Jake Virtanen, Adam Gaudette, and the inarguable problem of the bottom 6.

[Love]

The OP’s premise is based mostly on Jake being cheap. But is he going to be cheap moving forward? He’s at $1.25 mill which is cheap but he is a rfa with arbitration rights.

Fabbri in Detroit, just got $2.95 mill per for 2 years and has pretty much been a 0.5 PPG player for his career. More was expected from him but injuries have held him back.

If that is a Comparable for Jake in arbitration which I’m sure it will be, can the Canucks afford Jake at anything above $2.5 mill per? If you start running the numbers on guys on bridge type contracts coming off elc with around 35-45 prorated points for a season what are their cap hits?

unlikely to be $1.5 mill.

therein lies the issue with Jake. Is he a $3 mill player? If he is, that impacts what you do moving forward.

Canucks have $17 mill in cap space.

Virtanen, Motte, Gaudette, Stecher are rfa.
Toffoli, Markstrom, Tanev, Fantenberg are ufa.

they have 9 forwards signed, 10 if you include MacEwen I believe. On D, you have 4 guys signed who were on the roster and 1 goalie.

so with $17 mill you need to get 5 forwards, 3 Dmen and 1 goalie. That is 9 players for under $2 mill each on average.

Gaudette, Motte, Juolevi would come in around $3.5 or mill combined. Would then leave $13.5 mill for 6 players.

If jake is coming in at $3 mill then you have $10.5 mill for 5 skaters.

if that 5 skaters remaining there is an opening in the second line spot. Other spot up front is depth.

and it is very important to ensure enough cap space comes off in 2021 to ensure that you can extend Hughes and Pettersson for their approximately $18 mill combined.

so any notion of moving Sutter and using his cap space to improve next years roster has to consider the impact of not having that cap space available the following season assuming you are replacing him with a guy on a multi year contract.

so for me, you roll with pretty much the same roster and try to unload one of roussel, Beagle, or even a Eriksson to Seattle (ideally I’d like to see the Canucks bury him in the A next season hoping that he doesn’t report and they can terminate his contract).

Even if Jake is making 3 mil that’s WAY better value than what we’re getting from our other bottom 6 players so I don’t agree with what you’re saying here at all

 

[Kryten]

Realistically I want Leivo, Motte, Virtanen, MacEwan, Beagle yes Beagle to stick around.

Sutter, Eriksson, Roussel, Ferland to never return. Gaudette I don’t care either way

 

[VanJack]

Combined, the salaries for Gaudette and Virtanen likely won't crack the plateau of $3m a season next year. For context, that's about one-third of what the Canucks are paying Eriksson to eat popcorn in the press-box; and Baertschi to stay home.

 

[The Drop]

Combined, the salaries for Gaudette and Virtanen likely won't crack the plateau of $3m a season next year. For context, that's about one-third of what the Canucks are paying Eriksson to eat popcorn in the press-box; and Baertschi to stay home.

Virtanen had 18 goals and arb rights. He can prob get around 3mil on his own.

 

[StreetHawk]

Even if Jake is making 3 mil that’s WAY better value than what we’re getting from our other bottom 6 players so I don’t agree with what you’re saying here at all

Issue is whether the Canucks can move the other $3 mill guys as well. You can keep Jake around. The sacrifice is going to be Toffoli up front.

have to fight as hard as you can against jake to keep that number low. Can’t afford another Sven mistake where you don’t use the time when you have it. If you commit like they did with Sven you can’t be changing your mind a year later.

 

[Grumbler]

This is going to be a very difficult problem to address. This team needs cheap size and youth, not necessarily too much skill there, but players that can play well cohesively in a good system (which we also need a better coaching staff to get) and that may take years (even if we suddenly have competent management not to mention how much longer if we don't like we are right now...)...and will definitely hurt the core's prime years.

As much as I hate to say it, this was the year we had to win (which to my surprise we clearly shown we cannot for any subset of the span of 60 minutes play with Vegas in that game 7 despite us basically having a wall in net)...We are probably going to be worse next year mainly because of this cap issue.

