Angry Goose Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 not one person has "jumped off the boat". Where do you get this crap from? Would you be happy if he was producing at a 3p/g pace? Yes. So why is it that its not okay to be kinda bummed when hes producing at less than point per game while the rest of his team seems so be scoring no problem? because your expectations are too high given his time away. Don't see the need to jump on the guy so soon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2SKATES1STICK Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 (edited) I bet if JV was on another team people would be hyping him up to be the next Perry. But since he's on the Canucks our fans are convinced he can only be a third liner.\ because its been a LONG time since we had a 1st rounder turn into anything Edited November 18, 2014 by 2SKATES1STICK 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VanGnome Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Jake Virtanen with 10 points in 11 games (3g 7a) after missing an entire summer of training due to shoulder surgery and rehab... is just fine in my books. Also, he's only played in 11 games. He has nearly the same Pts/g clip (0.91) as the teams top scorer, Adam Tambellini who has 21 points in 20 games (0.95). I'm more concerned with Virtanen regaining his timing, and if he can manage a near 1.00 pts/g clip while doing so then that's a bonus. Once everything lines up for him (hopefully by the WJC) he will start to dominate the WHL once again. Next season we should see a huge rise in his point totals (which at that point, as an overager is to be expected), the key is him working on his consistency. No multiple games between getting points, etc. Jake's just fine, and in 2-3 I expect him to be fully ready to play for the Canucks on a full time basis, which by that time the Sedins will be our bonafide 2nd line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rollieo Del Fuego Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 because your expectations are too high given his time away. Don't see the need to jump on the guy so soon no fighting Gooses, bird fighting has been outlawed... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger-Hearted Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 (edited) JV is going to be just fine. I think several people thought that "JV's back!" after his 2g/3pt night in just his second game back. Then, the rust of not having a full summer of training starts to rear its ugly head. Let's be encouraged that JV's shoulder has healed nicely since he checked his opponent over the boards in that one game a couple of weeks ago. GREAT hit. I bet that once he gets going offensively, the Nylander talk will die down. Edited November 18, 2014 by Tiger-Hearted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boxiebrown Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 LA has good players that are big, fast, and play with an edge. Nylander is neither big, nor plays with an edge. It's not just about taking the player that has the most skill. It's a package of a bunch of different qualities. LA gets that, and that's why they're as good as they are now. Please show me the evidence that smaller teams can't beat bigger teams. The size fetishism on CDC is truly bizarre. Like, guys, the Boston series was 3.5 years ago and we didn't lose because we were "small." It's time to move on. LA doesn't win because they're "big" and "play with an edge." They win because they possess the hell out of the puck. Some of their players use size to do that, some use skill. We should acquire players that will help us be just as good as possessing the puck as LA. It really isn't rocket science. The funny thing is that even LA doesn't actually believe in this size obsession. They draft based on offensive production and puck skills, and if they player is also big, it's a bonus. For example, they drafted 5'9 Spencer Watson in the 7th round, who scored a PPG in junior. Meanwhile, we were drafting "big" dudes who are marginal CHL players. I wonder which strategy will work out better? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
73 Percent Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 (edited) no fighting Gooses, bird fighting has been outlawed...only if gambling is involved. Wild bird scraps are encouraged. Edited November 18, 2014 by Gooseberries Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boxiebrown Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Well you completely contradicted yourself with your argument. You make one claim that Nylander is a better player because of his stats, yet say that Benn is a better player than Backstrom despite Backstrom having far superior numbers to Benn over his career. (including a 101 point season). Again, you can't seem to separate skill with an overall game. Your only basis that Nylander is better is because of stats, yet I doubt you've watched him play a single game in the SHL. I've seen some of the assists he's getting over there, and they're not exactly all star plays. Yes, Virtanen is putting up average numbers after coming back from surgery, but in almost every game he's making an impact through his physical play. That's the difference between a player who just puts up points, and one who can contribute when they're not putting up points. There's no doubt that Nylander has more raw skill, but skill alone doesn't equal being better. I'm glad Benning realizes that. It's a huge misconception that "skill" players can only contribute by scoring. I agree that ideally you want two-way players. But skill players can be great defensive players. Look at Backstrom and Datsyuk, for example, or Plekanec. These are all guys who use positioning, speed and skill to be very effective defensive players. A lot of people also seem to conflate "physical" with "solid defensively." Finishing your checks is great and all, but it's actually a very small part of the game. The best "physical" forwards use their size and strength to control the puck and contribute on offence. So in that way, if a so-called physical player is not putting up numbers, they're also not really contributing much. Of course, some physical players are also excellent defensive players (Kopitar, Hanzal, Getzlaf, etc.) But again, size is just a tool they use, and there are other tools that can accomplish the same thing. We shouldn't be afraid of drafting skill players, as they can be just as effective two-way players as bigger guys. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Guest Dasein Posted November 18, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted November 18, 2014 The funny thing is that even LA doesn't actually believe in this size obsession. They draft based on offensive production and puck skills, and if they player is also big, it's a bonus. For example, they drafted 5'9 Spencer Watson in the 7th round, who scored a PPG in junior. Meanwhile, we were drafting "big" dudes who are marginal CHL players. I wonder which strategy will work out better? Congrats you found one diminutive LA prospect taken in the 7th round in 2014 out of the 10 players they selected in that draft - all others were 6'0" or taller. 2014 LA draft picks (1/10 under 6'0"): http://www.nhl.com/ice/draftsearch.htm?year=2014&team=LAK&position=&round= 2013 LA draft picks (0/7 under 6'0"): http://www.nhl.com/ice/draftsearch.htm?year=2013&team=LAK&position=&round= 2012 LA draft picks (1/6 under 6'0"): http://www.nhl.com/ice/draftsearch.htm?year=2012&team=LAK&position=&round= 2011 LA draft picks (0/6 under 6'0"): http://www.nhl.com/ice/draftsearch.htm?year=2011&team=LAK&position=&round= 2010 LA draft picks (1/5 under 6'0"): http://www.nhl.com/ice/draftsearch.htm?year=2010&team=LAK&position=&round= 2009 LA draft picks (2/10 under 6'0"): http://www.nhl.com/ice/draftsearch.htm?year=2009&team=LAK&position=&round= 2008 LA draft picks (4/9 under 6'0"): http://www.nhl.com/ice/draftsearch.htm?year=2008&team=LAK&position=&round= 2007 LA draft picks (4/10 under 6'0"): http://www.nhl.com/ice/draftsearch.htm?year=2007&team=LAK&position=&round= In the last 5 years, they've drafted a total of 3 players under 6'0" out of 34 selections, or 5 out of 44 in the last 6 years. In that span, Jordan Weal was the earliest taken at 70th overall (3rd round) - the rest were taken in the 5th, 6th or 7th round - also known as the crap shoot. The last time LA took a 1st rounder under 6'0" was in 2007 - Thomas Hickey. LA takes size into consideration in picks that matter. The only player under 6'0" on their recent championship roster was Mike Richards. Don't give that "LA's strategy is based on offensive production and skill" crap because they definitely take size into consideration. They might take a flyer on a small guy with the 7th round pick (and their 9th of 10 selections) in a draft, but they're not taking anybody with that size in draft picks that matter. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I'm Your Huckleberry Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Please show me the evidence that smaller teams can't beat bigger teams. The size fetishism on CDC is truly bizarre. Like, guys, the Boston series was 3.5 years ago and we didn't lose because we were "small." It's time to move on. LA doesn't win because they're "big" and "play with an edge." They win because they possess the hell out of the puck. Some of their players use size to do that, some use skill. We should acquire players that will help us be just as good as possessing the puck as LA. It really isn't rocket science. The funny thing is that even LA doesn't actually believe in this size obsession. They draft based on offensive production and puck skills, and if they player is also big, it's a bonus. For example, they drafted 5'9 Spencer Watson in the 7th round, who scored a PPG in junior. Meanwhile, we were drafting "big" dudes who are marginal CHL players. I wonder which strategy will work out better? Size plays a HUGE role in why LA is a possession beast. Obviously size isn't everything but if you don't think it's a significant factor you're out to lunch. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWMc1 Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Please show me the evidence that smaller teams can't beat bigger teams. The size fetishism on CDC is truly bizarre. Like, guys, the Boston series was 3.5 years ago and we didn't lose because we were "small." It's time to move on. LA doesn't win because they're "big" and "play with an edge." They win because they possess the hell out of the puck. Some of their players use size to do that, some use skill. We should acquire players that will help us be just as good as possessing the puck as LA. It really isn't rocket science. The funny thing is that even LA doesn't actually believe in this size obsession. They draft based on offensive production and puck skills, and if they player is also big, it's a bonus. For example, they drafted 5'9 Spencer Watson in the 7th round, who scored a PPG in junior. Meanwhile, we were drafting "big" dudes who are marginal CHL players. I wonder which strategy will work out better? LA has 6 players under 200 lbs. Vancouver has 14. Size is definitely a factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avelanch Posted November 18, 2014 Author Share Posted November 18, 2014 (edited) Jake Virtanen with 10 points in 11 games (3g 7a) after missing an entire summer of training due to shoulder surgery and rehab... is just fine in my books. Also, he's only played in 11 games. He has nearly the same Pts/g clip (0.91) as the teams top scorer, Adam Tambellini who has 21 points in 20 games (0.95). I'm more concerned with Virtanen regaining his timing, and if he can manage a near 1.00 pts/g clip while doing so then that's a bonus. Once everything lines up for him (hopefully by the WJC) he will start to dominate the WHL once again. Next season we should see a huge rise in his point totals (which at that point, as an overager is to be expected), the key is him working on his consistency. No multiple games between getting points, etc. Jake's just fine, and in 2-3 I expect him to be fully ready to play for the Canucks on a full time basis, which by that time the Sedins will be our bonafide 2nd line. next season he will be 19, which is NOT