Olli Juolevi | #48 | D

[Ray_Cathode]

1 hour ago, Stamkos said:

If this was the case then your primary point wouldn’t be the +/- of a player on a cruddy team before injury 

They weren’t all cruddy, As has been pointed out above - there were plenty of significant pluses on that team.  Juolevi and Chatfield were a pairing and they were awful. Granted Olli was a rookie, but so was Jasek (he only played 6 Games the previous year), and Jasek and Gaudette were very good. Look, I wish Olli had played better, I wish all of our signings worked out, but no matter how hard I wish and want, reality is not listening - Olli was not good last year. Hopefully it was because he was hurt, but wishin’ an’ hopin’ an’ beggin’ an’ prayin’ won’t help. Facts are facts.

[Ray_Cathode]

33 minutes ago, Googlie said:

He had 13 points in 18 games, not 18 points.

 

8 of his 13 were PP points, thus not factoring on plus minus stats.

 

He had 5 points at 5 on 5, was a -12, so was on the ice for 17 goals at 5 on 5 (or maybe 4 on 4 or 3 on 3. - the advanced stats don't differentiate), so conceding 1 goal per game at even strength when playing as the top defenseman isn't indicative of a shoddy defenseman at all.

 

Just sayin'

Being -1 per game extended to 82 games is -82. -82 for any defenceman is absolutely terrible. Three defensive pairings like that would be a total disaster. I think you should just say something else.

[J.I.A.H.N]

2 hours ago, Pete M said:

no I said several different things..you just don't get it....

 

A player can get points and everyone can point it out that OJ got 18 pts....but god forbid when you point out that he was "-12", which means he was on the ice for 30 goals against.

 

He needs to improve on his defensive game by focusing on defense first....he is not helping the team when he played 18 games and was on the ice for 30 goals against.

Man...…..you read those stats like the bible...…...

 

#1...…………..who was he playing against and with who

#2...……….….How many ,minutes was he playing

#3...…………..Did you see Biega's stats? 3 games minus 5 = which translates to minus 30 over the same amount of games (18 games)

 and Biega is a NHL Dman, albeit a #6 or 7

 

I just don't think you can bring up those stats and not put in his injury both plus and minus and not figure, he would do better, if healthy

 

So, my take is, he is better than Biega, when playing injured and just a rookie...……….

 

That is something to think about, don't you?

 

Healthy, I believe he has more points for and less against than he had...……...then compare that again to Biega

 

And NO, +/- does not work the way you did it...….PP points are not in the calculation at all....n0r are any +/- given for PP or PK just for the record

[J.I.A.H.N]

14 minutes ago, Ray_Cathode said:

Being -1 per game extended to 82 games is -82. -82 for any defenceman is absolutely terrible. Three defensive pairings like that would be a total disaster. I think you should just say something else.

Ray.....come on

 

Biega was down for 3 games and was -5

 

Does that make him a minus 135 player in the AHL?  Which prorated to the NHL is about minus 190ish.

 

I think not.

 

I think you have to wait and see what he has when he gets here and has been in the league for a year or 2

 

Then you might be right?

 

But I think you might be surprised (in a good way)...………..I am hoping!

[Googlie]

12 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

And NO, +/- does not work the way you did it...….PP points are not in the calculation at all....nor are any +/- given for PP or PK just for the record

Well, technically you are correct, but a shortie does count for +/ - purposes.  But OJ wasn't on the ice for any short handed goals against the power play or any for the PK units

[mll]

2 hours ago, theo5789 said:

When is someone going to bring up Bo's 40 point and team worst -30 season (he was 20 years old then) and call him a poor player?

 

Erik Karlsson as a 20 year old put up 45 points, but a -30.

 

Chris Pronger as a 20 year old put up 25 points and a -18.

 

I think the point I'm trying to make is that +/- doesn't necessarily tell the whole story of a player.

Associate coach Agnew who is responsible for the Ds in Utica gave a lengthy interview on Juolevi back in mid-November - it's behind the Athletic's paywall and some extracts have been posted in this thread at the time.  He was asked about Juolevi's +/- as it was the worst mark on the team back then.  

 

He didn't think Juolevi was responsible for all those minuses but did say that "when there's a little bit of a trend, there's a trend."  He went on to talk of how they are working with him on that and how receptive he is to coaching.  

 

He needs some more development time.  Agnew talked of how he had to learn how to play at AHL pace before being able to play at NHL pace.   In terms of readiness at the time of the interview he had Brisebois, Sautner and Chatfield ahead of him.  

 

Edited August 8, 2019 by mll

[Googlie]

1 hour ago, Ray_Cathode said:

Being -1 per game extended to 82 games is -82. -82 for any defenceman is absolutely terrible. Three defensive pairings like that would be a total disaster. I think you should just say something else.

