Vanek, Sekera, and a pick for Stastny and either Downie or McGinn...what do you guys think of this ?
As much as I would hate losing Sekera and as lopsided as that package might seem, a Stastny and Downie combo is interesting. Downie is a player I have long coveted.
I think Vanek's trade value is higher than Stastny's and I think Sekera's is higher than Downie/McGinn's.
If anyone's throwing in a pick, it's Colorado.
Downie, Kaleta and Ott on one team would be awfully hilarious, though.
Pretty much, this. That trade would definitely be a loss for Buffalo. Trade one of your best shutdown D and best goal-scorer for a 2C and another agitator? No thank you.
I never once brought up points. You bring them up and I respond with criticisms of the conclusions you draw from using points.
you referred to vanek as having more "objective" trade value. what were you referring to?
Quote:
Semantics if you will. As I used the word dynamic and every use of the word dynamic was in relation to a point I made, accept that my definition of "dynamic scorer" includes Thomas Vanek. He has an elite shot, has great hand-eye co-ordination, he can beat defenders 1 on 1, he beats goalies 1 on 1, he can score from the slot and around the net, he can create his own shot, and he is a capable playmaker. He is not a guy who simply cashes in easy opportunities: he creates goals for himself and others. That, to me, is dynamic. If your definition of dynamic is different then there's no purpose in arguing over the definition as that is hardly relevant now that you know what I mean.
vanek is terrible at creating his own shot with the puck on his stick. he beats defenders around the net, but not 1-1 in open ice.
dynamic has a definition...
Quote:
Talk of a guy "leading a team to a Cup" is largely overblown legend-building crap. Thomas Vanek can be a leading scorer on a Cup-winning team. His role is to be a scorer.
vanek was able to lead the sabres in scoring once in 5 years... so excuse me while i laugh my ass off at the notion that he could lead a stanley cup winning team in scoring...
Quote:
I said what is relevant to the argument I have formed and have had to twist and turn over and over to suit the fact that you ignore all previous argumentation with each response.
i know, you said...
vanek is dynamic
and
vanek has more objective value
one is a misunderstanding of a word...
the other was never supported by any actual objective evidence
Quote:
This is not relevant to the point. You continually conflate every separate point of debate when the proper way of finding discernible or agreeable truth is to separate each supporting point and handle it on its own merits. You claim that Vanek should be traded, as a supporting point because he is one-dimensional. Really above all else this is your only point that holds up, as the him "not leading a team to a Cup" is pointless conjecture and his age/contract are no worse for the future than acquiring Dubinsky+Boyle. So, get rid of him so he's one dimensional? So is Ennis. That is how we judge the merit of that supporting point.
i think you forgot what im replying to
Quote:
Don't be an ass. It isn't necessary to respond to each thing you personally deem fit to say. Vanek's skating is not garbage and he is exceptionally strong on his skates in any motion or context of skating. He is not fast, we know that. Unlike Brian Boyle, of course.
name one dynamic player who is worse on his skates then vanek...
Quote:
Vanek is an offensive player. He is one-dimensional, sure. But he isn't any more one-dimensional than most offensive players. Wow, I feel like I heard this before somewhere.
like who?
Quote:
End game: Your proposal does not conclusively improve the team next season and it does not improve the team in the future.
i think it improves the team both next year, and in the future. It makes them a more difficult team to play against now, and allows their young talent to learn to play the game that way.
it's ok you can bow out... i gotta head over to the preds board to let them know that patric hornqvist is dynamic
Just another hearsay "friend of a friend" rumor, so take it for what it's worth (this is a speculation thread afterall), but apparently Vanek for Stastny has legs.
I wouldn't care much for it, but that'd leave Pominville and Miller as the only remaining members of the "Rochester core."
Like I said, treat it as straight garbage - it likely is (my friend's father's friend knows a guy that works for the Sabres blah blah blah) - but it'd be interesting to speculate further. I can't imagine Regier would stop there. It'd have to be a precursor to a trade for/signing of a scoring-line winger.
I'm OK with those two staying.
Pominville gets his points, but also will help the young centers develop, either by playing with them, or playing on a line that faces top competition and protects them from that top competition. His leadership and professionalism are needed on a young team.
As much as bottoming out could help the Sabres with draft picks, it could also hurt the psychology of the team. Miller keeps the team in games, covering mistakes. Competing, staying in games is healthy for a young team. Plus, keeping Miller helps Ullmark develop, and/or gives Regier some time before he's got to go get another goalie.
Vanek is 5th in the whole NHL since the lockout in Power Play Goals.That right there shows you his worth. Our PP is bad enough as it is and you advocate trading one of the leagues best goal scorers who dominates on the PP? No way. In fact, Darcy should be extending Vanek in two seasons at a lower cap hit if possible then to dump him off for garbage. Vanek isnt the problem.
Vanek is 5th in the whole NHL since the lockout in Power Play Goals.That right there shows you his worth. Our PP is bad enough as it is and you advocate trading one of the leagues best goal scorers who dominates on the PP? No way. In fact, Darcy should be extending Vanek in two seasons at a lower cap hit if possible then to dump him off for garbage. Vanek isnt the problem.
14th which is pretty remarkable with him going through a number of injuries and missing 17 games during that 3 year stretch. Also had 10 more PPG then the 2nd ranked Sabre (Pominville) during the past 3 years. Vanek is going no where.
