Jake Virtanen | #18 | RW

[Jester13]

1 hour ago, Wolfgang Durst said:

Aside from conditioning and work ethic there is a issue with his  consistency.  Based  on one user's comment he showed great  performance in  some  games and in  some games he was one of the worst player's on the ice. (must have been a comment a few pages ahead of this current page). A user who saw some games in Utica this season. Well, I think it's disppointing when a player selected #6 overall does not show the necessary work ethic. I am pretty curious how he is going to look like with proper conditioning and work ethic. As Willie Desjarding puts it: Time will tell.

I think consistency is an issue even for most veterans, so it is certainly something he will have to also work on. 

 

He looked great the last month or more of the season, flying passed the other team like they were standing still. He also started to get a few points once paired with some better players, and I think the large amount of competition with the likes of our newly acquired young guys will do Jake wonders in trying to prove himself. His shot is top-notch like Boeser's.

 

The work ethic thing for a high draft pick is definitely disappointing, but he showed last year that he got the message; of course, as I mentioned previously, if he comes to camp out if shape again then my hope for him is lost. 

 

Some posters on here, tho, just look at his point totals last year and get so worried that he will never amount to anything. I look at his point totals his first year he stuck with us as well as his new-found professionalism and I feel quite confident that he will surprise all the naysayers. It will not surprise me one bit to see him become a solid 2nd line winger for us.

 

The pick is high risk, big reward, but if he does pan out for us, he is the kind of player we need in a playoff push. I like the Nylander- and Elhers-type players, but i would rather have someone like Jake throwing his weight around in a game 7 than a smaller skilled player--which we have plenty of already--disappearing when we need him the most. We didn't have a Jake-type player in our lineup, so I trust Benning's judgment. 

 

The moral of the story for me is that Jake is showing improvement where he needed it most, and trending up is all we can ask for. And, yes, time will tell, indeed. 

 

Edited May 21, 2017 by Jester13

[Rob_Zepp]

9 hours ago, The 5th Line said:

I understand the process just fine and if he is only scoring at .29 ppg pace in his draft +3 I have the right to be disappointed.  It doesn't mean I am disappointed with the end result, I am just disappointed with how he is currently producing.  Should I have not of been excited with Brock Boeser with his first two seasons at UND?  Because according to the process he could just as easily fade away and not amount to anything at the pro level.  

 

I am very confused with your take on all of this.

On that bolded above, we can both agree.   On the rest, I doubt it so let it go.

[Alflives]

1 hour ago, Jester13 said:

I think consistency is an issue even for most veterans, so it is certainly something he will have to also work on. 

 

He looked great the last month or more of the season, flying passed the other team like they were standing still. He also started to get a few points once paired with some better players, and I think the large amount of competition with the likes of our newly acquired young guys will do Jake wonders in trying to prove himself. His shot is top-notch like Boeser's.

 

The work ethic thing for a high draft pick is definitely disappointing, but he showed last year that he got the message; of course, as I mentioned previously, if he comes to camp out if shape again then my hope for him is lost. 

 

Some posters on here, tho, just look at his point totals last year and get so worried that he will never amount to anything. I look at his point totals his first year he stuck with us as well as his new-found professionalism and I feel quite confident that he will surprise all the naysayers. It will not surprise me one bit to see him become a solid 2nd line winger for us.

 

The pick is high risk, big reward, but if he does pan out for us, he is the kind of player we need in a playoff push. I like the Nylander- and Elhers-type players, but i would rather have someone like Jake throwing his weight around in a game 7 than a smaller skilled player--which we have plenty of already--disappearing when we need him the most. We didn't have a Jake-type player in our lineup, so I trust Benning's judgment. 

 

The moral of the story for me is that Jake is showing improvement where he needed it most, and trending up is all we can ask for. And, yes, time will tell, indeed. 

 

We've seen fat Jake and fit Jake.  Fat Jake is crappy.  Fit Jake is great.  We need him to be fit Jake.

[Putgolzin]

6 hours ago, guntrix said:

 

Like someone on HFBoards said, only two players with Jake's trajectory have gone on to become NHL regulars. 

I'm interested to hear more about that, any chance you remember who those players were?

[Rob_Zepp]

8 hours ago, guntrix said:

Process? Calm down there Gillis. You do understand that players like Virtanen are more likely to end up on the 4th line than in the top six right? You should probably go read up on boom/bust ratios of power forwards before talking about the "process."

