Olli Juolevi | #48 | D

[aGENT]

2 minutes ago, Ihatetomatoes said:

Juolevi had an average season to those who watched him the most, London Knights fans. The only people who think he had anything more than just an average regular season are stat watchers and Canuck fans.

No, stat-watchers would actually be the problem.

 

He put up the same points offensively, playing a harder, more defensive role, against the highest QOC all while sheltering a rookie on an inferior team. His year was perfectly fine.

 

Even the Canucks/Benning haters at Canucks Army are on side:

 

https://canucksarmy.com/2017/09/07/canucks-army-pre-season-prospect-profiles-3-olli-juolevi/

[Rocksterh8]

5 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Being young and a Dman is now an excuse is it?   

 

Go to any draft where Dmen are involved - take 2007 (a good examples as both the 4th (Hickey) and 5th (Alzner) were Dmen - Hickey is now an NHL regular but didn't become one until five years post drafting.    Alzner came out a bit quicker and was a regular three years later.   That averages to 4 years.   So in his second year after drafting you want him to be carrying the team?

Cherry picking 2 drafted defence men means nothing, I could cherry pick a dozen high pick D men that made a difference in the NHL in their first or second year. 

He's not just a 1st round pick, He's the 5th overall pick in that draft, my point is there are two dmen from that draft already way better than him.

[Rocksterh8]

5 hours ago, J.R. said:

19 year old kid, still adjusting to new weight he put on, in a preseason game where they had basically no practice together and the entire team was a Chinese fire drill in it's own end all night with nothing resembling structure....

 

Definitely time to panic.

 

I'm starting to believe that context may be a lost art form.

No one is panicking, I just believe JB made a mistake in taking him before some others that were on the board. He may be a solid d man in 3, 4 or 5  years...and he may never turn out. 

[Ihatetomatoes]

22 minutes ago, J.R. said:

No, stat-watchers would actually be the problem.

 

He put up the same points offensively, playing a harder, more defensive role, against the highest QOC all while sheltering a rookie on an inferior team. His year was perfectly fine.

 

Even the Canucks/Benning haters at Canucks Army are on side:

 

https://canucksarmy.com/2017/09/07/canucks-army-pre-season-prospect-profiles-3-olli-juolevi/

Well that is one of the first positive reports I've read about Juolevi's season last year. Was a good read.

 

All I know is from reading reports from people who watched him all year. Maybe they were negative nancies but from all reports he played uninterested and repeatedly would be getting burned for goals against. I personally only saw the playoffs in which from my account and the people he watched him the most he really picked up his play. Juolevi seems to be a guy who needs an extra reason to pick up the intensity to play at his best. Hence his brilliant play during his 17 year old WJC's and both his playoff runs with London. Hopefully he can learn to bring his best day in and day out.

[DrJockitch]

It may be worth noting too that OJ was a pretty slow starter in London last year.  Bo is to, maybe it is something to do with playing for the Knights, they save it for the playoffs.

[VegasCanuck]

3 hours ago, Tre Mac said:

 = sarcasm.  But that aside, the optics of Benning's top 10 picks don't look good now and if fans want to criticize that have every right too.  Virtanen, Juolevi and now Petterson have all been out shined by players taken after them. 

I think Benning picks the guy that he believes has the best long-term potential for the Canucks.

 

He bases this off of scouts who are attending games and watching these guys first hand, as well as his own first hand experience of going to see them play, as well as in person interviews. So, FAR more first hand experience than ANYONE on this board.

 

OJ, he needs another year before he's ready. This is extremely common with D, no matter how high they are taken. Every few years, one comes along, but far from normal for it to happen.

 

Virtanen, is starting to show why he was drafted high, again power forwards usually need a little time to get their game in order for the NHL. This is usually because they are bigger than all the other guys in Junior and its easier for them to ignore flaws in their game that will stand out in the NHL.

 

Petterson, right now, looks like he was the steal of the draft. This kid has all the capability to become a dominant player in the NHL.

 

Nothing here should surprise anyone.

 

Its amazing how little patience a lot of fans have when dealing with something that they have zero first hand experience!

[J-Dizzle]

2 hours ago, Rocksterh8 said:

No one is panicking, I just believe JB made a mistake in taking him before some others that were on the board. He may be a solid d man in 3, 4 or 5  years...and he may never turn out. 

Hindsight is great.  The only player I remember anyone being surprised Juolevi jumped was Tkachuk.  

[MrCanuck94]

16 minutes ago, The 5th Line said:

Okay but 19 year old kids that were drafted 5th overall should be looking at least average against an expansions teams rookie filled lineup.  Should they not?   Nobody expects him to be in the NHL this year but they expect him to not play as poorly as he did last night.  

I'm not gonna have rose-tinted glasses on and say that Juju has played well so far in pre-season, he has struggled, but a couple of bad games is different from a bad season, let's see how he bounces back in the next couple of games first before everyone labels a 19 year old a bust. All players have bad stretches and ups and downs.

 

If he continues to struggle in the next couple games, send him to Finland to develop, no need to stress, he'll be fine.

 

Personally, I'm not worried at all, I feel Juju's hockey iq is way too high for him to bust or not become at least a top 4 d-man.

[runtzguy]

I have to admit. I was excited when Juolevi was drafted. However, I do not know why but Juolevi looks like $&!# in the preseason game and the penticton games. His passes were always too hard for the forwards to receive and his defense is lackluster especially when a forward challenges him. 

 

Not sure what his problem is cause he looks different from his draft year. The problem I see with Juolevi right now is that he is slow to react to everything on the ice. EX: defending, passing, and shooting. 

[cripplereh]

He needs one maybe two years in the AHL and should be solid

 

the way people are seeing him is against NHLers which D men do take a year or two more so let him settle into a D man and next year if he does not make it give him one more year

[cyoung]

If like to see how he plays with some actual nhl players before making any judgements. His game has been slow for sure but I'm sure he will get into it. Preseason has just begun. Let's give our young guys a chance, the pressure we put on our players is well known.... I can't imagine Vancouver is the easiest place to play especially as a young guy. 

[ilduce39]

3 minutes ago, cyoung said:

If like to see how he plays with some actual nhl players before making any judgements. His game has been slow for sure but I'm sure he will get into it. Preseason has just begun. Let's give our young guys a chance, the pressure we put on our players is well known.... I can't imagine Vancouver is the easiest place to play especially as a young guy. 

Also I'm pretty sure the crew we saw last night had minimal if any practice time.  The Penticton scene was hardly better.  

 

It's easy to jump to conclusions in the preseason but a heady, young defenceman needs to be evaluated on the long game.

[canuckledraggin]

He was an extreme longshot to make the team out of camp and it is clear that the Liiga is the best place for him. He can essentially have a personal tutor from one of the best Canucks to have ever done it. I'm not concerned over his recent play and I hope he gets a chance to play with Tanev in the last few games and feel what it's like to be an actual NHL tandum.

[VegasCanuck]

3 minutes ago, canuckledraggin said:

He was an extreme longshot to make the team out of camp and it is clear that the Liiga is the best place for him. He can essentially have a personal tutor from one of the best Canucks to have ever done it. I'm not concerned over his recent play and I hope he gets a chance to play with Tanev in the last few games and feel what it's like to be an actual NHL tandum.

This, plus 1

 

[runtzguy]

18 hours ago, nitti999 said:

Pretty average looking dman. But seems like he is well positioned and works well with experienced players. At best a 2-3 dman. Don't think he will be an impact player. Reminds me of hammer. Hope I'm wrong 

I agree with your statement. He reminds me of hammer too. But hammer was a good defenceman in the NHL before he was 30 years old. Hammer's decline started at 30

[gameburn2]

12 hours ago, Ihatetomatoes said:

After watching the game last night one thing we desperately need to do is shore up our Defensive prospects.  Juolevi is our only real NHL prospect with the rest being long shots. Makes me a little nervous know that defensive prospects usually take a few more years to reach their peak than forwards. Benning is going to have to find a way to fast forward the rebuilding of our D or we're going to have a team with a bunch of guys that can score but no talent on the back end. 

Yes, the D just could not hold the line or defend well at all.  Not bad with the puck, but hopeless defending. 

And you have to draft high-end D; just look at how their respective teams acquired: Doughty, Keith, Karlsson. 

Bad luck with Tryamkin, but he may come back some day. 

 

While not wanting to generalize too much, it does seem like the best D are coming out of Canada and Sweden.  Some good players from Finland too, but in general, Canada and Sweden seem to produce the majority. 

[Kaner]

The problem with Juolevi is that his development has been stagnant. He hasn't really improved since he was drafted, which is inexcusable for someone picked that high. You can take Tkachuk out of the equation and still be upset over the Juolevi pick.  

[cyoung]

6 minutes ago, Kaner said:

The problem with Juolevi is that his development has been stagnant. He hasn't really improved since he was drafted, which is inexcusable for someone picked that high. You can take Tkachuk out of the equation and still be upset over the Juolevi pick.  

I don't see this at all. His offensive production was the only thing Juolevi didn't improve this past year and its not like it took a step back either. He played on a much weaker London team this year so expectations to put up a much better offensive season would be extremely hard for anyone. Anyone who watched his game,  saw every other part of it grow. He put on a lot of weight and it will take time to catch up, stop expecting everything at once. 

[Kaner]

3 minutes ago, cyoung said:

I don't see this at all. His offensive production was the only thing Juolevi didn't improve this past year and its not like it took a step back either. He played on a much weaker London team this year so expectations to put up a much better offensive season would be extremely hard for anyone. Anyone who watched his game,  saw every other part of it grow. He put on a lot of weight and it will take time to catch up, stop expecting everything at once. 

I actually did watch about 20-25 London games this past year, but thank you for jumping to conclusions.

 

And guess what? I wasn't very impressed with him. He was not even the best defensemen on the team, Victor Mete was. Of the games I watched, he was frequently getting beat wide, which happens to be the same issue he is having right now. 

 

6 or 7 years ago, this wouldn't be a huge issue, but the NHL is a different league than what it was. By the time most young players are 21, you already have a good understanding of what you have in them. Since 2013 (excluding 2017 of course) there's only been a few prospects drafted in the top 5 who haven't made an immediate impact. Namely MIchael Dal Colle and Bennet, both players who probably shouldn't have been drafted where they were. 

 

[cyoung]

Just now, Kaner said:

I actually did watch about 20-25 London games this past year, but thank you for jumping to conclusions.

 

And guess what? I wasn't very impressed with him. He was not even the best defensemen on the team, Victor Mete was. Of the games I watched, he was frequently getting beat wide, which happens to be the same issue he is having right now. 

 

6 or 7 years ago, this wouldn't be a huge issue, but the NHL is a different league than what it was. By the time most young players are 21, you already have a good understanding of what you have in them. Since 2013 (excluding 2017 of course) there's only been a few prospects drafted in the top 5 who haven't made an immediate impact. Namely MIchael Dal Colle and Bennet, both players who probably shouldn't have been drafted where they were. 

 

I don't agree at all but that's okay. He was drafted knowing it would be 2-3 years minimum. I think Europe would be good for a year, bigger ice will force him to improve his speed and transition game. He processes the game at a higher level than his junior teammates. He needs to play at a higher level to take the next step.