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

Olli Juolevi | #48 | D


b3.

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

He looks bigger than I remember.  He needed to grow into his frame, and it's looking like that's happened.  He's going to be up here soon.  

I'm not surprised he'd had some soreness, getting back into game shape would have been hard, and as you say he's also been growing. If he's blocking shots like that tho he must feel pretty good. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Fred65 said:

:lol::lol: Proves my other theory, cheer leaders don't like to be upset with facts :rolleyes:

 

ps. I guess Rafferty's +/- of +10 is useless too

Like Rafferty, but he's nearly 4 years older than OJ.  OJ is finally growing into his frame, and we are seeing a top 4 NHL D man now.    

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fred65 said:

:lol::lol: Proves my other theory, cheer leaders don't like to be upset with facts :rolleyes:

 

ps. I guess Rafferty's +/- of +10 is useless too

'facts', 'cheer leaders' :rolleyes:

 

Nope. Just needs context.

Edited by aGENT
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Like Rafferty, but he's nearly 4 years older than OJ.  OJ is finally growing into his frame, and we are seeing a top 4 NHL D man now.    

Yeah I hope so, of the 900+ AHL players stats are collected for, Rafferty is #30 O/A, which to my mind is far better than # 883. This is Rafferty's 1st Pro season. Josh Teves is a +9. These kids were developed in the NCAA

Edited by Fred65
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Fred65 said:

Yeah I hope so, of the 900+ AHL players stats are collected for, Rafferty is #30 O/A, which to my mind is far better than # 883. This is Rafferty's 1st Pro season.

I like Rafferty, and think (even though he is almost 25) can help us.  I just don't see much of a ceiling higher than what he is right now.  OJ, on the other hand, is only now physically maturing, and we are seeing a big boy becoming a big man.  He's going to be a lot stronger and quicker, while still having the high hockey IQ and elite skills.  He's going to be up with us in the spring for sure.  (providing he's healthy, of course.  That's his achilles heel.)

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Fred65 said:

Yeah I hope so, of the 900+ AHL players stats are collected for, Rafferty is #30 O/A, which to my mind is far better than # 883. This is Rafferty's 1st Pro season. Josh Teves is a +9. These kids were developed in the NCAA

+/- is a terrible stat to measure an individual player by.  Bad line change, a dman comes off at a bad time, OJ steps onto the ice jst as the other team scores and he gets a -, even though he was on the ice for 2-3 seconds.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, stawns said:

+/- is a terrible stat to measure an individual player by.  Bad line change, a dman comes off at a bad time, OJ steps onto the ice jst as the other team scores and he gets a -, even though he was on the ice for 2-3 seconds.

I understand that position/argument, but a bad line chnage can impact on many stats not just +/-. Here's the thing the pro & cons of the +/- tends to level out if there's adequate numbers ie 900 players and hundreds of games played. All the players are judged by the same parameters so the rules that apply to OJ also apply to Rafferty/Teves. 

Edited by Fred65
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Fred65 said:

I understand that position/arrgument, but a bad line chnage can impact on many stats not just +/-. Here's the thing the pro & cons of the +/- tends to level out if there's adequate numbers ie 900 players and hundreds of games played. All the players are judged by the same parameters so the rules that apply to OJ also apply to Rafferty/Tevo. 

I know quite a few scouts and don't know any who look at +/- as a useful metric with any serious consideration

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, stawns said:

I know quite a few scouts and don't know any who look at +/- as a useful metric with any serious consideration

I agree.  A guy like Tanev, for example, plays some wickedly hard minutes five on five.  A guy like Stecher doesn't.  that's true on every team.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, stawns said:

I know quite a few scouts and don't know any who look at +/- as a useful metric with any serious consideration

Just like +/- are these good scouts :lol: Oh, I understand the argument. The classic example of a poor stat was when Gradin won a draw in his end, absolutely clean. Lindgren was the D picked it up pivoted  and rather than slam it around the back wall fired it directly into his own net. Gradin is a given a minus 1 on that play.

 

But here's a fact the larger the numbers the better it offers value. Especially when you look at players on the same team ie OJ versus Rafferty. One is doing better than the other.

Edited by Fred65
  • Wat 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Fred65 said:

Just like +/- are these good scouts :lol: Oh, I understand the argument. The classic example of a poor stat was when Gradin won a draw in his end, absolutely clean. Lindgren was the D picked it up pivoted  and rather than slam it around the back wall fired it directly into his own net. Gradin is a given a minus 1 on that play

I do get where you're coming from and, obviously a + is preferred.  However< i think at one time Horvat had one of the worst +/-'s in the league.  Its a stat that has to be taken in context, imo

  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, stawns said:

I do get where you're coming from and, obviously a + is preferred.  However< i think at one time Horvat had one of the worst +/-'s in the league.  Its a stat that has to be taken in context, imo

That's a fair point. But in Horvat's case he takes too many defensive end draws. The facts is contrary to most  beliefs Horvat is not that great defensively and it shows. It's one the  reason Green likes it when Beagle and Sutter are in the line up, IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Fred65 said:

That's a fair point. But in Horvat's case he takes too many defensive end draws. The facts is contrary to most  beliefs Horvat is not that great defensively and it shows. It's one the  reason Green likes it when Beagle and Sutter are in the line up, IMO

Horvat is fine defensively. Green wants to get Horvat in more offensive situations because he's decent there as well whereas Sutter and Beagle are more strictly defensive oriented.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not saying that it is an entirely useless stat nor that OJ is fully developed and doesn't still need to adjust/improve, but if you look at some of the league's worst +/-stats from last year, the company is not too bad:

- Ristolainen -41

- Doughty -34

- Malkin - 25

- Hoffman - 24

- Laine - 24

 

Or this season so far:

- Burns -20

- Gardiner - 17

- Labanc -17

- Kessel - 16

- Green -15

- Subba - 15

- Hanifin -14

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Fred65 said:

That's a fair point. But in Horvat's case he takes too many defensive end draws. The facts is contrary to most  beliefs Horvat is not that great defensively and it shows. It's one the  reason Green likes it when Beagle and Sutter are in the line up, IMO

that's the point though.........+/- isn't a reliable metric to judge an individual player's defensive ability on without context.  It makes it seem like he's not, when actually he's quite reliable defensively, he just so happens to get a ton of defensive zone starts and the odds catch up to him.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fred65 said:

I understand that position/argument, but a bad line chnage can impact on many stats not just +/-. Here's the thing the pro & cons of the +/- tends to level out if there's adequate numbers ie 900 players and hundreds of games played. All the players are judged by the same parameters so the rules that apply to OJ also apply to Rafferty/Teves. 

Joulevi is -7.  He is a good game away from being -4, and jumping 300 or so players.  Not going to debate the relevance of +/-, but -7 is not  a huge deal.  It's not like he is on the red wings top line and running -25 or so.  He also just missed a month for a nagging/recurring injury.  He has 3 points in 2 games since coming back, I'd give him a bit of time.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...