Rob_Zepp Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 8 minutes ago, Ihatetomatoes said: Not sure why you think I'm annoyed. Thought we were having a reasonable discussion. I think Juolevi is a great prospect with great potential but I just disagree about him having the potential to be more valuable to the team than Boeser when he hasn't been used as a top pairing guy anywhere he's been in the last 2 years. Add to the reports from Salo that he still has major steps to make on the defensive side of the game to be an effective NHL defender. Also Boeser had 27 goals in 42 games in his freshman year, don't think he's the best example of a guy who's scoring more in the NHL than he did in Juniors. So he regressed? Isn't that how the rhetoric goes? If you think, for discussion sake of course, that 27 goals in 42 college games is more impressive than 20 goals in 34 NHL games our discussion does not have a mutually compatible point of reference I am afraid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush17 Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 14 minutes ago, cyoung said: They drafted him knowing fully that he would need 2-4 years. He wasn't drafted as a flashy Bobby Orr type. Who cares if players drafted after are already making it, that happens every year. He has plenty of time to develop into a great defenseman and honestly, his game has been great this year. I'm optimistic but realistic. I don't agree with everything Benning does but I have no problem with the Juolevi draft choice (I was calling for Sergachev but I cant complain cuz Juolevi was my #2). I was high on Sergachev as well. I wasn't upset at all with the Juolevi pick as he was a far more safe selection with potentially similar offensive upside. With the added reliability in his o zone. Just because Sergachev is producing at the nhl now really doesn't mean a lot in the long run. Juolevi could easily be a 40-50 point guy with his his strong shutdown and game awareness. It's way to soon for any of us to be holding judgement imo. I agree give him time and let him develop. A 20 yr old making the nhl as a d man is rare and it often hampers their development. I look forward to seeing the next game's play by play clips! It shall be exciting to watch for sure. So calm, smooth, and poised out there. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ihatetomatoes Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 10 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said: So he regressed? Isn't that how the rhetoric goes? If you think, for discussion sake of course, that 27 goals in 42 college games is more impressive than 20 goals in 34 NHL games our discussion does not have a mutually compatible point of reference I am afraid. Geez bud. I like reading your contributions on this forum but you're kinda being an ass right now and mega condisending. The point you were trying to make was that some guys play pro style games and will surprise when they make the NHL because they will be better players than expected when looking at their Junior careers if they didn't put up great numbers or didn't look that great because they don't excel in disorganized junior situations. Like Juolevi not being used as a top pairing defender because he plays a pro style game. Boeser was basically breaking records for a freshman and was hyped as $&!#. He was the best player in his team. Sure he had a less than Steller sophomore season compared to his junior season but he was an absolute top prospect with high expectations that put up Steller junior numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 3 minutes ago, Ihatetomatoes said: Geez bud. I like reading your contributions on this forum but you're kinda being an ass right now and mega condisending. The point you were trying to make was that some guys play pro style games and will surprise when they make the NHL because they will be better players than expected when looking at their Junior careers if they didn't put up great numbers or didn't look that great because they don't excel in disorganized junior situations. Like Juolevi not being used as a top pairing defender because he plays a pro style game. Boeser was basically breaking records for a freshman and was hyped as $&!#. He was the best player in his team. Sure he had a less than Steller sophomore season compared to his junior season but he was an absolute top prospect with high expectations that put up Steller junior numbers. Revising the past (most on CDC disliked the drafting of Boeser and he wasn't even considered the best player on his college team) or inventing words (condisending?) doesn't change anything about Juolevi. Again, you are not impressed with him as potential elite NHL Dman - others are albeit a minority it seems. Again, you win either way so be happy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rekker Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 31 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said: Not sure why some are still down on Juolevi. Because he was taken at #5? Hind site is convenient. Every draft, there are players taken later that exceed expectations (Boeser), and then there are some that take longer to develop (Juolevi, Virtanen) or are just plain busts (Hodgson). Juolevi is a Top 4 D on Finland's junior team and will turn into a very good, solid defenseman for the Canucks. I see him as a Chris Tanev type player, but more composed with better hockey smarts. You never know, Canucks luck, if