 

[wonton15]

Virtanen I don't mind keeping but wouldn't be surprised if he leaves or is traded.

Gaudette I would like to see moved but I have a feeling management likes him a lot. And he probably has more value internally than in a trade

 

[Canucks1096]

I think the issue with the bottom 6 is the center are not good enough to make their wingers better. Starts with the middle, the center should be the one that s carrying the line, making the line better. Gaudette, Sutter, Beagle can't do that. They need to find a way to upgrade the third line center.

 

[Diversification]

The thing with Virtanen is that he is inconsistent, maddeningly so. I don't see that changing anytime soon, if ever. In theory, a forward that play up and down the top 9 is a great thing to have. Even more so with his combination of size, skating and shot.

But he's not someone you can play up and down as the situation dictates. Rather, his play is all over the map and you have to accommodate where he is in his yo-yo-ing phase of play. That's annoying to deal with for the coaching staff and it's likely just as annoying to contend with for the players.

If we deal Virtanen for cap space and replace him with MacEwan, you lose some of his versatility. He can sometimes play as far up as the first line with EP and JTM, but you can't count on it and you don't know how long it will last before JV turns back into a pumpkin. With MacEwan, you have a guy who will play 75% of the time on the 4th line and spot duty on the 3rd. But he's known quantity.

The cap space JV buys you, however, is the main prize. It allows us to keep Tanev and sign a decent backup for Demko to ease him into the starter job. It gives us some flexibility on some other trades if we need to retain salary. In short, it buys us flexibility when the cap is at its tightest next season and wiggle room for the following season when EP and QH need 2nd contracts.

I wouldn't be surprised if we keep him. But I also wouldn't be too broken up if he's dealt as a means to free up cap.

 

[VanillaCoke]

This is going to be a super interesting offseason..



I'd keep Virtanen another year, should be able to sign him cheap.
Keep Baertschi and play him in Pearson's spot, who is sold high to whoever for whatever.

 

[CpatainCanuck]

I actually don't think the bottom six was that bad this year. They provided little to no offence, and ideally they should have been played a lot less than they were. Green seemed to think they warranted nearly as much ice time as the top-six.

The problem is they cost 20 million dollars this year and 20 million dollars next year.

The team should be in a position where they can add a high end free agent for a run next year: instead they will probably be unable to even maintain a similar roster next year.

 

[Didalee Hed]

Ok I want to stop you right there, Mr. Moderator. I know your itchy trigger finger is dying to move this to the management thread but this isn’t about Benning and management. Hear me out.



Obviously we’ve all been hearing a lot of criticism about Jake Virtanen. Adam Gaudette has gotten some too after having 0 points in 10 playoff games. Satiar Shah, who I normally find to be logical, level headed, and just all around seems to be a nice guy, had a take that inspired this thread for me.

In a tweet the other day, Shah said he thinks one way for the Canucks to improve their bottom 6 would be to trade JV. This is not a new or shocking opinion by any means, but I will attempt to show that it is in fact a logically incorrect opinion. That is, if opinions can in fact be incorrect and you are in fact trying to make the best hockey team possible.


Jake Virtanen is probably our best skating forward on a team that is imo starved for more speed up front. He had 18g 18a 36pts in 69 games this season. That prorates to 21g 21a 42pts over a full 82 game season. Virtanen’s 36 points was good enough for 161st in the NHL in points and 137th among forwards. That puts him, strictly based on math, as a 2nd line player based on his production. There are 31 teams in the NHL and each team has 6 top 6 forwards (duh) meaning there are 186 top 6 forwards.

This isn’t surprising for anyone paying attention. What is surprising, however, is that Virtanen did this while being 312th(!!!) among NHL forwards in ice time per game. What that means is, simply based on math, Virtanen was a 4th liner. Or rather he was given the ice time of a 4th liner.

“Ok, so what? He’s not a responsible player. We’re much better off having Loui in the top 6! Virtanen is a black hole on offence and doesn’t help his linemates!”

Statistically, you are wrong again.


