare.

 

So to sit and call Virtanen someone with "low hockey iq" is simply showing yourself to not know wtf you are really saying.  90% of all NHL players don't have "high hockey iq" but instead play how they've been trained to play their entire careers.  Some are faster, some have a shade more peripheral vision.  Some are larger.

 

But truly intelligent or high iq players are so exceedingly rare that the term is now used to reference someone who has a few good seasons, has solid chemistry with a linemate or has that perfect shot.

 

So can we please stop referencing this term to either prop someone up or hold someone down.  The truly high iq players as stated are beyond rare and they rarely end up being those amazing goal scorers but instead drive the play via passes smart defensive plays or the like and benefit from having players with less iq and more straight forward approaches as much as those low iq players benefit from them.

Hank and Danny are perfect examples of this.  Hank is a truly high IQ player, Danny is a perfectly suited example of a player who is smart but doesn't have that same high sense that Hank has but still shines above others.  We've seen them benefit from straight forward players yet fail miserably with "high iq" players

 

So again, please...can we stop using that term guys?

 

Virtanen is a kid pure and simple.  he'll put it together soon enough and those expecting him to do it NOW or basing it all off of 20-30 NHL games and a junior tournament are just an indicative example of the fast food me first instant gratification mind set that is so prominent in the world today.  Relax, let him grow and stop expecting immediate results from everything.

it is not how things work.  A truly high iq player or person would know that...

I've had enough of the Hockey IQ conversation as well. Everyone knows from juniors and when he got drafted that Jake's IQ is not great. Let's focus on what he can do and critique him there.

[McCannon]

26 minutes ago, The 5th Line said:

No actually If I end up being wrong I will be happy.  You think I want Jake to fail?

We'll wait a couple years and we will see who is wrong, hopefully it's me.

The point is exactly that, wait 3-4 years to wait to see what we have before  you whine that he's only a 3rd liner

You just argued against yourself.

[Ihatetomatoes]

1 hour ago, Warhippy said:

Can we stop using the term hockey iq?

 

Seriously...it's old.  It's bad and it's dumb.  It's used to reference a player that has done a move pass or shot so many times in their life it is second nature.  To some people it looks like a "smart hockey play" but it isn't.  It's a hockey play that they've been doing their entire lives which was seen doen or perfected by a player before them.

 

Hockey IQ

 

Let's list 5 great players with true hockey IQ shall we

 

Gordie Howe

Wayne Gretzky

Bobby Orr

Sidney Crosby

Niklas Lidstrom

Bonus players* Hank/Daniel Sedin.

 

Aside from orr all of these guys are averagely built hockey players.  They all have what most would say are high hockey IQ for reading the play etc.  You set the bar there and then trend downwards.  Now do yourself a favour.  Name 5 more current players with that insane near clairvoyant sense of knowing where the puck will be, where a player will be for a pass where the goalie will move.

 

You'll be hard pressed too because the myth of hockey IQ is just that a myth.  90% of all hockey players make it in the league by honing reflexes, plays and specific muscle memories to ensure they compete at that highest levels.  But truly intelligent hockey players are ridiculously rare.

 

So to sit and call Virtanen someone with "low hockey iq" is simply showing yourself to not know wtf you are really saying.  90% of all NHL players don't have "high hockey iq" but instead play how they've been trained to play their entire careers.  Some are faster, some have a shade more peripheral vision.  Some are larger.

 

But truly intelligent or high iq players are so exceedingly rare that the term is now used to reference someone who has a few good seasons, has solid chemistry with a linemate or has that perfect shot.

 

So can we please stop referencing this term to either prop someone up or hold someone down.  The truly high iq players as stated are beyond rare and they rarely end up being those amazing goal scorers but instead drive the play via passes smart defensive plays or the like and benefit from having players with less iq and more straight forward approaches as much as those low iq players benefit from them.

Hank and Danny are perfect examples of this.  Hank is a truly high IQ player, Danny is a perfectly suited example of a player who is smart but doesn't have that same high sense that Hank has but still shines above others.  We've seen them benefit from straight forward players yet fail miserably with "high iq" players

 

So again, please...can we stop using that term guys?

 

Virtanen is a kid pure and simple.  he'll put it together soon enough and those expecting him to do it NOW or basing it all off of 20-30 NHL games and a junior tournament are just an indicative example of the fast food me first instant gratification mind set that is so prominent in the world today.  Relax, let him grow and stop expecting immediate results from everything.

it is not how things work.  A truly high iq player or person would know that...

