Olli Juolevi | #48 | D

[guntrix]

Juolevi's not an offensive D. His play style is similar to that of Hamhuis and Tanev where he's reliable defensively, can always be depended on to get the puck out safely and puts himself in positions where he doesn't have to race for anything. Of course, the fact that he's producing in the Liiga is a plus, but I'd be wary about expecting him to produce at the same pace in the NHL. 

[Junkyard Dog]

18 minutes ago, guntrix said:

Juolevi's not an offensive D. His play style is similar to that of Hamhuis and Tanev where he's reliable defensively, can always be depended on to get the puck out safely and puts himself in positions where he doesn't have to race for anything. Of course, the fact that he's producing in the Liiga is a plus, but I'd be wary about expecting him to produce at the same pace in the NHL. 

He may not be a pure offensive D but he has what it takes to be a reliable, productive and dependable two-way defenseman that's capable of being used in all situations.

 

We will just have to watch how he continues to progress. 

[Warhippy]

7 hours ago, Ihatetomatoes said:

Sure, that's an arguement for sure. A weak one IMO because Heiskenan hasn't had a chance to play here yet and I'm sure it will be erased as soon as he does get a chance. I don't think the NA market is so vastly different like you suggest for young prospects coming over to play

I'd argue the opposite.  We've seen a small mountain of players that could never translate their play in European markets over to the NHL very well.  We could very easily see Heiskanen/Petterson/Palmu/Juolevi fail to succeed in the NHL

 

It's not out of the question at all

[The_Rocket]

17 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

I'd argue the opposite.  We've seen a small mountain of players that could never translate their play in European markets over to the NHL very well.  We could very easily see Heiskanen/Petterson/Palmu/Juolevi fail to succeed in the NHL

 

It's not out of the question at all

Idk about pettersson. Comparables to him based on point production/age/position/size etc all have a 100% success rate. If EP winds up being a bust, it would be unprecedented for someone of his pedigree

[Ray_Cathode]

38 minutes ago, guntrix said:

Juolevi's not an offensive D. His play style is similar to that of Hamhuis and Tanev where he's reliable defensively, can always be depended on to get the puck out safely and puts himself in positions where he doesn't have to race for anything. Of course, the fact that he's producing in the Liiga is a plus, but I'd be wary about expecting him to produce at the same pace in the NHL. 

I can't even imagine on what data your assumption rests, Yuolevi is now playing in a men's league, in Europe (where secondary assists are harder to come by) and he is producing at a higher offensive rate than in Junior - - indicating that he is one of those young players whose effectiveness increases relative to the talent level of the league in which he plays.  In other words, he thrives in situations where the play is more effectively organized.

[Ihatetomatoes]

3 hours ago, Warhippy said:

I'd argue the opposite.  We've seen a small mountain of players that could never translate their play in European markets over to the NHL very well.  We could very easily see Heiskanen/Petterson/Palmu/Juolevi fail to succeed in the NHL

 

It's not out of the question at all

True.But there is also a small mountain of players that never translate their play from success in the minor leagues in north america as well to the NHL. A prospect is a prospect, I really don't see the league they play in to have much effect on their eventual success in the NHL. More often teams get great value out of draft picks that come from the Euro leagues because teams underestimate them. 

[HorvatToBaertschi]

9 hours ago, guntrix said:

Juolevi's not an offensive D. His play style is similar to that of Hamhuis and Tanev where he's reliable defensively, can always be depended on to get the puck out safely and puts himself in positions where he doesn't have to race for anything. Of course, the fact that he's producing in the Liiga is a plus, but I'd be wary about expecting him to produce at the same pace in the NHL. 

He actually is an offensive D, as much as he is a defensive one. He's your prototypical 2-way defensemen, which tanev abd hamhuis definetely arent. He's creative, has incredibly O and D iq's, has a great shot, good instincts, is a phenomenal skater. Think more like Pietrangelo than Tanev. 

[guntrix]

9 hours ago, Ray_Cathode said:

I can't even imagine on what data your assumption rests, Yuolevi is now playing in a men's league, in Europe (where secondary assists are harder to come by) and he is producing at a higher offensive rate than in Junior - - indicating that he is one of those young players whose effectiveness increases relative to the talent level of the league in which he plays.  In other words, he thrives in situations where the play is more effectively organized.

Not exactly an assumption, more an analysis from having watched him regularly with the Knights. I'm assuming you're watching him play on a game-by-game basis in the Liiga? That's the only way you'd have a more educated opinion because I admittedly don't tune into Liiga games. 

 

He didn't seem like an offensive player during his time with London at all. In fact, most of his offensive production came from assists (which I'm sure you know are easy to come by in the high-scoring O). 

 

Of course, these 15 games with TPS may be more indicative of who he really is as a player. As you said, maybe he raises his level depending on the competition. 

 

1 hour ago, HorvatToBaertschi said:

He actually is an offensive D, as much as he is a defensive one. He's your prototypical 2-way defensemen, which tanev abd hamhuis definetely arent. He's creative, has incredibly O and D iq's, has a great shot, good instincts, is a phenomenal skater. Think more like Pietrangelo than Tanev. 

You may be right but I think his 15 games with TPS may be too small a sample. He wasn't above average in the OHL, not sure how he translates that to the NHL unless he elevates his compete level. He does have good instincts and is a good skater. His shot is good in that he tends to get it on goal (something we sorely lack) but it isn't a blistering hard shot per say. 

[HorvatToBaertschi]

15 minutes ago, guntrix said:

Not exactly an assumption, more an analysis from having watched him regularly with the Knights. I'm assuming you're watching him play on a game-by-game basis in the Liiga? That's the only way you'd have a more educated opinion because I admittedly don't tune into Liiga games. 

 

He didn't seem like an offensive player during his time with London at all. In fact, most of his offensive production came from assists (which I'm sure you know are easy to come by in the high-scoring O). 

 

Of course, these 15 games with TPS may be more indicative of who he really is as a player. As you said, maybe he raises his level depending on the competition. 

 

You may be right but I think his 15 games with TPS may be too small a sample. He wasn't above average in the OHL, not sure how he translates that to the NHL unless he elevates his compete level. He does have good instincts and is a good skater. His shot is good in that he tends to get it on goal (something we sorely lack) but it isn't a blistering hard shot per say. 

In the OHL, he was severely above in terms of IQ. Most of his assists came from incredible cross ice passes that the other team just didn't see coming. Who's specialty is that? Karlsson. Subban. I think the Tanev comparison os terrible because Tanev isn't a smart player at all. He just works harder than anyone else and makes the good play consistently. Juolevi is a tier above him, if not 2.

[GrizzlyAdams]

4 hours ago, HorvatToBaertschi said:

In the OHL, he was severely above in terms of IQ. Most of his assists came from incredible cross ice passes that the other team just didn't see coming. Who's specialty is that? Karlsson. Subban. I think the Tanev comparison os terrible because Tanev isn't a smart player at all. He just works harder than anyone else and makes the good play consistently. Juolevi is a tier above him, if not 2.

Yikes. 

[Whorvat]

5 hours ago, HorvatToBaertschi said:

In the OHL, he was severely above in terms of IQ. Most of his assists came from incredible cross ice passes that the other team just didn't see coming. Who's specialty is that? Karlsson. Subban. I think the Tanev comparison os terrible because Tanev isn't a smart player at all. He just works harder than anyone else and makes the good play consistently. Juolevi is a tier above him, if not 2.

Tanev might actually have the highest hockey IQ on our team..not sure how you could say that a player who consistently makes the right play is not a smart player.

 

Juolevi will do just fine in a Canucks uniform next season

Edited November 29, 2017 by Whorvat

[HorvatToBaertschi]

23 minutes ago, Whorvat said:

Tanev might actually have the highest hockey IQ on our team..not sure how you could say that a player who consistently makes the right play is not a smart player.

 

Juolevi will do just fine in a Canucks uniform next season

The way i see it is as soon as Tanev makes the first pass out, he's absolutely useless. I love him, he's a phenomenal Defensive D, but to compare him to Juolevi, who was drafted because of his high IQ in all 3 zones, is preposterous. Yes it wouldnt be bad to have another tanev, but the reality is, with Juolevi's potential, we're looking more on the Edler pre-2012 side of things. Tanev is a good player, but doesn't have a high hockey IQ, he just knows when to absorb a hit or when to give the puck to the other D by putting it behind the net softly for the other D to pick up and then make the pass out. That's not an inteligent play at all, that's just repetition at practice. How many stretch passes does Tanev make a year? Like 2? His IQ is average. 

