Player Discussion 2 Canucks That Require Patience, Not a Trade

PG Canuck

Registered User
Mar 29, 2010
62,739
23,887
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.

I don't think factual advanced stats are outliers to what kind of a player Virtanen is, but alright. He's played 200 NHL games, and for every single one of them we've heard "Just wait....oh you just wait!!!".
 

digger18

Registered User
Feb 23, 2009
3,762
35
Williams Lake B.C.
I’m not sure why you’d want to trade Virtanen at all. I thought he played fairly well last year. I expect him to have an even better coming year. Julio on the other hand....I think it’s pretty apparent that pick was wasted. If he can’t crack the lineup in camp again, then I’d take what you can get for the guy and move on.
 

bandwagonesque

I eat Kraft Dinner and I vote
Mar 5, 2014
7,097
5,397
I don't think factual advanced stats are outliers to what kind of a player Virtanen is, but alright. He's played 200 NHL games, and for every single one of them we've heard "Just wait....oh you just wait!!!".
Except no one that I've seen has the attitude about Virtanen you're implying they have. People watch him, see solid top 6 potential based on several spectacular physical tools and several dominant games, and say so. I'm one of them. I'm not saying he'll definitely get there, and I don't think anyone else is saying that either.
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,362
83,418
Vancouver, BC
Umm...defensemen don't take faceoffs...Also I didn't say that he was a lock to be a top-4, just that he still has the potential to do so. Let's wait and see, is all I'm saying.

Uh ... I'm saying he wasn't put on the ice for a defensive zone faceoff.

Your exact quote was "He may not become an elite top pairing defenseman, but he will be a solid top-four option in his prime capable of running a power play and efficiently moving the puck out of the defensive zone." That is a pretty definite statement from a player who does not merit a statement nearly so definitive at this point.

'Wait and see' isn't constructive unless you actually give reasons why 'wait and see' is a good idea and will be rewarded. Several of us here watched most of his games in Utica this year and the doubt and criticism around him is 100% justified. I'm not trying to be hard on you but there has been a ton of lazy reporting on Juolevi from the professionals (I've commented here before on the amazing perfect split between the people who didn't watch him play quoting '13 points in 18 games, did great!' and the people who actually watched him play saying uniformly that he was terrible) and hopefully we can aspire to better than that.

https://www.tsn.ca/radio/vancouver-1040/cull-juolevi-exceeding-expectations-in-utica-1.1196814

Around thr 10 min mark

I will be honest, I didn't watch any Utica games at all this year. I don't quite understand were all this talk is coming from that Juolevi was so bad in the ahl. The Head coach and most people overall like Johnson were happy with his play.

The year before in Finland, Salo even said he was one of our top D by the end of the year

All the people that have negative things to say about Juolevi this year nothing positive.. Is it because you can't get over Tkachuk and you feel like you need to put your anger towards Juolevi?

Virtanen, No argument. He should be traded

Of course his coaches and management are going to say generic nice things about him. What Cull actually thought about him is pretty obviously evidence in the fact that he didn't trust him enough for a PK shift or even a defensive zone faceoff.

On the flip side, Markus Naslund was offloaded by the Pens for essentially nothing.

When your example is from 23 years ago, that might be a hint that this doesn't happen that often.

Naslund was also an established NHLer in the middle of a 55-point season. He wasn't a prospect. @Melvin is completely correct in saying that most people give up on prospects too late rather than too soon, but conversely people do actually often give up on young established NHLers too soon. And underestimate just how huge the difference is between 'established NHLer who has been a bit disappointing' and 'busting prospect struggling in the AHL'.

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.

This is literally how it works in most NHL organizations. Here Benning has some impact on amateur scouting because of his background but most of the work is done by Brackett and his staff.
 

Shareefruck

Registered User
Apr 2, 2005
28,875
3,570
Vancouver, BC
No, not in this case. You're cherry picking the one statistic that might suggest you're correct. Daniel scored 15 goals at even strength in his first two seasons over 154 games. This isn't particularly related to Jake Virtanen, however. Sometimes you have to look at the individual players and judge them by their game play and play styles. He's strong, fast, quick and shoots really well, and he had a handful of dominant games last season along with many where he fought the puck. I think it's clear he has more potential and that there's a path for him to realize it. None of us knows whether he will or not.
He's correct either way, though. The Sedins were established 3rd line caliber players at the NHL level from the moment they stepped on the ice as rookies. They only "struggled" and "took a while to establish themselves" relative to the expectations of being 2nd & 3rd overall picks expected to step in and be offensive studs right away. Virtanen struggled to play like a convincing NHL-caliber player in his first few years, and only now is he starting to look like one. It's not a re-assuring comparison at all.

Only in his most recent year has Virtanen's play been remotely comparable to the first few seasons of the Sedins (even then, not really). By the time the Sedins were Virtanen's current age, they were already defensively strong masters of the cycle/possession game (the opposition rarely got the puck out of their own end when they were on the ice) and were established near-0.5-PPG players.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CanaFan

Shareefruck

Registered User
Apr 2, 2005
28,875
3,570
Vancouver, BC
People are almost always too slow to trade prospects and as a result get nothing for Jensen, Schroeder, Shinkaruk, etc.

One of the smartest trades a team has made in recent history was when they have up on Griffin Reinhart and managed to get great value from him when probably half the fanbase was howling about it.

People cling to their top prospects for ****ing ever. This myth that people give up too fast has absolutely no basis in history.
On top of that, the anecdotal evidence that Canuck fans have from personal experience is also misleading because many of our most relied upon players probably took a longer and more unorthodox development path than most. Even then, it's not a favorable comparison, but it should not be looked at as the norm either way.

Decisions should be made based on probable norms rather then technically possible exceptions.
 
Last edited:

Jack Burton

Pro Tank Since 13
Oct 27, 2016
4,961
2,937
Pork Chop Express
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?

Ahhhh ya nope.

Virtanens hockey IQ matches his jersey number and he's never used his linemates to full advantage...like ever.
What we see with Virtanen is what we'll get from Virtanen...a 3rd liner.

OJ...he's a bust for where he was picked.
Too many injuries at such a young age and he plays his position wayyyyyy to passively to ever be a top 4 Dman. I think we'll be extremely lucky if OJ ever becomes a bottom pairing Dman imho.

And we're not making the playoffs this year. Far too many "what if's" and everything has to go perfect for us just to be a bubble team...have you been watching the Canucks the past 5 years?
Ain't happening.
 

PG Canuck

Registered User
Mar 29, 2010
62,739
23,887
I get the sense some people here wouldn't do Virtanen, Juolevi for lets say, Barrie (a re-signed Barrie).
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,362
83,418
Vancouver, BC
Decisions should be made based on probable norms rather then technically possible exceptions.

Been saying this for years.

Decisions should be based on most likely outcomes, not 'maybe ifs'. And what this management team has constantly done is get tunnel vision on a 'maybe if' that has a 10% chance of happening and then pay full value for that maybe assuming it's a certainty. And then, predictably, 9 out of 10 moves turn out bad when the most likely outcome actually comes through. It's the single biggest failing of management that permeates every single thing they do.
 

WetcoastOrca

Registered User
Jun 3, 2011
38,142
21,935
Vancouver, BC
I get the sense some people here wouldn't do Virtanen, Juolevi for lets say, Barrie (a re-signed Barrie).
Some truth to that!The ghost of Cam Neely still haunts some Canuck fans. Or maybe it’s the resurrection of Todd Bertuzzi who took off when he came to the Canucks.
But I think those two examples don’t really apply to Virtanen and Juolevi. Both Neely and Bertuzzi if I recall already had some good numbers by the time they were that age. They just took it to another level but it was already pretty clear that they had that potential. In any event they are probably outliers to a certain extent and not the norm.
 

