Olli Juolevi | #48 | D

[Ghostsof1915]

Forget the bench. Two finger push ups are the way to go. 

 

 

I'd probably break my fingers just setting up. 

[Sean Monahan]

@nzan

 

The only way we should've taken Tkachuk is if we were flush with high-end D prospects and severely lacking in wingers or if Tkachuk was clearly the better player, none of which is the case. Quality young d-men are the greatest currency in the NHL and if at some point down the road we have a log-jam on D with a hole on the wings, we can easily trade a D for a forward- probably one of great value.

[Bigturk8]

9 minutes ago, Sean Monahan said:

@nzan

 

The only way we should've taken Tkachuk is if we were flush with high-end D prospects and severely lacking in wingers or if Tkachuk was clearly the better player, none of which is the case. Quality young d-men are the greatest currency in the NHL and if at some point down the road we have a log-jam on D with a hole on the wings, we can easily trade a D for a forward- probably one of great value.

That's pretty much the exact hypothetical situation that Nzan was describing.

" But if we had no legitimate forward prospects and had our current d-core with two legitimate d prospects also on their way...in that case I'd probably have rather added a forward. "

You guys seem to be agreeing without realizing it.

[Sean Monahan]

4 minutes ago, Bigturk8 said:

That's pretty much the exact hypothetical situation that Nzan was describing.

" But if we had no legitimate forward prospects and had our current d-core with two legitimate d prospects also on their way...in that case I'd probably have rather added a forward. "

You guys seem to be agreeing without realizing it.

I see what he said in his last post but I still think you take a D (in this case, Juolevi) unless the winger (in this case, Tkachuk) is head and shoulders the better prospect.

[aGENT]

6 minutes ago, Sean Monahan said:

I see what he said in his last post but I still think you take a D (in this case, Juolevi) unless the winger (in this case, Tkachuk) is head and shoulders the better prospect.

This.

 

Juolevi was clear BPA IMO. Even if we were flush with potential top pairing D prospects, I still would have taken him.

 

Especially considering the value of young D in trade in this league. Chances are we could trade one of those theoretical D for a future winger, likely even better than Tkachuck.

[Bigturk8]

4 minutes ago, Sean Monahan said:

I see what he said in his last post but I still think you take a D (in this case, Juolevi) unless the winger (in this case, Tkachuk) is head and shoulders the better prospect.

Then I don't understand the purpose of the following quote from your previous post as it directly contradicts what you've just said.

"The only way we should've taken Tkachuk is if we were flush with high-end D prospects and severely lacking in wingers or if Tkachuk was clearly the better player, none of which is the case."

I've bolded the "or" because it means that those are two separate scenarios in which we should have taken Tkachuk. The first of those scenarios being, "flush with high-end D prospects and severely lacking in wingers", is the same thing as "no legitimate forward prospects and had our current d-core with two legitimate d prospects". 

It's worded a little different but it's the same sentiment.

 

[Sean Monahan]

2 minutes ago, Bigturk8 said:

Then I don't understand the purpose of the following quote from your previous post as it directly contradicts what you've just said.

"The only way we should've taken Tkachuk is if we were flush with high-end D prospects and severely lacking in wingers or if Tkachuk was clearly the better player, none of which is the case."

I've bolded the "or" because it means that those are two separate scenarios in which we should have taken Tkachuk. The first of those scenarios being, "flush with high-end D prospects and severely lacking in wingers", is the same thing as "no legitimate forward prospects and had our current d-core with two legitimate d prospects". 

It's worded a little different but it's the same sentiment.

 

When I say flush I mean totally saturated. Like if you're Philadelphia picking at 5th this past June, and you see Juolevi and Tkachuk as being fairly equal- maybe then you start to consider Tkachuk.

[Bigturk8]

Just now, Sean Monahan said:

When I say flush I mean totally saturated. Like if you're Philadelphia picking at 5th this past June, and you see Juolevi and Tkachuk as being fairly equal- maybe then you start to consider Tkachuk.

Fair enough. My point is, I think that Nzan was trying to say the same thing, just worded differently. Like I said, the sentiment was the same, we're just getting hung up on the definition of the word "Flush". In the end, it seems that the agreed upon scenario is if we had a very strong defensive prospect pool and a very weak forward prospect pool, then Tkachuk might have been a more desirable pick.

Regardless, that was not the case and I'm pretty excited to have Olli aboard.

[Rink on Renfrew]

One thing of note, is that when it comes time to play for his country he should have a good chance at cracking the Finnish blueline thus helping to streamline his development and play in big games at a young age. The Fins are looking for their new Lumme for international play.

 

I'm excited to watch his ongoing improvement in the coming years. I have no doubt that he will be one of the most valuable players for us in the near future.

[Tre Mac]

11 hours ago, Camel Toe Drag said:

Boeser= Sharp

Virtanen= Lucic 

This again.  ok.

 

Boeser = Hull

Virtanen = Shanahan

Demko = Roy
Juolevi = Lidstrom

McCann = oh wait we traded him

Zhukenov = Datsuyk

Jordan Subban = P.K. Subban

Mackenzie Stewart = Enrico Ciccone(my favorite name of all time)

 

[Putgolzin]

1 hour ago, Bigturk8 said:

Fair enough. My point is, I think that Nzan was trying to say the same thing, just worded differently. Like I said, the sentiment was the same, we're just getting hung up on the definition of the word "Flush". In the end, it seems that the agreed upon scenario is if we had a very strong defensive prospect pool and a very weak forward prospect pool, then Tkachuk might have been a more desirable pick.

Regardless, that was not the case and I'm pretty excited to have Olli aboard.

