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

(Report) Virtanen kicked off his Swiss league team for fighting a teammate on his own bench

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, canuck73_3 said:

It was McCann his attitude sucked too. We just didn’t know Jake’s was trash too until too late. 

 

7 hours ago, DeNiro said:

The whole time Bartkowski’s mom was talking about Virtanen…

 

We always assumed it was McCann with the attitude problems.

 

If only we had listened to her.

The bigger problem here is that no one could tell two 19 year olds to show some respect and buy in for the sake of the team.

 

That's a leadership problem.

 

I don't care if leadership's words cut deep. These punks needed to have their heads shoved up their a$$es.

 

If it's clear no changes will happen then trade them while they still hold value.

Edited by Maginator
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Maginator said:

 

The bigger problem here is that no one could tell two 19 year olds to show some respect and buy in for the sake of the team.

 

That's a leadership problem.

 

I don't care if leadership's words cut deep. These punks needed to have their heads shoved up their a$$es.

 

If it's clear no changes will happen then trade them while they still hold value.

Very good analysis. Who was the Coach then? Why did he tolerate all this bad behavior from some kids?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Coconuts said:

Unpopular opinion: people shit on McCann too much for what he said and how he acted when he was a teenager, as if most people aren't immature or prone to saying things that probably shouldn't be said as teenagers, lot of posters around here are probably fortunate social media wasn't around when they were young and that they didn't have a spotlight shining on them 

 

People put way too much stock in teenage hockey players not acting like mature adults, even if they've had media training or been coached in this or that they're still teenagers  

 

McCann moved on with his life and has proven himself to be worth having

 

Jake got every opportunity in the book, including the slack that came with being a highly picked local guy, but despite all his natural gifts couldn't pull it all together 

 

Seems like he bought his own hype, maybe if he'd gone to a different market he'd have grown up more and made better decisions 

 

It's sad really, I was rooting for him 

Look at 18 year old Sam Bennet. 
He can’t do a single pull-up, he will never make it in the league.

He peaked at 18 he is a bust.

He has transformed into a tough as nails prototypical 2nd line centre, the type of player our club desperately needs. 
The road from the draft is rarely linear, it has peaks and valleys.

Unfortunately for JV the peaks were never very high and the valleys seem bottomless. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Maginator said:

 

The bigger problem here is that no one could tell two 19 year olds to show some respect and buy in for the sake of the team.

 

That's a leadership problem.

 

I don't care if leadership's words cut deep. These punks needed to have their heads shoved up their a$$es.

 

If it's clear no changes will happen then trade them while they still hold value.

What if that was attempted though? What if a coach or a leader of some sort actually did make an attempt to buy into the team?

 

Keep in mind we're talking about someone who you would think by now would have grown up years later. He clearly hasn't though. Perhaps even if your scenario played out, it might not have done anything. There are people like that in this world who are so set in their ways that even a form of leadership won't help.

 

It's easy to make an assumption that a coach or another player didn't do anything, but we don't even know if this is the case. We'll likely never know.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, The Lock said:

What if that was attempted though? What if a coach or a leader of some sort actually did make an attempt to buy into the team?

 

Keep in mind we're talking about someone who you would think by now would have grown up years later. He clearly hasn't though. Perhaps even if your scenario played out, it might not have done anything. There are people like that in this world who are so set in their ways that even a form of leadership won't help.

 

It's easy to make an assumption that a coach or another player didn't do anything, but we don't even know if this is the case. We'll likely never know.

I see where you're coming from. I agree it's not 100% either sides fault. 

 

I do think though to a degree that if we had proper leadership - let's say we were the Pittsburgh Penguins... There would be absolutely zero tolerance for childish behaviour. Virtanen would either find himself smartening up or traded.

 

We haven't been a tightly run organization or have had strong locker room leadership for years. Since the Sedins left.

 

This team was so desperate to be good, and unfortunately this is still the case, that we'll accept anybody regardless of how they are off ice or if there are personality/character issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, the harry said:

Very good analysis. Who was the Coach then? Why did he tolerate all this bad behavior from some kids?

I believe it was Willie D and then Travis Green.

 

When I say leadership I am referring to a mix of coaches and players, especially players wearing letters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Maginator said:

I believe it was Willie D and then Travis Green.

 

When I say leadership I am referring to a mix of coaches and players, especially players wearing letters.

Nah it’s on Jake, and McCann didn’t fully get his shit together until Seattle. Are you going to try and sell me Crosby not being a good leader? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Maginator said:

I see where you're coming from. I agree it's not 100% either sides fault. 

 

I do think though to a degree that if we had proper leadership - let's say we were the Pittsburgh Penguins... There would be absolutely zero tolerance for childish behaviour. Virtanen would either find himself smartening up or traded.

 

We haven't been a tightly run organization or have had strong locker room leadership for years. Since the Sedins left.

 

This team was so desperate to be good, and unfortunately this is still the case, that we'll accept anybody regardless of how they are off ice or if there are personality/character issues.

I think though too, you have to consider who Virtanen's had around during that time and afterwards.

 

His 1st year in Vancouver, the Sedins were playing.

Linden was President at one point when Virtanen was playing here.

