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

Status
Not open for further replies.

CanaFan

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
19,887
5,849
BC
provorov was listed at 201 lbs his draft year, and is either 2 or 3" shorter than juolevi depending on which site you check. that does seem like a different physical type to me. i'd consider an 18 year old over 200 lbs to be an early maturer.

https://www.defendingbigd.com/2015/...aft-ivan-provorov-profile-and-scouting-report

Bob Mckenzie's 2015 and 2016 final draft rankings:
http://www.tsn.ca/mcdavid-tops-mckenzie-s-final-draft-ranking-1.300634
http://www.tsn.ca/matthews-goes-wire-to-wire-as-tsn-s-top-prospect-1.511597

Provorov - 6'0 193lbs
Juolevi - 6'2 188lbs

I highly doubt Provorov is the exact weight today (201 per Eliteprospects) that he was two years earlier so I'd take that DefendingBigD number with some salt. Using Mackenzie as a single consolidated source it sounds like a difference of 2 inches and 5 lbs. If that negates the comparison then I'll refer you to my earlier comment that you are being FAR too selective in what you consider a comparable. 2 inches and 5 pounds should not be a critical factor in deciding whether two prospects are comparable or not. It's just an absurd way to duck out of setting a reasonably high bar for Juoelvi.

Edit: One interesting thing out of the DBD article. Mentioned that Provorov played for a powerhouse Brandon team in 2014-15, so I looked up their team GF (340 goals). In 2015-16 that dropped to "just" 316 goals or a decline of 24 goals. Despite this, Provorov still managed to increase his PPG from 1.02 to 1.18. Meanwhile the London Knights suffer a similar drop from 319 to 289 (30 goals) and this is considered a satisfactory explanation (for some) as to why Juolevi didn't increase his PPG.
 
Last edited:

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,611
84,143
Vancouver, BC
Other than Blake Wheeler 13 years ago, I'd love to hear some more examples of this mythical unicorn player that was a top-10 pick, flatlined and developed slowly because they were 'physically immature', and then magically became better than everyone else 4-5 years later.
 

CanaFan

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
19,887
5,849
BC
Other than Blake Wheeler 13 years ago, I'd love to hear some more examples of this mythical unicorn player that was a top-10 pick, flatlined and developed slowly because they were 'physically immature', and then magically became better than everyone else 4-5 years later.

Wheeler was also unusual because he was drafted directly out of high school as well, which doesn't fit as a corollary for Juolevi who was drafted out of the much more competitive and established OHL.
 

docbenton

Registered User
Dec 6, 2014
1,824
650
Wheeler was also unusual because he was drafted directly out of high school as well, which doesn't fit as a corollary for Juolevi who was drafted out of the much more competitive and established OHL.

Filip Forsberg? Looked like a bust for a while, then the skating and pace got better, now he's in the conversation for best player in that draft.

You could put Horvat in that category, remember when everyone had Lazar over him? Horvat put on a bunch of weight and couldn't skate his second year, was pretty useless for a player of his stature in the OHL playoffs and Memorial Cup. Had 0 points in 5 games in the AHL. Now he's challenging guys like Monahan and Lindholm, could argue he's already ahead because he's more dynamic.

I'm sure there are lots of examples.
 

Breakers

Make Mirrored Visors Legal Again
Aug 5, 2014
21,507
19,911
Denver Colorado
Other than Blake Wheeler 13 years ago, I'd love to hear some more examples of this mythical unicorn player that was a top-10 pick, flatlined and developed slowly because they were 'physically immature', and then magically became better than everyone else 4-5 years later.



Benning loves "under performing" top 10 picks

Burmistrov
Gudbranson
Skille

Lets trade for Magnus Paavri
 

krutovsdonut

eeyore
Sep 25, 2016
16,851
9,521
Bob Mckenzie's 2015 and 2016 final draft rankings:
http://www.tsn.ca/mcdavid-tops-mckenzie-s-final-draft-ranking-1.300634
http://www.tsn.ca/matthews-goes-wire-to-wire-as-tsn-s-top-prospect-1.511597

Provorov - 6'0 193lbs
Juolevi - 6'2 188lbs

I highly doubt Provorov is the exact weight today (201 per Eliteprospects) that he was two years earlier so I'd take that DefendingBigD number with some salt. Using Mackenzie as a single consolidated source it sounds like a difference of 2 inches and 5 lbs. If that negates the comparison then I'll refer you to my earlier comment that you are being FAR too selective in what you consider a comparable. 2 inches and 5 pounds should not be a critical factor in deciding whether two prospects are comparable or not. It's just an absurd way to duck out of setting a reasonably high bar for Juoelvi.

