Prospect Info: Who is Canucks #2 prospect?

[Iridescent*]

Or you were talking out your backside when you said that Virtanen has low hockey IQ...for which you have no actual personal examples to make such a claim.

Please don't be defensive when you know you're just spouting crap based of other's opinions and not your own actual one.

Edit - By all means elaborate on what you meant or what you're trying to base your opinion off of. I have no problem with that.

Not even sure I should dignify you with a response. But I'll deconstruct it anyways for you.

I said "hypothetically if I were to know Virtanen and his peers personally" (Meaning in a hypothetical situation I have first hand knowledge. Let's hypothesize I'm the head scout for Nucks), I couldn't give you what you're demanding because what you're demanding is an absolute definition of something which doesn't have one. (meaning what one person deems intelligence, another will not. There is no objective measure for smarts, other than IQ. Which is specious at best).

So he asked me to give him something impossible to give.

Following along now?

 

[vanuck]

Voted Virtanen though I did think about Shinkaruk for a bit.

 

[vanuck]

Unfortunately I'm not quite able to give what you're asking. I mean, even if in a hypothetical scenario I knew him and his peers enough to evaluate such a thing, intelligence is a heavily subjective topic. Different people will define it differently, have varying opinions on degrees of intelligence where they define it similarly, and it's really not quantifiable. What I will say is this.

I honestly believe the single most important factor which separates a legit top line player with all the tools from a bottom 6 player with all the tools is intelligence. Why does one guy with all the tools flourish, and another bust? Most times, in my opinion, it's due to intelligence.

I think the single most overlooked factor when drafting is intelligence. Look at Subban. Guy is easily a Mensa level intellect. He's brilliant. Overlooked because of physical/attitude deficiencies and nobody paid much attention to his strong mind. Look where he is now.

To me intelligence absolutely needs to be placed alongside physical tools when selecting prospects. Not as an end all be all, but if you got a guy coming in who clearly colors outside the lines despite having great tools, there should be some hesitation at drafting him early.

That's the best I can give ya on it unfortunately.

I agree with this in theory, and in combination with what people have reported on him it's why I'm not quite as high on him as others, though I think he's still a good prospect overall... just not the best choice at 6th IMO.

 

[Sharpshooter]

Not even sure I should dignify you with a response. But I'll deconstruct it anyways for you.

I said "hypothetically if I were to know Virtanen and his peers personally" (Meaning in a hypothetical situation I have first hand knowledge. Let's hypothesize I'm the head scout for Nucks), I couldn't give you what you're demanding because what you're demanding is an absolute definition of something which doesn't have one. (meaning what one person deems intelligence, another will not. There is no objective measure for smarts, other than IQ. Which is specious at best).

So he asked me to give him something impossible to give.

Following along now?

I'm following that you don't have a clue what you're talking about.

If you want to talk about hypotheticals, then great, but don't make your posts seem like you know things for a fact.

Low IQ? Again, based on what?

Nothing...except your 'hypothesis'. And your profferings mean nothing.

Follow me? Just stop. You don't know the player, you don't what he's capable of and most of all, you're not qualified to hypothesize whether or not his IQ in the game of hockey is commensurate to his learning ability or his actual sense of the game. You're worse than Botchford. Just stop.

 

[Iridescent*]

I'm following that you don't have a clue what you're talking about.

If you want to talk about hypotheticals, then great, but don't make your posts seem like you know things for a fact.

Low IQ? Again, based on what?

Nothing...except your 'hypothesis'. And your profferings mean nothing.

Follow me? Just stop. You don't know the player, you don't what he's capable of and most of all, you're not qualified to hypothesize whether or not his IQ in the game of hockey is commensurate to his learning ability or his actual sense of the game. You're worse than Botchford. Just stop.

You don't know I don't know what I'm talking about as much as I do. Your speculating on suspected speculation.

You do see the irony and faulty reasoning in that, do you not?

 

[CanaFan]

You don't know I don't know what I'm talking about as much as I do.

On that I agree with you 100%

 

[StrictlyCommercial]

Generally, when trying to make factual claims, you should, in fact, know what you're talking about.

 

[ARSix]

Some have said this is Virtanen having poor linemates he chose not to use.

Um both of his linemates outscored him.

 

[Iridescent*]

Generally, when trying to make factual claims, you should, in fact, know what you're talking about.

Everything is just one person's opinion. I don't think pure objectivity exists when evaluating hockey talent. If it did, there would never be debate on ranking the top 10 players in the league. We'd just hit the objective chart and statsheet and let it tell us the whole story.

 

[cc]

Well, aside from the highlights, and both our limited viewings from the U18 coverage, which person's opinion do you pin your opinion on?

Again, why should one use lesser linemates when one has the ability to make the play themselves? There will be a difference in the quality of linemates from the juniors to the pro's, so why shackle a guy with the 'low hockey IQ' label, when he simply gets the job done without assistance?? How many other scorers have also been through something like this that have excelled at the pro level? Are they of low hockey IQ too? Again, context matters.

I didn't pick any one person to listen to. I haven't read any reports from anybody that said that he used his linemates well and that he was good at setting up plays.
Most of the top scorers in the league were also good at setting up chances at the junior level.

Maybe he did have poor linemates, but that situation might arise in the nhl level as well. He may be put on a line where he thinks the players he's playing with are inferior and tries to do everything himself again. That would also be a concern as well.

 

[Hyack57]

Every year the flavour of the month usually gets top billing and everyone else gets bumped down. Shiny and new equals better.

 

[CanaFan]

Everything is just one person's opinion. I don't think pure objectivity exists when evaluating hockey talent. If it did, there would never be debate on ranking the top 10 players in the league. We'd just hit the objective chart and statsheet and let it tell us the whole story.

That's BS. Even a subjective assessment should have demonstrable support otherwise it is absolutely worthless. If I was to say Virtanen has an elite level IQ I suspect you'd ask me how I came by that opinion. If I merely replied it was a subjective opinion and that I can't be asked to possibly give any reason or support, well I can imagine what you would think of that opinion.

 

[CanaFan]

Um both of his linemates outscored him.

And who exactly do you think Virtanen's line mates were last year?

If you said Greg Chase and Brady Brassart you would be ... mistaken.