HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Buffalo Sabres
Notices

Vanek for Duchene

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-08-2012, 11:33 PM
  #101
bills44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Amherst, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 306
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
before duchene's knee injury (pre 12/29/11 injury)

200 gms / 147 pts / career .73 pts per game

before vanek got hit (pre 1/31/12 injury)

519 gms / 427 pts / .82 pts per game (

so if we give them their pt per game average for EVERY game they would've played after the point of injury and instead assume health...

39 games with 25 pts
43 games at .73 = 31 pts
= 56 total pts hypothetically

50 games with 41 pts
32 games at .82 = 26 pts
= hypothetical 67 pts

vanek is 6 years older
To be clear, we're ignoring the broken jaw, and the impact it had on Vanek's play after his return, right?

bills44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 11:36 PM
  #102
Jame
Dream '16
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Scotland
Posts: 32,432
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Jame
Quote:
Originally Posted by bills44 View Post
Do you really think that he wasn't injured?
no i don't think he was playing with any broken bones or messed up ligatments/tendons.

i think he takes a beating, and was a banged up hockey player... like 70% of the league after the mid way point

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 11:36 PM
  #103
Rob Paxon
Z E M G U S
 
Rob Paxon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: corfu, ny
Country: United States
Posts: 14,264
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rob Paxon
Can't believe this has gone on for 5 pages. Duchene is worth a lot more than Vanek, for a lot of reasons. This is getting ridiculous.

Rob Paxon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 11:41 PM
  #104
TheyAreGoodScaryGood
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,788
vCash: 500
I thought it came out that vanek played with a sprained ankle for a period of time? Either way Vanek is a warrior and isnt just your average beat up hockey player. Really not fair to baby duchene about his injuries and say vaneks gotta suck it up.

Now onto the thread topic, yes I do vanek for duchene but I dont add anything of value

TheyAreGoodScaryGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 11:42 PM
  #105
bills44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Amherst, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 306
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
no i don't think he was playing with any broken bones or messed up ligatments/tendons.

i think he takes a beating, and was a banged up hockey player... like 70% of the league after the mid way point
Pretty limited definition of injured.

Continue with your crusade, though.

bills44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 11:46 PM
  #106
Jame
Dream '16
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Scotland
Posts: 32,432
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Jame
Quote:
Originally Posted by bills44 View Post
To be clear, we're ignoring the broken jaw, and the impact it had on Vanek's play after his return, right?
from years ago?

we are looking at their careers up until this season when the argument on both sides is that their season was derailed by injury.

vanek gets banged up... its part of his career. he misses time, and struggles when he comes back... i dont think we should make the same excuse every time.

what we can do... is look at this year, since duchene stacks up equally to vanek in his first and second year (while he was a teenage and vanek was entering his prime). In this past season, both vanek and duchene had set backs in performance. both sides are attributing this to injury.

so what we can do, is look at the career pt per game production, and replace the games played/missed after their respective injuries with their career pt per game production

it shows that a 27 yr old, in his prime, thomas vanek hypothetically could've produced 67 pts (this hypothetical can be supported by the fact that vanek's career average is 67 pts per 82 games)

it also shows that a 20 yr old duchene, hypothetically could've produced 56 points (this hypothetical can be supported by the fact that duchene (this hypothetical can be supported by the fact that duchene's career average is 56 points)

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 11:46 PM
  #107
Jame
Dream '16
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Scotland
Posts: 32,432
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Jame
Quote:
Originally Posted by bills44 View Post
Pretty limited definition of injured.

Continue with your crusade, though.
i dont make excuses, and neither did thomas vanek when he was asked about it at the end of the year.

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 11:50 PM
  #108
TheyAreGoodScaryGood
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,788
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
i dont make excuses, and neither did thomas vanek when he was asked about it at the end of the year.
So why are you making excuses for duchene? Just because vanek is tough and plays through his injuries doesnt mean they arent there. Vanek probably would have taken a week off with duchenes injury

TheyAreGoodScaryGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-08-2012, 11:55 PM
  #109
Imlach a cup
Registered User
 
Imlach a cup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,875
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
before duchene's knee injury (pre 12/29/11 injury)

200 gms / 147 pts / career .73 pts per game

before vanek got hit (pre 1/31/12 injury)

519 gms / 427 pts / .82 pts per game (

so if we give them their pt per game average for EVERY game they would've played after the point of injury and instead assume health...

39 games with 25 pts
43 games at .73 = 31 pts
= 56 total pts hypothetically

50 games with 41 pts
32 games at .82 = 26 pts
= hypothetical 67 pts

vanek is 6 years older
so that means Ennis is a PPG player and we don't need to trade for a center? I mean I'm just extrapolating stats through injuries just like you so I guess Ennis will be amazing and therefore we don't need Duchene.

Imlach a cup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2012, 12:03 AM
  #110
Reddawg
Registered User
 
Reddawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,404
vCash: 500
Hands raised if you only read the first and last page and can't believe this thread is 5 pages long.

Reddawg is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2012, 12:03 AM
  #111
bills44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Amherst, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 306
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
from years ago?

we are looking at their careers up until this season when the argument on both sides is that their season was derailed by injury.

vanek gets banged up... its part of his career. he misses time, and struggles when he comes back... i dont think we should make the same excuse every time.

what we can do... is look at this year, since duchene stacks up equally to vanek in his first and second year (while he was a teenage and vanek was entering his prime). In this past season, both vanek and duchene had set backs in performance. both sides are attributing this to injury.

so what we can do, is look at the career pt per game production, and replace the games played/missed after their respective injuries with their career pt per game production

it shows that a 27 yr old, in his prime, thomas vanek hypothetically could've produced 67 pts (this hypothetical can be supported by the fact that vanek's career average is 67 pts per 82 games)

it also shows that a 20 yr old duchene, hypothetically could've produced 56 points (this hypothetical can be supported by the fact that duchene (this hypothetical can be supported by the fact that duchene's career average is 56 points)
Oh, so we're just going up to the time of Duchene's injury.

bills44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2012, 12:04 AM
  #112
bills44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Amherst, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 306
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
i dont make excuses, and neither did thomas vanek when he was asked about it at the end of the year.
You seem to be making excuse after excuse for Duchene.

I'm beginning to wonder if you even believe this injury nonsense you're spouting

bills44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2012, 12:05 AM
  #113
LordRamsay
Come out and flay
 
LordRamsay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: 905
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,277
vCash: 588
I can't believe what I'm reading. Avs have to add to Duchene in order to get Vanek?

The hell you say.

LordRamsay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2012, 12:05 AM
  #114
Imlach a cup
Registered User
 
Imlach a cup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,875
vCash: 500
John Scott thread is still longer.

Imlach a cup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2012, 12:05 AM
  #115
Jame
Dream '16
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Scotland
Posts: 32,432
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Jame
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imlach a cup View Post
so that means Ennis is a PPG player and we don't need to trade for a center? I mean I'm just extrapolating stats through injuries just like you so I guess Ennis will be amazing and therefore we don't need Duchene.
clearly, you didn't understand the concept
(ennis performed better after returning from injury...)


Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2012, 12:07 AM
  #116
Imlach a cup
Registered User
 
Imlach a cup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,875
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
clearly, you didn't understand the concept
(ennis performed better after returning from injury...)

But if we played him all season he would had been consistent for 82 games just like you say Duchene would. Same thing right? 20 year olds are always consistent.

Imlach a cup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2012, 12:12 AM
  #117
Jame
Dream '16
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Scotland
Posts: 32,432
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Jame
Quote:
Originally Posted by bills44 View Post
You seem to be making excuse after excuse for Duchene.

I'm beginning to wonder if you even believe this injury nonsense you're spouting
im not making excuses... duchene was injured, and he is going to have to prove himself all over again next year.

the only reason we are talking injuries is because of the idiocy of looking at last year, and using it as the entire basis of comparison for vanek/duchene

the fact is :
09-10
duchene and vanek had nearly identical performance. duchene was 18/19 and vanek was 25/26

10-11
duchene and vanek had nearly identical performance. duchene was 19/20 and vanek was 26/27

11-12
duchene had a huge set back in performance and injury was part of it
vanek had a smaller set back in performance and injury was part of it

we went off on this injury tangent because homer sabres fan thinks that 11-12 is the only season that matters in this analysis... which is borderline retarded when talking about a 21 yr old #2 overall pick who has shown nothing but living up to his draft hype. at 21, vanek wasn't even in the NHL.

