Olli Juolevi | #48 | D

[Alflives]

2 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

I'm hyper critical of our prospects in my own way but until the moment they're outside of this org I support them.

 

Criticism, critique and questions are valid.

 

But the nonsense that gets spewed by 2 or three people is over the top.  It IS in fact the same kind of "Look he scored 4 goals today, ya but he was a -1 and is terrible because he is a -1" crap that we see on HF

 

Sitting and dictating the failures of a kid at age 19 and basing it all off of opinion instead of facts, expert scouting and forethought or future planning (ability to see where a player fits in to a teams structure as a prospect and when) is the kind o thing that makes me consider said people the lowest common denominator.  

 

Borderline trolls in fact.

 

Gun, Nazzy, etc all contribute solid commentary from both sides of the spectrum.  But one small select trio have taken it over the top.  One or two saying flat out I can't wait until they bust/flame out so i can tell the benning lovers or [X prospect] supporters I was right

 

THAT is the kind of crap I cannot stand and earns my enimity, because at that point you're not a fan, you're just a sad person looking for attention.  Or...a turd on a black background.

What does this post have to do with Juiolevi?  

 

I think this prospect will look a better player in the NHL.  He makes smart plays, that are (sometimes) ahead of his peers.  If he is Dan Hamhuis 2.0, like I've read, then he will an important player for us.  

[N4ZZY]

6 minutes ago, logic said:

It's kinda sad to see a lot people on here get so caught up in hoping our prospects don't do well just so they can have a superior feeling of 'right'. Vocal about negativity, silent when it comes to positivity, They don't like 8/10 things our team does so why the hell are they still here then, whats the point of supporting a team when you don't support/like any of the moves or decisions they make. There's 31 other NHL teams to cheer for since some of you people clearly don't like a single thing about ours.

Win or lose I cheer for the Canucks because I love my team, and sometimes being a fan isn't about being right or wrong, its about supporting your team through thick and thin, and not bringing every single one of our damn prospects who haven't even played a fkn NHL game down.

Like damn, hockey is an escape from reality for me I don't want an escape to be clouded in negativity 24/7 if I wanted that I'd stay in the real world.

yeah. i love my team too, which is why i'm gonna cheer on our prospects as much as i can until they demonstrate otherwise, or they're with another organization. haha 

 

[Warhippy]

4 minutes ago, OptionalPants said:

Ok, I generally try to say nothing too negative about our prospects as they are probably the most interesting part about the Canucks theses days, but is it not a little concerning how Juolevi seems to have slowed in his development this year? I have watched more than a few London Knights games and the points I saw brought up from that post quoting HFboards are often valid. He does seem very uninterested when he plays, almost to cool and calm. His skating his very smooth, but also way too relaxed and payers are always getting in behind him. He also doesn't get too engaged in battles down low and seems to struggle to run a powerplay once inside the o-zone.

 

There are still lots of positives about his game. As mentioned, he is remarkably smooth and calm, and his breakout passing skills are as good as last year, if not even better. Also his wrist shot seems to find a way to get through. His positioning is always excellent which at times makes up for his slow reactions/ lack of explosiveness.

 

My concern about all this is that either, he has taken a step back in his development. Or another possibiliy is that he is bored with the OHL and as a result his play seems uninterested. That second option may sound encouraging, but honestly I'd be a little disappointed if that were true. Any thoughts on why is play seems to have been like this so far?

 

 

Objectively speaking here.  

 

Drouin was drafted 3rd overall.  In his draft year +1 he only increased his point totals by 3 whole points.  

Dal Colle drafted 5th.  +1 year dropped totals by 2 points.

Nick Ritchie, +1 dropped by 12 points

 

It's the same thing we're starting to see people say about Boeser now.

 

The point I am trying to make is had we drafted any of them people would be saying the exact same things.  Hell last year people were all but proclaiming Drouin a locker room cancer and a poison and a possible bust.  People WANT instant gratification.  Juolevi is playing less, taking harder line matching and is increasing almost every possible stat.

 

The thing about developing a prospect and where this team is, we cannot expect them to be immediate producers nor do we want them to be.  We want them to be marinating for 2-3 years no matter what.  If people cannot accept the time frame these kids need they need to go watch football where prospects/draft picks make immediate impacts.  

 

Juolevi and the entire Knights team taking a fraction of a step back this year is nothing to be concerned about at all IMO.  Now, if in 5 years he's no more than a 20 point 4-6 defenseman

 

Then THAT is something we can question, but...he'd only be 23 in 5 years so....

[N4ZZY]

2 minutes ago, Alflives said:

What does this post have to do with Juiolevi?  

 

I think this prospect will look a better player in the NHL.  He makes smart plays, that are (sometimes) ahead of his peers.  If he is Dan Hamhuis 2.0, like I've read, then he will an important player for us.  

war's just replying to some posters here who are incessantly negative all the time, it seems. i get what he's saying. 

back to juolevi. there's a good chance that juolevi steps into the NHL (when he's ready) and shows that his game belongs better with the professionals, maybe that's just how clean his game is compared to some other prospects. i dunno. 

i'm hoping he's dan hamhuis plus. 

 

[Warhippy]

5 minutes ago, Alflives said:

What does this post have to do with Juiolevi?  

 

I think this prospect will look a better player in the NHL.  He makes smart plays, that are (sometimes) ahead of his peers.  If he is Dan Hamhuis 2.0, like I've read, then he will an important player for us.  

What does constantly questioning their development or potential without basis of proof have to do with them?  

 

What does being called out on it proven wrong about facts and resorting to cute anecdotes about being a fictitious 80's sitcom puppet have to do with them?

 

It has its place in the conversation we were having.  Myself and another poster.  Spill over happens my man.  The negativity needs to be addressed at times

 

 

Edited March 11, 2017 by Warhippy

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, N4ZZY said:

war's just replying to some posters here who are incessantly negative all the time, it seems. i get what he's saying. 

back to juolevi. there's a good chance that juolevi steps into the NHL (when he's ready) and shows that his game belongs better with the professionals, maybe that's just how clean his game is compared to some other prospects. i dunno. 

i'm hoping he's dan hamhuis plus. 

 

I think we win the Cup in 2011 if Hamhuis doesn't get hurt.  I will be ecstatic if Juiolevi is even better.  Maybe Hamhuis, but with 40 points?  

[OptionalPants]

Just now, Warhippy said:

Objectively speaking here.  

 

Drouin was drafted 3rd overall.  In his draft year +1 he only increased his point totals by 3 whole points.  

Dal Colle drafted 5th.  +1 year dropped totals by 2 points.

Nick Ritchie, +1 dropped by 12 points

 

It's the same thing we're starting to see people say about Boeser now.

 

The point I am trying to make is had we drafted any of them people would be saying the exact same things.  Hell last year people were all but proclaiming Drouin a locker room cancer and a poison and a possible bust.  People WANT instant gratification.  Juolevi is playing less, taking harder line matching and is increasing almost every possible stat.

 

The thing about developing a prospect and where this team is, we cannot expect them to be immediate producers nor do we want them to be.  We want them to be marinating for 2-3 years no matter what.  If people cannot accept the time frame these kids need they need to go watch football where prospects/draft picks make immediate impacts.  

 

Juolevi and the entire Knights team taking a fraction of a step back this year is nothing to be concerned about at all IMO.  Now, if in 5 years he's no more than a 20 point 4-6 defenseman

 

Then THAT is something we can question, but...he'd only be 23 in 5 years so....

Oh yeah, I'm fine with his statline as is considering the London Knights are definitely a weaker team this year. My concern was with his uninterested play, as I mentioned he often allows players to get behind and around him because he is just too calm and not fast/aggresive enough and almost looks like he is bored all the time. I was hoping to get a discussion going as to the reasons why this has become so much more prominent for him this year.

 

My thoughts were that perhaps he is bored with the OHL? Or just unmotivated for some reason? I mean, this would bode well for him being a lot better than he is currently showing, but it would still be a rather disappointing trait to have.

Or perhaps he has some injury that he has been hiding that has slowed him down? Because I really didn't notice this drop until after he came back from the World Juniors.

 

[N4ZZY]

Just now, Alflives said:

I think we win the Cup in 2011 if Hamhuis doesn't get hurt.  I will be ecstatic if Juiolevi is even better.  Maybe Hamhuis, but with 40 points?  