we drafted Sergachev, he'd probably bolt back to Russia because they wouldn't put him in the lineup right away. We need to be patient with Juolevi and Virtanen. They're both good players that are continually improving. Well said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post MrCanuck94 Posted December 28, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted December 28, 2017 (edited) 22 hours ago, combover said: 5 joulevi - He’s doesnt seem to be progressing he’s not a impact player on his team in a far inferior league,barely noticed him in wjc 6 Tkachuk the player I wanted them to take and is an impact players in his second nhl season 7 Keller - an impact player now in his rookie 8 nylander - jury is still out 9 segachev - having a good season and a positive impact on an NHL team. last thing we needed then was another dman that isn’t an offence threat or phyical pressance.even less now. He might turn into a nhler one day. I know the Benning loyalist that refuse to admit anything he’s ever done is a mistake will defend this pick until benning tells them to think otherwise. Lol. Joulevi hasn't regressed, he's in fact improved greatly this year defensively under Salo and is earning more minutes (young guys don't automatically get high minutes in adult leagues like junior) and has put up 14 points in 20 games which is good for fourth all-time for U20 d-man ppg scoring in the Liiga. Also, him being barely noticeable is a good thing, that's his style Patience is a virtue with these kids. Edited December 28, 2017 by MrCanuck94 2 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruilin96 Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 Juolevi is on an historic pace for U20 defenseman at the Finnish league along with Heiskanen. I am confident that he will be a solid top 4 NHL D-man, playing a calm and cool game that can be count on all situations. As for his offensive number, it will depend on the role he plays, the team the Canucks build for in the future and the style of play of the entire team. Basically, he is a guy that could adjust to different kind of plays. If the Canucks are lucky and win the draft lottery and draft a Dahlin in next year's draft, Dahlin would be lean heavily towards playing and generating offence from the backend while Olli can be the guy calming and slowing the play down at a different pairing. In this case Olli's offensive stats will likely be around 25-35 points, getting mainly 2nd assists from making the first pass. If the Canucks don't draft another D-man with higher offensive potential, I see Benning either keep Tanev or find another elite level shut-down RHD to pair up with Olli and Olli will be counted generate offense. If that's the case, he could easily get 40-50 points or even 50+ if the Canucks forward group made up of Boeser, Pettersson etc. are as dangerous as they could be. Basically, I see him as a player that can do whatever the team asks him to do and it will be an valuable asset and building block to his team in the future. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 2 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said: Your Canucks even have a current rookie who is scoring more at NHL level than he seemingly did at any other level along the way. 1 hour ago, Rob_Zepp said: He is "one of those" players that those who could look for it could see a player that would do better at a pro level than otherwise. Some see that in Juolevi. The same one that quite a number here said needed development in Utica. And that his skating wasn't NHL-calibre, that his game had flaws that needed working on in the minors. We're talking about the 5th leading goal scorer in the entire league, no less the one that is praised by his coach for his work away from the puck. The cookie-cutter for development is not always applicable. It wasn't for Boeser, and may not be for Juolevi either. Likewise doubtful for Gaudette, as we will find out soon. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post MoneypuckOverlord Posted December 28, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted December 28, 2017 2 hours ago, combover said: 5 joulevi - He’s doesnt seem to be progressing he’s not a impact player on his team in a far inferior league,barely noticed him in wjc 6 Tkachuk the player I wanted them to take and is an impact players in his second nhl season 7 Keller - an impact player now in his rookie 8 nylander - jury is still out 9 segachev - having a good season and a positive impact on an NHL team. last thing we needed then was another dman that isn’t an offence threat or phyical pressance.even less now. He might turn into a nhler one day. I know the Benning loyalist that refuse to admit anything he’s ever done is a mistake will defend this pick until benning tells them to think otherwise. Where not drafting on who makes a bigger impact sooner. Player was drafted based on NHL potential. 1 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
