Olli Juolevi | #48 | D

[PlanB]

On 28/12/2016 at 0:54 PM, Fanuck said:

Being upset shows he cares, but I'd rather of seen him get furious during the game and do something to affect the outcome for his team - that would've been better than being mad in the dressing room during post game interviews. 

^ This. 

 

If there ever was a good time for OJ to show his qualities and make a statement it's RIGHT  NOW!  

 

Down 2-1 in a must win game......you don't want to be giving the same "I'm so angry....." post game interview......

[BI3KSALLENT]

Finald's goalie really should have done better on that first goal

[BI3KSALLENT]

People, as usual, are overreacting on this board. This is a bad Finland team that has so far 4 goals through almost 3 games. Last year they scored 23 goals in their 4 group games, so consequently Juolevi only has the 1 apple so far to show. He's a defenceman so his job is to play defence first and on a team that can't score much his job of playing defence is even more important. Last year he had 6 assists on 23 goals, so his 1 assist on 4 goals is essentially the same rate. He's not the second coming of Erik Karlsson, but I'm glad to see he's showing leadership on his team. Can't wait till he's a Canuck soon.

[TGokou]

Watched most of this game, and I have to agree that coach isn't putting Juolevi out there much. Also watching the other D and forwards this is a really bad finnish team. Can't finish passes, too many preventable icing calls, forwards are too passive and can't stand up to the swedish D. If anything, juolevi has been one of the better D but just not playing enough.

[snizzle_]

The 1 assist through 3 games isn't a big concern for me, but his play in general has been underwhelming. It seems I keep having to readjust my expectations/views of what kind of player Juolevi is. A lot has been discussed about the coach's deployment of OJ but he hasn't necessarily outplayed the rest of the Finnish d-core. I personally think that Saarijarvi and Valimaki have outplayed him, or have atleast been play drivers. OJ almost looks tired out there or maybe it's his intensity but again I fail to see him drive plays or really influence the play. His skating and puck skills are not cerebral enough to really be a threat as a puck rusher, however, his first pass and transition ups are spectacular. I truly expected more so far, irrespective of how poorly his team has played around him.

[70seven]

Im not concerned about Juolevi, but I dont have #1 D expectations of him.   He's going to be all situation, minute munching, mobile, and cerebral d-man with some offensive upside and good puck movement.  H'e not going to challenge for a Norris trophy, or lead NHL dmen in scoring.  But he WILL become a valuable piece to the puzzle.  At this point I have him somewhere between 1st and 2nd pairing quality.  Think Anton Stralman, Ryan Ellis, Ryan McDonagh, Olli Maata territory.   There might be a bit more offensive potential, but that'll greatly rely on his surrounding teammates skill level.

[clutesi]

9 minutes ago, 70seven said:

Im not concerned about Juolevi, but I dont have #1 D expectations of him.   He's going to be all situation, minute munching, mobile, and cerebral d-man with some offensive upside and good puck movement.  H'e not going to challenge for a Norris trophy, or lead NHL dmen in scoring.  But he WILL become a valuable piece to the puzzle.  At this point I have him somewhere between 1st and 2nd pairing quality.  Think Anton Stralman, Ryan Ellis, Ryan McDonagh, Olli Maata territory.   There might be a bit more offensive potential, but that'll greatly rely on his surrounding teammates skill level.

Very much how I see him. A valuable top four well-suited to the modern style of game,  but not necessarily a game breaker. We'll have that when we draft Dahlin  

 

Edited December 30, 2016 by clutesi

[Time Lord]

8 minutes ago, 70seven said:

Im not concerned about Juolevi, but I dont have #1 D expectations of him.   He's going to be all situation, minute munching, mobile, and cerebral d-man with some offensive upside and good puck movement.  H'e not going to challenge for a Norris trophy, or lead NHL dmen in scoring.  But he WILL become a valuable piece to the puzzle.  At this point I have him somewhere between 1st and 2nd pairing quality.  Think Anton Stralman, Ryan Ellis, Ryan McDonagh, Olli Maata territory.   There might be a bit more offensive potential, but that'll greatly rely on his surrounding teammates skill level.

McDonagh and Stralman are top 30 defensemen IMO, so basically low end #1 D. I see that as a realistic ceiling for Juolevi. If Juolevi becomes a top 60 defenseman, he's still a top pairing defenseman and we didn't make a bad pick. I can see Tkachuk becoming a low end first liner or a great 2nd liner (~55 points).

[Darius]

From the NHL lockout to 2012 the Canucks had a .619 winning percentage with Sami Salo  and .527 without Sami Salo.  Even those juggernaut Canuck teams were a little over .500 without Salo in the lineup.

 

Salo wasnt flashy, his highest point total was 37 points - he probably could have cracked 40+ points if it wasnt for some injuries.

 

He was so underrated - his first pass out of the zone was money, he had a very good hockey IQ and used his team mates well, especially on the PP.  He was no Doughty or Karlsson - but he was a major catalyst on those Canuck teams.  The cog in the wheel.

 

I see Juolevi having a similar type of effect if he reaches his ceiling.     Having a player that can transition the play from the back end and make wise decisions with the puck is huge...he doesnt have to light up the lamp and / or crush guys to turn a good team into a great team.

Edited December 30, 2016 by Darius71

[JamesB]

4 hours ago, TGokou said:

Watched most of this game, and I have to agree that coach isn't putting Juolevi out there much. Also watching the other D and forwards this is a really bad finnish team. Can't finish passes, too many preventable icing calls, forwards are too passive and can't stand up to the swedish D. If anything, juolevi has been one of the better D but just not playing enough.

Juolevi was the top D taken in last year's draft (at #5) and the top three Ds from the previous year (at #5, #7, and #8) are in the NHL and playing well.

 

If Juolevi is anything other than the best D on the ice in any game at the WJC, that is a negative. If he is just "one of the better D" and nothing more, that is disappointing.

 

These complaints about deployment remind of the complaints about the Calgary coaches not giving him enough PP time, or not playing on the first line in his draft+1 year in Calgary. Coaches make mistakes but they usually have a good idea about who is playing well and if they choose not to play a high pick in a premium spot, that is negative.

 

Not saying Juolevi is bad. He isn't bad and he is a good prospect but it is disappointing that all we got from last year's draft and Juolevi and some long shot lottery tickets.

 

1 hour ago, Darius71 said:

From the NHL lockout to 2012 the Canucks had a .619 winning percentage with Sami Salo  and .527 without Sami Salo.  Even those juggernaut Canuck teams were a little over .500 without Salo in the lineup.

 

Salo wasnt flashy, his highest point total was 37 points - he probably could have cracked 40+ points if it wasnt for some injuries.

 

He was so underrated - his first pass out of the zone was money, he had a very good hockey IQ and used his team mates well, especially on the PP.  He was no Doughty or Karlsson - but he was a major catalyst on those Canuck teams.  The cog in the wheel.

 

I see Juolevi having a similar type of effect if he reaches his ceiling.     Having a player that can transition the play from the back end and make wise decisions with the puck is huge...he doesnt have to light up the lamp and / or crush guys to turn a good team into a great team.

 

If Juolevi turns out to be as good as Salo that would be a reasonable return. Salo was very good and a key part of the Canuck teams that won back-back President's Trophies in 2011 and 2012 (and to several Divisional championships in previous years). 

[Sean Monahan]

@JamesB have you actually watched Finland's games?

 

@junglesniper downvoting me- boo, you ass.

Edited December 30, 2016 by Sean Monahan

[Darius]

20 minutes ago, JamesB said:

Juolevi was the top D taken in last year's draft (at #5) and the top three Ds from the previous year (at #5, #7, and #8) are in the NHL and playing well.

 

If Juolevi is anything other than the best D on the ice in any game at the WJC, that is a negative. If he is just "one of the better D" and nothing more, that is disappointing.

 

These complaints about deployment remind of the complaints about the Calgary coaches not giving him enough PP time, or not playing on the first line in his draft+1 year in Calgary. Coaches make mistakes but they usually have a good idea about who is playing well and if they choose not to play a high pick in a premium spot, that is negative.

 

Not saying Juolevi is bad. He isn't bad and he is a good prospect but it is disappointing that all we got from last year's draft and Juolevi and some long shot lottery tickets.

 

 

If Juolevi turns out to be as good as Salo that would be a reasonable return. Salo was very good and a key part of the Canuck teams that won back-back President's Trophies in 2011 and 2012 (and to several Divisional championships in previous years). 

 

I agree with some of what you say, but im not so sure about how to gauge players based on their WJC performance.  For instance Dubois hasnt scored a goal yet on a power house Canada team that has basically bi#t% slapped other teams. He was taken 3rd overall.  Barzal - taken 16th has 3 goals, and Raddysh-taken 58th overall has 5 goals.  

 

Should Columbus fans be disappointed? Should all of those teams that took players ahead of Raddysh be disappointed?  I dont think they should be, WJC performances are not a sure shot indicator of NHL success - otherwise Jordan Schroeder and Cody Hodgson would be all stars.  Conversely Bo Horvat looked very average when he made his WJC appearance too.

 

I think we should be cautious about judging Juolevi - his team just doesnt look that good.  Ive seen lots of his passes die on his team mates sticks, ive seen them unable to handle his hard passes.

Edited December 30, 2016 by Darius71

[stonecoldstevebernier]

Didn't watch today's game, but Juolevi got a huge boost in ice time over the previous two games. 22:49 compared to the 16ish he was getting before. Probably should've been playing that from the start though, its too late for the Finns unless they get another Danish miracle tomorrow...

But yeah, I agree with other sentiments that you shouldn't judge a player by their WJC performances, good or bad. Whether he leads the tourney in d-man scoring like last year or has a year like this one, it'll be way different when he's playing on a team of grown men in the NHL. You take Laine, Puljujarvi, Aho, Rantanen, and Kapanen out of your lineup and you're just not going to look as good. If you're going to get nine assists you need some players to convert those passes (and the ice time to do it).

[cuporbust]

6 hours ago, PlanB said:

^ This. 

 

If there ever was a good time for OJ to show his qualities and make a statement it's RIGHT  NOW!  

 

Down 2-1 in a must win game......you don't want to be giving the same "I'm so angry....." post game interview......

He is a d man on a weak team. Maybe put the blame on the guys up front. He got a pp helper. Its rediculous to expect even an offensive d man to be responsible for that

[Beary Sweet]

OJ performance this year in the WJC can't be judged as a disappointing one. The players up front need to do their job as well. Juolevi can't defend and score at the same time as he always wants to be in the right position every shift. He will continue to work on his game and continue to add more tools to his game. Would be nice if he can throw a hit or two out there as well 

[Bure_Pavel]

It was a really young finnish team this year, I think something like 14 of their players are draft eligible in this years draft. Its a 18 and 19 year olds tournament.  

[terrible.dee]

Do you have any idea at all how baseless nearly every point you made is? And how the tiniest dash of critical thinking would leave you embarrassed to have written it? You are regurgitating lame cliched excuses as if they were actually true. And worse as if they are original conclusions you have come to on your own, 

 

I am so tired of picking apart thoughtless posts, If I had you on the stand I would eat you for breakfast

 

I cannot stem the tide of millennial  ADD reasoning, I'm tapping out

 

But before I go let me say this , A wall painted white is a wall painted white, just because you point at it and say "No No this wall is black" does not make it any less white.

 

Results are results and mediocrity is mediocrity you can parrot the clubs spin of the week if you want, though I 'm sure you don't even know you're doing it, some of us tell the truth as it exists and that truth is that Joelevi's pathetic camp leaves no doubt he was an unwise pick at #5, and as for Virtanen, if his work habits were exemplary then there would be less cause for concern but the odds are overwhelmingly against him being a top 6 player at this point, and his work habits need work.

