Olli Juolevi | #48 | D

[aGENT]

21 hours ago, Warhippy said:

You need to go away

 

Just like 48 hours.

 

 

Just block him like I did. He used to at least be funny, now he's just obnoxious, repetitive and unoriginal. 

 

21 hours ago, Hockey101 class said:

Im sure if Benning's thinking the same now that we know what we have in stecher.

Right side vs left side. Offensive D  vs 2 way D. Size mismatch etc.

 

So no, not really.

[TheHockeyNerds]

How about we all just stop talking about Tkachuk smh. You can't judge a pick 7 months after 

Edited January 15, 2017 by TheHockeyNerds

[Lateralus91]

Olli had another goal today.

[-Vintage Canuck-]

41 minutes ago, Lateralus91 said:

Olli had another goal today.

With that, he now has 27 points (8 goals and 19 assists) in 31 games.

[numb3r 16]

10 hours ago, Hairy Kneel said:

27 points in 42 games

The knights have played 42 games but juolevi has been in only 30

[-Vintage Canuck-]

 

[TheAce]

5 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

 

dont think he'll be scoring wristers like that in the NHL but im encouraged that he hit the net and didnt blast it in the shin pads or miss the net by 2 feet !

[snizzle_]

Glad to see to play yesterday and contributed after what looked like a violent hit at the end of the game in Saginaw.

https://youtu.be/4OIHL9nKu0M?t=828

 

[Hockey101 class]

21 hours ago, J.R. said:

Just block him like I did. He used to at least be funny, now he's just obnoxious, repetitive and unoriginal. 

 

Right side vs left side. Offensive D  vs 2 way D. Size mismatch etc.

 

So no, not really.

I was thinking more in just the way he's played i wasnt trying to compare  the two by any means. Our D look good we could use another forward especially one like Chucky. Really dosnt matter anyway Juolevi what we got lets hope he turns out.

Edited January 16, 2017 by Hockey101 class

[terrible.dee]

On 12/30/2016 at 11:26 AM, Sean Monahan said:

There's absolutely no way of verifying the bolded. I'm sick of hearing people talk about "Benning is garbage, yet I'll admit he stumbled into some successes despite the fact he's a completely inept loser"- or something along those lines. Who says he didn't just do a better job of recruiting Stecher than other teams did? Sure, being a Vancouver native probably played a factor but the list of local boys who shunned Vancouver is far, far bigger than the list of those who haven't. Likely at least 10x longer. 

 

Also, it's disingenuous to mention other picks like Boeser, Demko, Tryamkin (I'll go ahead and throw in some other picks that look promising in guys like McKenzie, Lockwood, Gaudette, and Brisebois) while downplaying the potential impact of it. I think Benning has drafted at least 6 future NHL players in his 3 drafts which makes for a pretty dam good success rate- one most other teams (and certainly the Canucks of the Gillis era) would envy.

 

And to get to the ultimate point of this debate- Juolevi vs Tkachuk. I'll start by saying that it wasn't "off the board" or "reaching" to take Juolevi at 5. Plenty of experts and analysts had him going there, a couple even had him at 4th. If you want to talk about a reach you should look at Columbus taking PLD at 3rd. Aside from the draft day debate, why are we even bothering to draw conclusions at this point? The debate is entirely "apples to oranges", not to mention incredibly premature. You're comparing a left winger, who was physically ready to play in the NHL and spends much of his time playing with quality linemates such as Gaudreau, Frolik, Backlund, et al, to a d-man who was widely believed to be physically unready for the big time but considered a longer term investment. What's wrong with that? Didn't Benning get roasted for the "instant gratification" pick in Virtanen over Nylander/Ehlers? Juolevi is a tremendous prospect. A quick and simple Google search will tell you that many people outside of CDC share that opinion. To conclude we "lost" on draft day a mere 6 months afterwards is asinine. I think Tkachuk is likely a higher floor, lower ceiling guy while Juolevi is probably a lower floor/higher ceiling prospect- and I'm willing to wait and see about that. Juolevi will be an analytics darling in due time, and don't we all know that's what wins Stanley Cups?

 

You have to take at least two steps away from reality to arrive at any of your conclusions

The above poster made observations made on fact alone, facts you are desperate to two-step around

 

1. fact : Tchack is a first line NHL player Juolevi couldn't even cut it for NHL training camp. There is no concrete reason why one should expect Juolieve to be better than a 1st line NHL'er already is, to say so is just wild fantasy, You want ito happen so you say it, but it is's not a fact, do you understand? And the Only reason we took him is because Benning was caught flatfooted, he had no clue CBJ were going to jump in and take his player, so as not to look bad he picked a guy who was likely to play in the NHL but not to star, this high in the draft is where you go for top line talent, not dependable footsoldiers, bad drafting period.

 

2. All the reasons to be concerned about Jake, which were well known at the time of his drafting have happened. Every single one of them and more, we didn't know about the attitude. When he was drafted the team needed skill, Benning took muscle and not even sure thing muscle, he gambled on it, I will not list the comparables for Jakes situation, but it isn't good, players in his position usually washout, especially if they don't have a great attitude. The skill we lacked was ours for the taking all the fans and media knew it, Benning made a head-scratch choice  why is is head-scratching can be seen righty now, today, no spin doctoring necessary the facts are there fort you to see

 

Now i suppose you'll defend with a lots of opinions fantasies and what if's, know that none of what you are saying is actually happening right now, the facts and the truth are what they are, they do not need to be interpreted re-explained or spun

 

Anytime someone tries to re-interpret the facts for you you kinow they are full of s@$#t

[MeanSeanBean]

14 minutes ago, terrible.dee said:

You have to take at least two steps away from reality to arrive at any of your conclusions

The above poster made observations made on fact alone, facts you are desperate to two-step around

 

1. fact : Tchack is a first line NHL player Juolevi couldn't even cut it for NHL training camp. There is no concrete reason why one should expect Juolieve to be better than a 1st line NHL'er already is, to say so is just wild fantasy, You want ito happen so you say it, but it is's not a fact, do you understand? And the Only reason we took him is because Benning was caught flatfooted, he had no clue CBJ were going to jump in and take his player, so as not to look bad he picked a guy who was likely to play in the NHL but not to star, this high in the draft is where you go for top line talent, not dependable footsoldiers, bad drafting period.

 

2. All the reasons to be concerned about Jake, which were well known at the time of his drafting have happened. Every single one of them and more, we didn't know about the attitude. When he was drafted the team needed skill, Benning took muscle and not even sure thing muscle, he gambled on it, I will not list the comparables for Jakes situation, but it isn't good, players in his position usually washout, especially if they don't have a great attitude. The skill we lacked was ours for the taking all the fans and media knew it, Benning made a head-scratch choice  why is is head-scratching can be seen righty now, today, no spin doctoring necessary the facts are there fort you to see

 

Now i suppose you'll defend with a lots of opinions fantasies and what if's, know that none of what you are saying is actually happening right now, the facts and the truth are what they are, they do not need to be interpreted re-explained or spun

 

Anytime someone tries to re-interpret the facts for you you kinow they are full of s@$#t

100% incorrect. Pre draft Benning said he had 4 forwards and 1 defensemen in his top 5. Clearly he had Oli exactly where he took him in the possibility that PLD was no longer available when he was picking. 

[aGENT]

10 minutes ago, chilliwiggins said:

we are 2 regimes away from ever being at where we once were.    Consellation, Tickets will be cheap for years to come.   since this management has taken over the game change dramatically, and I remember them saying oh ya the boston model, oh ya the LA model, well those are already dinosaur models.   I don't believe this regime has the group to be adaptable or cutting edge in anyway.  Zero signs of this.     The game is speed now.    there is no body checking so small and fast works.     teams that win now have 4 mobile lines Our team has a couple of reasonably fast skaters that's it, and they were here already.     It looks obvious to me they are out of their league.  I don't think even for a second they will top the previous regime. not a chance.

 

Hilariously ironic post in a Juolevi thread of all places. Thanks for the Monday morning laugh 

[Warhippy]

1 hour ago, terrible.dee said:

You have to take at least two steps away from reality to arrive at any of your conclusions

The above poster made observations made on fact alone, facts you are desperate to two-step around

 

1. fact : Tchack is a first line NHL player Juolevi couldn't even cut it for NHL training camp. There is no concrete reason why one should expect Juolieve to be better than a 1st line NHL'er already is, to say so is just wild fantasy, You want ito happen so you say it, but it is's not a fact, do you understand? And the Only reason we took him is because Benning was caught flatfooted, he had no clue CBJ were going to jump in and take his player, so as not to look bad he picked a guy who was likely to play in the NHL but not to star, this high in the draft is where you go for top line talent, not dependable footsoldiers, bad drafting period.

 

2. All the reasons to be concerned about Jake, which were well known at the time of his drafting have happened. Every single one of them and more, we didn't know about the attitude. When he was drafted the team needed skill, Benning took muscle and not even sure thing muscle, he gambled on it, I will not list the comparables for Jakes situation, but it isn't good, players in his position usually washout, especially if they don't have a great attitude. The skill we lacked was ours for the taking all the fans and media knew it, Benning made a head-scratch choice  why is is head-scratching can be seen righty now, today, no spin doctoring necessary the facts are there fort you to see

 

Now i suppose you'll defend with a lots of opinions fantasies and what if's, know that none of what you are saying is actually happening right now, the facts and the truth are what they are, they do not need to be interpreted re-explained or spun

 

Anytime someone tries to re-interpret the facts for you you kinow they are full of s@$#t

You have to take 2 steps away from reality to arrive to any of your conclusions

 

1.  Tkachuk is a 2nd line player, playing a massive amount of PP time with players that are far above 3rd and 4th line status.  Juolevi didn't have a spot after training camp and was not physically ready.  There is no concrete reason to expect a 2nd line player will be better than the possible top 2 pairing Juolevi could become, that's just wild fantasy.  You want it to happen, but it's not a fact do you understand?  And the ONLY reason we took him is because we have a MASSIVE need for future LHD and PLD was off the board, so instead of fabricating crap you have no idea about like claiming Tkachuk is a 1st line player when he isn't and knowing what Benning and Canucks brass did or didn't do.  When you pick this high in the draft you pick the best player period for your team and that was Juoelvi

 

2.  All the reasons to be concerned about Jake, which were not well known outside of his shoulder issue and not being a pass first player are not happening.  Many top 10 players NEVER live up to their draft statsu.  So the best thing to do is allow them to develop and whine about them IN THEIR THREADS not threads of every other possible player or prospect

 

Now I suppose you`ll defend with lots of opinions or fantasies and what ifs, know that none of what you say is actually happening now.  Tkachuk is not a 1st line player.  Juolevi is not a bad pick for this club moving forward and you cannot spin or fabricate things to suit your argument until ALL of the facts are in.

 

Any time someone tries to re-interpret the facts or fabricate them to suit their opinion you know they are full of s**t

[hyper00]

17 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

You have to take 2 steps away from reality to arrive to any of your conclusions

 

1.  Tkachuk is a 2nd line player, playing a massive amount of PP time with players that are far above 3rd and 4th line status.  Juolevi didn't have a spot after training camp and was not physically ready.  There is no concrete reason to expect a 2nd line player will be better than the possible top 2 pairing Juolevi could become, that's just wild fantasy.  You want it to happen, but it's not a fact do you understand?  And the ONLY reason we took him is because we have a MASSIVE need for future LHD and PLD was off the board, so instead of fabricating crap you have no idea about like claiming Tkachuk is a 1st line player when he isn't and knowing what Benning and Canucks brass did or didn't do.  When you pick this high in the draft you pick the best player period for your team and that was Juoelvi

 

2.  All the reasons to be concerned about Jake, which were not well known outside of his shoulder issue and not being a pass first player are not happening.  Many top 10 players NEVER live up to their draft statsu.  So the best thing to do is allow them to develop and whine about them IN THEIR THREADS not threads of every other possible player or prospect

 

Now I suppose you`ll defend with lots of opinions or fantasies and what ifs, know that none of what you say is actually happening now.  Tkachuk is not a 1st line player.  Juolevi is not a bad pick for this club moving forward and you cannot spin or fabricate things to suit your argument until ALL of the facts are in.

 

Any time someone tries to re-interpret the facts or fabricate them to suit their opinion you know they are full of s**t

Nailed it. Tkachuk has that skill set that's perfect for a team with skilled guys like Gaudreau to thrive from worn out opponents. But a top pairing is needed on any team especially since they take their time to develop. These top 10 picks are there for a reason, they are your go to guys for building a future, but they might not live up to the hype like every draft. Juolevi will be great for Vancouver, but have patience. I'll be here cheering for Vancouver even if we bottom out for a couple of years.

[Warhippy]

45 minutes ago, hyper00 said:

Nailed it. Tkachuk has that skill set that's perfect for a team with skilled guys like Gaudreau to thrive from worn out opponents. But a top pairing is needed on any team especially since they take their time to develop. These top 10 picks are there for a reason, they are your go to guys for building a future, but they might not live up to the hype like every draft. Juolevi will be great for Vancouver, but have patience. I'll be here cheering for Vancouver even if we bottom out for a couple of years.

A team with a current dearth of LWs ON the team but not in the prospect bin, Tkachuk would have been either on the 4th line and declared a bust by guys like Dee, or in the minors and declared a bust of a pick by guys like Dee

 

A team like ours with 0 quality D prospects on the left side in the future needed a guy like JUolevi and somehow that's a bad pick

 

His statements and many like him read like this

 

Air Canada picked such a terrible pilot for this flight, seriously could have picked so much better, I hope he crashes mid flight

[hyper00]

1 minute ago, Warhippy said:

A team with a current dearth of LWs ON the team but not in the prospect bin, Tkachuk would have been either on the 4th line and declared a bust by guys like Dee, or in the minors and declared a bust of a pick by guys like Dee

 

A team like ours with 0 quality D prospects on the left side in the future needed a guy like JUolevi and somehow that's a bad pick

 

His statements and many like him read like this

 

Air Canada picked such a terrible pilot for this flight, seriously could have picked so much better, I hope he crashes mid flight

Great Metaphor for some of the people on this community. You can't just hope top players become busts, even if you got McDavid you can't just hope guys like Eichel and Marner are going to play like garbage. It's the same thing with Virtanen and Juolevi, Ehlers was a great pick, Nylander was a great pick. Tkachuk was a great pick. But so was Juolevi, and we're building from the ground up, so when that 60-80 point player shows up, Demko and Juolevi will be NHL ready.

[Warhippy]

4 minutes ago, hyper00 said:

Great Metaphor for some of the people on this community. You can't just hope top players become busts, even if you got McDavid you can't just hope guys like Eichel and Marner are going to play like garbage. It's the same thing with Virtanen and Juolevi, Ehlers was a great pick, Nylander was a great pick. Tkachuk was a great pick. But so was Juolevi, and we're building from the ground up, so when that 60-80 point player shows up, Demko and Juolevi will be NHL ready.

|It really has come down to, they didn't pick who I wanted, I hope he chokes.  Then every single blown shift they pop up see I told you I was right all along, see how right I was I was right about them

 

Like somehow hoping and praying that the guy they didn't want picked fails to develop is going to help this team long term.  Those SAME people are the ones crying about not having won a cup, then making proposals where every mediocre prospect on other teams are worth the world while our best prospects are simply add ons.