You need to get the math right though.  Yes, you can extrapolate that he would be on the ice even strength for 82 goals against, but he would also be on the ice for 23 goals for at even strength.

He was -12 in 18 games, not -18

[mll]

2 hours ago, Googlie said:

Well, technically you are correct, but a shortie does count for +/ - purposes.  But OJ wasn't on the ice for any short handed goals against the power play or any for the PK units

 

By early November he had been on the ice for 3 short-handed goals against.  Was still early in his transition from Liiga to the AHL - they had played maybe 12 games.  Don't know if there were more after that.  The Comets did end up with 19 short-handed goals against on the season - worst record in the league.

 

Edited August 8, 2019 by mll

[Kanukfanatic]

8 hours ago, Pete M said:

 

just stating facts dudes...when another poster is pointing out facts as well...OJ's has potential and he will be an NHLer, but the 18pts with "-12" tells me he has some development to do on his "D" game at the pro level compared to some other "D" who are on the same crappy team. (by the way, the team wasn't crappy until they lost Sautner, Schenn, Blujus and Brisebois ...all "+" players).

Your "facts" don't mean anything.

 

2018/19 Worst +/-:

-34 Doughty - yeah reall crappy D man

-28 Larsson - again real crappy D man

-20 Gost - again real crappy D man

-20 Montour - again real crappy D man

 

Der...the stats say they suck!!!!   

 

You need to do a little light reading on Statistics and learn something about them before you try and throw them around and say they mean something. When you do crack open that book look for "Sample Size".  Just a little tip there pal.  

 

 

[Kanukfanatic]

8 hours ago, MoneypuckOverlord said:

 

 

I rather comments like this then the crap that is said about him on hfboards.   worse is they are coming from Canucks fans. 

hfboard Canucks is a sewer with no real Canuck fans other than a hardcore few. Some of the posters that have 10s of thousands of posts are the biggest joke of all over there.

[Kanukfanatic]

6 hours ago, Googlie said:

He had 13 points in 18 games, not 18 points.

 

8 of his 13 were PP points, thus not factoring on plus minus stats.

 

He had 5 points at 5 on 5, was a -12, so was on the ice for 17 goals at 5 on 5 (or maybe 4 on 4 or 3 on 3. - the advanced stats don't differentiate), so conceding 1 goal per game at even strength when playing as the top defenseman isn't indicative of a shoddy defenseman at all.

 

Just sayin'

Nice post....not sure he will get 'actual' stats but I appreciated the info.

[HorvatToBaertschi]

9 hours ago, Pete M said:

nothing against OJ... however, there were good players on the team that were "+" players ....they too played on this crappy team. OJ still has some development to do with his "D" game.

Juolevi didn’t play a single game with Demko. You know, the only good goalie to have suited up for the Comets? The only one with an above .900 save %? Oh right, you’re nitpicking stats... congrats 

Edited August 8, 2019 by HorvatToBaertschi

[WeneedLumme]

8 hours ago, Ray_Cathode said:

Being -1 per game extended to 82 games is -82. -82 for any defenceman is absolutely terrible. Three defensive pairings like that would be a total disaster. I think you should just say something else.

1) He was not -1 per game.

2) Projecting a tiny sample size to a full season is something only a person completely ignorant of statistics would think has significance, especially when,

3):

On July 27, 2019 at 7:33 AM, 18W-40C-6W said:

He was also -11 in like the first 7 games or so. He adjusted quickly after that bad start and as above plus / minus is never really a great stat. It’s more a team stat than individual 

That tiny negative sample was largely produced during his first couple of weeks of adjusting to a new team in a new league (with a nagging knee injury), which no sentient person would believe accurately represents his playing ability.

Edited August 8, 2019 by WeneedLumme

[theo5789]

7 hours ago, mll said:

Associate coach Agnew who is responsible for the Ds in Utica gave a lengthy interview on Juolevi back in mid-November - it's behind the Athletic's paywall and some extracts have been posted in this thread at the time.  He was asked about Juolevi's +/- as it was the worst mark on the team back then.  

 

He didn't think Juolevi was responsible for all those minuses but did say that "when there's a little bit of a trend, there's a trend."  He went on to talk of how they are working with him on that and how receptive he is to coaching.  

 

He needs some more development time.  Agnew talked of how he had to learn how to play at AHL pace before being able to play at NHL pace.   In terms of readiness at the time of the interview he had Brisebois, Sautner and Chatfield ahead of him.  

 

Is anyone suggesting he doesn't need more development time? +/- is a stat that can easily be turned around, so not too worried about his progression is +/- is the worst statistic people can pull up.

