Nothing cherry picked about it. 20 goals is about as “establishing yourself” as it gets. Yes he had a lot more work to climb the rest of the way to his peak, but that wasn’t the question. Jake obviously hadn’t established himself at the same age as Daniel, considering he spent the next year in the AHL.
Player Discussion 2 Canucks That Require Patience, Not a Trade
- Thread starter SwaggyCanuckMZ
- Start date
Nothing cherry picked about it. 20 goals is about as “establishing yourself” as it gets. Yes he had a lot more work to climb the rest of the way to his peak, but that wasn’t the question. Jake obviously hadn’t established himself at the same age as Daniel, considering he spent the next year in the AHL.
Melvin
21/12/05
The Canucks in their history have made 46 first round picks, not including Juolevi, Hughes or Podkolzin.
They break down as such:
- 13 were pretty much immediate NHLers:
Petr Nedved
Trevor Linden
JJ Daigneault
Cam Neely
Rick Lanz
Rick Vaive
Jere Gillis
Rick Blight
Dennis Ververgaert
Bob Dailey
Don Lever
Jocelyn Guevremont
Dale Tallon
- Another 10 players played at least 40 NHL games in their D+2:
Jake Virtanen
Jared McCann
Bo Horvat
Daniel Sedin
Henrik Sedin
Jim Sandlak
Michel Petit
Garth Butcher
Bill Derlago
Elias Pettersson
Finally, 3 guys were NHLers in their D+3:
Brock Boeser
Ryan Kesler
Mike Wilson
(Kesler is probably a full-time player a year earlier if not for the lockout, as he had already played 28 games in his D+1.)
That leaves 20 players, but one of those, Cory Schneider, is a goalie and the other, Luc Bourdon, tragically passed away.
Here are the remaining 18, ranked by total career GP (* - still active) :
Tier 1 - 500+ games
1. Mattias Ohlund (909)
2. R.J. Umberger (779)
3. Bryan Allen (721)
4. Michael Grabner* (594)
This is it, the cream of the crop.
Ohlund and Umberger were both special cases where the team hadn't gotten the player under contract. Ohlund was playing in Europe and signed a lucrative offer sheet from the Leafs that the Canucks matched, and the rest is history. Umberger had a famously public contract dispute with Brian Burke who eventually traded his rights to New York. Both pretty different situations from Olli, who is signed. Bryan Allen actually had a few cups of coffee with the Canucks in his D+3 and D+4 but didn't become a full-time NHLer until his D+5. That leaves Grabner as really your only example of the "one who got away." Four seasons after being drafted, Grabner couldn't crack the Canucks lineup full-time and was included in the trade for Keith Ballard. That was a bad deal and Grabner has gone on to a pretty decent if unspectacular NHL career.
Tier 2 - 100-500 NHL games
5. Cody Hodgson (328)
6. Brad Ference (250)
7. Shawn Antoski (183)
8. Jordan Schroeder* (165)
9. Brendan Gaunce* (117)
10. Alek Stojanov (107)
And here is where you basically get to bust territory. Hodgson's trade for Kassian has to be viewed as a minor victory, and of course Stojanov-for-Naslund was a home-f***ing-run. The other 4 players were essentially lost for nothing.
Tier 3 - <100 NHL games
11. Josh Holden (60)
12. Nicklas Jensen (31)
13. Nathan Smith (26)
14. Hunter Shinkaruk* (15)
15. Dan Woodley (5)
16. Jason Herter (1)
17. Patrick White (0)
18. Libor Polasek (0)
(Olli Juolevi* (0))
The only one of these players to return anything of note was Patrick White, whose rights (and, by extension, a compensation pick for not signing him,) were traded for Christian Ehrhoff, and Shinkaruk who was traded for HFBoards hall-of-famer Markus Granlund. The other 6 players are indisputedly busts but were never traded for anything of note and mostly just let to walk.
So, to summarize:
- 26 players who pretty much made the NHL quickly.
- 10 players who were pretty much busts and were eventually lost for nothing.
- 4 players who were traded in deals where they returned a superior asset (Hodgson, Stojanov, Shinkaruk**, Patrick White)
- 2 players who didn't make the NHL quickly because of contract dispute.
- 1 player, Bryan Allen, who took his time, and the team was patient with, and had an OK career.
- 1 player, Michael Grabner, who was maybe given-up-on too soon and included in a poor trade.
** just go with it.
I find the claim that the Canucks give up on players too soon to be without merit. Basically all of the players who were not NHLers by the part of their careers Juolevi is in now either busted or were traded in a better deal.
