Toggle sidebar

LD Olli Juolevi - TPS, Liiga (2016, 5th, VAN)

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
The more I've watched him play over the year the more I've grown sour on him. Took my homer goggles off and took a real look at him as a prospect, and honestly, I don't really see much top 2 potential in the kid. There is 0 urgency to his game, he plays so passively he can lul me to sleep. Sure that's not his game, but he isn't going out of his way to try to be the difference maker. The only real stand out skill he has is his poise, which comes from his hockeyIQ. But because he's so passive he's not developed that skill much, again no urgency.

All that adds up to a player who will have a solid career as a top 4 defenseman. A Hamhuis type player, who in his prime can be a defensive #2 defenseman but will spend most of his time in the NHL being a 2nd pair guy. So essentially a few years as a top pairing guy, but mostly a career 2nd pairing player. But even Dan Hamhuis was a better junior players then Juolevi so who knows. Maybe that's a overly optimistic prediction.

It's disappointing that we picked him so high, because we clearly needed more skill, instead we passed up Tkachuck who was BPA for Juolevi. Another dumb move by management.
 
Last edited:
WTG said:
The more I've watched him play over the year the more I've grown sour on him. Took my homer goggles off and took a real look at him as a prospect, and honestly, I don't really see much top 2 potential in the kid. There is 0 urgency to his game, he plays so passively he can lul me to sleep. Sure that's not his game, but he isn't going out of his way to try to be the difference maker. The only real stand out skill he has is his poise, which comes from his hockeyIQ. But because he's so passive he's not developed that skill much, again no urgency.

All that adds up to a player who will have a solid career as a top 4 defenseman. A Hamhuis type player, who in his prime can be a defensive #2 defenseman but will spend most of his time in the NHL being a 2nd pair guy. So essentially a few years as a top pairing guy, but mostly a career 2nd pairing player. But even Dan Hamhuis was a better junior players then Juolevi so who knows. Maybe that's a overly optimistic prediction.

It's disappointing that we picked him so high, because we clearly needed more skill, instead we passed up Tkachuck who was BPA for Juolevi. Another dumb move by management.
Click to expand...

There is absolutely no way to project what he's going to be right now. He has extremely high IQ, a great ability to transition the puck up the ice and very good offensive numbers.

The fact that you came in here to mention tkachuk and talk bad about management is so damn unnecessary. Leave that in the Canucks section under the management thread, not here.
 
Oliewud said:
There is absolutely no way to project what he's going to be right now. He has extremely high IQ, a great ability to transition the puck up the ice and very good offensive numbers.

The fact that you came in here to mention tkachuk and talk bad about management is so damn unnecessary. Leave that in the Canucks section under the management thread, not here.
Click to expand...

That was literally 10% of his post yet the only thing you take issue with.

No comment about his take on the player despite WTG being the poster who provided more commentary and video on Juolevi on our board than any other poster? Just gonna disregard all that, offer your unsubstantiated opinion ("very good offensive numbers") and then ***** and moan that he mentioned Tkachuk once. Solid.
 
Oliewud said:
There is absolutely no way to project what he's going to be right now. He has extremely high IQ, a great ability to transition the puck up the ice and very good offensive numbers.

The fact that you came in here to mention tkachuk and talk bad about management is so damn unnecessary. Leave that in the Canucks section under the management thread, not here.
Click to expand...

Well said.
 
CanaFan said:
That was literally 10% of his post yet the only thing you take issue with.

No comment about his take on the player despite WTG being the poster who provided more commentary and video on Juolevi on our board than any other poster? Just gonna disregard all that, offer your unsubstantiated opinion ("very good offensive numbers") and then ***** and moan that he mentioned Tkachuk once. Solid.
Click to expand...

I have no problems with having an opinion on juolevi whether negative or bad. The problem is when people use this thread to bring up tkachuk/talk bad about management.

How many damn times are you guys going to beat a dead horse? Let's see what juolevi can do at the NHL level first. It's way too early / extremely arrogant to compare these two.
 
The one poster who always seems to offer an objective analysis of players is 93Leafs. There needs to be more of him and less of the pages of white noise that you have to sift through to find any worthy discussion of a player.
 
Oliewud said:
There is absolutely no way to project what he's going to be right now. He has extremely high IQ, a great ability to transition the puck up the ice and very good offensive numbers.

The fact that you came in here to mention tkachuk and talk bad about management is so damn unnecessary. Leave that in the Canucks section under the management thread, not here.
Click to expand...

This is completely wrong, and he's allowed to say it was a dumb move by mgmt. It was.
 
There isn't any Canuck D in history that really stand out as franchise guy. A lot of No.2s. A one legged Erik Karlsson would be better than any one of them.
 
Catbug said:
This is completely wrong, and he's allowed to say it was a dumb move by mgmt. It was.
Click to expand...

I wanted tkachuk more than anybody on draft day.

But anybody that thinks they know how effective juolevi will be at the NHL level is full of ****.
 
Oliewud said:
I have no problems with having an opinion on juolevi whether negative or bad. The problem is when people use this thread to bring up tkachuk/talk bad about management.

How many damn times are you guys going to beat a dead horse? Let's see what juolevi can do at the NHL level first. It's way too early / extremely arrogant to compare these two.
Click to expand...