I don't get this, don't use the word hockey iq but yet you used it repeatedly to explain how guys like the Sedins are great, what other word would you like to use to explain how guys like the Sedins are great because they play smart and have that instinct on knowing where to go and what's going to happen? Or explain how a guy like Booth can have all the tools to be a great player but can't figure out how to use those tools. What word would you prefer because it is a thing, some players are smarter than others, some players have better instincts than others, it's nice to have a word to use for this. Please tell what word you prefer 

[Alflives]

2 hours ago, The 5th Line said:

I reaalllyyyy hope you weren't talking about me here?  I don't hate Jake and you never "smacked me down".

 

 

 

Quite the taddle tail in elementary school weren't ya?  

My criticism towards Jake has been justified, he continues to regress but yet I am the bad guy for actually admitting it? and I'm the bad guy for mentioning the fact that Jake has a low hockey IQ even though many hockey experts have stated the same thing, and I have on numerous occasions asked posters to name me ONE player Jakes age who has a lower IQ than him and everybody just ignores the questions because they know they can't answer it.  I'm the bad guy for stating facts.

Last night was just the second game this season where I was actually impressed with what I saw.  2/20    

Is it being critical of JVs performance thus far that causes the ire of CDC, or is it the often stated "Nylander and Ehlers" would have been better picks because they will be elite NHL offensive stars that is the issue.  For myself, it's this comparison, while stating our JV will be less of a contributor to a Cup team than those other two.  I don't have issue with criticism of any of our players.

Edited January 11, 2016 by Alflives

[canuckledraggin]

4 minutes ago, The 5th Line said:

 

I said it has helped me come to a conclusion along with many other factors.

 

 

Gotcha. So a jr. tournament in which he underperformed, his draft +1 season (mentioning surgery and a shortened season would be making excuses though right?), his 2 games in the AHL this year plus the handful of games he played in the Calder playoffs last year (Even though he was out of shape coach Green was still playing him in the 2nd and 3rd rounds of the playoffs). And 20 NHL games in which he's averaging less than 10 minutes TOI.

Are there other factors? Does he get winded easily riding a stationary bike or something?

My point remains that any conclusion that you come to is based on incomplete information. 

 

 

[Warhippy]

1 hour ago, Ihatetomatoes said:

I don't get this, don't use the word hockey iq but yet you used it repeatedly to explain how guys like the Sedins are great, what other word would you like to use to explain how guys like the Sedins are great because they play smart and have that instinct on knowing where to go and what's going to happen? Or explain how a guy like Booth can have all the tools to be a great player but can't figure out how to use those tools. What word would you prefer because it is a thing, some players are smarter than others, some players have better instincts than others, it's nice to have a word to use for this. Please tell what word you prefer 

You read the whole comment right?

 

I stated very clearly that truly high iq players are very rare yet so many use that term to describe everyone.  Truly high iq players are pass first individuals that usually don't stand out physically at all.  I listed a few of them.

 

people use Virtanen as an example of a "low iq" player yet never reference truly high iq players to off set their statements.  

 

You can call it instincts, call it an arc loop within the frontal cortex as was referenced with Wayne Gretzky back in the day to explain why he was so great.  Bottom line is that people throw the term around like is an end all be all when i can look at the league right now and list 7 maybe 8 players out of what, 700 in the NA pro leagues(?) that are truly high iq players where others simply are faster, stronger, or have a better shot or put it all together with solid line mates that can offset their deficiencies and make them and their partners better as a whole.

 

Would Virtanen fall in to the supposed high iq category?  No, probably not.  but then again so do over 600 or more other players in the NHL/AHL right now. People overuse that term to justify their opinions.

 

I am not saying that truly intelligent players do not exist.  Obviously they do, but to overuse that word to single out one player or somehow claim that they are dificient because of it at age 19 (barely) is truly a sad argument with literally NO basis of fact because there IS no professional league body of work to fall on to justify their statements.

 

Booth, Booth is the protoypical example foa  guy who could not ut it together, beach, White and more who had all the physical attributes but couldn't make it work.  At the same time, Schroeder, Hodgson, Brule and even more supposed High IQ players couldn't make it work either, and that is with their supposed "high iq" people speak of.

 

Simply put, my statement is that people are overusing that term and overusing it in foolish ways.  Jake may not currently stand out as an "intelligent" hockey player, but then neither do hundreds of others who have made solid NHL careers, some even championships because of it.

 

Let's...lets think of it like the "all that and a bag of chips" statement, or rockstar parking.  Overused, rarely used correctly and simply put.  Annoying.

 

Better?

[Warhippy]

1 hour ago, The 5th Line said:

Exactly.  Ignore Booth as an example and just use Jake.