 

It's people like you who then go on to nonsensically compare his trajectory to that of Bertuzzi and Benn.

 

Like someone on HFBoards said, only two players with Jake's trajectory have gone on to become NHL regulars. The probability statistics are there and we're using those to make our points instead of throwing out obscure terms like the "process."

 

Expectations should be tampered to reflect what Jake has shown so far. I'd be ecstatic if he became a regular 4th line player. 

"People like you".   You know nothing about me.   You clearly know less about developing young hockey players.   Having been in his shoes in my own life and been surrounded by many others, I have somewhat of a clue who is likely to make it and who isn't.   NOTHING is a lock and even McDavid could still crash and burn ala some injury issue and someone like Rodin becomes a 30 goal NHL scorer - both unlikely but both can happen.   With the player of topic for this thread, he simply had no idea how to play as a professional as it was so easy for him against teenagers.   He got a wake up call, got the step in the right direction he needed under Green and now the rest is patience by team and hard work by him.   He could easily fail, sure, but his combination of size, speed and overall "edge" are unique combinations that don't show up more than once every five to ten years for any team and I contend with the strides he made this year, he is going to have an awful lot of those burying him already eating a lot of crow.

[Toews]

3 minutes ago, nzan said:

I'm interested to hear more about that, any chance you remember who those players were?

One of them is Ben Eager. I forget who the other player was.

[Alflives]

2 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

"People like you".   You know nothing about me.   You clearly know less about developing young hockey players.   Having been in his shoes in my own life and been surrounded by many others, I have somewhat of a clue who is likely to make it and who isn't.   NOTHING is a lock and even McDavid could still crash and burn ala some injury issue and someone like Rodin becomes a 30 goal NHL scorer - both unlikely but both can happen.   With the player of topic for this thread, he simply had no idea how to play as a professional as it was so easy for him against teenagers.   He got a wake up call, got the step in the right direction he needed under Green and now the rest is patience by team and hard work by him.   He could easily fail, sure, but his combination of size, speed and overall "edge" are unique combinations that don't show up more than once every five to ten years for any team and I contend with the strides he made this year, he is going to have an awful lot of those burying him already eating a lot of crow.

You win this debate, hands down.  I would add that Jake has all the tools to become a great player like you mention, but he's also mean.  We need his meanness.  

[Kaner]

10 hours ago, Drewismyname said:

Kinda like Hodgson? 

 

Maybe it has a bit to do with the culture? Nevermind, you wouldn't understand. You've probably never made a big whopper meal now have you? Try aassociating with Mcdonalds while trying to be a pro athlete and you'll feel right at home with Virtanen.

 

Yea. I love misery. I love having a losing team. I want to break down and humiliate every person we sign so their bank account is the only thing that looks good. 

 

Once this team ends the " i " culture, we will win. Just like Boston, Chicago, Detroit, and so on. 

 

 

end of thread. Oh, I'm sorry, did I make you uncomfortable exposing the absolute disgustingness that the rest of the league holds their noses at that is the culture of "canucks nation"? The one all of you trolls are fighting JB for trying to change? 

 

My bad. I guess u have to think of some one else next time you buy your happy meal. Maybe yourself? 

No, but you're mom has

[Toews]

6 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

"People like you".   You know nothing about me.   You clearly know less about developing young hockey players.   Having been in his shoes in my own life and been surrounded by many others, I have somewhat of a clue who is likely to make it and who isn't.   NOTHING is a lock and even McDavid could still crash and burn ala some injury issue and someone like Rodin becomes a 30 goal NHL scorer - both unlikely but both can happen.   With the player of topic for this thread, he simply had no idea how to play as a professional as it was so easy for him against teenagers.   He got a wake up call, got the step in the right direction he needed under Green and now the rest is patience by team and hard work by him.   He could easily fail, sure, but his combination of size, speed and overall "edge" are unique combinations that don't show up more than once every five to ten years for any team and I contend with the strides he made this year, he is going to have an awful lot of those burying him already eating a lot of crow.

No one really cares about your credentials on an anonymous online forum. Maybe if you could tell us which NHL team or even major junior team you are employed with, we will actually take your unqualified boasts seriously. Till then you are just a pleb like the rest of us giving your opinion on a player from the seat of your couch.

 

Also I did find it funny that the demonstration of your superior hockey mind included the statement that McDavid could get injured and "crash and burn". Wow such a hot take, none of us had even considered the possibility that a player could get hurt playing one of the most physical sports in the world.

