Therein lies the problem - were his offensive numbers in London due to the fact he was playing with top tier talent? or was he the one that actually created offensive chances/points due to his skill? and not as a result of having benefited from an all-star line-up?

As touched on, I haven't seen him play that much so am going by the bits of information that others (who have seen him play quite a bit) have provided. Hence, it's more difficult to get a proper read on what, precisely, is the overall upside and quality of this player?
- Zogg

I would say they fed off each other. Marner and Co. were so effective because of the elite play of Juolevi getting the puck out of the zone and making that first pass. He got points because they banged in rebounds/deflected shots/finished after he made a solid pass. he is a solid 3 zone defenseman that reads the play at an elite level and can adjust to it at an elite level. People get so caught up about defensemen that put up 60+ pts year after year. But a lot of them are not that great in their own end, in fact someone of them are not that effective defensively to the point where offensive output means nothing without a partner making up for defensive lapses. Look at Duncan Keith as a great example. People here have argued that he is the best defenseman in the league. Except for 2 years, he tends to hover around the 45 point mark. This is where I see Juolevi, in the 40-50 pt mark most years. But the rest of his play will be at an elite level. He will be a #2 and possibly that true #1 defenseman. That is worth a 5OA.

I would say they fed off each other. Marner and Co. were so effective because of the elite play of Juolevi getting the puck out of the zone and making that first pass. He got points because they banged in rebounds/deflected shots/finished after he made a solid pass. he is a solid 3 zone defenseman that reads the play at an elite level and can adjust to it at an elite level. People get so caught up about defensemen that put up 60+ pts year after year. But a lot of them are not that great in their own end, in fact someone of them are not that effective defensively. Look at Duncan Keith as a great example. People here have argued that he is the best defenseman in the league. Except for 2 years, he tends to hover around the 45 point mark. This is where I see Juolevi, in the 40-50 pt mark most years. But the rest of his play will be at an elite level. He will be a #2 and possibly that true #1 defenseman. That is worth a 5OA.
- Retinalz

Don't jinx it now. Ease up on the Keith talk.

Our defence is fine the next 2 years, what's our plan for replacing the Sedins, that was supposed to be Dubois, a forward, so why aren't we taking the next best forward and consensus best player available at #5. 29 other teams would have taken Tkachuk at #5 but Jim Benning is a buffoon
- sushi

At least Juolevi didn't tweet out I hate Canucks like Bostons pick did :

At least Juolevi didn't tweet out I hate Canucks like Bostons pick did :

- VANTEL

Which pick did this? I want to see the tweet.

Which pick did this? I want to see the tweet.
- Retinalz

It was sarcasm. He went BU and is from there. Charles McAvoy.

Therein lies the problem - were his offensive numbers in London due to the fact he was playing with top tier talent? or was he the one that actually created offensive chances/points due to his skill? and not as a result of having benefited from an all-star line-up?

As touched on, I haven't seen him play that much so am going by the bits of information that others (who have seen him play quite a bit) have provided. Hence, it's more difficult to get a proper read on what, precisely, is the overall upside and quality of this player?
- Zogg

I suggest you watch him play, don't believe other's crap.

I would say they fed off each other. Marner and Co. were so effective because of the elite play of Juolevi getting the puck out of the zone and making that first pass. He got points because they banged in rebounds/deflected shots/finished after he made a solid pass. he is a solid 3 zone defenseman that reads the play at an elite level and can adjust to it at an elite level. People get so caught up about defensemen that put up 60+ pts year after year. But a lot of them are not that great in their own end, in fact someone of them are not that effective defensively to the point where offensive output means nothing without a partner making up for defensive lapses. Look at Duncan Keith as a great example. People here have argued that he is the best defenseman in the league. Except for 2 years, he tends to hover around the 45 point mark. This is where I see Juolevi, in the 40-50 pt mark most years. But the rest of his play will be at an elite level. He will be a #2 and possibly that true #1 defenseman. That is worth a 5OA.
- Retinalz

When you watch him you will notice his head is always up, he has great vision.

Tryamkin, Gudbranson, stecher, Pedan, Olsen, brisebois, Sbisa, Candella, Juolevi. And possibly Larsen.. He started with what? Hutton cederholm and subban?? He's completely overhauled this franchises Defense in 2 seasons.. The man should get a medal for what he started with

Im gonna copy and paste this quote every day, all summer
- Brooks_Light

Should I leave on a high note??!

When you watch him you will notice his head is always up, he has great vision.
- A_SteamingLombardi

I have only seen highlights and read what players playing against him/with him have said. He will be elite unless something unforeseen derails him(injury, etc) and that is never the fault of the GM who drafted if it happens.

