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

Olli Juolevi | #48 | D


b3.

Recommended Posts

It's very easy to look at guys like Ehlers, Drouin or Keller and be excited about their 2 ppg in the Q or their dazzling highlight reels but often times it's the quiet, subtle guys that help win games. Juolevi won't show up in the "top 10 plays of the week" very often but he makes everybody around him better and when there's a minute left on the clock, coaches know there's that one guy they can always trust. Juolevi is that guy. Take the Sharks' playoff run for example. It's easy to see what Burns brings to the game but what about a guy like Vlasic? Tanev is probably the most boring player in the league but 29 other GMs would love to have him on their team. Tkachuck is going to be a phenomenal player but don't sleep on Juolevi. "Vanilla" is necessary sometimes. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, JamesB said:

 

 

 

In the 2016 NHL draft, OJ was the top pick from the OHL at #5 overall. In 2015 the top D taken was Noah Hannafin, also at #5. He made the NHL in his draft+1 year, played well, and is having a good year in the NHL his draft+2 year. Provorov was taken at #7 and he had a monster year in the WHL in his draft+1 year (72 pts in 62 games and +64). He is now playing well in the NHL. In 2014 the first pick overall was Ekblad from the OHL, who has played (and played very well) in the the NHL from his draft+1 year on. The only other OHL D taken in the first round in 2014 was DeAngelo at #19. He had a huge year in Junior in his draft+1 year (89 pts in 55 games) and is now doing well in the NHL.

 

The point is that the top player taken from the OHL should be an excellent player and should be good enough to stand out at the OHL level if he plays there in his draft+1 season. Right now Juolevi has a PPG of 0.81, which ranks him 13th in the OHL -- not even in the top 10 and slightly behind Sergachev. His plus-minus is +17, which ranks #7 in the OHL. And he is playing on a good team with a good D-partner (Mete).

 

He is a having a good year in the OHL. By no stretch of the imagination is he having a "great" year. As with Virtanen, in the draft+1 year we can use rose-colored glasses to interpret what we see but, objectively, you would hope for more from the #5 overall pick, especially as we did not even get to use our high second round pick where we could have got another good player and maybe have someone else to root for in the WJC.

 

Right now, things look like a lot like they did before the draft -- with 4 or 5 good defencemen in the mix -- Juolevi, Chychrun, Sergachev, and Bean. It was hard to say then and it is hard to see now who will turn out better. A team that picked one of those guys in the middle of first round would be feeling pretty good. But a team that picked any of those guys at #5 ahead of Tkachuk has to be having second thoughts.

 

@Crabcakes makes a good point about Dubois, though. That was the guy the Canucks expected to get at #5 and the guy most us (including me) wanted at #5, and he has not looked great in his draft+1 year. Right now I am not sure I would take Dubois over Juolevi. But, when Tkachuk fell into our laps at #5 we should have taken him.

I'm starting to feel that JB goofed when he passed on MT at #5. I still like Jake over Ehlers or Nylander if he develops into a top 6 forward. I've always felt that Finnish players tend to leave something to be desired at the NHL level. Forwards more so than d but overall they seem to have mildish careers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The 5th Line said:

 

Like physically have I seen what he looks like?  Yes I have.  

 

I'm sick of using a coach as a scapegoat, at some point the player needs to take the blame.  Any time one of our players and/or prospects does poorly their coach always takes the blame.  My comments above referenced Virtanen in Calgary.  Posters here riped the coach for not using him properly.  Jake couldn't do anything on a line with Connor McJesus and can't seem to do much with pro players eithers.  Stop blaming the damn coach, just because you saw a few people on HF write negative things about him doesn't mean he's a bad coach, it just means their team is doing poorly and somebody needs to take the blame

 

I said Juolevi is the type of guy coaches can trust with a minute left. You quoted me and said he wasn't on the ice with a minute left for the past couple games. Well, there isn't a single defenceman I'd take over Juolevi on that Finnish roster and I'd say Juolevi being named captain is a testament to that. Not putting the captain on the ice in the final minute is questionable. I'm not using the coach as a scapegoat, I just think his deployment of players is questionable and many others would agree with me. FWIW, Juolevi was on the ice in the Czech game. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, two drink minimum said:

I'm starting to feel that JB goofed when he passed on MT at #5. I still like Jake over Ehlers or Nylander if he develops into a top 6 forward. I've always felt that Finnish players tend to leave something to be desired at the NHL level. Forwards more so than d but overall they seem to have mildish careers

 

You know Virtanen is like half Finnish right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Odd. said:

McCann was a great pick. Pretty sure McCann was a projected top 15 pick too so at that time it was a steal when he fell. Unfortunately, McCann's been rushed, and at the moment, he's kinda useless.

