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

TGokou

Members
  • Posts

    854
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TGokou

  1. https://theathletic.com/472659/2018/08/14/a-deep-dive-into-olli-juolevis-year-in-finland-and-what-to-expect-from-him-next-season/ By Janik Beichler Olli Juolevi’s first professional season was one of ups and downs. With the year in the rearview mirror, however, he looks like a lock to become a top-four defenceman for the Vancouver Canucks for many years. The Canucks’ 2016 first-round pick had little more to gain in junior hockey and decided to make his way back home instead of sticking with the OHL London Knights for another year. While he needed some time to adjust, his decision to join TPS Turku in Finland turned out to be the right call. Following a difficult start to the season, he continuously improved. And despite being a healthy scratch for a couple of games after the World Junior Championship, Juolevi arguably became Turku’s best defenceman by season’s end. At this point, Juolevi looks like a strong all-around defenceman who can be an NHL contributor for years to come. Juolevi had a rough start to his first pro season, being on the ice for five five-on-five goals against in his first four games and ten goals against in his first nine games. In that same time span, he was on the ice for just eight goals, four of which came in a single game, as illustrated in the graphic below, courtesy of CanucksArmy’s Jeremy Davis. However, his game greatly improved as the season progressed and he got acclimated to the new surroundings and professional hockey. In the remaining 29 games, Juolevi was on the ice for 23 goals and only 15 against. A lot of this was due to Juolevi’s personal production. After going pointless in his first four games of the year, he had a three-point night in his fifth game of the season and went on a four-game point streak. Thanks to more consistent production after that slow start (except for a little slump after the world juniors), he was awarded an average of 17:52 in ice time per game, which even increased to 22:57 in the postseason. Juolevi finished the regular season with 0.5 points per game before adding two goals and seven points in 11 postseason games. What really stands out – both positively and negatively – when watching Juolevi play is that he keeps things simple. The Canucks drafted him in hopes of getting an offensive contributor and power-play quarterback, and while fans envisioned someone flashy to fill that role, we have to accept that Juolevi won’t be that type of player. But, while he’ll never be a Quinn Hughes type, Juolevi does contribute offensively and spent a significant amount of time on Turku’s power play. The Finn has everything he needs to be successful at the highest level: he’s smart, he can pass and shoot the puck, and he’s a solid skater as well. So, let’s take a deep dive into some game footage of Juolevi’s play last season to see what he really brings to the Canucks. For this analysis, we’ll work our way from the neutral zone to defence and then back up ice. In all of these clips, Juolevi wears No. 4 in black and white. One of Juolevi’s big defensive strengths is his mobility along with his reach. He possesses the ability to transition from offence to defence quickly and move laterally to react to oncoming attackers and defend well against the rush. In the clip below, Juolevi moves into open space on the attack, making himself available for a cross-ice pass. When the forward’s shot gets deflected to the left boards, Juolevi reacts quickly, taking a turn and a quick crossover stride to intercept the puck. Thanks to an unlucky bounce, however, the puck moves back to the middle where an opponent picks it up to drive down the centre lane. Juolevi is able to recover, close the gap, and use his reach to knock the puck loose before turning play the other way with a bank pass. Also note how he keeps his right arm close to his body to hide his reach, allowing him to jump out at the attacker with a quick poke check only when the time is right. Below is another example. He tries to stay inside the dots, but when the attacker gets past the forechecker, Juolevi takes a quick step over, turns around and angles his opponent perfectly to break up the play. However, there’s one thing Juolevi still needs to work on to make even better use of his toolkit: stay on the inside. In the clip below, Juolevi is the player at the left boards near the red line in a 2-3 forecheck. In this system, he is required to close down the left side – but not at all costs. The only opponent on his side is closer to the middle than the boards, far on Juolevi’s inside. With that, Juolevi gives him the centre lane, forcing his teammate in the middle to cover two players. Of course, the attacker on Juolevi’s side isn’t the one who ended up getting the breakout pass, but the fact that Juolevi didn’t cover him, forced the middle defender to move over, giving the breakout attacker extra space. Below is another example where Juolevi runs into trouble because he’s too far on the outside. While there is no way to know for sure, it looks like Turku’s strategy on the backcheck is to cut the ice in half, but Juolevi realizes too late that he’s too far on his left. This causes him to transition from forward skating to backward to close the gap, which then makes it more difficult to react to the cross-ice pass. Again, this doesn’t make the goal against Juolevi’s fault. The goal is scored by a defenceman joining the rush, who should be covered by Turku’s F3 (the last forechecker to reach the D-zone). However, had Juolevi stayed in position throughout the play, he would have had an easier time reacting to the defensive breakdown. If he irons this out, Juolevi will be even more effective against the rush. An encouraging side note: Juolevi didn’t struggle with his positioning or angling against the rush when he played for Team Finland at the 2018 world juniors. The slower pace of junior hockey may have been a contributing factor, but it may also be an indication that he has an easier time playing in the smaller North American rink. In the D-zone, Juolevi is one of those players who stand out by not standing out at all. He just plays his part without any flash – and without many mistakes. His skating, smarts, reach, and frame allows him to play a strong, pro-style defensive game that should translate well to the NHL. So, instead of watching video of plays where nothing happens because everyone’s in perfect position, let’s take a look at something Juolevi could still improve in the D-zone. When Juolevi is on the ice for a goal against, it’s often because someone else screwed up. In the clip below, Turku is in possession and starting a breakout, with Juolevi staying back to present a support option below the goal line. His teammate plays a dangerous pass through the middle for a turnover and big-time scoring chance against. As said, Juolevi wasn’t really part of the play and should get no blame, but that doesn’t mean there’s nothing he could have done. He quickly realizes his team turned the puck over and moves to the front of the net. However, instead of taking a couple of quick strides to pressure the puck-carrier, he freezes in front of the net, trying to block the shot – and failing. Had he closed the gap more quickly, he might’ve had a chance to intercept the puck. Below is another example where Juolevi makes a questionable decision. After joining the attack in the offensive zone, he’s the last player back on the counter attack. When he arrives, however, the puck is in the corner and he could easily move into proper position – which would be covering the net. Instead, he moves behind the net. Who knows what he was thinking, but the fact is, he leaves an opponent wide open in the slot. Juolevi generally reads the play well and has all the tools to be successful in the defensive zone. But if there’s one thing he can still improve, it’s his decision-making in unplanned game situations. On the breakout, Juolevi’s game is more of the same: solid, but nothing special. No Hughes-like end-to-end rushes, no fancy footwork and quick turns. Just simple puck-moving. In the offensive zone, Juolevi has a clear strength: Seeing openings and jumping in to create chances. The clip below is a perfect example of Juolevi’s hockey sense. More specifically, he displays excellent offensive awareness and vision. Juolevi’s D-partner is deep in the offensive zone with the puck and making his way back toward the blueline. Rather than staying back to support, Juolevi takes a small risk by pinching into the open space. He gets a pass, finds a teammate on the other side, and gets a cross-ice pass through traffic for a perfect assist. Below is a similar example, only this time, Juolevi elects to shoot the puck rather than setting up a teammate. His shot isn’t elite, but when he’s got space, Juolevi can get hard, accurate wrist shots at the net. In 2017-18, Juolevi averaged three shots on net in the regular season, and that number increased to 4.18 in the playoffs, which is extremely encouraging to see from a rookie. Juolevi likes to shoot, and he manages to get pucks through to the net consistently, both after pinching and from the blueline. However, his tendency to get shots off quickly and frequently – while in part due to Turku’s offensive strategy of crowding the net and shooting from the blueline – also shows an aforementioned deficiency in his game. In the sequence below, Juolevi receives a pass at the point and fires it at the net from a bad angle. When he’s without immediate passing options, he picks the simple play because he lacks the dynamic skating ability and creativity to walk the blueline and get himself into better position. Again, Juolevi is a smooth skater with solid puck skills who can deke around defenders occasionally when he’s granted the space (as seen below), but he generally picks the safe play. Power play On the man advantage, Juolevi brings one exciting attribute: versatility. While the Canucks were and likely still are hoping Juolevi can become their power-play quarterback, that’s not the only role he filled with Turku last season. His ability to pinch up the left side and get open for shots comes in handy on the power play as well. In Vancouver, this is Brock Boeser’s spot on PP1 and it will be for many years. But, Juolevi has proven he can be a dangerous second option in this position thanks to his wrist-shot accuracy and vision. At the world juniors, Juolevi was consistently deployed on the left side of a 1-3-1 formation as well, and he had great success there, both as a shooter and a playmaker. Likewise, Juolevi is a solid option on the right side, though this is unlikely to become a regular gig for him in Vancouver. In the play below, he shows the ability to get open and create lanes for cross-ice passes. He also manages to bury the puck with a quick snap shot for a nice power-play goal. However, he neither has a lethal one-timer nor the dynamic playmaking ability to create chances for others from his off-side. As the right half-boards are likely to become Elias Pettersson’s spot on PP1 anyway, Juolevi’s ability to lead the power play from the point is, of course, the most important one. Luckily, this is also where he spent the most time with Turku last season. With extra space, Juolevi is much better at using his smooth skating and puck skills to his advantage. While he plays a rather simple style on the man advantage as well, he is able to make the penalty-killing unit move and create space for himself and his teammates. In the play below, Juolevi receives the puck on the right point off the zone entry. He then moves toward the middle of the ice, opening up in the process to have his upper body facing up ice, allowing him to see and evaluate his options. He plays a pass back to the right side, gets it back, and fires it at the net for a goal through traffic. While this sequence shows he has the tools to run a power play from the point, he again ends up finishing the play with a shot through traffic despite a wide-open teammate to his left. The power play is all about quick passes and shifting the play around to make the penalty-killers move. So, even though it worked out this time, shots through traffic are generally not the ideal play – and there’s still room for improvement. There is one thing that’s always apparent when watching Juolevi play: he keeps it simple and doesn’t have the tools to be a game-changing offensive dynamo and No. 1 NHL defenceman. But, he’s effective in all three zones and still has time to get better, so there’s little doubt about his ability to join the Canucks sooner rather than later. Given Juolevi’s age, last season’s development, and the state of the organization, there is no point in waiting any longer to give him a chance at the highest level. Looking at the Canucks’ depth chart, there is currently no room for him, but the club should do everything in their power to give him a chance to prove his worth. Even if he doesn’t make the team out of training camp – whether it’s due to his play or waiver implications – we will see Juolevi in a Canucks uniform soon. At this point, the Canucks have to admit Juolevi isn’t becoming what they wanted to get when they selected him fifth overall in 2016. But, he has what it takes to become a minute-munching top-four defenceman and power-play contributor at the NHL level. And with Boeser, Pettersson, and Hughes, they won’t even have to rely on him to be their star player on the power play. Olli Juolevi had a year of ups and downs – but he’s ready for next step. Sorry I don't know how to post the link properly. I had to cut some video clips out cause it was getting too long but just wanted to point out that I've found a lot of value in The Athletic articles. Well worth the $34 annual subscription with their promo code every once in a while. Just thought I'd throw that out there.
  2. I was basing it off of his point per game but I guess that works too
  3. Judging from the video above he doesn't seem to have the same skating ability as Hughes although still very good. Definitely had a productive year in Liiga but he is one of the older players in the draft if I am not mistaken. He will have to up his production to Heiskanen levels in his draft year in order to be considered in top 5 in my opinion. I've also heard his defense needs a lot of work, probably in the same vein as Boqvist. My guess is he will continue to be rated anywhere between 5-10 all season long and maybe falling just outside top 10 after the draft when all is said and done.