an overager.... overagers are kids eligible to play in the ahl (20 by dec 31st of that season), but are returned or continue to play in the chl. Edited November 18, 2014 by avelanch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger-Hearted Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 no fighting Gooses, bird fighting has been outlawed... At least, there wasn't any 'fowl' language involved. Lol. Not allowed on CDC. It's a huge misconception that "skill" players can only contribute by scoring. I agree that ideally you want two-way players. But skill players can be great defensive players. Look at Backstrom and Datsyuk, for example, or Plekanec. These are all guys who use positioning, speed and skill to be very effective defensive players. A lot of people also seem to conflate "physical" with "solid defensively." Finishing your checks is great and all, but it's actually a very small part of the game. The best "physical" forwards use their size and strength to control the puck and contribute on offence. So in that way, if a so-called physical player is not putting up numbers, they're also not really contributing much. Of course, some physical players are also excellent defensive players (Kopitar, Hanzal, Getzlaf, etc.) But again, size is just a tool they use, and there are other tools that can accomplish the same thing. We shouldn't be afraid of drafting skill players, as they can be just as effective two-way players as bigger guys. Great hockey teams have a balance of both size and skill. If a team has shorter but highly skilled and fearless guys like a Gallagher, a St.Louis, a Theo Fleury, and a Tony Tanti(for us old-time Canucks fans), then those very teams need the likes of big guys with a skill set who use their size to their advantage as well as providing room for their shorter and skilled linemates. If JV and Nylander played on the same line together, provided if they were teammates, they would make a dynamic duo. For the record, Nylander is not short. He's listed as 5'11". Just needs to bulk up more muscle to his 169 lb frame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Sestito Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Nylander is taking a shit on the SHL right now. Better numbers than the Sedins, Steen etc. While I think that Nylander will turn into a better player, I'm going to hope Virtanen turns into the better player. Think Virtanen will do better as a rookie than Nylander will Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toews Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 (edited) The size obsession always rears its head when a team that has a lot of it wins the Cup. It happened when the Ducks won the Cup, the Bruins won and the Kings won. The fact of the matter is that for a well balanced team you need a good mix of both. My Hawks are easily one of the softest teams in the league. The Kings most definitely have a size advantage on them but we still beat them once and took them to game 7 last year. Size is definitely a factor when you look at a prospect but to use it as a sole reason to prop one guy over the other is also not smart. Its funny the people that suggest it don't realize that they are actually giving Benning and Virtanen less credit when doing so. The Canucks didn't draft Virtanen because he was a few inches taller, that is ridiculous. They drafted him because they believe he will the better player. Now that not might be today or even next year but lets give it some time before we make our judgements. Edited November 18, 2014 by Toews Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VanGnome Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 next season he will be 19, which is NOT an overager.... overagers are kids eligible to play in the ahl (20 by dec 31st of that season), but are returned or continue to play in the chl. I forgot he was a late birthday, still my reasoning stands, and that points won't be an issue for him next season. I wonder, how many games constitutes as a "full season" in the AHL? He played 9 games during the regular season, then 5 games in the post season during the 2011-2012 season for the Hitmen. If that counts, this technically would be his 4th season in the WHL, which would allow him to play next season in the AHL as a 19 year old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wshdrvvn Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Virtanen was a mission statement pick, if you will. When they made the selection, JB was basically saying "these are the type of guys we will build around going forward". Canucks need more size, sure. But look at Utica. Our big/skilled players aren't NHL ready yet. It takes time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avelanch Posted November 18, 2014 Author Share Posted November 18, 2014 all the agreement says is "Players drafted and playing for CHL teams are ineligible to play in the professional minor leagues (AHL, ECHL) until they are 20 years old (by December 31st of that year) or have completed four years in major juniors." it doesn't say how many games consist as a year. I think he might be AHL eligible next season... i'll have to look deeper into it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2SKATES1STICK Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Virtanen is a point off of p/g pace and he's coming off of major offseason surgery. I fail to see why theres a need to be worried. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wshdrvvn Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 all the agreement says is "Players drafted and playing for CHL teams are ineligible to play in the professional minor leagues (AHL, ECHL) until they are 20 years old (by December 31st of that year) or have completed four years in major juniors." it doesn't say how many games consist as a year. I think he might be AHL eligible next season... i'll have to look deeper into it. He'll be 20 on august 17th, 2016. so AHL eligible in the 2016-17 season i believe? He was the youngest player in the draft if i remember correctly. at least the youngest of the first rounders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now