Player Discussion Jake Virtanen Part 2

[TruKnyte]

I'm loving Jake's game this year. Over the last 3 years he's gone from barely a pro, to a steady pro/borderline NHLer, to a top 9 forward that can score, hit and disrupt possession with his speed and reach. And I love that Roussell seems to be rubbing off a bit on Jake...starting to see some **** disturbing in JV's game.

He's also shown for two straight off-seasons that he has a good recognition of what he needs to improve, and then puts the work into improving it. He's turning himself into a very valuable support piece that can play anywhere in the lineup. Like to see him start getting some PK time at some point, but not atm with the way it's rolling.

I thought when Virtanen was drafted that he could potentially turn into a Raffi Torres for us, seeing some comparables in their game now.

 

[Pip]

Hockey is a tough game, especially in the playoffs, and will always be. Teams will always need the Virtanen/Wilson type players to win ?Cups. Teams without those players will get pounded. It’s clear that JB picked the right player in Jake.

Pittsburgh

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Hockey is a tough game, especially in the playoffs, and will always be. Teams will always need the Virtanen/Wilson type players to win ?Cups. Teams without those players will get pounded. It’s clear that JB picked the right player in Jake.

You didn’t answer my question about how Pittsburgh won back-to-back Cups without what you call a quintessential player. Try again...

 

[Shareefruck]

I disagree with the notion that you shouldn't compare players with who could/should have been drafted before them, or that this suggests that someone can't be happy with the progress that the player has made. I also disagree that comparing players with those drafted ahead of them that were never on the table is relevant, let alone something that we should roll our eyes about not being mentioned.

You can happily do both. Virtanen has done extremely well to reverse his fortunes after his future looked a bit grim, and he should be praised and looked forward to for that. He looks like a piece that can be a really effective role player on a contending team, which even most skeptics at the time of the trade thought his ceiling could be. Yet it can also reasonably be acknowledged that he hasn't caught up to Ehlers/Nylander, and that those who felt they were the obvious draft choices over him still appear to be justified in thinking that.

It doesn't need to stop being brought up in order to appreciate what Virtanen's doing.

 

[Mr Plow]

I disagree with the notion that you shouldn't compare players with who could/should have been drafted before them

Sure, but do it in the management thread if you feel compelled to talk about them. Passing on Ehlers/Nylander has some relevance for our management, but it has zero relevance on Jake Virtanen as a player.

 

[Shareefruck]

Sure, but do it in the management thread if you feel compelled to talk about them. Passing on Ehlers/Nylander has some relevance for our management, but it has zero relevance on Jake Virtanen as a player.

Agreed, but that doesn't appear to line up with the sentiment that the comments in this thread that I'm referring to seem to be expressing. Yours is a completely different (more agreeable) reason altogether.

That said, personally, I've never been fully on board with the idea of total segregation of discussion topics-- It's always seemed weird to me. For any good conversation, there's always going to be tangentially relevant subjects that overlap and bleed into others and diverge into weird nooks and crannies. It seems a little crazy to me to say "you can talk about the player here, but anything about the circumstances that lead to acquiring them is off limits!", but I get the rules and I'll play ball.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

I disagree with the notion that you shouldn't compare players with who could/should have been drafted before them, or that this suggests that someone can't be happy with the progress that the player has made. I also disagree that comparing players with those drafted ahead of them that were never on the table is relevant, let alone something that we should roll our eyes about not being mentioned.

You can happily do both. Virtanen has done extremely well to reverse his fortunes after his future looked a bit grim, and he should be praised and looked forward to for that. He looks like a piece that can be a really effective role player on a contending team, which even most skeptics at the time of the trade thought his ceiling could be. Yet it can also reasonably be acknowledged that he hasn't caught up to Ehlers/Nylander, and that those who felt they were the obvious draft choices over him still appear to be justified in thinking that.

It doesn't need to stop being brought up in order to appreciate what Virtanen's doing.

This is a fair point that I can appreciate.

Virtanen is still tracking to be a Raffi Torres-esque player (which is actually a generous comparison at this point in time when you compare both players' development at the same age). Not a slight against Virtanen, but a realistic comparable at this point. Personally, I'd always take the finesse, skilled forward that put up two 60 point seasons in his first three years in the NHL. Both useful players, but I prefer the higher skill/ceiling player that could be a game breaking top 6 forward, over the physical top 9 forward with lower hockey IQ.