  4. No matter how good he is I have a hard time seeing him getting drafted in the top 5. He is a winger that plays in a junior league in russia. He would have to have a season that absolutely blows the doors off...more so than a player like Filip Zadina who fell to 6th. With the number of centres projected in the top 10 I have a feeling it will be similar to this year in that highly skilled wingers will make a case for top 5 but fall out of the top 5 in favor of those centres.
  5. I know we shouldn't set expectations but what are everyone's expectations for him to achieve next year in the NCAA? What would you consider above expectations or below? Adam Fox had 28 points in 29 games last season (2nd NCAA year) Zach Werenski had 36 points in 36 games (2nd NCAA year) Hughes had 29 points in 37 games (1st NCAA year) I'm putting expectations of him having a minimum of point per game so 37 points in 37 games. Anything above 40 points I would consider that blowing my expectations out of the water. I would be pretty disappointed if he only had 34 points. I'm also hoping he works on his shot this summer and can improve dramatically on his goal totals. Hoping for about 8-10 goals
  6. To be honest it's not a very high bar to achieve.
  7. Hmmm....there is not enough homerism from you Alf. No worries, I got your back. FTFY.
  8. KHL is probably better than the AHL. I think they only award primary assists if I'm not mistaken.
  9. Come on Alf you have no idea what your talking about. Dahlin played against men in arguably one of the best leagues outside of the NHL. Basically by your own admission then, Pettersson is not that great because he scored 56 points against a bunch of pansies... and I know you would never say that. Also for defencemen I'd argue that they have an easier time transitioning to the NHL because there's less places for a forward to move, making it easier to take your man.
  10. I think generational can be used to describe an entire line give or take. 2 D and 3 forwards but obviously this doesn't have to be set in stone. I would put Lindros and bure in there too. They were unique in their skill set for what they did and are HOFers
  11. I don't think it's any coincidence that the year he went back to the KHL his team jumped from 21st in standings to 7th overall. Avtomobilist has always been a pretty mediocre team and this is their highest placing since entering the KHL back in 2010. They made a goal differential jump from -26 the previous year to +28 this year for a total of 54. He is too good for the KHL.
  12. I personally like the Tryamkin suggestion as well. You don't really need a true stay at home defenseman with Hughes cause they are both fairly fast and with Tryamkin's reach can nullify a lot of 2 on 1 chances. Plus Tryamkin's shot will only get better for a guy of his size and we need a point man that can shoot the puck since it's unlikely Hughes will ever be that guy. He will also make up for the size discrepancy in case they ever need to clear the crease. I am not overly concerned that Tryamkin likes to join the rush because both of their escapability is extremely high (Hughes with his skating and Tryamkin with his reach). In the event that Tryamkin turns the puck over, I think Hughes can reverse and catch his man. If Hughes turns the puck over, Tryamkin would most likely be hanging back. Hughes- Tryamkin Juolevi-Woo Hutton-Stecher (Or any of the other upcoming defenceman making their way up)
  13. TBH if Hughes turns out like Ellis I would be pretty disappointed. His max point total in a season is 38 points. For a player that had the gaudy point totals in junior I would've thought he'd do a better job translating that into NHL numbers, especially in the new NHL.
  14. I rewatched that clip and realized something else. Actually he didn't really infer that he had 2 centres in front of Hughes. He inferred that he realizes that Hughes dropped because "other" teams need to draft your own centre ice men (hence why Arizona and Montreal had to reach to select Hayton and Kotkaniemi).
  15. I know which quote he is referring to. It was based on a quote where Benning implied that they had the same players just in different orders. Personally I wouldn't make the trade and I don't think anyone on this forum would have said so either. I personally was focusing on Dobson myself but I wasn't really focused too much on Hughes as I had expected him to be gone. Either way I'm cheering for both Hughes and Dobson to do well. Never really liked Bouchard and of course with him going to the oilers it's just one more reason I hope he busts.
  16. Watching the shift-by-shift video of him against Team Canada you can definitely see that Hughes still needs a lot of work in the D-zone. There was one goal where he was completely at fault because he drifted away from his player in front of the net for an easy tap-in. There was no reason for that to happen at all as he should've been covering his man. He was obviously looking to breakout too soon.The other two goals he was on I don't believe were his fault at all. One was basically a goal the goalie absolutely must have had. The third goal he almost had his man tied up but once again the goalie had to have that. In one case, Hughes lets his man blow by him through the neutral zone on the rush. Could've easily been a breakaway. In another instance he was being pressured by a fore-checker, and with multiple safe tape-to-tape options he chooses the most dangerous option of going through the fore-checkers stick and ends up turning over the puck. Obviously nothing to complain about with his offensive game but definitely needs to clean it up in his own end. Also with the whole thing about drafting Jack Hughes. It would obviously be a dream to have this happen but I'm not too hopeful. The great thing about this upcoming draft is that it seems to be very heavy in good centres. Based on their stats they all seem like they could easily go in the top 15. I'm not sure how they compare defensively but this could be a very deep draft.
  17. Are you talking about the quote where he was asked if there were other players that fell outside of 1 and 2 if the decision would've been harder? If so Benning said that he had one maybe two guys he would've ranked higher. Not sure if that is Hayton but my guess was it would've been Tkachuk and Kotkaniemi. I suppose there's a chance but to say it was heavily implied is reaching. My guess as to how his draft rankings would've fallen would be 1. Dahlin 2. Svechnikov 3. Tkachuk/Kotkaniemi 4.Tkachuk/Kotkaniemi 5. Hughes 6. Zadina 7. Hayton?
  18. With Hughes 1 G and 5 A and 6 points in 4 games that leads his team in scoring while playing in one fewer game than most of his teammates. Jack Hughes with 1 goal 2 assists in 5 games. Brady Tkachuk with only 2 assists in 4 games played. Also leads the team with 24 penalty minutes, 3 min more than B. Tkachuk with 21 min.
  19. I know that Arizona gets a lot of flack for drafting Hayton where they did but I do believe he will be a very good player for them down the road. His numbers don't particularly stand out but he is a late birthday and I would think that next year he would probably put up 80-90 points. Would I have drafted him at 5? Probably not, he would've been closer to #10 in my rankings.
  20. I think part of the reason too is that fans place more emphasis on individual efforts such as dangling through one or two players to get to the net or crashing the net to create a scoring chance. The twins were wizards with the pass and go and created scoring chances out of thin air but rarely would you see a buildup of anticipation from one of those exciting dangles other players can do.
  21. My guess and it is only a guess is that players who have been passed too many times every year eventually see the writing on the wall and eventually stop trying as hard to impress but you would have to be a bubble player for that to happen. I'm sure there were plenty of small guys who never made it to the big show but had they been given an actual chance they would've done well for themselves. However if a team doesn't want a small skilled guy on the team you would have to absolutely blow the doors off to get any consideration.
  22. Exactly. I am not against having him in the opening lineup but it has to be for the right reasons. He will have to have plum offensive situations, weak line match-ups to start and probably limited icetime to get his feet wet. Once he shows he can progress further than that you can move him up your lineup and in more situations.
  23. I'm not even sure I see the Shinkaruk comparable. It's been a while but I recall Shinkaruk was a perimeter player. In Madden I see a player that goes into the tough areas which is made even more impressive by the fact that he is so lightweight. Also seems to have a tremendous amount of skill around the net. It's interesting that he had such a low point total but I can definitely see the upside, similar to how Gaudette made huge strides in his D+1 and D+2.
×
×
  • Create New...