Olli Juolevi | #48 | D

[ruilin96]

8 minutes ago, rekker said:

To me OJ is the best Fin D. You could argue Heiskinan is and you could be right. What I don't get is OJ's time in ice. I would play him more if I was coaching. The winning goal went in on the third pairing D with a minute half left. WTF. I would of played the top two pairs for the last 2 or 3 sets of $&!#s of the game. Even the games in general. I would sit the third pairing way more.

He ended up with an assist and a +2 rating. Pretty solid game from him all around. It must sting to have lose the game with minutes left in regulation after working so hard to tie the game. They could atleast use a point to face a weaker opposition in first round of the elimination.

[combover]

4 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

I said it before the draft, I said it during the draft and I will keep saying it.  I would never want a team I have interest in taking a player like MT.   Never.  Not a chance.   

So had we drafted MT and he had already played 100nhl games and had a bunch of point and was filling a role this team has missed since burrows Torres laperrie Cooke ruutu all guys you must have hated . you be here  today saying man I wish we drafted OJ because he looks like a solid #3/4 dman in another years or so And you would be critizing benning picking MT.

 

i find that hard to believe in fact it’s unbelievable, from the post I’ve read of yours and a few others critiquing anything benning has ever done would be sacreligious. 

 

im sure OJ will be a fine nhl  dman one day.

 

[gameburn]

2 hours ago, Rush17 said:

 I'm thinking more like a keith or seabrook.

A big difference between Seabrook and Keith: TOI, offensive skills, number of Norris trophies, etc.  Let's hope for Keith!   With Keith it's brains and skating that set him apart.  Juolevi looks smart, for sure -- he made a couple of interceptions of long passes in WJC game vs. the U.S. and immediately turned them around for scoring chances with nice feeds.  His linemates looked a little lost out there at times, and weren't great at breaking down the U.S. cycle game, but with a bit of luck they could easily have won that game.  Not Juolevi's fault, imo.

 

 

[combover]

4 hours ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Go to the PG Threads. You'll see pretty much everyone complaining about our defence for the exception of Tanev (Who folks still want to move, because he gets injured and he's not a big body). Then you get a big body who plays with an edge and fans get their knickers in a knot when he misses an assignment (Gudbranson). 

 

Are you telling me if training camp has Dahlin and Juolevi you'd hate it? 

If we magically go Dahlin id be shocked. 

I wouldn’t hate it I won’t hate it if OJ comes to camp and plays great and makes the squad. 

I thinkl hell be a solid middle paring dman  Gms continually say best player avaible I didn’t thnk he was then and honestly he’s done nothing to change that.

 

 

[Rush17]

What was the score vs USA?

[rekker]

9 minutes ago, combover said:

So had we drafted MT and he had already played 100nhl games and had a bunch of point and was filling a role this team has missed since burrows Torres laperrie Cooke ruutu all guys you must have hated . you be here  today saying man I wish we drafted OJ because he looks like a solid #3/4 dman in another years or so And you would be critizing benning picking MT.

 

i find that hard to believe in fact it’s unbelievable, from the post I’ve read of yours and a few others critiquing anything benning has ever done would be sacreligious. 

 

im sure OJ will be a fine nhl  dman one day.

 

I will go on record wanting MT when he was still on the board. Was a little shocked we took OJ. Grew to love the pick. Pretty sure he will not be the best D in the draft but will be a top four and that's great. MT is a goof. He would get away with a lot less if he was a Canuck. He is the better player right now. Talk to me in three or four years. Young, solid, top four D are a rare commodity. Easily on par with a reckless, one dimensional winger who has been gifted top minutes on an inbreed squad.

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

41 minutes ago, CRAZY_4_NAZZY said:

I like how smooth his game, but still needs to be more assertive in his own zone.  He has that thick frame, use it to his advantage...use his body to cut off lanes, and lean on the smaller bodies.

As a general point, I agree that he needs to be a bit more assertive at times and show more frequent willingness to engage physically. Although I do feel he is making significant progress in that area.

 

There was that one shift where he had a really good battle going with a US forward (I believe it was Kieffer Bellows). Delivered a hard check and continued to press the guy into the glass and joust with him as they skated around the zone. Had to do a bit of a double take on the jersey number because I didn’t expect that kind of aggressive Dzone play from #7.

 

There are also times where he looks disengaged but he’s actually playing great positional D and anticipating the run of the play at a very high level. You see him nullifying one opponent by slipping between them and the play and then making a quick switch to pressure a second opponent, effectively holding two guys in check while not even putting his body or stick on either of them.