The Canucks have only taken 2 players in their entire history for whom patience in them at this stage paid, or would have paid, off: Allen and Grabner. And Allen at this stage had played in the NHL, just not as an every-day player, so even he was ahead of Olli.
Now, that's not to say that Olli can't be an exception! But the point remains that if we had dealt every single first-round-pick who was not an everyday NHLer by their D+3, we would be way, way ahead in the long run, as most of these guys probably would have returned a pick or some asset before they were eventually just let go after clinging to them for years.
In the NHL, patience is not a virtue, it is a trap.
They break down as such:
- 13 were pretty much immediate NHLers:
Petr Nedved
Trevor Linden
JJ Daigneault
Cam Neely
Rick Lanz
Rick Vaive
Jere Gillis
Rick Blight
Dennis Ververgaert
Bob Dailey
Don Lever
Jocelyn Guevremont
Dale Tallon
- Another 10 players played at least 40 NHL games in their D+2:
Jake Virtanen
Jared McCann
Bo Horvat
Daniel Sedin
Henrik Sedin
Jim Sandlak
Michel Petit
Garth Butcher
Bill Derlago
Elias Pettersson
Finally, 3 guys were NHLers in their D+3:
Brock Boeser
Ryan Kesler
Mike Wilson
(Kesler is probably a full-time player a year earlier if not for the lockout, as he had already played 28 games in his D+1.)
That leaves 20 players, but one of those, Cory Schneider, is a goalie and the other, Luc Bourdon, tragically passed away.
Here are the remaining 18, ranked by total career GP (* - still active) :
Tier 1 - 500+ games
1. Mattias Ohlund (909)
2. R.J. Umberger (779)
3. Bryan Allen (721)
4. Michael Grabner* (594)
This is it, the cream of the crop.
Ohlund and Umberger were both special cases where the team hadn't gotten the player under contract. Ohlund was playing in Europe and signed a lucrative offer sheet from the Leafs that the Canucks matched, and the rest is history. Umberger had a famously public contract dispute with Brian Burke who eventually traded his rights to New York. Both pretty different situations from Olli, who is signed. Bryan Allen actually had a few cups of coffee with the Canucks in his D+3 and D+4 but didn't become a full-time NHLer until his D+5. That leaves Grabner as really your only example of the "one who got away." Four seasons after being drafted, Grabner couldn't crack the Canucks lineup full-time and was included in the trade for Keith Ballard. That was a bad deal and Grabner has gone on to a pretty decent if unspectacular NHL career.
Tier 2 - 100-500 NHL games
5. Cody Hodgson (328)
6. Brad Ference (250)
7. Shawn Antoski (183)
8. Jordan Schroeder* (165)
9. Brendan Gaunce* (117)
10. Alek Stojanov (107)
And here is where you basically get to bust territory. Hodgson's trade for Kassian has to be viewed as a minor victory, and of course Stojanov-for-Naslund was a home-f***ing-run. The other 4 players were essentially lost for nothing.
Tier 3 - <100 NHL games
11. Josh Holden (60)
12. Nicklas Jensen (31)
13. Nathan Smith (26)
14. Hunter Shinkaruk* (15)
15. Dan Woodley (5)
16. Jason Herter (1)
17. Patrick White (0)
18. Libor Polasek (0)
(Olli Juolevi* (0))
The only one of these players to return anything of note was Patrick White, whose rights (and, by extension, a compensation pick for not signing him,) were traded for Christian Ehrhoff, and Shinkaruk who was traded for HFBoards hall-of-famer Markus Granlund. The other 6 players are indisputedly busts but were never traded for anything of note and mostly just let to walk.
So, to summarize:
- 26 players who pretty much made the NHL quickly.
- 10 players who were pretty much busts and were eventually lost for nothing.
- 4 players who were traded in deals where they returned a superior asset (Hodgson, Stojanov, Shinkaruk**, Patrick White)
- 2 players who didn't make the NHL quickly because of contract dispute.
- 1 player, Bryan Allen, who took his time, and the team was patient with, and had an OK career.
- 1 player, Michael Grabner, who was maybe given-up-on too soon and included in a poor trade.
** just go with it.
I find the claim that the Canucks give up on players too soon to be without merit. Basically all of the players who were not NHLers by the part of their careers Juolevi is in now either busted or were traded in a better deal.
The Canucks have only taken 2 players in their entire history for whom patience in them at this stage paid, or would have paid, off: Allen and Grabner. And Allen at this stage had played in the NHL, just not as an every-day player, so even he was ahead of Olli.