[Dazzle]

3 hours ago, HorvatToBaertschi said:

Juolevi didn’t play a single game with Demko. You know, the only good goalie to have suited up for the Comets? The only one with an above .900 save %? Oh right, you’re nitpicking stats... congrats 

@Pete M He also noted all the pluses were AHL veterans too.

 

For a sample size of 18 games. Juolevi did really well.

Part of the reason why he did bad was because of a lingering injury which he is now 100 percent for.

[Googlie]

8 hours ago, mll said:

 

By early November he had been on the ice for 3 short-handed goals against.  Was still early in his transition from Liiga to the AHL - they had played maybe 12 games.  Don't know if there were more after that.  The Comets did end up with 19 short-handed goals against on the season - worst record in the league.

 

Thanks, yes - my mistake. (I read the stat "SHA" as short handed against. But it is short handed assists)

[Jester13]

+/-, 13 pts in 18 gms, yada yada yada. What I would like to know is why so many posters in this thread have such a hard time admitting that OJ still needs to work on the defensive side of his game, and why emotions are so touchy when someone mentions this? 

 

No one in this thread (from what I've seen over the past couple of years) is denying all of his positives - breakouts, passing, PP, etc. - but it just seems like his downfalls are taboo. Sure, maybe someone can say that some posters only speak about his downfalls, but maybe that's just because it's so off limits in here that they are trying to make the point that I am right now, which is that we should be able to talk about OJ and all of his game without posters jumping on the backs of others and crying that they are slamming our prospect. They simply are not. OJ's foot speed has been a problem for quite some time now. Granted, injuries have set him back a ton, and leniency should be given in this regard, but it doesn't change the fact that this is a large mountain that OJ needs to overcome sooner rather than later, as the team won't be able to wait forever, and other guys will take his spot if he's not ready, essentially making it even harder to crack the lineup.

 

I personally do not see OJ making the team this year (he may see some games, but I think it's more likely that he stays in Utica for the year). I just feel like his injuries, although fixable, are pretty significant, and we are not in a rush to bring him in. Let him incubate a little longer in the AHL and get his legs back and better/stronger/quicker than ever, while improving his foot speed and positional play in his own zone. As is, and I really don't think by Christmas either, I don't think he will be ready to make the jump to the NHL, as he will get blown by wide almost every time by the world's best. His point total last year in the short period does not say enough of his readiness. He is a defenceman first, which is currently where he needs the most work. 

[higgyfan]

10 hours ago, mll said:

He needs some more development time.  Agnew talked of how he had to learn how to play at AHL pace before being able to play at NHL pace.   In terms of readiness at the time of the interview he had Brisebois, Sautner and Chatfield ahead of him.  

 

Of course he needs more development, mll.  The kid has played all of 56 games since he was in Jrs. and has had a lot of rehabbing from injuries.  Those 3 dmen that Agnew mentions as more nhl ready are 2 - 4 years older than OJ, so I would think they should be getting close (although Sautner at 25yrs old is a long shot and the other 2 will probably be bottom pairing dmen).  Even with just 18 games, OJ put up more points than any of them.  

 

OJ has the luxury of time, which the others don't really have.  A healthy season in Utica (with some callups if ready) will round out his game for the NHL and the Canucks will have another dman with offensive upside.

 

 

[Nucker 67]

Led Zeppelin - When the Levee Breaks

 

If it keeps on rainin' (in Vancouver)
Juolevi's goin' to break
If it keeps on rainin'
Juolevi's goin' to break
When Juolevi breaks
He'll have no place to play

 

(off season bored)

[Fred65]

57 minutes ago, higgyfan said:

Of course he needs more development, mll.  The kid has played all of 56 games since he was in Jrs. and has had a lot of rehabbing from injuries.  Those 3 dmen that Agnew mentions as more nhl ready are 2 - 4 years older than OJ, so I would think they should be getting close (although Sautner at 25yrs old is a long shot and the other 2 will probably be bottom pairing dmen).  Even with just 18 games, OJ put up more points than any of them.  

 

OJ has the luxury of time, which the others don't really have.  A healthy season in Utica (with some callups if ready) will round out his game for the NHL and the Canucks will have another dman with offensive upside.

 

 

To be honest I haven't seen Chatfield or Briesbois but I had a good look at Sautner and frankly couldn't pick many deficiencies in his game. He handled a 3rd pairing role, some aggressiveness to his game and will be Cap friendly, and we're going to need that in a couple of years time in the EP & QH era. If Vcr lets him go ( RFA next year ) then I think some one else would pick him up pretty quickly. By the by where has Evan McEnemy gone to ?