Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Olli Juolevi | #48 | D


b3.

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Dave "The Hammer" Schultz said:

That is correct, hes like his father , was just saying....the way hockey is going, people like tkachuk are VERY rare ( so when players like him are avail, id jump at it if i could ) ...which is why i listed those other peeps ( hitters, tough guys and players who will protect the scorers ) ...to show how hockey has changed over the years, and im not saying for the good either.

I’m hoping, if we don’t get Dhalin, we get Brady Tkatchuk.  I think by the time of the draft, Brady will be ranked second behind Dhalin. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

I’m hoping, if we don’t get Dhalin, we get Brady Tkatchuk.  I think by the time of the draft, Brady will be ranked second behind Dhalin. 

Agree , and i watched brady a couple times, he has a future ( he has grit, skill and will make a hit/take a hit to make a play ) ...

On a side note,  we lack a puck moving def bigtime, we had high hopes on subban, but he hasnt turned out well ..hence the trade , so really id love to make the playoffs, but on another note id love a crack at dahlen ....he would add so much to nucks d, even more than juolevi  would ever do

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dave "The Hammer" Schultz said:

Agree , and i watched brady a couple times, he has a future ( he has grit, skill and will make a hit/take a hit to make a play ) ...

On a side note,  we lack a puck moving def bigtime, we had high hopes on subban, but he hasnt turned out well ..hence the trade , so really id love to make the playoffs, but on another note id love a crack at dahlen ....he would add so much to nucks d, even more than juolevi  would ever do

Dhalin and Juolevi could be our top pairing for the next decade.  Fingers, toes, and eyes crossed:)

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, jking said:

Well, there was that audible groan in the building when Benning announced his pick. If I recall correctly, Winter Soldier was the only person here who wanted us to pick OJ prior to the actual draft.

Incorrect, there were a number of us very high on Juolevi. I was, and I remember J.R. discussing it positively. There were a few others who agreed, and a number more who didn't think he'd be a bad pick 5th overall even if they wanted someone else.

  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

I’m hoping, if we don’t get Dhalin, we get Brady Tkatchuk.  I think by the time of the draft, Brady will be ranked second behind Dhalin. 

Agree completely 

 

I like:

 Dahlin

Tkachuk

Zadina

Svechnikov

Boqvist

 

And I like the way OJ is playing in this tourney so far 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, elvis15 said:

Incorrect, there were a number of us very high on Juolevi. I was, and I remember J.R. discussing it positively. There were a few others who agreed, and a number more who didn't think he'd be a bad pick 5th overall even if they wanted someone else.

Who'd you vote for in the poll.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, MJDDawg said:

I'm sure this has been said already on this thread, but to me he plays like a young Boss Tanev.

 

Nothing wrong with this at all for a young player to be considered as such. This tourney shows he's exactly as advertised...and that's a good thing.

 

So I'm still good with the pick, but I'd be lying if I didn't say I was kind of hoping to get a more dynamic player at #5...regardless of position. 

 

 

I think Olli has a lot more to give offensively than tanev

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am so tired of reading all these pages and all this crap about how Juolevi is such a big disappointment and was a stretch at #5.  There is 'tons' of stuff around to support that in his draft, there was a BIG 3, then below that 3 or 4 in the next level that were about the same, depending on what you wanted.  In this TSN clip featuring Bob McKenzie, who is certainly one of the most knowledgeable hockey people around, and the least bias, he states all of this and says the next 3 were about the same and it just depended on what you wanted, forward or D and the Canuck's wanted D.  He goes on to say that at that draft about half the teams thought Tkachuk and the other half thought Juolevi as the next pick.  Bob does a ton of research with the teams and he knows what they think.  He goes on to say that he has NO concerns over Juolevi.

 

I think why this pick gets so much flak is that he is not a 'dazzling' type player, in either big hits, blistering shot, end to end rushes etc.  He will just be a super solid top 2 D that does everything at a top level that will be a mainstay for us for many years.  Personally I love the pick and can't wait to see him in a Canuck uniform and part of our core moving forward.

 

He is quietly having an outstanding year and that is how I think his career will unfold.

 

Listen to Bob and tell me if you don't agree.

 

 

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd rather have Mete than Joulevi. Should have taken Tkachuk. I screamed at my tv for 10 minutes over that one. Couldn't believe blundering Benning allowed our rivals in cowtown to have a guy that'll punch us in the face and score on us to go to another team like that. Yet another debacle under the Benning regime. Clueless. Got lucky with Boeser. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stormriders said:

I am so tired of reading all these pages and all this crap about how Juolevi is such a big disappointment and was a stretch at #5.  There is 'tons' of stuff around to support that in his draft, there was a BIG 3, then below that 3 or 4 in the next level that were about the same, depending on what you wanted.  In this TSN clip featuring Bob McKenzie, who is certainly one of the most knowledgeable hockey people around, and the least bias, he states all of this and says the next 3 were about the same and it just depended on what you wanted, forward or D and the Canuck's wanted D.  He goes on to say that at that draft about half the teams thought Tkachuk and the other half thought Juolevi as the next pick.  Bob does a ton of research with the teams and he knows what they think.  He goes on to say that he has NO concerns over Juolevi.

 

I think why this pick gets so much flak is that he is not a 'dazzling' type player, in either big hits, blistering shot, end to end rushes etc.  He will just be a super solid top 2 D that does everything at a top level that will be a mainstay for us for many years.  Personally I love the pick and can't wait to see him in a Canuck uniform and part of our core moving forward.

 

He is quietly having an outstanding year and that is how I think his career will unfold.

 

Listen to Bob and tell me if you don't agree.

 

 

Not taking Tkachuk was a complete blunder. I'll always stand by that. Still pissed and always will be because Juolevi will never be the big point producer that a player taken at that spot in a deep draft should be. An absolute blunder. Could've gotten the same calibre player in the 3-5th rounds.  Benning throws darts at a board and hopes to get lucky. Proof is in the pudding. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, YummyCakeFace said:

I'd rather have Mete than Joulevi. Should have taken Tkachuk. I screamed at my tv for 10 minutes over that one. Couldn't believe blundering Benning allowed our rivals in cowtown to have a guy that'll punch us in the face and score on us to go to another team like that. Yet another debacle under the Benning regime. Clueless. Got lucky with Boeser. 

 

2 hours ago, YummyCakeFace said:

Not taking Tkachuk was a complete blunder. I'll always stand by that. Still pissed and always will be because Juolevi will never be the big point producer that a player taken at that spot in a deep draft should be. An absolute blunder. Could've gotten the same calibre player in the 3-5th rounds.  Benning throws darts at a board and hopes to get lucky. Proof is in the pudding. 

Don't worry we have players like Gadjovich, Gaudette and MacEwen coming up, $&!# if worse comes to worst we got Laplante (Who I want on our 4th line). No one will mess with him. 

 

Dont worry bout Juolevi he'll be fine. Sometimes it's not always about the big point productions. 

Edited by J-23
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Darryl Keeping’s  (Canucks Army) postgame report highlights just how efficient Juolevi was in moving the puck yesterday:

 

EDIT: there are some format issues below that the editor won’t allow me to correct. The comments after the chart are mine, and shouldn’t have gotten moved inside the quote (don’t know why this happened, but the editor will not allow me to fix it and just erases everything when I try). :angry:

 

Quote

 


If you’re here, you’re likely a Canucks fan and just wondering how Olli Juolevi did so I’ll jump into that. Boring games are Juolevi’s time to shine, and he did. Again, he was steady in the neutral zone, breaking up plays and forcing the opposition to dump the puck in. He was smart with the puck, effectively drawing in forecheckers and utilizing his speedy defensive partner to maximize controlled zone exits, a trait of fan favourite, Chris Tanev.

In the chart below, notice that Juolevi had the second highest controlled zone exit rate, trailing only his partner, Chicago 2017, first round pick, Henri Jokiharju. Furthermore, note that fail rate, one fail on 19  touches, not too shabby.  The lower total exit rate is because the rate is based off defensive zone touches. If you see a lower total zone exit rate paired with a low fail rate, it means that the defencemen are passing multiple times prior to the exit. To put it simply, more touches per exit equals a lower exit rate.