 

Can look passive but it’s actually highly active defending, just very cerebral versus physical. There were a few times when Finland made easy zone exits and had numbers through the neutral zone, and this all started when Juolevi had angled one US forward low, pressured the next guy, and directed that guy’s movements to effectively take him out of the play and gain position. He basically was “herding” two US forwards without them even realizing he was pulling their strings. Kind of a Jedi mindtricks style of defending. Noticed it a couple times when he was behind his net and dealing with two attacking players and he basically eliminated the threat without making actual contact with either of them. 

 

He seems hyper aware not to overcommit to individual man-on-man situations when he sees danger developing away from him. He’s watching several guys at once and making very quick decisions as to where he needs to be positioned. Can look like he’s playing passive but often it’s not the case.

 

Kind of a similar style to what Gaunce does sometimes (albeit F vs D) when he looks like he’s not doing much but he’s actually doing a quite a lot just through positioning and anticipating where the puck and players are going next (versus just reacting to where they are right now).

 

However, like Gaunce, he needs to learn not to play the cerebral game too much but also learn to pick his spots and commit to physical play when the situation dictates or when there’s an opportunity to aggressively take a guy out of the play without also removing himself in the process. It’s a fine line and probably a tougher adjustment for “smart” players than the more instinctive types. But Juolevi seems to be making progress and is definitely more physical now than he’s ever been in his career. Plus he has the body now to be pretty effective physically when he chooses to.

[ilduce39]

33 minutes ago, combover said:

So had we drafted MT and he had already played 100nhl games and had a bunch of point and was filling a role this team has missed since burrows Torres laperrie Cooke ruutu all guys you must have hated . you be here  today saying man I wish we drafted OJ because he looks like a solid #3/4 dman in another years or so And you would be critizing benning picking MT.

 

i find that hard to believe in fact it’s unbelievable, from the post I’ve read of yours and a few others critiquing anything benning has ever done would be sacreligious. 

 

im sure OJ will be a fine nhl  dman one day.

 

Maybe someone more knowledgeable about prospects can add a name or two but at this point the only guys drafted after Juolevi that I’d trade him 1-1 for are  the obvious ones: Sergachev, McAvoy and Keller. 

 

Tkachuk is a luxury at this point that we don’t need.  We’d just be chasing defencemen even harder than we already are.  Keller breaks the mold as a C, but obviously holds a lot of value.  Not sold on Chychrun - Olli will be here some time next year and the whining will subside.  

 

Edit: I also see Olli as a 2-3 rather than a 3-4 which is a big distinction.  I think he has the brains, physical attributes and pedigree to play on a top pairing if not carry one. 

Edited January 1, 2018 by ilduce39

[Rush17]

What channel is the Finland/USA game on?  Just saw on tsn its still on going?  Anyone have any details?

[Phat Fingers]

5 hours ago, gameburn said:

I agree completely. 

 

I think the only frustration most of us have with Juolevi is that he didn't step in as soon as possible,  Like Tkachuk did.  Technically, to be really fair, Juolevi may never make the NHL.  He isn't Tkachuk's equal until he plays enough to have completed a rookie season (40 games? not sure how many it is).  Like you, I believe that Juolevi will be one of the best D we have had since Ohlund and Salo, who knows, maybe much better.  But he actually hasn't made the NHL yet.  If he goes through 2018-2019  without making the Canucks... there will be a lot of grumbling.  And Sergachev was available, too -- more of us liked him than Juolevi.  Many of us were surprised when Juolevi was picked by Benning. 

True and well said. 

 

At the draft I was hoping for PLD or Chykrun. I saw PLD as prefect C/LW and thought that Chykrun was dropping without merit. 

 

My biggest concern with OJ and MT was that their points were inflated from playing on such dominant teams. 

 

The extra reason not to take MT as that he was the son of Keith. Not everyone takes after their dad, thank god... but I wouldn’t want Keith anywhere near the nucks. 

 

As to whether or not OJ makes the NHL. I’ll take a bet that he will.  Anyone want to give odds he won’t?  His skill game, poise and skating were there at the draft. Now he is 6’3 and is playing around 200lbs.  

 

He hasn’t yet, to be sure, but I see him making the cut by next season. Added to that he will

be eligible for the AHL and can be sent up and down without waivers. 

 

Was never high on Serge and hardly knew about McAvoy. Shows what I know about scouting!  

 

EmW

[Phat Fingers]

2 hours ago, bieksa.bounce said:

Sergachev was the D we needed. Oh well. I'm still optimistic about Juolevi but should not have taken him at 5. 

Not so sure. Serge has a lot of holes in his game in areas that OJ doesn’t. Serge has a great shot and is good in the O zone, but is prone to gaffs in his zone. 

 

Like his size too, but both have a lot to prove. 

[Phat Fingers]

1 hour ago, ruilin96 said:

Willie D coaching style

Been some questionable coaches in Finland for the past few WJC’s it seems 

[The Great Canucks]

1 hour ago, combover said:

Lol.what funnier is if you believe that. So who on the Canucks is a hard nosed agitator that scores, those are unique  talents and they made burrows a star. .....