Edited November 29, 2017 by HorvatToBaertschi

[khay]

17 hours ago, guntrix said:

Juolevi's not an offensive D. His play style is similar to that of Hamhuis and Tanev where he's reliable defensively, can always be depended on to get the puck out safely and puts himself in positions where he doesn't have to race for anything. Of course, the fact that he's producing in the Liiga is a plus, but I'd be wary about expecting him to produce at the same pace in the NHL. 

I think Juolevi's ability to recognize options and move the puck accurately makes him a PMD. He is not an offensive D in the sense of say, Karlsson or Burns but IMO, he is a PMD.

 

He needs to make small improvements to defensive aspect of his game to become a top 2D.

 

I think his skating is pretty decent from what I have seen, although it may not be as good as Hamhuis once was (at least not yet). If he can become a bit better, that would go a long way. Defensively, Tanev's ability to read plays and break up plays is elite and Juolevi is not nearly as good... but Juolevi might get there one day.

 

Juolevi also has decent size 6'3 and 200lbs. That is enough size to box out opponents and play the body, something that a player like Karlsson is not able to do successfully. Juolevi definitely has upside in terms of defensive aspect of the game and combined with his puck moving skills, he can be like his current mentor, Sami Salo. A top 2D that plays well at both ends of the ice.

 

Ideally, if he can skate like Hamhuis and read and break up plays like Tanev, then Juolevi will be a 1D in the sense of Lidstrom. I know I shouldn't compare anyone to the best defenceman since Orr but comparison is made in the sense that Juolevi can move the puck like Lidstrom, who didn't make fancy plays like Karlsson much but he sure knew where the puck should go next and knew how to get the shots through (writs shots like Juolevi). Only thing that stops Juolevi from reaching an elite level is skating and defending, but If he is able to improve a bit on those, then well, he will be 1D.

 

Of course, improving on skating and ability to read plays (defensive hockey IQ) is easier said than done. So realistically speaking, Salo type top 2D is what I expect and hope that Juolevi can reach. 

 

Drawing parallels to Canuck greats:

 

Salo->Juolevi

Naslund->Boeser (kind of)

Linden->Horvat

Henrik+Daniel->Pettersson

Bertuzzi->Virtanen 

 

Now, we just need to find Bure's successor and Ohlund's successor and we are set. 

 

[GrizzlyAdams]

37 minutes ago, HorvatToBaertschi said:

The way i see it is as soon as Tanev makes the first pass out, he's absolutely useless. I love him, he's a phenomenal Defensive D, but to compare him to Juolevi, who was drafted because of his high IQ in all 3 zones, is preposterous. Yes it wouldnt be bad to have another tanev, but the reality is, with Juolevi's potential, we're looking more on the Edler pre-2012 side of things. Tanev is a good player, but doesn't have a high hockey IQ, he just knows when to absorb a hit or when to give the puck to the other D by putting it behind the net softly for the other D to pick up and then make the pass out. That's not an inteligent play at all, that's just repetition at practice. How many stretch passes does Tanev make a year? Like 2? His IQ is average. 

Your assessment of Tanev is hard to read.

 

Traits a defensive defenseman exhibit that shows high IQ:

- Don't get caught out of position

- Force opposition to go offside

- Make good, safe, first pass out of zone

- Jump up in play when opportunity presents itself 

 

 

[Boudrias]

41 minutes ago, HorvatToBaertschi said:

The way i see it is as soon as Tanev makes the first pass out, he's absolutely useless. I love him, he's a phenomenal Defensive D, but to compare him to Juolevi, who was drafted because of his high IQ in all 3 zones, is preposterous. Yes it wouldnt be bad to have another tanev, but the reality is, with Juolevi's potential, we're looking more on the Edler pre-2012 side of things. Tanev is a good player, but doesn't have a high hockey IQ, he just knows when to absorb a hit or when to give the puck to the other D by putting it behind the net softly for the other D to pick up and then make the pass out. That's not an inteligent play at all, that's just repetition at practice. How many stretch passes does Tanev make a year? Like 2? His IQ is average. 

