Prospect Info: Olli Juolevi, Pt. V

Status
Not open for further replies.

F A N

Registered User
Aug 12, 2005
18,629
5,893
The point is, you cant have it both ways. If he was defending him against because guys like McGuire said he is like Lidstrom then it would have been an ok argument. The argument of Benning defending Juolevi against the expectations raised by Benning himself is rather questionable.

I understand your point. My point was that Benning didn't really place expectations on Juolevi that doesn't come with such a high pick. He obviously really liked Juolevi and thought he was getting a potential first pairing Dman. If I remember correctly, most of us, including myself, didn't place high odds on Juolevi being a first pairing Dman. I still remember back in the day Delorme admitted that maybe the Canucks should have picked Perron instead of Patrick White.
 

bossram

Registered User
Sep 25, 2013
15,324
14,391
Victoria
This is a classic Democrats vs Republican viewpoint. It's like you have to take sides to the extreme. There are plenty of moderates and independents out there who don't agree with everything the party/politician they support does but they are somehow labeled.

So you have posters who get thrown into your characterization above just because they support some of Benning's moves. It's infuriating because it's mob rule.

It is a classic "Democract vs Republican" situation, but not in the way you think.

One side refuses to live in reality, peddles falsehoods, and either willfully dig in their heels or are hopelessly blinded.

The other side, while obviously still having an agenda, actually live in reality and can admit mistakes, find reasonable critiques, and actually engage in somewhat reasonable argumentation.
 

krutovsdonut

eeyore
Sep 25, 2016
16,772
9,427
You have got to be trolling here.

It isn't 'off on a tangent' if it's referring to expectations that Benning himself created.

right, and any discussion whatever involving benning and gudbranson is referring to a player that "benning himself traded for", so by your logic it should be fair game to launch into a discussion of that original trade if banning's name and gudbranson's come up together.

but we should not support the idea that discussions can be derailed on the slightest pretext. because that leads to prolix and pedantic discussions that prevents rational interaction and the exchange of ideas.

there are instead rules of relevance and logic that govern polite discourse. if you can't follow those rules, it is not possible to have a polite discussion with you. there are many people here who seem incapable of grasping that or who perhaps post as they do for different motives, such as currying popularity or to disrupt the discussion or to antagonize a poster they generally disagree with.

incidentally, the correct formulation of your analogy is as follows

"master of puppets" benning was helping a guy to an ambulance

"everyone" no he was not, he was helping a guy to a hospital. he never said ambulance. master of puppets if a fabricator. he fabricates things. haha. look at the fabricating fabricator of fabrications! nya nya.

"krutov" [entering the scene late] hmm, i understood benning to be referring to an ambulance, and here is some context for that understanding. at the very least it's a fair comment by master of puppets.

"peter10" krutov's context includes a word i can seize on as a pretext for criticizing benning for something totally unrelated to whether benning meant hospital or ambulance. i will phrase my random benning criticism in a way that implies krutov has overlooked a relevant point.

"krutov" wut?

"everyone else" we hate benning also so we will defend the right of peter10 to seize on a ridiculous pretext to randomly criticize benning even if it disrupts the entire discussion.

"krutov" forget it pastor of muppets, it's hfboards canucks subforum.

[ krutov exits stage left ]
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,362
83,430
Vancouver, BC
right, and any discussion whatever involving benning and gudbranson is referring to a player that "benning himself traded for", so by your logic it should be fair game to launch into a discussion of that original trade if banning's name and gudbranson's come up together.

but we should not support the idea that discussions can be derailed on the slightest pretext. because that leads to prolix and pedantic discussions that prevents rational interaction and the exchange of ideas.

there are instead rules of relevance and logic that govern polite discourse. if you can't follow those rules, it is not possible to have a polite discussion with you. there are many people here who seem incapable of grasping that or who perhaps post as they do for different motives, such as currying popularity or to disrupt the discussion or to antagonize a poster they generally disagree with.

incidentally, the correct formulation of your analogy is as follows

"master of puppets" benning was helping a guy to an ambulance

"everyone" no he was not, he was helping a guy to a hospital. he never said ambulance. master of puppets if a fabricator. he fabricates things. haha. look at the fabricating fabricator of fabrications! nya nya.

"krutov" [entering the scene late] hmm, i understood benning to be referring to an ambulance, and here is some context for that understanding. at the very least it's a fair comment by master of puppets.

