Olli Juolevi | #48 | D

[R.Dahlin26]

5 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

It isn't about how putrid the D core is

 

You don't know coach green very well if you do

 

There are only so many roster spots.  There is only so much ice time.  Coach Green will give you spots if you earn them.  But if there is only X amount of spots on the left which are already eaten up by pre-existing players on contracts by simple numbers OJ will be pushed out and it has little to do with his ability to play well or not.

 

The most likely scenario is a 60-40 NHL/AHL next year and that's fine

 

The fun part will be seeing what happens when both him and Miro are 3rd year NHL players and we revisit this.

 

Because for all the comparisons, we've seen OJ be successful on NA ice.  By comparison, we've seen Heiskanen shy away from physical play entirely and have yet to see him play in North America

 

Again, it all comes down to a lack of aptience for a true rebuild within this fan base.  

If he earns a spot they will make room for him.

 

If he's in Utica that means he didn't have a good showing just like his previous training camp.

 

Don't you think if he killed it at training camp in September he would be on the team right now? That they would have made room for him?

[Darius]

8 minutes ago, R.Dahlin26 said:

If he earns a spot they will make room for him.

 

If he's in Utica that means he didn't have a good showing just like his previous training camp.

 

Don't you think if he killed it at training camp in September he would be on the team right now? That they would have made room for him?

The way I see it is Boeser killed it last year and in training camp and he still did not get a start.  Imagine if he had a slow start the first 10 games he probably would have been sent down.

 

Even if he killed it I would not keep an impressionable 19 year old d man here unless he was a phenom (imagine how his confidnce would take a beating with this team right now) - we all know D men take longer to develop, there are countless examples of this in NHL history.

 

I think there is a reason they signed MDZ and brought in other Dmen - it gives a chance for the prospects to develop at their own pace.   Other people see these moves as JB trying to compete for a playoffspot/cup but to me these guys are fillers on short term contracts that can be flipped if they actually perform ok....only there to give the Oj's, chatfields, Brassards time to grow properly..even if that means getting bit$h slapped and benched in their developmental leagues.

 

 

Edited January 30, 2018 by Darius71

[R.Dahlin26]

6 minutes ago, ilduce39 said:

Why wouldn’t I want to talk about those other players?  I don’t mind acknowledging they’ve beaten Olli to the NHL.  Doesn’t mean they will have the better careers.  You’re assuming linear improvement year to year - that’s not how it works.  Juolevi could still be as good as any of those names listed - it’s no surprise he’s taken his time growing into his body.  That was always the deal. 

 

Comparing him to Heiskanen is fine - but you’re obviously doing it just to crap on Olli - which is an obnoxious thing to do given the forum you’re in.  It’s not even productive - it’s just a random Debbie downer comment.  “Olli is doing great” “yeah but Heiskanen plays more minutes and was drafted a year later.”  So?  Go bop about that to a Stars fan - Heiskanen’s early success doesn’t affect Juolevi in any way. Hippy makes a great point about them being 10 months apart - it’s also their first years in Liiga - they’re both rookies.  Pretty much an even field, draft years be damned.

 

On on the contrary, Juolevi growing up in London (and playing that extra year there) shines through in the U20 numbers - not only is he much larger than Miro, he’s accustomed to the small ice surface.  Again, I’m not sure I do that’s deal 1-1.

1

 

Keyword is "could". He could but with everything we have to look at based on the last 2 years, it's very unlikely. Now if he was playing in the NHL in his D+2 and making massive strides and keeping up with those players I mentioned then for sure.

 

But right now he is a good but not great Liiga defenceman while the players I mentioned are doing extremely well at the NHL level and are likely future stars.

 

Heiskanen is looking like a future top pairing d-man for the Stars so that is not a slight to Juolevi at all when comparing them.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

 

 

 

23 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Do the math

 

More ice time.  Better D pairing partner.  More PP time.  More offensive zone starts will lead to better overall numbers.  That's it that's all

 

Or in laymans terms

 

Work more hours, work a better position, work with better benefits.  Earn more money

The problem is, you are being too simplistic.  It’s not as simple as more ice = more production.

 

There’s so much more to production than ice time and usage.  Heck why don’t we give Brock 24 minutes a night and all 4 minutes of PP time per game, by your theory his production should also go up even higher…..Hey, same with the Sedins, instead of cutting back their ice time, why don’t we try increasing it?  Getting the point?

 

What happens when Juolevi’s team gives him the same usage as Heiskanen (which include the same pressures of being counted on as the number 1 D) and Juolevi can’t handle it.  It would destroy his confidence and hurt his development.  Case en point, Alex Edler. When he became the go to guy he cracked and his play and production has taken a massive hit.  Asking a player to do to much doesn’t increase production. There’s reasoning as to why players are counted on more than others.  It’s not as simple as you’re trying to make it out to be. 