 

To be totally honest, I don't know how these people function on a day to day basis with all of the broken ankles they must have jumping on and off the bandwagon

[TheOgRook]

17 hours ago, TheAce said:

dont think he'll be scoring wristers like that in the NHL but im encouraged that he hit the net and didnt blast it in the shin pads or miss the net by 2 feet !

Not sure, that goal is scored fairly often in the NHL.  By the looks of it the goalie didn't get a good look at it. Also, you are right he didn't pull and Edler  

[HomeBrew]

1 hour ago, Warhippy said:

|It really has come down to, they didn't pick who I wanted, I hope he chokes.  Then every single blown shift they pop up see I told you I was right all along, see how right I was I was right about them

 

Like somehow hoping and praying that the guy they didn't want picked fails to develop is going to help this team long term.  Those SAME people are the ones crying about not having won a cup, then making proposals where every mediocre prospect on other teams are worth the world while our best prospects are simply add ons.

 

To be totally honest, I don't know how these people function on a day to day basis with all of the broken ankles they must have jumping on and off the bandwagon

I agree 100%. It's like buying a lottery ticket, losing and then calling the whole thing rigged, turn and point to a winner and say it must be the corner store they bought it from... they obviously have a more competent corner store, I'm going to change corner stores. Lose, rigged, so on and so on...

 

Thats an embellishment but it definitely feels that way with a lot of people. It's all about instant gratification. 

 

Mike Gillis in his time here drafted 3 fringe NHLers (Cannauton, Schroeder, and Gaunce), 1 ok NHLer (Hutton) and 1 decent NHLer (Horvat).*

Jim Benning in his first draft already produced 4 current fringe NHLers (Virtanen, McCann, Tryamkin and Forsling), and 1 high quality propsect (Demko). At least 2 of these players are going to become ok-decent players in the NHL.

 

*you might consider Hodgson also a fringe-ok NHL player but he retired earlier after being a disappointment to everyone.

 

To say the least, I am much happier with our direction and prospect development than what it used to be.

[Warhippy]

54 minutes ago, HomeBrew said:

I agree 100%. It's like buying a lottery ticket, losing and then calling the whole thing rigged, turn and point to a winner and say it must be the corner store they bought it from... they obviously have a more competent corner store, I'm going to change corner stores. Lose, rigged, so on and so on...

 

Thats an embellishment but it definitely feels that way with a lot of people. It's all about instant gratification. 

 

Mike Gillis in his time here drafted 3 fringe NHLers (Cannauton, Schroeder, and Gaunce), 1 ok NHLer (Hutton) and 1 decent NHLer (Horvat).*

Jim Benning in his first draft already produced 4 current fringe NHLers (Virtanen, McCann, Tryamkin and Forsling), and 1 high quality propsect (Demko). At least 2 of these players are going to become ok-decent players in the NHL.

 

*you might consider Hodgson also a fringe-ok NHL player but he retired earlier after being a disappointment to everyone.

 

To say the least, I am much happier with our direction and prospect development than what it used to be.

I posted in another thread every top 10 pick from 2009 to 2014 that has either not made it, been less than their draft position dictated they SHOULD be or is a player that while producing is someone that CDC would claim isn't nearly the player that draft slot dictated they should be and is somehow someone elses fault

 

It turns out on average from 2014 back to 2009 from 10 to 1 it's 3 to 4 players that just either don't cut it at all or 4-5 that just do not thus far deserve to have been drafted top 10

 

But these people continue to claim that top 10 picks are all important all encompassing and somehow we missed the boat on everything because this other team has shiny prospect A and B picked 14th and 54th and we somehow missed the boat on them

 

it's actually getting embarrassing to read some days and I cannot wait until we can shed the whining and I can lurk in here reading valid posts about games, line mates and prospect productivity instead of how we picked 5th but needed player X instead of player Y

Edited January 16, 2017 by Warhippy