 

The problem is that Jake is failing for all the reasons everyone knew, and Juolevi seems highly unlikely to be a high impact talent, these were two crucial picks and in both cases the better options were obvious, and have already proved they would have been better picks.

[terrible.dee]

14 hours ago, clutesi said:

It's a good sign MT is doing well, but what's his ceiling long term. I still think a top four D man is more valuable than a top six forward . Everyone knows a high end d takes longer to develop. 

 

No, they don't, high-end D like Ekblad for instance play right away because they are...you guessed it HIGH END

 

That is a cliched excuse, do not state it as fact for it is easily disproved

 

Calling Juolevi a top 4 D as if it is a given is just bizarre, he is not anything close to that, and based on his dismal training camp there is reason to be VERRY concerned with his ceiling 

 

MT's ceiling is doing just fine thank you very much.

 

And D are not more valuable than forwards: Centers>Dmen>Wingers>Goaltender

[samurai]

37 minutes ago, terrible.dee said:

Do you have any idea at all how baseless nearly every point you made is? And how the tiniest dash of critical thinking would leave you embarrassed to have written it? You are regurgitating lame cliched excuses as if they were actually true. And worse as if they are original conclusions you have come to on your own, 

 

I am so tired of picking apart thoughtless posts, If I had you on the stand I would eat you for breakfast

 

I cannot stem the tide of millennial  ADD reasoning, I'm tapping out

 

But before I go let me say this , A wall painted white is a wall painted white, just because you point at it and say "No No this wall is black" does not make it any less white.

 

Results are results and mediocrity is mediocrity you can parrot the clubs spin of the week if you want, though I 'm sure you don't even know you're doing it, some of us tell the truth as it exists and that truth is that Joelevi's pathetic camp leaves no doubt he was an unwise pick at #5, and as for Virtanen, if his work habits were exemplary then there would be less cause for concern but the odds are overwhelmingly against him being a top 6 player at this point, and his work habits need work.

 

The problem is that Jake is failing for all the reasons everyone knew, and Juolevi seems highly unlikely to be a high impact talent, these were two crucial picks and in both cases the better options were obvious, and have already proved they would have been better picks.

 

you are guilty in the latter parts of your post of what you accuse a previous poster of in the first paragraph of your post - cliches - did you not notice this?  You seem to think you know what is going to happen with these players which of course you do not know - nobody does.    Yes, you are correct in stating that the odds are against Jake, but that applies to all first round picks.  Statistically, the chances of any first rounder making a career as a top six are not very good.  In other words you are stating a fact that applies not just to Jake but all first rounders including OJ.  In simpler language there are statistically more first round busts than top six or four successes.   If you have such insight at picking the sure things than you really should be in the business rather than posting on here.

 

Edited December 30, 2016 by samurai

[Off_The_Schneid!]

1 hour ago, terrible.dee said:

No, they don't, high-end D like Ekblad for instance play right away because they are...you guessed it HIGH END

 

That is a cliched excuse, do not state it as fact for it is easily disproved

 

Calling Juolevi a top 4 D as if it is a given is just bizarre, he is not anything close to that, and based on his dismal training camp there is reason to be VERRY concerned with his ceiling 

 

MT's ceiling is doing just fine thank you very much.

 

And D are not more valuable than forwards: Centers>Dmen>Wingers>Goaltender

 

Juolevi"s play is more geared towards the NHL 

world juniors is a bunch of individuals holding onto the puck to long showcasing individual talent and not playing with structure 

 

Juolevi will adapt to the NHL seamlessly with his position and vision 

 

you can't lump all d men into one category as well 

offensive defenceman (doughty) are more valuable than a stay at home defensive defenceman (Tanev) 

im not saying you don't need both just based on your grading system 

 

#1 offensive defenseman >#1center>Top 4 d>#2 center