which was the worse pick.
Virtanen @ 6
or
Juolevi @ 5
Juolevi is still a better pick than Virtanen, IMO.
While the outcome that we're currently seeing is debate-able, that shouldn't be what we're judging this on-- it was a more sensible decision at the time, and that's the only thing that I can hold the decision to. Tkachuk was better, and many of the other guys around him were also arguably better, but it would have been foolish not to consider Juolevi still a pretty solid and promising prospect at the time who was at least in the ballpark of the other guys not named Tkachuk. The fact that he continues to show no interest in correcting a perfectly correctable flaw is not something that we could have predicted to this extent, IMO. And the one positive take-away from this is that if he does decide to just flip a switch on and start busting his ass off and approaching the game the right way, he still has the tools to immediately reverse his fortunes (not that I'm optimistic that he will).
Virtanen on the other hand was fool's gold right from the start-- He arguably already is busting his ass off and has his head on straight now after a few hiccups, and you can probably argue that what he's doing now is actually a pretty positive outcome relative to what we should have expected given his skillset/capabilities. He was an extremely limited player with awful fundamentals and hockey IQ at the draft, and was unreasonably/foolishly elevated by our management group based on this unlikely pipe dream of him becoming a dominant power-forward. He had no business being drafted that high, whereas Juolevi did.