Olli Juolevi | #48 | D

[Warhippy]

11 hours ago, two drink minimum said:

I agree the Flames are further ahead on the rebuild curve and that may be some help to a young MT but he's coming as advertised. Some scouts had him as the 3rd best player behind Matthews and Laine and ahead of Poolparty/PLD.

 

I think in 4-5 years the Canucks will need both LW and an LHD so as I see it the best bet is who will have a bigger impact as an NHLer. I believe it will be MT

I think in 4 to 5 years we'll be able to draft a solid LW.  I don't think in 9 rounds of drafting over 5 years plus extra picks, free agency, trades and the NCAA that we'll REALLY worry about Tkachuk

 

Because if we drafted Tkachuk in 4-5 years we'd need a solid potential top 2 LHD no?  

 

And we'd be right back here debating the pick.

[Warhippy]

10 hours ago, J.R. said:

 

It would be nice to have Jost, Keller, Sergachev etc too. 

 

You only get one pick. You can't have all the players. 

Raymond Ballard and a 1st say otherwise pffft

[Gaudette Celly]

17 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Just

Like

Always

 

That means this ORGANIZATION.  Not once did I mention this management group only management in general.  Management that over the last 40+ years has done just that.  Every decade.

 

You can twist it however you'd like to back up your statement.  But my statement was as always when I speak of making trades and long term health/future of this club about everything from 1970 to present. 

 

Exactly -- so where is the "always" of the current regime making "ridiculous trades for a post season push"?  Two TDLs so far and there are NONE.  You're trying to project upon and broadbrush the current regime with the actions of past ones, with no substantiation or factual basis whatsoever.  That is a complete strawman and shallow fallacious reasoning.

 

I'm sure you could find plenty of things to criticize about current management based on what they've actually done, but to make clearly false accusations to try to maintain a narrative is pretty disingenuous and disrespectful, especially when they have repeatedly said they will not trade young players for rentals or the like.

[CanadianRugby]

Craig Button on Team 1040 today:

• Juolevi accountable player, took responsibility for his play at tourney
• Leadership group went to Finn coaching staff to ask to play a less static game
• Good overall player, will have long career
• Won't overwhelm anyone with any one thing (not great shot, not great speed)

 

[Warhippy]

30 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said:

 

Exactly -- so where is the "always" of the current regime making "ridiculous trades for a post season push"?  Two TDLs so far and there are NONE.  You're trying to project upon and broadbrush the current regime with the actions of past ones, with no substantiation or factual basis whatsoever.  That is a complete strawman and shallow fallacious reasoning.

 

I'm sure you could find plenty of things to criticize about current management based on what they've actually done, but to make clearly false accusations to try to maintain a narrative is pretty disingenuous and disrespectful, especially when they have repeatedly said they will not trade young players for rentals or the like.

Another smug ignoring of the statement and information by Hutton and his wink

 

Carry on being better than everyone.

 

[JamesB]

8 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Raymond Ballard and a 1st say otherwise pffft

 

I think it was usually Ballard, Raymond and a second (BRS) that could be used to acquire pretty much any player in the league.

 

Speaking of Raymond, good to learn he did well at the Spengler Cup this year.

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, JamesB said:

 

I think it was usually Ballard, Raymond and a second (BRS) that could be used to acquire pretty much any player in the league.

 

Speaking of Raymond, good to learn he did well at the Spengler Cup this year.

Raymond still plays?  Is he on a Euro team?

[Warhippy]

2 minutes ago, JamesB said:

 

I think it was usually Ballard, Raymond and a second (BRS) that could be used to acquire pretty much any player in the league.

 

Speaking of Raymond, good to learn he did well at the Spengler Cup this year.

Already looking at a possible spot on the Olympics team should the NHL not attend

[Alflives]

2 hours ago, CanadianRugby said:

Craig Button on Team 1040 today:

• Juolevi accountable player, took responsibility for his play at tourney
• Leadership group went to Finn coaching staff to ask to play a less static game
• Good overall player, will have long career
• Won't overwhelm anyone with any one thing (not great shot, not great speed)

 

If he turns into a 20 minute top four D man that's a good pick, right?

[lethal_spaghetti]

The thing with Olli is that he is such a smart player with a high hockey IQ. The fact that he doesn't excel in any one area (skating, shot, power, etc) isn't a concern to me as these are things that he can work on and eventually improve in his career. I mean these guys are still so young we shouldn't be worried about the pick as of now. You can't teach the hockey IQ that comes naturally everything else you can teach and hopefully Olli is willing to put in the work.

[CanadianRugby]

40 minutes ago, Alflives said:

If he turns into a 20 minute top four D man that's a good pick, right?

If you're picking the top D in the draft and he's a top 4 not a top 2, I'd say it's an ok pick.  Top 2 would be good pick. 

[Warhippy]

Just now, CanadianRugby said:

If you're picking the top D in the draft and he's a top 4 not a top 2, I'd say it's an ok pick.  Top 2 would be good pick. 

Looking at the consistent players picked at 5...top 4 is almost par for the course the last 10+ years

[Phat Fingers]

IQ and drive will make up for a whole host of shortcomings. Juolevi is also a sublime skater as per pre draft reports. 

 

The thing is, there is no real weakness to his game, but what he excels at is perhaps the hardest things for young d men to aquire, IQ. 

 

Juolevi's floor was becoming a top 4 defender in the NHL, while many talking heads compared his game to Vlasic. They believe he could reach that level of play, which would be fine for a 5th OA. 

 

EW

[Stelar]

All this talk about Ollie over Tkachuk.  Vancouver has been in the league for 45 years and have never had a number one stud D man.  Hence, no cups.  Benning picked the D man who he thought could be that guy. Will he? Who knows.  But donkeys on here "claiming" they don't see him as any better than a 4 or 5 D man 6 months after being drafted are out to lunch.  They have no idea......  no one does..

[canucklehead80]

23 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Not drafting Tkacuk was a blessing to this team in disguise.  It forced the management group to play the long game instead of the immediate in the present game for once.  A draft choice that allows us to make plans for the future, not the post season.

 

This may have been JB's plan. If his hands have been tied by "up top", this could have at least altered the path just enough to bring on a rebuild earlier, even if just slightly. If we had taken Tkachuk and he was having the same success with us as he has with Calgary (hard to say, could have easily been different or in London), the team may have been fooled into believing we were closer to being "rebuilt" than we currently are.

[Gaudette Celly]

6 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Another smug ignoring of the statement and information by Hutton and his wink

 

Carry on being better than everyone.

 

Then comes the non sequitur ad hominem finisher.  Simply stop making false accusations to suit your narrative and there won't be any problem.

[Phat Fingers]

6 hours ago, Stelar said:

All this talk about Ollie over Tkachuk.  Vancouver has been in the league for 45 years and have never had a number one stud D man.  Hence, no cups.  Benning picked the D man who he thought could be that guy. Will he? Who knows.  But donkeys on here "claiming" they don't see him as any better than a 4 or 5 D man 6 months after being drafted are out to lunch.  They have no idea......  no one does..

 

For the most part this is a classic reaction by a sub group of the CDC going back to 'we should have drafted Kopitarzz!'  Bourdun was a stud, RIP, and those posters just went on to say the same thing over and over. 

 

In fairness, the Canucks draft record was abissamal for a period of time.  Patrick White didn't sting that much because GMMG was able to get Erhoff in a sweetheart deal.  But no one here would be wrong to say, We could have had PK etc from that draft. 

 

One has to think that the OJ should have been Tkachuk is really just an echo of past angst. JB has done a great job drafting and so far there is no reason to believe that OJ cannot reach his floor of becoming a top 4 defender.  He could easily be our top defender, think Edler with a much higher IQ or Tanev with more offense, in a few years.  To me, that would be a legit number one d man.  

 

It's low hanging fruit to compare picks early on.  Context makes it nearly impossible to say pick 'x' is better than pick 'y' if only JB had drafted pick 'x' all would be better. Pick 'x' could be back in Jr if we had drafted him, just like pick 'y'. 

 

This goes away when the prospect makes the NHL and proves their ability. Horvat is a great example. 'Should have drafted Nishukinzz' went on for a year or so, how did that turn out?  

 

Even Boeser has some 'Should have drafted Konecy' (sp?) fans out there. 

 

The good news is that this only seems to be with 1st rounders.  No one is out there saying bo about Demko or Trymakin right now. 

 

EW

[Vinny in Vancouver]

On 1/2/2017 at 9:11 PM, The 5th Line said:

This is just another sad excuse.  Why are people so afraid to admit how nice it would be to have Tkatchuk?  There is no possible way you can judge how well he would of done, put him with the Sedins and who knows?  He's pretty much a Burrows in his prime.

You would draft a Burrows (even at his prime) at number 5 in this past draft? As much as I love Burrows, that's tough to digest. The Canucks badly need forwards who can create plays from nothing. My main concern with Tkachuk is I'm not really sure how much higher his ceiling is - his Dad is one of the best players of all-time and they have deep pockets so you know that he has been taught quite a bit and has been through a lot more training than the other players, but what I saw pre-draft is a player who is complementary and opportunistic rather than creative.

[aGENT]

On 02/01/2017 at 9:11 PM, The 5th Line said:

 

This is just another sad excuse.  Why are people so afraid to admit how nice it would be to have Tkatchuk?  There is no possible way you can judge how well he would of done, put him with the Sedins and who knows?  He's pretty much a Burrows in his prime.

 

 

 

 

 

On 02/01/2017 at 9:26 PM, J.R. said:

 

It would be nice to have Jost, Keller, Sergachev etc too. 

 

You only get one pick. You can't have all the players. 

 

Further to this, why are you so afraid to admit how nice it is to have Juolevi?

[Vinny in Vancouver]

7 hours ago, The 5th Line said:

 

He plays like Burrows as an 18 year old rookie.  Not tough to digest at all

I think you skipped the second part of my post about 'ceiling'. If Burrows is the ceiling, then it is tough. As I said in the post, because of his Dad, he probably has been taught and trained a lot more than the other kids in the draft, and yet, even now, when I see him play with the puck, he tends to be only complementary and not creative. Honestly, with his pedigree, I expected more.