Olli Juolevi | #48 | D

[Glory_Days]

I like OJ, really smooth skater and moves the puck up the ice well, not sure why everyone is comparing him to Maata, I see more of a resemblance to Roman Josi.

 

If OJ turns into a Roman Josi type, I am more than ok with that, we've seen what happens to teams with D that lack skating ability, they get hemmed into their own zone for most of the game.

[DeNiro]

4 minutes ago, clam linguine said:

Yea, sure...Ollie has potential, but to pass up Tkachuk?   We will have to be lucky to get the better of this.  I am done whining now, but if Benning screwed up this no brainer, I hope he gets turfed.  However,  if Ollie outperforms MT...I will hail JB  and Winter Soldier...as genius.

 

 

 

 

 

It's a no brainer to take a D-man when we have the weakest D prospect pool in the league.

 

I don't know how you can compare a forward to D-man either. Both contribute in completely different ways.

[clam linguine]

7 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

It's a no brainer to take a D-man when we have the weakest D prospect pool in the league.

 

I don't know how you can compare a forward to D-man either. Both contribute in completely different ways.

I don't think we have the weakest D pool in the league...and if we did...that's where UFAs and trades come in.  I think there is a good chance we will be able to tell who the better pick was.  If not...its a push...simple.  If it isn't painfully obvious, I will be happy.

Edited June 28, 2016 by clam linguine

[DeNiro]

1 minute ago, clam linguine said:

I don't think we have the weakest D pool in the league...and if we did...I would buy them.  I think there is a good chance we will be able to tell who the better pick was.  If not...its a push...simple.

We didn't have one blue chip D prospect until we drafted Juolevi.

 

Successful teams have these players, we're not going anywhere without drafting one because they're way too expensive to trade for.

[clam linguine]

2 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

We didn't have one blue chip D prospect until we drafted Juolevi.

 

Successful teams have these players, we're not going anywhere without drafting one because they're way too expensive to trade for.

What are the odds of Ollie being this blue chip guy?  It was a poor pick at number 5.  Check out how many CDCers were picking him as their choice pre-draft...3%.  I am ready and hoping to be eating crow.

 

I think Hutton is a great blue chip prospect, FWIW.

[Darius]

10 minutes ago, clam linguine said:

What are the odds of Ollie being this blue chip guy?  It was a poor pick at number 5.  Check out how many CDCers were picking him as their choice pre-draft...3%.  I am ready and hoping to be eating crow.

 

I think Hutton is a great blue chip prospect, FWIW.

Ollie's odds are no different than Tkachuck's odds. In the end someone picked #15-20 could be the star of this whole draft. Who knows.  There are some very knowledgeable hockey people that project this guy to be a #1 dman, ... #2 seems to be this guys projected floor.

 

This was a wise move for the organisation. There were no elite young D men in the system.  The bottom line is #1-#2 dmen are much harder to obtain via free ageny or trades than are 20-30 goal scoring wingers who arent particularly fast.  Its not like Tkachuck is some elite scorer.  If all things pan out he will probably play on calgary's second line.  Guys like that come around more than top 2 dmen do.

 

 

[JiffyPB]

1 hour ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Carlson put up 76 points 6 years ago as a 19 year old after playing his previous two years in the USHL. And sure matta didn't put up points but even Domi only ended up with 87 points compared to Dvorak who had 121 points.  

 

I'm not saying he won't produce. but he's not a highly rated offensive prospect, he's a good skater and has good hockey sense, but that doesn't mean he will be an offensive threat.  We all like him but lets not over hype him and make him something he's not.   He's going to be a good player but lets stop taking anything against his game getting up in arms about it. He's not a complete prospect, there's a reason why he went 5th overall and not 1st.

An older player on an even more spectacularly stacked team with OHL prodigy John Tavares, Kadri and Del Zotto. What D partner did Juolevi play that even closely compares to Del Zotto. London had 1 godsend line on the team Juolevi played on while Carlson had 2 lines to work with along with a very capable threat on the blueline who could carry the offense in Del Zotto. That year was an exception, not the rule. If anything, that proves my point shows Juolevi has even more to show in his draft +1 year just as Carlson did.

 

When they had Schremp, Bolland, Hunter and Kostitsyn in 2006 their highest scoring D had 14 points

 

When they had Gagner, Kostitsyn and Patrick freaking Kane in 2007 their highest scoring D had 24 points.

 

The 2005 Memorial Cup winning team had a 19 year old and a 20 year old paired together putting up points. A team stacked with talent including Cory Perry, Hunter, Schemp, Bolland, Prust, Methot and Girardi. The 2016 London Knights barely qualify to shine that team's shoes.

 

As demonstrated, just because you have good forwards doesn't equal defensemen loading up on points in London. The players who did were all at least a year older and/or were on more deeper teams and none of the London D that DID put up points were draft eligible 17 year old imports like Juolevi. Juolevi played on a very good team, but it wasn't as deep as the 2005 and 2010 London teams. He didn't he play with someone on the blue-line as good as some of those players had and it wasn't his role to purely produce offense like Jake Bean. He had to be used in every situation and thus his numbers are a bit more understated compared to other top ranked D. I agree with you that he's not a Karlsson or a future Lidstrom, but that doesn't mean his OHL number somehow signify that he doesn't have the chops to be a Suter or a T.J. Brodie (medium #1 or higher end #2).

