Prospect Info: Olli Juolevi, Pt. VI

[LeftCoast]

If he turns out to be a top pairing D who plays 20+ minutes per night and produces at a decent rate (say 30+ pts per year) it will end up basically a push. But that's the bar he needs to hit.

 

[Diamonddog01]

Nah, the outright dismissal of a player's potential fit (playing style, character, etc.) with an organization and how that can impact both their own development and the team's overall chemistry is rather the lesson that needs to be learned here.

There is no such lesson. To be blunt - this is completely fabricated bull****.

 

[krutovsdonut]

nice to see juolevi is progressing nicely. i have no idea why we're talking about tkachuk in here. that debate will not start again until juolevi is in the nhl.

 

[y2kcanucks]

nice to see juolevi is progressing nicely. i have no idea why we're talking about tkachuk in here. that debate will not start again until juolevi is in the nhl.

Based on this Florida fans shouldn't judge the Panthers taking Tyler Plante ahead of James Neal in 2005 because Plante hasn't played in the NHL yet.

 

[krutovsdonut]

Based on this Florida fans shouldn't judge the Panthers taking Tyler Plante ahead of James Neal in 2005 because Plante hasn't played in the NHL yet.

based on the fact someone was suddenly comparing juolevi positively to tkachuk because of juolevi's recent good play in the liiga. i am not much interested in that apples and oranges debate starting up.

i suspect we're on the same side on this one.

 

[y2kcanucks]

based on the fact someone was suddenly comparing juolevi positively to tkachuk because of juolevi's recent good play in the liiga. i am not much interested in that apples and oranges debate starting up.

i suspect we're on the same side on this one.

Juolevi is already a blown pick. I don’t see his play surpassing what Tkachuk, Keller, or Sergachev have accomplished. Whether or not we salvage a useful second pairing defenseman out of him remains to be seen.

 

[krutovsdonut]

Juolevi is already a blown pick. I don’t see his play surpassing what Tkachuk, Keller, or Sergachev have accomplished. Whether or not we salvage a useful second pairing defenseman out of him remains to be seen.

ok, well if you insist.

many miles away
something crawls to the top of the u20 leaderboard
of a small finnish pro league

 

[tantalum]

Not as many miles away players put up good numbers in the best league in the planet.....

 

[krutovsdonut]

Not as many miles away players put up good numbers in the best league in the planet.....

another hfboards thread hijacked for moaning
benning haters screaming at the wall
we have to shout above the din of all the whining
we can't hear anything at all

 

[krutovsdonut]

anyway

 

[Shareefruck]

As nice as it is to see Juolevi progressing rather than stagnating like it looked like he was possibly in danger of doing, until he does show as much promise as Tkachuk currently does, it would only be reasonable to view that comparison as being wildly unfavorable to Juolevi.

It's ludicrous to make a wait and see type comment in response to that. He has a huge mountain to climb just to break even, and that's if Tkachuk stands perfectly still and doesn't progress even further. It's reasonable to be tentatively dismissive about that possibility because it's currently wildly unlikely to happen. If it does, great-- but that possibility is wishful thinking right now, to say the least.

 

[me2]

Joulevi is doing well (opposite ways to expected ie good D/adequate O prospect is turning into a great O/medicore D. strange but take what you can get). Valuewise he's losing to NHLers like Keller/Tkachuk but he's got time and maybe he catches up with the others in his draft, I'm fine waiting another year or two, the team stinks and we'd just be burning contract years.

 

[me2]

snip double

 

[nowhereman]

Based on this Florida fans shouldn't judge the Panthers taking Tyler Plante ahead of James Neal in 2005 because Plante hasn't played in the NHL yet.

That's a great analogy. I mean, it's not like Juolevi is 19 years old or anything.

And we all know that defensemen usually only take a few months, maybe a year tops, to fully develop and showcase their full potential. For instance, Duncan Keith, Zdeno Chara, Ryan Suter, Brent Burns, Victor Hedman, and Mark Giordano all made instant impacts on their team and were all Calder candidates right out of the gate. In fact, I don't think anyone questioned Victor Hedman's development curve at all. He was an instant sensation.

