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

[major major]

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:

I give credit where it is due. You saw the "tiki taka" before it happened. Are you a soccer (jalkapallo?) fan, by chance?

 

[Tulipunaruusu*]

I give credit where it is due. You saw the "tiki taka" before it happened. Are you a soccer (jalkapallo?) fan, by chance?

I hate tiki-taka brand of football or what Catalonia/Spain turned it into... Hartnell and Wennberg have that right possession mentality (four passes break any defence) theme showing through. Dano might have adaptation time ahead in Chicago if he is forced at least partially have to do without that key support in the beginning. It cannot happen very often in the NHL when a line with two, in some ways still raw rookies, has such effect.

The possession side of things has been a key element in Finnish hockey and sports discussion for ten years or now also. Reflecting sides such as Ajax Amsterdam in football and Soviet Union in hockey. But it is sure a fine line between inefficient sharing and good possessive game.

In the Vancouver Olympic hockey Finnish old guard of NHL players rebelled against the new wave of hockey and turned against the head coach Jukka Jalonen's ideas of possession hockey during the tournament. He had prepared and send DVD's for each player to watch before the tournament in order to get familiar with this new way of playing hockey (for some) that would be Finland's style of play, "our game". Well no-one of the veterans bothered actually watching the tape and the players and the coaching staff ended up clashing during the tournament. The veterans agreed during the final break of the Finland-Slovakia bronze game to forfeit these tactics and play the way they are taught in the NHL. Finland then rose past Slovakia to take the bronze.

By the way... Too much Tiki-talk or you just happen to be originally from Thunder Bay or somewhere along those lines to speak perfect Finnish?

 

[major major]

I hate tiki-taka brand of football or what Catalonia/Spain turned it into... Hartnell and Wennberg have that right possession mentality (four passes break any defence) theme showing through. Dano might have adaptation time ahead in Chicago if he is forced at least partially have to do without that key support in the beginning. It cannot happen very often in the NHL when a line with two, in some ways still raw rookies, has such effect.

The possession side of things has been a key element in Finnish hockey and sports discussion for ten years or now also. Reflecting sides such as Ajax Amsterdam in football and Soviet Union in hockey. But it is sure a fine line between inefficient sharing and good possessive game.

In the Vancouver Olympic hockey Finnish old guard of NHL players rebelled against the new wave of hockey and turned against the head coach Jukka Jalonen's ideas of possession hockey during the tournament. He had prepared and send DVD's for each player to watch before the tournament in order to get familiar with this new way of playing hockey (for some) that would be Finland's style of play, "our game". Well no-one of the veterans bothered actually watching the tape and the players and the coaching staff ended up clashing during the tournament. The veterans agreed during the final break of the Finland-Slovakia bronze game to forfeit these tactics and play the way they are taught in the NHL. Finland then rose past Slovakia to take the bronze.

By the way... Too much Tiki-talk or you just happen to be originally from Thunder Bay or somewhere along those lines to speak perfect Finnish?

No Finnish, I just happen to know a variety of the world's names for soccer because of a recent discussion with some friends. I haven't 100% confirmed it but a friend made a good case that "football" actually is a much older umbrella term for a variety of end-to-end sports that involve being on foot, as opposed to being on a horse like a respectable person and playing polo. Soccer, calcio, etc.. is just more specific.

 

[SuperGenius]

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.

Look, I don't know what to tell you. I specifically said that I didn't say it. I don't really care what you 'think' I meant. Why don't you focus on the other part of my post where I directly respond to your assertion that he was 'handed' a roster spot:

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.

Again, which C should have been playing over Wennberg?

 

[MAHJ71]

Look, I don't know what to tell you. I specifically said that I didn't say it. I don't really care what you 'think' I meant.

Which C should have been playing over Wennberg?

Guess what: I don't care what you think I meant either. Newsflash: your opinion isn't everything people care about.

I never said Wennberg was horrible, all I said was he was handed his spot - which he was, injuries or not - and there were other players who could have been given a look. I don't need to name people because anyone who claims to be a fan knows there were other options. I never said anyone would do better but, it would have been something different and no one here knows what would have happened as a result. So continue bashing if you wish, I could care less as I learned very early when I signed up on these boards that you don't know how to understand there are people out there in the world who have differing and sometimes better opinions than yours. What you and many others need to learn is how to realize other people will have differing opinions and there are right and wrong ways to go about talking with them about it. This is a message board and it's about time you and several others realized your posts don't have to be agreed with or answered.

 

[SuperGenius]

Guess what: I don't care what you think I meant either. Newsflash: your opinion isn't everything people care about.

I never said Wennberg was horrible, all I said was he was handed his spot - which he was, injuries or not - and there were other players who could have been given a look. I don't need to name people because anyone who claims to be a fan knows there were other options. I never said anyone would do better but, it would have been something different and no one here knows what would have happened as a result. So continue bashing if you wish, I could care less as I learned very early when I signed up on these boards that you don't know how to understand there are people out there in the world who have differing and sometimes better opinions than yours. What you and many others need to learn is how to realize other people will have differing opinions and there are right and wrong ways to go about talking with them about it. This is a message board and it's about time you and several others realized your posts don't have to be agreed with or answered.

Big surprise here. This whole spat boils down to you answering a single question and you just can't do it.

You seem to have problems taking things personally. I'm not bashing you - I'm asking you to back up your claim that there were better options available and Wennberg was handed his spot. Others are doing the same. I'm doing this precisely because I do care what you have to say. I just don't really care what your interpretation of what *I* am saying because, well, you know, I know what I'm saying and I explicitly defined it for you. If you still don't believe me then that's on you.

It's very true that there are differing opinions and that all opinions are valuable in a discussion. However, sometimes, opinions turn into statements of fact - and, well, if you're gonna do that, be prepared to back it up, preferably without questioning someone else's fandom. The 'troo fan' bit is BS, and you know it.

At this point it's probably best to either drop it or just admit you didn't realize the extent of the injuries and that TJ Tynan probably wasn't the answer to the Wennberg problem.

He probably got a little more time than he deserved at times, but at the end of the day, he was the best remaining option for most of the first half of the season. After being sent down and returning to the club, he seemed to 'get it' and improved into a pretty good young player by the end of the season. Watching the game tonight, he looked great. I'm not sure I'll ever understand why he's such a polarizing figure here or why he's discussed in what seems like every thread.

 

[MAHJ71]

At this point it's probably best to either drop it or just admit you didn't realize the extent of the injuries and that TJ Tynan probably wasn't the answer to the Wennberg problem.

He probably got a little more time than he deserved at times, but at the end of the day, he was the best remaining option for most of the first half of the season. After being sent down and returning to the club, he seemed to 'get it' and improved into a pretty good young player by the end of the season. Watching the game tonight, he looked great. I'm not sure I'll ever understand why he's such a polarizing figure here or why he's discussed in what seems like every thread.

You prove my point right here. There were other options including Tynan. As I've said already would they have been better - probably not - but the constant defense Wennberg gets on these boards is crap. Bottom line is he was given the longest look of anybody and hardly penalized for crap play. Yes he got better but, does that erase the first part of his story? No. Maybe he's a polarizing figure because you and others cannot seem to let posters post their opinion without trying to stir/spin callout drama on our section of the forums. There's a way of disagreeing and some still need to learn how it's done.

 

[Monk]

You prove my point right here. There were other options including Tynan. As I've said already would they have been better - probably not - but the constant defense Wennberg gets on these boards is crap. Bottom line is he was given the longest look of anybody and hardly penalized for crap play. Yes he got better but, does that erase the first part of his story? No. Maybe he's a polarizing figure because you and others cannot seem to let posters post their opinion without trying to stir/spin callout drama on our section of the forums. There's a way of disagreeing and some still need to learn how it's done.

We'll now I'm not even sure what your point is, to be honest. You've yet to actually answer the one question that supports your main premise, and it's a simple question that's been posed multiple times.

Unless of course your point is that you don't like Wennberg. Got that loud and clear.

 

[Kfarschman]

Maybe he's a polarizing figure because you and others cannot seem to let posters post their opinion without trying to stir/spin callout drama on our section of the forums. There's a way of disagreeing and some still need to learn how it's done.

What?

And...

Is "a way" of disagreeing you speak of to act defensive and bordering on un-civil?

Also..

There's a good chance this is a relative of/ or themselves, T.J. Tynan I think, right?

Also..

T.J. Tynan was drafted 66 overall, or "CBJsixtysix" overall.... coincidence?

In closing...

Maybe T.J Tynan should have been given more of a look. I don't know.

 

[Crede777]

I'm still confused about which centers (plural is important because it is repeatedly being alluded to) should have been called up instead. Can someone please tell me?

 

[Johansen2Foligno]

I'm still confused about which centers (plural is important because it is repeatedly being alluded to) should have been called up instead. Can someone please tell me?

Chaput, CDC, etc..

 

[thebus2288*]

Karlsson, Tynan, Chaput. Along with NUMEROUS wingers who should have seen more time. I'm not gonna go back and look at timelines on injuries but there's was plenty of time when we had available centers playing wing while Wennberg was "handed" the spot.

I'm gonna laugh when Karlsson beats out Wenny for that 3rd C spot. Would add a whole other aspect of "winning" that trade.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

I'm gonna laugh when Karlsson beats out Wenny for that 3rd C spot. Would add a whole other aspect of "winning" that trade.

That kind of comments sounds like you are the type of fan that would rather be right and see the Jackets struggle than be wrong and the team succeed.

 

[Tulipunaruusu*]

That kind of comments sounds like you are the type of fan that would rather be right and see the Jackets struggle than be wrong and the team succeed.

Which ones do get hired as advisors to the general manager?

 

[Dr. Fire]

I am not really sure there were a lot of people on this board that were defending Wennberg in the way being implied here. I think most people last season realized that Wennberg was thrust into a tough situation, and good or bad, we sort of had to tolerate his growing pains. I agree, there were not any other better options.