 

Edited June 28, 2016 by ghjffbali

[Alflives]

1 hour ago, clam linguine said:

Yea, sure...Ollie has potential, but to pass up Tkachuk?   We will have to be lucky to get the better of this.  I am done whining now, but if Benning screwed up this no brainer, I hope he gets turfed.  However,  if Ollie outperforms MT...I will hail JB  and Winter Soldier...as genius.

 

 

 

 

 

I just want us to win a bloody Cup.  To do so a team needs (or seems to need) a high minute, all situations, stud D man.  I hope Olli can do for us what he did for London and Finland - be the stud D that leads his team to a championship. 

[Ghostsof1915]

6 minutes ago, Alflives said:

I just want us to win a bloody Cup.  To do so a team needs (or seems to need) a high minute, all situations, stud D man.  I hope Olli can do for us what he did for London and Finland - be the stud D that leads his team to a championship. 

Have a cat, on the house. 

[ForsbergTheGreat]

14 minutes ago, ghjffbali said:

An older player on an even more spectacularly stacked team with OHL prodigy John Tavares, Kadri and Del Zotto. What D partner did Juolevi play that even closely compares to Del Zotto. London had 1 godsend line on the team Juolevi played on while Carlson had 2 lines to work with along with a very capable threat on the blueline who could carry the offense in Del Zotto. That year was an exception, not the rule. If anything, that proves my point shows Juolevi has even more to show in his draft +1 year just as Carlson did.

 

When they had Schremp, Bolland, Hunter and Kostitsyn in 2006 their highest scoring D had 14 points

 

When they had Gagner, Kostitsyn and Patrick freaking Kane in 2007 their highest scoring D had 24 points.

 

The 2005 Memorial Cup winning team had a 19 year old and a 20 year old paired together putting up points. A team stacked with talent including Cory Perry, Hunter, Schemp, Bolland, Prust, Methot and Girardi. The 2016 London Knights barely qualify to shine that team's shoes.

 

As demonstrated, just because you have good forwards doesn't equal defensemen loading up on points in London. The players who did were all at least a year older and/or were on more deeper teams and none of the London D that DID put up points were draft eligible 17 year old imports like Juolevi. Juolevi played on a very good team, but it wasn't as deep as the 2005 and 2010 London teams. He didn't he play with someone on the blue-line as good as some of those players had and it wasn't his role to purely produce offense like Jake Bean. He had to be used in every situation and thus his numbers are a bit more understated compared to other top ranked D. I agree with you that he's not a Karlsson or a future Lidstrom, but that doesn't mean his OHL number somehow signify that he doesn't have the chops to be a Suter or a T.J. Brodie (medium #1 or higher end #2).

 

And where did I ever mention that?  Seriously people, I backed up a statement saying he's not the top rated offensive D man in this draft and it's becomes get this "pitch forks out".   And I've been one of the people praising this kid the past year, yet now because canucks drafted him it's like he can walk on water or turn water into wine.  He's a good prospect, the top ranked D prospect this year and will likely become canucks best D to wear our uniform, but that doesn't mean he's not perfect in every area of the game.

 

Here's a post of mine back prior to WJC in the draft thread.

 

On 12/6/2015 at 7:09 PM, ForsbergTheGreat said:

 Olli Juolevi & Mikhail Sergachev are the two players I want.  I can see both being better than Chychrun 8 years down the road.  Nothing against Chychrun just see a lot of Dion Phanuef in is play.  Good D man and a for sure top 4 guy just feel like he's peaking early now that the rest of the league is catching up to his size advantage. 

 

And here's another in the "Chychrun, the next one" thread

 

On 12/2/2015 at 0:40 PM, ForsbergTheGreat said:

 

Chychrun may be the current best D in the draft.  But it really wouldn’t surprise me if 6 years post draft he wasn’t in the top 3, of the defensemen draft class.   He reminds me of Phaneuf especially in his Junior days, not a bad pick by any means, just might not pan out to that true #1 D man we need. I don’t know if there is that pick in this years draft.  Offensively he isn’t setting the world on fire and in his same draft class in for D offensively there are better options ....

 

Juolevi and Sergachev are two other big OHL D, with big shots that we should also keep are eyes on.  They will likely be available in the area we are picking (8-16)....

 

Offensively then there is the Hitmans, Jake Bean who is 6.1, 170lbs and has 23 points in 26 games

That’s just in the top 15ish.  We could be coming out of the draft this year will 3 D picks in the first 90 selections, 

One thing about all four of these D (including Chychrun), they all have left handed shots.  I’d say we should be pushing hard to pick up a right handed top 4 D through trade.  Hamonic, Gudbranson, Barrie, Bowey,  use edler as trade bait if we have two

[JiffyPB]

2 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

And where did I ever mention that?  Seriously people, I backed up a statement saying he's not the top rated offensive D man in this draft and it's becomes get this "pitch forks out".   And I've been one of the people praising this kid the past year, yet now because canucks drafted him it's like he can walk on water or turn water into wine.  He's a good prospect, the top ranked D prospect this year and will likely become canucks best D to wear our uniform, but that doesn't mean he's not perfect in every area of the game.

