Olli Juolevi | #48 | D

[Toews]

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

Totally agree.  I don't really see how anyone can deny that Tkatchuk at the same age as Juiolevi is BY FAR the more impactful player.  I could see if Tkatchuk was three years older, and we were waiting for Olli to catch up age wise, but they are the same friggin age!  Three years from now, when Olli finally makes our team (hopefully) Tkatchuk will be three years older too, and have played in the NHL for three bloody years getting even better.  My God how excited would our fan base be with Tkatchuk in our current lineup?  

Olli won't require three years.

[Alflives]

2 minutes ago, Toews said:

Olli won't require three years.

Oh, I hope you're right Toews.  I hope for us that Olli becomes (next season) an impactful NHL dman.  It sucks watching the very hated, loser, Flames reaping the benefits of a guy we passed over that a great many of us wanted JB to select:(

[Darius]

Do you guys really think that Willie would have put Tkachuck in the top 6, given him PP time, and all of the ice time he gets in Calgary.  No way he would have 36 points right now if he was here.  Hes playing with two established players, one of which is having a career year.  I wonder if he would have 25 assists playing with any combo of Chaput, Skille, Megna, Gaunce etc?  Id argue that Backlund is a better forward than anyone on the Canucks not named Bo right now.

Hes a good player who has been put in an extremely good situation.

 

I will reserve my judgement on pick 5 vs pick 6 for about another 3 to 4 years.

[aGENT]

49 minutes ago, Hairy Kneel said:

Well I felt we should be a team at least earning a wild card spot and here we are like 4 points out .( only if we had Ericksson scoring MT wouldn't have mattered so much) and honestly I preferred Sergechev because of his physicality.

'ALL" the players? No just the one spot of picking the best forward available at the time not a Lumme like player 3 years away.

We're also only 2 points from 28th.

 

Sergachev is higher risk/reward. Would have loved to get him too.

 

MT and OJ were basically equal quality according most scouts. MT was ranked higher because forwards are more predictable and require less development time. That's it. 

 

Again, you can't have all the players.

[aGENT]

25 minutes ago, Darius71 said:

Do you guys really think that Willie would have put Tkachuck in the top 6, given him PP time, and all of the ice time he gets in Calgary.  No way he would have 36 points right now if he was here.  Hes playing with two established players, one of which is having a career year.  I wonder if he would have 25 assists playing with any combo of Chaput, Skille, Megna, Gaunce etc?  Id argue that Backlund is a better forward than anyone on the Canucks not named Bo right now.

Hes a good player who has been put in an extremely good situation.

 

I will reserve my judgement on pick 5 vs pick 6 for about another 3 to 4 years.

Actually, IMO we might have seen him on Bo's LW with say one of Burr, Hansen, maybe Baer or Granlund on their off wing.

 

But then we wouldn't have Juolevi in a couple years 

[KKnight]

Question time. 

 

Lets say we get a top 4 selection this year and select a Necas (Krejci-lite), Middlestadt, Peterrson etc. 

 

Then next year we get a top 3 selection, which is probable, depending on progression. Do you select a forward Veleno,Svechnikov,Tkachuk,  or do you go with probably the best young dman ive seen in quite some time in Dahlin and then proceed to trade a dman like Hutton and gain forwards that way. Which as we have seen go for huge price tags. 

 

I personally am all for Bennings tactics. Would a highly skilled super pest like Tkachuk help our line up? Hell yeah. But, more than an excellent young d core that we are establishing and could be one of the very best in a few years?? I take D core.

 

If we didnt have Boeser the year before last, we would have taken Tkachuk. 

 

We have got forwards coming

 

Boeser

Gaudette

Lockwood

Aston-Reese (im hoping he signs here) 

Forward this years draft (Necas)

Virtanen (wherever you are)

[HKSR]

1 hour ago, Darius71 said:

Do you guys really think that Willie would have put Tkachuck in the top 6, given him PP time, and all of the ice time he gets in Calgary.  No way he would have 36 points right now if he was here.  Hes playing with two established players, one of which is having a career year.  I wonder if he would have 25 assists playing with any combo of Chaput, Skille, Megna, Gaunce etc?  Id argue that Backlund is a better forward than anyone on the Canucks not named Bo right now.

Hes a good player who has been put in an extremely good situation.

 

I will reserve my judgement on pick 5 vs pick 6 for about another 3 to 4 years.

That's besides the point.  The point is, Tkachuk was put into that position, and he took off with it.  If he wasn't an impact player, he would have fizzled out and be sent back down to the juniors (cough... Virtanen... cough).  As much as it hurts to admit it, the Flames got a helluva player in Tkachuk.  We better hope (well, GMJB better hope even more) that Juolevi becomes that #1 or #2 dman he's touted to be...

[Hairy Kneel]

42 minutes ago, J.R. said:

We're also only 2 points from 28th.

 

Sergachev is higher risk/reward. Would have loved to get him too.

 

MT and OJ were basically equal quality according most scouts. MT was ranked higher because forwards are more predictable and require less development time. That's it. 

 

Again, you can't have all the players.

Not all the players just switching the one pick.

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, Hairy Kneel said:

Not all the players just switching the one pick.

 

41 minutes ago, J.R. said:

But then we wouldn't have Juolevi in a couple years 

 

[Hairy Kneel]

2 minutes ago, J.R. said:

 

 

If he pans out.

[aGENT]

12 minutes ago, Hairy Kneel said:

If he pans out.

#OJBust

Edited February 16, 2017 by J.R.

[Vinny in Vancouver]

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

Totally agree.  I don't really see how anyone can deny that Tkatchuk at the same age as Juiolevi is BY FAR the more impactful player.  I could see if Tkatchuk was three years older, and we were waiting for Olli to catch up age wise, but they are the same friggin age!  Three years from now, when Olli finally makes our team (hopefully) Tkatchuk will be three years older too, and have played in the NHL for three bloody years getting even better.  My God how excited would our fan base be with Tkatchuk in our current lineup?  

Tkachuk won't be scoring much in our lineup.

[Hairy Kneel]

41 minutes ago, J.R. said:

#OJBust

Hope not.

[aGENT]

19 minutes ago, vinny_in_vancouver said:

Tkachuk won't be scoring much in our lineup.

He'd likely be doing ok on a line with Horvat. Our D however s not (yet) at the level of CGY's particularly at transitioning the puck and helping maintain offensive pressure. We simply haven't got the parts there in sufficient quantity and the one's we do have are all pretty bright green. So on our team I'd guess he'd probably be closer to 25+/- presently vs 36 points on Calgary.

[canucklehead80]

2 hours ago, Darius71 said:

Do you guys really think that Willie would have put Tkachuck in the top 6, given him PP time, and all of the ice time he gets in Calgary.  No way he would have 36 points right now if he was here.  Hes playing with two established players, one of which is having a career year.  I wonder if he would have 25 assists playing with any combo of Chaput, Skille, Megna, Gaunce etc?  Id argue that Backlund is a better forward than anyone on the Canucks not named Bo right now.

Hes a good player who has been put in an extremely good situation.

 

I will reserve my judgement on pick 5 vs pick 6 for about another 3 to 4 years.

I've been saying this all season. Different teams, different situations. For all we know Tkachuk would have been back in London playing with OJ if we had drafted him. Willy's track record shows MT would have either been back in Jr. or would have been in and out of the lineup playing bottom 6 minutes, just as every other youngster WD has had in his 3 seasons here have done.

[Vinny in Vancouver]

28 minutes ago, J.R. said:

He'd likely be doing ok on a line with Horvat. Our D however s not (yet) at the level of CGY's particularly at transitioning the puck and helping maintain offensive pressure. We simply haven't got the parts there in sufficient quantity and the one's we do have are all pretty bright green. So on our team I'd guess he'd probably be closer to 25+/- presently vs 36 points on Calgary.

I personally think they would be putting him on the Sedin line, but we'll never know...

[Darius]

1 hour ago, HKSR said:

That's besides the point.  The point is, Tkachuk was put into that position, and he took off with it.  If he wasn't an impact player, he would have fizzled out and be sent back down to the juniors (cough... Virtanen... cough).  As much as it hurts to admit it, the Flames got a helluva player in Tkachuk.  We better hope (well, GMJB better hope even more) that Juolevi becomes that #1 or #2 dman he's touted to be...

sure they got a great player. My point is that he wouldnt be a 36 point player on the Canucks.  If Bo Horvat started on the 4th line here this year, and had to go through the wall to get second unit pp time and still doesnt get put on the ice with the goalie pulled I doubt Keith Junior would be getting the equivalent of what hes got in Calgary here - two very good line mates and top 6 time.  People freaking out about his point total and then comparing him to Juolevi isnt exactly fair at this point.

 

[aGENT]

5 minutes ago, vinny_in_vancouver said:

I personally think they would be putting him on the Sedin line, but we'll never know...

It's a possibility. I'd say his skating, unrefined D game and frequently over the edge play would nullify that option but you never know.

 

Could be on any of our three second lines really. MT, Sutter, Hansen/Burr would be a good 2 way, PITA line as well.

 

As I said earlier....

 

2 hours ago, J.R. said:

Again, you can't have all the players.

 

[HKSR]

Just now, Darius71 said:

sure they got a great player. My point is that he wouldnt be a 36 point player on the Canucks.  If Bo Horvat started on the 4th line here this year, and had to go through the wall to get second unit pp time and still doesnt get put on the ice with the goalie pulled I doubt Keith Junior would be getting the equivalent of what hes got in Calgary here - two very good line mates and top 6 time.  People freaking out about his point total and then comparing him to Juolevi isnt exactly fair at this point.

 

I get what you're trying to say, but let's face it, he's in the Top 6 and getting those minutes because he's done what he needs to do to be there.  He was given an opportunity and took off with it.  Not all players can do that.

 

I'm sure he would have been given an opportunity here as well, and if he looked effective (which I'm sure he would considering he goes into the dirty areas all night long), he would be playing with Horvat in the Top 6.  Maybe he wouldn't have 36pts, but even 26pts would put him around the same point totals as Sutter and/or Baertschi.  Tkachuk is an impact player, and there's no way you can discredit that.  He earned his ice time and is showing why he's a high 1st round pick.

 

I'm not comparing him to Juolevi at this point because comparing forwards to d-men isn't fair... especially this early in their career.  All I'm saying is I sure hope Juolevi pans out, because if he doesn't, GMJB and the Canucks will look really stupid for passing on a player that looked like a surefire NHLer (not to mention he has the bloodlines as well).

[Darius]

18 minutes ago, HKSR said:

I get what you're trying to say, but let's face it, he's in the Top 6 and getting those minutes because he's done what he needs to do to be there.  He was given an opportunity and took off with it.  Not all players can do that.

 

I'm sure he would have been given an opportunity here as well, and if he looked effective (which I'm sure he would considering he goes into the dirty areas all night long), he would be playing with Horvat in the Top 6.  Maybe he wouldn't have 36pts, but even 26pts would put him around the same point totals as Sutter and/or Baertschi.  Tkachuk is an impact player, and there's no way you can discredit that.  He earned his ice time and is showing why he's a high 1st round pick.

 

I'm not comparing him to Juolevi at this point because comparing forwards to d-men isn't fair... especially this early in their career.  All I'm saying is I sure hope Juolevi pans out, because if he doesn't, GMJB and the Canucks will look really stupid for passing on a player that looked like a surefire NHLer (not to mention he has the bloodlines as well).

I agree with everything you say except Im not so sure hes going to turn out to be the impact player some are thinking he will be.  11 goals is great, its not like it hasnt been done before.

 

In the end it comes down to this - if Juolevi turns out to be a top pair D man - I will choose a top pair dman every time over a top 6 winger.  Every time.... unless we are talking about point per game guys - and I doubt he is that good.  And for that I reserve judgement until Juolevi is at least given a chance to show us what he can do when he makes it to this level.

 

 

Edited February 16, 2017 by Darius71