[aGENT]

Here guys, everyone take one please:

 

[ilduce39]

7 minutes ago, R.Dahlin26 said:

 

Keyword is "could". He could but with everything we have to look at based on the last 2 years, it's very unlikely. Now if he was playing in the NHL in his D+2 and making massive strides and keeping up with those players I mentioned then for sure.

 

But right now he is a good but not great Liiga defenceman while the players I mentioned are doing extremely well at the NHL level and are likely future stars.

 

Heiskanen is looking like a future top pairing d-man for the Stars so that is not a slight to Juolevi at all when comparing them.

Right. If only Boeser was playing in the NHL during his D+2 season he might be able to keep up with others in his draft class.

 

All of that stuff is just fluff.  Olli is playing overseas because he was drafted as a 6’3 beanpole and he’s still growing into his body.  He put on muscle this offseason and looked slow in camp.  Looked pretty quick again at the Jrs.  Trying to chart his ceiling based on draft years and stats while ignoring all other context is just plain ridiculous. 

[R.Dahlin26]

11 minutes ago, Darius71 said:

The way I see it is Boeser killed it last year and in training camp and he still did not get a start.  Imagine if he had a slow start the first 10 games he probably would have been sent down.

 

Even if he killed it I would not keep an impressionable 19 year old d man here unless he was a phenom (imagine how his confidnce would take a beating with this team right now) - we all know D men take longer to develop, there are countless examples of this in NHL history.

 

I think there is a reason they signed MDZ and brought in other Dmen - it gives a chance for the prospects to develop at their own pace.   Other people see these moves as JB trying to compete for a playoffspot/cup but to me these guys are fillers on short term contracts that can be flipped if they actually perform ok....only there to give the Oj's, chatfields, Brassards time to grow properly..even if that means getting bit$h slapped and benched in their developmental leagues.

 

 

If he's ready he's ready. Holding back a player can hurt their development as well.

 

If Juolevi's play earns him a spot he'll be on the team. I can't see them sending him to Utica unless he has a bad showing TBH.

 

But we'll see, it'll be interesting on how Juolevi looks after a year playing against men.

[ohmy]

10 minutes ago, R.Dahlin26 said:

 

Keyword is "could". He could but with everything we have to look at based on the last 2 years, it's very unlikely. Now if he was playing in the NHL in his D+2 and making massive strides and keeping up with those players I mentioned then for sure.

 

But right now he is a good but not great Liiga defenceman while the players I mentioned are doing extremely well at the NHL level and are likely future stars.

 

Heiskanen is looking like a future top pairing d-man for the Stars so that is not a slight to Juolevi at all when comparing them.

Extremely disappointed. Highly unlikely. If you cut your finger are you most likely to bleed out and die? Lol thats how your making it sound for our prospect whos had a great season to date and has now been healthy scratched which noone knows why. Your just using alternative facts to suit your discussion. 

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, R.Dahlin26 said:

If Juolevi's play earns him a spot he'll be on the team. I can't see them sending him to Utica unless he has a bad showing TBH.

I think he sees something similar to Stecher's first year.

 

Likely shows well in camp, goes to Utica to prove he can keep it up while waiting for injury to open up a spot (or a trade). Worst case scenario, he only gets a few injury fill-in games until one or both of Edler/MDZ are moved at the TDL.

[R.Dahlin26]

3 minutes ago, ilduce39 said:

Right. If only Boeser was playing in the NHL during his D+2 season he might be able to keep up with others in his draft class.

 

All of that stuff is just fluff.  Olli is playing overseas because he was drafted as a 6’3 beanpole and he’s still growing into his body.  He put on muscle this offseason and looked slow in camp.  Looked pretty quick again at the Jrs.  Trying to chart his ceiling based on draft years and stats while ignoring all other context is just plain ridiculous. 

Boeser was the 23rd overall pick who had a historic D+1 year. As evidence of his 4 goals in 9 games at the end of his D+2 year, I'm sure if he played the whole year in the NHL he would have had a successful rookie campaign. Boeser elected to stay for another year by his own wishes.

 

Juolevi is the Fifth overall pick who has had a rocky past year of development. Olli is playing overseas because he had a bad showing at training camp and was clearly not at a top fitness level.

 

If he's in Utica next year. Is it going to be because he's a beanpole? D-men take longer to develop? Or something else?

[MeanSeanBean]

Man oh man, when did the OJ thread become worse then the JV thread. " no mines bigger, no mines bigger".

 

Shhhaaaaammmmmmeeeeee!!!

[R.Dahlin26]

8 minutes ago, aGENT said:

I think he sees something similar to Stecher's first year.

 

Likely shows well in camp, goes to Utica to prove he can keep it up while waiting for injury to open up a spot (or a trade). Worst case scenario, he only gets a few injury fill-in games until one or both of Edler/MDZ are moved at the TDL.

Again I can't see it. Stecher was a FA signing out of college.

 

 

Juolevi is a 5th overall pick and a questionable one, there will be a lot of allure and buzz around him so if he is NHL ready, he'll make the team IMO.

[ilduce39]

2 minutes ago, R.Dahlin26 said:

Boeser was the 23rd overall pick who had a historic D+1 year. As evidence of his 4 goals in 9 games at the end of his D+2 year, I'm sure if he played the whole year in the NHL he would have had a successful rookie campaign. Boeser elected to stay for another year by his own wishes.

 

Juolevi is the Fifth overall pick who has had a rocky past year of development. Olli is playing overseas because he had a bad showing at training camp and was clearly not at a top fitness level.

 

If he's in Utica next year. Is it going to be because he's a beanpole? D-men take longer to develop? Or something else?

So? At this point of his D-2 year Brock didn’t have a sniff of the NHL.  Didn’t mean squat for his rookie campaign.

 

If he’s in Utica next year... nothing like proposing a hypothetical negative situation to make your point.  “What about” if he cracks the Canucks, plays top pairing with Tanev and puts up 35+ points? It’s a silly game.

 

Youre trying to make the point that because other players broke in earlier to the NHL that it means we should worry about Juolevi’s progression.  His fantastic Liiga season  (switching ice surfaces) and quality U20 tourney belie those fears.  He’s developing nicely.  

 

McAvoy is 6’0 210, 20 years old and trained in College against older players with more time for weight training.  Sergachev is a beast.  Chychrun is a beast. 

 

The Canucks made a mistake rushing Jake and McCann - JB isn’t one to repeat his mistakes.  Olli will cook until he’s ready and up until now I haven’t seen any reason to worry.

[aGENT]

2 minutes ago, R.Dahlin26 said:

Again I can't see it. Stecher was a FA signing out of college.

 

 

Juolevi is a 5th overall pick and a questionable one, there will be a lot of allure and buzz around him so if he is NHL ready, he'll make the team IMO.

'Buzz' has nothing to do with him making the team IMO. I mean frankly, that's silly IMO.

 

There's simply no room at the inn unless they make a bunch of moves between now and next October. It's highly unlikely he starts on the team short of outplaying near everyone. And as good as I think he'll eventually be, it's unlikely he immediately unseats Edler or even MDZ. And they're not simply going to toss a Hutton or Pouliot on waivers because OJ is as good or even slightly better than one of them.

 

Then there's also Holm who I believe they'd like to start as 7th D next year on that left side as I believe he'll require waivers (and they won't be keeping OJ as a 7th).

 

They need to make some moves OJ or not. Even with those moves, he'll be hard pressed to force their hand. From there they need to wait for another team to have an injury, a player disappoint etc to open up a possible trade for guys like Edler, MDZ, Hutton or whoever they decide to move after that to make room for him.

 

Without a LOT of movement before next October, the odds are far more likely he starts in Utica.

[rekker]

I hope our prospects stay of this forum. Sheesh.

[R.Dahlin26]

Just now, ilduce39 said:

So? At this point of his D-2 year Brock didn’t have a sniff of the NHL.  Didn’t mean squat for his rookie campaign.

 

If he’s in Utica next year... nothing like proposing a hypothetical negative situation to make your point.  “What about” if he cracks the Canucks, plays top pairing with Tanev and puts up 35+ points? It’s a silly game.

 

Youre trying to make the point that because other players broke in earlier to the NHL that it means we should worry about Juolevi’s progression.  His fantastic Liiga season  (switching ice surfaces) and quality U20 tourney belie those fears.  He’s developing nicely.  

 

McAvoy is 6’0 210, 20 years old and trained in College against older players with more time for weight training.  Sergachev is a beast.  Chychrun is a beast. 

 

The Canucks made a mistake rushing Jake and McCann - JB isn’t one to repeat his mistakes.  Olli will cook until he’s ready and up until now I haven’t seen any reason to worry.

2

Then he should have no problem making this team next year and being an impact player just like Tkachuk, McAvoy, Segachev, and Keller if he's developing so nicely.

 

We'll see how he looks like in Training camp. Check out all the d-men drafted in the top 10 who have not made the NHL by there D+3 they tend to not usually work out.

[Darius]

19 minutes ago, R.Dahlin26 said:

Boeser was the 23rd overall pick who had a historic D+1 year. As evidence of his 4 goals in 9 games at the end of his D+2 year, I'm sure if he played the whole year in the NHL he would have had a successful rookie campaign. Boeser elected to stay for another year by his own wishes.

 

Juolevi is the Fifth overall pick who has had a rocky past year of development. Olli is playing overseas because he had a bad showing at training camp and was clearly not at a top fitness level.

 

If he's in Utica next year. Is it going to be because he's a beanpole? D-men take longer to develop? Or something else?

 

D men usually do take longer to develop - even those drafted in the first round.  The issue here is you have to manage your need for immediate gratification just because Tkachuk (who is a winger btw and wingers historically can be thrown into the mix alot faster) and Sergachev are lighting it up.

 

Off the top of my head here are 2 excellent D men that would have been written off by your standards

 

Muzzin... did not really play in NHL till D+5 (lots of AHL time)

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=89797

 

Klingberg.... did not really play in NHL til D+4 (bounced around the SEL, SWEHL and AHL)

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=127778

 

[R.Dahlin26]

8 minutes ago, Darius71 said:

 

D men usually do take longer to develop - even those drafted in the first round.  The issue here is you have to manage your need for immediate gratification just because Tkachuk (who is a winger btw and wingers historically can be thrown into the mix alot faster) and Sergachev are lighting it up.

 

Off the top of my head here are 2 excellent D men that would have been written off by your standards

 

Muzzin... did not really play in NHL till D+5 (lots of AHL time)

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=89797

 

Klingberg.... did not really play in NHL til D+4 (bounced around the SEL, SWEHL and AHL)

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=127778

 

Seriously? Both Muzzin and Klingberg where 5th round draft picks. Odds were that they both were not going to make it just because of the round they were picked in. They both have developed into excellent d-men but who expected it?

 

Juolevi is a fifth overall pick who is expected to be a difference maker and when you're picking in the top 5 they should be impact players very soon if not right away. They don't take 3-5 years and if they do they usually don't work out.

Edited January 30, 2018 by R.Dahlin26

[Darius]

7 minutes ago, R.Dahlin26 said:

Seriously? Both Muzzin and Klingberg where both 5th round draft picks. Odds are they both were not going to make it just because of the round they were picked in. They both have developed into excellent d-men but who expected it?

 

Juolevi is a fifth overall pick who is expected to be a difference maker and when you're picking in the top 5 they should be impact players very soon if not right away. They don't take 3-5 years and if they do they usually don't work out.

Have you seen how many top 10 drafted d men have failed to meet any expectation? there is one on our roster right now in Pouliot.  Draft position does not guarantee anything.

 

My issue with your argument is not whether Juolevi is gonna be a bust or not .  Im not even arguing that he was the best pick at 5.

 

My issue is with your timelines.  It is absurd to look down on the kid (exactly what you are doing here) because he is not having an impact in the NHL right away.  The guy is 19.  I wont even be worried if he plays in Utica next year at 20. 

 

Again, your issue is that you want to be gratified right now because Tkachuk (absurd to compare him to a winger btw) and Sergachev are lighting it up.

Edited January 30, 2018 by Darius71

[ilduce39]

3 minutes ago, R.Dahlin26 said:

Then he should have no problem making this team next year and being an impact player just like Tkachuk, McAvoy, Segachev, and Keller if he's developing so nicely.

 

We'll see how he looks like in Training camp. Check out all the d-men drafted in the top 10 who have not made the NHL by there D+3 they tend to not usually work out.

Don’t you see how silly that sounds, though?  Setting some obscure goal posts: top 10, D+3 and then saying “tend to not usually work out.”  

 

To add to Darius: Matthias Ekholm is another who took awhile to crack the NHL.  Who cares if he was drafted in a later round?  Your argument is that players that don’t play in the NHL by their D+3 year can’t go on to be highly effective.  

 

The silly labels like draft position and draft+ years mean nothing at the end of the day without context as to their individual development.  It’s lazy thinking.

 

Juolevi is 19 until May.

 

First year in a men’s league overseas, switching to the bigger ice surface.

 

Gained 20 pound this offseason.

 

Putting up historically good numbers for a rookie.

 

Named a top player for his team in the U20 worlds. 

 

Was always considered a long-term prospect as he grows into his body.

 

He’s a memorial cup and world junior champion. 

 

...but I’m supposed to be worried because he might start next year in Utica? I almost hope he does. He’ll be 20 for the whole year - that’s still super young.  

 

There’s no real reasons to worry if you put down the obscure labels and look at the actual player involved.