 

[Shareefruck]

This is a fair point that I can appreciate.

Virtanen is still tracking to be a Raffi Torres-esque player (which is actually a generous comparison at this point in time when you compare both players' development at the same age). Not a slight against Virtanen, but a realistic comparable at this point. Personally, I'd always take the finesse, skilled forward that put up two 60 point seasons in his first three years in the NHL. Both useful players, but I prefer the higher skill/ceiling player that could be a game breaking top 6 forward, over the physical top 9 forward with lower hockey IQ.

It's not even really a matter of stylistic preference, IMO. Even if one prefers complete packages over one-dimensional game-breaking pure-skill players (I think I lean towards the former in general), that idea can only be taken so far.

While I think Virtanen has turned into a relatively strong player physically and defensively, he hasn't been SO dominant in either of those areas (nor are Ehlers/Nylander such liabilities in those areas) that he suddenly becomes more effective than guys scoring 50% more than he is. I mean, only guys with Selke/Stevens/Prime Lucic-level intangibles generally make up that kind of ground in place of offense (and even then the idea is still often questioned and scrutinized), and Virtanen certainly isn't on that level yet.

 

[nucksflailtogether]

This is a fair point that I can appreciate.

Virtanen is still tracking to be a Raffi Torres-esque player (which is actually a generous comparison at this point in time when you compare both players' development at the same age). Not a slight against Virtanen, but a realistic comparable at this point. Personally, I'd always take the finesse, skilled forward that put up two 60 point seasons in his first three years in the NHL. Both useful players, but I prefer the higher skill/ceiling player that could be a game breaking top 6 forward, over the physical top 9 forward with lower hockey IQ.

That's fair. But how many times does it have to be said? We're beating a dead horse a thousand times over. I've never seen a discussion get so stuck in the mud and people just happy to stay there.

 

[topched88]

I honestly don’t get how people still enjoy talking about virtanen vs ehlers/ nylander.

He wasn’t the right pick at the time, it’s over. And even if he is improving and closing the gap, he still has to make up for the past 3 seasons of utility that ehlers and nylander were quite literally in another league compared to virtanen. Leave it alone man.

The player himself in my opinion has taken a good step this year, but I don’t think quite as big as this season has shown so far. I don’t know, but I’m sure someone could tell me how his shooting % compares this year to last two? In any event, I had hoped virtanen might be able to still turn into a middle six 20-20 player who brings some speed and a heavy brand of hockey. I’m not convinced he’s that player yet but he’s trending the right way

 

[Fatass]

I honestly don’t get how people still enjoy talking about virtanen vs ehlers/ nylander.

He wasn’t the right pick at the time, it’s over. And even if he is improving and closing the gap, he still has to make up for the past 3 seasons of utility that ehlers and nylander were quite literally in another league compared to virtanen. Leave it alone man.

The player himself in my opinion has taken a good step this year, but I don’t think quite as big as this season has shown so far. I don’t know, but I’m sure someone could tell me how his shooting % compares this year to last two? In any event, I had hoped virtanen might be able to still turn into a middle six 20-20 player who brings some speed and a heavy brand of hockey. I’m not convinced he’s that player yet but he’s trending the right way

Guys like Ehlers and Nylander come available every draft, and via trade for 2nd round picks. Guys like Jake are far more rare. I heard a guy on 650 say that everyone would love to have Tom Wilson (it was the guy who does those 31 thoughts). He said Wilson is 25, and added Jake is getting into that territory as a play. Jake is only 22.

 

[ErrantShepherd]

Guys like Ehlers and Nylander come available every draft, and via trade for 2nd round picks.

Yes, every draft usually in the 1-10 range... sometimes 1-15 if lucky or even 23rd.
Nylander and Ehlers went 8-9 in 2014 respectively.

Getting a Nylander or Ehlers for 2nd round picks would be a ridiculous steal of a trade, and likely result in that GM being fired not too long after.

...I like Jake too, but c'mon.