14th which is pretty remarkable with him going through a number of injuries and missing 17 games during that 3 year stretch. Also had 10 more PPG then the 2nd ranked Sabre (Pominville) during the past 3 years. Vanek is going no where.
wow... he scores 3 more PPG per year than Pommer! super elite!
hey where does vanek rank is ES goal scoring over the last 3 years... since he's such an elite scorer it must be pretty high?
wow... he scores 3 more PPG per year than Pommer! super elite!
hey where does vanek rank is ES goal scoring over the last 3 years... since he's such an elite scorer it must be pretty high?
14th is a pretty damn high ranking in the league. Of all the things you could reasonably pick on Vanek for, I don't know why you insist on trying to say he's bad at the one thing he's great at.
wow... he scores 3 more PPG per year than Pommer! super elite!
hey where does vanek rank is ES goal scoring over the last 3 years... since he's such an elite scorer it must be pretty high?
That's you using a 3 year time frame. Of course you wouldn't say Vanek is 5th since the lockout because it goes against your agenda. Btw, Vanek averages 14.3 PPG a season. Pominville averages 6.2... So Vanek more then doubles Poms in PPG every season but your response will to go off of 2-3 years instead of a career, which is more appropriate as you are comparing 2 players in their prime, you use full body of work not just 2-3 seasons.
And for ES goals the past 3 years he's 25th and still ahead of Pominville. I don't know why your trying to argue against Vaneks value.
I think the key thing to remember with Vanek is that players of his skill-set aren't a dime-a-dozen.
Does Jame bring up some valid points about his skating a two-way game. Yes.
Has Vanek shown the ability to dominate offensively for this club, and be a catalyst as opposed to a piece of the puzzle? for stretches, yes, for a long period, not so much.
Is he overpaid? Yes, of course, but in the current market, I could see him getting $6.5M per year. So it's not as bad as some lament over.
Did he play much better after Roy was injured 2 years ago? Yes, yes he did.
He's a free agent in 2 years. He's not a guy you build a team around, but he is a key component. He may not be the best backchecker, or a great skater, but he gets in front of the net, has a knack for making goals happen out of nowhere in front of the net, and seems to be a fairly hard working, decent guy (that's pure speculation on my part). He reminds me of more durable, better Thomas Holmstrom. Now, Holmstrom wasn't the key to the Red Wings winning teams, but he was a key component. He was the guy who did the dirty work, and his skill set kept him in the league till he was almost 40, and was a 20 goal scorer into his late 30's. Vanek I believe is a more talented player offensively. Building this young core, they will need a guy with size, experience, and an innate ability of being at the right place at the right time. Keep him, re-sign him to a lesser cap hit in a couple years (he's already made almost $50M in his career, I'm sure he can afford to go a million or two less per season if he wants to stay with Miller and Pommers and see the young core develop) and have him be a component, not the catalyst, on a Cup contending team.
I think too many people are looking at a short term view, they need to start looking long term. This is a guy who by the time we're really competing for cups, won't be the key component, and trading him for Stastny won't help that. Hodgson, Ennis, Grigorenko, and Girgensons will likely bring the elements of the game that Stastny will (playmaking, solid face-off guy, etc), none of them, and no one in the organization right now, gives us what Vanek does.
There are 4 active players in the NHL who have scored 25+ goals their first 7 seasons in the league... Kovalchuk, Ovechkin, Jagr and Vanek. There is no way arguing that Vanek is not an elite goal scorer. His GPG is only .01 worse then Gilbert Perreaults! Not comparing the two because Gil is far better but the fact that Vaneks GPG is nearly identical to the greatest Sabre of all-time SHOULD mean something.
I think the key thing to remember with Vanek is that players of his skill-set aren't a dime-a-dozen.
Does Jame bring up some valid points about his skating a two-way game. Yes.
Has Vanek shown the ability to dominate offensively for this club, and be a catalyst as opposed to a piece of the puzzle? for stretches, yes, for a long period, not so much.
Is he overpaid? Yes, of course, but in the current market, I could see him getting $6.5M per year. So it's not as bad as some lament over.
Did he play much better after Roy was injured 2 years ago? Yes, yes he did.
He's a free agent in 2 years. He's not a guy you build a team around, but he is a key component. He may not be the best backchecker, or a great skater, but he gets in front of the net, has a knack for making goals happen out of nowhere in front of the net, and seems to be a fairly hard working, decent guy (that's pure speculation on my part). He reminds me of more durable, better Thomas Holmstrom. Now, Holmstrom wasn't the key to the Red Wings winning teams, but he was a key component. He was the guy who did the dirty work, and his skill set kept him in the league till he was almost 40, and was a 20 goal scorer into his late 30's. Vanek I believe is a more talented player offensively. Building this young core, they will need a guy with size, experience, and an innate ability of being at the right place at the right time. Keep him, re-sign him to a lesser cap hit in a couple years (he's already made almost $50M in his career, I'm sure he can afford to go a million or two less per season if he wants to stay with Miller and Pommers and see the young core develop) and have him be a component, not the catalyst, on a Cup contending team.
I think too many people are looking at a short term view, they need to start looking long term. This is a guy who by the time we're really competing for cups, won't be the key component, and trading him for Stastny won't help that. Hodgson, Ennis, Grigorenko, and Girgensons will likely bring the elements of the game that Stastny will (playmaking, solid face-off guy, etc), none of them, and no one in the organization right now, gives us what Vanek does.
