Prospect Info: Olli Juolevi, Pt. VI

[lawrence]

I get your point about a top 5 pick should dominate and play quickly but OJ being a top 5 pick is not his fault. It's Benning and this scouting staffs misjudgment of a player.

Bottom line OJ was a reach @ 5

Virtanen was a reach @ 6

Pettersson was a reach @ 5

Whenever I read the argument that "a top 5 player should" I don't necessarily see the gun being pointed at the player but instead being aimed directly at Benning and Co.

Bottom line OJ was a reach @ 5

nope. He was going to go at 5 or 6, so to say he was a reach at 5 is not true.

Virtanen was a reach @ 6

nope. He was ranked to go around 6 7 8 or 9 heading into the draft by many scouting sources, so to say he was a reach again is not true.

Pettersson was a reach @ 5

sigh...... dude, just change your user name to reflect the team your really cheering for and stop pretending to be a Nucks fan.

Oh, absolutely. Everything being said is with the context of his draft position.

As I've said repeatedly, I think he's a 'good' prospect who will probably be an NHL player of some sort eventually. If we'd taken him at #28 overall, I'd be quite happy with this player and where he sits right now.

Top-5 picks are a different ballgame. We suffered through a nightmare season to get this extremely high pick that should be a sure-fire NHLer, quickly. When it isn't and the player isn't developing in line with his draft slot, it's fair to be very concerned.

but the team felt he will be better then Tkachuk though, for now we have to live with it. It's not about who is a better player at 19, it's who is a better player when it's all said and done.

 

[Bleach Clean]

nope. He was going to go at 5 or 6, so to say he was a reach at 5 is not true.

With all respect, you don't know this. That may have been VAN's ranking. We have little indication that it was also CGY's ranking.

Also, "reach" depends upon the difference in quality of prospects remaining. In this case, Tkachuk was at a level above Juolevi. To pass him up to draft Juolevi felt like a reach then, and that feeling is bearing itself out now.

nope. He was ranked to go around 6 7 8 or 9 heading into the draft by many scouting sources, so to say he was a reach again is not true.

Virtanen was not the best PWF available. Nor was he the most skilled player available. The rationale to take him over the remaining options did not hold at the time, and it's looking like a disaster now.

sigh...... dude, just change your user name to reflect the team your really cheering for and stop pretending to be a Nucks fan.

Pettersson was likely the most skilled forward remaining. He was a reach at #5, true, but it's a reach that has a clear rationale (unlike the Virtanen pick). Many players within the same ranking space were all around the same level of quality. Hard to choose. So it's nice to see the Canucks target a unique skill set there. They made the right bet there, IMO, even if Pettersson fails.

but the team felt he will be better then Tkachuk though, for now we have to live with it. It's not about who is a better player at 19, it's who is a better player when it's all said and done.

... And the team is trending on it's way to being wrong. We cannot ignore the development of either prospect to this point. We cannot just dismiss it to wait for some future arbitrary point. This is not looking good.

 

[rune74]

With all respect, you don't know this. That may have been VAN's ranking. We have little indication that it was also CGY's ranking.

Also, "reach" depends upon the difference in quality of prospects remaining. In this case, Tkachuk was at a level above Juolevi. To pass him up to draft Juolevi felt like a reach then, and that feeling is bearing itself out now.





Virtanen was not the best PWF available. Nor was he the most skilled player available. The rationale to take him over the remaining options did not hold at the time, and it's looking like a disaster now.





Pettersson was likely the most skilled forward remaining. He was a reach at #5, true, but it's a reach that has a clear rationale (unlike the Virtanen pick). Many players within the same ranking space were all around the same level of quality. Hard to choose. So it's nice to see the Canucks target a unique skill set there. They made the right bet there, IMO, even if Pettersson fails.





... And the team is trending on it's way to being wrong. We cannot ignore the development of either prospect to this point. We cannot just dismiss it to wait for some future arbitrary point. This is not looking good.

Didn't your group say it wasn't even benning who decided on Virtanen, more the ownership wanted him?

Now all of a sudden Joulevi was only looked at by vancouver that high?

I think way to early to call on juolevi I would say. So up and down on these boards nowadays..

We can't get any news on training camp because most are busy calling (or not calling or whatever the buzz word is now) juolevie a bust. Hedged bets to say they always said it from the start.

 

[CanaFan]

Didn't your group say it wasn't even benning who decided on Virtanen, more the ownership wanted him?

Now all of a sudden Joulevi was only looked at by vancouver that high?

I think way to early to call on juolevi I would say. So up and down on these boards nowadays..

We can't get any news on training camp because most are busy calling (or not calling or whatever the buzz word is now) juolevie a bust. Hedged bets to say they always said it from the start.

It's our fault there's "no news" out of training camp?

lol That's a new approach.

 

[rune74]

It's our fault there's "no news" out of training camp?

lol That's a new approach.

No, I'm saying spending so much time going in circles and spinning tires on the same thing over and over to say he's a bust(but not say it so you can't be called on it) is non productive....usually there were people digging up nuggets now we have 2 or 3 posters doing it.

 

[CanaFan]

No, I'm saying spending so much time going in circles and spinning tires on the same thing over and over to say he's a bust(but not say it so you can't be called on it) is non productive....usually there were people digging up nuggets now we have 2 or 3 posters doing it.

They aren't mutually exclusive activities though. It's not like talking about Juolevi is what has prevented me from going down to watch camp and report it back. Blame 2 kids and a busy week for that.

 

[rune74]

They aren't mutually exclusive activities though. It's not like talking about Juolevi is what has prevented me from going down to watch camp and report it back. Blame 2 kids and a busy week for that.

Well that's just not good enough, don't you have a shed with a lock on it?

 

[Bleach Clean]

Didn't your group say it wasn't even benning who decided on Virtanen, more the ownership wanted him?

Now all of a sudden Joulevi was only looked at by vancouver that high?

I think way to early to call on juolevi I would say. So up and down on these boards nowadays..

We can't get any news on training camp because most are busy calling (or not calling or whatever the buzz word is now) juolevie a bust. Hedged bets to say they always said it from the start.

My "group"?

I have never considered Benning to have been excluded from the decision to take Virtanen.

We don't know if CGY had the same rankings as VAN. Nor do we know if all other teams valued Juolevi as the best Dman in his draft. If you can make a case otherwise, do so.

I don't need to make a call on Juolevi's career in order to properly ascertain that he is tracking well below the pace Tkachuk has set -- Simply because the pace Tkachuk has set is staggering.

If I project Juolevi to be a top4 NHL Dman eventually, but still well behind Tkachuk's 1st line LW ceiling, Juolevi himself is not a "bust" and the criticisms surrounding the pick are upheld. See how that works? These two ideas can be true while Juolevi still becomes a successful NHLer.

 

[CanaFan]

Well that's just not good enough, don't you have a shed with a lock on it?

Ya but the wifi blows out there.

 

[Ryp37]

Didn't your group say it wasn't even benning who decided on Virtanen, more the ownership wanted him?

Now all of a sudden Joulevi was only looked at by vancouver that high?

I think way to early to call on juolevi I would say. So up and down on these boards nowadays..

We can't get any news on training camp because most are busy calling (or not calling or whatever the buzz word is now) juolevie a bust. Hedged bets to say they always said it from the start.

Yeah must have nothing to do with camp being during work/school hours and everything to do with people sharing opinions on a message board.

 

[settinguptheplay]

just to keep things in perspective.

Juolevi - May 5th 1998
Gadjovich - October 12th 1998
Lind - October 16th 1998
Chatfield - June 15th 1996

I heard all summer about Pettersson's late bday and how he should be compared to some from the previous draft. Yet here we are with the opposite situation and somehow still working against the player.

Juolevi is still 19 years old (and will be for another 8 months) and already we have had months of pissing and moaning about him. I am not saying we need to follow with blind optimism but at least let our prospects develop without so much vitriol towards them.

 

[CanaFan]

just to keep things in perspective.

Juolevi - May 5th 1998
Gadjovich - October 12th 1998
Lind - October 16th 1998
Chatfield - June 15th 1996

I heard all summer about Pettersson's late bday and how he should be compared to some from the previous draft. Yet here we are with the opposite situation and somehow still working against the player.

Juolevi is still 19 years old (and will be for another 8 months) and already we have had months of pissing and moaning about him. I am not saying we need to follow with blind optimism but at least let our prospects develop without so much vitriol towards them.

Everyone is aware how old Juolevi is. No one was under the impression he was 20, 21, or 22.

 

[settinguptheplay]

Everyone is aware how old Juolevi is. No one was under the impression he was 20, 21, or 22.

So why all the hand wringing. The kid was 18 just 4 months ago and he is constantly called out as a disappointment. I am not convinced that people do know just how old he is. And how much development time he still has ahead of him.

 

[CanaFan]

So why all the hand wringing. The kid was 18 just 4 months ago and he is constantly called out as a disappointment. I am not convinced that people do know just how old he is. And how much development time he still has ahead of him.

Because players drafted as high as Juolevi don't require 3-4 years to develop into NHLers. At least the good ones don't. Good ones make the NHL by the time they are 19, 20 at the latest. Go look up some successful defensemen that were drafted top 10 and see how many needed 3-4 years of development. Juolevi wasn't drafted as a long shot project like Ben Hutton, he was drafted because he had a refined package of skills that should have had him on a fairly fast track to the NHL. If he doesn't make it it's because he's not developed much since being drafted, and that is worrying. Stagnation is bad.

 

[F A N]

Because players drafted as high as Juolevi don't require 3-4 years to develop into NHLers. At least the good ones don't. Good ones make the NHL by the time they are 19, 20 at the latest. Go look up some successful defensemen that were drafted top 10 and see how many needed 3-4 years of development. Juolevi wasn't drafted as a long shot project like Ben Hutton, he was drafted because he had a refined package of skills that should have had him on a fairly fast track to the NHL. If he doesn't make it it's because he's not developed much since being drafted, and that is worrying. Stagnation is bad.

And if he doesn't make the team this season he will be 20 next year, which falls under your "good ones make the NHL by the time they are... 20 at the latest" no?

Personally, I think a lot of it is draft status and team standings. There's a difference between "making" the NHL as in put in the NHL and being good enough to truly contribute in the NHL. There were quite a few successful Dmen drafted in the top 10 who weren't exactly deserving to be on the roster in their rookie year.

 

[Kaako Kappo]

Because players drafted as high as Juolevi don't require 3-4 years to develop into NHLers. At least the good ones don't. Good ones make the NHL by the time they are 19, 20 at the latest. Go look up some successful defensemen that were drafted top 10 and see how many needed 3-4 years of development. Juolevi wasn't drafted as a long shot project like Ben Hutton, he was drafted because he had a refined package of skills that should have had him on a fairly fast track to the NHL. If he doesn't make it it's because he's not developed much since being drafted, and that is worrying. Stagnation is bad.

If Juolevi was gonna be an NHL ready Dman at 18 or 19 years old, he would've been picked 3rd.

You people are delusional. If he's not in the nhl by 20, then start ******** ur pants.

 

[FinPanda]

I hope Juolevi proves you all wrong as soon as possible. Been reading this thread for a while and it is really sad to see that there is no trust for him. He is a disappointment already which is sad. He was drafted a bit too early when he should have, that is for sure. I was surprised that he was drafted at 5.

 

[Tobi Wan Kenobi]

If Juolevi was gonna be an NHL ready Dman at 18 or 19 years old, he would've been picked 3rd.

You people are delusional. If he's not in the nhl by 20, then start ******** ur pants.

I think a lot of it has to do with Tkachuk being there at 5. If he wasn't in that draft I don't think people would be hating as much. Defenseman take time. Development is different for every player. Juolevi brings a lot to the table that you just can't teach. He'll prove a lot of people wrong

 

[Peter10]

I think a lot of it has to do with Tkachuk being there at 5. If he wasn't in that draft I don't think people would be hating as much.

I kind of agree on that, although I still would have preferred Keller.

Juolevi brings a lot to the table that you just can't teach. He'll prove a lot of people wrong

I dont get the point of Juolevi "proving people wrong" that you and others make. As far as I can tell at least most people who complain about picking him at 5, dont deny that he is still a damn good prospect and one that is likely to have a very good NHL career.

 

[CanaFan]

If Juolevi was gonna be an NHL ready Dman at 18 or 19 years old, he would've been picked 3rd.

You people are delusional. If he's not in the nhl by 20, then start ******** ur pants.

Provorov 7th
Werenski 8th
Hanifin 5th
Reilly 5th
Lindholm 6th
Trouba 9th

All played at 18 or 19. All defensemen. None were picked higher than 5th.

Maybe familiarize yourself with the draft a bit before commenting?

 

[Pavel96]

I hope Juolevi proves you all wrong as soon as possible. Been reading this thread for a while and it is really sad to see that there is no trust for him. He is a disappointment already which is sad. He was drafted a bit too early when he should have, that is for sure. I was surprised that he was drafted at 5.

I hope he proves everyone wrong too. Why not. The problem is his play is encouraging this "lack of trust" not the person he is. World Juniors, D1, rookie camp - nothing impressive besides one or two passes that people cite as reasons why he will be an impact dman. He is clearly trending down. It's not a lack of trust or the fact people don't like him - he just is not impressing most people with his play (especially as a top 5 pick)!

If he was drafted early it is not his fault but it's logical that he as a "Canuck's draft pick" will face a lot more pressure. It's also why he will be gifted more opportunities to make the club and likely sign for a higher amount initially then a 4th round pick. It was his choice to enter into draft and he ended up being drafted earlier and now has an even better opportunity to showcase his skills. That shouldn't be a problem for him he should count his blessings if he truly wants to be an NHL player.

 

[Jack Burton]

sigh...... dude, just change your user name to reflect the team your really cheering for and stop pretending to be a Nucks fan.

Wow! What a classic defense mechanism when a person can't handle criticism. Not only can you not evaluate talent that well but you can't even get a proper handle on posters.

35+ years son...

 

[Mergatroidskittle]

Wow! What a classic defense mechanism when a person can't handle criticism. Not only can you not evaluate talent that well but you can't even get a proper handle on posters.

35+ years son...

Maybe time you give it a rest then sir

 

[PuckMunchkin]

If Juolevi was gonna be an NHL ready Dman at 18 or 19 years old, he would've been picked 3rd.

You people are delusional. If he's not in the nhl by 20, then start ******** ur pants.

The pant ******** is caused by his lack of progress after we drafted him combined with the consensus pick already putting in a season as a bona fide middle6 forward.

Hope he can make some huge strides this year playing in Finland and be ready for the camp next year.

 

[crazyforhockey]

just to keep things in perspective.

Juolevi - May 5th 1998
Gadjovich - October 12th 1998
Lind - October 16th 1998
Chatfield - June 15th 1996

I heard all summer about Pettersson's late bday and how he should be compared to some from the previous draft. Yet here we are with the opposite situation and somehow still working against the player.

Juolevi is still 19 years old (and will be for another 8 months) and already we have had months of pissing and moaning about him. I am not saying we need to follow with blind optimism but at least let our prospects develop without so much vitriol towards them.

I concur.......he will be agood to a very good dman...give him time to mature