Was Virtanen mismanaged here?

[Fred65]

16 minutes ago, timberz21 said:

Short answer, yes both.

 

Long answer, Canucks' mismanagement had little impact on his overall development, Virtanen's mismanagement of himself had a bigger weight for underachieving.  IMO bottom line is, Virtanen has no hockey IQ.  His elite speed and heavy shot was enough to dominate at the junior level, but in the NHL that is not enough.  He never had the hockey sense to elevate his game at the pro level.  So, in the end, had the Canucks better managed him, the results would barely be any different, IMO.

 

As I recalll Virtanen was kept in Vcr because they felt he was not getting any help with the Hitmen and needed to get him out of that enviroment

[250Integra]

Jake is due for a raise this season. It'll likely cost the team $2.5 - 3 million to keep him for the next 3 years or so.

 

If you're Benning, do you spend that money on retaining some of your other key free agents and slide in MacEwan for a full-time position? or do you keep hoping that Jake will pan out in the next year or so, turning this contract into a steal. It's a pretty big risk seeing as we are hoping to keep Markstrom, Toffoli, and Tanev with limited cap space.

 

Unless Jake signs for $2.00 million or less on another 1-2 year "show-me" deal, I think he is a goner. 

 

 

[Fanuck]

1 hour ago, 250Integra said:

 or do you keep hoping that Jake will pan out in the next year or so, turning this contract into a steal.

 

 

I'm wondering what people thought Jake was going to be if they're still asking if he'll 'pan out'?  IMO, he's already panned out into they player he's going to be (minus some refinement to his game with more coaching/experience).  He's a 20'ish goal scorer who can play up/down the line-up and be physical at times.  I don't think he was ever advertised as anything more than that - was he? 

[oldnews]

If the question were "has he been / or is he being mismanaged" it wouldn't tend to imply the drama, as if he's already gone....

 

however - "he won't learn it here..."  = is maybe just a bit too much crap-goggling.

 

"Was he mismanaged?"..... fatalistic/dramatic/past tense....and probably not just semantics given the rest of the OP.

 

He's still being managed.   Until the facts are otherwise, Virtanen is still a Canuck.

[Fred65]

2 hours ago, Fanuck said:

I'm wondering what people thought Jake was going to be if they're still asking if he'll 'pan out'?  IMO, he's already panned out into they player he's going to be (minus some refinement to his game with more coaching/experience).  He's a 20'ish goal scorer who can play up/down the line-up and be physical at times.  I don't think he was ever advertised as anything more than that - was he? 

This is what management thought he's be

 

 

[Law of Goalies]

13 hours ago, timberz21 said:

Short answer, yes both.

 

Long answer, Canucks' mismanagement had little impact on his overall development, Virtanen's mismanagement of himself had a bigger weight for underachieving.  IMO bottom line is, Virtanen has no hockey IQ.  His elite speed and heavy shot was enough to dominate at the junior level, but in the NHL that is not enough.  He never had the hockey sense to elevate his game at the pro level.  So, in the end, had the Canucks better managed him, the results would barely be any different, IMO.

 

IMHO, even in the long answer, I think the effect of management might have made a difference in the results. For example, in his first year, he was hitting everyone like crazy and yes, he was out of position at times, but that made us all love him. I remember watching the hits highlights and 90% was from Jake. Afterwards, the 2nd year he came in, he was super fat (it was reported that management told him to get "bigger", not sure how much context is true or not true but he did come in "bigger" and maybe there was no guidance on how to become "bigger"). He was then demoted to AHL where he shed so much weight that he was ripped by the end of the season (good for Green). The third year, he didn't come in out of shape and was still fit from his days in the AHL and made the team. Didn't have a good year as he was adjusting back to NHL life. By the end of the third year, he stated in the season ending press conference, he will work on his skill set. He went out and found Pavel Barber and was learning and doing sick moves with the puck. Therefore, in the fourth year, he didn't come in out of shape and scored in the first or second game of the season on a breakaway and everyone was freaking out. He then finished the season with 15 and 10. This season, he came in and missed a few targets (as mentioned before, his targets might have been super high and he didn't meet it), but in no ways was he "FAT". He improved again and got 18 and 18. For the restart, he was not reported "fat" but only immature for clubbing and not joining the team earlier, therefore, his timing was off that even Tanev toe dragged him. Throughout his NHL days, he has been playing through the lineup and I don't think I have seen him with the same line mates for more than 5 games. It is like working for 8 different colleagues and not being able to get any type of chemistry with them.