I'd be happy with a player on the backend like that. I think it really depends on the team that Juolevi will be entering into. Surround him with a solid mix of offensive players, and a good defensive corps, and i get the sense with his hockey iq, he's going to be making smart plays that will lead him to earn primary assists, or secondary assists, and on top of that some goals, because he's so damn smart on the ice. not worried about this kid at all. 

 

[N4ZZY]

1 minute ago, OptionalPants said:

Oh yeah, I'm fine with his statline as is considering the London Knights are definitely a weaker team this year. My concern was with his uninterested play, as I mentioned he often allows players to get behind and around him because he is just too calm and not fast/aggresive enough and almost looks like he is bored all the time. I was hoping to get a discussion going as to the reasons why this has become so much more prominent for him this year.

 

My thoughts were that perhaps he is bored with the OHL? Or just unmotivated for some reason? I mean, this would bode well for him being a lot better than he is currently showing, but it would still be a rather disappointing trait to have.

Or perhaps he has some injury that he has been hiding that has slowed him down? Because I really didn't notice this drop until after he came back from the World Juniors.

 

maybe the kid is bored with the competition. if he's as good as he's been advertised to be, then i can understand that. it's like having a kid who's super smart ,and should be in like a higher learning class, but instead is stuck with his normal class. lmao. maybe the OHL is too pedestrian in terms of competition for him. maybe the kid just needs better competition to light a fire under his ass. 

 

[Brad Marchand]

13 minutes ago, N4ZZY said:

sheesh. juolevi will be fine. 

i think it's human tendency to be negative, it's very difficult to remain positive about anything, let alone this organization and it's prospects. i wanna try to be as supportive as i can with all of our prospects, but if they're not growing or developing as much as i think, i'll also post my thoughts on that. but incessantly bashing our prospects? well, maybe some of us just need a little bit more air. go out, meet people, get a life, etc.  enjoy life a little aside from the Canucks

It's all part of the development cylce of a typical Canucks prospect:

 

1) Draft Day

Canucks select player X, a bunch of people complain "This guy sucks, why didn't they pick player Y?". This is pretty much guaranteed to happen no matter who the Canucks pick.

2) First post-draft season

This usually goes one of two ways:

a. Player X does well and people start saying "Yeah, they made the right pick all along".

b. Player X struggles while some other player drafted after him starts putting up points somewhere (NHL, CHL, etc.). People start saying "Yeah, I knew they shouldn't have taken player X, this guy's a bust".

3) First post-draft season slump

Regardless of whether the drafted player goes down path A or path B from part 2, the player will usually go through a dry spell or two where their offensive totals take a hit or their level of play suffers. Again, the "Yeah, I knew they shouldn't have taken player X, this guy's a bust" comments reappear.

4) Beyond

At this point, player X either

a. busts through his slumps and develops into a solid NHL player

b. slips into oblivion

Players who fall into category A receive heaps of praise from everyone, including the people who labelled them busts at some point in phases 1, 2, or 3. Players who fall into category B usually face a barrage of "I knew I was right all along" comments from those who proclaimed them busts.

[logic]

2 minutes ago, N4ZZY said:

I'd be happy with a player on the backend like that. I think it really depends on the team that Juolevi will be entering into. Surround him with a solid mix of offensive players, and a good defensive corps, and i get the sense with his hockey iq, he's going to be making smart plays that will lead him to earn primary assists, or secondary assists, and on top of that some goals, because he's so damn smart on the ice. not worried about this kid at all. 

 

A lot of when Juolevi does is not seen on the scoresheet, he is so lethal at the first pass out of the zone, the third or fourth assist that puts the play in motion, a catalyst from the backend.

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, Warhippy said:

What does constantly questioning their development or potential without basis of proof have to do with them?  

 

What does being called out on it proven wrong about facts and resorting to cute anecdotes about being a fictitious 80's sitcom puppet have to do with them?

 

It has its place in the conversation we were having.  Myself and another poster.  Spill over happens my man.  The negativity needs to be addressed at times

 

 

I must say you have a way of making you point, while keeping within the realm of entertainment.  