Now, that's not to say that Olli can't be an exception! But the point remains that if we had dealt every single first-round-pick who was not an everyday NHLer by their D+3, we would be way, way ahead in the long run, as most of these guys probably would have returned a pick or some asset before they were eventually just let go after clinging to them for years.
In the NHL, patience is not a virtue, it is a trap.
Last edited:
Intangibos
High-End Intangibos
To be fair I don't trust any GM to get value out of Virtanen or Juolevi.
Juolevi, despite some awful appearances, still does have upside if he can put his game together. It was a shortened year, he's had some injuries, and he's just 21 and while that makes him an adult and a professional athlete, I think in retrospect a lot of us were bigger shits than we would like to admit at that age.
Virtanen has shown some improvement over the years, and while last year was disappointing, what would anyone really pay for him that is more valuable than the chance he gets it together. I still think Virtanen can become a Booth type player and that's a solid 2nd line player. Watching him play what I found frustrating is that he has no puck skills and seemingly cannot make a move to the inside, so defenders cheat on him going wide and he ends up behind the net. He's a player that I think has a chance of having the game just click for him and take a major leap forward.
I would not trade these players because I would almost certainly not get enough for them. If there was anyone in the league to overpay for these players it would likely be Benning in the first place so I would be surprised to even see him try to move them. I'm glad he's hanging onto Goldobin as well, he's a guy who could be our Baertschi from Calgary's perspective. I would include Gaunce and Hutton on this list too but oh well.
Horse McHindu
They call me Horse.....
Are you implying that Benning makes 100% of the Pro Scouting decisions and 0% of the Amateur Scouting department decisions?
Sounds fair and logic based.
me2
Go ahead foot
Neither are getting traded
1. they have limited value, might as well hold on.
2. PR nightmare of getting a 2nd or 3rd for a 5th OA and 6th OA pick
3. Virtanen bring value to the team, his contract is dirt cheap. Juolevi is still on his ELC and waivers exempt so they will persist.
The team will keep them and hope for miracle breakouts, it doesn't have any other choice.
1. they have limited value, might as well hold on.
2. PR nightmare of getting a 2nd or 3rd for a 5th OA and 6th OA pick
3. Virtanen bring value to the team, his contract is dirt cheap. Juolevi is still on his ELC and waivers exempt so they will persist.
The team will keep them and hope for miracle breakouts, it doesn't have any other choice.
Fire Benning
diaper filled piss baby
Virtanen I’d keep because he has value as a depth player with a reasonable salary, his value on the roster right likely outweighs his value in a trade unless you could get something like a quality young defender for him.
Juolevi on the other hand, I think there’s a case to be made whatever value he has right now should be recouped in a trade, if you hold onto him for this season you run the risk of his value plummeting even further.
You look at what Griffen Reinhart fetched in a trade for still having ‘potential’ as a former high draft pick (albeit not too recently), I don’t know if the return for Juolevi would be quite as big, but I’d think there’s still a possibility to upsell Juolevi and I probably would.
Juolevi on the other hand, I think there’s a case to be made whatever value he has right now should be recouped in a trade, if you hold onto him for this season you run the risk of his value plummeting even further.
You look at what Griffen Reinhart fetched in a trade for still having ‘potential’ as a former high draft pick (albeit not too recently), I don’t know if the return for Juolevi would be quite as big, but I’d think there’s still a possibility to upsell Juolevi and I probably would.
I’m just saying the outcomes look crazy.
You’re the one giving the logical, unbiased extrapolation.
Melvin
21/12/05
Here is some more data, looking beyond the Canucks at the 1,100+ first round picks across the NHL, through 2015 draft:
- 53% of first round picks are full-time NHLers within 3 years.
- 34% of first round picks are pretty much busts ("pretty much" because it depends somewhat on your definition of a bust.)
- 13% of first round picks took longer to make the show for whatever reason but had a significant NHL career.
bUt DefensEMAN taKe LonGeR
Here are the same stats for defensemen only:
- 50% of first-round d-men were full-time within 3 years.
- 37% were pretty much busts.
- 13% took longer but had a significant NHL career.
Basically no difference, except a slightly higher overall bust rate.
It's worth noting also that the majority of players in that 13% group did have some NHL experience at this stage, but then, Olli likely would have also played at least some games last year were it not for his injury so I will cut him some slack on that rather than comparing him to the guys with literally 0 NHL games at this stage (this is a grim comparison group.)
