Olli Juolevi | #48 | D

[Master 112]

3 minutes ago, SingleThorn said:

Sounds like you frequent the usual click bait villains ! Care to name a few ? ( actually am interested in your sources )

 

Mainly:

CDC

/r/canucks

4chan's /sp/

Canucks discords

Hfboards and Twitter more occassionally

 

lol

 

There are definitely people who are more hopeful about Juolevi than others, but I never see anyone--sports journalist, random fan, or someone from the Canucks org--try to argue that he's had 3 great years or w/e. It's been tough for OJ, and we can admit that without saying he's a **** hockey player.

[DeNiro]

19 hours ago, The 5th Line said:

Or maybe we send Tkachuk back to Junior and it has no implications at all and we end up with Petterson and Tkachuk.  You can use any little thing as an example of the butterfly effect, it's not very reasonable.   If we don't take Boeser, we probably don't get Juolevi which means we don't get Petterson etc etc.  Things have worked out good since that draft but it was still a brutal miss of a pick.

 

Another 2 points for Matthew"punch my face"Tkachuk tonight.  

 

Yea, we're sending a player that was good enough to crack a much better Flames roster back to junior, after Virtanen cracked our roster. 

 

Common sense bud, try it. Tkachuk would have immediately been one of our better players based on our lineup.

 

Very unlikely we would have ended up with both.

[aGENT]

3 hours ago, Phat Fingers said:

Conjure all you want, we drafted OJ and not Tkachuk. 

Funny thing is, they can't even hindsight properly! 

 

With the gift of hindsight, I still wouldn't draft that face punch-able little puke. I'd trade down to Boston's pick and grab McAvoy+ 

 

 

 

 

[TheRealistOptimist]

14 minutes ago, 112 said:

 

28 minutes ago, SingleThorn said:

Sounds like you frequent the usual click bait villains ! Care to name a few ? ( actually am interested in your sources )

 

Mainly:

CDC

/r/canucks

4chan's /sp/

Canucks discords

Hfboards and Twitter more occassionally

 

For a second there I thought you might have legit sources, not just message board fodder.

 

If you just imagined Juolevi went to college, there would be next to no worry about his development. 

 

Injuries are the only legit worry for Juolevi, and even then only because he’s had 2 somewhat serious injuries. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again Knee injuries shouldn’t worry anyone anymore though, it’s 2019 not 1980.

 

[Elias Pettersson]

4 hours ago, Phat Fingers said:

The chances of any drafted player becoming a top d man is small, it doesn't matter how long or little they play in the minors or if they get injured.  

 

 

Edler has been a top pairing guy for a decade, he was a 3rd rounder, so what does that mean???  Exactly the same thing, nothing.  

 

Conjure all you want, we drafted OJ and not Tkachuk.  Time is still ticking and yes OJ still has the chance to prove himself.  Save your energy to complain about the guy next year if need be.  Until then it's a wasted effort.  

Yeah Edler has been our top pairing guy for almost a decade.  And you wonder why we keep drafting in the top 10 every year since that has happened.  If you think Edler is actually a legit top pairing guy on a legit playoff team then I don't even know what to say really...

[Master 112]

30 minutes ago, TheRealistOptimist said:

For a second there I thought you might have legit sources, not just message board fodder.

 

If you just imagined Juolevi went to college, there would be next to no worry about his development. 

 

Injuries are the only legit worry for Juolevi, and even then only because he’s had 2 somewhat serious injuries. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again Knee injuries shouldn’t worry anyone anymore though, it’s 2019 not 1980.

 

can you quote me any 'legit' sources, then, that argue Juolevi has been tracking as expected?

 

why are you on a forum if you think anyone with a journalism gig inherently has a better opinion than everyone else?

[BlastPast]

6 hours ago, 112 said:

It was well established, even before his injury this year, that he has not been following his expected developmental course

You realize he had a good year last season playing against men and was putting up ~0.75 ppg in Utica before getting injured this season.  His development has been fine , the problem is people's expectations and ignorance.  I'm not saying he's tracking toward stardom but he's doing pretty well.

[Warhippy]

1 hour ago, 112 said:

He wasn't even performing particularly well in Finland. 

 

One of the best rookie seasons by a D man in the league in years (heiskanen not withstanding) says you're wrong

[Master 112]

2 minutes ago, BlastPast said:

You realize he had a good year last season playing against men and was putting up ~0.75 ppg in Utica before getting injured this season.  His development has been fine , the problem is people's expectations and ignorance.  I'm not saying he's tracking toward stardom but he's doing pretty well.

I think we agree, then.

 

My point is that he's not projecting to be as good as one would hope a 5th overall draft pick is.