 

LOL, nice try, but Tkachuk is not a star to anyone outside of Calgary.

[flickyoursedin]

5 minutes ago, The Great Canucks said:

LOL, nice try, but Tkachuk is not a star to anyone outside of Calgary.

Not a star but he has the potential to be one. At 19 years old put up a 48 point season and this year is on pace for 50. Gonna be an absolute beast in the playoffs.

[The Great Canucks]

7 minutes ago, flickyoursedin said:

Not a star but he has the potential to be one. At 19 years old put up a 48 point season and this year is on pace for 50. Gonna be an absolute beast in the playoffs.

Both Bo and Brock have already shown to be better than that. That's why I have no problem passing on Tkachuk and picking someone who still has the potential to be a top-pairing defenseman, contrary to what certain naysayers want to believe.

[combover]

13 minutes ago, The Great Canucks said:

LOL, nice try, but Tkachuk is not a star to anyone outside of Calgary.

Lol. What everyone said about burrows.

By your logic burrows wasn’t a star for the Canucks because the rest of the league didn’t view him that way.. good stuff.

[The Great Canucks]

9 minutes ago, combover said:

Lol. What everyone said about burrows.

By your logic burrows wasn’t a star for the Canucks because the rest of the league didn’t view him that way.. good stuff.

No matter how much you whine and cry, Tkachuk is has yet to prove he is this elite winger you make him out to be, while Juolevi is not some scrub that deserves to be written off because you lack patience.

[flickyoursedin]

45 minutes ago, The Great Canucks said:

No matter how much you whine and cry, Tkachuk is has yet to prove he is this elite winger you make him out to be, while Juolevi is not some scrub that deserves to be written off because you lack patience.

I am happy with Juolevi but Tkachuk is the same age. You’re talking as if what Tkachuk is now is what he’s gonna be. Both players will get better then what they are now and Tkachuk is already a pretty decent power forward at 20 years old in the hardest league in the world.

Edited January 1, 2018 by flickyoursedin

[CRAZY_4_NAZZY]

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

As a general point, I agree that he needs to be a bit more assertive at times and show more frequent willingness to engage physically. Although I do feel he is making significant progress in that area.

 

There was that one shift where he had a really good battle going with a US forward (I believe it was Kieffer Bellows). Delivered a hard check and continued to press the guy into the glass and joust with him as they skated around the zone. Had to do a bit of a double take on the jersey number because I didn’t expect that kind of aggressive Dzone play from #7.

 

There are also times where he looks disengaged but he’s actually playing great positional D and anticipating the run of the play at a very high level. You see him nullifying one opponent by slipping between them and the play and then making a quick switch to pressure a second opponent, effectively holding two guys in check while not even putting his body or stick on either of them.

 

Can look passive but it’s actually highly active defending, just very cerebral versus physical. There were a few times when Finland made easy zone exits and had numbers through the neutral zone, and this all started when Juolevi had angled one US forward low, pressured the next guy, and directed that guy’s movements to effectively take him out of the play and gain position. He basically was “herding” two US forwards without them even realizing he was pulling their strings. Kind of a Jedi mindtricks style of defending. Noticed it a couple times when he was behind his net and dealing with two attacking players and he basically eliminated the threat without making actual contact with either of them. 

 

He seems hyper aware not to overcommit to individual man-on-man situations when he sees danger developing away from him. He’s watching several guys at once and making very quick decisions as to where he needs to be positioned. Can look like he’s playing passive but often it’s not the case.

 

Kind of a similar style to what Gaunce does sometimes (albeit F vs D) when he looks like he’s not doing much but he’s actually doing a quite a lot just through positioning and anticipating where the puck and players are going next (versus just reacting to where they are right now).

 

However, like Gaunce, he needs to learn not to play the cerebral game too much but also learn to pick his spots and commit to physical play when the situation dictates or when there’s an opportunity to aggressively take a guy out of the play without also removing himself in the process. It’s a fine line and probably a tougher adjustment for “smart” players than the more instinctive types. But Juolevi seems to be making progress and is definitely more physical now than he’s ever been in his career. Plus he has the body now to be pretty effective physically when he chooses to.

Ah thanks for the clarification, at times maybe when I don't see him being assertive or active in the actual moment play makes me wonder whether if he is being indecisive to jump into the fray or not. Never thought of his defense like that thanks for the breakdown!

[rekker]

1 hour ago, flickyoursedin said:

Not a star but he has the potential to be one. At 19 years old put up a 48 point season and this year is on pace for 50. Gonna be an absolute beast in the playoffs.

Meh. He had 0 points last year in the playoffs. If memory serves he took some stupid penalties last playoffs. If I'm betting I bet he takes more stupid penalties that cost his team this year. Overrated player surrounded by some talent.