Right, all of the above, and @J.R.still picks Juolevi. Balls-y.

Edited September 13, 2016 by nzan

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, nzan said:

Right, except @J.R.still picks Juolevi. Balls-y.

He's clearly BPA IMO. and like I said earlier:

 

1 hour ago, J.R. said:

Even if we were flush with potential top pairing D prospects, I still would have taken him.

 

Especially considering the value of young D in trade in this league. Chances are we could trade one of those theoretical D for a future winger, likely even better than Tkachuck.

 

[Boudrias]

21 hours ago, DeNiro said:

I think if we had a young player like OEL it might help extend the Sedins careers.

 

Just look at how efficiently they move the puck around playing with OEL and Karlsson. Their skating is not even an issue when they have guys like that rushing the puck.

OEL is a pleasure to watch and moves the puck well for the Twins. Karlsson is another question all together. Offensively he is one of the best I have ever seen but his d-zone coverage is bad. Ottawa had the worse turnover rate in the NHL last year, I believe, and I can see why. Maybe Ottawa should have made the pitch for Weber.   

 

[Boudrias]

5 hours ago, J.R. said:

I'd still have taken OJ.

 

People still underestimating I see...

Joulevi playing at 205 - 210 and fans will forget about Tkachuk. Benning didn't have an option IMHO. At #5 he had a crack at a possible 1D that the org did not have and a stronger finish this year might not allow again.  Tkachuk is a possible 1LW but the likelihood of another pick which yields that type of player is greater.

[N4ZZY]

I wonder if Juolevi has put on weight and muscle this summer, and if so, how much, cause that'll probably determine whether he makes the team or not. it's not his hockey IQ, and it's not his skillset - those things undoubtedly, if that's what allows him to make the team, he has an abundance of. but whether he can handle the physical grind of the NHL, that's quite something else. when he was drafted, he looked skinny, almost physically frail. if he's still like that, then he probably needs another year with London. If he's bulked up (195-200 pounds), then he might be ready to go. 

 

[Phat Fingers]

1 hour ago, N4ZZY said:

I wonder if Juolevi has put on weight and muscle this summer, and if so, how much, cause that'll probably determine whether he makes the team or not. it's not his hockey IQ, and it's not his skillset - those things undoubtedly, if that's what allows him to make the team, he has an abundance of. but whether he can handle the physical grind of the NHL, that's quite something else. when he was drafted, he looked skinny, almost physically frail. if he's still like that, then he probably needs another year with London. If he's bulked up (195-200 pounds), then he might be ready to go. 

 

Its all about size and weight for Juolevi. He has the skating, skill and IQ to make it out of the draft in the NHL.  He has to be close to 200 lbs at training camp to be considered. 

 

This is is a nice problem to have.  He is not a Juinor player that dominates because he overpowers everyone, he out thinks them. 

 

Lookkng at his stats and heard at the draft that he managed to add 9lbs of lean muscle mass in the second half of Juinor last year.  He was reported to be 189lbs at the draft. He has the height, he just needs to add 10 to 12 pounds of legit muscle mass. 

 

Going back to Juinor is not a bad outcome. Win win all around.

 

 

[N4ZZY]

20 minutes ago, Eastcoast meets Westcoast said:

Its all about size and weight for Juolevi. He has the skating, skill and IQ to make it out of the draft in the NHL.  He has to be close to 200 lbs at training camp to be considered. 

 

This is is a nice problem to have.  He is not a Juinor player that dominates because he overpowers everyone, he out thinks them. 

 

Lookkng at his stats and heard at the draft that he managed to add 9lbs of lean muscle mass in the second half of Juinor last year.  He was reported to be 189lbs at the draft. He has the height, he just needs to add 10 to 12 pounds of legit muscle mass. 

 

Going back to Juinor is not a bad outcome. Win win all around.

 

 

so does anyone have any info with regards to his weight training and progress?

[aGENT]

25 minutes ago, Eastcoast meets Westcoast said:

Its all about size and weight for Juolevi. He has the skating, skill and IQ to make it out of the draft in the NHL.  He has to be close to 200 lbs at training camp to be considered. 

 

This is is a nice problem to have.  He is not a Juinor player that dominates because he overpowers everyone, he out thinks them. 

 

Lookkng at his stats and heard at the draft that he managed to add 9lbs of lean muscle mass in the second half of Juinor last year.  He was reported to be 189lbs at the draft. He has the height, he just needs to add 10 to 12 pounds of legit muscle mass. 

 

Going back to Juinor is not a bad outcome. Win win all around.

 

 

While I generally agree with the sentiment, he'll also have to adjust to playing against men, at a far faster pace etc. 

 

I'm as high on this kid as anyone but it's far more likely he's at least 1-2 years away than not.

[N4ZZY]

9 minutes ago, J.R. said:

While I generally agree with the sentiment, he'll also have to adjust to playing against men, at a far faster pace etc. 

 

I'm as high on this kid as anyone but it's far more likely he's at least 1-2 years away than not.

yep. he will have to adjust if he makes it. i think he will get his nine games to start and then he will he sent back to junior for further development. if anything. he makes the team next year along with Boeser. 

 

but. his hockey IQ will, i think cut down his adjustment to playing against men in the NHL. i'm looking forward to the young stars tournament to see juolevi play. hope he brings it to the tournament and then brings it even more to main camp. could you imagine if he makes the team right out of training camp? wow. 

[aGENT]

44 minutes ago, N4ZZY said:

he will get his nine games to start and then he will he sent back to junior for further development.

I doubt this very much. They're not going to risk losing depth on waivers just to give him 9 games and send him down.