 

[Fatass]

Yes, every draft usually in the 1-10 range... sometimes 1-15 if lucky or even 23rd.
Nylander and Ehlers went 8-9 in 2014 respectively.

Getting a Nylander or Ehlers for 2nd round picks would be a ridiculous steal of a trade, and likely result in that GM being fired not too long after.

...I like Jake too, but c'mon.

Baer was a top 15 pick. We got him for a second. These little skilled wingers need the right setting to perform their best, and often don’t get going if not given that setting.
Jake has a much more unique skill set.

 

[bossram]

Baer was a top 15 pick. We got him for a second. These little skilled wingers need the right setting to perform their best, and often don’t get going if not given that setting.
Jake has a much more unique skill set.

Does "unique" necessarily mean better though?

Your comparison is also extremely bad. You're using Baertschi as a proxy for Nylander/Ehlers. But Baertschi is not even close the latter two. You're never getting those guys for a 2nd round pick. Jake has been progressing nicely. It looks like he'll turn out to be a Torres/Booth hybrid (which is literally what I said on these boards at the time of the draft) and that's fine. That's a useful player. He's progressing well.

Ehlers/Nylander were still better picks. They are better players. All of the above can still be true. It's not mutually exclusive. I don't get why we can't just comfortably state all the facts and not get upset:

1. Jake is progressing well and will turn out to be a valuable NHL player
2. Ehlers/Nylander are better players

 

[Fatass]

Does "unique" necessarily mean better though?

Your comparison is also extremely bad. You're using Baertschi as a proxy for Nylander/Ehlers. But Baertschi is not even close the latter two. You're never getting those guys for a 2nd round pick. Jake has been progressing nicely. It looks like he'll turn out to be a Torres/Booth hybrid (which is literally what I said on these boards at the time of the draft) and that's fine. That's a useful player. He's progressing well.

Ehlers/Nylander were still better picks. They are better players. All of the above can still be true. It's not mutually exclusive. I don't get why we can't just comfortably state all the facts and not get upset:

1. Jake is progressing well and will turn out to be a valuable NHL player
2. Ehlers/Nylander are better players

Different players. Jake is unique. That makes him more important to a Cup team, much like Tom Wilson was to Washington.
And I like Ehlers! I think he’s a way better player than Nylander.

 

[ErrantShepherd]

Baer was a top 15 pick. We got him for a second. These little skilled wingers need the right setting to perform their best, and often don’t get going if not given that setting.
Jake has a much more unique skill set.

Baertschi was 13 overall by Calgary in 2011. 3 years prior. Outside of the top 10. 4-5 picks beyond Nylander and Ehlers. 8 and 9th in 2011 for comparisons sake are Sean Couturier and Dougie Hamilton both of whom I would consider superior players and cost far more than a second round pick.

The point of contention here isn't about Jake. We both value him and like his skillset. You seem to be vastly underestimating the value of players like Nylander and Ehlers though.

Ehlers and Nylander in their last two seasons at 20-21 years of age both put up 60 point and above seasons playing almost all games.

Baertschi at 20-21 years of age put up 21 points in 46 NHL games for the Flames those two seasons combined. That is why he was available for just a 2nd.

Sven since hasn't even played close to a full 82 game schedule yet, and his career high so far is 35pts/68gm.

Again, you can get another Baertschi for a 2nd round pick, but not another Nylander or Ehlers, the value and production provided by those two are on a whole other level.

...that said, it would be cool to see Jake eventually eclipse Sven's point totals while providing that power forward playstyle. That could actually happen if he keeps up this progression.

 

[Shareefruck]

That's fair. But how many times does it have to be said? We're beating a dead horse a thousand times over. I've never seen a discussion get so stuck in the mud and people just happy to stay there.

If someone continually argues that the opposite is true a thousand times over, then the counter-position should be provided a thousand times over. As long as it's still a common sentiment, it isn't really a dead horse.

Different players. Jake is unique. That makes him more important to a Cup team, much like Tom Wilson was to Washington.
And I like Ehlers! I think he’s a way better player than Nylander.

Uniqueness can certainly be a part of the consideration, but you're acting like it super-cedes absolutely every other consideration, regardless of the caliber of player.