[Master 112]

3 hours ago, Warhippy said:

One of the best rookie seasons by a D man in the league in years (heiskanen not withstanding) says you're wrong

By what metrics? I recall that he was having a difficult time throughout his season there, apparently getting it together somewhat as the year progressed but still not wowing.

 

e: importantly, who are his comparables from that league based on his season purely stats wise?

Edited March 23, 2019 by 112

[kenhodgejr]

2 hours ago, 112 said:

I think we agree, then.

 

My point is that he's not projecting to be as good as one would hope a 5th overall draft pick is.

no but he still might be a good top 4 NHL defence man. Thats why it was so awesome we landed Q.Hughes. He is a kid who can handle the pressure of being a superstar top pairing defence man. Juolevi will quietly contribute very much like Edler did for us during his career. One thing Juolevi is really good at is getting a sneaky point shot in on net. Also his passing skills during a power play will come in handy. I think he gives us another weapon on the power play and i think him and Pettersson will work well together setting each other up. Give him time to let his knee heal properly and get his strength back. Hopefully next year he gets some NHL games in. 

Edited March 23, 2019 by kenhodgejr

[Master 112]

40 minutes ago, kenhodgejr said:

no but he still might be a good top 4 NHL defence man. Thats why it was so awesome we landed Q.Hughes. He is a kid who can handle the pressure of being a superstar top pairing defence man. Juolevi will quietly contribute very much like Edler did for us during his career. One thing Juolevi is really good at is getting a sneaky point shot in on net. Also his passing skills during a power play will come in handy. I think he gives us another weapon on the power play and i think him and Pettersson will work well together setting each other up. Give him time to let his knee heal properly and get his strength back. Hopefully next year he gets some NHL games in. 

Agreed- no arguments here over any of that.

 

He could very well become something on the power play for us we haven't had since Ehrhoff. If one of him or Hughes can play the right side and we can run something like this as a first unit:

 

Horvat/x - Pettersson - Boeser

Juolevi - Hughes

 

it could be really deadly.

[TheRealistOptimist]

@112 I wouldn’t exactly say comments made on any message board qualify as sources.

 

I’m not quite sure why people are placing limits on Juolevi and whether or not he can be a top pairing defensemen? He’s only 20 years old.

 

What he becomes is still up in the air, but he definitely has the talent to become a top pairing defensemen, that’s why he was drafted where he was. 

 

If Quinn Hughes plays the left side and can force Juolevi to play on the 2nd pairing because he’s that good, then that would be great for us as a team. 

[Master 112]

35 minutes ago, TheRealistOptimist said:

@112 I wouldn’t exactly say comments made on any message board qualify as sources.

 

I’m not quite sure why people are placing limits on Juolevi and whether or not he can be a top pairing defensemen? He’s only 20 years old.

 

What he becomes is still up in the air, but he definitely has the talent to become a top pairing defensemen, that’s why he was drafted where he was. 

 

If Quinn Hughes plays the left side and can force Juolevi to play on the 2nd pairing because he’s that good, then that would be great for us as a team. 

If the claim I was making is that the general belief among people who follow our team is that Juolevi is not developing as expected, then what I have read on Juolevi on places where Canucks fans converse en masse is a valid thing to point to in support of my view.

 

You're not disproving me by telling me to come up with 'legit sources' when you're not pulling up anything yourself to demonstrate that I'm in the wrong. 

 

Anyway, we're arguing about whether an opinion is popular, not whether it's correct or not, which is kinda silly. I hate how some posters on this forum pick out an arbitrary string of text to bold within a much longer post and then keep raising the issue of it because if they can confuse themselves enough about a random add-on to a post, it means they don't have to accept the rest of it. They play 'burden of proof' games as though this is a courtroom, never even raising issue with the more substantive parts of the message they're attacking. Idk if it's some sort of defence mechanism or what

[TheRealistOptimist]

7 hours ago, 112 said:

8 hours ago, stawns said:

Who says that?  

It's the most popular opinion concerning OJ I've been hearing in the Canucks circles I frequent

That’s my fault for assuming that statement was meant as something different than message boards.

 

my apologies 

[TheRealistOptimist]

1 hour ago, 112 said:

 

You're not disproving me by telling me to come up with 'legit sources' when you're not pulling up anything yourself to demonstrate that I'm in the wrong. 

I wasn’t trying to prove you wrong.

 

I have heard from so many people that Juolevi is a bust already, I just have a differing opinion and want to wait before judging his ceiling. 

[stawns]

21 hours ago, 112 said:

He is a 5th overall pick who did not improve on his junior totals between his draft and +1 seasons and failed to crack one of the worst defensive corps in the league in his +3. He wasn't even performing particularly well in Finland. It's not controversial to say what he's shown isn't what was anticipated when Van picked him.

 

Thinking back on OJ's last 3 years, can you really say he's developing according to plan? Are you interested in actually rebutting anything I've said, or are you happy asking 3-word questions that imply you don't like what my thoughts are without bothering to criticize?

Gotcha, about what I figured you'd say.

[aGENT]

14 hours ago, 112 said:

I think we agree, then.

 

My point is that he's not projecting to be as good as one would hope a 5th overall draft pick is.

Something akin to Hampus Lindholm at 5th OA is just fine, thanks.

[MrCanuck94]

19 hours ago, 112 said:

It's the most popular opinion concerning OJ I've been hearing in the Canucks circles I frequent, and it's been so for a long time. CDC is homer central, and there are still lots of people being realists about him in this thread. 

 

He is a 5th overall pick who did not improve on his junior totals between his draft and +1 seasons and failed to crack one of the worst defensive corps in the league in his +3. He wasn't even performing particularly well in Finland. It's not controversial to say what he's shown isn't what was anticipated when Van picked him.

 

Thinking back on OJ's last 3 years, can you really say he's developing according to plan? Are you interested in actually rebutting anything I've said, or are you happy asking 3-word questions that imply you don't like what my thoughts are without bothering to criticize?

In his d+1, the Knights lost Dvorak's 121 points, Marner's 116 points and Tkachuk's 107 points. OJ managed to put up the same amount of points with the loss of this much offence. 

 

Juolevi had great growth as a 19 year old player in Finland to the point where he was able to handle the workload of being their #1 dman in the playoffs because of injuries.

 

Juolevi was Utica's #1 dman and would've been on the Canucks for the second half of the season if he was not hurt.

 

Juolevi has had defensive struggles, many young players do. I'm not concerned with it because he has high hockey IQ and he'll figure it out, it's all part of the process. He hasn't made the team out of camp but that doesn't change his ceiling. Of course it would be preferred that a 5th overall pick makes the team sooner than later, but if taking more time with the player ensures they develop properly to what they can be, then I'm all for it. At the end of the day, he's only 20 years old. Making the big club at 21 is still very good.

[ilduce39]

34 minutes ago, MrCanuck94 said:

In his d+1, the Knights lost Dvorak's 121 points, Marner's 116 points and Tkachuk's 107 points. OJ managed to put up the same amount of points with the loss of this much offence. 

 

Juolevi had great growth as a 19 year old player in Finland to the point where he was able to handle the workload of being their #1 dman in the playoffs because of injuries.

 

Juolevi was Utica's #1 dman and would've been on the Canucks for the second half of the season if he was not hurt.

 

Juolevi has had defensive struggles, many young players do. I'm not concerned with it because he has high hockey IQ and he'll figure it out, it's all part of the process. He hasn't made the team out of camp but that doesn't change his ceiling. Of course it would be preferred that a 5th overall pick makes the team sooner than later, but if taking more time with the player ensures they develop properly to what they can be, then I'm all for it. At the end of the day, he's only 20 years old. Making the big club at 21 is still very good.

Yeah, that’s my recollection of Juolevi’s progress as well.  

 

The pick has suffered a negative bias from the get go.  We passed on Tkachuk and Sergachev with Chychrun also making the jump early.  Plus on the heels of the “Virtanen pick” and with Boeser not yet arrived, everyone was quick to trash Juolevi when he had a perceived lateral year with the Knights.  

 

The Canucks IMO shrewdly sent him to Finland and he finished very strong in my memory.  I remember watching him at the Juniors that season too and while Finland flopped I thought Olli looked electric (and was praised by his coaches.)  I remember he had the highest young d point total or something silly if it wasn’t for Heiskanen.

 

He did have a rough (young stars?) pre season after bulking up to 200 pounds and looked a bit slow... but as he adjusted to his size he looked fine to me as the season progressed.

 

Then there’s this year... another (surprisingly) high scoring season playing against men in a pro league.  I’m pretty heartened by that, as he was billed as more of a steady, transition type defender than a guy who can drive offense.  

 

In short: he’s shown well in the past two seasons against men, bringing more offense than I’d expect.  

 

He was always billed as a player who needed physical development time and wouldn’t be ready as quickly as Serg/Tkachuk/Chycrun so with the injury this year I’m not overly worried about his trajectory - I don’t see the reasoning that his draft ceiling is somehow diminished because he isn’t in the NHL yet.  The various pundits I’ve read or listened to all seemed to have the same things to say about him as well - he’s doing fine.

 

I like that he’s got a big, rangy frame to contrast with Hughes.  He also (iirc and from what I’ve seen) relies on super quick decision making, vision and great stretch passes to generate his offense rather than skating his way out.  Can’t wait to see him hit Jake, Bo or Petey with some long range bombs.

 

I don’t think he’s a sure fire top pairing guy, but he’ll be a great add to our top 4 by the middle of next season if I had to make a bet.