Confirmed with Link: CBJ acquire Saad/Broadhurst/Paliotta from CHI for Anisimov/Dano/Morin/Tropp/2016 4th

[Kutter]

Disappointing for Dano, but it's not like it's a total shock. Hawks immediate help was AA; Dano was their long game.

Agree, not completely surprising. I have no idea how his camp with Chicago went, but he was somewhat streaky last year. He definitely finished the season very strong with us but early in the year had been up and down a bit. I believe even in Springfield he was streaky.

Ultimately he is likely going to be a solid pro but Chicago didn't win their Cups by accident and are likely making a smart move to get him some more seasoning in the AHL.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

I just hope he's not in Coach 'Q's doghouse. Once you get in, hard to get out.

 

[Hello Johnny]

Never said he didn't have things to work on or shouldn't be sent down. But you can't deny one bit that Wennberg was handed his spot and, no matter his play was kept there.

He was "handed" his spot because of the circumstances. In a normally healthy season, Wennberg plays most of last year in the A. It's pretty obvious why we had to keep him – we simply had no choice.

 

[MAHJ71]

He was "handed" his spot because of the circumstances. In a normally healthy season, Wennberg plays most of last year in the A. It's pretty obvious why we had to keep him – we simply had no choice.

Sure we had injuries that helped his case, but we also had other prospects would could have given looks to. All we ever talk about is how deep our prospects are.

 

[blahblah]

Agree, not completely surprising. I have no idea how his camp with Chicago went, but he was somewhat streaky last year. He definitely finished the season very strong with us but early in the year had been up and down a bit. I believe even in Springfield he was streaky.

Ultimately he is likely going to be a solid pro but Chicago didn't win their Cups by accident and are likely making a smart move to get him some more seasoning in the AHL.

"Streaky" is pretty much every scorer in the league. Not sure that's much of a bar. I'm pretty sure Chicago was looking at more than just preseason stats.

 

[DarkandStormy]

Sure we had injuries that helped his case, but we also had other prospects would could have given looks to. All we ever talk about is how deep our prospects are.

Please, tell us who should have been playing instead. Chaput was already up here with 4th line duty. Foligno was filling in at C. Joey was top line C every game. Then AA, Dubi, and Letestu rotated in when healthy. Wennberg went down for a stint in Springy then came back. Seriously...who else warranted a look in the org.? TJ Tynan?

 

[MAHJ71]

Please, tell us who should have been playing instead. Chaput was already up here with 4th line duty. Foligno was filling in at C. Joey was top line C every game. Then AA, Dubi, and Letestu rotated in when healthy. Wennberg went down for a stint in Springy then came back. Seriously...who else warranted a look in the org.? TJ Tynan?

There are options, you know just as well as I do you left more than few centers out of your post - fill them in yourself.

 

[DarkandStormy]

There are options, you know just as well as I do you left more than few centers out of your post - fill them in yourself.

Sean Collins? Luke Adam? Seriously, who else was going to play when we were missing C's 2-4?

 

[Crede777]

There are options, you know just as well as I do you left more than few centers out of your post - fill them in yourself.

I am honestly thinking and I cannot come up with others. We didn't get Karlsson until the TDL so he's out. Jenner/Dubi/AA/Letestu were out. Chaput was up. Foligno was forced to play C. I mean, who else is there?

 

[major major]

As I remember it, there was a month or so where we didn't have any other option but Wennberg and the waiver wire.

But Wennberg was awful for about 3-4 months, and we gave him ridiculous ice time for a struggling player. Chaput and Cracknell were both just as bad, so I don't really consider that as a better scenario. But we had enough natural centers (if you count Jenner and Foligno) for a good chunk of the year, and we could have demoted Wennberg if we had slid one of them over and called up any of Rychel, Anderson, or Dano earlier. I think it's a fair assessment to say Wennberg had his job handed to him, and he didn't earn it until he was paired with Hartnell late in the year.

 

[Tulipunaruusu*]

I think it's a fair assessment to say Wennberg had his job handed to him, and he didn't earn it until he was paired with Hartnell late in the year.

If his job description by that time asked for outmuscling opponents, carrying a line and breaking some rookie record while on it I can agree. It's a long and winding road for rookies. How come the humble beginning in the greatest story ever told matters so much when emphasis should be on what was coming like a storm over Atlantic for those who saw it developing.

The truth is that in this team two guys knew in beginning and in the end of the last season how to allow others to play to their best ability. Father and a son. They created life in Marko Dano.

 

[MAHJ71]

As I remember it, there was a month or so where we didn't have any other option but Wennberg and the waiver wire.

But Wennberg was awful for about 3-4 months, and we gave him ridiculous ice time for a struggling player. Chaput and Cracknell were both just as bad, so I don't really consider that as a better scenario. But we had enough natural centers (if you count Jenner and Foligno) for a good chunk of the year, and we could have demoted Wennberg if we had slid one of them over and called up any of Rychel, Anderson, or Dano earlier. I think it's a fair assessment to say Wennberg had his job handed to him, and he didn't earn it until he was paired with Hartnell late in the year.

