Player Discussion Jake "Big Tuna" Virtanen | XVII Nikolaj Who...?

[Hodgy]

This is simply not true. In his rookie season he didn't score at a really high rate - 7 goals / 13 points in 55 games, but he was a positive possession player (corsi 53%, Fenwick 52%), he skated hard, back checked well, and in only 55 games, was first among forwards in hits. This despite averaging only 7:34 minutes of ice time and basically never playing in the 3rd period.

No, you are absolutely wrong and I won't stand for this type of revisionist history. Virtanen didn't deserve to make the NHL and looked completely in over his head during his rookie season save and except for a two week period in the spring. Decent players in the NHL are not poor players in the WJCs - it simply doesn't happen.

 

[Hodgy]

Sure, I guess we will both have to wait and see how he does. I'm very happy with his progress this year. I wasn't offended, I just didn't agree with you. I'm sorry you feel your time was wasted, I felt somewhat the same way.

We won't have to wait and see how he does to determine whether he has been tracking poorly since being draft to the present time....

 

[rune74]

We won't have to wait and see how he does to determine whether he has been tracking poorly since being draft to the present time....

If that makes you happy.

 

[Hodgy]

If that makes you happy.

It has nothing to do with emotions, its just a fact that we don't have to wait and see how he does, moving forward, to evaluate his past development. This isn't rocket science.

 

[rune74]

It has nothing to do with emotions, its just a fact that we don't have to wait and see how he does, moving forward, to evaluate his past development. This isn't rocket science.

Sure. At least right now he is trending up.

 

[CanaFan]

It is true Jake has tracked poorly from 2014 to today. It is also true his play was excellent in camp and preseason.

You’re both simply arguing over which time period you are basing his “progression” on.

 

[rune74]

It is true Jake has tracked poorly from 2014 to today. It is also true his play was excellent in camp and preseason.

You’re both simply arguing over which time period you are basing his “progression” on.

I simply said he is trending up now, I guess that is controversial.

 

[CanaFan]

I simply said he is trending up now, I guess that is controversial.

He’s up after a long downward trend. Where that puts him overall is still unclear. I did think he was very effective in preseason but the reality is he will always be weighed against Nylander and Ehlers. It’s a mixed bag.

 

[LeftCoast]

No, you are absolutely wrong and I won't stand for this type of revisionist history. Virtanen didn't deserve to make the NHL and looked completely in over his head during his rookie season save and except for a two week period in the spring. Decent players in the NHL are not poor players in the WJCs - it simply doesn't happen.

Well on one hand there is your opinion, and on the other there is statistical evidence that says something quite different.

As far as WJC performance - there are many players who had outstanding performances at the WJCs who have bombed in the NHL. Nolan Baumgartner, Cody Hodgson, Kimbi Daniels, Stefan Legein, Greg Nemisz, Shawn Belle, ... Virtanen's biggest problem at the WJCs was that, trying to be physically aggressive, he took a couple of bad penalties and inopportune times. This is not actually a tournament that favours physically aggressive players.

 

[rune74]

Well on one hand there is your opinion, and on the other there is statistical evidence that says something quite different.

As far as WJC performance - there are many players who had outstanding performances at the WJCs who have bombed in the NHL. Nolan Baumgartner, Cody Hodgson, Kimbi Daniels, Stefan Legein, Greg Nemisz, Shawn Belle, ... Virtanen's biggest problem at the WJCs was that, trying to be physically aggressive, he took a couple of bad penalties and inopportune times. This is not actually a tournament that favours physically aggressive players.

I thought Virtanens advanced stats for that season were quite good?

 

[LeftCoast]

I thought Virtanens advanced stats for that season were quite good?

That was my point - they were. He was saying his rookie season was "an unmitigated disaster".

 

[member 290103]

I simply said he is trending up now, I guess that is controversial.

This is the most boring conversational debate ever.

 

[VanJack]

No matter what Virtanen 'does' or 'doesn't' become, you'd have to say he belongs in the NHL based on his elite-level skating alone....that burst through the neutral zone in game one was a sight to behold. While he may not have the hockey sense to ever be a top-six scoring forward, the guy can flat-out fly out there.....there has to be a fit for him somewhere on your four lines

 

[RobertKron]

No matter what Virtanen 'does' or 'doesn't' become, you'd have to say he belongs in the NHL based on his elite-level skating alone....that burst through the neutral zone in game one was a sight to behold. While he may not have the hockey sense to ever be a top-six scoring forward, the guy can flat-out fly out there.....there has to be a fit for him somewhere on your four lines

More or less, yeah. To me, even last year, he still probably ends up somewhere in the spectrum between a middle-class-man's pre-injuries David Booth, and the frustrating post-injuries David booth.

 

[terrible dee]

What? What's all this?

Jake never said he was a victim.

NO NOT JAKE!

The poster I was replying too was making all kinds of excuses, it was that victim mentality I was referring to.

 

[Hodgy]

Well on one hand there is your opinion, and on the other there is statistical evidence that says something quite different.

As far as WJC performance - there are many players who had outstanding performances at the WJCs who have bombed in the NHL. Nolan Baumgartner, Cody Hodgson, Kimbi Daniels, Stefan Legein, Greg Nemisz, Shawn Belle, ... Virtanen's biggest problem at the WJCs was that, trying to be physically aggressive, he took a couple of bad penalties and inopportune times. This is not actually a tournament that favours physically aggressive players.

The sample size is too small to draw meaningful results. Jake was poor in his NHL rookie season and simply didn't deserve to be there. I can't believe we are even having this discussion.

With respect to your WJC comment, your logic is flawed. You assume that because X doesn't necessarily mean Y, the Y doesn't necessarily mean X. Its incredibly rare that "NHL players" are released to the WJC and play as poorly as Virtanen did. Sometimes these players don't make the massive impact that some think (I recall this with RNH), but they certainly don't generally play as poorly as Virtanen did.

 

[rune74]

The sample size is too small to draw meaningful results. Jake was poor in his NHL rookie season and simply didn't deserve to be there. I can't believe we are even having this discussion.

With respect to your WJC comment, your logic is flawed. You assume that because X doesn't necessarily mean Y, the Y doesn't necessarily mean X. Its incredibly rare that "NHL players" are released to the WJC and play as poorly as Virtanen did. Sometimes these players don't make the massive impact that some think (I recall this with RNH), but they certainly don't generally play as poorly as Virtanen did.

What was his advance stats for his first year in the NHL? What was his possession numbers like?

 

[LeftCoast]

The sample size is too small to draw meaningful results. Jake was poor in his NHL rookie season and simply didn't deserve to be there. I can't believe we are even having this discussion.

Sample size? He played 55 games. Okay - less than 82 but certain enough to evaluate a season on. His corsi and fenwick numbers were very good, he scored 7 goals and 13 points (on pace for 10 goals and 19 points) while playing only 7 minutes per game and playing with guys like Dorsett and Higgins. Simply stating a falsehood over and over doesn't make it true.[/quote][/QUOTE]

 

[Tv9924]

Sample size? He played 55 games. Okay - less than 82 but certain enough to evaluate a season on. His corsi and fenwick numbers were very good, he scored 7 goals and 13 points (on pace for 10 goals and 19 points) while playing only 7 minutes per game and playing with guys like Dorsett and Higgins. Simply stating a falsehood over and over doesn't make it true.

His advanced stats for that season were very misleading. Sure, he was good at generating shot attempts and when he was on the ice the Canucks generally out shot their opponents, but the quality of his shots was not good.

He was...

1st in Rel CF% with 3.48 ... Hamhuis was 2nd with 3.01
8th in Rel HDCF% (High Danger Chances For) with 2.41 ... Henrik was 1st with 8.27
5th in Rel MDCF% (Medium) with 2.71 ... Hamhuis was 1st with 5.00
1st in Rel LDCF% (Low) with 6.74 ... Henrik was 2nd with 2.99
All stats are 5v5
​

The massive difference between him and Henrik in Relative Low Danger Chances For is very telling. He put up a ton of shot attempts which makes his advanced stats look good, but they were of very low quality.

Stats are from Naturalstattrick

 

[Hodgy]

His advanced stats for that season were very misleading. Sure, he was good at generating shot attempts and when he was on the ice the Canucks generally out shot their opponents, but the quality of his shots was not good.

He was...

1st in Rel CF% with 3.48 ... Hamhuis was 2nd with 3.01
8th in Rel HDCF% (High Danger Chances For) with 2.41 ... Henrik was 1st with 8.27
5th in Rel MDCF% (Medium) with 2.71 ... Hamhuis was 1st with 5.00
1st in Rel LDCF% (Low) with 6.74 ... Henrik was 2nd with 2.99
All stats are 5v5
​

The massive difference between him and Henrik in Relative Low Danger Chances For is very telling. He put up a ton of shot attempts which makes his advanced stats look good, but they were of very low quality.

Stats are from Naturalstattrick

Which makes sense given that he looked poor for most of the year. Honestly, I don’t know how anyone could watch his rookie season and characterize it as anything but poor. There are lots of cases of advanced statistics not accurately depicting a players performance and I think this is one of them.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Sample size? He played 55 games. Okay - less than 82 but certain enough to evaluate a season on. His corsi and fenwick numbers were very good, he scored 7 goals and 13 points (on pace for 10 goals and 19 points) while playing only 7 minutes per game and playing with guys like Dorsett and Higgins. Simply stating a falsehood over and over doesn't make it true.

We cannot infer based on a 55 game sample.

 

[rune74]

We cannot infer based on a 55 game sample.

There was also a report that his Corsi was very good in the AHL, granted they did it over a random sampling of I think 15 games.

 

[CanaFan]

We cannot infer based on a 55 game sample.

Cannot infer what? That his 55 games were not “terrible” based on that 55 game sample?

We are talking descriptive stats and not predictive, right?

 

[rune74]

His advanced stats for that season were very misleading. Sure, he was good at generating shot attempts and when he was on the ice the Canucks generally out shot their opponents, but the quality of his shots was not good.

He was...

1st in Rel CF% with 3.48 ... Hamhuis was 2nd with 3.01
8th in Rel HDCF% (High Danger Chances For) with 2.41 ... Henrik was 1st with 8.27
5th in Rel MDCF% (Medium) with 2.71 ... Hamhuis was 1st with 5.00
1st in Rel LDCF% (Low) with 6.74 ... Henrik was 2nd with 2.99
All stats are 5v5
​

The massive difference between him and Henrik in Relative Low Danger Chances For is very telling. He put up a ton of shot attempts which makes his advanced stats look good, but they were of very low quality.

Stats are from Naturalstattrick

These don't seem that terrible for an 18 year old playing in the NHL, he wasn't a star that's for sure, but these don't look that bad at all.

 

[CanaFan]

These don't seem that terrible for an 18 year old playing in the NHL, he wasn't a star that's for sure, but these don't look that bad at all.

19