 

https://canucksarmy.com/2017/12/30/canucksarmy-world-junior-recap-finland-5-2-slovakia/

 

Over 60% controlled exits and only one fail on 19 touches. 

Edited by SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME
See EDIT
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

Of course when there's a misfire, it's all on him, but when he hits it out of the park, he was just "lucky".

 

You sound like Matt Murray.

 

 

 

 

Don't post much but I had to say thank you for this, this clip has set my day up perfectly. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Had we taken MT I wonder how many members right now would be saying they wished we took OJ instead. And the same ones adimittly saying they believe OJ’s  a better hockey player/pick  would be saying the same thing about him if he was in Calgary system ....right.

 

I don’t have anything against OJ I think he’ll be a very serviable dman for the Canucks in a few years.I just don’t see him as a special player or a player you build around he doesn’t  bring anything  unique or above average.i wasn’t impressed in training camp where he looked lost and in the wjc he’s played a like a safe/solid #3/4 dman he’s got good  passing  and skates well. 

AHL eligible next season and most likely where he be.

 

 

 

I guess my expectation of a guy taken 5th overall is a bit higher than an average player making his nhl debut 3-4 years after his draft.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, combover said:

Had we taken MT I wonder how many members right now would be saying they wished we took OJ instead. And the same ones adimittly saying they believe OJ’s  a better hockey player/pick  would be saying the same thing about him if he was in Calgary system ....right.

 

I don’t have anything against OJ I think he’ll be a very serviable dman for the Canucks in a few years.I just don’t see him as a special player or a player you build around he doesn’t  bring anything  unique or above average.i wasn’t impressed in training camp where he looked lost and in the wjc he’s played a like a safe/solid #3/4 dman he’s got good  passing  and skates well. 

AHL eligible next season and most likely where he be.

 

 

 

I guess my expectation of a guy taken 5th overall is a bit higher than an average player making his nhl debut 3-4 years after his draft.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 post above is a bar graph....it shows that Heiskanen who was drafted 3rd overall is not doing as well as Juolevi at controlled zone exits ...he get's the puck out everytime....

 

Next year I see him and Stecher being a Killer pair for us, Stecher is just breaking out now ...half way through his second year and Oli only need about a year more...he may start in Utica but by mid season next year I see him with Stecher...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Darryl Keeping’s  (Canucks Army) postgame report highlights just how efficient Juolevi was in moving the puck yesterday:

 

EDIT: there are some format issues below that the editor won’t allow me to correct. The comments after the chart are mine, and shouldn’t have gotten moved inside the quote (don’t know why this happened, but the editor will not allow me to fix it and just erases everything when I try). :angry:

 

And Juolevi takes body contact to free up pucks.  I’ve noticed a lot of those other guys don’t.  

  • Like 1
  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, YummyCakeFace said:

I'd rather have Mete than Joulevi. Should have taken Tkachuk. I screamed at my tv for 10 minutes over that one. Couldn't believe blundering Benning allowed our rivals in cowtown to have a guy that'll punch us in the face and score on us to go to another team like that. Yet another debacle under the Benning regime. Clueless. Got lucky with Boeser. 

Why would you want a player that no one would want to play with, will be hated around the league and bring added crap to your own star players and who will ultimately alienate a lot of your fan base who understand the code of the game?      

 

You may have a yummyface mrs cake but your hate of the Canucks management has made you blind to what a "debacle" really is and then some.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

Of course when there's a misfire, it's all on him, but when he hits it out of the park, he was just "lucky".

 

You sound like Matt Murray.

 

 

Incredibly funny.  Sad, too.  Why is Murray so negative about Boeser?  Better to praise him, as Murray let in all 3 goals.  (Boeser could have had 3 more in that game, too, talk about unlucky.)  "Off a guy's foot" -- was a pass from a fellow Canuck lol; "off a D-man's leg" -- that shot would have gone in cleanly if the D hadn't touched it -- and the other goal was a clean breakaway finished with a perfect shot.  Some goalies can't admit when they were beaten. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • -Vintage Canuck- changed the title to Olli Juolevi | #48 | D
  • -SN- locked and unlocked this topic

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...