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

Olli Juolevi | #48 | D


b3.

Recommended Posts

Since we're talking about who we woud've taken as fans, here are my picks:

 

2016: Keller or Sergachev

2017: Vilardi

2018: Hughes

 

I think Vilardi had back surgery in his draft -1 year and I didn't find out until after the draft. That would've slid him down my list, but Pettersson still would've been my 2nd or 3rd pick. 

 

I was fine with the Juolevi pick even though he wasn't my first defenseman on my list. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

 

Why’d you start at 2013. Horvat was a Gillis pick and he was the only Gillis pick that turned out. If your adding in Gillis’ selection. I bet the fans win. 

It wasn’t about Jim benning making the drafts it’s more of an example of fans getting it wrong.  Steve tambellini and Robert Nilsson being Canucks fans choices in 2003 is another example.  

 

But feel free to do one for Gillis. Personally I wasn’t following closely to the drafts during those times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its still too early to be writing him off. It was a bad pick in the sense that we didn't get the BPA at #5. But if Juolevi is a good #3 on a championship team that wouldn't be a bad pick historically speaking. 

 

He was developing well. Other than his D+1 year, his development has been pretty good. He's the same age as Pettersson, if he not faced the injuries this could've been his first year too. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, The Lock said:

Yeah, I don't even recall reading about anyone going "Why didn't we pick Dobson?" other than maybe TheHockeyGuy on Youtube. I remember almost everyone on these forums seemed to be content about a draft pick for the first time that I've ever seen (I stress almost). lol

'That's a small body...'!

 

I'm very happy with QH and think he'll work out just fine for us!

 

Merry Christmas to all! Most of you are probably just getting up, and me and my family are just getting ready to put the turkey in the oven, and sit down to a Christmas day game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, The Lock said:

Sorry Phat, but a gut is a gut. I don't care whether it comes from his dad or if it comes from a random blockbuster employee you knew back in high school (no idea why I thought of that as a comment btw). Are you the exact same as your dad? If someone doesn't like you because of your dad is that fair?

 

I get that grudges happen and all but I'm also of the mentality of that it takes a stronger person not to hold a grudge, so I personally try and be the stronger person, especially when it comes to people I don't even know on a personal level. That being said, there's obviously bad people out there and I'm not saying don't hold grudges against serial killers or anything but, even then, the whole guilty by association thing just isn't all that fair in my opinion. I've known people who are like that. I've been friends before with people like that and I always wonder why they tend to be so bitter. Perhaps it affects my heart a little more than it should but it's a sucky attitude in my opinion to have which is ironic as those people tend to care the most, just perhaps going about it in the wrong way perhaps?

I am sticking with my "gut" with Tkachuk for now.  Plus he is a great player to "hate" on another roster.  

 

BTW the Canucks brass did not interview Matt in the lead up to the draft that year.  

 

IMO they clearly wanted PLD and when he was taken early they went with a player that would need time to physically develop.  

 

Matt was never on their radar, even though he was a Knight and was likely ready to step in right away.  

 

If the reports are true about his salary demands, then it would reinforce my supposition that he has the traits if his father in ways I would not want in the nucks locker room.  

 

One player gets greedy, it can feed into the team culture.  I would like to see Bo be the major influence on our young roster  vs Matt.  Added to that hindsight is always 20/20.  I had these concerns at the draft.  I still think there is validity to my 'gut'.  

 

Character is a major component to JB's team building.  Give me Brock over Matt any day.  Since Brock was already our prospect, the team could look to other needs like center in defence.  Finding wingers to compliment our centers and defenders is likely the easier position to draft.  

 

Jake has taken a long time to put things together, but I believe he can play a similar role on our roster.  Lind, Gads and possibly MacEwan could also become that player.  

 

Matt is a good player.  He has a team that already had its key players on its roster   Matt was the last piece in many ways.  IMO he isnt the driver that some believe.  He benefits from the top line.  Calgary also has an enviable defence, good and deep.  

 

I like Matt's play around the net.  That's why Gads was such a positive draft pick.  He plays a similar game.  

 

Having a MT at 8-9 million, what would Jake, Brock, EP40 and Quinn sign for.  It could add 1million per player.  The flames are lucky that their key players are already under contract.  But that attitude could be destructive in our team at this point.  

 

That is the main reason I was and am happy that MT went elsewhere.  

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Phat; you have put forward a lot of suppositions regarding MT that only time will prove either true or false. I would not be surprised if MT asks for 7+ mil / yr in his next contract and that may put the squeeze on Calgary's cap but Calgary, IMO shot themselves in the foot with the 5 and 3/4 mil 5 year contract to James Neil.... Shades of Loui Eriksson. 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Kootenay Gold said:

Phat; you have put forward a lot of suppositions regarding MT that only time will prove either true or false. I would not be surprised if MT asks for 7+ mil / yr in his next contract and that may put the squeeze on Calgary's cap but Calgary, IMO shot themselves in the foot with the 5 and 3/4 mil 5 year contract to James Neil.... Shades of Loui Eriksson. 

 

 

Is MT better than Nylander?  Obviously he’s A LOT better.  MT will ask for 10, and will sit out until Calgary caves in and pays him.  

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Kootenay Gold said:

Phat; you have put forward a lot of suppositions regarding MT that only time will prove either true or false. I would not be surprised if MT asks for 7+ mil / yr in his next contract and that may put the squeeze on Calgary's cap but Calgary, IMO shot themselves in the foot with the 5 and 3/4 mil 5 year contract to James Neil.... Shades of Loui Eriksson. 

 

 

Matt is a really good player.  My only concern is about his contract demands.  His dad sunk the Jets.  Let's see what Matt signs for.  If the early reports are to be believed, he will be after money north of 8m per season.  He is after better money than Johnny Hockey with no where near the production.  The very thing I was learly about with him.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Kootenay Gold said:

Phat; you have put forward a lot of suppositions regarding MT that only time will prove either true or false. I would not be surprised if MT asks for 7+ mil / yr in his next contract and that may put the squeeze on Calgary's cap but Calgary, IMO shot themselves in the foot with the 5 and 3/4 mil 5 year contract to James Neil.... Shades of Loui Eriksson. 

 

 

I have little problem with any person getting the most they can for a job they do. Whatever the traffic will bear. The fact that these young player like MT will make demands that would have got them laughed out of the room a few years ago is shaking up the NHL. Teams have to decide which 4 players they will pay to led them into CUP contention. Make a mistake whether on character or skill development and your hopes could be dashed. That has always existed but now the risk is higher since the decision has to be made at a younger age. 

 

Canuck fans should remember that Hughes roomed with BT and spent a lot of time in the Thachuk home. If money is the bottom line we might have our own problems on the horizon. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Phat Fingers said:

I am sticking with my "gut" with Tkachuk for now.  Plus he is a great player to "hate" on another roster.  

 

BTW the Canucks brass did not interview Matt in the lead up to the draft that year.  

 

IMO they clearly wanted PLD and when he was taken early they went with a player that would need time to physically develop.  

 

Matt was never on their radar, even though he was a Knight and was likely ready to step in right away.  

 

If the reports are true about his salary demands, then it would reinforce my supposition that he has the traits if his father in ways I would not want in the nucks locker room.  

 

One player gets greedy, it can feed into the team culture.  I would like to see Bo be the major influence on our young roster  vs Matt.  Added to that hindsight is always 20/20.  I had these concerns at the draft.  I still think there is validity to my 'gut'.  

 

Character is a major component to JB's team building.  Give me Brock over Matt any day.  Since Brock was already our prospect, the team could look to other needs like center in defence.  Finding wingers to compliment our centers and defenders is likely the easier position to draft.  

 

Jake has taken a long time to put things together, but I believe he can play a similar role on our roster.  Lind, Gads and possibly MacEwan could also become that player.  

 

Matt is a good player.  He has a team that already had its key players on its roster   Matt was the last piece in many ways.  IMO he isnt the driver that some believe.  He benefits from the top line.  Calgary also has an enviable defence, good and deep.  

 

I like Matt's play around the net.  That's why Gads was such a positive draft pick.  He plays a similar game.  

 

Having a MT at 8-9 million, what would Jake, Brock, EP40 and Quinn sign for.  It could add 1million per player.  The flames are lucky that their key players are already under contract.  But that attitude could be destructive in our team at this point.  

 

That is the main reason I was and am happy that MT went elsewhere.  

 

 

Same here, even before the 2016 draft, I did not want the Canucks to take Tkachuk because of the person he is. I am willing to bet that when things go south for the Flames in a few years, Tkachuk could pull a Kesler, demanding a trade while providing only a 2 team list.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Phat Fingers said:

I am sticking with my "gut" with Tkachuk for now.  Plus he is a great player to "hate" on another roster.  

 

BTW the Canucks brass did not interview Matt in the lead up to the draft that year.  

 

IMO they clearly wanted PLD and when he was taken early they went with a player that would need time to physically develop.  

 

Matt was never on their radar, even though he was a Knight and was likely ready to step in right away.  

 

If the reports are true about his salary demands, then it would reinforce my supposition that he has the traits if his father in ways I would not want in the nucks locker room.  

 

One player gets greedy, it can feed into the team culture.  I would like to see Bo be the major influence on our young roster  vs Matt.  Added to that hindsight is always 20/20.  I had these concerns at the draft.  I still think there is validity to my 'gut'.  

Tkachuk will get paid commensurate to his production and he is currently outpacing Gaudreau's production coming off his ELC. Tkachuk is also younger and has the pedigree of being a high draft pick so it could be argued that he has even higher potential. Gaudreau also signed his contract a couple of years ago for 6.75M AAV. Just this summer Nylander who was coming off back to back 60 point seasons got paid 6.9M AAV. Tkachuk will surely get paid more than that. As long as he maintains his production I think he should end up around 8M-9M which is around what we will give Brock.

 

So will Brock getting paid affect team culture? I think we have established he is going to make more than Bo, does that lessen Bo's influence? I say nay to both and I think as long as you have strong leadership you don't have to worry about jealousy or resentment towards a player just because he gets a bigger paycheck. Most players are happy for their teammates when they get paid because ultimately its a business and the players side with players at least on the business side of things. 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Phat Fingers said:

Matt is a really good player.  My only concern is about his contract demands.  His dad sunk the Jets.  Let's see what Matt signs for.  If the early reports are to be believed, he will be after money north of 8m per season.  He is after better money than Johnny Hockey with no where near the production.  The very thing I was learly about with him.  

Refresh our memories on how Keiths contract  sunk the jets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't believe people are saying it would be detrimental to have player who's worth 8-9 million per year. 

 

In the absolute worst case scenario, we could trade Tkachuk for a package including a defensive prospect similar to Juolevi and more. 

 

Could you imagine the return we could get if we traded Boeser? That's what we could get.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Alflives said:

When Juiolevi was picked is was okay, but a bit disappointed we didn’t select MT.

When ?Hughes wS there for us at 7, I was friggin’ hysterical with disbelief at how stupid the other six teams were.  

So were you happy we took Hughes over the other dmen available?

Edited by AK_19
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, N7Nucks said:

Tkachuk and Petey would absolutely devastate the league together.

Yes let’s also throw in ehlers while we are at it ?

 

weve said this too many times already.  We cannot have tkatchuk and pettersson on the same roster due to the butterfly effect of having tkachuk on our team in 2017 would have made us a stronger team and ultimately not being able to pick pettersson.

  • Cheers 2
  • 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...