Now, Wennberg rounded into a fine player, and has had a good camp. He looks very smooth, creates chances, and is smart on the puck. His development in the NHL is moving along nicely in my book, and he still has a lot more up-side.

So, I don't really know what the big deal is here.

 

[Johansen2Foligno]

Karlsson, Tynan, Chaput. Along with NUMEROUS wingers who should have seen more time. I'm not gonna go back and look at timelines on injuries but there's was plenty of time when we had available centers playing wing while Wennberg was "handed" the spot.

I'm gonna laugh when Karlsson beats out Wenny for that 3rd C spot. Would add a whole other aspect of "winning" that trade.

Chaput was fourth line center for a good portion of the beginning of the season. Karlsson wasn't on the team until March. When Anisimov came back from injury he was not able to take face-offs because of his triceps injury. Dubinsky and Jenner each only played 30-40 some games. Even Letestu was out for 30 some games (mostly beginning of year).

It just wasn't pretty last year. I'm not a huge Wennberg fan but he's looked decent in the preseason.

 

[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.

I'll just re-quote this here, because evidently none of the posters from the last page or so have read it.

 

[major major]

I am not really sure there were a lot of people on this board that were defending Wennberg in the way being implied here. I think most people last season realized that Wennberg was thrust into a tough situation, and good or bad, we sort of had to tolerate his growing pains. I agree, there were not any other better options.

Now, Wennberg rounded into a fine player, and has had a good camp. He looks very smooth, creates chances, and is smart on the puck. His development in the NHL is moving along nicely in my book, and he still has a lot more up-side.

So, I don't really know what the big deal is here.

Like everything on the boards, it's really not a big deal. It's just that some of us are sticklers for proper history. And I have no problem recognizing Wennberg's upside and maintaining that he was bad for several months last year. It seems some folks just can't imagine that I might be able to have both of those thoughts in mind at the same time.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

It seems some folks just can't imagine that I might be able to have both of those thoughts in mind at the same time.

I don't think posters here think that much about other posters.

 

[Dr. Fire]

Like everything on the boards, it's really not a big deal. It's just that some of us are sticklers for proper history. And I have no problem recognizing Wennberg's upside and maintaining that he was bad for several months last year. It seems some folks just can't imagine that I might be able to have both of those thoughts in mind at the same time.

I feel ya.

I mean I just think everyone was pretty realistic about Wennberg, and our other options, and that would include you.

 

[Dr. Fire]

I don't think posters here think that much about other posters.

That is kind of harsh, but you might be right in some cases. Never say never, and never say always.

 

[blahblah]

Like everything on the boards, it's really not a big deal. It's just that some of us are sticklers for proper history. And I have no problem recognizing Wennberg's upside and maintaining that he was bad for several months last year. It seems some folks just can't imagine that I might be able to have both of those thoughts in mind at the same time.

The only thing I can add is that the main issue I had was the degree in which some people were saying he was "bad" and some of the people that were using that period to say that he wasn't going to amount to anything in his career. I will also say that Chaput wasn't really an option, he didn't do really anything in the role he was given.

If I remember correctly my issue wasn't how he was used after the injuries piled up but how we used him at the beginning of the season during that brief period when we actually were moderately healthy and there were other options.

I came in very late and am not sure why Wennberg came up, but that's kind of all I have to say.

 

[major major]

If I remember correctly my issue wasn't how he was used after the injuries piled up but how we used him at the beginning of the season during that brief period when we actually were moderately healthy and there were other options.
\

There was also after Jenner and Dubi and several other players returned in December, and Rychel had 3 pts in 5 games. Wennberg was still struggling but was kept in the lineup playing lots of minutes, while Kerby Rychel was sent down.

Edit: Jenner was out when Wennberg was recalled, per post below.

 

[cbjgirl]

Just so we are all on the same page concerning centers last season.

Info from NHL.com
Expected centers:
Johansen - played every game
Dubinsky - first regular season game played - Dec 9th
Anisimov - out between Nov 29th and Jan 29th - did not take faceoffs after his return
Letestu - out between Oct 28th and Jan 6th

Chaput - played for CBJ between start of season and Jan 4th
Folgno - based on faceoff % - was playing center in December and maybe late Feb.
Jenner - missed Oct and between Dec 18 and March 21st

Wennberg - played 68 games at CBJ level, 6 in AHL, "missing" games between Nov 28 and Dec 20th and March 19 and March 31st

Any one else we should be talking about since there were SO many centers available?

 

[Viqsi]

Karlsson, Tynan, Chaput. Along with NUMEROUS wingers who should have seen more time. I'm not gonna go back and look at timelines on injuries but there's was plenty of time when we had available centers playing wing while Wennberg was "handed" the spot.

I'm gonna laugh when Karlsson beats out Wenny for that 3rd C spot. Would add a whole other aspect of "winning" that trade.

Chaput WAS called up. He played poorly.

Karlsson wasn't even in the organization when Wennberg was playing badly.

So we're back to just Tynan - whom nobody but me cared about until folks noticed his AHL scoring last year.