Javaman

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
2,456
3,243
Vancouver
Some truth to that!The ghost of Cam Neely still haunts some Canuck fans. Or maybe it’s the resurrection of Todd Bertuzzi who took off when he came to the Canucks.
But I think those two examples don’t really apply to Virtanen and Juolevi. Both Neely and Bertuzzi if I recall already had some good numbers by the time they were that age. They just took it to another level but it was already pretty clear that they had that potential. In any event they are probably outliers to a certain extent and not the norm.

By the time Bertuzzi had reached the age Virtanen is now (i.e. D+5), he'd already shown he could score at a 20 goal pace (and this was during the dead puck era). Virtanen has yet to show that he is capable of doing the same. He might crack the 20 goal barrier at some point in his career, but it's most likely he caps out as a decent third line winger who gives you 30-35 points to go with his size and speed.

There's very little reason to believe that Virtanen will blossom into even a shadow of the dominant power forward that Berruzzi became. At this point, he's Leivo-calibre, who was acquired for a career AHLer.

If the Canucks can upgrade at a position of need by trading Virtanen, then they shouldn't hesitate to do so. If they can get a draft pick for him that projects to have a floor as a third line winger, that would probably be a reasonable trade. Otherwise, I agree, don't trade him simply because he was a bad draft pick.
 

F A N

Registered User
Aug 12, 2005
18,626
5,890
I get the sense some people here wouldn't do Virtanen, Juolevi for lets say, Barrie (a re-signed Barrie).

I can see that as well. I think the biggest question is what would Barrie's next contract look like. Like Myers, he'll be 29 to start his UFA year.
 

Oleksiak

Registered User
Jun 12, 2019
2,124
3,034
Victoria, BC
I'd like to see what Virtanen can do with consistent offensive linemates before he's given up on. There's a big hole on the second line that he could fill perfectly. OJ will be fine and was playing well before he got hurt. He'll be up as soon as the injuries hit and do well.
 

BROCK HUGHES

Registered User
Jun 3, 2006
3,450
582
Victoria bc/red deer alberta
Coaching and developing from a stand point is critical. Benning drafts and hires coaches thinking that throwing them projects that he will hit a home run.Jakes first NHL coach ,was Willie D.who thought playing Linden Vey over everyone was critical.Jake had no direction with this idiot.
Travis has him going now,don't give up on him yet.Juolivi has not even played in the NHL yet,I'd say give him 1 more year,before we cast him off.
 

Javaman

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
2,456
3,243
Vancouver
I'd like to see what Virtanen can do with consistent offensive linemates before he's given up on. There's a big hole on the second line that he could fill perfectly. OJ will be fine and was playing well before he got hurt. He'll be up as soon as the injuries hit and do well.

As I recall, Green gave him a shot in the top 6 last season. It didn't go particularly well. Why do you think it will be different in his D+6 season?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Canucks1096

forget

Registered User
Jul 6, 2019
41
56
I don't think factual advanced stats are outliers to what kind of a player Virtanen is, but alright. He's played 200 NHL games, and for every single one of them we've heard "Just wait....oh you just wait!!!".
Just wait until he gets activated in the playoffs:laugh:
 
Last edited:

Phenomenon13

Registered User
Oct 10, 2011
2,479
496
People say virtanen has flashes of great offensive ability but that's just what a third liner is, a guy who isnt skilled or consistent enough offensively to be a top six player. The chances of virtanen finally breaking out and doubling his production to be a viable top idc forward is very low. I just dont see it, if we can move him for a player or prospect with higher upside, I think it's worth looking into. Hes still a young guy so he fits our timeline nicely and doesn't cost a whole lot to keep but to still cling onto hope hes going to be a top six player is a pipe dream due to the very low probability. I feel that after 200 nhl games, we know what we have here.

It's the same thing when gudbranson was traded to us... he had 300nhl games and was pretty established, I didnt see that there was a whole lot of room to grow.

Juolevi is still an big unknown to me. At this point, I think the injuries have derailed what I believed to be a for sure top 4 defender. I think he still has that chance to be a top 4 guy but if we can sell someone on his potential and the importance of defenseman, I'm all for it. I definitely believe juolevi has the higher upside of the two. Obviously this is just my personal opinion and I'm sure many would disagree.
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,362
83,418
Vancouver, BC
If we had taken Virtanen in the 4th round and had the exact same 23 y/o big fast ~15 goal top-9 winger everyone would be thrilled and calling him a brilliant pick and nobody would want to move him because what he does at <$2 million is very good value for the team. You have to be able to separate the disappointment of the lousy pick from the actual useful asset.

Again, there is a tendency to be too hard on under-25 NHL players (especially those who were high picks) who are established in the league but inconsistent and frustrating/struggling. Conversely, everyone hugely overrates 19-22 y/o prospects who aren't in the NHL yet and are usually way too late at wanting to cut bait and salvage value. Virtanen belongs in the former category, Juolevi the latter.
 

Javaman

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
2,456
3,243
Vancouver
People say virtanen has flashes of great offensive ability but that's just what a third liner is, a guy who isnt skilled or consistent enough offensively to be a top six player. The chances of virtanen finally breaking out and doubling his production to be a viable top idc forward is very low. I just dont see it, if we can move him for a player or prospect with higher upside, I think it's worth looking into. Hes still a young guy so he fits our timeline nicely and doesn't cost a whole lot to keep but to still cling onto hope hes going to be a top six player is a pipe dream due to the very low probability. I feel that after 200 nhl games, we know what we have here.

It's the same thing when gudbranson was traded to us... he had 300nhl games and was pretty established, I didnt see that there was a whole lot of room to grow.

Juolevi is still an big unknown to me. At this point, I think the injuries have derailed what I believed to be a for sure top 4 defender. I think he still has that chance to be a top 4 guy but if we can sell someone on his potential and the importance of defenseman, I'm all for it. I definitely believe juolevi has the higher upside of the two. Obviously this is just my personal opinion and I'm sure many would disagree.

It's entirely possible that OJ might finally unlock his potential and show he's a capable top 2... hell, top 4... defender.

It just doesn't seem to be a defensible position to take at this time. This season should tell all.
 

Phenomenon13

Registered User
Oct 10, 2011
2,479
496
It's entirely possible that OJ might finally unlock his potential and show he's a capable top 2... hell, top 4... defender.

It just doesn't seem to be a defensible position to take at this time. This season should tell all.
That's my opinion.

The reason I say this in regards to games played. If juolevi had 200 games and was a bottom pairing guy, I'd pretty sure we have a bottom pairing defender.

I feel that number of games played is a factor people dont consider enough and just focus on age.

I agree that juolevi chances of reaching his potential are slim but I was just stating that I believe he has the higher upside of the two.

If we risk waiting on juolevi another season, we risk losing a lot of his value. It's part of the cost analysis when we inquire about his trade value. Personally, I don't believe anybody will give up much for either of them.
 

Javaman

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
2,456
3,243
Vancouver
That's my opinion.

The reason I say this in regards to games played. If juolevi had 200 games and was a bottom pairing guy, I'd pretty sure we have a bottom pairing defender.

I feel that number of games played is a factor people dont consider enough and just focus on age.

I agree that juolevi chances of reaching his potential are slim but I was just stating that I believe he has the higher upside of the two.

If we risk waiting on juolevi another season, we risk losing a lot of his value. It's part of the cost analysis when we inquire about his trade value. Personally, I don't believe anybody will give up much for either of them.

Yeah, the main reason to not trade either of Virtanen or Juolevi is that you'd likely get nothing comparable back in value. It's not because either player is some sort of hidden gem that you dare not give up on.

Virtanen probably is what he is at this point. If Benning can convince another GM that he is potentially more than what he has shown, you take that deal and walk away smiling. Same thing with Juolevi, but Virtanen probably returns you more at this point.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->