 

However, after year 1 and that suspension, he has tried to be physical but two reasons have made him a bit tentative which is 1. the suspension might have got to his head and 2. every time he did something wrong, he would be benched and seems to have a shorter leash than other players. In addition, he has to learn the two way game which I'm sure he wasn't required to do so in juniors. 

 

Furthermore, he didn't help his own cause too especially in the first few years where he would be partying too much, hanging out with Biebs and banging Chloe Moretz and even now, he is still partying (before the bubble) and doing stupid stuff. I don't mind him going drinking but he shouldn't have due to COVID.

 

Therefore, I do think it is a bit of both.

[samurai]

On 9/9/2020 at 11:53 PM, timberz21 said:

Jake's biggest problem is between the ears.  He has no hockey sense or IQ.  He was blessed with a heavy shot and blazing speed in junior, and with his size made looks like he could dominate immature players.  Eventually, that caught up with him.  He rode that wave of his draft year after scoring 45 goals, but went downhill from there.  His draft +1 year was suppose to be a dominant one and it was disappointing, same with his 2 WHJC stint.  You could see the regression in those 2 years and was never able to figure things out at the professional level either.  After this, my expectation for him were lowered, but I still thought he could become that physical presence as a middle 6 players, with an eye for the net, but I think that ship as sailed also.  He'll be a tweener at best, bouncing from teams to teams as a bottom 6 players for a few more years, IMO.

 

His career path reminds me a lot of Benoit Pouliot.

Agreed.  If you watch his WHL highlight package his goals all look the same for the reasons you explained.   Not sure why the scouts never saw that as a warning.  

[Ferlands_Head]

11 hours ago, Fred65 said:

This is what management thought he's be

 

 

This video would make a lot more sense if it was the 2019 draft and they were talking about Podkolzin. 

[timberz21]

On 9/9/2020 at 10:53 AM, timberz21 said:

Jake's biggest problem is between the ears.  He has no hockey sense or IQ.  He was blessed with a heavy shot and blazing speed in junior, and with his size made looks like he could dominate immature players.  Eventually, that caught up with him.  He rode that wave of his draft year after scoring 45 goals, but went downhill from there.  His draft +1 year was suppose to be a dominant one and it was disappointing, same with his 2 WHJC stint.  You could see the regression in those 2 years and was never able to figure things out at the professional level either.  After this, my expectation for him were lowered, but I still thought he could become that physical presence as a middle 6 players, with an eye for the net, but I think that ship as sailed also.  He'll be a tweener at best, bouncing from teams to teams as a bottom 6 players for a few more years, IMO.

 

His career path reminds me a lot of Benoit Pouliot.

23 hours ago, timberz21 said:

Short answer, yes both.

 

Long answer, Canucks' mismanagement had little impact on his overall development, Virtanen's mismanagement of himself had a bigger weight for underachieving.  IMO bottom line is, Virtanen has no hockey IQ.  His elite speed and heavy shot was enough to dominate at the junior level, but in the NHL that is not enough.  He never had the hockey sense to elevate his game at the pro level.  So, in the end, had the Canucks better managed him, the results would barely be any different, IMO.

 

 

 

15 hours ago, Fred65 said:

This is what management thought he's be

 

 

This video pretty much confirms what I had been saying about Jake, his speed, shot and physicality made him a threat in junior.  However, lack of hockey IQ prevented him to translate that to the pro level, where guys are bigger, faster and goalie better.  Without the hockey IQ he was never able to elevate his game to compensate for the higher level of competition.

 

Hockey IQ is probably the hardest thing to evaluate and make projection about a young player.  Can't blame the Canucks for liking the toolset of Virtanen as a junior player, can't blame them either for not seeing how bad is hockey IQ would develop or in this case not develop.  

 

 

[Fred65]

5 hours ago, timberz21 said:

 

 

This video pretty much confirms what I had been saying about Jake, his speed, shot and physicality made him a threat in junior.  However, lack of hockey IQ prevented him to translate that to the pro level, where guys are bigger, faster and goalie better.  Without the hockey IQ he was never able to elevate his game to compensate for the higher level of competition.

 

Hockey IQ is probably the hardest thing to evaluate and make projection about a young player.  Can't blame the Canucks for liking the toolset of Virtanen as a junior player, can't blame them either for not seeing how bad is hockey IQ would develop or in this case not develop.  

 

 

We do all understand that scouting prospects does not end at seeing a few games. They interview the guy, his coach, his team mates, school friend, teachers etc etc. They also follow up his family life and life style. They go to incredible length to check the guy out. As a rule they only get one first round pick every year and you better be right about your choice

[JaboVancouver]

I do believe there was a level of mismanagement with Jake, but in the end I believe it was just a poor decision to draft him. When they drafted him they were really in a tough spot. He wasn't ready for the NHL, but he obviously had gotten as much out of junior hockey as he could. The Canucks best 1st round picks have all been players outside of the CHL. Boeser, Petey and Hughes were all able to go and continue to develop against older competition in the NCAA and the SHL. This allowed them all to be more NHL ready, and much more confident when they got to the NHL having played against men. You are seeing it again with Hoglander in the SHL. Hopefully Podkolzin gets more of a shot in the KHL as this season moves on.  Jake's option were to go continue to play against players as young as 16 with the Hitmen where he wasn't continuing to develop the necessary skills and habits to play in the NHL or come straight to the Canucks where they could monitor him closely. I am not sure if 2 more years in the CHL would have made Jake anymore ready for the pro game and what he is going through now was sort of inevitable. 

 

In the end Jake just hasn't had the maturity off the ice and the hockey sense on it to make the most out of his tools at the NHL level to this point. Could things change? Maybe, but that is on Jake to make the proper commitment to become a better pro. That isn't just doing what is expected, but going above and beyond. That means simple work ethic and consistency both on and off the ice.

[Hockey101]

On 9/8/2020 at 4:11 PM, tas said:

no, he's just a bad pro. 

 

at lower levels he was always able to skate by on his physical tools and to a lesser extent his talent, but unfortunately his lack of hockey sense and poor work ethic become glaring in the NHL.

lack of hockey sense i dont see it, i really don't the kid great vision positions himself well defensively. Yeah ill admit he lacks a little intensity maybe dosnt take the game as seriously as some would like but i think with a different set of coaches Jake could flourish really are coaches never played a physical game and don't coach a physical game I think early in Jakes career he got a lot of flack for getting outta position chasing the big hit to where now he 's not looking to hit. Jake needs a coach that wants him to play physical dosnt mind if he gets caught outta position occasonally and plays him consitantly cause Jake will produce if you go ice time to points Jakes one of the top producers on this team hell he already is with a lack of ice time. If were looking for a 1st rounder BB gotta be on the block although he's part of that team chemistry but geez he's sure regressed and dont see much intensity there either. I take Jake over Brock.

[tas]

13 minutes ago, Hockey101 said:

lack of hockey sense i dont see it, i really don't the kid great vision positions himself well defensively. Yeah ill admit he lacks a little intensity maybe dosnt take the game as seriously as some would like but i think with a different set of coaches Jake could flourish really are coaches never played a physical game and don't coach a physical game I think early in Jakes career he got a lot of flack for getting outta position chasing the big hit to where now he 's not looking to hit. Jake needs a coach that wants him to play physical dosnt mind if he gets caught outta position occasonally and plays him consitantly cause Jake will produce if you go ice time to points Jakes one of the top producers on this team hell he already is with a lack of ice time. If were looking for a 1st rounder BB gotta be on the block although he's part of that team chemistry but geez he's sure regressed and dont see much intensity there either. I take Jake over Brock.

sorry, too much word salad for me to rebut point by point, but I feel like that's a pretty inaccurate take. 

[EdgarM]

16 hours ago, timberz21 said:

 

 

This video pretty much confirms what I had been saying about Jake, his speed, shot and physicality made him a threat in junior.  However, lack of hockey IQ prevented him to translate that to the pro level, where guys are bigger, faster and goalie better.  Without the hockey IQ he was never able to elevate his game to compensate for the higher level of competition.

 

Hockey IQ is probably the hardest thing to evaluate and make projection about a young player.  Can't blame the Canucks for liking the toolset of Virtanen as a junior player, can't blame them either for not seeing how bad is hockey IQ would develop or in this case not develop.  

 

 

Yeah OK, 43 goals in the last 3 seasons in the NHL playing limited minutes on the 3rd and 4th lines? Seems like it never translated alright. Give me  break! 

[Law of Goalies]

On 10/1/2020 at 6:28 AM, tas said:

sorry, too much word salad for me to rebut point by point, but I feel like that's a pretty inaccurate take. 

Lol

[NorthWestNuck]

I’ve said it before, the only people overrating Jake are those who still think he should be a 35+ goal phenom because of his draft rating.

