Player Discussion: Jake Virtanen | XIV

[Intangibos]

It's sad to think that inthe two years the Canucks have drafted in the top 7 that the regular fan could have picked a better draft pick both times.
IMHO I did give Jake the nod mostly one he hopes of a home grown talent from our backyard, but I also liked the potential of a kid who was already 6'2 205 at the time and fast as hell. But I agreed the more skilled players were Ehlers Nylander in that order for me. I also didn't have Larkin on my radar.
But I had Matty T at my number 1 even at 3 admittedly. I love the kids game. He's what I was hoping Jake would be.

TBH I think HFCanucks have some pretty good posters. Lots of us have been posting here regularly for the better part of a decade too. We've experienced ups and downs, prospects busting, different styles of play around the NHL. I think a lot of the posters here really know what they're talking about given their many years of experience learning the game.

It's not so much sad that people here can draft better than our GM, well it is, but it's sad that people here can draft way way way better than our GM because he can't do the one thing he's supposedly good at.

[MOD]

 

[canucksfan]

Craig Button had Virtanen rated as a second-rounder in 2014; and Brock Boeser as a sure-fire top-10 in 2015....can we just fire our scouting staff and go with Button's TSN picks? Please!

Who did he have 6th in 2014?

 

[Hansen]

Who did he have 6th in 2014?

Ehlers

 

[Icebreakers]

Ehlers Nylander Virtanen Ritchie was honestly a coin flip. Whats done is done. Hindsight is everything.

 

[timw33]

Ehlers Nylander Virtanen Ritchie was honestly a coin flip. Whats done is done. Hindsight is everything.

That's totally not true.

There were a ton of reasons to be concerned about Virtanen (Injuries, being more physically developed against kids, never really had an elite scoring season, attitude concerns, etc) and Ritchie (conditioning, skating).

Just going for the elite skill is a much better bet at getting a prospect and Ehlers and Nylander were just OOZING elite skill and showing that they could dominate.

 

[Canucker]

Ehlers Nylander Virtanen Ritchie was honestly a coin flip. Whats done is done. Hindsight is everything.

Yup, what's done is done...Benning flipped a coin. Unfortunately for those of us who wanted Ehlers/Nylander all along have to listen to those claiming "hindsight is everything".

 

[Icebreakers]

That's totally not true.

There were a ton of reasons to be concerned about Virtanen (Injuries, being more physically developed against kids, never really had an elite scoring season, attitude concerns, etc) and Ritchie (conditioning, skating).

Just going for the elite skill is a much better bet at getting a prospect and Ehlers and Nylander were just OOZING elite skill and showing that they could dominate.

It is true. Going by consensus it is true. No one said we reached for Virtanen around the league. If they were oozing elite skill then they should have been ranked higher. Its simple. Virtanen had one of the best interviews. There were not many attitude concerns in junior. Virtanen`s style was "sexy" in junior and it caught the eyes of coaches. His style didnt negatively impact his draft position.

 

[northwestern comfort]

It is true. Going by consensus it is true. No one said we reached for Virtanen around the league. If they were oozing elite skill then they should have been ranked higher. Its simple. Virtanen had one of the best interviews. There were not many attitude concerns in junior. Virtanen`s style was "sexy" in junior and it caught the eyes of coaches. His style didnt negatively impact his draft position.

Virtanen definitely wasn't a reach, but the majority of opinions put Nylander and Ehlers ahead of Virtanen and Ritchie. Size was an issue with Nylander and Ehlers, but Virtanen and Ritchie also had big question marks around health, conditioning, size advantage, etc.

Overall the people around here definitely preferred Nylander and Ehlers to Virtanen and Ritchie until it became clear that Benning was looking at one of the two BC boys.

 

[GreetingsFromCanada]

It is true. Going by consensus it is true. No one said we reached for Virtanen around the league. If they were oozing elite skill then they should have been ranked higher. Its simple. Virtanen had one of the best interviews. There were not many attitude concerns in junior. Virtanen`s style was "sexy" in junior and it caught the eyes of coaches. His style didnt negatively impact his draft position.

He had an elite birth place

 

[Whale]

I still don't mind the pick, power forwards take longer to develop but make a bigger impact. What I don't like is rushing him to the NHL when he hadn't really earned it. He would have been better off having a dominant Jr season than playing in the NHL, and it has also made him a bit complacent. He's still so young though, and that is something that can be fixed. Adversity is not defeat, it will make him a better player.

I would still pick Virtanen based on drafting for the playoffs not the regular season.

Which is also why I would have picked Chychrun over Juolevi... soooo....

I think its far to early to make grand pronouncements about Bennings prospect scouting history, Boeser looks like a steal for example, Demko too, Stecher and Tryamkin are working out, Baertchi is coming around, Granlund is better than Shinkaruk... He has had some wins and most of the ones that are struggling are far to young to really count as busts.

 

[iFan]

That's totally not true.

There were a ton of reasons to be concerned about Virtanen (Injuries, being more physically developed against kids, never really had an elite scoring season, attitude concerns, etc) and Ritchie (conditioning, skating).

Just going for the elite skill is a much better bet at getting a prospect and Ehlers and Nylander were just OOZING elite skill and showing that they could dominate.

And at the time size was a big concern with Ehlers and Nylander, Virtanen big concern was the injury, they all were neck and neck, this is all hindsight now.

 

[iFan]

Virtanen definitely wasn't a reach, but the majority of opinions put Nylander and Ehlers ahead of Virtanen and Ritchie. Size was an issue with Nylander and Ehlers, but Virtanen and Ritchie also had big question marks around health, conditioning, size advantage, etc.

Overall the people around here definitely preferred Nylander and Ehlers to Virtanen and Ritchie until it became clear that Benning was looking at one of the two BC boys.

I don't know.. Ehlers was small, like pretty small dude and light and that was a huge concern, he was also in the Q which was also looked at as not as good as WHL or OHL. Nylander was the only one that had the star potential but Virtanen overall package of size, shot, skating and grit really got noticed as every team what's what Jake could be in their top 6.

 

[Canucks1096]

Ehlers Nylander Virtanen Ritchie was honestly a coin flip. Whats done is done. Hindsight is everything.

GM gets paid the big bucks to get those decision right.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Except the problem is you're always going to be less sure with a guy whose game is partly built on size, since that goes farther in junior than it does in the pros. Are those numbers truly the product of pure skill, or the product of a genetic advantage that will be filed down considerably at the next level? I'd rather have that not be a question mark for a guy who has nice offensive totals. By all means take a gamble later in the draft (note there are plenty who haven't come at the top of the draft, be it Lucic, Bertuzzi, Leclair, Sheppard, etc.), I just don't like the idea of burning a really early pick on one, especially because I think hockey executives are extremely disproportionate in how they rate power forwards, and overvalue them like hell.

Everything goes "further" in junior than it does in the pros... There are degrees of variation of course, but by and large, the impact of most skills are tempered by the increase in quality of competition. This is true of size, speed, stick-handling, playmaking, shooting and more. Proper scouting and projection account for this expectation.

What you are talking about is eliminating bias, but you are also introducing bias into your preference. I have bias as well, just in the opposite direction. Logically, we should both leave bias at the door and put projection at the forefront in order to maximize conversion. Conversion is the primary aspect to worry about.

Still, if we are talking about only preferences, then I think there is more opportunity to get a smaller-pure skill player in the depth rounds. So my preference is to compliment this drafting strategy by emphasizing dissimilar assets in the 1st round, such as PWFs/bigger players. Doubly so those that have higher comparative production to their smaller peers. It's the 'safest' route to getting player like that at all, IMO.

 

[Megaterio Llamas]

I was for Ehlers at the time, with Ritchie my second choice and no interest at all in Virtanen. Of course we have Jake now so we have to hope for the best, but it isn't really hindsight when you spent weeks online arguing for Ehlers and against Virtanen like I did. And I haven't thrown in the towel on Virtanen at all, I'm still quite hopeful that he becomes an NHL regular for us. In fact, he's is better than I expected, I really was expecting a complete failure when we drafted him.

 

[Intangibos]

I thought Jake had a ceiling of prime David Booth, who was a pretty good player. People said "lmao David Booth, no thanks", but I think at this point we'll be extremely lucky if we get anything close to that.