- 53% of first round picks are full-time NHLers within 3 years.
- 34% of first round picks are pretty much busts ("pretty much" because it depends somewhat on your definition of a bust.)
- 13% of first round picks took longer to make the show for whatever reason but had a significant NHL career.
bUt DefensEMAN taKe LonGeR
Here are the same stats for defensemen only:
- 50% of first-round d-men were full-time within 3 years.
- 37% were pretty much busts.
- 13% took longer but had a significant NHL career.
Basically no difference, except a slightly higher overall bust rate.
It's worth noting also that the majority of players in that 13% group did have some NHL experience at this stage, but then, Olli likely would have also played at least some games last year were it not for his injury so I will cut him some slack on that rather than comparing him to the guys with literally 0 NHL games at this stage (this is a grim comparison group.)
ProstheticConscience
Check dein Limit
Virtanen and Juolevi are still on entry-level deals. So in a salary cap world, anything you can get out of them is a bonus. Virtanen is an everyday player, albeit on the third or fourth line at present, and scored 15 goals last season.
Juolevi might start the year in the minors, but given the Canucks inevitable injuries on the blueline, could see 30-40 games in VanCity this year.
So these two guys are the least of the Canuck problems. It's the 'dead-air' contracts for the 30-plus year old players that are dragging this team down by the ankles.
Juolevi might start the year in the minors, but given the Canucks inevitable injuries on the blueline, could see 30-40 games in VanCity this year.
So these two guys are the least of the Canuck problems. It's the 'dead-air' contracts for the 30-plus year old players that are dragging this team down by the ankles.
PuckMunchkin
Very Nice, Very Evil!
I think a better, less controversial, take would have been: "The Canucks should not sell low on Juolevi & Virtanen".
I agree with what you're trying to say, but there is a difference between trading a former top 10 pick and trading a late 1st round pick who hasn't exactly developed in a way that put aside the draft day question marks. You also got to make individualized determination. The value of drafted players tend to fluctuate in a reverse bell curve kind of way. As soon as they hit the road they aren't worth as much anymore until they star in the AHL or make the NHL. Jensen, Schroeder and especially Shinkaruk (due to injury) had average draft + 1 seasons. Nobody was trading a 1st round pick after their draft + 1 season (meaning their value is lower than what they were worth). For what it's worth, Shinkaruk was involved in trade rumors the summer Benning took the job. Benning has actually made quick determinations on players and has reportedly offered Virtanen in a trade.
Back on topic, every player is available to be traded if the price is right. If the Oilers offered McDavid for Pettersson, if you can make the salary work, you do it. With Virtanen, he's not a prospect. He's a young player who may or may not have much upside. But right now he has value on an NHL club. For $1.25M this season he's a solid value for what he brings and can bring. As for Juolevi, if someone is offering a player of good value or a 1st round pick you consider it. If not, unless you have determined that he will never make it to the NHL it's probably worth being patient with him as the sample size is rather small.
sting101
Registered User
- Feb 8, 2012
- 15,871
- 14,722
I would move Juolevi in a heart beat for what St.Louis got for Rundblad.
Just not seeing anything worth getting excited about from OJ. Talked to one of the Canuck scouts about him and he said he's not very smart either which was suppose to be his calling card. Upside is Gardiner and likely he's worse after all these injuries and how timid he is.
Jake is worth seeing through this year and giving him the best shot of his career to put up or shut up. Needs a contract at the end of next season and they wont be commiting to him if he cant be relied upon in a role
Wouldn't surprise me to see them both gone by 2020/21 season but dumping them for peanuts would really piss me off
Just not seeing anything worth getting excited about from OJ. Talked to one of the Canuck scouts about him and he said he's not very smart either which was suppose to be his calling card. Upside is Gardiner and likely he's worse after all these injuries and how timid he is.
Jake is worth seeing through this year and giving him the best shot of his career to put up or shut up. Needs a contract at the end of next season and they wont be commiting to him if he cant be relied upon in a role
Wouldn't surprise me to see them both gone by 2020/21 season but dumping them for peanuts would really piss me off
Pastor Of Muppetz
Registered User
- Oct 1, 2017
- 26,128
- 15,983
Would not give up on Jake..I think a lot of of people might be surprised at what another year of maturity can do..(looks like his best buddy Hutton is gone ..wake up call..)..
OJ still has 2 years on his ELC...Would be an absolute bonus if he can crack the roster later in the year..
OJ still has 2 years on his ELC...Would be an absolute bonus if he can crack the roster later in the year..
Horse McHindu
They call me Horse.....
Keep both players and give them every opportunity to develop. OJ has next to zero value right now while JV’s trade value right now doesn’t come even close to his potential (ie JV is the type of guy that could be traded for a modest amount but then go to a new team and eventually become a very good top 6 player).
Best case scenario: They eventually reach their potential.
Worse case scenario: They don’t hit their potential but still become NHL caliber players (JV already is one) and we Sign them at lowered cap hits.
Worst case scenario: OJ doesn’t make the NHL.
In the case, there is far less pressure on him than there was two years ago.
1) Hughes is our new “kingpin” on defense.
2) Tryamkin is far likelier to return now than before.
Just let OJ take his time and develop in the AHL. Let him grow his game and get his swagger back. Let him earn and NHL spot so that he doesn’t develop an “entitled” mindset.
Best case scenario: They eventually reach their potential.
Worse case scenario: They don’t hit their potential but still become NHL caliber players (JV already is one) and we Sign them at lowered cap hits.
Worst case scenario: OJ doesn’t make the NHL.
In the case, there is far less pressure on him than there was two years ago.
1) Hughes is our new “kingpin” on defense.
2) Tryamkin is far likelier to return now than before.
Just let OJ take his time and develop in the AHL. Let him grow his game and get his swagger back. Let him earn and NHL spot so that he doesn’t develop an “entitled” mindset.
Last edited:
Well St. Louis traded Rundblad to get a pick to draft Tarasenko. That was a home run pick. Had they not draft Tarasenko with that pick the return would have been meh in hindsight.
As for the bolded, not sure who you talked to and assuming your story is true, hockey IQ is different from being "smart" in every day life. Juolevi does have a good sized frame to develop. I am hopeful that he will figure things out.
Askel
By the way Benning should be fired.
Virtanen is not on his rookiedeal. He just hadnt proven anything and got a small second contract.
I hope joulevi shows this year that he was a decent pick.
Jack Burton
Pro Tank Since 13
I'd package them both up together(+ maybe a 3rd pick)and see what I could get.
Definitely be after an established/proven 2nd line winger or 3 or 4 Dman.
Definitely be after an established/proven 2nd line winger or 3 or 4 Dman.
sting101
Registered User
- Feb 8, 2012
- 15,871
- 14,722
That "meh" return is likely what we just traded to Tampa for Miller and people are getting upset. Reinhart deal 16OA (Barzal) and the Rundblad deal 13OA (Tarasenko). would have had the choice of Knight Newhook Krebs Caufield York Harley this year. Thats a return i would look hard and fast at.
I will say i didn't watch him in Utica (did watch him in LIIGA though about 7 or 8 times) and i dont know how much his injuries were effecting his play like the Coaches and trainers/doctors would. He's pretty likely damaged goods after 2 major surgeries and a distaste for contact and im extremely doubtful his skating can get to a level where that wont matter too much which is why i would do it if the reports checked out poorly
The Scout is a true story.........(talked last year at the LEC he was watching Byram) not gonna mention names but will say he was easy to ID. He was specifically down on his hockey IQ which kind of blew me away because of how he is advertized. and OJ really plays with his head up and looks players off. Could just be nerves coming into training camps.....we'll see.
ChilliBilly
Registered User
Sorry, but that's a massive overpayment. Juolevi alone could easily be a top pairing D man in 3 - 4 years. And while I think we make the playoffs this yer, why sell our futures for short term pieces that won't significantly improve the team?
PG Canuck
Registered User
- Mar 29, 2010
- 62,939
- 24,098
It's amazing there are still people out there who think Virtanen will just flip a switch a be a HHOF'er. You don't just get hockey IQ from thin air - Jake has little hockey IQ and it's always been his biggest issue. He can be a Jannik Hansen at his peak and that's all I see.
The organization has already moved on from Virtanen. Oh he may not be traded or anything but all the rumours about their concentration on top 6 wingers tells you all you need to know on where they plan to play Virtanen from here on out. He'll be a bottom 6 forward and will not see prime ice.
PG Canuck
Registered User
- Mar 29, 2010
- 62,939
- 24,098
On the flip side, people will find any sort of outlier to try and prove Virtanen will be good.
bandwagonesque
I eat Kraft Dinner and I vote
- Mar 5, 2014
- 7,141
- 5,450
Posters on any side of any disagreement here use outliers to try to prove their arguments. While that doesn't work, it also doesn't make their positions invalid.