combover Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 7 minutes ago, MoneypuckOverlord said: Where not drafting on who makes a bigger impact sooner. Player was drafted based on NHL potential. Exactly. I didnt think we did we took the guy with highest potential and still don’t. Hopefully in another 2/3 he proves me wrong but I’m not holding my breath on this one. Time will tell. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phat Fingers Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 7 hours ago, Warhippy said: While this is great and all I think we all need to be a little more realistic and simply listen to the 2-3 people on here that know better than most. OJ is just totally underwhelming and was a bad pick at 5 obviously I mean...obviously right? The world juniors is the end all be all indicator of future success. Hodgson, Schroeder and more. Keep banging the drum WarHippy. The stat watchers will never hear it but many of us appreciate a good dose of sarcasm. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenhodgejr Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 Juolevi needs to round out his game both defensively and offensively. He also needs to be more physical. I think he is most skilled in making good long passes, skating the puck out of the zone, making smart passes and good low shots on net. also being the guy who hangs back protecting the D zone while a more offensive partner runs the play. At times he reminds me of Edler I think he will have a solid 10-15yr NHL career. He will not be our star player, more of a reliable role player. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenhodgejr Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 Dahlin and or Hughes would give us the puck moving D our team is lacking. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sbriggs Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 49 minutes ago, kenhodgejr said: Dahlin and or Hughes would give us the puck moving D our team is lacking. Amen brother 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Great Canucks Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 Glad to see the typical know-nothing scrubs still down on Juolevi, even when he is playing really well. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Phat Fingers Posted December 28, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted December 28, 2017 (edited) 17 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said: So he regressed? Isn't that how the rhetoric goes? If you think, for discussion sake of course, that 27 goals in 42 college games is more impressive than 20 goals in 34 NHL games our discussion does not have a mutually compatible point of reference I am afraid. Solid point RobbZepp. The official guide to hating JB and everyone he drafts as a he Canucks GM states: No prospect can either be static or decline in any ‘relevant’ stat line. Injuries are never allowed to be considered, in fact nothing is allowed to to be considered when discussing a prospect other that goals scored and total points, assists are not worthy on their own. Examples of circumstances that have no bearing on development. shoulder injuries requiring surgery, harder minutes with less team depth, wrist injuries etc.. Added to that, every time a Canucks prospect looks to be a potential star, posters must constantly bring up the possibility that the player in question will decline to sign with Vancouver and re enter the draft or sign with other clubs as a FA Bonus points for constantly informing other posters of players that ‘should have’ been drafted instead of any Canucks prospect, with references to how our team management sucks especially when compared to previous GM’s who really knew how to draft and develop players. Extra bonus points for thinking that all other teams have better prospects than we do, always remember to remind posters of those prospects every time they attempt to discuss any positive POV about any Canucks prospect. EmW Edited December 28, 2017 by Eastcoast meets Westcoast 4 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flickyoursedin Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 1 hour ago, kenhodgejr said: Dahlin and or Hughes would give us the puck moving D our team is lacking. And Boqvist. Only problem is if we want any of these three we’ll probably need a top 5 pick! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RetroCanuck Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 5 minutes ago, flickyoursedin said: And Boqvist. Only problem is if we want any of these three we’ll probably need a top 5 pick! By the looks of our year we will be down there somewhere lol Dahlin, Svechnikov, Hughes, Boqvist, Zadina, Merkley, Tkachuk, Bouchard would all be great 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flickyoursedin Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 Wonder if management can pull the trigger on some trades at the deadline! If they can get an extra 1rst rounder that would be awesome! I’m a fan of Merkley and he’s slipping in the rankings which I can only assume is due to his defensive play. My mock draft which is a site I like for mock drafts has Merkley going 18th right now. When you watch his highlights he’s just so deceptive on his cross ice passes on the PP. He pinches up holds onto the puck until the very last second and then sneaks a pass cross ice over to a guy with a wide open net. Just feel like it’s easy translatable points in higher level hockey. I guess it all depends on whether he can play defence at a higher level of hockey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fanfor42 Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 (edited) A top 5 in the 1st and 2nd rounds plus another first rounder in the 20 to 30 spot would be really great for our future. Say a 5, 25 and 36 in 2018. Helluva nice thought. Not impossible if mngmt moves guddy or vanek or.. Edited December 28, 2017 by fanfor42 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now