I think most judge metrics on a complete season, or 100 games. His ice time, usage, QoT and QoC will factor into that though. Definitely wouldn't be doing it after 55 games with 11 min ATOI, without precedent and rookie usage by the coach. YMMV.
100 games or 1000 ES minutes sounds right to me. I don't think it's accurate to say people wait 100 games, though. The board has often talked about players in smaller samples, including Horvat's run with Kenins late last season. It's peculiar that sample size has become so stringent in this case.
What I'm asking you is if you think Virtanen is going to be a good possession player or not? On one hand you're questioning the validity of his possession number but on the other you're already giving him credit for being David Booth. Which is it?
Curious though, how have you evaluated "the increase of events" for Virtanen?
The first thing I'm looking for from all these young guys is whether or not they can get the play going the right way. Players don't earn the kind of ice-time they need to produce until they learn to play a game that a coach wants to put on the ice. I commented often this season on how effective Virtanen was on the back check. He was also effective at getting in on the forecheck and turning pucks over. IMO it shows up in his CA number
http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...=50&teamid=29&type=corsi&sort=A60&sortdir=ASC
IMO his play this season (his possession stats included) are a great sign for Virtanen's development. Taking the puck from the other team is important, doing it in the offensive zone even more so. That's something that will get him onto the ice and help the team win hockey games even when he's (inevitably) not scoring. For a 19 year old with question marks about his IQ and motor to have a season like that is great.
That said, these young guys can be tricky. We have no idea if he can repeat the effort next season, never mind improve on it. That's where the question about repeatability comes in. It's not like production where so much luck is involved that it brings questions. There is no doubt that Virtanen can be an effective player in the NHL. He already has enough physically and mentally to do it at 19 years old. That's exciting if you allow yourself to consider that he
might improve.
But this is all besides the point. The argument isn't: Is he a good possession player? It's: Is he going to produce well? If you want to stretch the correlation of shots directed to goals, into points overall, and then into making a prediction on Virtanen's production in particular, feel free. Because until you do, the case for possession does not prove the case for production.
No it's not. This started as me being baffled by how Virtanen is judged compared to other players. IMO possession is always something that is talked about and valued. It was certainly a big consideration for people in regards to Booth. Sure, we all would have liked him to score more. But nobody ignored the fact he was an effective possession player. Certainly not you. I liked him as a physical element in the top 6, he just wasn't 'that guy' to pair with Kesler and form a 1b kinda line. He was a good player and they did have good runs here.
Virtanen is almost that good right now imo. It should be talked about more. Instead, people are using these arguments to pimp Gaunce. It's strange to me.
A precedent of production would help him here, but without that baseline, we don't know if he will be a high volume shooter that produces poorly for his ratio (Booth), or one that explodes if his rates normalize over time.
He still has a way to go offensively. He creates chances by being active at turning the puck over but too often squanders those opportunities with poor shots/passes. We won't know what we have offensively until he stops improving. The game should slow down for him and his skills should get better, but again, these young guys are tricky.