Horvat became captain when Virtanen was playing here.

Burrows even was playing at the same time.

 

I could continue that list but hopefully you get the idea. There's been leadership when he was around and there has to be a point where we have to say they did all they could. His more recent issues is proof that even if they tried, it probably wouldn't have changed things.

 

And I challenge what your saying in terms of there being "zero tolerance" on other teams. Would there be? Place Virtanen on the Penguins roster during the same time period. Have him drafted 6th overall by the Penguins instead. Would they have actually been different? We'll likely never know that because we don't have a scenario to really compare with there. It's easy to want to think they would be different, but it might not actually be the case. The Penguins haven't really had high draft picks because they have been a good team. It's just a totally different scenario and not one we can really compare.

 

Think of the Islanders and how they handled Ho-Sang: another prospect with personality issues. Like with Virtanen, they never traded him. They did send him to the minors, but Virtanen was also sent to the minors. Actually, I'd say Ho-Sang was arguably worse than Virtanen since he actually complained about being in the minors and I'm sure there can be points that can be brought up about Ho-Sang. Still though, I think the overall idea there still stands: some prospects just can't be reasoned with.

 

I'll agree that we haven't been a tightly run organization and I'll agree that there were problems with management not pulling a trigger of sorts with these kinds of players. However, I disagree that other teams would have been different because we see this kind of thing happening around the league, especially when it comes to higher end prospects. It's very common for management to be "prideful" of their picks to the point where they don't want to admit their mistakes. Trading those players can ultimately be thought of as that admittance for some. Is it the right way to look at things? Probably not, as if you get a good return then that can cover things up, but pride can get in the way of that.

Edited by The Lock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

Nah it’s on Jake, and McCann didn’t fully get his shit together until Seattle. Are you going to try and sell me Crosby not being a good leader? 

As I mentioned in a previous post it is not 100% on either side. Obviously there's comes a point where you realize you can only do so much to help someone change.

 

It's just a shame it took this team 6 seasons and ZERO assets coming back to realize that Jake was hopeless.

 

As for McCann I'm not sure what point you're trying to make? Seems to me he played well there for three seasons and is only gone due to expansion draft purposes.

Edited by Maginator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, The Lock said:

I think though too, you have to consider who Virtanen's had around during that time and afterwards.

 

His 1st year in Vancouver, the Sedins were playing.

Linden was President at one point when Virtanen was playing here.

Horvat became captain when Virtanen was playing here.

Burrows even was playing at the same time.

 

I could continue that list but hopefully you get the idea. There's been leadership when he was around and there has to be a point where we have to say they did all they could. His more recent issues is proof that even if they tried, it probably wouldn't have changed things.

 

And I challenge what your saying in terms of there being "zero tolerance" on other teams. Would there be? Place Virtanen on the Penguins roster during the same time period. Have him drafted 6th overall by the Penguins instead. Would they have actually been different? We'll likely never know that because we don't have a scenario to really compare with there. It's easy to want to think they would be different, but it might not actually be the case. The Penguins haven't really had high draft picks because they have been a good team. It's just a totally different scenario and not one we can really compare.

 

Think of the Islanders and how they handled Ho-Sang: another prospect with personality issues. Like with Virtanen, they never traded him. They did send him to the minors, but Virtanen was also sent to the minors. Actually, I'd say Ho-Sang was arguably worse than Virtanen since he actually complained about being in the minors and I'm sure there can be points that can be brought up about Ho-Sang. Still though, I think the overall idea there still stands: some prospects just can't be reasoned with.

 

I'll agree that we haven't been a tightly run organization and I'll agree that there were problems with management not pulling a trigger of sorts with these kinds of players. However, I disagree that other teams would have been different because we see this kind of thing happening around the league, especially when it comes to higher end prospects. It's very common for management to be "prideful" of their picks to the point where they don't want to admit their mistakes. Trading those players can ultimately be thought of as that admittance for some. Is it the right way to look at things? Probably not, as if you get a good return then that can cover things up, but pride can get in the way of that.

 

Honestly I think maybe one year of the Sedins (where anything anyone said would have gone in one ear and out the other anyway) might have been worse for him since he then experienced the transition to (and establishing of) a leadership vacuum.  I also doubt Linden being around in the front office dealing with his own battles would have done anything for Virtanen.

 

Linden had three years to learn from Smyl as a young player, in addition to which he was the anti-Virtanen at the outset anyway (had to reschedule an interview with Pat Quinn to help around the farm).

 

Virtanen...is Virtanen.  Maybe a guy like that will start to get some perspective at age 40 or something.

 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

Honestly I think maybe one year of the Sedins (where anything anyone said would have gone in one ear and out the other anyway) might have been worse for him since he then experienced the transition to (and establishing of) a leadership vacuum.  I also doubt Linden being around in the front office dealing with his own battles would have done anything for Virtanen.

 

Linden had three years to learn from Smyl as a young player, in addition to which he was the anti-Virtanen at the outset anyway (had to reschedule an interview with Pat Quinn to help around the farm).

 

Virtanen...is Virtanen.  Maybe a guy like that will start to get some perspective at age 40 or something.