no one but homer sabres fans would take vanek over duchene when taking age, contract, skill into consideration. no one. go post it on the main board and we can all have a good laugh

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2012, 12:15 AM
  #118
Jame
Dream '16
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Scotland
Posts: 32,432
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Jame
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imlach a cup View Post
But if we played him all season he would had been consistent for 82 games just like you say Duchene would. Same thing right? 20 year olds are always consistent.
the point was to replace the games AFTER injury, with the career average, to eliminate the impact of said injury.

not to mention the already present correlation of a drop in performance related to injury regarding duchene/vanek.

ennis doesnt fit the criteria.

C+ for effort

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2012, 12:16 AM
  #119
Imlach a cup
Registered User
 
Imlach a cup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,875
vCash: 500
Would youtake Vanek or a 5th under 25 center. Thats my argument. Duchene at his age and production > Vanek but is Duchene > Ennis or Hodgson or Grigorenko or Girgensons? IMO not enough so (if at all) to justify losing Vanek.

Imlach a cup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2012, 12:17 AM
  #120
Imlach a cup
Registered User
 
Imlach a cup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,875
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
the point was to replace the games AFTER injury, with the career average, to eliminate the impact of said injury.

not to mention the already present correlation of a drop in performance related to injury regarding duchene/vanek.

ennis doesnt fit the criteria.

C+ for effort
so again you are claiming Duchene is the most consistent 22 yr old in the NHL?

Imlach a cup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2012, 12:19 AM
  #121
Dubi Doo
Registered User
 
Dubi Doo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 6,171
vCash: 2225
Quote:
Originally Posted by dma0034 View Post
Okay lets compared Roy's and Vanek's first three years:

Vanek
200506 81 25 23 48
200607 82 43 41 84
200708 82 36 28 64
------
245 104 92 196

Roy
2005-2006 70 18 28 46
20062007 75 21 42 63
20072008 78 32 49 81
-----
223 71 119 190

Duchene
219 65 85 150
Duchene isn't even close to his prime. His shelf life is much longer than Vanek's. The potential is > the risk in this scenario.

Dubi Doo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2012, 12:20 AM
  #122
Jame
Dream '16
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Scotland
Posts: 32,432
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Jame
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imlach a cup View Post
Would youtake Vanek or a 5th under 25 center. Thats my argument. Duchene at his age and production > Vanek but is Duchene > Ennis or Hodgson or Grigorenko or Girgensons? IMO not enough so (if at all) to justify losing Vanek.
i'll take a 21 yr old, #2 overall, signed for 3.5, still RFA, 60+ pt center with 80+ pt potential for vanek... all day, every day. the fact that it is a question is mind boggling to me.

centers can play wing...
bergeron, seguin, krecji, peverly

2 yrs from now... duchene, grigorenko, hodgson, ennis, girgensons is a core that you could build a long term contender with
2 yrs from now.... vanek is a free agent

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2012, 12:20 AM
  #123
SirRocko
Registered User
 
SirRocko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Buffalo, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 236
vCash: 500
Jame, this honestly isn't worth it. I'm tired and I want to go to bed and some people are either incapable or unwilling to accept that they original opinion on a matter was way off target and needs reforming. You are wasting your time. Every intelligent fan of either team knows Duchene has considerably more value.

I usually enjoy reading your discussions with Zip or JoshJull or whomever, as you all continue making creative arguments to prove your point, but this is pathetic. My little sister knows you take Duchene in this deal!

SirRocko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2012, 12:21 AM
  #124
Imlach a cup
Registered User
 
Imlach a cup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,875
vCash: 500
Cause there's such a great track record of us moving players to new positions. Or we can play out the guys we have and resign Vanek in 2 years.

Imlach a cup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2012, 12:22 AM
  #125
jBuds
pretty damn valuable
 
jBuds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NYC Suburbs
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 26,461
vCash: 500
This is beyond realistic discussion-wise. You're talking about a center who made a significant NHL impact as a 19 year old. And you think Colorado would take Vanek alone for him?

Gimme some of that ****, please.

jBuds is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:23 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.