At least one person gets it..

 

[JLarucci23]

Hawks fan here. We were kind of surprised to see Dano down but I think its whats best for him. We knew Tuevo was ready last year to start on the big league club but he was sent down to Rockford to play top line minutes and was up about halfway through the year and played pretty good the back half. I am suspecting the same sort of thing with Dano. Let him play top line minutes in Rockford and I'm more then sure hell be up here this year contributing along the same lines as Tuevo.

 

[major major]

If his job description by that time asked for outmuscling opponents, carrying a line and breaking some rookie record while on it I can agree. It's a long and winding road for rookies. How come the humble beginning in the greatest story ever told matters so much when emphasis should be on what was coming like a storm over Atlantic for those who saw it developing.

The truth is that in this team two guys knew in beginning and in the end of the last season how to allow others to play to their best ability. Father and a son. They created life in Marko Dano.

I don't mind saying nice things about Wennberg, or focusing on the promising aspects. It's just this blatantly false narrative that Wennberg outplayed vets to earn his job or that he had a good rookie year. He had a good finish though, so feel free to focus on that, and stick to the truth.

Marko Dano as Pinocchio. Okay. There's all sorts of ways to assess who created life in who. I'll do the simplest of all tests. How did Dano play when Wennberg was out of the lineup? He kept scoring. How did Wennberg do when Dano was out? Not good. Case closed (or it would be if this wasn't one of those zombie ideas that never dies and always comes back).

 

[SuperGenius]

Never said he didn't have things to work on or shouldn't be sent down. But you can't deny one bit that Wennberg was handed his spot and, no matter his play was kept there.

Yes I can.

Wennberg was put in a difficult position of playing a little before he was ready because he was the best option left after the crazy injuries. While he wasn't particularly noticeable in the first half, he wasn't horrible at all. He then gets sent down, returns and really responds with a great last third.

 

[SuperGenius]

Funny, I didn't know that Dano didn't earn his time here in Columbus.

On another note, have the Hawks really demoted him or is this just a paper move to get under the cap? In other words, are they just going to call him back up after Bickell and some $ clears waivers? I honestly don't know.

He did earn his time. Here. Different year, different team, different circumstances. I think Q and the Hawks generally have proven they know what they're doing developing young guys. He'll be fine.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

As I remember it, there was a month or so where we didn't have any other option but Wennberg and the waiver wire.

But Wennberg was awful for about 3-4 months, and we gave him ridiculous ice time for a struggling player. Chaput and Cracknell were both just as bad, so I don't really consider that as a better scenario. But we had enough natural centers (if you count Jenner and Foligno) for a good chunk of the year, and we could have demoted Wennberg if we had slid one of them over and called up any of Rychel, Anderson, or Dano earlier. I think it's a fair assessment to say Wennberg had his job handed to him, and he didn't earn it until he was paired with Hartnell late in the year.

I thought Jenner was out longer but I agree with MM here. Wennberg was bad, stuck even after there were options, was granted ice time and circumstances, and eventually found his way when Hartnell and Dano were put on his wings. If someone wants to say that was how the org decided to develop him, then fine, and if they want to use his improved play at season's end as proof it worked, or that it's evidence they were right about him all along while some were blasting him, I'm not going to argue, even though I don't necessarily agree.

Here's all I hope now as regards Wennberg - that he continues to get better and thus deserves his roster spot. He showed some really good stuff and if he genuinely maintains his roster spot with the team's depth at forward, it should mean good things for player and team.

 

[DarkandStormy]

I am honestly thinking and I cannot come up with others. We didn't get Karlsson until the TDL so he's out. Jenner/Dubi/AA/Letestu were out. Chaput was up. Foligno was forced to play C. I mean, who else is there?

Shhh there were secret better options. We just aren't allowed to type them. Or something.

 

[Tulipunaruusu*]

We knew Tuevo was ready last year to start on the big league club but he was sent down to Rockford to play top line minutes and was up about halfway through the year and played pretty good the back half. I am suspecting the same sort of thing with Dano. Let him play top line minutes in Rockford and I'm more then sure hell be up here this year contributing along the same lines as Tuevo.

Tuevo Tuerovaenen is very different prospect coming over to North America compared to Marko Dano in his second season. Dano should already have far more developed physique pumping it hard this summer.

Dano will be called upon by the NHL but I would be surprised if the Blackhawks replaced Saad's recent and more importantly future contribution with this trade as it has been proclaimed. With futures.

I don't mind saying nice things about Wennberg, or focusing on the promising aspects. It's just this blatantly false narrative that Wennberg outplayed vets to earn his job or that he had a good rookie year.

