Prospect Info: Canucks 2017 Prospect Rankings - #8

[M2Beezy]

Again, there are no comparables. There has never been another player who performed well as an NHL regular at age 19 and then cratered in that fashion in the AHL at age 20. Comparing him to a bunch of guys who were nothing at 19 and then nothing again at 20 proves nothing.

If I had to guess, I'd put the odds of Virtanen becoming a decent regular NHL asset at about 25%. Which might be comparable to Lind and Gadjovich, but he's also closer to the NHL and that carries value.



This has been mentioned several times. He still has the size/skating/physical package and ability to drive play that give him Chris Kreider potential, even if he's much less likely to reach that potential than before.

I disagree that Lind has tools that project well at the NHL level. We'll see.



I would have happily taken a #33 pick for Virtanen before the draft, but I don't really like Kole Lind and had him rated much lower. Wouldn't have traded it for Dal Colle.

Obviously it's all subjective. But I don't think rating Virtanen in this position is 'unreasonable'.

And I have Zack MacEwen ahead of Virtanen right now, for the record. And I realize I'm on an island with that one.

I dont think so. Anyone whose paying attention should have macewan ahead of Virtanen

 

[y2kcanucks]

These arguments go no where, let's boil this down more.

Did he get better as he got in better shape, yes or no?

2 goals and 3 points in his final 12 games, averaging 1.66 shots on goal per game during that stretch.

So no.

 

[MS]

7 goals and 13 points in 55 games is considered as performing well as an NHL regular? It's not awful, but I wouldn't say he performed well. He had about a month where he looked competent. I think there are plenty of players who look OK at the NHL at a young age, who end up cratering and flaming out. Again, if we ignore his draft position he's probably a forgotten prospect.

He had a month-long stretch where he looked legitimately good, and where his size/skating was playing effectively against NHLers and he was a positive asset for the team. If this was 3 years ago, fine, it's probably gone. But it was 14 months ago and it's a big deal to look good in the NHL at age 19.

I don't think we'd have forgotten his NHL play in 14 months if he'd been a 5th rounder.

Gadjovich has those tools too, minus the skating. What about Lind don't you like?

Lind does nothing that projects. OK skater, average size, not really a finisher, not really a top-end playmaker. There's nothing that projects as being a legitimate NHL player of real value. Maybe he can be an OK space-filling bottom-6 guy.

And again, if you like Lind, it's a perfectly reasonable opinion to have him ahead of Virtanen. I'm not offended by it. And likewise, the anger you have over the notion that Virtanen might still be ranked higher than you by some people is completely misplaced.

Yes, you certainly are on an island with that one.

Yup.

If he had the same birthday as Lind and Gadjovic, he'd have been a top-10 pick in this year's draft. And he has less CHL experience than those guys. As you said - age doesn't matter nearly as much as experience and development curve, and right now his is off the charts.

 

[m9]

At this point of the poll, there are a bunch of players that have extremely similar asset value. One of them has taken a very unique way to get there, so I understand why he's harder to place.

That said, with these guys it is extremely subjective and while I find the discussion interesting it's very unreasonable to have that much of an averse reaction to the opinion of others.

There are places on this list where I believe people should be firm in their choice as the data has made it very clear. I don't think this is one of those places.

 

[MS]

At this point of the poll, there are a bunch of players that have extremely similar asset value. One of them has taken a very unique way to get there, so I understand why he's harder to place.

That said, with these guys it is extremely subjective and while I find the discussion interesting it's very unreasonable to have that much of an averse reaction to the opinion of others.

There are places on this list where I believe people should be firm in their choice as the data has made it very clear. I don't think this is one of those places.

Good post. Agreed completely, especially the bolded.

 

[denkiteki]

Likewise, Virtanen clearly has a superior skillset to Carcone and is a far better NHL prospect, and it should be obvious why he's rated well ahead. Do you have Petrus Palmu and Pierre-Luc Dubois rated similarly?

The question isn't if he's better than Carcone but the fact that despite similar production, Carcone isn't in the discussion yet (nor should he be). Carcone likely won't be considered for at least 10 more prospects so is the difference between Carcone and Virtanen really 10+ prospects?

You also got to remember he is on the clock. Virtanen has 1 year of developmental time left (or non-waiver developmental time). The rest have 3+ years (realistically some 5+ years). That alters the value of a player... just like you see teams trying to get whatever assets they could for players who need to clear waivers and not make the team (i.e. possibility for Virtanen next season).

That was ME who mentioned that, and I am the one arguing with you. Does that not indicate something to you?

I actually bought that up a few threads ago too so you weren't the first nor the only one to bring up similar production between Carcone and Virtanen. Again not saying Virtanen should be ranked ~20th (likely range Carcone gets voted) but given his production, one could argue his ranking should be closer to Carcone than #8.

Absolutely nobody is rating him ahead of Pettersson or Boeser or whoever, and that's what you claimed they should be doing if they felt his performance 2 years ago carried value. He's going to be ranked 8th. Ahead of a couple recent low-ish upside 2nd rounders who are miles from the NHL.

And him dropping to 8th reflects that - he's been passed by Demko/Boeser/Goldobin/Gaudette. I can't remember if he was ranked on this list last year, but if he was I'm pretty sure he was top-3.

A couple things...

#1 Lind is considered by many boards as a late first or early second rounder. He had 3rd round projection at the start of the season but was actually one of the fastest raisers. Most mock drafts had him going between 20 and 40 so not exactly late 2nd round. Pretty much every scouting report praises his IQ and high end play making skill. He doesn't bring the physical element, which it seems like you value more (Virtanen/MacEwen/etc) so i can see your reasoning of rating him lower but he isn't by any means a late 2nd rounder on draft boards.

#2 Virtanen was actually #4 last year with Tramkin #5, Gaunce #6, Subban #7, and Stecher #8. Of course the interesting thing is out of the next 4 below him, 3 of them were NHL regulars last season. The 3 ahead of him were Boeser, Juolevi, and Demko.

But also note that really the only person who "passed" Virtanen despite a bad season from him is Gaudatte. The rest of the players ahead of him were ahead of him already or not in the organization. Dahlen and Goldobin were deadline additions. Petterson was added via the draft.

I guess in the end it depends on how you value stats and the timing. If you value them like signing UFA (what you did most recent holding more value than what you did 2 seasons ago), then Virtanen should drop more. If you value draft status more, then Virtanen wins now (or even ahead of Goldobin since he was drafted ahead of him in the same draft).

Everything is subjective and like i said, i'm not exactly surprised Virtanen wins now.... i actually expected it a few times despite him being lower in my rankings. I even made the claim i'm not going to worry about voting for Virtanen because i'm pretty sure he'll win a poll long before i consider voting for him.

We need to do the next poll already since #10 is the next interesting one (based on current results, Lind probably wins #9 tho Gadjovich is keeping it close).

 

[Braeden]

Went with easy Breezer

 

[vancityluongo]

I would have happily taken a #33 pick for Virtanen before the draft, but I don't really like Kole Lind and had him rated much lower. Wouldn't have traded it for Dal Colle.

What about Gadjovich then? You mentioned earlier that you would have essentially taken him at 33. And if you happily trade Jake for Gadjovich value wise, what's the difference in these rankings?

It's certainly not an unreasonable, outrageous stance to have Virtanen here. It's really just splitting hairs and last years rankings show how quickly things change. But like you said, it's more about trying to place a player whose value right now is much harder to place than almost any other Canucks prospect, maybe ever.

In trying to keep consistent with the notion that a mystery box is worth more than a lowered ceiling/raised floor player, even after the last page of posts I still can't really reconcile Jake being higher than the recent second round picks. It's a big deal to look good in the NHL at 19, but it's also a big deal to score 45 goals in the WHL at 17. It's a bigger deal to look awful in the AHL at 20.

Gadjovich had 46 goals in the OHL and hasn't yet played in the NHL, but also hasn't **** the bed in the AHL. An average linear progression still suggests to me a better result at 20 than where Jake is now.

 

[LickTheEnvelope]

We keep getting random team fans voting on these polls as well. Oh well

Oh that makes more sense

 

[LickTheEnvelope]

You're acting like Virtanen now has the same value as Virtanen in 2015.

2015 Virtanen would have been voted in at #3 in this poll. His stock has dropped considerably.

Based on what?

I think it would make more sense to compare him to Lind and Gadjovich, both of whom had more impressive draft years...

 

[MS]

Based on what?

I think it would make more sense to compare him to Lind and Gadjovich, both of whom had more impressive draft years...

Most re-drafts a year after the 2014 draft had Virtanen in the 12-16 range. He wasn't even remotely on par with new 2nd rounders.

Again, I feel weird defending Virtanen, but the over-reaction here is getting a little silly.

 

[ChilliBilly]

Most re-drafts a year after the 2014 draft had Virtanen in the 12-16 range. He wasn't even remotely on par with new 2nd rounders.

Again, I feel weird defending Virtanen, but the over-reaction here is getting a little silly.

Well said. Its just a poll made by fans. No one went out and killed a kitten.

Virtanen has a lot on his plate this year. Hope he shows he can play in the NHL.

Was he the wrong choice? Of course. I haven't seen a person on here defend the pick. Not one. But he is just a kid. Maybe he turns out to be decent NHLer. How many players have beed condemned to nothingness on here? A year ago they were saying that about Tryamkin. Now they are whining that he bolted. This happens every year.

 

[Zarpan]

Gadjovich had 46 goals in the OHL and hasn't yet played in the NHL, but also hasn't **** the bed in the AHL. An average linear progression still suggests to me a better result at 20 than where Jake is now.

I like Gadjovich, but his skating is a concern. An average linear progression in his skating ability would mean that he still wouldn't be able to keep up well with the NHL pace in a few years. His skating apparently improved noticeably during the last year, so there's hope there, but skating is a major factor for how production translates as you move up levels.

That's why I can see putting MacEwan ahead of Virtanen though. Good wheels combined with a nice trajectory.

 

[JumpierPegasus]

Based on what?

I think it would make more sense to compare him to Lind and Gadjovich, both of whom had more impressive draft years...

Virtanen's 45 goals in his draft year was an absolutely fantastic number, he had a fantastic shot, great speed, and size, all of which were considered top of the draft. Looking back at that Calgary team, they finished with an impressive 103 points, but the team wasn't all that talented. It was carried by the top line, which was kind of carried by Jake (he really propped up Chase that season by scoring so much). Virtanen had a really good season, I doubt he slipped past 10 in that draft.

Lind is maybe a comparable, he was the best player on his team points wise, but he had a solid supporting cast in Merkley, Foote, Gardinier. But he is a slighter forward without a real standout ability so that's why he went lower. Was still ranked around 20-25 on some lists. Gadjovich isn't really comparable, his size is about it. He wasn't as fast as Jake, he was as physical and had the same size, but he played on an excellent Owen Sound team. He was also sort of propped up by Suzuki's skill, unlike Jake where he was the Suzuki in his situation

This is coming from someone who doesn't really like Jake. I don't like the way he plays, it's very junior oriented, and he needs to adapt for the NHL. Knowing him personally I was not a fan of his commitment and attitude, but that seems to have changed if Green is to be believed. But he was really talented in his draft year. Didn't love it at 6 since we left some stuff on the board I would have preferred, but to say Jake had a worse draft season than two second round picks in a weak draft is absurd.

 

[Verviticus]

If he had the same birthday as Lind and Gadjovic, he'd have been a top-10 pick in this year's draft. And he has less CHL experience than those guys. As you said - age doesn't matter nearly as much as experience and development curve, and right now his is off the charts.

age is pretty important when the guy we're talking about played his 20-21 year old season. he's 6'4 and 212lbs, lol

Most re-drafts a year after the 2014 draft had Virtanen in the 12-16 range. He wasn't even remotely on par with new 2nd rounders.

Again, I feel weird defending Virtanen, but the over-reaction here is getting a little silly.

lets say we own virtanen and NYI owns gadjovich. would you swap players with them? now do the reverse, we own gadjovich and they own virtanen. do that swap? FTR, i'd do #1, not #2 for every player ranked so far + lind/gadjovich

i dont see virtanen's ceiling being kreider any more. i think its pretty obvious his high watermark in the WHL was inflated somewhat, even accounting for injuries

 

[Verviticus]

Again, there are no comparables. There has never been another player who performed well as an NHL regular at age 19 and then cratered in that fashion in the AHL at age 20. Comparing him to a bunch of guys who were nothing at 19 and then nothing again at 20 proves nothing.

a friend i asked brought up MPS as a comparison. physically talented, very successful 19 yo season, cratered to the AHL and fell out of the league

anyways, i dont think there arent any comparables. other than MPS im sure they've existed and just got little fanfare. that doesnt imply that there are a LOT, just that its not unique

 

[denkiteki]

Most re-drafts a year after the 2014 draft had Virtanen in the 12-16 range. He wasn't even remotely on par with new 2nd rounders.

Again, I feel weird defending Virtanen, but the over-reaction here is getting a little silly.

I'm not sure which ones you looked at... the only redraft i remember him going in the teens was from the score. draftsite have him going 29th in their redraft and i think that's the most popular redraft site.

https://www.draftsite.com/nhl/redraft/2014/

If you want to go by HF general board redrafts you have him going anywhere from #15 to the 6th round (ok that's a bit extreme/joke).

Also note that most redrafts for 2014 would be done @ 2015... that doesn't take into account his 15-'16 season nor 16-17 seasons.

If there's a redraft of 2014 now (with hindsight), i probably have Virtanen outside my top 60. So from that point of view, i would say a 2nd round pick would likely have more value than him. Here's a look at NHL production from that draft and it shows that although a lot of players haven't made the NHL yet, there are a few who have and more importantly, a lot of them still have 2 years on their waiver clock (Virtanen has 1).

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/nhl2014e.html

Not too hard to find 20+ players who already have more productive careers than Virtanen. 15 seems pretty unlikely since players like Nylander, Ehlers, Larkin, Pastrnak would all likely jump into the top 10. If Tryamkin didn't head over to Russia, he likely would also jump above Virtanen. From our poll, one would suggest both Demko and Goldobin jumping above Virtanen as well. Also later picks like Arvidsson plus quite a few D (like Schmaltz) would likely be drafted before Virtanen (with hindsight).

 

[valkynax]

Is this year gonna be the last chance for Virtanen? Or the next year?

He should at least improve his AHL numbers, last year was absolutely putrid...

 

[maaran]

Is this year gonna be the last chance for Virtanen? Or the next year?

He should at least improve his AHL numbers, last year was absolutely putrid...

If he doesn't drastically improve his ahl numbers, then you can consider Virtanen to no longer have the potential for a "top 6" role. He is probably going to be an Nhl'er, but it just matters where he is deployed.

 

[denkiteki]

Is this year gonna be the last chance for Virtanen? Or the next year?

He should at least improve his AHL numbers, last year was absolutely putrid...

its his last year of waiver exemption. That means he needs to clear waivers after the season so he will be on the nhl roster in 2018-2019 since there is almost no chance he clears waivers. Doesnt mean he cant develop in the NHL but it will be a lot harder and evenutally the team might just give up on him to free up a roster spot.