The kids are alright
- Thread starter theD86
- Start date
Dr. Fire
What, me worry?
Lot of people thought Wennberg did not have a good game last night, but I disagree a little. I think he was sorta quiet, but played a smart game. He looked to me like he was trying to play smart and try not to make mistakes.
It is sort of typical when they take these natural centers and put them on a wing to acclimate them to the NHL. We have seen this before. I thought he was good on the fore-check, made good passes, and did not make any glaring mistakes.
This kid is going to be something when he is back in his natural position, and is fully acclimated to NHL play.
It is sort of typical when they take these natural centers and put them on a wing to acclimate them to the NHL. We have seen this before. I thought he was good on the fore-check, made good passes, and did not make any glaring mistakes.
This kid is going to be something when he is back in his natural position, and is fully acclimated to NHL play.
Last edited:
Iron Balls McGinty
Registered User
- Aug 5, 2005
- 9,163
- 7,244
Thats a big thing too. Its common for rookies to come in and try to take the whole world on their shoulders and show they belong because they were drafted in the first round but both Dano and Wennberg were playing a good team game last night. Dano was in the right place at the right time for his goal but I saw nothing that made Wennberg stick out in a bad way at all. If he continues this play, his points will come.
The calmness they are both showing so far is definitely a great sign for their development.
I agree. He didn't do anything great, but he also didn't do anything bad. That is okay. We have other guys who can score right now. He is playing smart and learning and that is good enough for now.
EspenK
Registered User
- Sep 25, 2011
- 15,842
- 4,445
So far so good. The question is - do they both stay when Dubi & Jenner return? I'm thinking Wennberg does on the Hartnell-Arty line. Dano would be relegated to 4th line duty so I don't know if that is good or if he is better served playing top 6 minutes in Springfield. Alternative would be to move Calvert to the 4th line and have Dano play with Dubi.
It will be interesting and it is a good problem to have.
It will be interesting and it is a good problem to have.
The solution is not to have a 4th line. Roll with a first and three second lines. 
Dano and Weinberg stay. Gibbons (when healthy) and Tropp head to waivers and then Springfield.
Dano and Weinberg stay. Gibbons (when healthy) and Tropp head to waivers and then Springfield.
The solution is not to have a 4th line. Roll with a first and three second lines.
Dano and Weinberg stay. Gibbons (when healthy) and Tropp head to waivers and then Springfield.
Tropp has a one-way deal, meaning we'd be paying him an NHL salary to play in the AHL. Don't see that happening.
If they keep playing like they've been playing, yes.
Cracknell and Tropp both have one ways and I agree with DJA that they probably won't get sent down. I don't see Chaput going down based on how he's played.
Plus, it's still at least a month off. Odds are we'll have some new injuries arise.
I think Chaput would be the first to be sent down. He was good in game one, but I didn't think he played that well last night. He is going to have to play really good to stay up, IMO. I would keep both Dano and Wennberg up. One, I think they are good enough. Two, you can move them around based on how they are playing. They are versatile in both the lines they can play and the positions they can play on a line.
Dano was playing on the 4th line last night as the game went on. I think wennberg is more of a top 9 guy and chaput is a bottom 6 guy. Dano seems like he could fit anywhere. So it makes me think wennberg and chaput would to down or get scratched before dano. Who knows really, it all depends on how well they continue to play. They are playing very well and it's going to be a hard decision for staff to make if they keep it up.
To me, we are paying them either way, so keep the best players. I look at it like we have x number of players on our team for y price. Play the best from that group. I have never understood teams who play the more expensive player over the better player.
I.E.
Player A - $4 million
Player B - $1 million
Why does it matter who you play? You are paying $5 million whether player A or player B plays. Obviously, it is different if you could send someone down who would make less, but you get my point. Play the best players.
EspenK
Registered User
- Sep 25, 2011
- 15,842
- 4,445
I agree but if a guy on a 2-way goes down then you are paying less. But I agree play the best.
You're right on the logic, and I totally agree. But don't expect perfect rationality from hockey execs.
The solution is not to have a 4th line. Roll with a first and three second lines.
Dano and Weinberg stay. Gibbons (when healthy) and Tropp head to waivers and then Springfield.
The problem with that is you just cut into everyone's ice time. Dubinsky, Anisimov, Johansen, etc.. those guys need to play. It's not like you get better rested players producing at a better rate, you just get less good hockey.
I really cannot see how Wennberg stays. He is a play-making center, not a winger. Dano? Fits like a glove on the third line as a wing where he could score 15-18 goals. Wennberg show no offensive potential as a wing. He should go to Springfield and be the first line center on that team, getting lots of face-off practice. Somebody has to go when Boone comes back. I say it should be Wennberg back to Springfield.
LetsGOJackets!!
Registered User
Thru two games I believe the kids are alright
Chaput, Dano and Wennberg have all had moments where they played well, this is the best experience in the world as they are learning how to play team hockey without the pressure of being the one counted on for offense. Right here, right now, they can just play.
Chaput, Dano and Wennberg have all had moments where they played well, this is the best experience in the world as they are learning how to play team hockey without the pressure of being the one counted on for offense. Right here, right now, they can just play.
There are pros and cons to whatever move gets made. That's why discussion boards and social media will always have plenty of content. IF we have to send one of three youngsters down, Wennberg would also be my preference for reasons already stated here.
I agree with your conclusion, to the extent that if what we've seen so far continues Wennberg should be the one to go down when Dubi and Jenner are back. But "show no offensive potential as a wing" I don't think applies to Wennberg. He's a better center, and I want him to develop at center in Springfield, but he has enough raw talent to produce on the wing.
I want to remind folks of the "big brother" theory of player development. A disproportionate number of players are the oldest of their set of siblings. Why? Because they get years of practice against inferior competition, which enables them to learn by trying new things.
Another version of the same theory, put forward by Malcolm Gladwell, looks at the hugely disproportionate number of NHL players born in months immediately following age cut-offs. The same principle is at work: being a bit more mature than everyone else lets you try things and grow as a player.
19 and 20 year olds don't really get to try new things at the NHL level, unless they're Nathan Mackinnon. For that reason, the AHL is a better place to learn. Wennberg, Dano, etc.. yeah, the kids are good enough to play in the NHL, but the AHL might make them better years down the road.
I'd like to see a study where you look at the production of players who get extra time in the AHL due to some exogenous factor like a lockout or strike. I know this applies to Atkinson, Spezza, Cammaleri, etc... It could confirm or disprove my theory.
Another version of the same theory, put forward by Malcolm Gladwell, looks at the hugely disproportionate number of NHL players born in months immediately following age cut-offs. The same principle is at work: being a bit more mature than everyone else lets you try things and grow as a player.
19 and 20 year olds don't really get to try new things at the NHL level, unless they're Nathan Mackinnon. For that reason, the AHL is a better place to learn. Wennberg, Dano, etc.. yeah, the kids are good enough to play in the NHL, but the AHL might make them better years down the road.
I'd like to see a study where you look at the production of players who get extra time in the AHL due to some exogenous factor like a lockout or strike. I know this applies to Atkinson, Spezza, Cammaleri, etc... It could confirm or disprove my theory.
Crede777
Deputized
- Dec 16, 2009
- 14,841
- 4,558
One kink is the fact that Wennberg and Dano are not from the CHL, they are from the SHL and KHL where they played against older opponents and were frequently used in the bottom-6.
So they aren't like, say, Kerby Rychel who got top line minutes all season long against young opponents.
So they aren't like, say, Kerby Rychel who got top line minutes all season long against young opponents.
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
That's only true in the rare and wondrous circumstance in which Everybody Is Healthy.
Double-Shift Lasse
Just post better
Bolded makes this a fun but largely meaningless conversation. Our opinion is going to change on these players a half-dozen times between now and the return of the injured players. Then there's the will there be any other injuries in the meantime thing.