This is from Brian Choi:

“Analytically, the line of Pettersson – Miller – Virtanen was one of the best the Canucks rolled out all season. According to moneypuck.com’s model, their Expected Goals for Per 60 Minutes (xG/60)* of 3.84 was the highest of any Canuck line combination. League-wide, they were no slouch as their 3.84 xG/60 put them at 3rd. Their Corsi* and Fenwick* was also the highest of any Canuck line combination, at a very impressive 58.3% and 59.7%, respectively. For those unfamiliar with Corsi and Fenwick, Corsi measures total shot attempts for, while Fenwick measures unblocked shot attempts for. In other words, 58.3% of the total shot attempts and 59.7% of the total unblocked shot attempts belonged to the Canucks when Pettersson – Miller – Virtanen were on the ice.”

The Breakout Season of Vancouver Canucks Winger Jake Virtanen


You can literally make a statistical argument that Virtanen was the best RW for the Miller-EP line this season. Better than Boeser on that line, better than Toffoli on that line, he was that good. His points per 60 was better than anyone not named Pettersson, Boeser, Miller, and Gaudette, all while playing primarily with 3rd and 4th liners.



Ok so now you’re wondering, so what? “I still think he’s lazy, don’t like him, I’m still crying that he’s not Cam Neely”, etc.


When you compare Jake to someone like let’s say Antoine Roussel, the comparison becomes especially stark. Roussel makes triple what Virtanen makes and is significantly less productive. But this comparison is relevant because of Virtanen is traded, this is the type of replacement we’re looking at.

We can ALL agree that the bottom 6 needs to get better. The problem is, when you have someone like Sat Shah (and many other fans) suggesting we trade Virtanen, all that will do is make the problem worse. If we ditch Virtanen who takes his spot? There’s one of two options: it’s either someone like Zack MacEwen who is significantly worse than Virtanen (sorry guys it’s just unarguable. I like MacEwen too but it’s a shooting gallery against him when he’s out there) or the other option is signing a veteran like Roussel who will cost double what Virtanen will cost while still being a lesser player.


I can see it now. As soon as we trade Virtanen, within the next 6 months Canucks fans will be saying: “We need young cheap players who can contribute! We have way too many old overpaid players!”

So to many of you who want Virtanen gone but also want the bottom 6 to improve, what’s your end game?


Step 1: Trade our most productive bottom 6er.

Step 2: Sign an older, more expensive, worse player to replace him.

Step 3: ????

Step 4: Bottom 6 gets better.




Look I think JV is maybe the most misrepresented and unfairly treated player I’ve seen in this market. Obviously I’m a fan of his and obviously he isn’t perfect. I think so many criticize him relentlessly because they’re still hung up on where he was drafted and had uninformed expectations of what kind of player he is. He can hit but he’s not Bertuzzi. He can fight sometimes but he’s not Jamie Benn. But he is a big, fast, productive young player who continues to get better. There are probably 5-10 other players who deserve the criticism JV gets much more than Jake.


Anyway that’s the end of my rant for now. I know many of you will still light up Jake for some unsubstantiated reason like “hE’s fAT tHo” or “hE SuX dEfeNSivElY”, both of which are untrue. Also I didn’t mention Gaudette much but pretty much all of what I said about JV can also be applied to Gaudette. The worst thing we could do is trade AG and replace him with a more expensive and less productive player.

Jake on that line produced the most expected offence but was also the poorest defensively. Brock being on that line produced a higher ratio of expected production vs expected goals against. Virtanen on that line makes it higher event, but you lose out on the amount of “winning” the matchups.

 

[m9]

I think in a perfect world it would be nice to turn that 3rd into into a young, fast, offensive line with Gaudette and Virtanen. Maybe you flip Virtanen onto the left wing and get MacEwen onto the right side.

This is where the bottom six extra bodies and bloated contracts become an issue. Roussel, Motte, Beagle, and Sutter are all probably going to be in the lineup but don't fit on the top line. So can you move Roussel and then go with a Virtanen/Gaudette/MacEwen & Motte/Beagle/Sutter bottom six for next year? Maybe that makes the most sense.