Lolwut

Comparing two picks is kinda what this place is for. :help:
 
Oliewud said:
I have no problems with having an opinion on juolevi whether negative or bad. The problem is when people use this thread to bring up tkachuk/talk bad about management.

How many damn times are you guys going to beat a dead horse? Let's see what juolevi can do at the NHL level first. It's way too early / extremely arrogant to compare these two.
Click to expand...

Sure but there was a lot more substance in that post that just the two sentences you took issue with. Dismissing all that to "chastise" him over something so small was disengenuous and ignores the value in his thoughts about Juolevi.
 
Oliewud said:
I wanted tkachuk more than anybody on draft day.

But anybody that thinks they know how effective juolevi will be at the NHL level is full of ****.
Click to expand...

I've heard lots about how he's definitely gonna be a top 2 Dman, he's gonna be like Dan Hamhuis, etc.

Are those posters all full of **** too?
 
CanaFan said:
Sure but there was a lot more substance in that post that just the two sentences you took issue with. Dismissing all that to "chastise" him over something so small was disengenuous and ignores the value in his thoughts about Juolevi.
Click to expand...

I addressed the first part of his post when I talked about Juolevi's game. And then I addressed the 2nd part which I had a problem with.

Why are you acting like some white knight coming to save the day and defend him from criticism? I think he can handle himself there bud :laugh:
 
Oliewud said:
There is absolutely no way to project what he's going to be right now. He has extremely high IQ, a great ability to transition the puck up the ice and very good offensive numbers.

The fact that you came in here to mention tkachuk and talk bad about management is so damn unnecessary. Leave that in the Canucks section under the management thread, not here.
Click to expand...

I'm going to have to disagree with what you said, production is a good way to project players. Sure, it's not all about production that transfers over. I personally think that Juolevi's game will transfer over just fine to the NHL game, better then Mete's for example, a defenseman who had a better season then Juolevi.

My second disagreement is with how he put up great offensive numbers, personally, I don't think he put up great numbers at all. Rather mediocre production.

I talk about the canucks management because I am dissapointed, I'm a fan too, remember that :laugh:.
 
WTG said:
I'm going to have to disagree with what you said, production is a good way to project players. Sure, it's not all about production that transfers over. I personally think that Juolevi's game will transfer over just fine to the NHL game, better then Mete's for example, a defenseman who had a better season then Juolevi.

My second disagreement is with how he put up great offensive numbers, personally, I don't think he put up great numbers at all. Rather mediocre production.

I talk about the canucks management because I am dissapointed, I'm a fan too, remember that :laugh:.
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with that. I had no problems with your analysis up until the end which left a sour taste in my mouth because I keep seeing it regurgitated over and over.

A couple years from now we can declare it a bad move by the management if Tkachuk ends up being the more valuable player. But until then, I don't think it adds much to the discussion.
 
Guys dont get disheartened.

The things you guys are talking about defensive poise, IQ, defensive passive game etc. are all skills that young defensemen struggle with. Its a lot easier to be good at offence and run around all over the ice. It is not, however, easy to develop defensive IQ, that has to be gained through experience and sadly most defensemen never develop it.

You just cant project defensemen, it just does not work. I mean even if Juolevi had success in the NHL that doesn't mean anything for long-term projection of defensemen because their just so unpredictable.

Of course picking Tkachuck a forward (who is more easy to project would have been the easier move), but you never know what you have with a defensemen until their about 22. So it is a slight on the Nucks management for picking off the board defensemen (Very hard to predict), but Tkachuck vs Juolevi debate is far, far from over.
 
Oliewud said:
I addressed the first part of his post when I talked about Juolevi's game. And then I addressed the 2nd part which I had a problem with.

Why are you acting like some white knight coming to save the day and defend him from criticism? I think he can handle himself there bud :laugh:
Click to expand...

Mostly cause I dislike rational, well informed opinions being dismissed by people acting like some white knight coming to save the day and defend Benning from criticism.
 
Damn, some are in full on panic mode. Give the kid some time. I get that Tkachuk would have been the shorter route, but at least you don't have Corey Perry 2.0 tarnishing your team, lol.
 
With Tryamkin gone and the possibility Sbisa goes in the expansion draft, Juolevi is virtually a lock to be a 6-7 d-man in VanCity next season.....who else do they have?...I suspect he'll benefit from the more structured and system-based play in the NHL, even if he struggles on the physical side at times.

Should be interesting to compare the progress of Juolevi, Sergachev and Chychrun, who all emerged from the first round in the same 2016 draft....early edge goes to Sergachev and Chychrun who both have NHL games under their belt.
 
Had him at 6 last year closely behind Tkachuck. Its tough to say Tkachuck obvi had a fantastic rookie season in the best league the NHL. Looks like hes created quiet a gap between the two but has to be mentioned that maybe we have to be patient with Juol before saying it was a bad pick. It looks that way now and we can speculate about it which is the point of the forum i guess but we really cant know for a couple a more seasons. Dont get me wrong I had Tkachuck at 5 and i pray Benning eventually proves us all wrong but even now i dont think it was a HUGE mistake. Juol had some ups and downs this year and leaves on a hi note hopefully for us he can build on next year hopefully not in the NHL so he can develop more
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom