RW Jake Virtanen - Calgary Hitmen, WHL (2014, 6th overall, Vancouver)

[arsmaster*]

Love this kid. So much grit, speed, and skill.

Even off the ice he's a great character and comes across extremely humble. Good building block for the nucks. I'm curious who you guys value more out of Horvat and Virtanen?

I think it comes down to the type of player each individual prefers.

Many Nuck fans do not prefer two way centerman or power wingers. I think as a player I prefer JV's style more, but as a team builder, I prefer Horvat's.

Clear as mud? Good!

 

[canucks10]

Seems similar to Kreider, correct? Would've looked great on Kesler's wing back in the day.

Thats a pretty good comparison actually has all the same intangibles and plays a similar style

 

[Love]

Love this kid. So much grit, speed, and skill.

Even off the ice he's a great character and comes across extremely humble. Good building block for the nucks. I'm curious who you guys value more out of Horvat and Virtanen?

Toss up for most of us. I think in the Canucks boards Horvat was ranked as our #1 prospect and Virtanen 2nd. Either way it's close and I could see Virtanen becoming the consensus #1 prospect for the Canucks very soon if he isnt already.

 

[InfinityIggy]

I think it comes down to the type of player each individual prefers.

Many Nuck fans do not prefer two way centerman or power wingers. I think as a player I prefer JV's style more, but as a team builder, I prefer Horvat's.

Clear as mud? Good!

Horvat all day everyday. Virtanen is still. A big ? for me.

 

[blendini]

Jake is the kind of player that the Nucks haven't had in years (or maybe ever).

Effective use of his physical size, along with blazing speed and scoring ability; JV is going to be a force in the WC.

Look forward to seeing him in the NHL.

 

[monster_bertuzzi]

Virtanen>Horvat all day. But im glad we have them both.

 

[Mathew Barzal]

I'm still skeptical of his game translating against NHL'rs. Might turn out to be an OK 2nd liner if he pans out.

 

[Sonny21]

 

[drax0s]

Haha. I love the Hitmen backup goalie yelling at him.

 

[Virtanen2Horvat]

Can't wait too see him in the NHL! future top 6:

Virtanen - Strome? - Jensen
Shinkaruk - Horvat - Kassian

Would love to have Strome as a 1C if we manage to draft him. Colin White will probably be our best bet.

 

[Canucks LB]

Holy ****

 

[Zaddy91]

Love this kid. So much grit, speed, and skill.

Even off the ice he's a great character and comes across extremely humble. Good building block for the nucks. I'm curious who you guys value more out of Horvat and Virtanen?

Horvat is captain material and by far my favourite player without an NHL game.

That said, Jake is the better player and I think he can be 1RW no problem.

Definately value Virtanen more

 

[GFY]

On-topic. I feel Virtanen could go one of three directions. He could either end up like a Chris Kreider (And I love the comparison by the way), a David Booth, or a 4th-line crash and banger.

I wasn't hyped for Virtanen when we drafted him. Infact, I didn't want him at all. I feel his lack of great hockey IQ will hold him back from being the elite winger we hope we'll get in him, but I hope he proves me wrong. He has all the other tools to really succeed.

 

[DadBod]

On-topic. I feel Virtanen could go one of three directions. He could either end up like a Chris Kreider (And I love the comparison by the way), a David Booth, or a 4th-line crash and banger.

I wasn't hyped for Virtanen when we drafted him. Infact, I didn't want him at all. I feel his lack of great hockey IQ will hold him back from being the elite winger we hope we'll get in him, but I hope he proves me wrong. He has all the other tools to really succeed.

This "lack of IQ" stuff has got blown out of proportion. It's snowballed by a blurb from a scout questioning his IQ, and wanting him to use his line mates more.

Without going into detail on his young age, shoulder injury, linemates, useage, and special teams play (or lack there of) I think everyone would agree if you can score 40+ goals...your "hockey IQ" is just fine.

 

[Sergei Shirokov]

This "lack of IQ" stuff has got blown out of proportion. It's snowballed by a blurb from a scout questioning his IQ, and wanting him to use his line mates more.

Without going into detail on his young age, shoulder injury, linemates, useage, and special teams play (or lack there of) I think everyone would agree if you can score 40+ goals...your "hockey IQ" is just fine.

Nope.

Junior & NHL are 2 entirely different things, just because you score 40 goals in Junior doesn't mean you will have the hockey IQ to acheive your full potential at the NHL level.

Not saying Virtanen doesn't, I think he could easily be a 30 goal scorer in the NHL one day, but I just don't really agree with your logic here in general.

 

[CanaFan]

Nope.

Junior & NHL are 2 entirely different things, just because you score 40 goals in Junior doesn't mean you will have the hockey IQ to acheive your full potential at the NHL level.

Not saying Virtanen doesn't, I think he could easily be a 30 goal scorer in the NHL one day, but I just don't really agree with your logic here in general.

I tend to agree with the previous poster. Hockey IQ is a broad term that covers a lot of how you think the game - instincts, vision, positioning - and just because a player doesn't rack up enormous assists doesn't mean they lack IQ. To score 45 goals at 17 with 2nd line minutes and PP time indicates to me this kid knows "how" to score goals at a high level. That demonstrates a solid hockey IQ to me. He isn't a playmaker though, no doubt about that.

 

[Sergei Shirokov]

I tend to agree with the previous poster. Hockey IQ is a broad term that covers a lot of how you think the game - instincts, vision, positioning - and just because a player doesn't rack up enormous assists doesn't mean they lack IQ. To score 45 goals at 17 with 2nd line minutes and PP time indicates to me this kid knows "how" to score goals at a high level. That demonstrates a solid hockey IQ to me. He isn't a playmaker though, no doubt about that.

A lack of hockey IQ in Virtanen's case comes from an inability at times to do the correct things with the puck.

Watching him in the U18's, he was really all about the rush and trying to shoot or go for a wrap around, he never seemed to be looking to make a play, he would either try to shoot, or else he would skate himself into a hole & have to settle for a weak wrap around attempt. He would even pass up obvious passes/plays for this.

That's where a lack of hockey sense comes in, in certain situations not being able to slow things down and make the best/better play available.

The logic overall just doesn't always work, its a junior, many players are scorers & point producers in junior then it doesn't translate to the NHL.

 

[CanaFan]

A lack of hockey IQ in Virtanen's case comes from an inability at times to do the correct things with the puck.

Watching him in the U18's, he was really all about the rush and trying to shoot or go for a wrap around, he never seemed to be looking to make a play, he would either try to shoot, or else he would skate himself into a hole & have to settle for a weak wrap around attempt. He would even pass up obvious passes/plays for this.

That's where a lack of hockey sense comes in, in certain situations not being able to slow things down and make the best/better play available.

The logic overall just doesn't always work, its a junior, many players are scorers & point producers in junior then it doesn't translate to the NHL.

I don't disagree that he's not a playmaker and the examples you cite fit that, but passing, vision, playmaking are just one aspect of hockey IQ though they tend to be used by many to determine a player's IQ (incorrectly so IMO). The problem with this is it tends to describe playmakers only and exclude goal scorers. But scoring goal takes hockey IQ too. Finding soft ice, reading defences, knowing when to shoot and when to hold, how to use defenders as screens, etc. It's different from finding an open man in your peripheral vision but it shouldn't be dismissed as not involving hockey IQ.

And to your point that many point producers in junior don't translate to the NHL - well sure, that's not being argued. But hockey IQ or lack thereof isn't the sole reason a player may or may not make the NHL. Work ethic, size, skating, skill, battle level are all factors that have limited the NHL careers of junior players who had great hockey IQ. Jake may or may not succeed at the NHL level, but if he does it will be as a goal scorer and he understands how to do that just fine, however you want to peg his IQ.

 

[Sergei Shirokov]

I don't disagree that he's not a playmaker and the examples you cite fit that, but passing, vision, playmaking are just one aspect of hockey IQ though they tend to be used by many to determine a player's IQ (incorrectly so IMO). The problem with this is it tends to describe playmakers only and exclude goal scorers. But scoring goal takes hockey IQ too. Finding soft ice, reading defences, knowing when to shoot and when to hold, how to use defenders as screens, etc. It's different from finding an open man in your peripheral vision but it shouldn't be dismissed as not involving hockey IQ.

And to your point that many point producers in junior don't translate to the NHL - well sure, that's not being argued. But hockey IQ or lack thereof isn't the sole reason a player may or may not make the NHL. Work ethic, size, skating, skill, battle level are all factors that have limited the NHL careers of junior players who had great hockey IQ. Jake may or may not succeed at the NHL level, but if he does it will be as a goal scorer and he understands how to do that just fine, however you want to peg his IQ.

I definitely agree hockey IQ is a broad term that could be attributed to different areas, with Jake you wonder sometimes whether his superior scoring ability comes from a superior level of strength against less developed competition, which may or may not be a strength at the next level.

But I do definitely think his success has to do with his ability rather than just his strength, obviously his shot and skating ability should continue to be strength's of his going into the NHL.

My main point wasn't against Jake (though I brought up that example of the U18's), just more against the logic that scoring goals in Junior = good hockey IQ in the NHL. I think as far as Jake goes he should be fine, he's got strengths that should translate to the NHL rather easily and as I said I've thought all along he could be a 30+ goal scorer in the NHL.

 

[DadBod]

so let me see if I can get this right..

if you rack up more assits than goals = you have exceptional "hockey IQ"

if you score around the same amount of goals and assits = "good hockey IQ"

if you can't score goals at all, but get a lot of assits = "great hockey IQ"

but,

if you score a lot of goals, but not a lot of assits = poor "hockey IQ"







I'm either not following what you're saying...or it's a bunch of BS. remember the game "telephone" where one person whispers something and by the end its totally incorrect? that's kind of like the impression of JV's "hockey IQ". One scout mentioned he's concerned and by the end of the year JV is terrible with the puck, can't pass, bad decisions etc.


if you want to talk about "IQ", nothing screams IQ to me more then scoring in bunches with consistency. Especially with limited PP time, poor line mates, in a role position. It's no secret Jake isn't a setup man, but that's not his game, his game is scoring.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

He could just as easily be described as having a scorers mentality. I do hav3 questions and his floor is low, (Raffi Torres?) but his ceiling is high.

 

[Love]

He could just as easily be described as having a scorers mentality. I do hav3 questions and his floor is low, (Raffi Torres?) but his ceiling is high.

If his floor is Raffi Torres then that is great news. Torres is a 2 time 20+ goal scorer including a season of 27 goals and 41 points, also had another year where he scored 19 in 60 games.

 

[Ho Borvat]

I'm still skeptical of his game translating against NHL'rs. Might turn out to be an OK 2nd liner if he pans out.

I am more bullish than most on Virtanen, but that seems more like his floor to me. An "OK 2nd liner" is a 35-45 point guy and I don't really see that as a fair ceiling.

Ceiling being a Jeff Carter, floor being a Chris Higgins (in my opinion).

 

[Sergei Shirokov]

so let me see if I can get this right..

if you rack up more assits than goals = you have exceptional "hockey IQ"

if you score around the same amount of goals and assits = "good hockey IQ"

if you can't score goals at all, but get a lot of assits = "great hockey IQ"

but,

if you score a lot of goals, but not a lot of assits = poor "hockey IQ"







I'm either not following what you're saying...or it's a bunch of BS. remember the game "telephone" where one person whispers something and by the end its totally incorrect? that's kind of like the impression of JV's "hockey IQ". One scout mentioned he's concerned and by the end of the year JV is terrible with the puck, can't pass, bad decisions etc.


if you want to talk about "IQ", nothing screams IQ to me more then scoring in bunches with consistency. Especially with limited PP time, poor line mates, in a role position. It's no secret Jake isn't a setup man, but that's not his game, his game is scoring.

Its not about assists vs goals to make the determination on one's hockey IQ its about watching them play.

 

[CanaFan]

Its not about assists vs goals to make the determination on one's hockey IQ its about watching them play.

Agreed except in most cases people are making the determination about Virtanen's IQ based on his stat line rather than watching him play. Some WHL watchers for sure have pointed out some 'tunnel vision' or tendency to try to do too much, but most of the real negative 'low IQ' aspersions seem to come from those who have never watched him play.