 

[Wildcarder]

The big problem is that we have too many bottom 6 players (Virtanen, Gaudette, Roussel) who are not trusted to defend leads or play on the PK, and also don't produce offense or drive play consistently enough to make them worthwhile.

You need to have some balance here, otherwise what's the point of having them unless they're dirt cheap?

 

[Love]

The big problem is that we have too many bottom 6 players (Virtanen, Gaudette, Roussel) who are not trusted to defend leads or play on the PK, and also don't produce offense or drive play consistently enough to make them worthwhile.

You need to have some balance here, otherwise what's the point of having them unless they're dirt cheap?

You say those three players (Virtanen, Gaudette, Roussel) are the "big problem" in the bottom 6 and that they don't drive play yet those three drive play better than the other three players in our bottom 6. Sutter and Beagle are somehow trusted to defend leads which is an absolute joke since they cant keep the puck out of their own end.

But yes they kill penalties. We seem to have an extremely low bar for those two. Like AHL level low bar.

 

[Wildcarder]

You say those three players (Virtanen, Gaudette, Roussel) are the "big problem" in the bottom 6 and that they don't drive play yet those three drive play better than the other three players in our bottom 6. Sutter and Beagle are somehow trusted to defend leads which is an absolute joke since they cant keep the puck out of their own end.

But yes they kill penalties. We seem to have an extremely low bar for those two. Like AHL level low bar.

I don't have a problem with the 3 individually, but I do think we have a balance problem when half of our bottom 6 is in this category. If we don't want our top 6 playing much on the PK, we can't have half of our bottom 6 as non PKers. I also think Sutter and Beagle are redundant from a balance perspective, especially given their salary. The problem is that one or both of them have always been injured which means we've had to play Horvat 23 minutes a game when you add PK duties on him.

One of the three needs to go (ideally Roussel) as does Sutter. Ideally you have to hope that Gaudette develops into a better two-way option or can be taught to PK.

 

[Love]

I don't have a problem with the 3 individually, but I do think we have a balance problem when half of our bottom 6 is in this category. If we don't want our top 6 playing much on the PK, we can't have half of our bottom 6 as non PKers. I also think Sutter and Beagle are redundant from a balance perspective, especially given their salary. The problem is that one or both of them have always been injured which means we've had to play Horvat 23 minutes a game when you add PK duties on him.

One of the three needs to go (ideally Roussel) as does Sutter. Ideally you have to hope that Gaudette develops into a better two-way option or can be taught to PK.

I can agree with this. Sutter or Beagle (preferably Beagle imo) should go. I also think Gaudette and Virtanen could learn to PK and it would be in their best interest to do so.

Ideally a bottom 6 player can kill penalties AND not get obliterated at 5 on 5. Right now we don’t have any player in our bottom 6 who fits that description.

 

[Wildcarder]

I can agree with this. Sutter or Beagle (preferably Beagle imo) should go. I also think Gaudette and Virtanen could learn to PK and it would be in their best interest to do so.

Ideally a bottom 6 player can kill penalties AND not get obliterated at 5 on 5. Right now we don’t have any player in our bottom 6 who fits that description.

I agree. I think Virtanen is the closest player we have who can be the solution here. I think the biggest problem we're all trying to solve is finding a bottom 6 that can hold their own on 5 on 5 play. It was painful watching us against Vegas. I think honestly a big issue here as well is having a second mobile defenseman not named Hughes.

 

[Grub]

Don’t really care what happens to Gaudette. Was complete trash all playoffs and a no show.

 

[StreetHawk]

I actually don't think the bottom six was that bad this year. They provided little to no offence, and ideally they should have been played a lot less than they were. Green seemed to think they warranted nearly as much ice time as the top-six.

The problem is they cost 20 million dollars this year and 20 million dollars next year.

The team should be in a position where they can add a high end free agent for a run next year: instead they will probably be unable to even maintain a similar roster next year.

