Discussion in 'Columbus Blue Jackets' started by Palm Tree, Oct 12, 2018.
Oh my.....with half the season gone, Wennberg has but one goal. While I figured I had enough fingers to keep track of his tallies, I'm truly shocked I needed just one - the same total as Riley Nash.
So I'm left to ask - which will be the first to tally a 2nd?
To show my faith in Wennberg, I'm saying it was be #10 and he will do it quickly - within the next 15 games.
Shouldn't this be titled The No-Purpose Alexander Wennberg Thread?
1 goal in his last 51 games.
He's pacing himself.
I'd send him to Cleveland. I really would. He needs to wake up.
Nice chunk of change he collects each game for his current output
$2,629,268 per goal for his current pace.
If you paid an entire team at Wennberg's rate and they scored 3 goals per game over an 82 game season, your payroll would be $646.8 million.
You would be over the cap by a little bit.
I know the last of the Wennycans will still point to the ridiculous infatuation with his lack of goals, and attempt to use it as proof that people are ignoring his actual traits.
So lets look at it this way, defensively he's used on the 3rd group of forwards on the PK, and he shouldn't even be there.
Offensively, points NOT JUST GOALS, he's still being OUTSCORED by Ryan Murray. Somebody WHO STILL isn't seen as an offensive defenseman in any way.
NO PURPOSE and NO USE.
Give me Sedlak, Stenlund, Dalpe…...and that's AFTER Dubinsky and Nash.
13 players had a point in last nite's Rangers game. Anyone want to guess who was one of the players who did not have a point?
Although the way his season is going, the next time Wennberg scores a goal he should engage in the most ridiculous celebration he can come up with.
That made me laugh Crede !!! Of course Wennie was good in the faceoff circle last nite.
I would send him down too, except unlike you I think he'd be claimed on waivers and unlike you I think that would be unfortunate. It would take a while before his value sinks low enough that we could count on not losing him to waivers. Maybe we could scratch him for a couple weeks and then give him a "conditioning stint".
We can't just keep trotting Wennberg out in the same situation over and over again and expect him to fix his issues, he needs a change, perhaps a positional change. For now the Jackets don't feel they have the depth at center to do experiments with Wennberg. My hope is that the team adds a center soon.
Quite frankly, I forgot about the waivers.
If he has ANY trade value, then Jarmo ought to get it. Now. Wennberg is sinking like a rock now. Something on the order of 4 assists in his last 18 games while averaging 15+ minutes.
I know that my previous suggestions of buying him out at 1/3rd if he can't be traded isn't popular (in fact I may be the only one who would think this is a good idea), but I just don't see any value he brings to the team right now.
Players slump. Players have bad seasons and rebound. But Wennberg's trajectory over the past (almost) 2 seasons is suggestive that he has "lost it". Could it be from timidness as a result of concussions?
Waking Wennberg: John Tortorella's idea to get Blue Jackets'...
Is Wennberg even open to changing his game (if that's the solution)?
I'm of the mind that Wennberg is either a reprise of Umberger (completely done) or Mason (needs a change of scenery). Wennberg has been given more rope than almost any other player whom I've ever seen. Other Jarmo first round picks-Milano, Rychel and Dano- would have killed to have been given the chances and leeway that Wennberg has had. At some point a decision has to be made in the best interests of the team and not Wennberg. I'm deeply suspicious that Wennberg is Jarmo's "pet", if you will.
Something has to be done. If he can't be traded, then let him be claimed. I'd rather see Stenlund, Letestu or Gerbe be put as the #3C and Jenner made #2C than watch Wennberg drag the team down.
To the bottom, I think Jenner is the 2C now. I'm not doing an extensive TOI analysis, but Boone had more minutes last night and is averaging more TOI for the season (admittedly, not always at center). And I think it's fair to suggest Andy and Nick are the second-line wing and not Duclair and whomever.
But yeah, Wennberg isn't doing enough well enough of the time to be of much help. I think the team should be looking to change his role, and major has advocated something similar - both of those posts I assume are in this thread. But fi they're not going to do something to get Wennberg going, if they're not going to do things to try and make him better, or at least play better, then a benching or waiving or trade (no I'm not advocating this) are the only things that make sense.
This is where I think you've gone off track. You take for granted the things that Wenny does right, and think any old AHL center could do it. A few months of that line being trapped in their own end would dissuade you of that. Maybe in a little bit Stenlund could do it, but we can't jump the gun on that.
I find it easier to believe that Jarmo feels like we don't have a better center playing behind Wenny, than to believe he has some nefarious affection for him. Torts too, although I'd rather see Nash's line get more time, Torts disagrees with me. Torts' lesson from the William Karlsson story (the last guy to go on a super-long goal drought) seems to be to give Wennberg offensive roles. I'd rather Wennberg be in a more defensive role, he's wasting his offensive zone starts.
Gerbe has 398 reg. season NHL games under his belt. Letestu has 558. I think you are incorrect in dismissing them as "any old AHL centers".
Add to the fact that either of them would have a desperation level of play as it would probably be their last chance to showcase their NHL talents.
With Edmonton last season, Letestu had corsis similar to Wennberg despite having more dzone starts. He was almost exclusively used in dzone starts with the CBJ last season. So, I don't see how you can infer that he'd be caught in his own end any more than Wennberg might. Gerbe might be done as an NHLer, I'll concede that as he's been in the AHL for 3 seasons now, but he'd bring more offense to the table than Wennberg does now.
Having read the various Wennberg posts, I share similar views on several points:
@major major - agree we need to keep searching for a 2C......Wennberg’s play in his current role isn’t going to fix itself.....he’s more a defensive than offensive player (now).....not for a move to wing (as others - not so much MM proposed) since a non-goal scoring wing is far less desirable than a no-goal center.
@Cyclones Rock - the quote he used saying he’s not dump/chase nor a willing puck carrier thru the zone does indeed make one wonder “what is his identity?”....agree with CR there’s nothing in his trajectory to expect a turnaround....as to possible solutions proposed, let me come back to that.
@Monk - dismissing the relevance of $5M cap space, I can’t agree (especially with the Dubi & Nash) contracts. The 2C chart was unconvincing as it measures a 3/4C player against 2Cs...thats a non-useful cap management outlook.
As MM said, we need a 2C. Maybe Wennberg is a a package piece to get one. (I believe he may have trade value; others don’t). Maybe I’m wrong, so waive him and see if he’s claimed (better than a buyout). But if we get a 2C - and maybe I’d overpay - then we have Dubois, new true 2C and Jenner with Nash as 4C. That’ll work. The money saved from Wennberg (and Bob, possibly Bread, and maybe a Dubi buyout) allows acquisition of a scoring left winger, which comes cheaper than lesser performing centers. (We may need two - certainly two if Bread goes). A lot of moving parts? Yes, but we need to be deeper in quality (whether with or without Breadman).
Note - Longer post than I usually prefer to submit, so apologies.
Never apologize for agreeing with me
I'll beat this drum again, but I swear to the heavens that Wennberg is a defenseman in the NHL
Here's what I'd do with Wennberg, if we aren't going to acquire a big center upgrade:
1. Put him in a more moderate defensive role, with heavier d-zone starts. His faceoff win % has been above 50% lately, that was the one thing suggesting he wasn't ready for defensive roles.
2. Give him wingers that he plays well with, not the misfits and dog-house players. Duclair also has a good argument to not be saddled with Wennberg. When you have two players who are minus together and plus separately, then keep them separate. Wennberg with Foligno and Bjorkstrand was great last year and it looks great in pieces this year.
I watched Letestu closely last year in both Edmonton and Columbus, and came to the conclusion that he was done, he just couldn't keep up physically. His scoring rate was well below even Wennberg's current rate. I think perhaps his absence has made your heart grow fonder.
If he can't be salvaged in his current role I'd love someone to try him as a D-man. It would take a summer's training at least. But I agree I see a D-man when I watch him play. Great outlet passer, great all-directions skater, great defensive reads, weak scoring instincts - that's a f****** defenceman!
I wouldn't say I'm dismissing the usefulness of $5 million dollars outright, but I haven't really seen any persuasive posts indicating how that money would be used to improve the team. And it's not like they can't get rid of Wennberg when the need for additional cap space actually arises. If there isn't a sound avenue to spend that $5 million, it's not really worth much in and of itself as cap space imo.
I think we have a pretty strong, deep defensive core without adding Wennberg to it.
It'd be repurposing an existing player. Are you that overwhelmingly opposed to ever again seeing Wennberg in union blue?
Still going on about this, eh?
Separate names with a comma.