I can understand fans being frustrated with our top picks not helping the big club, while seeing guys selected after, playing important roles with other teams.  I think Juiolevi is on our team next season.  It's pointless to send him back to junior, and he can't play in the A.  

[Alflives]

6 minutes ago, N4ZZY said:

I'd be happy with a player on the backend like that. I think it really depends on the team that Juolevi will be entering into. Surround him with a solid mix of offensive players, and a good defensive corps, and i get the sense with his hockey iq, he's going to be making smart plays that will lead him to earn primary assists, or secondary assists, and on top of that some goals, because he's so damn smart on the ice. not worried about this kid at all. 

 

I see Juiolevi passing to: Bo, Gaudette, Boeser, Virtanen, Granlund, and Middlestadt (who we get this draft:)

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

26 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said:

Shocker.  They say nothing good about anyone on the Canucks, from ownership on down to players.  It's a cesspool circle-jerk of back-slapping puerile ignorance.

Can't really dispute anything you've said here when it comes to the current climate on the HFBoards Canucks forum.

 

Still, they do provide something of a counterbalance to some of the stuff we often see over here from a vocal pep squad of Pollyanna Pompoms types.

 

Seems to me the real story of this team lies somewhere in the middle of these two extremes.

 

It's been one of my great frustrations the past few years watching two opposing factions of Canucks fans harden into pretty extreme viewpoints on opposite ends of the spectrum.

 

There's a sizeable group of "JB can do no wrong" fans on CDC who seem to lash out at anything they perceive as "negativity."

 

And HFBoards (and Canucks Army) seems to be the home of the "Dim Jim" contingent who seem unable to see anything positive in the work of the so-called "worst GM in the league." They simply refuse to acknowledge the good work Benning has done and will shout down anyone with an opposing viewpoint.

 

Personally, I find it exhausting dealing with both these factions. 

 

I'm not directing this at anyone in particular (certainly not you @Hutton Wink) and there are plenty of reasonable posters on here (especially this subforum) with whom you can have a great discussion and who are open to fair and reasonable criticism. And once you sort through the "cesspool," there are several HFBoards members who provide balanced and objective analysis. But it often feels like this is the exception and not the rule, on both boards (and on most other sites that discuss the Canucks).

 

*gets off soapbox and nervously eyes crowd*

[Gaudette Celly]

Thanks, Sid.  Warhippy and I both got scarred I think from the few hours CDC went down on the TDL and we had to wade into HF for a while, lol.  The mod there is perhaps the worst of the bunch that I saw.

[Ihatetomatoes]

21 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Objectively speaking here.  

 

Drouin was drafted 3rd overall.  In his draft year +1 he only increased his point totals by 3 whole points.  

Dal Colle drafted 5th.  +1 year dropped totals by 2 points.

Nick Ritchie, +1 dropped by 12 points

 

It's the same thing we're starting to see people say about Boeser now.

 

The point I am trying to make is had we drafted any of them people would be saying the exact same things.  Hell last year people were all but proclaiming Drouin a locker room cancer and a poison and a possible bust.  People WANT instant gratification.  Juolevi is playing less, taking harder line matching and is increasing almost every possible stat.

 

The thing about developing a prospect and where this team is, we cannot expect them to be immediate producers nor do we want them to be.  We want them to be marinating for 2-3 years no matter what.  If people cannot accept the time frame these kids need they need to go watch football where prospects/draft picks make immediate impacts.  

 

Juolevi and the entire Knights team taking a fraction of a step back this year is nothing to be concerned about at all IMO.  Now, if in 5 years he's no more than a 20 point 4-6 defenseman

 

Then THAT is something we can question, but...he'd only be 23 in 5 years so....

Droing scored more points in 3 less games

Dal Colle had 2 less points in 12 less games

Ritchie had 12 less points in 13 less games. His ppg went up

 

Those are some bad examples of poor play the year after a draft. Especially considering Dal Colle is not developing well.

 

People can accept the time frame and in the meantime people will want to discuss how they are doing, and sometimes if they are not doing that well people will want to talk about how it does not seem like they are developing well. 

 

Mete is playing amazingly well and you can read about how he is far and away their best defenseman and how much the team relies on him. That is a good example of a prospect taking the next step after a draft and excelling.

[ilduce39]

Good to hear the Knights fans are crapping on Juolevi... that program really does get you ready for the NHL. 

 

Well, our team anyways.  

[OptionalPants]

1 hour ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

Can't really dispute anything you've said here when it comes to the current climate on the HFBoards Canucks forum.

 

Still, they do provide something of a counterbalance to some of the stuff we often see over here from a vocal pep squad of Pollyanna Pompoms types.

 

Seems to me the real story of this team lies somewhere in the middle of these two extremes.

 

It's been one of my great frustrations the past few years watching two opposing factions of Canucks fans harden into pretty extreme viewpoints on opposite ends of the spectrum.

 

There's a sizeable group of "JB can do no wrong" fans on CDC who seem to lash out at anything they perceive as "negativity."

 

And HFBoards (and Canucks Army) seems to be the home of the "Dim Jim" contingent who seem unable to see anything positive in the work of the so-called "worst GM in the league." They simply refuse to acknowledge the good work Benning has done and will shout down anyone with an opposing viewpoint.

 

Personally, I find it exhausting dealing with both these factions. 

 

I'm not directing this at anyone in particular (certainly not you @Hutton Wink) and there are plenty of reasonable posters on here (especially this subforum) with whom you can have a great discussion and who are open to fair and reasonable criticism. And once you sort through the "cesspool," there are several HFBoards members who provide balanced and objective analysis. But it often feels like this is the exception and not the rule, on both boards (and on most other sites that discuss the Canucks).

 

*gets off soapbox and nervously eyes crowd*

This is the most true statement I have seen on CDC. Honestly I wish there was just one main message board for Canucks fans so both sides would have to interact with each other. Instead, both groups get trapped in an echo-chamber on their respective forums

[The Lock]

2 hours ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

Can't really dispute anything you've said here when it comes to the current climate on the HFBoards Canucks forum.

 

Still, they do provide something of a counterbalance to some of the stuff we often see over here from a vocal pep squad of Pollyanna Pompoms types.

 

Seems to me the real story of this team lies somewhere in the middle of these two extremes.

 

It's been one of my great frustrations the past few years watching two opposing factions of Canucks fans harden into pretty extreme viewpoints on opposite ends of the spectrum.

 

There's a sizeable group of "JB can do no wrong" fans on CDC who seem to lash out at anything they perceive as "negativity."

 

And HFBoards (and Canucks Army) seems to be the home of the "Dim Jim" contingent who seem unable to see anything positive in the work of the so-called "worst GM in the league." They simply refuse to acknowledge the good work Benning has done and will shout down anyone with an opposing viewpoint.

 

Personally, I find it exhausting dealing with both these factions. 

 

I'm not directing this at anyone in particular (certainly not you @Hutton Wink) and there are plenty of reasonable posters on here (especially this subforum) with whom you can have a great discussion and who are open to fair and reasonable criticism. And once you sort through the "cesspool," there are several HFBoards members who provide balanced and objective analysis. But it often feels like this is the exception and not the rule, on both boards (and on most other sites that discuss the Canucks).

 

*gets off soapbox and nervously eyes crowd*

I'll admit that at times I an be a pom pom person; though it's mostly on topics where I think the "negativity" is rather biased (the other group obviously). I think overall I try and stay mostly positive but I do realise there are some issues that do arise in the organization, whether it be regarding a player or something else. At the end of the day I'm merely a fan who likes to write on a forum about the Canucks.  I do read what other people say and tend to consider it. I think how one gets a better overall picture.

 

For what it's worth, I consider you one of the most well-thought-out posters on this forum. I don't know if I've ever actually disagreed with you on this forum.... like ever....

Edited March 11, 2017 by The Lock

[guntrix]

Benning's first round draft record as head scout of the Sabres is there for all to see... he simply doesn't do well in the first round. It's like the overthinks the pick.

 

Knights fans are indeed disconcerted with Olli and many of the opinions about him on HFBoards aren't that far off, despite how much we'd like to avoid admitting it. Sometimes I feel like these two boards are polar opposites - HF can be overly pessimistic at times while this board tends to go over the top with positivity and delusion.