I agree. But this is the when the Canucks have to pay Peter after borrowing to pay Paul.

signing these bloated contracts in which they attached term was always going to cost them down the road. They had the cap room back then but ultimately to get the player signed they added term.

like honestly, if Aquaman was prepared to pay Eriksson $31 mill over 4 years (ie Including his $3 mill bonus) why not structure the deal to be $7.75 mill for 4 years against the cap? Had plenty of room over the past few years to go higher. Maybe that extra $1.75 mill would have meant no Ferland this past summer.

but they gave out term. Now it’s time to pay Peter as the old adage goes.

 

[Zippgunn]

Based on the playoffs, the bottom 6...

Motte>Virtanen>Gaudette>Beagle/Macewen>Sutter/Roussel/Eriksson

For a big strong guy Virtanen plays a soft skilled game, he’s a useful player as he has the ability to play up and down the lineup, however Virtanen isn’t fiesty and relentless enough to play in the bottom 6 full time, and doesn’t have the high awareness to play in the top 6 full time. Coach is always trying to jump start his play every few games by giving him time in the top 6, he excels for a while before eventually fading and the cycle just continues. The ideal fit for Virtanen would be on a Scoring 3rd line. I would also put him on LW as that is were he had success in junior, being a right hand shot it would give him more opportunities and make it easier to drive to the net, playing RW he’s forced to go straight and around the net. A line of Virtanen-Gaudette-Leivo should work nicely.

Good God man that line would have been eaten alive by Vegas...

 

[Bad Goalie]

Virtanen I don't mind keeping but wouldn't be surprised if he leaves or is traded.

Gaudette I would like to see moved but I have a feeling management likes him a lot. And he probably has more value internally than in a trade

"I don't mind keeping but wouldn't be surprised if he leaves or is traded." This statement has a big problem within it.

Jake can be "traded". That half holds up.

Jake cannot just up and "leave". He is an RFA which means he is still under Vancouver's grasp. Vancouver can settle on a qualifying number and make him an offer. He can turn it down. If Vancouver accepts Jake is looking for more than they are willing to offer and will file for arbitration and they believe he would win they can simply not offer him a qualifying offer in the first place. In this case he would become an Unrestricted Free Agent.

This last track would simply be ludicrous for Vancouver to employ. A player at his age, who put up essentially a .5 PPG average, is worth something on the trade market. LETTING him just walk away would be flat out insane for a team that needs to gain cap space.

So, I would guess they are inquiring as to what teams would be willing to pay for him. Hopefully, it's being done quietly. If the return is worth it, look for him to be traded. If something can't be worked out to their advantage look for the Canucks to try and get Jake to sign a friendly hometown deal in order to avoid the higher likely arbitration award.

JB working the kind of financial finagling the Canucks need to do this off season with all of their upcoming contracts that need to be settled within their cap state is going to be interesting to watch.

 

[2011 still hurts]

on the list of issues with this team virtanen is way way down the list now

completely fine with keeping him at a discount as a player u can move up and down the lineup and if he plateus after this i honestly don't give a f***

all tools, no toolbox, cant cycle low hockey iq etc etc i agree but there's a reason to keep a player that u can get production out of and who helps matchup against certain top 2 lines better

get rid of sutter, eriksonn, roussel or myers before u get rid of jv

 

[lawrence]

I never had a problem with Jake. He's executing his role the best he can as a young kid in his first playoff run with his home team the best he can. He is literally leading our team in hits and consistently been doing that the most through the entire playoffs more then anyone else. Him and Rouselle.

I've concluded he will never lite it up like Boeser or become a top 6 offensive winger. I peg him as a bottom liner role 20 goals 20 assist, banger type of player. I have no issues with Jake right now and even Gaudette.

If you ask me the problem was actually Myers in our top 4. He is not top 4 dman material and I think it's best his ice time gets allocated to someone more capable. Myers should be a bottom pairing guy.

 

[lawrence]

Jake and Gaudette didn't develop as much as I would like to see during the season

they literally had their best season. Jake almost scored 20 if the season didn't end.

This is also Gaudettes 2nd season, gimme a break.