Like you said, it may be sensible to value Virtanen, a 35-40 point pace guy, over a 45 point pace guy like Sven Baertschi (for the sake of the hypothetical, let's just pretend that Baertschi isn't older and injury prone as well) on the basis of his uniqueness and overall game, even when the latter outproduces him by 5-10 points (I certainly would), but as you move up to better and better offensive players (which Ehlers/Nylander, who are closer to 60-65 point pace guys, certainly are), that notion becomes progressively more absurd and unfounded.

It not that far off from arguing that you would take the 60 point version Milan Lucic over a 100 point offensive forward who plays a more typical style. In fact, that's really generous, because Virtanen, at this stage in his career, is not close to a prime-Lucic level of unique/one of a kind. There's a clear limit to the value of uniqueness.

 

[Zippgunn]

I've been as hard on Jake as anybody here and am happy to say that he is finally starting to look like the player that I thought we were drafting back when we did just that. If he continues to progress I feel he will be a more useful player than either Nylander or Ehlers both of whom are high talent-low grit kind of players who often can disappear when the going gets tough. If he can turn into a 25-25 kind of player with speed and sandpaper I will say that he was indeed the best player taken at his point in the draft. Onwards and upwards...

 

[bossram]

Different players. Jake is unique. That makes him more important to a Cup team, much like Tom Wilson was to Washington.
And I like Ehlers! I think he’s a way better player than Nylander.

"Unique" doesn't trump "being a better player". Why would an inferior player be more important to a Cup calibre team?

The Wilson argument doesn't make sense. Wilson is also a very useful, very effective (albeit extremely dirty) player. He is currently a much better player than Jake. But let's not kid ourselves. The drivers of that team are OV, Kuzy, Backstrom, Carlson, Niskanen/Orlov. You subtract one of their 1C calibre players, they're done. You subtract Wilson, sure they're worse, but still a good team. And again, Jake is not even as good as Wilson.

I also don't understand this "playoffs" argument. At no point in Jake's career has he shown any exceptional aptitude in the playoffs or any "clutch" ability. He was famously bad at the WJCs one year. And we also have to, y'know, actually make the playoffs first. Who is going to help us get there more? A legitimate 1st line winger or Jake Virtanen?

You want good players. Sure, being a "good fit" or "unique" is a bonus, but you should never pass over legitimately better players to chase some mythical qualities that player may not even possess.

It's just so strange. I think Virtanen is coming along nicely. He's going to be the player I thought he would be. Why do some others want to ascribe some other magical properties to him? Everyone wants to move on from the Ehlers/Nylander vs JV arguments, rightly. If we want to move on, all we have to do is accept that 1) Jake is going to be a good NHLer, and 2) the other two players were and are currently better than him. Both are true. It's fine.

 

[DFAC]

I thought when Virtanen was drafted that he could potentially turn into a Raffi Torres for us, seeing some comparables in their game now.

I just dont see the nastiness or big hits in Jake’s game. He always lets up right before a big hit

 

[Addison Rae]

Do people even watch hockey conpairing Virtanen to Tom Wilson is laughable they’re nowhere near comparable players.

Virtanen really isn’t that physical, I agree with the poster above I just haven’t really seen much from him in that department.

 

[Addison Rae]

Virtanen is having a really good season but leave it to this fan base to start making ridiculous claims and suggest he’s “better suited for the playoffs” than legitimate 60
+ point wingers in Nylander and Ehlers.

Just shut up and enjoy his progression, not a single team or non Canucks homer would even consider taking Virtanen over Ehlers/Nylander in any context.

Can we focus on his good play instead of these ridiculous comparisons.

 

[DFAC]

He’s kinda like a Steve Bernier/David Booth hybrid. Big guy with speed and a nice shot

 

[Var]

Might be the same style, but Raffi has a special psycho quality. Just can't put my finger on it...

 

[DL44]

Virtanen is having a really good season but leave it to this fan base to start making ridiculous claims and suggest he’s “better suited for the playoffs” than legitimate 60
+ point wingers in Nylander and Ehlers.

Just shut up and enjoy his progression, not a single team or non Canucks homer would even consider taking Virtanen over Ehlers/Nylander in any context.

Can we focus on his good play instead of these ridiculous comparisons.

And yet.. you continue it..
And so angry.