 

[M2Beezy]

At the time of the draft id of ranked them

Ritchie
Ehlers
Virtanen
Nylander

Now its

Ritchie
Ehlers
Nylander

 

[groov2]

It is true. Going by consensus it is true. No one said we reached for Virtanen around the league. If they were oozing elite skill then they should have been ranked higher. Its simple. Virtanen had one of the best interviews. There were not many attitude concerns in junior. Virtanen`s style was "sexy" in junior and it caught the eyes of coaches. His style didnt negatively impact his draft position.

It's true in the sense that he was ranked right around there, but I think if you go back to the threads back then, you will find that the majority of the fanbase on here wanted Nylander or Ehlers. Personally, I so very badly wanted Nylander. I did; however, like Jake. He is a very frustrating prospect.

Side note: Merry Christmas everyone!

 

[TheWanderer]

HF should GM by committee this team

 

[jimmythescot]

It's true in the sense that he was ranked right around there, but I think if you go back to the threads back then, you will find that the majority of the fanbase on here wanted Nylander or Ehlers. Personally, I so very badly wanted Nylander. I did; however, like Jake. He is a very frustrating prospect.

Side note: Merry Christmas everyone!

Pretty much how I feel. I was after Ehlers, but I don't see the point in wishing we could go back and change it. Unless it's in an argument about firing Benning.

 

[y2kcanucks]

It is true. Going by consensus it is true. No one said we reached for Virtanen around the league. If they were oozing elite skill then they should have been ranked higher. Its simple. Virtanen had one of the best interviews. There were not many attitude concerns in junior. Virtanen`s style was "sexy" in junior and it caught the eyes of coaches. His style didnt negatively impact his draft position.

It's not hindsight when people on here did not want Virtanen with the 6th overall pick. I don't think anyone here had Virtanen ahead of Ritchie, Nylander, or Ehlers. I personally wanted Ritchie at 6, though I think the general consensus was Ehlers.

 

[VanJack]

Had such high hopes for that '014 draft....Virtanen, McCann, Demko and Tryamkin looked like a home-run and first pieces in the rebuild....now, seems to all depend on Demko and Tryamkin....both Virtanen and McCann clearly rushed to the NHL before they were nearly ready, and both in the minors.

 

[Oliewud]

It's not hindsight when people on here did not want Virtanen with the 6th overall pick. I don't think anyone here had Virtanen ahead of Ritchie, Nylander, or Ehlers. I personally wanted Ritchie at 6, though I think the general consensus was Ehlers.

someone brought up the old thread a couple weeks a go...mostly everybody wanted ehlers

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

Unless your name is Ehlers and Nylander, either one of which the Canucks could have picked....same draft class and potential ppg players in the NHL right now...sorry, but most posters on this board could have picked a better player than the Canucks did.

I was mocking the people who are expressing that we need to have all the patience in the world for Brad Isbister 2.0 while simultaneously bagging on the previous regime for not turning the scouting and drafting around in a ridiculous timeframe.

Virtanen is looking like he's going to be an underwhelming prospect no matter what happens and the only reason people are clinging to the hope he's going to suddenly become a dynamic top tier player overnight is due to the post traumatic stress Canucks fans collectively hold as a result of the Neely trade, plus some "BC Boy" nonsense.

Even if he pans out and becomes the player he was forecast to be, he's still gonna look like a stinker when our Super Amazing Brilliant Master Evaluator of Talent ended up picking him over some pretty fantastic players who are tearing it up.

Like, it's not that the Canucks chose poorly. It is that the Canucks, under Benning's guidance, chose poorly.

 

[beachcomber]

I was mocking the people who are expressing that we need to have all the patience in the world for Brad Isbister 2.0 while simultaneously bagging on the previous regime for not turning the scouting and drafting around in a ridiculous timeframe.

Virtanen is looking like he's going to be an underwhelming prospect no matter what happens and the only reason people are clinging to the hope he's going to suddenly become a dynamic top tier player overnight is due to the post traumatic stress Canucks fans collectively hold as a result of the Neely trade, plus some "BC Boy" nonsense.

Even if he pans out and becomes the player he was forecast to be, he's still gonna look like a stinker when our Super Amazing Brilliant Master Evaluator of Talent ended up picking him over some pretty fantastic players who are tearing it up.

Like, it's not that the Canucks chose poorly. It is that the Canucks, under Benning's guidance, chose poorly.

I thought 2014 was Crawfords draft? That is what the narrative appears to be here.