NHL skater, NHL shot, NHL size and strength.  Goes to the WJHC and can only produce 1 assist 0 goals.  He must be lacking something then?  I wonder what that could be

Exactly, ignore his age, ignore everything else about him.  Justify your "opinion" by hinting towards the term hockey IQ and use a banged up year in junior after major shoulder surgery and of course a WJC to back it up because you've nothing else even though ALL of the stats barring his point totals say exactly otherwise.

 

Let's write him off as nothing more than a bottom 6 player at age 19 because we don't have a professional level resume to speak of, instead use only his junior record.  Good call.

 

By that statement the literally hundreds of players with marginal WJCs  and terrible first couple of seasons in the NHL who broke out a shade later were all...justifiably written off at young ages.

 

You need to give it a rest man, you've literally no pro level resume to speak of keep hinting at his wjc and last year in juniors as though somehow that will dictate his entire future "but I hope he proves me wrong" statements because ya just don't like him.

 

It's fine.  but please just stop.  We don't need to see you brow beating him using the same talking points poorly every third post.  Take a week off, enjoy sometime away from your computer or phone.  You'll feel better

[Alflives]

1 hour ago, The 5th Line said:

Exactly.  Ignore Booth as an example and just use Jake.

NHL skater, NHL shot, NHL size and strength.  Goes to the WJHC and can only produce 1 assist 0 goals.  He must be lacking something then?  I wonder what that could be

Experience and confidence.

[Warhippy]

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

Experience and confidence.

+1 to you good sir.  

[Alflives]

Just now, The 5th Line said:

I was asking what he was lacking during the WJHC, but alright. 

Experience and confidence.  He lacked the experience to accept that he couldn't win a hockey game all by himself.  As a result, he tried too hard and lost confidence with his overall game.  He will be a better player for us for this lesson.

[MJDDawg]

4 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Can we stop using the term hockey iq?

 

Seriously...it's old.  It's bad and it's dumb.  It's used to reference a player that has done a move pass or shot so many times in their life it is second nature.  To some people it looks like a "smart hockey play" but it isn't.  It's a hockey play that they've been doing their entire lives which was seen doen or perfected by a player before them.

 

Hockey IQ

 

Let's list 5 great players with true hockey IQ shall we

 

Gordie Howe

Wayne Gretzky

Bobby Orr

Sidney Crosby

Niklas Lidstrom

Bonus players* Hank/Daniel Sedin.

 

Aside from orr all of these guys are averagely built hockey players.  They all have what most would say are high hockey IQ for reading the play etc.  You set the bar there and then trend downwards.  Now do yourself a favour.  Name 5 more current players with that insane near clairvoyant sense of knowing where the puck will be, where a player will be for a pass where the goalie will move.

 

You'll be hard pressed too because the myth of hockey IQ is just that a myth.  90% of all hockey players make it in the league by honing reflexes, plays and specific muscle memories to ensure they compete at that highest levels.  But truly intelligent hockey players are ridiculously rare.

 

So to sit and call Virtanen someone with "low hockey iq" is simply showing yourself to not know wtf you are really saying.  90% of all NHL players don't have "high hockey iq" but instead play how they've been trained to play their entire careers.  Some are faster, some have a shade more peripheral vision.  Some are larger.

 

But truly intelligent or high iq players are so exceedingly rare that the term is now used to reference someone who has a few good seasons, has solid chemistry with a linemate or has that perfect shot.

 

So can we please stop referencing this term to either prop someone up or hold someone down.  The truly high iq players as stated are beyond rare and they rarely end up being those amazing goal scorers but instead drive the play via passes smart defensive plays or the like and benefit from having players with less iq and more straight forward approaches as much as those low iq players benefit from them.

Hank and Danny are perfect examples of this.  Hank is a truly high IQ player, Danny is a perfectly suited example of a player who is smart but doesn't have that same high sense that Hank has but still shines above others.  We've seen them benefit from straight forward players yet fail miserably with "high iq" players

 

So again, please...can we stop using that term guys?

 

Virtanen is a kid pure and simple.  he'll put it together soon enough and those expecting him to do it NOW or basing it all off of 20-30 NHL games and a junior tournament are just an indicative example of the fast food me first instant gratification mind set that is so prominent in the world today.  Relax, let him grow and stop expecting immediate results from everything.

it is not how things work.  A truly high iq player or person would know that...

How could you forget Mario????