You are right about Wennberg not really outplaying any veteran centreman in the beginning of the season. But he was still handled a rather rough hand in terms of lines and suitable partners to help ease that process which eventually somewhat worked out. Isn't it very much about the diamond unveiled when you talk about players who could play the next 8 seasons for the Blue Jackets and not so much about the first rough material impressions.

Then what is a good season if not the one where one surpassed both Letestu and Jenner in the depth chart, made Anisimov tradeable for a very good return and where one even makes 1/3 of a surprisingly prominent (made mostly of rookies!) line in the NHL.

 

[MAHJ71]

Yes I can.

Wennberg was put in a difficult position of playing a little before he was ready because he was the best option left after the crazy injuries. While he wasn't particularly noticeable in the first half, he wasn't horrible at all. He then gets sent down, returns and really responds with a great last third.

Again, when did I say he was horrible? I'll wait..

 

[major major]

As for who was horrible, I'll maintain that Chaput, Cracknell, Wennberg, and Boll were all distinctly horrible in the first half of last year. Huge minuses across the board, next to zero goals scored.

You are right about Wennberg not really outplaying any veteran centreman in the beginning of the season. But he was still handled a rather rough hand in terms of lines and suitable partners to help ease that process which eventually somewhat worked out. Isn't it very much about the diamond unveiled when you talk about players who could play the next 8 seasons for the Blue Jackets and not so much about the first rough material impressions.

Then what is a good season if not the one where one surpassed both Letestu and Jenner in the depth chart, made Anisimov tradeable for a very good return and where one even makes 1/3 of a surprisingly prominent (made mostly of rookies!) line in the NHL.

You can't make the argument that Wennberg was a great player just awaiting half decent linemates. Wennberg had ****** linemates and played ******. Wennberg had great linemates (including Joey and Foligno) and played ******. It was only Hartnell and Dano that worked.

I agree that he made Anisimov expendable but that's forward looking, not so much because of anything Wennberg has already done. And for god's sakes, Boone Jenner is not behind Wennberg on anyone's depth chart. If Wennberg was a competent wing I bet they'd consider sliding him over to let Jenner, who played very well at center, take the job.

 

[SuperGenius]

Again, when did I say he was horrible? I'll wait..

I didn't say you said he was horrible. Pay attention and stop asking others to make your arguments for you. For example..that list of centers who were better options...

 

[Tulipunaruusu*]

You can't make the argument that Wennberg was a great player just awaiting half decent linemates. Wennberg had ****** linemates and played ******. Wennberg had great linemates (including Joey and Foligno) and played ******. It was only Hartnell and Dano that worked.

Marko Dano had Toews and Hossa besides him before his fall. So it isn't about how good the others in the line are as the 'chemistry' that completes a line reaches far beyond and yet returns to the very core of an individual. Whether he is an inexperienced rookie or not. It does not matter much.

In the distant continent of Eurasia: the old world Alexander called his home the game was cast upon him. Marko Dano was part of that branch once. How Scott Hartnell learned it, I do not know. But I saw something this month a year ago:

Wennberg was fourth best in points for Djurgården and second best goal scorer for Frölunda. Against professional players and his main game isn't even scoring points. If he showed nothing spectacular in second game at least he controlled the team's puck possession very well.

Hartnell and Wennberg tend to be among those few who know how to play short-passing possession game so it's nice to see those two playing at least together.

If you want more offense from him I think it would be better to play Wennberg alongside Hartnell or Letestu so the puck would move from a blue jacket to another at least once in a game for that line after the initial pass. Between Atkinson and Calvert he managed to get two takeaways while playing center and pass it forth but those 'too' direct attacks really dried up after that.

If he is now sent down to AHL I can't see no harm done. Rather valuable experience (starting from training large portion of this summer in Columbus) instead which will only help in the future.

 

[MAHJ71]

I didn't say you said he was horrible. Pay attention and stop asking others to make your arguments for you. For example..that list of centers who were better options...

Pay attention? Lol... Read what you posted - you implied that I was saying Wennberg was horrible. Spin it however you wish - many here do the same.

 

[thebus2288*]

I think you forgot to log out of this username and use your other one

Actually is funny considering how far off and non-contributing your post was.

Wait a second... What's this supposed to ****in mean??

As I remember it, there was a month or so where we didn't have any other option but Wennberg and the waiver wire.

But Wennberg was awful for about 3-4 months, and we gave him ridiculous ice time for a struggling player. Chaput and Cracknell were both just as bad, so I don't really consider that as a better scenario. But we had enough natural centers (if you count Jenner and Foligno) for a good chunk of the year, and we could have demoted Wennberg if we had slid one of them over and called up any of Rychel, Anderson, or Dano earlier. I think it's a fair assessment to say Wennberg had his job handed to him, and he didn't earn it until he was paired with Hartnell late in the year.

Pretty much.

At least one person gets it..

Looks like were up to about 7-8 guys at this point. Baby steps.



You guys gotta turn every thread into a damn Wennberg or Wisniewski thread, its unbelievable!!