[guntrix]

2 hours ago, nzan said:

I'm interested to hear more about that, any chance you remember who those players were?

Here's the post:

 

Quote

I don't know why anyone who thinks the odds are stacked against Virtanen becoming a solid NHLer is a "spin artist". The fact is, Virtanen managed only 0.29 pts/g. Among 1st rounders taken in the last 20 years who managed under 0.4 pts/g (so the upper cutoff is nearly 40% higher production than what Virtanen managed), here's a list of guys who ended up hitting the 200 game mark in the NHL:

Ben Eager
Colby Armstrong

A few other guys like Gaunce, Etem, and Danault might get there, but that's about it. There's just very few instances where a player struggled as much as Virtanen did this year but ended up becoming a quality NHLer. Yeah he didn't look too bad at times last season in the NHL, but even then that was one of the poorest 19 year old seasons in recent history. There are only 3 guys since 2000 to put up less offense than Virtanen at 19 and stay in the NHL: Niederreiter (who unlike Virtanen had an excellent 20 year old AHL season) and a couple of defensive centers in Sutter and Wilson.

Virtanen's entire career since being drafted is full of red flags. The real spin is in discounting those.

Considering the fact that it's based purely on historical data, I'd say he makes quite a solid argument.

2 hours ago, Alflives said:

You win this debate, hands down.  I would add that Jake has all the tools to become a great player like you mention, but he's also mean.  We need his meanness.  

No one wins anything until we see who's right about Jake. I don't think it's that hard to comprehend. I'd love to be wrong and for Jake to be one of the very few exceptions.

[Dannydog]

30 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

"People like you".   You know nothing about me.   You clearly know less about developing young hockey players.   Having been in his shoes in my own life and been surrounded by many others, I have somewhat of a clue who is likely to make it and who isn't.   NOTHING is a lock and even McDavid could still crash and burn ala some injury issue and someone like Rodin becomes a 30 goal NHL scorer - both unlikely but both can happen.   With the player of topic for this thread, he simply had no idea how to play as a professional as it was so easy for him against teenagers.   He got a wake up call, got the step in the right direction he needed under Green and now the rest is patience by team and hard work by him.   He could easily fail, sure, but his combination of size, speed and overall "edge" are unique combinations that don't show up more than once every five to ten years for any team and I contend with the strides he made this year, he is going to have an awful lot of those burying him already eating a lot of crow.

cheers, well said. If jake was on another team some here would try to be trading tanev for him saying his size, his hitting ,his grit, his speed, Oh and hes a vancouver kid maybe he just needs a change of scenery and he'll be a gem.

 

[Toews]

5 minutes ago, Dannydog said:

cheers, well said. If jake was on another team some here would try to be trading tanev for him saying his size, his hitting ,his grit, his speed, Oh and hes a vancouver kid maybe he just needs a change of scenery and he'll be a gem.

I don't know about anyone else but I would absolutely not advocate trading our best defenseman for Jake no matter which team he played for. 

 

EDIT: Also IMO anyone who cites geography as a reason to acquire a player is someone that isn't worth taking seriously.

 

EDIT2: I was totally thinking of Don Cherry with the comment on geography. 

Edited May 21, 2017 by Toews

[Drewismyname]

2 hours ago, Kaner said:

No, but you're mom has

Okay so acting like a child is the answer to being treated like one. Fair enough.

 

She actually has tho it was wendys LoL

[Alflives]

2 hours ago, guntrix said:

Here's the post:

 

Considering the fact that it's based purely on historical data, I'd say he makes quite a solid argument.

No one wins anything until we see who's right about Jake. I don't think it's that hard to comprehend. I'd love to be wrong and for Jake to be one of the very few exceptions.

You're data is gonzo wrongzo.  What about kids that don't play in the NHL until their early Twenties, like Johnny Hockey?  Jake is big, fast, skilled, and mean.  His issue was he was a fatty.  Now that he realizes he needs to be in shape, he will become a force.  And it happens this season.  If Jake was fit and sucked, that would be an issue.  He sucked because he was fat.  He's going to score 20 this season.

[Ichiban604]

24 minutes ago, Alflives said:

You're data is gonzo wrongzo.  What about kids that don't play in the NHL until their early Twenties, like Johnny Hockey?  Jake is big, fast, skilled, and mean.  His issue was he was a fatty.  Now that he realizes he needs to be in shape, he will become a force.  And it happens this season.  If Jake was fit and sucked, that would be an issue.  He sucked because he was fat.  He's going to score 20 this season.