Edit: One interesting thing out of the DBD article. Mentioned that Provorov played for a powerhouse Brandon team in 2014-15, so I looked up their team GF (340 goals). In 2015-16 that dropped to "just" 316 goals or a decline of 24 goals. Despite this, Provorov still managed to increase his PPG from 1.02 to 1.18. Meanwhile the London Knights suffer a similar drop from 319 to 289 (30 goals) and this is considered a satisfactory explanation (for some) as to why Juolevi didn't increase his PPG.

i guess i am confused why you would pick the one showing juolevi at 188 if you doubt provorov at 200? juolevi was generally listed at or under 180 at draft age .

https://thehockeywriters.com/olli-juolevi-the-next-ones-nhl-2016-draft-prospect-profile/

https://www.habseyesontheprize.com/...couting-report-rankings-highlights-defenceman

http://lastwordonsports.com/2016/04/06/olli-juolevi-scouting-report-2016-nhl-draft-7/

conversely, here's provorov listed at 200 or 201 lbs in multiple draft previews

https://www.thedraftanalyst.com/nhl-draft-2016/ivan-provorov/

http://bsndenver.com/nhl-draft-prospect-ivan-provorov/

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/prospect-of-interest-411-on-ivan-provorov/

if they are all wrong, can we agree they are likely to be wrong to the same extent and in the same direction of overstating both player's size?
 

Pip

Registered User
Feb 2, 2012
69,188
8,517
Granduland
Filip Forsberg? Looked like a bust for a while, then the skating and pace got better, now he's in the conversation for best player in that draft.

You could put Horvat in that category, remember when everyone had Lazar over him? Horvat put on a bunch of weight and couldn't skate his second year, was pretty useless for a player of his stature in the OHL playoffs and Memorial Cup. Had 0 points in 5 games in the AHL. Now he's challenging guys like Monahan and Lindholm, could argue he's already ahead because he's more dynamic.

I'm sure there are lots of examples.

Horvat showed great progression in his draft +1 season that indicated that he would be a good NHLer
 

CanaFan

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
19,887
5,849
BC
Filip Forsberg? Looked like a bust for a while, then the skating and pace got better, now he's in the conversation for best player in that draft.

You could put Horvat in that category, remember when everyone had Lazar over him? Horvat put on a bunch of weight and couldn't skate his second year, was pretty useless for a player of his stature in the OHL playoffs and Memorial Cup. Had 0 points in 5 games in the AHL. Now he's challenging guys like Monahan and Lindholm, could argue he's already ahead because he's more dynamic.

I'm sure there are lots of examples.

Those are some very poor examples.

Forsberg increased his PPG significantly from pre-draft (.40) to D+1 (.87) in a pretty tough league.

Horvat similarly improved from .91 to 1.37 from his pre-draft to D+1.

Horvat then made the NHL at 19 while Forsberg was a very good player in the AHL and had a cup of coffee with the Preds.

Neither were "slow developers" in the slightest.
 

CanaFan

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
19,887
5,849
BC
i guess i am confused why you would pick the one showing juolevi at 188 if you doubt provorov at 200? juolevi was generally listed at or under 180 at draft age .

https://thehockeywriters.com/olli-juolevi-the-next-ones-nhl-2016-draft-prospect-profile/

https://www.habseyesontheprize.com/...couting-report-rankings-highlights-defenceman

http://lastwordonsports.com/2016/04/06/olli-juolevi-scouting-report-2016-nhl-draft-7/

conversely, here's provorov listed at 200 or 201 lbs in multiple draft previews

https://www.thedraftanalyst.com/nhl-draft-2016/ivan-provorov/

http://bsndenver.com/nhl-draft-prospect-ivan-provorov/

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/prospect-of-interest-411-on-ivan-provorov/

if they are all wrong, can we agree they are likely to be wrong to the same extent and in the same direction of overstating both player's size?

Sure because it really doesn't matter. Juolevi wasn't "undersized" in junior and isn't "undersized" going into this training camp. If you think the most salient difference between Provorov and Juolevi is their weight then I'm stunned by the glibness of your analysis.

Weight isn't the issue with Juolevi, it's the passiveness with which he plays the game. Provorov is a top D in the NHL at 19 because he has the skill and mindset to be a top D. Juolevi isn't because he doesn't, not because of his weight.
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,611
84,143
Vancouver, BC
Those are some very poor examples.

Forsberg increased his PPG significantly from pre-draft (.40) to D+1 (.87) in a pretty tough league.

Horvat similarly improved from .91 to 1.37 from his pre-draft to D+1.

Horvat then made the NHL at 19 while Forsberg was a very good player in the AHL and had a cup of coffee with the Preds.

Neither were "slow developers" in the slightest.

Yeah, Forsberg threw 63 points on the board in the NHL at the same age that Pettersson will be in 18-19. Not even remotely a slow developer.

And again, in the case of Pettersson - this is the guy who was the *most advanced* player in the 2017 top-10 in terms of age/production/level of competition. So what if he's skinny? Plenty of skinny guys do just fine in the NHL if they have the talent to back it up. And Pettersson would seem to.
 

pitseleh

Registered User
Jul 30, 2005
19,164
2,613
Vancouver
While Hampus Lindholm was the pre-draft comp people were throwing around, Brandon Gormely is the closest Juolevi comparable at the draft +1 stage I can think of.

Was loved in his draft year, ranked #4 on Bob McKenzie's list, and every scouting report raved about his ability to play in transition, to skate, and primarily about how he thought the game, despite mediocre point totals on an offensive powerhouse and some concerns about needing to fill out.

An example of pre-draft info:

"He has size (6-foot-2, 187 pounds), he skates very well, he’s smart and poised with the puck. He can feather some great passes on the tape through the middle to set up guys in the clear. He’s reliable in all areas, and has confidence.”- NHL Central Scouting Quebec scout Chris Bordeleau to NHL.com; February, 2010

"He's got a laid-back personality. He's got the maturity of a 30 year old. Take away hockey -- he's just a rock-solid young man.He was the first overall pick here and when he came in he was so quiet, so unassuming, so humble you couldn't tell if he was the first overall player and a player projected as a franchise player, or a free-agent walk-on who hitchhiked into camp."- Moncton head coach Danny Flynn to NHL.com; February, 2010

Strengths: Superb, effortless skater who looks like he's gliding over air. Very good acceleration and recovery speed. Balanced and agile; adept at crossing over and keeping containment on speed to the outside; his footwork has improved since last year. Good hockey IQ; maintains gap control effectively and keeps the puck in front of him. Understands when to jump up into the play and when to stay home. Naturally sense the play's flow and goes to vulnerable areas of the ice on both offense and defense. Excellent on-ice vision and soft hands make him an accurate and effective passer. Keeps his head up and can spring the breakout with one good feed. Nice puckhandler who carries the biscuit with speed and confidence. Has a good point shot that is hard, low and finds its way through traffic. Also possesses an array of wrist and snap shots that he's not afraid to use, with a release that is tough for goaltenders to pick up. Productive from the blue line: 9 goals, 43 points in 58 games should substantially increase if he returns to junior next season. Has an almost zen-like calm and poise on the ice; doesn't often cough up the puck or succumb to forechecking pressure. Works hard and makes life easy on his coaches by responding to guidance and making adjustments to his game. Disciplined-- doesn't play selfishly and always puts his team first. Another mature, articulate, well-spoken prospect who carries himself well and not only plays like a top draft pick, but acts like one. Although Moncton had a disappointing 0-3 showing at the Memorial Cup in May, Gormley was the Wildcats' best player by a significant margin.

Weaknesses: Long, lean frame is going to require a lot of off-ice work to physically mature. Can play a physical game at times, but prefers to use his quick stick to break up plays rather than take the body-- a function perhaps of the lightness of his build. Several scouts have said that Gormley may be one of those 'tweener-type defenders at the NHL level: solid both on defense and offense, but not exceptional in either area-- more like a jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none.

http://bruins2010draftwatch.blogspot.ca/2010/06/first-round-draft-spotlight-brandon.html

And:

"He's got a number of great qualities," said Flynn. "He's got really good size, he's 6-2, headed to 6-3, and starting to fill out. He's got outstanding hockey sense. He's got that poise, that innate ability to recognize when he has time and when he doesn't have time. For a tall, somewhat-gangly 17-year-old, he's got very good feet, very good mobility. He's not going to wow you, pull you out of your seat by going coast to coast. But as you watch him, you see how efficient he is and you grow to like his game.”

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/389807-nhl-2010-top-draft-prospects-brandon-gormley

In his draft +1 season, his RelGF% tanked, although he managed to improve his point totals (the first is true for Juolevi, but not the second). People were still raving about his hockey sense even in 2014:

Corey Pronman of ESPN ranked Gormley as the 16th best prospect on his top 100 list, up from his previous 19th ranking.

There are some concerns about the fact that Gormley hasn’t graduated to the NHL yet, and he may be tailing off as a prospect. I think that’s a reasonable issue to bring up, but for me, the lack of graduation is more about Arizona’s depth chart as opposed to the player — he scored 36 points in 54 games for the Coyotes’ AHL affiliate this past season. Praise for Gormley’s hockey IQ is echoed by anyone who has seen him play. He’s a quality two-way defenseman who has continued to improve on the physical components of the game. However, I will echo the common concern that this upcoming season has to be the one in which Gormley secures a full-time NHL gig.

HockeysFuture has Gormley ranked as their 35th prospect on their top 50 list heading into this season. He ranked 10th when just looking at defensmen.

With a stacked blue line in Arizona, Gormley has been the shining example of patience in the minors. Year after year the dynamic defenseman has become better and better as he awaited his spot to open up. Now going on his third year of professional hockey, the two-way defenseman is at a point where the NHL seems a sure thing. He has proven that the offensive ability is there in the minors as well as the defensive game. Despite a minus-22 rating last season in the AHL, Gormley is as tough as they come in the defensive end. With a heavy shot, a good presence on the puck, and an intelligent game, he should eventually fit into the Coyotes’ top four. He is capable of eating huge minutes, playing in every situation, and he looks ready for his rookie NHL season.

http://mynhltraderumors.com/on-the-trade-block-a-closer-look-at-brandon-gormley/2014/10/20/

Guys like Cody Ceci and Haydn Fleury fit the same mould too. OEL and Hampus Lindholm show that these types of players move quickly when they are actually good.
 

CanaFan

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
19,887
5,849
BC
While Hampus Lindholm was the pre-draft comp people were throwing around, Brandon Gormely is the closest Juolevi comparable at the draft +1 stage I can think of.

Was loved in his draft year, ranked #4 on Bob McKenzie's list, and every scouting report raved about his ability to play in transition, to skate, and primarily about how he thought the game, despite mediocre point totals on an offensive powerhouse and some concerns about needing to fill out.

An example of pre-draft info:



http://bruins2010draftwatch.blogspot.ca/2010/06/first-round-draft-spotlight-brandon.html

And:



http://bleacherreport.com/articles/389807-nhl-2010-top-draft-prospects-brandon-gormley

In his draft +1 season, his RelGF% tanked, although he managed to improve his point totals (the first is true for Juolevi, but not the second). People were still raving about his hockey sense even in 2014:



http://mynhltraderumors.com/on-the-trade-block-a-closer-look-at-brandon-gormley/2014/10/20/

Guys like Cody Ceci and Haydn Fleury fit the same mould too. OEL and Hampus Lindholm show that these types of players move quickly when they are actually good.

Great work! More effort than I was willing to put in for this discussion.
 

docbenton

Registered User
Dec 6, 2014
1,824
650
Yeah, Forsberg threw 63 points on the board in the NHL at the same age that Pettersson will be in 18-19. Not even remotely a slow developer.

And again, in the case of Pettersson - this is the guy who was the *most advanced* player in the 2017 top-10 in terms of age/production/level of competition. So what if he's skinny? Plenty of skinny guys do just fine in the NHL if they have the talent to back it up. And Pettersson would seem to.

Forsberg had 34 points in 47 games in his D+2 year in the AHL and didn't look that great, not exactly impressive considering the player he became his D+3 year. Horvat barely looked like an NHL player at the start of his D+2 year, obviously got a lot better (mostly again his skating and pace) as the year went along. Olli is only starting his D+2 year, so he's got time to improve in those areas.
 

CanaFan

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
19,887
5,849
BC
Forsberg had 34 points in 47 games in his D+2 year in the AHL and didn't look that great, not exactly impressive considering the player he became his D+3 year. Horvat barely looked like an NHL player at the start of his D+2 year, obviously got a lot better (mostly again his skating and pace) as the year went along. Olli is only starting his D+2 year, so he's got time to improve in those areas.

I don't know what sort of standard you are holding these players to but 34 pts in 47 games for a player who would have been ineligible for the AHL if he was North American is very damn good. If Virtanen had put that up in his D+3 season (1 year older) we'd all be singing his dramatic turnaround.

And Bo making the NHL at 19 is also very impressive, esp considering how slow Willie was to trust Bo with ice time. Again if Juolevi makes the team and shows a Bo-like season this year no one* will be complaining.

*Excludes MtB who would probably freak out about something
 

krutovsdonut

eeyore
Sep 25, 2016
16,851
9,521
Sure because it really doesn't matter. Juolevi wasn't "undersized" in junior and isn't "undersized" going into this training camp. If you think the most salient difference between Provorov and Juolevi is their weight then I'm stunned by the glibness of your analysis.

Weight isn't the issue with Juolevi, it's the passiveness with which he plays the game. Provorov is a top D in the NHL at 19 because he has the skill and mindset to be a top D. Juolevi isn't because he doesn't, not because of his weight.

juolevi was and is undersized for the nhl and compared to provorov given his height.

weight relative to height is obviously being used as a proxy for build type and relative state of physical maturity at draft age here. to suggest otherwise or that this is the whole of my analysis seems pretty glib.

if you want a more detailed analysis, here you go.

depending on which index you use,

167-189 lbs is average body weight for a 6' 2" healthy 18 year old
165-177 is average body weight for a 6' healthy 18 year old.

so provorov's most commonly reported weight at draft age is 23 lbs over high average for his height

and juolevi's most commonly reported weight is 9 lbs below high average. juolevi is said to have a large projectable frame.

so to be the same relative "bulk" as provorov, juolevi would need to have been 213 lbs at 18.
 

CanaFan

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
19,887
5,849
BC
weight relative to height is obviously being used as a proxy for build type and relative state of physical maturity at draft age here. to suggest otherwise or that this is the whole of my analysis seems pretty glib.

if you want a more detailed analysis, here you go.

depending on which index you use,

167-189 lbs is average body weight for a 6' 2" healthy 18 year old
165-177 is average body weight for a 6' healthy 18 year old.

so provorov's most commonly reported weight at draft age is 23 lbs over high average for his height

and juolevi's most commonly reported weight is 9 lbs below high average. juolevi is said to have a large projectable frame.

so to be the same relative "bulk" as provorov, juolevi would need to have been 213 lbs at 18.

And that matters why?

Is Juolevi unable to be a dominant player against 17-19 year olds because he doesn't have Provorov's build? Is that really going to be the crux of your argument?

Fine. Then what about Hampus Lindholm. 6'2 and listed at 185lbs at the draft.
https://thehockeywriters.com/hampus-lindholm-the-next-ones-2012-nhl-draft-prospect-profile/

Oliver Ekman-Larsson
6'2 and just 176lbs at draft
https://thehockeywriters.com/6-oliv...hockey-spy’s-2009-nhl-entry-draft-rankings/


Both played in NHL at D+2 and very quickly became stand-out players.

Weight doesn't determine how good a player you are. It is a factor, but not to the degree you are arguing.
 

krutovsdonut

eeyore
Sep 25, 2016
16,851
9,521
And that matters why?

Is Juolevi unable to be a dominant player against 17-19 year olds because he doesn't have Provorov's build? Is that really going to be the crux of your argument?

Fine. Then what about Hampus Lindholm. 6'2 and listed at 185lbs at the draft.
https://thehockeywriters.com/hampus-lindholm-the-next-ones-2012-nhl-draft-prospect-profile/

Oliver Ekman-Larsson
6'2 and just 176lbs at draft
https://thehockeywriters.com/6-oliv...hockey-spy’s-2009-nhl-entry-draft-rankings/

Both played in NHL at D+2 and very quickly became stand-out players.

Weight doesn't determine how good a player you are. It is a factor, but not to the degree you are arguing.

i never said it did. draft age weight is just a handy proxy for physical maturity and physical maturity is a factor whether a player is nhl ready. skinny players can take longer.

i am happier with either of those new comparisons than with provorov. at least we're talking somewhat similar builds.
 

CanaFan

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
19,887
5,849
BC
i never said it did. draft age weight is just a handy proxy for physical maturity and physical maturity is a factor whether a player is nhl ready. skinny players can take longer.

i am happier with either of those new comparisons than with provorov. at least we're talking somewhat similar builds.

I can accept that skinny players don't reach the NHL as quickly, though given Juolevi's reported weight I don't consider him "skinny" anymore.

I don't accept it has any meaningful role in his ability to dominate at the OHL level. If Ryan Ellis can be named the OHL's top defenseman twice then so can Juolevi.
 

krutovsdonut

eeyore
Sep 25, 2016
16,851
9,521
I can accept that skinny players don't reach the NHL as quickly, though given Juolevi's reported weight I don't consider him "skinny" anymore.

I don't accept it has any meaningful role in his ability to dominate at the OHL level. If Ryan Ellis can be named the OHL's top defenseman twice then so can Juolevi.

i don't think i said it did explain his ohl play. i agree with you that it does not.
 

CanaFan

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
19,887
5,849
BC
i don't think i said it did explain his ohl play. i agree with you that it does not.

If the only point is that it prevented him from playing immediately after being drafted then I concede but no one really had that expectation anyway. Like Provorov, Werenski, OEL, and Lindholm I think most of us would be pleased with his progress if he made the NHL this year (D+2, 19 years of age). And since he is up to ~200lbs at this camp, shouldn't it be mostly irrelevant from this point going forward?
 

krutovsdonut

eeyore
Sep 25, 2016
16,851
9,521
If the only point is that it prevented him from playing immediately after being drafted then I concede but no one really had that expectation anyway. Like Provorov, Werenski, OEL, and Lindholm I think most of us would be pleased with his progress if he made the NHL this year (D+2, 19 years of age). And since he is up to ~200lbs at this camp, shouldn't it be mostly irrelevant from this point going forward?

i think you've taken this and run with it.

being tall and skinny was part of an explanation why he is slow to the nhl and was predictably going to be slow when drafted. the other reason was the weaknesses in his defensive game and his skillset being merely good rather than dominant. i said they drafted him in spite of these weaknesses for his possession/transition game.
 

CanaFan

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
19,887
5,849
BC
i think you've taken this and run with it.

being tall and skinny was part of an explanation why he is slow to the nhl and was predictably going to be slow when drafted. the other reason was the weaknesses in his defensive game and his skillset being merely good rather than dominant. i said they drafted him in spite of these weaknesses for his possession/transition game.

Part A doesn't follow. He hasn't been slow to the NHL ... yet. People have been critical of his OHL, WJC, and prospects camp play, yes. I haven't noticed anyone disappointed that he didn't make the team as an 18 year old.

Part B doesn't sound like a player that should have been drafted anywhere near the top 10. A player with weaknesses in his defensive game and skill set should probably go where Guilliam Brisebois went.
 

maroon 6

Registered User
Dec 31, 2009
5,065
1,093
British Columbia
Other than Blake Wheeler 13 years ago, I'd love to hear some more examples of this mythical unicorn player that was a top-10 pick, flatlined and developed slowly because they were 'physically immature', and then magically became better than everyone else 4-5 years later.

Daniel and Henrik Sedin
 

CanaFan

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
19,887
5,849
BC
Daniel and Henrik Sedin

In the NHL? Yes

In their age group? They were standouts in the SEL as teenagers and at both the 1999 and 2000 WJC tournaments. Not really the same as Blake Wheeler, who was a developmental slow burner long before the NHL.
 

krutovsdonut

eeyore
Sep 25, 2016
16,851
9,521
Part A doesn't follow. He hasn't been slow to the NHL ... yet. People have been critical of his OHL, WJC, and prospects camp play, yes. I haven't noticed anyone disappointed that he didn't make the team as an 18 year old.

Part B doesn't sound like a player that should have been drafted anywhere near the top 10. A player with weaknesses in his defensive game and skill set should probably go where Guilliam Brisebois went.

i disagree, we have seen many times that dmen can have offsetting skills for their defensive weaknesses and still go high.

based on the prospects tournament, juolevi is not remotely ready for nhl forwards defensively, so while he will get a good chance to show us why he was drafted at this camp, he will almost certainly be seasoning himself elsewhere.

at which point, he will be a guy who didn't make the team d+2. and so i'm explaining why that doesn't worry me if he shows the possession/transition skills that got him drafted.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad