How good was Fredrik Olausson?

[K Fleur]

I think people are selling Olausson short here. 1000+games and 500p is nothing to sneeze at. Reading this thread you would think he was garbage.

People are selling him as a soft power play specialist, which is what he was.

 

[tony d]

Very solid defenseman during his career. Always liked him.

 

[DDRhockey]

People are selling him as a soft power play specialist, which is what he was.

ok? paul coffey was also soft.

 

[K Fleur]

ok? paul coffey was also soft.

Sorry, you’ll have to explain what Paul Coffey has to do with Fredrik Olausson? A good explanation preferably.

 

[DDRhockey]

Sorry, you’ll have to explain what Paul Coffey has to do with Fredrik Olausson? A good explanation preferably.

not sure why 'soft' has such importance when he put up 1000 games and 500p and stanley cup win as a dman. He was a decent player, not elite but pretty good. not sure why you have to downgrade him so. I guess it is because he is a euro player.

 

[K Fleur]

not sure why 'soft' has such importance when he put up 1000 games and 500p and stanley cup win as a dman. He was a decent player, not elite but pretty good. not sure why you have to downgrade him so.

This is not even an explanation much less a good one.

I guess it is because he is a euro player.

Ahh there it is. Always comes crying out sooner or later. Better to lead with it. Saves time for everyone else.

 

[DDRhockey]

This is not even an explanation much less a good one.



Ahh there it is. Always comes crying out sooner or later.

because it is true. I have watched olausson in my career (I am 40), and soft isnt what I would describe him. probably saw 100 nhl matches when he played.

once again, you dont play 1000+ games as a D in the 80s and 90s if you are soft.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

because it is true. I have watched olausson in my career (I am 40), and soft isnt what I would describe him. probably saw 100 nhl matches when he played. Typical derogatory comments, if he was canadian he would been an amazing player.

once again, you dont play 1000+ games as a D in the 80s and 90s if you are soft.

It's a matter of whether your strengths can outweigh your weaknesses. Many soft players have long careers because they are still net positive contributors to NHL teams. Jordan Eberle is one of the softest players I have ever seen in my life. He will probably play 1000+ NHL games and make tens of millions of dollars doing so. Doesn't mean he isn't soft.

 

[Sentinel]

Good, not great. Lidstrom Extra Lite.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

totally, completely different classes of players though. Numminen was a number one defenseman and would have been number one on most teams in the league. Olausson spent most of his career playing a number 4/5 role at even-strength while being a power-play specialist.

Pietrangelo and shattenkirk...

late 90s/early 2000s numminen, sure.

but when they were teammates in the late 80s/early 90s (which i assume the comparison is about), numminen was a solid #3 on most teams with B offense, olausson was a #4 + A- PP ability. not so far off, valuewise, imo.

as for olausson’s softness, he wasn’t as soft as his PP partner.

 

[sr edler]

Olausson didn't play much for the national team, being over in North America so much. I see on his stats page he was a member of the infamous 2002 Olympic (Belarus failing) squad though, but I can't remember if he was a regular or not. Lidström, Öhlund, Jönsson & Norström were certainly in front of him, so I guess he had to compete for bottom pairing minutes with Kim Johnsson & Ragnarsson. He did have 2 penalty minutes in the tournament.

In Sweden a player like Anders Eldebrink is certainly more revered than Fredrik Olausson, despite the discrepancy in NHL games and Stanley Cup honors. Unless you're a standout player in the NHL people aren't going to be overly impressed. Tommy Albelin played 950+ NHL games and won a Stanley Cup (1995), but he was just a different type of defenseman than Olausson (defensive) (had no idea he played so many games for Calgary, by the way).

 

[streitz]

as for olausson’s softness, he wasn’t as soft as his PP partner.

That's really not saying much.



Also Numminen was better by his 2nd year.

 

[streitz]

not sure why 'soft' has such importance when he put up 1000 games and 500p and stanley cup win as a dman. He was a decent player, not elite but pretty good. not sure why you have to downgrade him so. I guess it is because he is a euro player.

I was a jets fan so I watched a lot of him early in his career, posts like yours frankly make me dislike European players because of people playing victim and making excuses bla bla bla bias.



In my post I mentioned 2 European players the jets had at the same time specifically who weren't soft. One a fellow Defenseman(Numminen) one a fellow Swede (Steen).Another poster above also alluded to an american player who was even softer then Olausson(which is try, btw it's Housley). So because Olausson was a silky Swede player who managed 500 points in a high scoring era we're all supposed to make him out to be Nick Lidstrom? BS through and through.



Olausson was good on the PP. He was good with breakout passes and he had a nice shot. He wasn't terrible defensively but not good either, most of the time not even average. He was soft, I can't speak to how he played later in his career but with the Jets he played like he was intimidated 90% of the time. So trying to turn this into a pity party for poor swedes makes no sense when at the same time the Jets had Steen who was probably the 2nd-4th most popular Jet 1.0 because he worked hard and played the game like a man(he was Cherry's favorite european). If Olausson decided to play like that I wouldn't call him soft at all, but he didnt.



I didn't dislike Olausson on the jets but there were very serious flaws in his game. He was ok on the 3rd pairing sheltered or when he was with an extremely good defensive minded partner(which the jets didn't really have) while getting pp time.

 

[Nick Hansen]

Couple of thoughts:

- Amazing that Albelin played after the 04 lockout. I would never in a million years have guessed that.

- Numminen actually received some Norris votes. I don't think Olausson was ever even near being relevant in that discussion.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

That's really not saying much.

well yeah exactly. anyone calling him not soft either never saw him play in winnipeg or is using housley as their goalpost for softness.

i mostly remember him from the 92 and 93 playoffs. but does anyone remember olausson’s first few years in the league? his ES production drops like a stone starting in 91, a year before paddock got there so i don’t think it’s just a case of acosch’s chosen deployment. what happened there?

 

[MXD]

Couple of thoughts:

- Amazing that Albelin played after the 04 lockout. I would never in a million years have guessed that.

- Numminen actually received some Norris votes. I don't think Olausson was ever even near being relevant in that discussion.

He somehow received a few votes, because point totals probably.

 

[MXD]

because it is true. I have watched olausson in my career (I am 40), and soft isnt what I would describe him. probably saw 100 nhl matches when he played.

once again, you dont play 1000+ games as a D in the 80s and 90s if you are soft.

Patrice Brisebois also played 1000+ games, albeit tad later with less points (because a tad later) and I don't think anyone DIDN'T call him soft a some point.

And he was also a pretty good player. Like Olausson actually, albeit not quite the same type of player (a bit better, because he could be entrusted with a bit more minutes, but that's neither here or there). But he was soft.

 

[streitz]

Patrice Brisebois also played 1000+ games, albeit tad later with less points (because a tad later) and I don't think anyone DIDN'T call him soft a some point.

And he was also a pretty good player. Like Olausson actually, albeit not quite the same type of player (a bit better, because he could be entrusted with a bit more minutes, but that's neither here or there). But he was soft.

I'm not sure if 'trusted' is and adequate term to describe Breeze-by's usage in Montreal in the late 90's-early 2000's. More like they had no one else and entered the darkest stage in franchise history.

 

[MXD]

I'm not sure if 'trusted' is and adequate term to describe Breeze-by's usage in Montreal in the late 90's-early 2000's. More like they had no one else and entered the darkest stage in franchise history.

It was more in absolute terms. Brisebois wasn't a star by any means, but he could've play 20+ mins on any team in his prime, despite being much better fit for 2nd pairing duties. And Montreal's darkest stage was probably better than Winnipeg's brightest stage, so...

 

[streitz]

Montreal's darkest stage was probably better than Winnipeg's brightest stage, so...

LOL, I lived in the peg and moved near Montreal in the late 90's(married a french girl). I watched the late 90's/early 2000's habs on a fairly regular basis and the mid-late 80's/early 90's jets would of eaten those teams.



Either Hawerchuk or Selanne alone would be more valuable then the entire 2001 canadiens(for example) roster, by a long shot.

 

[Doctor No]

I was a jets fan so I watched a lot of him early in his career, posts like yours frankly make me dislike European players because of people playing victim and making excuses bla bla bla bias.

So in other words, you're biased against European players because people think that you're biased against European players.

I always think of Olausson as a Duck for some reason, and he was a lot of fun to watch on the ice.

 

[streitz]

So in other words, you're biased against European players because people think that you're biased against European players.

I always think of Olausson as a Duck for some reason, and he was a lot of fun to watch on the ice.

My 2nd favorite player of all time is Thomas Steen, Selanne is up there for sure as well. When I read the woe is me crap for calling a spade a spade it does make me more biased though.


Olausson was soft but despite that I never really had a problem with him on the jets, a big part of that is probably because he wasn't asked to do too much. 2nd/3rd pairing depending on injuries/depth that year and rip it up on the PP.

 

[MXD]

LOL, I lived in the peg and moved near Montreal in the late 90's(married a french girl). I watched the late 90's/early 2000's habs on a fairly regular basis and the mid-late 80's/early 90's jets would of eaten those teams.



Either Hawerchuk or Selanne alone would be more valuable then the entire 2001 canadiens(for example) roster, by a long shot.

... including the Hart winner. Yep. Totally not bothering about this one anymore.

 

[streitz]

... including the Hart winner. Yep. Totally not bothering about this one anymore.

Yeah because Jose Theodore outside of that 2001-2002 season was such a great goaltender, Montreal won so many games with him.



I heard when he fell down his steps post lockout and hurt himself it was because he reached for the railing with his glove hand and missed it by 2 feet.

 

[Reality Check]

The best adjective is simply solid. More than acceptable as a top 4. But probably better suited as a #5 as he aged.

He was a terrific fit on the 2002 Red Wings.