[Alflives]

4 minutes ago, The 5th Line said:

Ohh okaay I was thinking maybe he was experienced considering he won a gold medal on the team a year before and I thought he would have some confidence considering he was sent to a junior tournament after playing the start of this season in the NHL.  But yeah your reasoning makes much more sense.  Looks like I was wrong again

I don't think you're wrong.  On the contrary, your opinion carries merit.  JV should have learned from his experiences last season.  He's young though, and may have been thinking he was an NHL player and it would be a one man show.  He lacked not the experience of playing at the WJC, but the experience of being an NHL player going back to Junior.  He thought he could do too much by himself.  I know you like Nylander.  I think he did the same as JV, and that's why he got clocked.  He took a puck from the wall to the centre of the ice in the neutral zone, something he wouldn't do in the AHL, because he'd get his head ripped off.  He thought he could do it because he was back in Junior.  I think both these guys know it's a team game to be always played the right way, no matter the level.  I think both JV and WN will be better team players for their experiences.  

[McCannon]

4 hours ago, The 5th Line said:

It works both ways, pal.  I'm not allowed to express my opinion for another 3-4 years but you are?   Yeah let's stay off the prospects page until all of these kids are 23/24.  Cool 

No I am just not going to bitch 24/7 like a kid who didn't get a ribbon about a friggen 19 yr old hockey player

Maybe find a hobby?

[McCannon]

4 minutes ago, The 5th Line said:

Look how defensive and mad you are getting..if anyone here is the B word it's you.  

You have been on this forum for a couple weeks and you are constantly fighting with people.  Stop crying, it's gunna be okay. 

Mad? LOL

Is that a troll technique? Isn't that the equivalent of  you mad bro? it is isn't it? LOL....every time you post you prove me right Captain of the trolling boat!

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/your-online-secrets/201409/internet-trolls-are-narcissists-psychopaths-and-sadists

https://darkpsychology.co/internet-trolls/

Get some help kid - just trying to help you move past the denial stage and address your issues. You'll be better off for it when you do

Wow troll number 6 added to my list, have a 7th coming shortly too!  The junior b superstar who's too good for his coaches! LOL...I guess that's why he never got paid to play the game and I did!

Edited January 11, 2016 by McCannon

[Gaudette Celly]

12 hours ago, McCannon said:

Sportlogiq tracks a stat they called “successful forechecking plays,” which includes successful blocked passes, stick-checks and body checks in the offensive zone. Virtanen leads the Canucks by this category, though as a team the Cancuks rank 23rd in the NHL.

This is one of the things I've really noticed.  Not just the hits but Jake's speed and great first step gets him to the puck in the O-zone regularly before others, whether when loose or stripping it from a defender.  Once he gets a good playmaker with him to pick up his retrievals and learns where to position himself, being an offensive contributor will not be an issue. 

Patience, we got a good one.

[Toews]

1 hour ago, McCannon said:

Mad? LOL

Is that a troll technique? Isn't that the equivalent of  you mad bro? it is isn't it? LOL....every time you post you prove me right Captain of the trolling boat!

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/your-online-secrets/201409/internet-trolls-are-narcissists-psychopaths-and-sadists

https://darkpsychology.co/internet-trolls/

Get some help kid - just trying to help you move past the denial stage and address your issues. You'll be better off for it when you do

Wow troll number 6 added to my list, have a 7th coming shortly too!  The junior b superstar who's too good for his coaches! LOL...I guess that's why he never got paid to play the game and I did!

I find it funny that you have only been here for 6 weeks and you have already blocked 6 people. I have been on here for 6 years and have never felt the need to block anyone. But then again I am not a loose cannon who feels the need to go off on people for daring to disagree with them. 

Stay long enough and the whole forum probably ends up on your block list. All because you can't handle disagreement. You are like Brick Tamland on roid rage.

[Caknuckle Puck]

8 hours ago, Wild Sean Monahan said:

And last night, his usual critics were nowhere to be found when he's playing well (as per usual). This is what gets tiresome for me.

.. those are stupid canuck fans for you, I wish I had a google chrome add on to filter out these idiots lol, just skip them they don't know how to be real supportive fans

[Sean Monahan]

19 minutes ago, Caknuckle Puck said:

.. those are stupid canuck fans for you, I wish I had a google chrome add on to filter out these idiots lol, just skip them they don't know how to be real supportive fans

I've no issue with posters critiquing our young players but they should acknowledge  when the youngsters play well too. Virtanen was a stand out player in the first period yesterday but the naysayers were dead silent.

[N4ZZY]

I still believe that Virtanen's going to be a top six forward. 

And until he's proven to me that he isn't going to be, I'm gonna hold out hope. 

Offensively, if he's scoring 50-60 points a year. That's gold. Worth a 6th overall pick, top six forward. That's a win in my books. 

Let's hope he can develop into such a player! 

 

[wshdrvvn]

10 hours ago, Wild Sean Monahan said:

I've no issue with posters critiquing our young players but they should acknowledge  when the youngsters play well too. Virtanen was a stand out player in the first period yesterday but the naysayers were dead silent.

The silence is acknowledgement enough for me.