As nice as it is to see Juolevi progressing rather than stagnating like it looked like he was possibly in danger of doing, until he does show as much promise as Tkachuk currently does, it would only be reasonable to view that comparison as being wildly unfavorable to Juolevi.

It's ludicrous to make a wait and see type comment in response to that. He has a huge mountain to climb just to break even, and that's if Tkachuk stands perfectly still and doesn't progress even further. It's reasonable to be tentatively dismissive about that possibility because it's currently wildly unlikely to happen. If it does, great-- but that possibility is wishful thinking right now, to say the least.

As you may be able to tell from my comment above, defensemen don't develop at the same rate as forwards. There's even a big discrepancy between defensemen, as some develop more quickly than others. Many of the NHL's best defensemen were written off or came out of nowhere, since it's harder to predict how they'll progress.

Unfortunately, even though you don't like it, people who are proclaiming "wait and see" are 100% correct.

 

[nowhereman]

Delete

 

[Krnuckfan]

That's a great analogy. I mean, it's not like Juolevi is 19 years old or anything.

And we all know that defensemen usually only take a few months, maybe a year tops, to fully develop and showcase their full potential. For instance, Duncan Keith, Zdeno Chara, Ryan Suter, Brent Burns, Victor Hedman, and Mark Giordano all made instant impacts on their team and were all Calder candidates right out of the gate. In fact, I don't think anyone questioned Victor Hedman's development curve at all. He was an instant sensation.

What a load of garbage this post is. Hedman made the NHL right away after his draft year. In his d+2 year he averaged 21:01 of icetime second among defencemen on the TBL.

Most dmen drafted high in the draft make the NHL by their d+2 season. The ones that don't generally turn out to be busts with a couple of exceptions. Get a clue about how elite prospects develop instead of regurgitating tired old cliches like "dmen develop slower!!!"

 

[y2kcanucks]

another hfboards thread hijacked for moaning
benning haters screaming at the wall
we have to shout above the din of all the whining
we can't hear anything at all

So this is the response people get when posting facts?

 

[CanaFan]

That's a great analogy. I mean, it's not like Juolevi is 19 years old or anything.

And we all know that defensemen usually only take a few months, maybe a year tops, to fully develop and showcase their full potential. For instance, Duncan Keith, Zdeno Chara, Ryan Suter, Brent Burns, Victor Hedman, and Mark Giordano all made instant impacts on their team and were all Calder candidates right out of the gate. In fact, I don't think anyone questioned Victor Hedman's development curve at all. He was an instant sensation.


As you may be able to tell from my comment above, defensemen don't develop at the same rate as forwards. There's even a big discrepancy between defensemen, as some develop more quickly than others. Many of the NHL's best defensemen were written off or came out of nowhere, since it's harder to predict how they'll progress.

Unfortunately, even though you don't like it, people who are proclaiming "wait and see" are 100% correct.

Defensemen picked in the top 5 develop very quickly. Defensemen picked in later rounds (like most of your examples) take longer because ... well that’s what players drafted in later rounds do.

 

[y2kcanucks]

What a load of garbage this post is. Hedman made the NHL right away after his draft year. In his d+2 year he averaged 21:01 of icetime second among defencemen on the TBL.

Most dmen drafted high in the draft make the NHL by their d+2 season. The ones that don't generally turn out to be busts with a couple of exceptions. Get a clue about how elite prospects develop instead of regurgitating tired old cliches like "dmen develop slower!!!"

People use the “defensemen take longer to develop” as an excuse. There’s almost no stats that support this. Meanwhile the evidence overwhelmingly supports the statement that defensemen who don’t make the NHL in their Draft +2 season, especially defensemen drafted high, end up busting. Very few exceptions, Dougie Hamilton for example, and those who are the exception at least showed progression between their Draft and Draft +1 seasons.

If you were to do a 2016 re-draft, I question if Juolevi would even go in the first round. Definitely not a top 20 pick at least.

 

[nowhereman]

What a load of garbage this post is. Hedman made the NHL right away after his draft year. In his d+2 year he averaged 21:01 of icetime second among defencemen on the TBL.

Most dmen drafted high in the draft make the NHL by their d+2 season. The ones that don't generally turn out to be busts with a couple of exceptions. Get a clue about how elite prospects develop instead of regurgitating tired old cliches like "dmen develop slower!!!"

And, yet, many a NHL GM or scout has said that they will usually steer toward drafting forwards earlier because their development curve is easier to predict. They must just be saying that to hear themselves talk, since it's obviously just a tired old cliche...

Early in his career, Hedman's validity as a franchise defenseman and #2 pick was questioned, since he didn't storm out of the gate the same way a player like Doughty did. Yes, he was an NHL defenseman early in his career but it took a while for him to take off to his current level and many were impatient.

The point is, you generally know pretty early on what you're getting from a forward. That's not necessarily the case with defensemen. Off the top of my head, Ryan Ellis is a good example of having to wait and see with a highly drafted defenseman.

 

[me2]

Defensemen picked in the top 5 develop very quickly. Defensemen picked in later rounds (like most of your examples) take longer because ... well that’s what players drafted in later rounds do.

I'd argue most Dmen picked in the top 5 don't develop very quickly because that have already developed and that is why they are ahead of their peers. It's the ones later in the draft that need to develop to get them moving upwards.

 

[Wo Yorfat]

My baseless speculation is that it doesn't take Dmen longer to develop, it just takes longer to make the NHL full time. It's not that big of a commitment to keep 1 spot for a developing fwd w the big club. 1 of 6 dmen spots is a bigger risk to take, therefore you might want to be a little extra certain before letting a Dman stay up than a forward.

 

[krutovsdonut]

As nice as it is to see Juolevi progressing rather than stagnating like it looked like he was possibly in danger of doing, until he does show as much promise as Tkachuk currently does, it would only be reasonable to view that comparison as being wildly unfavorable to Juolevi.

It's ludicrous to make a wait and see type comment in response to that. He has a huge mountain to climb just to break even, and that's if Tkachuk stands perfectly still and doesn't progress even further. It's reasonable to be tentatively dismissive about that possibility because it's currently wildly unlikely to happen. If it does, great-- but that possibility is wishful thinking right now, to say the least.

he is progressing just fine in finland. he is certainly behind other players. we won't be able to evaluate him until he gets to the nhl. recently he did not look remotely ready for the nhl.

all that is obvious. i agree there is not much to discuss until he returns to the nhl and we can measure his progress where it counts. the recent good results in finland are simply encouraging and reason to hope.

but being "tentatively dismissive" of a 19 year old off who is breaking u20 records in a pro league in finland and calling the idea that he might yet be ok for his draft position "wishful thinking"is not analysis. "tentatively dismissive" is not an analytical approach justified by the objective evidence. it's being unreasonable and disclosing that your analysis has an agenda. perhaps not as big an agenda as another poster calling him a "blown pick" but nevertheless its just posturing masquerading as analysis. you give yourself away with the use of "ludicrous" where it no way fits in with a rational discussion of the situation.

 

[CanaFan]

I'd argue most Dmen picked in the top 5 don't develop very quickly because that have already developed and that is why they are ahead of their peers. It's the ones later in the draft that need to develop to get them moving upwards.

Ya, my wording was a bit lazy. You’re right that they are typically more advanced in their development at the draft which is why they are picked high on the first place.

I should have said “make the NHL quickly” to be more accurate.

 

[me2]

My baseless speculation is that it doesn't take Dmen longer to develop, it just takes longer to make the NHL full time. It's not that big of a commitment to keep 1 spot for a developing fwd w the big club. 1 of 6 dmen spots is a bigger risk to take, therefore you might want to be a little extra certain before letting a Dman stay up than a forward.

I think they take a year or so longer.

a) As you say, hiding a forward is easy
b) overlooking a rookies defensive errors is easier at forward. A defender who can't defend gets sent down, a rookie forward with points gets more leeway
c) physical maturity is more important for Dmen than forwards. You might get by as a stick figure forward but as a dman you are going to smashed