"peter10" krutov's context includes a word i can seize on as a pretext for criticizing benning for something totally unrelated to whether benning meant hospital or ambulance. i will phrase my random benning criticism in a way that implies krutov has overlooked a relevant point.

"krutov" wut?

"everyone else" we hate benning also so we will defend the right of peter10 to seize on a ridiculous pretext to randomly criticize benning even if it disrupts the entire discussion.

"krutov" forget it pastor of muppets, it's hfboards canucks subforum.

[ krutov exits stage left ]

:whaaa?:
 

VasilyHoglander

Registered User
Jun 28, 2014
493
176
West Vancouver
The encouraging thing about Juolevi is that he has done well every time he stepped up a league.
2014-15: First season in Jr. A SM-liiga (U20)
44GP - 6G - 26A - 32pt
Juolevi was 4th in points on his team and 1st among Ds -- despite being 16 years old in an U20 league. League wide, Juolevi was tied for 7th in D scoring. The 6 guys ahead of him: Veeti Vainio (1997 born), Olli Vainio (1994), Oliwer Kaski (1995), Taneli Siikaluoma (1994), Roni Sevänen (1995), Sameli Ventelä (1994). Juolevi has a May 1998 birth date.
2015-16: First season in the OHL.
57GP - 9G - 33A - 42pt
Leaving home at 17 and playing in NHL sized rinks for the first time, Juolevi was the top scoring D in London (2nd was Victor Mete with 38pts in 68GP). Major force in the playoffs and WJC, raised his draft stock enough to be considered the best all-around D. Fourth in points among first time draft eligible defensemen from the OHL.
2017-18: First season in the Liiga.
38GP - 7G - 12A - 19pt
Juolevi was one of 11 defensemen who played more than 15 games in the Liiga as an U20 that year. He was 2nd in points (Heiskanen was 1st) and got better as the year went along. Per Salo:
“When the playoffs started, he was our best defenceman,” Salo said. “We lost (Henrik) Tallinder and it was good to see Olli carry the weight of Tallinder. He really picked up the Tallinder weight and was clearly our best defenceman."
2018-19: First season in the AHL.
18GP - 1G - 12A - 13pt
His 0.72 PPG was 8th among all AHL rookies and 1st among Ds. From Cull:
"I think Olli has done a really good job,” Comets coach Trent Cull said. “For a young guy, he’s played a lot of minutes for us, and he’s done some really good things. To show that he can be very much a good player for us at this level — this quickly — it is really boding well for his confidence.”
This is while coming back from offseason back surgery and dealing with nagging knee issues. When Juolevi flew to Vancouver for his knee, Cull said: "He had some (complaints) with it. It wasn’t getting better. He followed up and double-checked with doctors. They found something and that’s what they’re following through with."
That sounds like something he had tried to play through for a while. We'll never know what a full, healthy season would've looked like for Juolevi, but here are a few young defensemen who played in the AHL as 20 year olds:
Sanheim: 76GP - 10G - 37pt - 0.49ppg
Theodore: 50GP - 9G -37pt - 0.74ppg
Morrissey: 57GP - 3G - 22pt - 0.39ppg
Pulock: 54GP - 17G - 29pt - 0.54ppg
All these guys had a ways to go defensively as rookies. Juolevi has improved his defense everywhere he played -- his second year in London, he was their defensive workhorse. A couple months into his first season in the Liiga, Salo said "Olli has a lot of puck skills and sees the ice well but still needs to improve his defensive awareness but over-all we are happy with his play." By the end of the season, he was filling in for Tallinder, who played nearly 700 games in the NHL as a shutdown D. Of course he still has work to do, but his ability to rise to the challenge every time the competition increases speaks to his skills and hockey IQ. Tons of promising prospects never made it because they couldn't adjust to higher levels of play. Juolevi has proven in every instance that he has the ability to grow and adapt no matter where he is.

-from another forum
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,362
83,430
Vancouver, BC
But seriously ....

"Gudbranson is in the lineup tonight" -> "GUDBRANSON WAS DRAFTED BY BENNING, BENNING SUCKS!'

is not the same thing as

"Benning was protecting Juolevi from Lidstrom comparisons" -> "Benning was literally the only person comparing Juolevi to Lidstrom and is the entire reason those unreasonable expectations exist in the first place."

I'm gobsmacked this is even a discussion.
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,362
83,430
Vancouver, BC
The encouraging thing about Juolevi is that he has done well every time he stepped up a league.
2014-15: First season in Jr. A SM-liiga (U20)
44GP - 6G - 26A - 32pt
Juolevi was 4th in points on his team and 1st among Ds -- despite being 16 years old in an U20 league. League wide, Juolevi was tied for 7th in D scoring. The 6 guys ahead of him: Veeti Vainio (1997 born), Olli Vainio (1994), Oliwer Kaski (1995), Taneli Siikaluoma (1994), Roni Sevänen (1995), Sameli Ventelä (1994). Juolevi has a May 1998 birth date.
2015-16: First season in the OHL.
57GP - 9G - 33A - 42pt
Leaving home at 17 and playing in NHL sized rinks for the first time, Juolevi was the top scoring D in London (2nd was Victor Mete with 38pts in 68GP). Major force in the playoffs and WJC, raised his draft stock enough to be considered the best all-around D. Fourth in points among first time draft eligible defensemen from the OHL.
2017-18: First season in the Liiga.
38GP - 7G - 12A - 19pt
Juolevi was one of 11 defensemen who played more than 15 games in the Liiga as an U20 that year. He was 2nd in points (Heiskanen was 1st) and got better as the year went along. Per Salo:
“When the playoffs started, he was our best defenceman,” Salo said. “We lost (Henrik) Tallinder and it was good to see Olli carry the weight of Tallinder. He really picked up the Tallinder weight and was clearly our best defenceman."
2018-19: First season in the AHL.
18GP - 1G - 12A - 13pt
His 0.72 PPG was 8th among all AHL rookies and 1st among Ds. From Cull:
"I think Olli has done a really good job,” Comets coach Trent Cull said. “For a young guy, he’s played a lot of minutes for us, and he’s done some really good things. To show that he can be very much a good player for us at this level — this quickly — it is really boding well for his confidence.”
This is while coming back from offseason back surgery and dealing with nagging knee issues. When Juolevi flew to Vancouver for his knee, Cull said: "He had some (complaints) with it. It wasn’t getting better. He followed up and double-checked with doctors. They found something and that’s what they’re following through with."
That sounds like something he had tried to play through for a while. We'll never know what a full, healthy season would've looked like for Juolevi, but here are a few young defensemen who played in the AHL as 20 year olds:
Sanheim: 76GP - 10G - 37pt - 0.49ppg
Theodore: 50GP - 9G -37pt - 0.74ppg
Morrissey: 57GP - 3G - 22pt - 0.39ppg
Pulock: 54GP - 17G - 29pt - 0.54ppg
All these guys had a ways to go defensively as rookies. Juolevi has improved his defense everywhere he played -- his second year in London, he was their defensive workhorse. A couple months into his first season in the Liiga, Salo said "Olli has a lot of puck skills and sees the ice well but still needs to improve his defensive awareness but over-all we are happy with his play." By the end of the season, he was filling in for Tallinder, who played nearly 700 games in the NHL as a shutdown D. Of course he still has work to do, but his ability to rise to the challenge every time the competition increases speaks to his skills and hockey IQ. Tons of promising prospects never made it because they couldn't adjust to higher levels of play. Juolevi has proven in every instance that he has the ability to grow and adapt no matter where he is.

-from another forum

He did horribly stepping up a league to the AHL.
 
  • Like
Reactions: daddyohsix

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,362
83,430
Vancouver, BC
13 pts in 18 games? That’s really good numbers. That was him without much training coming off an injury.

It was all on the PP, where he was very good.

He had 1 primary point at ES and was completely ventilated defensively despite being on a sheltered 3rd pairing with a veteran babysitter that Cull wouldn't even put on the ice for a defensive zone faceoff. His defensive game was ECHL-calibre and he had massive problems adjusting to that league outside of on the PP.

What impact the injuries had is unknown but claiming that he adjusted well to the AHL is just completely, utterly false.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pavel96

F A N

Registered User
Aug 12, 2005
18,629
5,893
It is a classic "Democract vs Republican" situation, but not in the way you think.

One side refuses to live in reality, peddles falsehoods, and either willfully dig in their heels or are hopelessly blinded.

The other side, while obviously still having an agenda, actually live in reality and can admit mistakes, find reasonable critiques, and actually engage in somewhat reasonable argumentation.

And my point is that there are moderate Democrats and moderate Republicans. Just because you express support for one side on some things doesn't make the fit into one of your 2 categorizations.
 

WTG

December 5th
Jan 11, 2015
23,749
7,690
West Coast
And my point is that there are moderate Democrats and moderate Republicans. Just because you express support for one side on some things doesn't make the fit into one of your 2 categorizations.

Yeah but we arent talking about moderates.
 

VasilyHoglander

Registered User
Jun 28, 2014
493
176
West Vancouver
It was all on the PP, where he was very good.

He had 1 primary point at ES and was completely ventilated defensively despite being on a sheltered 3rd pairing with a veteran babysitter that Cull wouldn't even put on the ice for a defensive zone faceoff. His defensive game was ECHL-calibre and he had massive problems adjusting to that league outside of on the PP.

What impact the injuries had is unknown but claiming that he adjusted well to the AHL is just completely, utterly false.
Utica was a terrible team to start the year. Olli definitely needs a lot of work defensively. He wasn’t 100% in all the games he played because of that nagging knee and like I said he didn’t even have a proper summer of training. Lots of potential there, no idea why people are writing this kid off already and calling him a bust. It’s just absurd.
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,362
83,430
Vancouver, BC
Utica was a terrible team to start the year. Olli definitely needs a lot of work defensively. He wasn’t 100% in all the games he played because of that nagging knee and like I said he didn’t even have a proper summer of training. Lots of potential there, no idea why people are writing this kid off already and calling him a bust. It’s just absurd.

Where did anyone call him a bust?

He’s been a major disappointment who has developed poorly but is definitely not at bust status yet.

Another year without dominating the AHL and yup, then he’ll be a bust.
 

VasilyHoglander

Registered User
Jun 28, 2014
493
176
West Vancouver
Where did anyone call him a bust?

He’s been a major disappointment who has developed poorly but is definitely not at bust status yet.

Another year without dominating the AHL and yup, then he’ll be a bust.
A lot of people in this thread has been calling him a bust for at least a year now. Being a professional hockey player myself, I know guys can do a complete 180 just by having a good healthy disciplined proper summer of training and i feel like Juolevi haven’t had that in a long time even this summer. He’s still “taking it easy” because of his knee. Next year he should focus on building back that confidence and swagger and really focus on his defensive game. His 23 year old season is the make it or break it season in my opinion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MarkusNaslund19

F A N

Registered User
Aug 12, 2005
18,629
5,893
We'll never truly know, but I feel that there are way too many prospects who has their development forever held back from missing a chunk of development time in their draft eligible year and afterwards. I think Morgan Reilly is one of the few in recent memory who reached his potential despite missing essentially a full year of development in his draft eligible year.
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,362
83,430
Vancouver, BC
A lot of people in this thread has been calling him a bust for at least a year now. Being a professional hockey player myself, I know guys can do a complete 180 just by having a good healthy disciplined proper summer of training and i feel like Juolevi haven’t had that in a long time even this summer. He’s still “taking it easy” because of his knee. Next year he should focus on building back that confidence and swagger and really focus on his defensive game. His 23 year old season is the make it or break it season in my opinion.

Very few people have called him a bust. Many have said he's developed terribly and was an awful pick and are very negative about the selection ... but that's not the same thing.

Also he was tracking very poorly even before any of the injury issues.

We'll never truly know, but I feel that there are way too many prospects who has their development forever held back from missing a chunk of development time in their draft eligible year and afterwards. I think Morgan Reilly is one of the few in recent memory who reached his potential despite missing essentially a full year of development in his draft eligible year.

Absolutely. Injuries are a huge thing.

As I've said before, people tend to act like they're an excuse for poor development (correctly) but then also assume that once healthy, the player will magically be at the same level as if multiple years of key development time hadn't been wasted. It isn't a case of 'Oh, Juolevi is healthy now, everything is great and he'll realize his pre-draft potential!'. It's a case where his development - which wasn't going very well before the injuries - is permanently altered and his ultimate upside permanently lowered.

This is also another reason why knowingly taking a broken Jake Virtanen over similar-rated healthy prospects was so dumb.
 

F A N

Registered User
Aug 12, 2005
18,629
5,893
Absolutely. Injuries are a huge thing.

As I've said before, people tend to act like they're an excuse for poor development (correctly) but then also assume that once healthy, the player will magically be at the same level as if multiple years of key development time hadn't been wasted. It isn't a case of 'Oh, Juolevi is healthy now, everything is great and he'll realize his pre-draft potential!'. It's a case where his development - which wasn't going very well before the injuries - is permanently altered and his ultimate upside permanently lowered.

This is also another reason why knowingly taking a broken Jake Virtanen over similar-rated healthy prospects was so dumb.

When I think of Virtanen, I think of Sam Bennett who had his arm in a sling shortly after the draft and apparently had a bum shoulder to begin with.
 

VasilyHoglander

Registered User
Jun 28, 2014
493
176
West Vancouver
Very few people have called him a bust. Many have said he's developed terribly and was an awful pick and are very negative about the selection ... but that's not the same thing.

Also he was tracking very poorly even before any of the injury issues.



Absolutely. Injuries are a huge thing.

As I've said before, people tend to act like they're an excuse for poor development (correctly) but then also assume that once healthy, the player will magically be at the same level as if multiple years of key development time hadn't been wasted. It isn't a case of 'Oh, Juolevi is healthy now, everything is great and he'll realize his pre-draft potential!'. It's a case where his development - which wasn't going very well before the injuries - is permanently altered and his ultimate upside permanently lowered.

This is also another reason why knowingly taking a broken Jake Virtanen over similar-rated healthy prospects was so dumb.
A number of people here have called him a bust, I’m not going to sit here and go through every page looking for the posts. He obviously wasn’t the ideal or right pick at 5th but the amount of people writing him off already is absurd. He had a slow start in Europe and really picked it up towards the end of the season and really got going during the playoffs in Liga. He was by far the best player on his team during their playoff run. He would single handedly control the pace and dictate the play every time he was on the ice. It showed on the score board as well by having the 3rd highest point total on his team. The biggest thing for Olli is working on his first 3 steps and foot speed, that is what will keep him from being an elite defensemen. If he can succeed working on it, he’ll be that much quicker to get to loose puck, closing gaps and jumping on rushes. The thing Olli needs the most is a long healthy summer of training.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MarkusNaslund19

lawrence

Registered User
May 19, 2012
15,883
6,620
I understand your point. My point was that Benning didn't really place expectations on Juolevi that doesn't come with such a high pick. He obviously really liked Juolevi and thought he was getting a potential first pairing Dman. If I remember correctly, most of us, including myself, didn't place high odds on Juolevi being a first pairing Dman. I still remember back in the day Delorme admitted that maybe the Canucks should have picked Perron instead of Patrick White.

No he didn’t, like every draft, the scouting staff have a meeting and made a list and ranked the players.

Scouting team thought juolevi is the best player at 5.
 

lawrence

Registered User
May 19, 2012
15,883
6,620
A number of people here have called him a bust, I’m not going to sit here and go through every page looking for the posts. He obviously wasn’t the ideal or right pick at 5th but the amount of people writing him off already is absurd. He had a slow start in Europe and really picked it up towards the end of the season and really got going during the playoffs in Liga. He was by far the best player on his team during their playoff run. He would single handedly control the pace and dictate the play every time he was on the ice. It showed on the score board as well by having the 3rd highest point total on his team. The biggest thing for Olli is working on his first 3 steps and foot speed, that is what will keep him from being an elite defensemen. If he can succeed working on it, he’ll be that much quicker to get to loose puck, closing gaps and jumping on rushes. The thing Olli needs the most is a long healthy summer of training.

I booked mark a ton of people who wrote him off.

Thank me later.

Only the members here hate juolevi and I mean hate. No Canuck community is this toxic and it’s not close.
 

tantalum

Hope for the best. Expect the worst
Sponsor
Apr 2, 2002
25,088
13,875
Missouri
I booked mark a ton of people who wrote him off.

Thank me later.

Only the members here hate juolevi and I mean hate. No Canuck community is this toxic and it’s not close.

No one hates Juolevi or at least very, very, very few people hate him. Many hate the pick. Many dislike how his development has progressed. Many don't like the way he currently plays the game as they believe it's not conducive to having a long/effective NHL career. The reason for those feelings have been explained very clearly numerous times and whether you agree with the arguments or not they are valid arguments.

But they don't hate Juolevi.

The same people who have or are near to writing him off as a bust also hope he actually does have appreciable late development into a top 4 D-man. That is what would be good for the team they cheer for. They'd love to be wrong.

I'd love nothing more than for Jim to be right in his original assessment and have Juolevi turn into a minute munching, puck moving top 4 guy. I just don't think it'll happen given a typical development curve (for him to succeed he will have to deviate significantly from the norm) and it was the wrong pick at the time. It will very likely always remain the wrong pick. But I don't hate Juolevi.

I very much hate the job Benning has done. I hate what I perceive as his complete incompetence. I hate his arrogance. That doesn't mean I won;t be ecstatic if he actually manages to build a Stanley Cup contender.
 

Pavel96

Registered User
Apr 7, 2015
2,452
2,318
No one hates Juolevi or at least very, very, very few people hate him. Many hate the pick. Many dislike how his development has progressed. Many don't like the way he currently plays the game as they believe it's not conducive to having a long/effective NHL career. The reason for those feelings have been explained very clearly numerous times and whether you agree with the arguments or not they are valid arguments.

But they don't hate Juolevi.

The same people who have or are near to writing him off as a bust also hope he actually does have appreciable late development into a top 4 D-man. That is what would be good for the team they cheer for. They'd love to be wrong.

I'd love nothing more than for Jim to be right in his original assessment and have Juolevi turn into a minute munching, puck moving top 4 guy. I just don't think it'll happen given a typical development curve (for him to succeed he will have to deviate significantly from the norm) and it was the wrong pick at the time. It will very likely always remain the wrong pick. But I don't hate Juolevi.

I very much hate the job Benning has done. I hate what I perceive as his complete incompetence. I hate his arrogance. That doesn't mean I won;t be ecstatic if he actually manages to build a Stanley Cup contender.
Yeah, I'm sure everyone is so glad that he hasn't turned into Lidstrom 2.0. It would have been appalling to see him even appear to play like Lidstrom, for this franchise, for the next ten years.

Just look at EP - that guy is hated on these boards right? This toxic environment hasn't even given that poor kid a chance and that's likely the main reason he had such a bad season. And Boeser - it's not like the only one that doesn't want to pay him is his GM, the same guy willing to pay top dollar for aging vets and overpaid FA's.
 

tantalum

Hope for the best. Expect the worst
Sponsor
Apr 2, 2002
25,088
13,875
Missouri
No he didn’t, like every draft, the scouting staff have a meeting and made a list and ranked the players.

Scouting team thought juolevi is the best player at 5.

Yes and no. He said well before the draft they were looking at taking a D-man. It was telegraphed (and if you search you'll likely find posts from me saying this very thing at the time...I thought they'd lean to Sergachev though). They explicitly went into that draft to use that pick to address positional need rather than BPA. Drafting by positional need is a foolish strategy to begin with but what made it even more "hilarious" is that they actually didn't realize that they needed top prospects at every position (and still do). At the very least the staff was limited to ranking the D-men for that pick and that's on the GM.
 

lawrence

Registered User
May 19, 2012
15,883
6,620
No one hates Juolevi or at least very, very, very few people hate him. Many hate the pick. Many dislike how his development has progressed. Many don't like the way he currently plays the game as they believe it's not conducive to having a long/effective NHL career. The reason for those feelings have been explained very clearly numerous times and whether you agree with the arguments or not they are valid arguments.

But they don't hate Juolevi.

The same people who have or are near to writing him off as a bust also hope he actually does have appreciable late development into a top 4 D-man. That is what would be good for the team they cheer for. They'd love to be wrong.

I'd love nothing more than for Jim to be right in his original assessment and have Juolevi turn into a minute munching, puck moving top 4 guy. I just don't think it'll happen given a typical development curve (for him to succeed he will have to deviate significantly from the norm) and it was the wrong pick at the time. It will very likely always remain the wrong pick. But I don't hate Juolevi.

I very much hate the job Benning has done. I hate what I perceive as his complete incompetence. I hate his arrogance. That doesn't mean I won;t be ecstatic if he actually manages to build a Stanley Cup contender.

You gotta be fricking kidding me. The way juolevi is trashed you think it’s leafs fans pretending to be Canucks fans in fact it’s actually Canucks fans.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->