Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Olli Juolevi | #48 | D


b3.

Recommended Posts

50 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:

It was at a point with the setbacks that it was hard to count on him becoming a player. I think this was a huge step. Agree completely with the above^ that this was more than just your ordinary pre-season game.

 

Now he was the 7th D, didn't play alot. But all the things he does well were evident in that game. Mentally, he doesn't have any issue with the NHL level game speed.

 

what came across to me is OJ didn't look out of place. He still needs a little work on his quickness, but thats going to come with a few more months of skating training. Nothing insurmountable there at all. 

 

I'm getting excited for the day our d has the option for Huges or Rathbone to carry the puck out, or Juolevi stretch pass. If Rathbone and Juolevi can make the jump next year and get a full season in, in two seasons from now this team is going to be really fun to watch. 

  • Cheers 2
  • Huggy Bear 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, MrCanuck94 said:

The thing that impressed me about Olli last night was his board play. He's strong on the boards and is confident enough to know when to pinch to cut a play off, especially at the neutral zone red line. Very impressive.

 

Those stretch passes are just a thing of beauty.

 

As long as he stays healthy this kid will be just fine.

 

It wasn't anything to write home about but one play I liked was in the first period the Jets threw the puck across to no one, he had already put himself in a position to pinch up so he was right there. Took the puck up ice into the WPG zone alone, and rather than just a soft dump in for a change - like alot of guys would've done - he got a shot off high enough that Hellebuyck had to catch & freeze it. Creating an O-zone draw out of nothing really. 

 

Such a small thing but in the playoffs that can be a big thing rather than giving the team a chance to come up ice. I remember 2011 R1 we had a shift against Chicago where we had them hemmed in for like 2 mins, and at the end Sharp skated it out and got a nothing off from far that Lu covered. Which was big considering how they had just been scrambling around. And this Juolevi play reminded me of that. 

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
I'm leaning in favour of Rathbone in this debate. Yes, Juolevi played in a higher calibre league the last couple of years but that is only  one consideration.
I'm more impressed by Rathbone's basic toolkit. We're talking opinion and not evidence but it just looks more impressive and NHL proficient to me. Both are high IQ players but Rathbone is much the better skater, plays quicker, has a much better shot. He also has personality inclinations that lead him to play with more edge and physicality. Bye-the-way, Rathbone also makes a great stretch pass just like Juolevi.
 
Juolevi, while playing in a higher level league, was however quite pedestrian, injury related or not and demonstrated some deficiencies. Rathbone, coming right out of high school hockey was above average in his first year and an all-star in his second year. His development trajectory and acceleration has been superb. His game just looks suited to translate well to the NHL- one of those players whose talent is enhanced when playing a faster game with more talented other players. Again, speculation!
 
Another thing I sense about him that could work to his advantage is the intra-game passion and fire in the belly  that seems to flare-up in him in response to game situations. Pettersson and Hughes have that too.
All of this is not to say that Rathbone is a lock to make the team next season. He may still have some things to learn and require some seasoning. We'll see!
And this is not to downgrade Juolevi. Hopefully both these guys become big contributors to team success.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, John_Guest said:

I was just listening to Brian Burke discuss Juolevi on Sportsnet:

https://www.sportsnet.ca/650/sportsnets-starting-lineup/brian-burke-juolevi-wouldnt-surprised-became-star/

He was saying the year Calgary drafted Tkachuk they had him rated side by side with Juolevi. He said Juolevi was fantastic as a junior. He played like a 24 year old. Burke was impressed by Juolevi's play last night and said it wouldn't surprise him if Juolevi becomes an all-star.

But but the CDC scouts had Juolevi ranked mid-late 1st, what does Burke know?

 

Maybe OJ will be our 4th consecutive Calder nominee ::D

  • Haha 2
  • Huggy Bear 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Praise to Travis Green once again for walking the fine line between playing the kids and playing the experienced veterans.

 

I was happy to see that physically Juolevi belongs in the NHL. His size helped. He did not shy away from physical contact. He seemed poised and calm. Knowing his own physical limitations he did not try to do too much to show off his skills. His stretch passes were noticeable. I hope we can lock him up to a long term contract at bargain cap value.

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Maddogy said:

Praise to Travis Green once again for walking the fine line between playing the kids and playing the experienced veterans.

 

I was happy to see that physically Juolevi belongs in the NHL. His size helped. He did not shy away from physical contact. He seemed poised and calm. Knowing his own physical limitations he did not try to do too much to show off his skills. His stretch passes were noticeable. I hope we can lock him up to a long term contract at bargain cap value.

Yup. 6'3 and just over/under 200 is nothing to scoff at...

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Maddogy said:

I hope we can lock him up to a long term contract at bargain cap value.

With only one year left on his ELC, I don’t imagine he’ll have time to really build much value for his next deal. I’d expect he'll re-sign on a very cheap deal, the question is how much term? I’d be surprised if either side wanted to do a long term contract for his next deal.

 

I do agree that a long term deal would have the potential to be a steal for the Canucks. I really doubt Juolevi could command anything over $2M AAV, so if he achieved top-4 status, while playing multiple years locked in at that low cost, it would be a serious bargain.

  • Thanks 2
  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, GoCanucks16 said:

It is fine to disagree. We're not fighting. :)

 

I think there's more to it than experience, and I also think you're underrating the NCAA game. It's a high-quality league with good competition and is particularly geared toward player development. Jack's 61 college games isn't far off of Olli's 63 AHL games + Liiga experience, especially when you consider how much training OJ has lost to injuries.

 

I think there's lots of measurable things to look at in determining who's more ready to jump into the show. Rathbone's skating is actually phenomenal, and that's the biggest thing that puts him ahead imo. Skating is a huge part of the game for defenders today, and Rathbone's ability in the area should allow him to transition to the NHL game much more easily than Juolevi. He has a great transitional game, and while OJ doesn't slack with his outlet pass, Rathbone can carry the puck out the zone in ways Juolevi can't. Rathbone also has a good first pass and sends teammates on breakaways/breakouts on the reg.

 

Both have good hockey IQs, but Rathbone has a better skill set to use it with.

 

I've seen quite a bit of tape of Rathbone--never watched a full game of his to my recollection, but I've seen enough to know he's the real deal.

So you're basically stretching a narrative by saying NCAA = AHL. Never mind the fact that AHL has some long time former NHL players playing there. Never mind that AHL players in general have more experience than NCAA players. You're saying that Juolevi's experience is basically equal to Rathbone.

 

So here's the thing. The skating thing you're saying is a joke. No one else who is credible to comment on this has said Rathbone's skating is better nor worse than Juolevi's. I highly doubt you saw enough of both players skate to really make that accurate of a comparison. This is not taking into account the difference in level of competition. But to finally clear up the reality of competition - here's what other posters said about NCAA vs AHL:.

tl;dr - every single poster believes AHL > NCAA. Go through both sites (HF/Reddit). Your opinion is just wrong.

 

Source 1


HF Boards

 

https://hfboards.mandatory.com/threads/ncaa-vs-ahl.2441209/

 

For what it's worth, UNB is an elite CIS team and has been for a while. You can't really draw conclusions about the level of competition in CIS/USports based on their performance. Personally I think even a weak AHL team would chew through virtually every NCAA team. I just can't see NCAA defenses being able to handle even the worst AHL team's top players. I wish we had more inter-league games to get some numbers to support/refute these types of questions.

 
 
 

NCAA could win a one-off, but AHL would probably win nine out of ten 7 game series.

 

 

 
^This is pretty spot on. Top NCAA teams would probably have a couple lines that would be fine against a bad AHL team. But in terms of depth I dont see many NCAA standing much of a chance in the long run
 
All in all though the AHL is far higher quality of play than the CIS. For example, the following players graduated from UNB to pro hockey last year:
 
 
 
 
-----------------------------------------
Source 2
 
Reddit
 
 
 
 
level 1
 
CHI - NHL
104 points · 2 years ago
 

AHL is probably the hardest out of all of those.

 

  1. AHL (by a country mile)

  2. NCAA

  3. WHL

  4. QMJHL

 
Edited by Dazzle
  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

So you're basically stretching a narrative by saying NCAA = AHL. Never mind the fact that AHL has some long time former NHL players playing there. Never mind that AHL players in general have more experience than NCAA players. You're saying that Juolevi's experience is basically equal to Rathbone.

 

So here's the thing. The skating thing you're saying is a joke. No one else who is credible to comment on this has said Rathbone's skating is better nor worse than Juolevi's. I highly doubt you saw enough of both players skate to really make that accurate of a comparison. This is not taking into account the difference in level of competition. But to finally clear up the reality of competition - here's what other posters said about NCAA vs AHL:.

tl;dr - every single poster believes AHL > NCAA. Go through both sites (HF/Reddit). Your opinion is just wrong.

 

Source 1


HF Boards

 

https://hfboards.mandatory.com/threads/ncaa-vs-ahl.2441209/

 

For what it's worth, UNB is an elite CIS team and has been for a while. You can't really draw conclusions about the level of competition in CIS/USports based on their performance. Personally I think even a weak AHL team would chew through virtually every NCAA team. I just can't see NCAA defenses being able to handle even the worst AHL team's top players. I wish we had more inter-league games to get some numbers to support/refute these types of questions.

 
 
 

NCAA could win a one-off, but AHL would probably win nine out of ten 7 game series.

 

 

 
^This is pretty spot on. Top NCAA teams would probably have a couple lines that would be fine against a bad AHL team. But in terms of depth I dont see many NCAA standing much of a chance in the long run
 
All in all though the AHL is far higher quality of play than the CIS. For example, the following players graduated from UNB to pro hockey last year:
 
 
 
 
-----------------------------------------
Source 2
 
Reddit
 
 
 
 
level 1
 
CHI - NHL
104 points · 2 years ago
 

AHL is probably the hardest out of all of those.

 

  1. AHL (by a country mile)

  2. NCAA

  3. WHL

  4. QMJHL

 

I didn't say AHL = NCAA. You're reading into my post things it did not express.

 

Canucks brass was talking about Rathbone's "elite" skating in the draft day video.

 

I can find numerous sources on Rathbone's skating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, GoCanucks16 said:

I didn't say AHL = NCAA. You're reading into my post things it did not express.

 

Canucks brass was talking about Rathbone's "elite" skating in the draft day video.

 

I can find numerous sources on Rathbone's skating.

But you did. Here's what you said.

 

I think there's more to it than experience, and I also think you're underrating the NCAA game. It's a high-quality league with good competition and is particularly geared toward player development. Jack's 61 college games isn't far off of Olli's 63 AHL games + Liiga experience, especially when you consider how much training OJ has lost to injuries.

 

This in particular shows that you've watered down the difference of the two leagues, particularly noting that 61 college games "isn't far off" 63 AHL games. Otherwise why bother pointing out the 61 games and 63 AHL games? You seem to have treated them as equals, and this could not be further from the truth. Furthermore Liiga is a professional league (older men play in it). Again, you seem to be shortchanging the competition there as well.

 

Rathbone maybe "elite" in his competition, but does this mean he is elite in his league? Or does the elite description apply to ALL skaters? Juolevi is playing against harder competition, since I've established that AHL > NCAA. Yet just because there is no "elite" description of his skating, it doesn't mean that Rathbone has an "edge" on him either. In fact, both players are apples and oranges in two different leagues. It's like saying that an AHL veteran is "elite" against CHL players. It's taken out of context and you can't meaningfully quantify just how good a player is because of the differences.

 

I'm not hating on Rathbone. I'm just pointing out there are flaws in your analysis. You can't compare Rathbone and Juolevi from two different leagues. You've not seen both of them skate on the same ice surface, so there is no equal ground.

Edited by Dazzle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of our current D core only Hughes and Myers (given the lengthy contract) are long term locks so I don't quite understand why some are having this Juolevi v Rathbone or prior to that Juolevi v Rafferty argument. With Edler in his twilight, Tanev and potentially Stetcher gone this fall via free agency and the likes of Fanta, Benn as short term depth pieces, we will have more than enough spaces for these guys to play (provided they prove capable at this level). Moreover if any of our prospects do prove good enough to crack the roster this management has shown the willingness to let those who merit playing time get into the lineup even if it means burying big salary in the minors (Sven) or in the press box (Loui).

 

Remember having competition for spots is a good thing and having good assets in the system whether as depth, in the lineup or as a trade chip is essential. If you look back on our best teams from the WCE era to even the Sedins peak the one thing that we have often lacked is depth and young competition to battle for spots.  

  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Dazzle said:

But you did. Here's what you said.

 

I think there's more to it than experience, and I also think you're underrating the NCAA game. It's a high-quality league with good competition and is particularly geared toward player development. Jack's 61 college games isn't far off of Olli's 63 AHL games + Liiga experience, especially when you consider how much training OJ has lost to injuries.

 

This in particular shows that you've watered down the difference of the two leagues, particularly noting that 61 college games "isn't far off" 63 AHL games. Otherwise why bother pointing out the 61 games and 63 AHL games? You seem to have treated them as equals, and this could not be further from the truth. Furthermore Liiga is a professional league (older men play in it). Again, you seem to be shortchanging the competition there as well.

 

Rathbone maybe "elite" in his competition, but does this mean he is elite in his league? Or does the elite description apply to ALL skaters? Juolevi is playing against harder competition, since I've established that AHL > NCAA. Yet just because there is no "elite" description of his skating, it doesn't mean that Rathbone has an "edge" on him either. In fact, both players are apples and oranges in two different leagues. It's like saying that an AHL veteran is "elite" against CHL players. It's taken out of context and you can't meaningfully quantify just how good a player is because of the differences.

 

I'm not hating on Rathbone. I'm just pointing out there are flaws in your analysis. You can't compare Rathbone and Juolevi from two different leagues. You've not seen both of them skate on the same ice surface, so there is no equal ground.

I'm saying the amount of development they've gone through in their respective leagues isn't much different. Just that Juolevi skates against better competition doesn't mean he's developing faster. Development isn't linear.

 

Rathbone's skating is phenomenal, and we don't need to see both players on the same ice surface to know he's better than Juolevi at it.

  • Wat 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...