 

Here's a post of mine back prior to WJC in the draft thread.

 

 

And here's another in the "Chychrun, the next one" thread

 

 

I was speaking in general as you were referring originally to a post made by Gooseberries.

[elvis15]

1 hour ago, clam linguine said:

What are the odds of Ollie being this blue chip guy?  It was a poor pick at number 5.  Check out how many CDCers were picking him as their choice pre-draft...3%.  I am ready and hoping to be eating crow.

 

I think Hutton is a great blue chip prospect, FWIW.

75% of all stats are made up.

 

And using CDC'ers as a measuring stick? How many of those were intelligent posters?

 

Juolevi already is a blue chip prospect. He's very highly ranked among the hockey community, and for good reason. You may like Tkachuk better, and that's your opinion, but consider the pick on it's merits not because you missed out on the player you thought was better.

[Ryan Strome]

1 hour ago, clam linguine said:

What are the odds of Ollie being this blue chip guy?  It was a poor pick at number 5.  Check out how many CDCers were picking him as their choice pre-draft...3%.  I am ready and hoping to be eating crow.

 

I think Hutton is a great blue chip prospect, FWIW.

I think he has the talent to be the best defenseman the Canucks have ever had throughout his career.

Edited June 28, 2016 by Ryan Strome

[clam linguine]

14 minutes ago, elvis15 said:

75% of all stats are made up.

 

And using CDC'ers as a measuring stick? How many of those were intelligent posters?

 

Juolevi already is a blue chip prospect. He's very highly ranked among the hockey community, and for good reason. You may like Tkachuk better, and that's your opinion, but consider the pick on it's merits not because you missed out on the player you thought was better.

I quoted the CDC stats because the 97% of those that were hoping not to pick OJ seem to have vanished.  OJ is a blue chip prospect but odds are he will not be a blue chip (all star) defenceman...so sayeth me.   Whats wrong with being upset because we missed out on a better player?  I hope I am wrong.

 

Edited June 28, 2016 by clam linguine

[TGokou]

I think one must also see that it's not all about the points either. Juolevi is able to turn the puck around with a quick transition creating scoring opportunities and as Benning stated (quoted from Brent Sutter), "Juolevi is impossible to forecheck" because he just grabs the puck and it's in the forwards hands before the checking forwards know what to do. I project him to be a 30-35 point (5 goal 30 assist) D in his prime but if he can do better that'd be great.

[clam linguine]

21 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

I think he has the talent to be the best defenseman the Canucks have ever had throughout his career.

Were you  referring to Hutton or Ollie.....+1 either way.

[GettinGuddyWithIt]

3 hours ago, TGokou said:

I think one must also see that it's not all about the points either. Juolevi is able to turn the puck around with a quick transition creating scoring opportunities and as Benning stated (quoted from Brent Sutter), "Juolevi is impossible to forecheck" because he just grabs the puck and it's in the forwards hands before the checking forwards know what to do. I project him to be a 30-35 point (5 goal 30 assist) D in his prime but if he can do better that'd be great.

I know he will be better than that.

Edited June 28, 2016 by GettinGuddyWithIt

[messier's_elbow]

1 hour ago, clam linguine said:

What are the odds of Ollie being this blue chip guy?  It was a poor pick at number 5.  Check out how many CDCers were picking him as their choice pre-draft...3%.  I am ready and hoping to be eating crow.

 

I think Hutton is a great blue chip prospect, FWIW.

You just sound butt hurt we didn't get Dubois or Tkachuk. You will be changing your tune in a year or two. This guys hockey sense is A+ he will will be our rink general when Hank is gone. 

[clam linguine]

1 minute ago, messier's_elbow said:

You just sound butt hurt we didn't get Dubois or Tkachuk. You will be changing your tune in a year or two. This guys hockey sense is A+ he will will be our rink general when Hank is gone. 

I am absolutely butt hurt that we missed out on MT...how much clearer can I make it.... lol.   I predict you will be too... maybe in 4 or 5 months.   Think Corey Perry....and I am outta here....

[The Lock]

10 minutes ago, clam linguine said:

I am absolutely butt hurt that we missed out on MT...how much clearer can I make it.... lol.   I predict you will be too... maybe in 4 or 5 months.   Think Corey Perry....and I am outta here....

I don't see the point in being "butthurt" about something I can't control. If we're to focus on what we could have had, we might as well focus on every draft pick in our history that we could have drafted but didn't. We could then be depressed no matter what team we cheer for. We could become pessimistic; dismal. But then what's the point of cheering for a team? It would just ruin the enjoyment would it not?

 

It's the nature of the draft. Teams win. Teams lose. We don't have a crystal ball to say who's going to be the better prospect at this point so why expect the worst?

 

So why be so butthurt? I honestly don't get it.

Edited June 28, 2016 by The Lock