Olli Juolevi | #48 | D

[Jester13]

 

This thread be like ∆

[theo5789]

12 hours ago, dpn1 said:

Ya, but in his rookie year he scored 70 goals if I'm not mistaken?

Well now we know what the expectations will be when he enters the NHL. Good luck OJ.

[Ray_Cathode]

22 hours ago, ruilin96 said:

Teemu Selanne would’ve been considered a “bust” by fans today as he didn’t make the NHL until his Draft+4 years.

Same as Mattias Ohlund, who also is European, and appropriately, a defenceman.

[Noble 6]

On 1/1/2020 at 7:38 PM, Junkyard Dog said:

I use that argument because I can. It's a valid one based on the higher probability. I haven't forgotten. Just using the higher probability. We would be a better team in 2016-17 with Tkachuk. Boeser would be on his rookie year too. We would of likely gotten a first pick that was higher than 5th. We could of won the lotto but would we draft Petey with a top 3 pick? We are dealing with a lot more what ifs when we break it down.

 

That's why we should probably stop complaining about wanting Tkachuk because it probably would of made our team look a lot different than it is and we have a lot of good things going for us with what we have currently. Yeah we haven't gone anywhere with Petey or Hughes yet but ones a rookie and the other is a sophomore. Our team is still young and still has a few more holes to fill but we've been trending upwards for a bit now.

 

No GM is perfect. Boston drafted Pasternak in 2014 and then flopped in 2015. Could of had 3 of Boeser, Chabot, Aho, Konecny or Barzal(All of which have been All-Stars) but missed out on them all.

 

Going in to potential alternative outcomes is useless.

 

At the end of 2016, we had witnessed the organization rush the development of McCann and Virtanen by keeping them in the NHL this year. It's quite likely that management (and the fanbase) would be cautious about keeping an even younger player in the NHL the next year.

 

The following year, Tkachuk making the team would prevent us from signing Vanek before the season started. The point production is virtually a wash. Even if it wasn't, the only other team that would have taken Pettersson was the Rangers. If we do significantly better that season, Arizona drops down and has a higher pick and they therefore don't trade it. 

 

So there you go, we pick Tkachuk and still end up with Pettersson and Hughes. 

[Junkyard Dog]

8 minutes ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

 

Going in to potential alternative outcomes is useless.

 

At the end of 2016, we had witnessed the organization rush the development of McCann and Virtanen by keeping them in the NHL this year. It's quite likely that management (and the fanbase) would be cautious about keeping an even younger player in the NHL the next year.

 

The following year, Tkachuk making the team would prevent us from signing Vanek before the season started. The point production is virtually a wash. Even if it wasn't, the only other team that would have taken Pettersson was the Rangers. If we do significantly better that season, Arizona drops down and has a higher pick and they therefore don't trade it. 

 

So there you go, we pick Tkachuk and still end up with Pettersson and Hughes. 

Yeah but Tkachuk would step in training camp and earn a spot like he did in CGY
 

We have cap and still sign Vanek in my mind. Tkachuks ELC allows us to get one more guy making us a better team. 
 

being a better team we draft higher. 
 

Like I said. We probably would look like a much different team if we drafted Tkachuk. For better or worse. 
 

 

Edited January 3, 2020 by Junkyard Dog

[Noble 6]

2 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

Yeah but Tkachuk would step in training camp and earn a spot like he did in CGY
 

We have cap and still sign Vanek in my mind. Tkachuks ELC allows us to get one more guy making us a better team. 
 

being a better team we draft higher. 
 

Like I said. We probably would look like a much different team if we drafted Tkachuk. For better or worse. 
 

 

 

I already addresses the first part. Virtanen and McCann had just been rushed in to the NHL, so management likely would not have kept him in the NHL in his rookie year. 

 

Even if we are a better team in 2017, that gives Arizona a top 5 pick since we'd have to pass them and they don't trade it away. We still walk away with Pettersson.

 

It's pointless to speculate what would happen. 

[Junkyard Dog]

5 minutes ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

 

I already addresses the first part. Virtanen and McCann had just been rushed in to the NHL, so management likely would not have kept him in the NHL in his rookie year. 

 

Even if we are a better team in 2017, that gives Arizona a top 5 pick since we'd have to pass them and they don't trade it away. We still walk away with Pettersson.

 

It's pointless to speculate what would happen. 

I countered that part stating that Tkachuk would come in and prove more than Vietnamese or McCann ever did and that he was ready. JB would have no choice despite Jared and Jake. 
 

I doubt we get Petey if we drafted Tkachuk. No way he gets past the Rangers. 
 

Yeah it’s meaningless and harder to predict. Hence why we should be happy with how things turned out. Likely could of been a lot worse right now. 

 

[Noble 6]

32 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

I countered that part stating that Tkachuk would come in and prove more than Vietnamese or McCann ever did and that he was ready. JB would have no choice despite Jared and Jake. 
 

I doubt we get Petey if we drafted Tkachuk. No way he gets past the Rangers. 
 

Yeah it’s meaningless and harder to predict. Hence why we should be happy with how things turned out. Likely could of been a lot worse right now. 

 

 

Or it likely could be a lot better.

[Junkyard Dog]

Just now, Horvat is a Boss said:

 

Or it likely could be a lot better.

Unlikely since we’d be a better team like I stated. Better team = higher pick.  I am basing off of the higher probability. 
 

Could win lotto though but we probably don’t draft Petey with a top 3 pick. 

[flickyoursedin]

25 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

Unlikely since we’d be a better team like I stated. Better team = higher pick.  I am basing off of the higher probability. 
 

Could win lotto though but we probably don’t draft Petey with a top 3 pick. 

In a weird way the hockey gods did help us out that year by putting us in a position to take Pettersson. Watching the mic’d up for that draft year Benning says “if the top 3 go like we think” and then talks of trading down and points out Pettersson.

[Noble 6]

31 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

Unlikely since we’d be a better team like I stated. Better team = higher pick.  I am basing off of the higher probability. 
 

Could win lotto though but we probably don’t draft Petey with a top 3 pick. 

 

Did you not read my other posts? If were better then Arizona would have to be worse, and would therefore have a top 5 pick since Vegas' pick didn't depend on their season that year. If Arizona had a top 5 pick, they likely wouldn't have traded it to the Rangers (the only team Benning thought might take him) and therefore the Canucks still get Pettersson.

[Junkyard Dog]

18 minutes ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

 

Did you not read my other posts? If were better then Arizona would have to be worse, and would therefore have a top 5 pick since Vegas' pick didn't depend on their season that year. If Arizona had a top 5 pick, they likely wouldn't have traded it to the Rangers (the only team Benning thought might take him) and therefore the Canucks still get Pettersson.

 We add a top 6 PWF that could move us a number of spots. 50 point player likely could net ya 5-10 more wins. Could likely end up drafting outside top 10. 
 

Rangers would of have to sweeten the deal but they could of definitely got it done.  If not with them then someone else in the top 10 if we were outside easy. Someone else could also draft him too.
 

So it is unlikely we get Petey if we had Tkachuk. Unfortunate as it is. 
 

We could of been a lot worse off though. Boston could have 3 of Barzal, Boeser, Aho or Chabot. Just right after they drafted Pasternak the year prior. Probably would of beaten the Blues if they did. 

Edited January 3, 2020 by Junkyard Dog

[TigerTail]

Changing the subject a bit here, but here’s my take on Juolevi. Our defence still needs work but it’s much better this year. It’s a good sign that he’s not in the lineup yet. Previous years he would have been Put in much sooner because we had little depth and players had to be thrown in. This is a good thing. But the most important thing is that we have a stronger team. This will be good for him when he comes up. From what I’ve seen of Juolevi is that he can be a very good piece on a strong team but he needs strong players to set up and finish. I’m good with letting him bake in the AHL for most of the year until he’s ready and then come in and really be a nice surprise.

[Dannydog]

This is the Jake thread all over again. because hes not a super star now hes a bust .Im looking forward to when he can beat this injury funk get back to his game and put all this nonsense to bed. 

[Sedinyoureyesontheprize]

49 minutes ago, Dannydog said:

This is the Jake thread all over again. because hes not a super star now hes a bust .Im looking forward to when he can beat this injury funk get back to his game and put all this nonsense to bed. 

I agree with that sentiment. It will be while till he’s fullfilling his potential but that’s ok. He could inject more puck moving and offence to the defensive core when it finally does happen. 

[Phat Fingers]

8 hours ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

 

Or it likely could be a lot better.

How could we be better than what the team is currently.  MT is a good player.  He found a niche on the top line in Calgary that was already complete as a roster.  But him on our train wreck of the past few years and expect a rookie not nearly as skilled or dynamic as Ep40 and Hughes and expecting them to transform our roster is ridiculous.  

 

MT didn't transform Calgary's roster, Giordano, Monahan and Gaudreau did.  

 

We didn't pick MT, get over it.  Calgary got a player that has done well that we passed on, big whoop.  

 

Think they would like to redraft the 2014 draft?  Betcha Bennett is not taken by Calgary.  Think they would like this years JV over this years Bennett, who may or may not be 19 years old still.  

 

How about Edmontom, passing on MT vs Poolparty.  Man that looks damn foolish now doesn't it?  Did anyone see Poolparty not making it over MT, nope.  

 

OJ is a great asset to have.  He is a future top 4 d man easily.  Just needs to gain man strength.  

 

Every team has players they wished they had selected vs who they did select.  We have 3 players that are complete steals vs almost everyone drafted 5 spots ahead of them.  Ep40, Hughes and Boeser.  Be happy about that vs being a sulky toddler that wants someone else's toy.  

[ForsbergTheGreat]

10 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said:

I countered that part stating that Tkachuk would come in and prove more than Vietnamese or McCann ever did and that he was ready. JB would have no choice despite Jared and Jake. 
 

I doubt we get Petey if we drafted Tkachuk. No way he gets past the Rangers. 
 

Yeah it’s meaningless and harder to predict. Hence why we should be happy with how things turned out. Likely could of been a lot worse right now. 

 

For some reason I’m now hungry. 
 

 

[Noble 6]

4 hours ago, Phat Fingers said:

How could we be better than what the team is currently.  MT is a good player.  He found a niche on the top line in Calgary that was already complete as a roster.  But him on our train wreck of the past few years and expect a rookie not nearly as skilled or dynamic as Ep40 and Hughes and expecting them to transform our roster is ridiculous.  

 

MT didn't transform Calgary's roster, Giordano, Monahan and Gaudreau did.  

 

We didn't pick MT, get over it.  Calgary got a player that has done well that we passed on, big whoop.  

 

Think they would like to redraft the 2014 draft?  Betcha Bennett is not taken by Calgary.  Think they would like this years JV over this years Bennett, who may or may not be 19 years old still.  

 

How about Edmontom, passing on MT vs Poolparty.  Man that looks damn foolish now doesn't it?  Did anyone see Poolparty not making it over MT, nope.  

 

OJ is a great asset to have.  He is a future top 4 d man easily.  Just needs to gain man strength.  

 

Every team has players they wished they had selected vs who they did select.  We have 3 players that are complete steals vs almost everyone drafted 5 spots ahead of them.  Ep40, Hughes and Boeser.  Be happy about that vs being a sulky toddler that wants someone else's toy.  

 

You're blowing this way out of proportion. I was simply saying that there's no point in speculating in possible alternative outcomes because an opposite outcome can just as easily be created. 

 

Even if you want to believe that Tkachuk on our team would be wildly inferior to the one we see in Calgary, I'd still take that. If he can make an impact with Backlund and Frolik then I'm sure he'd be fine with Pettersson/Boeser or Horvat.

[Kanukfanatic]

16 hours ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

It's pointless to speculate what would happen. 

100% agree. Someone could type whatever they want and say it could have happened.  Waste of time...

 

Edit: we could have picked Tkachuk and he could have become addicted to fortnight and quit hockey. We could have still drafted Pettersson and he could have become a crack head and moved to East Van.  Man...imagine if that happened!!  

Edited January 3, 2020 by Kanukfanatic

[73 Percent]

1 minute ago, Kanukfanatic said:

100% agree. Someone could type whatever they want and say it could have happened.  Waste of time...

Could have won the cup bro.