Proposal: Olli Juolevi for Cale Fleury [MTL & VAN]

[Frankie Blueberries]

With the core he inherited and the lottery luck he's had, is it really that surprising?

It is when he could have gotten better assets for the players he had like Kesler/Hamhuis, not trade draft picks for waiver eligible players (Vey, Etem, Larsen, Pouliot, etc.), and not blowing half of his top 10 picks.

 

[Michoulicious]

Brook for Julolevi would be a better offer and fill more Vancouver needs, since Hugues is a LHD.

 

[Hostile Offer]

It is when he could have gotten better assets for the players he had like Kesler/Hamhuis, not trade draft picks for waiver eligible players (Vey, Etem, Larsen, Pouliot, etc.), and not blowing half of his top 10 picks.

Sure, the Canucks would be a considerably better team over the last three years had they not given up a bunch of mid round picks for Etem, Larsen, Pouliot etc. I'm not a Benning fan, couldn't care less how the Canucks make business but the core Benning inherited was badly aging and they haven't got a chance to draft a gamechanging talent a la McDavid/Matthews. That's why they suck. I'm not here to defend his moves but with any GM running the team they would be pretty terrible in the last few years.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Sure, the Canucks would be a considerably better team over the last three years had they not given up a bunch of mid round picks for Etem, Larsen, Pouliot etc. I'm not a Benning fan, couldn't care less how the Canucks make business but the core Benning inherited was badly aging and they haven't got a chance to draft a gamechanging talent a la McDavid/Matthews. That's why they suck. I'm not here to defend his moves but with any GM running the team they would be pretty terrible in the last few years.

I don’t disagree with your main point, the mid round pick point is just a smaller aspect to a bigger theme of a GM not rebuilding properly. Those mid round picks do add up and have an impact; it may have cost us another Gaudette. I’m more pissed that we could easily have a top 6 including Nylander/Ehlers, Tkachuk, and DeBrincat. Never mind the other dumb trades like acquiring Gudbranson and trading away Forsling, or overpaying for old depth UFAs.

 

[Hostile Offer]

I don’t disagree with your main point, the mid round pick point is just a smaller aspect to a bigger theme of a GM not rebuilding properly. Those mid round picks do add up and have an impact; it may have cost us another Gaudette. I’m more pissed that we could easily have a top 6 including Nylander/Ehlers, Tkachuk, and DeBrincat. Never mind the other dumb trades like acquiring Gudbranson and trading away Forsling, or overpaying for old depth UFAs.

And that doesn't have much to do with their sucking in the last three years which was the point you brought up in the first place. What's more telling is if they continue sucking in the next three years. That's when you can really tell if Benning has done well in his job. He's already done a few glaring mistakes that are surely going to slow down the process, though.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

And that doesn't have much to do with their sucking in the last three years which was the point you brought up in the first place. What's more telling is if they continue sucking in the next three years. That's when you can really tell if Benning has done well in his job. He's already done a few glaring mistakes that are surely going to slow down the process, though.

We’re sucking this year as well, and likely next year. Benning definitely prolonged the rebuild by at least 2-3 years by the moves I mentioned above. I think ownership is to blame for the impatient moves (trading 2nd/3rd round picks for bust prospects like Vey and the Gudbranson trade), but the UFA signings and Virtanen/Juolevi picks fall squarely on Benning.

 

[wetcoast]

Yeahhh I don't think the Canucks entertain this. Brook maybe.

Ya I tend to agree, Cal fleury is a type of guy who can be had on waivers, at Oli has some offensive upside.

That being said, I think Benning has too much invested in Oli in trading him at this point, and yes that's a bad thing IMO.

 

[eviohh26]

We’re sucking this year as well, and likely next year. Benning definitely prolonged the rebuild by at least 2-3 years by the moves I mentioned above. I think ownership is to blame for the impatient moves (trading 2nd/3rd round picks for bust prospects like Vey and the Gudbranson trade), but the UFA signings and Virtanen/Juolevi picks fall squarely on Benning.

nope.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

nope.

Tkachuk, Nylander, DeBrincat, McCann, Forsling, Theodore, and a handful of draft picks.

 

[eviohh26]

Tkachuk, Nylander, DeBrincat, McCann, Forsling, Theodore, and a handful of draft picks.

Hindsight is so useful. Book is not completely out on picks thus far. I dont care much for McCann and Forsling. 2-3 yrs is a bit much. Plus if we drafted those guys we may not have sucked enough to draft Pettersson and Hughes? Because im more pumped about those 2 than anyone else on your list.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Hindsight is so useful. Book is not completely out on picks thus far. I dont care much for McCann and Forsling. 2-3 yrs is a bit much. Plus if we drafted those guys we may not have sucked enough to draft Pettersson and Hughes? Because im more pumped about those 2 than anyone else on your list.

Hindsight isn’t needed for the Nylander and Tkachuk picks - they were the consensus best players available at the time. The Gudbranson trade looked bad at the time too, all statistics pointed towards him being a bad dman. Forsling for Clendening looks like they never even watched Clendening play before pulling the trigger on it.

 

[lawrence]

Another Benning thread? I thought it was a proposal thread.

Ya I tend to agree, Cal fleury is a type of guy who can be had on waivers, at Oli has some offensive upside.

That being said, I think Benning has too much invested in Oli in trading him at this point, and yes that's a bad thing IMO.

he's a 5th overall pick 2 years ago, of course he is invested in him.

 

[Canadian Canuck]

Tkachuk, Nylander, DeBrincat, McCann, Forsling, Theodore, and a handful of draft picks.

Yes the Forsling trade at the time was bad, but wtf has he done since? Nothing. Again hindsight is 20/20

 

[puckpilot]

Yes the Forsling trade at the time was bad, but wtf has he done since? Nothing. Again hindsight is 20/20

You want to know a funny stat? Right now, they've both played exactly 90 games in the NHL, and Clendening has 24pts and Forsling has 23pts.

 

[Bleach Clean]

No, I'm referring to the NHL Rank King pNHLe which takes into account the prospect's age, and the league they play in.

For example, Nikolay Goldobin scoring 31pts in 30 games at age 21 (in the Ahl last season) was rated more favorably than Reid Boucher's 46pts in 45 games at age 23 due to age gap. Just like Elias Pettersson scoring 56pts in 44 games (in the SHL) at age 19 was rated more favorably than Joakim Lindström's 50pts in 46 games at age 34.

Forgive me, but I do not understand the significance of pNHLe. Is it predictive of future success? I see that Pettersson was rated as an 84 last year. This year, Adam Fox is rated 117. Quinn Hughes is at 91. Does this mean that they are expected to have better success than Pettersson has had (relative to position)?

To my knowledge, only NHLe has been adopted as a common model. Of course age factors there as well. It's not that NHLe ignores age. So I'm unclear what this means for Juolevi? What does a 57 pNHLe signify? On Mason Black's twitter, he has the top 26 Dmen that range from 117 pNHLe to 53 pNHLe. That's quite a numerical gap. From my understanding, it means that Fox is slated to be a superstar and Juolevi a 2nd pairing Dman?

Anyway, long way around: It is highly unlikely that Juolevi is moved anywhere. However, I do see an Edler trade to MTL being viable.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Yes the Forsling trade at the time was bad, but wtf has he done since? Nothing. Again hindsight is 20/20

You want to know a funny stat? Right now, they've both played exactly 90 games in the NHL, and Clendening has 24pts and Forsling has 23pts.

I mean, he's still playing in the NHL today so there's that. His stats this season look pretty good so far as well.

 

[MadaCanuckle]

You want to know a funny stat? Right now, they've both played exactly 90 games in the NHL, and Clendening has 24pts and Forsling has 23pts.

Another funny stat: Clendening is 26 years old, Forsling is 22.

About the OP: Canucks boards is not low on Juolevi just because he is busting, he is low because we could had Tkachuk instead of him and everyone and his dog was asking for Tkachuk. I would trade him for a very good pick or prospect, and no one on the Canucks board would accept it. Maybe Benning or his bros, but not any actual fan of the Canucks.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Another Benning thread? I thought it was a proposal thread.

I did too. And then this happened:

LOL, Canucks fans on hfboards in regards to Juolevi's trade value vs Canucks fans on hfbaords Canucks sub forum section is totally different. My gosh, that's utterly sad, I'm not sure is it because of Tkachuks, success or the mob like mentality against anything players Benning brought in, glad the ones here (non sub forum Canuck fans) have some actual sense.

Do you have amnesia where you forget what you post and then blame other people for when the topic changes based on your own posts?

 

[Mrb1p]

I'm not giving up Cale Fleury for Juolevi.

 

[Cupless44]

Wasn’t implying you guys should or should not do the trade. You asked who Cale Fleury was.

Draft pedigree doesn’t mean anything. Fleury might end up being the best of the two D later on.

He might, but an NHL GM who drafted Juolevi doesn't make that trade now.