Jordan Schroeder also "fell" to us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, The 5th Line said:

 

Points aren't the issue, ice time and deployment are.  Some people will do and say whatever it takes to defend our prospects, Virtanen was defended with a long list of excuses and now all of those people who defended him are starting to look foolish.

Yup.  A barely 20 year old kid.  Foolish.  Terrible.  Bust.  Look foolish for sticking up for the team you love and its kids when grown adults feel high and mighty by tearing them down with the most trivial and pathetic of reasons without provocation or factual basis' to back their opinions up.

 

It's like the guys who shart on our prospects all the time yet hype up the prospects of any other team to godlike status.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, The 5th Line said:

 

Down 2-1 to the Czechs he was not on the ice in the last minute.

 

Of course you wouldn't take any other D man over Olli, he's probably the only defenceman you know anything about and he is a Canucks prospect.. Valimaki and Saarijarvi have far superior Junior numbers playing on far less superior teams.  How is it the coaches fault for wanting them on the ice?  

 

 

 

Seeing as Juolevi is a year younger and was chosen captain over Saarijarvi, I don't think I am the only one who would choose Juolevi. Valimaki is not on the same level has Juolevi either. However, I see your point as I would choose those two to score over Juolevi. My point was that Juolevi is a safer defenseman and is multi-dimensional. I would trust Juolevi to protect a lead and I wouldn't be scared to have Juolevi in any situation. I probably didn't choose my wording carefully. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

 

McCann over Pastrnak I'll give him a pass on because he was highly rated. But passing on Ehlers and Tkachuk is already coming back to bite us.

 

He went against the rule of taking best player available and went for need instead. He thought we needed to get bigger and tougher, and that we needed to get a puck mover. Both are true, but you only fill those needs if those players happen to be the best player available. Virtanen and Juolevi were not BPA.

I've looked at teams who picked the BPA vs teams that picked their needs.

 

We have needs, teams have needs.  Surefire cannot miss players like a McDavid or Eichel or Stamkos Tavares etc are one thing.  But taking a BPA over a need at center or D without an eye for the future costs teams in the long run.

 

We NEED D for the future.  people look at a crowded line up and get whiney about us taking the best perceived LHD in the draft yet never factor in that in 3-4 years when he's really solidifying out blue line that almost all of our veteran LHD will either be gone or moving down the charts due to age.  

 

Benning is building for a future not a now and that is the direction we NEED to take.  Much like this year there is no wrong answer if we take another D or a center/winger hybrid with our 1st.  If we cannot look past the next season, and we cannot look to the future in the next 5 we're just going to continue doing what we've been doing for over 40 years.

 

Fighting our way to the middle

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, asian player said:

 

I'm going to assume you're Irish because of your name

Two drink minimum used to be a thing when Bars/Pubs would advertise it as an alternative to a cover charge. I.E. in oder to be seated it was understood you would order two drinks. It kept people from sitting and drinking water all night. It was a minimum charge for service. Its not an Irish thing per se. Although I am 3/4 Irish my ancestors came to Canada 5 generations ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Lancaster said:

This reminds me of the debates when the Canucks picked Luc Bourdon instead of Anze Kopitar back in 05.  

Need vs BPA.

 

 

A team should always take the BPA.  The player can always be traded later to fill a specific need.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Lancaster said:

This reminds me of the debates when the Canucks picked Luc Bourdon instead of Anze Kopitar back in 05.  

Need vs BPA.

 

 

 

I've never been a believer in taking a D-man top 10 unless they're a sure thing like Doughy, Hedman, or Ekblad.

 

Too much risk with D-men taken here, not to mention there's always good D-men in the late first and early 2nd that are just as good.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...