When fans question Joulevi's offensive potential they should dial back to last year's MemCup. When Hunter wanted offense he had OJ on the left point and Joulevi delivered. Many comparisons to Hamhuis but I never really saw Hamhuis's game when he was in Nashville. If he achieved Hamhuis's level at his high in Van then fans should be very happy.  

[Whorvat]

58 minutes ago, HorvatToBaertschi said:

The way i see it is as soon as Tanev makes the first pass out, he's absolutely useless. I love him, he's a phenomenal Defensive D, but to compare him to Juolevi, who was drafted because of his high IQ in all 3 zones, is preposterous. Yes it wouldnt be bad to have another tanev, but the reality is, with Juolevi's potential, we're looking more on the Edler pre-2012 side of things. Tanev is a good player, but doesn't have a high hockey IQ, he just knows when to absorb a hit or when to give the puck to the other D by putting it behind the net softly for the other D to pick up and then make the pass out. That's not an inteligent play at all, that's just repetition at practice. How many stretch passes does Tanev make a year? Like 2? His IQ is average. 

Sorry I didn't mean to insinuate that Tanev has the offensive ceiling that Juolevi does. Merely stating that I think Tanev's hockey IQ is incredibly high. I think Juolevi has far more offensive potential than Tanev, but I am not sure if he reaches Tanev on the defensive side of the puck.

 

As far as your assessment of Tanev's hockey IQ though, I would just agree to disagree.

 

I believe any defenseman who is consistently in the right position defensively, always making the right/smart play, that is hockey IQ. It requires reading the play thoroughly and picking and choosing when to step up at the line, when to take the guy wide etc.

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

Juolevi playing right now and already has an assist (his 8th on the season) through 1 period.

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

21 minutes ago, The 5th Line said:

Playing against KooKoo.  

 

Tuning in to watch Olli for the first time this year.  

Noticed Juolevi is playing with Henrik Tallinder on TPS’s first pairing.

 

Great to see. Olli had a good thing going partnered with Heikkinen on the second pairing, but moving up to play higher minutes alongside a 700+ NHL games veteran like Tallinder should be even better for his development.

 

Also haven’t seen Palmu playing this game and he’s not listed in the lineup. Maybe injured? Haven’t heard anything. Hopefully not healthy scratched, but his scoring has dropped off significantly since his hot start, so it’s possible.

[SpennyCanuck]

7 hours ago, HorvatToBaertschi said:

In the OHL, he was severely above in terms of IQ. Most of his assists came from incredible cross ice passes that the other team just didn't see coming. Who's specialty is that? Karlsson. Subban. I think the Tanev comparison os terrible because Tanev isn't a smart player at all. He just works harder than anyone else and makes the good play consistently. Juolevi is a tier above him, if not 2.

Terrible offensively, but is one of the better players on his own end of the ice. That doesn't mean he has low IQ. 

 

Can't just work hard and have balls to block shots. You need to have good positioning, know how to identify threats, read plays.

 

He always seems to be in the right place at the right time. Thats not luck, that's IQ. 

[HorvatToBaertschi]

54 minutes ago, The 5th Line said:

Tanev made the NHL against all odds because of his smarts.  Absorbing hits and softly putting the puck in to places for teammates too easily skate on too are good examples of hockey IQ so you are contradicting yourself big time here.  Tanev makes smart, high % plays, stretch passes are not that

Tanev made the NHL because in the 2011 finals we got decimated on D.. and he was calm and composed, like he could have had a cigarette in his mouth while he was playing. He stuck because he is coachable and does the small things right. That doesn't mean he has good IQ. You often seen Tanev not know what to do with the puck in the neutral zone, so he dumps it in. That's an example of making the right play, but not having the IQ to make a better play. Tanev has one zone he masters, and that's it, but boy does he master it. But not because he has high IQ, but because he can take a hit, battle hard, and get the puck out. 

Either way I will agree to disagree with everyone. I understand what im saying is very touchy and that its not a popular opinion, but it is my opinion. 

Im glad hes on the back end, but this all really comes back to the fact that I personally think Juolevi will be a much better player than Tanev, in bothends of the rink. Juolevi has more hockey IQ in his left pinky than Tanev does, and that's not even a knock on Tanev. 

And for the record i never said Tanev had low hockey Iq, i said he wasnt a smart player, i think he has average hockey IQ.

Edited November 29, 2017 by HorvatToBaertschi