 

While this may be true, I think you have to look at the guys collectively around Virtanen. The Sedins were not the only ones around him and some would be there in the locker room longer than the Sedins. Sedins were also brought back in as management later on. How much that would affect things on the ice, I don't really know, but they were still arguably around.

 

But I think we're still agreeing for the most part about Virtanen: had a lot going for him but just... unteachable.

 

Edit: Actually, I'm wrong with the Sedins. They were there for Virtanen's 1st 3 years, not just his 1st year. That's hard to make an excuse of it being a "transistion year" at that point.

Edited by The Lock
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Maginator said:

As I mentioned in a previous post it is not 100% on either side. Obviously there's comes a point where you realize you can only do so much to help someone change.

 

It's just a shame it took this team 6 seasons and ZERO assets coming back to realize that Jake was hopeless.

 

As for McCann I'm not sure what point you're trying to make? Seems to me he played well there for three seasons and is only gone due to expansion draft purposes.

Main point is far more responsibility and accountability are on the dickheads to stop being dickheads. 
 

Leaders can, do and should tell you how to act and what to expect. After that the onus is on the dickheads to stop being dickheads. 

  • Cheers 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Lock said:

I think though too, you have to consider who Virtanen's had around during that time and afterwards.

 

His 1st year in Vancouver, the Sedins were playing.

Linden was President at one point when Virtanen was playing here.

Horvat became captain when Virtanen was playing here.

Burrows even was playing at the same time.

 

I could continue that list but hopefully you get the idea. There's been leadership when he was around and there has to be a point where we have to say they did all they could. His more recent issues is proof that even if they tried, it probably wouldn't have changed things.

 

And I challenge what your saying in terms of there being "zero tolerance" on other teams. Would there be? Place Virtanen on the Penguins roster during the same time period. Have him drafted 6th overall by the Penguins instead. Would they have actually been different? We'll likely never know that because we don't have a scenario to really compare with there. It's easy to want to think they would be different, but it might not actually be the case. The Penguins haven't really had high draft picks because they have been a good team. It's just a totally different scenario and not one we can really compare.

 

Think of the Islanders and how they handled Ho-Sang: another prospect with personality issues. Like with Virtanen, they never traded him. They did send him to the minors, but Virtanen was also sent to the minors. Actually, I'd say Ho-Sang was arguably worse than Virtanen since he actually complained about being in the minors and I'm sure there can be points that can be brought up about Ho-Sang. Still though, I think the overall idea there still stands: some prospects just can't be reasoned with.

 

I'll agree that we haven't been a tightly run organization and I'll agree that there were problems with management not pulling a trigger of sorts with these kinds of players. However, I disagree that other teams would have been different because we see this kind of thing happening around the league, especially when it comes to higher end prospects. It's very common for management to be "prideful" of their picks to the point where they don't want to admit their mistakes. Trading those players can ultimately be thought of as that admittance for some. Is it the right way to look at things? Probably not, as if you get a good return then that can cover things up, but pride can get in the way of that.

@Maginator Actually, there is arguably a scenario similar in Pittsburgh, just maybe not in a sense of lack of discipline. Pouliot was drafted in 2012 and it took until the 2016-17 season before he was actually traded. The thing is, a change in management occurred since he was drafted; therefore, there would be less attachment to that player and less "pride  when it came time to trade him.

 

Still though, he was traded to us (just to make you more discontent about our management lol) for only Pedan and a 4th: not exactly a good return for an 8th overall pick. He clearly was kept on for too long if any value worth noting was to be returned.

 

But this also assumes that we can lump discipline in the same bucket as performance. Still though, I hope you at least understand where I'm coming from in all of this: just because an organization has been successful, it doesn't mean they're that much different when it comes to holding onto their drafted prospects. There are a ton more examples of this around the league (Dal Colle, Hayden Fleury, etc). Teams are attached to their high draft picks and I'm sure all of these "high end flops" have a different story to tell.

Edited by The Lock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Coconuts said:

Unpopular opinion: people shit on McCann too much for what he said and how he acted when he was a teenager, as if most people aren't immature or prone to saying things that probably shouldn't be said as teenagers, lot of posters around here are probably fortunate social media wasn't around when they were young and that they didn't have a spotlight shining on them 

 

People put way too much stock in teenage hockey players not acting like mature adults, even if they've had media training or been coached in this or that they're still teenagers  

 

McCann moved on with his life and has proven himself to be worth having

 

Jake got every opportunity in the book, including the slack that came with being a highly picked local guy, but despite all his natural gifts couldn't pull it all together 

 

Seems like he bought his own hype, maybe if he'd gone to a different market he'd have grown up more and made better decisions 

 

It's sad really, I was rooting for him 

Wow, did not know Nylander is 200lbs.  That kid really filled out and in hindsight was the player we should've picked.  He took a lot of crap for being a "princess": good for the kid.  I remember wanting Ehlers but was not disappointed by drafting a fast, hard hitting, local PWF. 

 

Shame that he had all the tools and the high point of his career was inialating McDavid in a prospect game.  

 

Sorry coco, quoted the wrong post of yours.

Edited by Petey Castiglione
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...