Discussion in 'Columbus Blue Jackets' started by Palm Tree, Oct 12, 2018.
Yeah.....that's it alright.
It would certainly explain why there's so many folks who keep repeating arguments based exclusively on the themes of "ONLY ONE GOAL OMG" and "but William Karlsson" and "he doesn't hit people so he's soft".
I bet he never scores a goal ever again.
I’ll double down and say I bet he never does a good hockey play ever again. All he knows how to do is lose face offs, and do cute dog videos for Stanley steamer.
Am I doing this right?
The defense and defenders are becoming laughable at this point.
And, while there are a few people that focus a bit too much on a few quite "redundant" or "unimportant" aspects, of the issues with Wennberg, there are PLENTY of people who go into detail and have explained IN DEPTH the issue that they feel/AND ARE THERE with Wenny. And some have been saying it for a while.
And all you are doing is DEFLECTING from the FACT that BOTH are actually right. You attempt to shut down BOTH sides with this simplistic, "Hur Dur"...."OMG"....BS. When its actually all true.
The "goalposts" continue to be moved farther and farther by the last defenders of the "Swedish Filatov". Think of what would be and was said to the people 1-2-3 years ago that would say what is NOW majority opinion on Wennberg. "They" were supposedly wrong then and now the same, LITERAL "OMG, HATERS!!" defense, is all they have going against them.
Cant even make the DEFLECTING "secondary assists" jokes when he's not even getting those, eh?
WHAT DOES HE DO WELL?!
Other than being an above average skater and above average passer that cant put himself in the position to use either attribute on a consistent basis.
He has simply average defensive ability and awareness. In relation to your average NHL player he is soft. And comparing him to Datsyuk in ANY WAY is ridiculous. Especially if you are trying to relate them in regards to a ****ing stick lift. This is the ****ing NHL.
Cant wait for the, "I told ya so".
Umby, Wizzy, Joey, Wenny, Bobby....oh my. AND BYE BYE.
Okay. You're just making things up now.
Wennberg does a lot of things very well, skilled skater
However, His inability to even be a scoring threat, let alone actually score, is a huge problem
He's between a third and forth line center, with second line center salary
I'd take Wennberg over Datsyuk for sure.
No I'm not, YOU ARE. Its not always about you. There is 1 poster for sure who has done it multiple times, and it irks me. He is 1 of you. One of the last Wennycans. I wont call him out, but, its not too hard to find with the numbers with what they are nowadays.
Anything else to add to actually debate anything I said?? Or just another LITERAL "OMG!!" response/defense??
You won’t call him out, yet you do so by name calling. Okay then. Do it or don’t. And nobody has ever said Wenny > Datsyuk
Swedish Filatov sounds like a good name for a band
Face it, I was prescient when I nicknamed “Pooh”.
Wennberg has 1 even strength goal in his last 61 regular season games.
If Gomez can bag a second in a year, I think Wennberg can do it in half that time.
Wennberg needs put back in that net-front role he manned for a couple of surprisingly productive weeks last year. Let him use his ability to read the play but force him to do it in an engaged rather than passive manner.
You are the eternal optimist
He'll probably go on a 10 goals in 7 games tear.
Fixed your post with a few emojis.
He's talking about me. And I've said multiple times I'm not comparing them skill wise, simply their defensive play styles.
And I love all this hate after last night when he was put on a line with Panarin and Duke and the line looked like a legitimate threat almost every time they were on the ice together.
*Insert line about how Panarin/Duke were carrying the line and Wennberg was just a passenger and how Wennberg sucks because he can't score a goal.
Also for the millionth time, if Wennberg was "just okay" defensively, he wouldn't be put on the PK when there are other options to be put out there.
There are indeed valid arguments that reflect poorly on Wennberg. But when it's pointed out that said arguments are not necessarily fatal to a productive NHL career (albeit one not as productive as we would hope), I've yet to see a followup response outside of a return to "ONE GOAL SOFT SOFT ONE GOAL KARLSSON GOAL ONE KARLSSON".
Expectations are lower for the guy. That's undeniable. Sometimes, however, even a player that isn't turning out as desired is still useful.
Yep. Because the whole debate is BS. The in-depth arguments are acknowledged and pointed out as unfortunate but not crippling, and that gets ignored in favor of the whining. The threshold for "failed player" is being set ludicrously high here.
* * *
You're criticizing his positional awareness now? That's like criticizing Josh Anderson's ability to push to the net and battle in hard paces - it's, like, the biggest defining feature that makes him particularly useful.
If you can't see that, no wonder you think he's hopeless.
Wennberg and Atkinson are almost always together shorthanded, and so far they're 3 goals for and 3 goals against. Pretty good for down a man.
Now lets see Dubinsky's numbers playing with Atkinson.
Over a short and long period of time.
Actually, looking back, other than the Calvert-Dubinsky-Atkinson line being good, I'm pretty sure in the past, Dubi and 1 of those guys actually used to score "often" on the PK.
This right here is the heart of the issue.
#1, he isnt that good positionally, especially in the defensive zone, ESPECIALLY around the net where he gets pushed around and outmuscled regularly. That is IF he has made the correct "read", picked up the correct "open" man and is in position to make a play, which more often does not happen.
#2, THIS IS THE ****ING NHL. If "positional awareness" is considered his, "biggest defining feature" (small step back from "playmaker"/"passer") and what, "makes him particularly useful", then there is a legit problem with him having a 5 mil cap hit. Its almost the same as Hannikainen being a good forechecker. To be clear, Wennberg > Hannikainen.
For all the "pumping of the brakes" I've asked for on Anderson, I take him 10/10 over Wennberg. To compare a legit strength that Anderson uses on a *nearly* nightly basis to make an "impact" or at least make "something" happen, to Wennberg's supposed "advanced awareness" is..... something.....I would not do.
AND TO ADD, "battling in hard places", is 1 of the main things we are talking about when we call Wenny "soft, or the "Pooh"..
Wait. Wait. This is like saying "so-and-so has a bad shot because he's skating slowly". The one does not follow from the other.
Wennberg doesn't do the "living impassable barrier" space denial thing; he's an active stick-checker. It's a different but still valid style of defensive play. All the "you can't get to the high slot because I'm in your face" play doesn't help if the other guy can get a pass off, or gets the puck knocked away or his stick lifted just before the shot. Physicality may sometimes be more interesting to watch, and it's a completely valid play style (despite what the anti-Dubi camp might suggest), but that doesn't automatically mean it's a prerequisite for effectiveness.
He makes the right reads for his approach to defense. And the numbers show it's working.
I take it you therefore have similar issues with Ryan Suter and Ryan Murray? Because that's a large part of what defines those guys' effectiveness on the ice as well.
...except that that is a legit strength of Wennberg's.
I get that. But it's also completely irrelevant. It's like accusing Dubinsky of being a useless plug because he can't dangle the puck. That's not his game, and it doesn't need to be his game for him to be an effective contributor.
Separate names with a comma.