 

He has proven to be a solid (not elite) 3rd liner who can move up and down the roster, pot 15 to 20 goals, draws penalties better then almost anyone on the team, is defensive adequate (not great), can throw the occasional hit, is better at taking away pucks then giving away pucks, and can cause opposing defensemen fits on the forecheck.

 

If he had have been drafted early third round he would be loved by everyone. He is a good option for the third line due to his versatility, and worth the 2.5 to 3 million in my opinion. Maybe not much more, but there would be many more overpaid players then Jake at that cost.

[Law of Goalies]

2 hours ago, NorthWestNuck said:

I’ve said it before, the only people overrating Jake are those who still think he should be a 35+ goal phenom because of his draft rating.

 

He has proven to be a solid (not elite) 3rd liner who can move up and down the roster, pot 15 to 20 goals, draws penalties better then almost anyone on the team, is defensive adequate (not great), can throw the occasional hit, is better at taking away pucks then giving away pucks, and can cause opposing defensemen fits on the forecheck.

 

If he had have been drafted early third round he would be loved by everyone. He is a good option for the third line due to his versatility, and worth the 2.5 to 3 million in my opinion. Maybe not much more, but there would be many more overpaid players then Jake at that cost.

The fact is more than half of the posters here are making it sound like he hasn't improved at all and that he only scores 5 goals a year. 

[EdgarM]

26 minutes ago, Law of Goalies said:

The fact is more than half of the posters here are making it sound like he hasn't improved at all and that he only scores 5 goals a year. 

I agree and I beieve the only thing holding him back is Green. Let the guy work through his growing pains and stop treating him like a minor leaguer. He has improved year over year and the only deficiency I see is his confidence and motivation, which can be directly or indirectly related to how he is treated by the Coach. 

The potential is still there in that he is still young,big, fast and can produce when given the opportunity. Like others said he can play up and down the line up and play various types of games(up tempo,aggressive,trap) when needed. 

Get Coach Green off his back and then see how he blossoms. 

[bree2]

19 minutes ago, EdgarM said:

I agree and I beieve the only thing holding him back is Green. Let the guy work through his growing pains and stop treating him like a minor leaguer. He has improved year over year and the only deficiency I see is his confidence and motivation, which can be directly or indirectly related to how he is treated by the Coach. 

The potential is still there in that he is still young,big, fast and can produce when given the opportunity. Like others said he can play up and down the line up and play various types of games(up tempo,aggressive,trap) when needed. 

Get Coach Green off his back and then see how he blossoms. 

Green has been very fair with Jake, he has treated Jake well, it has been 5 years and he still hasn't grown up. sure he played well for a stretch this past season, and i thought he was on his way, but then he reverts to floating around on the ice like a deer in headlights.  he also looks like he is skating in mud and i don't get that when he is considered one of the fastest on the team,  anyways Green is the coach and i am sure he knows more than what we know about Jake

[EdgarM]

25 minutes ago, bree2 said:

Green has been very fair with Jake, he has treated Jake well, it has been 5 years and he still hasn't grown up. sure he played well for a stretch this past season, and i thought he was on his way, but then he reverts to floating around on the ice like a deer in headlights.  he also looks like he is skating in mud and i don't get that when he is considered one of the fastest on the team,  anyways Green is the coach and i am sure he knows more than what we know about Jake

It's your opinion that he has been treated "very fair" Bree. He still hasn't "grown up"? This concerns an NHL hockey coach how? Are we concerned that he doesn't clean his room as well? Come on, these are pro's who are young and are not perfect either on or off the ice. Its not like he'd robbing banks in his off time. 

Like I stated before, if he comes to work "out of shape" then play him until he drops. I am sure for his own sake he would not want to do that on a regular basis. 

Its like Green is waiting for him to make a mistake or not have a good shift and "BAM" riding the pine he goes. 

He was playing in the top 6 for a short time when your boy "the flow" was not producing and produced at a rate of a point per game when given the opportunity. Then I guess he has a couple of lackluster "shifts" and back to the checking line he goes, while Boeser, who did nothing, gets relegated back into the top 6.

How about playing LE like he matters or can produce offensively to warrant playing in the top 6 on a "REGULAR BASIS". Come on! Really? 

Jake was treated like a minor leaguer early on in his career and was sent to the minors, once he made it to the big club, Green should have been treating him like a Pro as he earned it. 

Since I am chatting with you Bree, I would much prefer Jake on the team over Boeser because if both of them are not producing offensively, Jake can still check, hit and play a defense game which contributes to the teams overall success. Boeser does not contribute much if he is not scoring goals and in the final series in the playoffs, he was non-existant.