Also because of his maturity and his low IQ to process the game at a higher level

[ilduce39]

11 minutes ago, Alflives said:

You're data is gonzo wrongzo.  What about kids that don't play in the NHL until their early Twenties, like Johnny Hockey?  Jake is big, fast, skilled, and mean.  His issue was he was a fatty.  Now that he realizes he needs to be in shape, he will become a force.  And it happens this season.  If Jake was fit and sucked, that would be an issue.  He sucked because he was fat.  He's going to score 20 this season.

Have any prospects in that Canucks army tool actually followed Jake's career trajectory thus far?  IIRC that tool uses age, size and production to show success and failure.... but how authentic is Jake's previous season considering he was out of shape, gifted a spot on the roster, hurt his shoulder, deployed in limited minutes, scratched, unceremoniously (and seemingly in a surprise move to him) busted down to the AHL.  How many "relevant matches" then?

 

In the AHL Green didn't coddle him into an offensive role to make him feel good - he busted his butt on a fitness program, worked his way up the lineup and worked on developing a "pro" game rather than relying on his shot and being bigger and faster than most opponents.  That's a ton of progress that doesn't show up on the score sheet - and that progress and attitude is why we should all keep an open mind.

 

From highlights, he still relied on his shot too much so there's a much more room to grow offensively - if Green/Willie can get Baer to drive to the net, hopefully they can teach Jake to do it too.  He's already shown the ability to be a good hitter/checker/puck hound at the NHL level in his first year.

 

I'm not saying anything new, but the fact remains the upcoming year will be infinitely more authentic for predicting Jake's NHL success than the last one - and if he keeps the momentum from last year going over the summer I like his chances.

[Alflives]

1 hour ago, Ichiban604 said:

Also because of his maturity and his low IQ to process the game at a higher level

Anyone in today's hyper speed game would appear to have low IQ if they were fat.  

[Alflives]

1 hour ago, ilduce39 said:

Have any prospects in that Canucks army tool actually followed Jake's career trajectory thus far?  IIRC that tool uses age, size and production to show success and failure.... but how authentic is Jake's previous season considering he was out of shape, gifted a spot on the roster, hurt his shoulder, deployed in limited minutes, scratched, unceremoniously (and seemingly in a surprise move to him) busted down to the AHL.  How many "relevant matches" then?

 

In the AHL Green didn't coddle him into an offensive role to make him feel good - he busted his butt on a fitness program, worked his way up the lineup and worked on developing a "pro" game rather than relying on his shot and being bigger and faster than most opponents.  That's a ton of progress that doesn't show up on the score sheet - and that progress and attitude is why we should all keep an open mind.

 

From highlights, he still relied on his shot too much so there's a much more room to grow offensively - if Green/Willie can get Baer to drive to the net, hopefully they can teach Jake to do it too.  He's already shown the ability to be a good hitter/checker/puck hound at the NHL level in his first year.

 

I'm not saying anything new, but the fact remains the upcoming year will be infinitely more authentic for predicting Jake's NHL success than the last one - and if he keeps the momentum from last year going over the summer I like his chances.

You write far better than me, but you said what I was trying to.  Jake's been a fatty, and out of shape forever.  Seeing him in shape, and under 210 posters will be shocked into realizing just how good Jake is.

[Hemsky]

Nylander won MVP at the WHC today. Great first season in the nhl and continued international success. He could have been a canuck. Daily reminder. 

[GoBoGo53]

12 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Anyone in today's hyper speed game would appear to have low IQ if they were fat.  

Virtanen's low hockey IQ goes beyond poor fitness. He doesn't think the game in the same way other picks around him do. Ehlers, Draisaitl, Reinhart, Nylander all have elite hockey IQ and can drive offense. Plays die on Virtanen's stick quite frequently, and I can't remember how many times he skates in and aimlessly shot it at the goalie's crest. Or in the World Juniors with Canada on the powerplay, he takes a stupid penalty to negate the man advantage. Or his poor use of his team mates in general. It's the primary thing holding him back and has been a problem his whole career, a major reason guys like Button had him ranked in the 2nd round.

 

Speaking of Nylander, he just won MVP of the world championship. Gonna regret that pick for the next 10 years atleast. shame.