Prospect Info: Olli Juolevi, Pt. V

[lawrence]

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.

They’ve been looking for a dman since 2015, yet boeser was drafted. They were still looking for an offensive dman in 2017. See a pattern here ? Telegraph no? Why didn’t he use his 1st round pick in those years to address his needs ? Cause like every year the team draft bpa according to their own list.

Like seriously you guys like to use whatever you want to slam benning (I want him gone too). Pick was made by the Canucks. Juolevi was drafted on the basis of the Canucks draft list. Not benning.

 

[WTG]

They’ve been looking for a dman since 2015, yet boeser was drafted. They were still looking for an offensive dman in 2017. See a pattern here ? Telegraph no? Why didn’t he use his 1st round pick in those years to address his needs ? Cause like every year the team draft bpa according to their own list.

Like seriously you guys like to use whatever you want to slam benning (I want him gone too). Pick was made by the Canucks. Juolevi was drafted on the basis of the Canucks draft list. Not benning.

And the draft list is dead wrong.

 

[tantalum]

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.

(virtually) No one hates Juoelvi the person. (virtually) No one hopes he fails. They hate the pick (justified). They hate his development curve thus far and what it likely means his projection is (justified). They may hate his style of play as I mentioned (again justified). They don't hate Juolevi. They'd like nothing more than to be wrong. Why? because that means they have high impact young player on a cheap contract in the lineup. You can't win without those guys. It means the team will be better moving forward.

Don't equate doubt of a player reaching the ceiling he was drafted with and anger with the pick itself (and the thinking behind the pick) with hating the person and hoping he fails. That's not what is happening.

 

[tantalum]

They’ve been looking for a dman since 2015, yet boeser was drafted. They were still looking for an offensive dman in 2017. See a pattern here ? Telegraph no? Why didn’t he use his 1st round pick in those years to address his needs ? Cause like every year the team draft bpa according to their own list.

Like seriously you guys like to use whatever you want to slam benning (I want him gone too). Pick was made by the Canucks. Juolevi was drafted on the basis of the Canucks draft list. Not benning.

“I like our forward depth. I’m looking at defensemen tonight. I’ve got my eye on four or five D-men,” Benning told Sportsnet.
“We’re going to take the best player in the first round, but in a perfect world, we’d like to take a D-man.
“Our philosophy is we’re always going to take the best player in the first round. We’ll figure out the position, but having said that, the last little while we’ve taken a lot of forwards.
“We’ve got good forward depth. We’ve got to start building up our defensemen depth."

That was in JANUARY 2016.

Oh he played the "best player available card" because that's the throw away line a GM uses because deep down they know they can't really admit they are drafting by position but almost every conversation and interview about the draft comes back to picking a D-man and having a D-man in that spot on their list etc etc etc. Now if they were higher than #5 things may have changed of course as other factors in terms of overall quality are going to override but there was very little doubt from January on that if they landed in the second tier of the draft (as they did) they were going D-man ("in an ideal world..."). And his own reasoning was clearly his thinking they had built depth elsewhere (lol).

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

“I like our forward depth. I’m looking at defensemen tonight. I’ve got my eye on four or five D-men,” Benning told Sportsnet.
“We’re going to take the best player in the first round, but in a perfect world, we’d like to take a D-man.
“Our philosophy is we’re always going to take the best player in the first round. We’ll figure out the position, but having said that, the last little while we’ve taken a lot of forwards.
“We’ve got good forward depth. We’ve got to start building up our defensemen depth."

That was in JANUARY 2016.

Oh he played the "best player available card" because that's the throw away line a GM uses because deep down they know they can't really admit they are drafting by position but almost every conversation and interview about the draft comes back to picking a D-man and having a D-man in that spot on their list etc etc etc. Now if they were higher than #5 things may have changed of course as other factors in terms of overall quality are going to override but there was very little doubt from January on that if they landed in the second tier of the draft (as they did) they were going D-man ("in an ideal world..."). And his own reasoning was clearly his thinking they had built depth elsewhere (lol).

I would kind of agree with this.(except thinking they had depth elsewhere part, because they didnt..Henrik Sedin and Edler were not getting any younger)..Benning was saying that teams are built up through the middle...So generally,it was always a#1C, or a first pairing D on their radar..and this continued right up until 2018.

 

[Bleach Clean]

They’ve been looking for a dman since 2015, yet boeser was drafted. They were still looking for an offensive dman in 2017. See a pattern here ? Telegraph no? Why didn’t he use his 1st round pick in those years to address his needs ? Cause like every year the team draft bpa according to their own list.

Like seriously you guys like to use whatever you want to slam benning (I want him gone too). Pick was made by the Canucks. Juolevi was drafted on the basis of the Canucks draft list. Not benning.

You’re wrong. Positional need definitely played a role in deciding _their_ BPA in 2016.

Do not confuse the Canucks’ draft list with being a consensus BPA list. These are not the same.

 

[tantalum]

I would kind of agree with this.(except thinking they had depth elsewhere part, because they didnt..Henrik Sedin and Edler were not getting any younger)..Benning was saying that teams are built up through the middle...So generally,it was always a#1C, or a first pairing D on their radar..and this continued right up until 2018.

I don't disagree with that at all. You need all those pieces and why collecting picks and actually building organizational depth is important. But his comments then and leading into the draft go well beyond we'll pick BPA and if it's a D-man then great. They go over that line. They incorrectly assessed the depth elsewhere and prioritized a position at the draft based on that wrong assessment.

This has gone off topic at this point...

 

[lawrence]

You’re wrong. Positional need definitely played a role in deciding _their_ BPA in 2016.

Do not confuse the Canucks’ draft list with being a consensus BPA list. These are not the same.

Please do not confuse what benning says to media vs what happens on the draft table. He says things that are not true and you should know this by now.

 

[lawrence]

And the draft list is dead wrong.

No shit so the scouting should liable, and benning shouldn’t be the one taking the full hit for this. He probably just sat there as they rounded up,their top 5.

 

[lawrence]

“I like our forward depth. I’m looking at defensemen tonight. I’ve got my eye on four or five D-men,” Benning told Sportsnet.
“We’re going to take the best player in the first round, but in a perfect world, we’d like to take a D-man.
“Our philosophy is we’re always going to take the best player in the first round. We’ll figure out the position, but having said that, the last little while we’ve taken a lot of forwards.
“We’ve got good forward depth. We’ve got to start building up our defensemen depth."

That was in JANUARY 2016.

Oh he played the "best player available card" because that's the throw away line a GM uses because deep down they know they can't really admit they are drafting by position but almost every conversation and interview about the draft comes back to picking a D-man and having a D-man in that spot on their list etc etc etc. Now if they were higher than #5 things may have changed of course as other factors in terms of overall quality are going to override but there was very little doubt from January on that if they landed in the second tier of the draft (as they did) they were going D-man ("in an ideal world..."). And his own reasoning was clearly his thinking they had built depth elsewhere (lol).

Why are you showing me the quote ? He said been saying he would like a dman since 2015 and again in 2017,:yet they drafted forwards, which probably means they’ve been going bpa this entire time including 2016.

 

[WTG]

No **** so the scouting should liable, and benning shouldn’t be the one taking the full hit for this. He probably just sat there as they rounded up,their top 5.

Benning compared Juolevi to Lidstrom, not the scouting staff. Now we can only speculate this sentiment was shared with the scouts. But, one thing we do know that it was Benning who said it. So yes, Benning should be liable.

 

[tantalum]

Why are you showing me the quote ? He said been saying he would like a dman since 2015 and again in 2017,:yet they drafted forwards, which probably means they’ve been going bpa this entire time including 2016.

Geez I wonder why I provided the quote based on the discussion.

In 2016 it was far different than general discussion of wanting more D-men. It was a D-man the entire way. That hasn’t always been the case in the other years

 

[Pavel96]

No **** so the scouting should liable, and benning shouldn’t be the one taking the full hit for this. He probably just sat there as they rounded up,their top 5.

The guy gets in front of a microphone and drops the name of the best defender in NHL history, right after drafting this project. But it's not his fault- it never is.

We can't blame this on Gillis right? So I guess it must have been that Aqualini forced Benning to make this comparison. Any GM in the league under Aqua would have been forced to draft Olli and call him Lidstrom.

Benning was just knowingly talking nonsense and in no way thought Olli deserved to be compared to Lidstrom, but he said it anyways in a TV interview.

 

[F A N]

“I like our forward depth. I’m looking at defensemen tonight. I’ve got my eye on four or five D-men,” Benning told Sportsnet.
“We’re going to take the best player in the first round, but in a perfect world, we’d like to take a D-man.
“Our philosophy is we’re always going to take the best player in the first round. We’ll figure out the position, but having said that, the last little while we’ve taken a lot of forwards.
“We’ve got good forward depth. We’ve got to start building up our defensemen depth."

That was in JANUARY 2016.

Oh he played the "best player available card" because that's the throw away line a GM uses because deep down they know they can't really admit they are drafting by position but almost every conversation and interview about the draft comes back to picking a D-man and having a D-man in that spot on their list etc etc etc. Now if they were higher than #5 things may have changed of course as other factors in terms of overall quality are going to override but there was very little doubt from January on that if they landed in the second tier of the draft (as they did) they were going D-man ("in an ideal world..."). And his own reasoning was clearly his thinking they had built depth elsewhere (lol).

He also said that the team was likely to draft a forward around May 2016.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

He also said that the team was likely to draft a forward around May 2016.

My guess is that player was PLD..

 

[Kryten]

My guess is that player was PLD..

Hey wasnt that the guy who you and a few others here were ripping on during his D+1 year?

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Hey wasnt that the guy who you and a few others here were ripping on during his D+1 year?

Wasn't me...He was my first choice that year.

 

[tantalum]

He also said that the team was likely to draft a forward around May 2016.

Every conversation always ended up back to the Dman though. He wanted a d-man and got it. If one of the top 3 or 4 slipped to 5 yes then he may have gone a different route because there was a break in quality but if no one slipped to the second tier it was always going to be a defender no matter what. It wasn’t BPA when they stepped up to the podium. It was d-man and it was telegraphed for months.

And he’ll if it was it’s not like it shines any better of a light on him!

 

[lawrence]

Benning compared Juolevi to Lidstrom, not the scouting staff. Now we can only speculate this sentiment was shared with the scouts. But, one thing we do know that it was Benning who said it. So yes, Benning should be liable.

yes he compared Juolevi to Lidstrom, and?

 

[lawrence]

The guy gets in front of a microphone and drops the name of the best defender in NHL history, right after drafting this project. But it's not his fault- it never is.

We can't blame this on Gillis right? So I guess it must have been that Aqualini forced Benning to make this comparison. Any GM in the league under Aqua would have been forced to draft Olli and call him Lidstrom.

Benning was just knowingly talking nonsense and in no way thought Olli deserved to be compared to Lidstrom, but he said it anyways in a TV interview.

I am not defending Benning with this comparison frankly it was stupid of him to even bring his name into it. (Lidstrom) Benning was just being himself which dumb and stupid? according to you guys right? dim jim right? obviously hes a dumb guy so why are you taking this so seriously?

 

[lawrence]

Geez I wonder why I provided the quote based on the discussion.

In 2016 it was far different than general discussion of wanting more D-men. It was a D-man the entire way. That hasn’t always been the case in the other years

It's been the same every year up until 2019.

 

[Pavel96]

I am not defending Benning with this comparison frankly it was stupid of him to even bring his name into it. (Lidstrom) Benning was just being himself which dumb and stupid? according to you guys right? dim jim right? obviously hes a dumb guy so why are you taking this so seriously?

Benning made a really stupid comparison, and it's his fault for making it. There's only one guy here btw.

 

[WTG]

yes he compared Juolevi to Lidstrom, and?

No pressure kid.
Just compared you to one of the greatest players to ever play the game.
It doesn't matter! Just a comparison.