I would say they fed off each other. Marner and Co. were so effective because of the elite play of Juolevi getting the puck out of the zone and making that first pass. He got points because they banged in rebounds/deflected shots/finished after he made a solid pass. he is a solid 3 zone defenseman that reads the play at an elite level and can adjust to it at an elite level. People get so caught up about defensemen that put up 60+ pts year after year. But a lot of them are not that great in their own end, in fact someone of them are not that effective defensively to the point where offensive output means nothing without a partner making up for defensive lapses. Look at Duncan Keith as a great example. People here have argued that he is the best defenseman in the league. Except for 2 years, he tends to hover around the 45 point mark. This is where I see Juolevi, in the 40-50 pt mark most years. But the rest of his play will be at an elite level. He will be a #2 and possibly that true #1 defenseman. That is worth a 5OA.
- Retinalz

Thanks for the input - interesting comparisons and analysis

You forgot Tanev and Edler.

I must say, Edler has been one of the biggest disappointments I've seen as a Canucks fan. He was supposed to be the next Lidstrom and turned into a total plug. He really doesn't do anything well anymore, except turn the puck over and shoot into shin pads.
- Scooby_Doo

I meant to leave them... Was just talking about what prospects he walked into and what he's added since then

It was sarcasm. He went BU and is from there. Charles McAvoy.
- thundachunk

He's from new York. It was a tweet from like 3 years ago. He actually meant it for sure lol.. I think they said it was after Boston had knocked the rangers out or something along those lines

Thanks for the input - interesting comparisons and analysis
- Zogg

The closest comparableI have seen for potential is OEL.

Juolevi’s calm demeanor and active defensive presence is reminiscent of Hall of Fame defenseman Nicklas Lidstrom.

With such a well-rounded game and among the highest hockey IQ in the entire draft class, it’s hard to find faults with the package that Juolevi brings to the table.

Good read on him here

http://thehockeywriters.c...6-draft-prospect-profile/

NHL Player(s) Comparison – Hampus Lindholm

In two years Benning took an old stagnant D and replaced it with a D core that has the greatest potential ever for Canucks.

In two years Benning took an old stagnant D and replaced it with a D core that has the greatest potential ever for Canucks.
- VANTEL

That's how I see it

http://futurism.com/nasa-...arth-has-a-new-mini-moon/

Cool read on our 2nd moon

According to Linden all draft picks will be attending camp this year. Now we can develop our picks no need to rush them

In two years Benning took an old stagnant D and replaced it with a D core that has the greatest potential ever for Canucks.
- VANTEL

Ask oiler fans about potential. Potential means sweet F all if team doesn't develop properly or build a balanced roster.

I have only seen highlights and read what players playing against him/with him have said. He will be elite unless something unforeseen derails him(injury, etc) and that is never the fault of the GM who drafted if it happens.
- Retinalz

Rookies are not allowed to buy motorcycles or high performance vehicles of any kind.

Ask oiler fans about potential. Potential means sweet F all if team doesn't develop properly or build a balanced roster.
- bloatedmosquito

There lies the difference . I think they are building a proper team.

They have youth and experience, skill and toughness , talent on the back end now and good goaltending.

According to Linden all draft picks will be attending camp this year. Now we can develop our picks no need to rush them
- VANTEL

What! but I already pencilled in Lockwood to play with the Sedins

There lies the difference . I think they are building a proper team.

They have youth and experience, skill and toughness , talent on the back end now and good goaltending.
- VANTEL

Benning is also smart enough not too draft the same type of player year after year.

There lies the difference . I think they are building a proper team.

They have youth and experience, skill and toughness , talent on the back end now and good goaltending.
- VANTEL

OK, but I want to see some of these new guys play in a canuck jersey and play within a canuck system before I get too excited. Fan expectations should be at an all time low.

Out of the teams that have been rebuilding which team will make the most progress this year?


Toronto?
Buffalo?
Columbus?
Edmonton?
Arizona?
Carolina?
- manvanfan

Toronto & Buffalo

Ask oiler fans about potential. Potential means sweet F all if team doesn't develop properly or build a balanced roster.
- bloatedmosquito

I am also weary of the whole 'potential' dynamic. That's why I don't understand people clamoring for trading a guy like Hansen (for a second round pick as was suggested by some, which I feel is a significant under-evaluation). If you have a player that is of decent quality, reasonable age, and good cap hit (all of which apply to Hansen) you do not move him for 'potential' - at least in my opinion.

I think a lot of people have unrealistic views of anticipated success from any first round (and even second round - despite what history has shown/dictated) picks. Yes, it's exciting and 'sexy' to draft new talent but realistically there is only a very small fraction of players who are drafted that actually live up to their 'potential'. A lot of people seem to ignore this aspect, especially in and around the time of the draft where excitement and expectations often override common sense

I would take a proven player every time over 'potential' unless we are talking about a generational talent. Something to think about when discussing a team's anticipated success going forward