Confirmed with Link: Canucks re-sign Jake Virtanen [2 years, $1.25M AAV]

Serac

#HFOutcasts
Jun 27, 2014
8,674
2,075
B.C.
Was expecting 1x1, so 250k for an extra year seems fair. Just going to avoid looking at Hartman to make myself feel better about contract negotiations though.
 

orcatown

Registered User
Feb 13, 2003
10,251
7,395
Visit site
No problem with this.

Showed some promise last year and the increase in the cap limit is going to mean players like Virtanen get some boost in salary.

If he has a decent year, Virtanen is going to be looking around the room at bunch of people being over paid in comparison to him.
 

me2

Go ahead foot
Jun 28, 2002
37,903
5,595
Make my day.
I sit corrected.
I don't think he really benefit much from OZone starts anyway. He's a mediocre player on the cycle, he's not a good passer, not a good front of net presence and has a limited IQ. Those things are key to being effective when the teams are set up.

The one area he does excel at is carrying the puck in on open play, he generated the most rush attempts of any canuck last year. Admittedly he's not very smart at turning this skill into quality chance, he takes too many bad angle muffins, maybe one day it'll click. Starting in the Dzone is probably as good a place for him, if not better, than starting in the Ozone because it utilities his one great skill.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PuckMunchkin

Cogburn

Pretend they're yachts.
May 28, 2010
15,068
4,467
Vancouver
So Linden steps down, and the next day we sign Virtanen?

Well, it's clear to me. Linden hates Virtanen!
 

DL44

Status quo
Sep 26, 2006
17,894
3,801
Location: Location:
This might turn out to be a very good deal.
The second you realize its a multi year deal makes it a very good deal.

Whatever his developmental progress is plus Tom Wilson's deal will mess with his next contract value.... at least its an extra year away.
 

PuckMunchkin

Very Nice, Very Evil!
Dec 13, 2006
12,219
9,932
Lapland
I don't think he really benefit much from OZone starts anyway. He's a mediocre player on the cycle, he's not a good passer, not a good front of net presence and has a limited IQ. Those things are key to being effective when the teams are set up.

The one area he does excel at is carrying the puck in on open play, he generated the most rush attempts of any canuck last year. Admittedly he's not very smart at turning this skill into quality chance, he takes too many bad angle muffins, maybe one day it'll click. Starting in the Dzone is probably as good a place for him, if not better, than starting in the Ozone because it utilities his one great skill.

I say make him a neutral zone specialist! That way the puck is sure to be in transition, one way or another. :thumbu:
 

DL44

Status quo
Sep 26, 2006
17,894
3,801
Location: Location:
I say make him a neutral zone specialist! That way the puck is sure to be in transition, one way or another. :thumbu:

Sounds good to me!
Put Virtanen with Sutter and let them carry the neutral starts (split with the 4th line).
Let Horvat carry the Ozone (split with Sutter), Beagle carry the Dzone (split with everyone).


Now on a tangent...

On average... across the league... there are 60-61 faceoffs per game.

The general ratio :

21 Ozone
21 Dzone
19 Neutral zone

Canucks this season:
60 FO/gm
20 Ozone/gm
21 Dzone/gm
19 Nzone/gm

Never did make sense to me why Zone start percentages were only a ratio of O-D zones.

That "Rate" is misleading as hell.. and often used/quoted without proper context... and usually (99.9%) with zero regard for the actual raw numbers.


60 faceoffs a game..
4 lines in hockey...
Weighted approximately like 22-18-12-8
Then you split by zones...
- Your weakest lines you want starting in the Nzone
- Your best lines you want in either O/ D zone.
- But there 20ish/zone over the course of a game...

If that second line player goes on in a 6-7-5 ratio usage (O-N-D).. people are quoting a 6/11, 54.6% ozone start number and discussing how he was gifted... a 4th liner (like Gaunce) could go 1-5-2.... and people would be quoting his insanely heavy lifting 66% dzone start usage... vs 25% actual personal usage... or an actual game usage of 2/20 of the team's total D zone draws.

Neutral zones need to referenced in order to contextualize the stat better. We would already know who the league's real neutral zone specialists actually are...


Game by game zone start numbers are some of the most useless to ever quote for an individual player... But it continues.. over and over.
For example... that 6-7-5 second line player... with a 54.5% zone start.. switch one O start for a D, and he's now a 45.5% zone start player. 9% swing. One faceoff.
Now compare that to the perception someone has for a 54.5% vs 45.5% player after a game.

/tangent.
 
Last edited:

PuckMunchkin

Very Nice, Very Evil!
Dec 13, 2006
12,219
9,932
Lapland
Sounds good to me!
Put Virtanen with Sutter and let them carry the neutral starts (split with the 4th line).
Let Horvat carry the Ozone (split with Sutter), Beagle carry the Dzone (split with everyone).


Now on a tangent...

On average... across the league... there are 60-61 faceoffs per game.

The general ratio :

21 Ozone
21 Dzone
19 Neutral zone

Canucks this season:
60 FO/gm
20 Ozone/gm
21 Dzone/gm
19 Nzone/gm

Never did make sense to me why Zone start percentages were only a ratio of O-D zones.

That "Rate" is misleading as hell.. and often used/quoted without proper context... and usually (99.9%) with zero regard for the actual raw numbers.


60 faceoffs a game..
4 lines in hockey...
Weighted approximately like 22-18-12-8
Then you split by zones...
- Your weakest lines you want starting in the Nzone
- Your best lines you want in either O/ D zone.
- But there 20ish/zone over the course of a game...

If that second line player goes on in a 6-7-5 ratio usage (O-N-D).. people are quoting a 6/11, 54.6% ozone start number and discussing how he was gifted... a 4th liner (like Gaunce) could go 1-5-2.... and people would be quoting his insanely heavy lifting 66% dzone start usage... vs 25% actual personal usage... or an actual game usage of 2/20 of the team's total D zone draws.

Neutral zones need to referenced in order to contextualize the stat better. We would already know who the league's real neutral zone specialists actually are...


Game by game zone start numbers are some of the most useless to ever quote for an individual player... But it continues.. over and over.
For example... that 6-7-5 second line player... with a 54.5% zone start.. switch one O start for a D, and he's now a 45.5% zone start player. 9% swing. One faceoff.
Now compare that to the perception someone has for a 54.5% vs 45.5% player after a game.

/tangent.

Damn. Is that how they are split? I assumed it was split from the red line, with the middle dot face offs rare enough not to count.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->