Toggle sidebar

Prospect Info: Olli Juolevi Discussion XXXIIII (Post #755)

Status
Not open for further replies.
BloatedGuppy

BloatedGuppy

Registered User
Jun 29, 2007
4,307
232
Vancouver
Verviticus said:
why dont people just say a #1 defenceman as it should be mathematically and logically, and then qualify where in the spectrum that lands? karlsson is #1 in the nhl and probably the world, and dan hamhuis might've been #15 in his prime. those are both #1 defencemen just as both connor mcdavid and tyler seguin are #1 centres.
Click to expand...

I dunno man. No one uses the same parlance when discussing these things. It probably leads to a lot of arguments. There's definitely a separation between a "1D" as looked at across 30(1) NHL clubs and a "#1 defenseman", who is closer to being a franchise cornerstone.

Verviticus said:
its a weird setup because if you were just guaranteed to pick hamhuis and torres you would be getting alright value on your picks and you would never, ever be able to build an awesome team off of drafting because you would never get lucky on their upside. ultimately it would be much easier to build a team off of a star player and a bust than two hamhuises or whatever, even though the odds work out in such a way that both of those realities are similar

this isnt exactly what im saying but here's a really good quick article on the return of aiming for stars vs aiming for Pretty Good
Click to expand...

Good article.

While I think smart drafting and always more or less getting decent value for your pick positions would eventually land you in a really solid spot organizationally through sheer asset volume, with the condition the Canucks are taking a lot of moon shots on high upside players might be the better strategy. Until they get a handful of stars they can build a new identity around they're going to be spinning their wheels, so might as well try and maximize your chances of that.
 

F A N

Registered User
Aug 12, 2005
18,761
5,972
Dan Hamhuis was drafted as an offensive Dman. As a junior prospect he was nothing like Juolevi with his open ice hits. If Hamhuis wasn't drafted in an era where his size was considered less than ideal he would have and should have been drafted in the top 10. Hamhuis evolved into a top pairing "puck moving" Dman. Some here act like he's some average talent.
 
Tobi Wan Kenobi

Tobi Wan Kenobi

Registered User
May 25, 2011
5,284
94
Vancouver
brokenhole said:
I'm not sure how you can claim that when Juolevi has not even played an N.H.L. game..kind of like putting the cart in front of the horse.
Click to expand...

lol... What am I blind until he gets to the NHL? It's called watching him. His kinetics, his puck skills and his vision. It's called projecting. You'd all make terrible scouts. "Nope not gonna watch him or project him until he's in the NHL, maybe then we can trade for him or wait until UFA" Just because Hamhuis ut up good numbers in junior doesn't mean it would translate. Clearly it didn't. His defensive awareness is off the charts. I'm not saying he's average. He's one of the best defenseman who's ever played in the organization. I'm just saying Juolevi has more upside offensively. It's pretty clear he does. Don't understand how you can't see it. His vision, poise, puck skills and shot are all projecting to be better than Dans.
 
Last edited:

Rotting Corpse*

Registered User
Sep 20, 2003
60,153
3
Kelowna, BC
Doobie Dubois said:
lol... What am I blind until he gets to the NHL? It's called watching him. His kinetics, his puck skills and his vision. It's called projecting. You'd all make terrible scouts. "Nope not gonna watch him or project him until he's in the NHL, maybe then we can trade for him or wait until UFA" Just because Hamhuis ut up good numbers in junior doesn't mean it would translate. Clearly it didn't. His defensive awareness is off the charts. I'm not saying he's average. He's one of the best defenseman who's ever played in the organization. I'm just saying Juolevi has more upside offensively. It's pretty clear he does. Don't understand how you can't see it. His vision, poise, puck skills and shot are all projecting to be better than Dans.
Click to expand...

It's cute that you think you would make a good scout.
 

Rotting Corpse*

Registered User
Sep 20, 2003
60,153
3
Kelowna, BC
BloatedGuppy said:
I dunno man. No one uses the same parlance when discussing these things. It probably leads to a lot of arguments. There's definitely a separation between a "1D" as looked at across 30(1) NHL clubs and a "#1 defenseman", who is closer to being a franchise cornerstone.



Good article.
Click to expand...

It leads to so many boring, meaningless arguments. In no possible way does it ****ing matter if someone is a #1 D or not.
 
TruGr1t

TruGr1t

Proper Villain
Jun 26, 2003
23,409
7,414
Gud Vibrations said:
Ceiling is Duncan Keith minus all the dirty stuff.
Click to expand...

I'm assuming you're getting this from the recent Heiskanen comparisons to Keith? Never heard it about Juolevi, but it's been said a few times about Heiskanen that I've seen.
 
PetterssonSimp

PetterssonSimp

Registered User
Dec 12, 2008
7,374
917
Well it's good to know Alex Edler in Dan Hamhuis' body has gotten such in depth discussion going. So now 5th overall for Edler 2.0 and 6th overall for Torres 2.0.
 
mathonwy

mathonwy

Positively #toxic
Jan 21, 2008
19,157
10,145
mstad101 said:
Well it's good to know Alex Edler in Dan Hamhuis' body has gotten such in depth discussion going. So now 5th overall for Edler 2.0 and 6th overall for Torres 2.0.
Click to expand...

When one says Edler 2.0 and Torres 2.0 in the same sentence, one is implying the two players are in the same category.

Assuming this is your implication, I would disagree with your assessment.

When not MCO'ed, Edler is a top pairing d-man that's played 668 games for only one team while Torres has spent most of his life in the bottom 6 on 7 different teams incurring multiple boneheaded suspensions.

I would be fine if OJ turns into a Edler 2.0 because pre-back problems Edler was a very very good Edler.
 
rune74

rune74

Registered User
Oct 10, 2008
9,228
552
Mango Walnut Beard said:
It leads to so many boring, meaningless arguments. In no possible way does it ****ing matter if someone is a #1 D or not.
Click to expand...

It matters to push agendas.

At this point in time we have no idea how this player will level out. He is far to green to even make conclusions that are based on fact.
 
DL44

DL44

Status quo
Sep 26, 2006
17,910
3,833
Location: Location:
http://theprovince.com/feature/canucks-top-10-prospects-2017/canucks-top-10-prospects-olli-juolevi


juolevi.jpg
 
racerjoe

racerjoe

Registered User
Jun 3, 2012
12,204
5,921
Vancouver
GetFocht

GetFocht

Indestructible
Jun 11, 2013
9,077
4,373
I think it's pretty certain that he will start the season on the Canucks next year.
 
Breakers

Breakers

Make Mirrored Visors Legal Again
Aug 5, 2014
21,536
19,968
Denver Colorado
His Ceiling is Hampus Lindholm. He doesn't play like Duncan Keith at all.


Button compared him Lindholm
ISS compared him to lindholm
Pronman compared him to lindholm.
 
Kryten

Kryten

slightly regarded
Sponsor
Sep 29, 2011
15,466
12,826
Kootenays
Art of Sedinery said:
Did the Knights season not end after the Canucks season?
Click to expand...

"It was surprising the Canucks had no plans to bring Juolevi to Utica or Vancouver when his junior season ended. They wanted his off-season training to get started as quickly as possible."

Botch is clueless as usual
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom