HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Buffalo Sabres
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Your "trade Roy" energy... Should you focus it on wanting to move Vanek?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-02-2012, 12:11 AM
  #1
jBuds
pretty damn valuable
 
jBuds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NYC Suburbs
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 27,874
vCash: 500
Your "trade Roy" energy... Should you focus it on wanting to move Vanek?

Seriously. Should you? Bigger return, bigger dollar figure off the books (allowing for more to come back our way in return), taking away from an area of more depth (wing) than at center... and a shakeup to the original core.

I know we've thrown it around. I know we all realize nobody is untouchable. But for all the energy that is out there that wants to see Roy driven out of town...some could be spared towards trading Vanek, gaining assets, shaking the core, and getting closer to our goal.

The more I see the market waiting on Parise's move, the higher I see Vanek's price going. In a good way. Could we use him as a chip for those interested in ZP with backup plans of Ryan and Nash?

Regier said that he is "having conversations about the guys who you would think he would be inquiring about"... Alluding to trades, likely (IMO) Ryan. Then you take Capaccio's advice and write down the list of old core vs. new core. One of the oldies (Vanek, Roy, Stafford) has to go. I wonder if this option is something to consider, since we've spoken a ton about Roy and a bit about Stafford.

jBuds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2012, 12:14 AM
  #2
McTank
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,852
vCash: 500
If we trade vanek I want all 3 of them gone, if we trade the best player from the core we might as well just get them all out

McTank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2012, 12:15 AM
  #3
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 36,096
vCash: 500
move both of them.

move either one of them.

no preference

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2012, 12:16 AM
  #4
Myllz
ARF ARF ARF ARF ARF
 
Myllz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle
Country: United States
Posts: 14,188
vCash: 500
All depends on the return or what Regier does with the free cap room. I don't care about moving either one of them as long as the result is good.

Myllz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2012, 12:16 AM
  #5
GodHatesBuffalo
Registered User
 
GodHatesBuffalo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Rochester
Posts: 81
vCash: 500
Actually following the draft LW is our position of least depth now. After Vanek its Leino/foligno.

GodHatesBuffalo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2012, 12:22 AM
  #6
jBuds
pretty damn valuable
 
jBuds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NYC Suburbs
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 27,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Myllz View Post
All depends on the return or what Regier does with the free cap room. I don't care about moving either one of them as long as the result is good.
Yeah...that's about where I stand... Just curious if there's a larger-than-realized contingency of people who want to retain Vanek under all circumstances.

Believe me, this is not a thread meant to hint at forgetting how amazing of a season the man had for the first half of the last one. He carried us with Pommer for a long stretch - albeit unsuccessfully - and is far from THE problem on the team. I just look at a group of Ennis, Hodgson, Myers, Foligno, Gerbe, McNabb, plus the likes of Armia, Pysyk, and now the Jeamenn, and see a new core ready to literally push one or two of the "older core" of players out. For sake of change after not winning with them at the forefront.

Sort of unlike me to think like that, but the fact is, we have a handful of assets on both sides of the core, old and new, that should be used in some form to get this team full steam and on track for legitimate contention. I guess that makes this tangential in the grand scheme of things....

jBuds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2012, 12:22 AM
  #7
jBuds
pretty damn valuable
 
jBuds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NYC Suburbs
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 27,874
vCash: 500
(it is definitely the offseason. Sorry. )

jBuds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2012, 12:25 AM
  #8
Myllz
ARF ARF ARF ARF ARF
 
Myllz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle
Country: United States
Posts: 14,188
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jBuds View Post
Yeah...that's about where I stand... Just curious if there's a larger-than-realized contingency of people who want to retain Vanek under all circumstances.

Believe me, this is not a thread meant to hint at forgetting how amazing of a season the man had for the first half of the last one. He carried us with Pommer for a long stretch - albeit unsuccessfully - and is far from THE problem on the team. I just look at a group of Ennis, Hodgson, Myers, Foligno, Gerbe, McNabb, plus the likes of Armia, Pysyk, and now the Jeamenn, and see a new core ready to literally push one or two of the "older core" of players out. For sake of change after not winning with them at the forefront.

Sort of unlike me to think like that, but the fact is, we have a handful of assets on both sides of the core, old and new, that should be used in some form to get this team full steam and on track for legitimate contention. I guess that makes this tangential in the grand scheme of things....
I'd be all for moving him, really. I'd love to get his cap hit off the books and put that space to use elsewhere. It just doesn't seem like something Regier would do, so I haven't put a lot of thought into it. Roy on the other hand could actually be moved by Regier, so I put more interest in that possibility since it could actually happen.

Myllz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2012, 12:34 AM
  #9
buffalowing88
Registered User
 
buffalowing88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,467
vCash: 500
Nice post. I like hearing people reevaluate the consensus. Vaneks a personal favorite but he would generate a bigger return then the other forwards. My only hesitance would be in making sure we replace him with someone else who can get the dirty goals because God knows no one else on the team can with Goose gone.

buffalowing88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2012, 12:34 AM
  #10
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 36,096
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Myllz View Post
I'd be all for moving him, really. I'd love to get his cap hit off the books and put that space to use elsewhere. It just doesn't seem like something Regier would do, so I haven't put a lot of thought into it. Roy on the other hand could actually be moved by Regier, so I put more interest in that possibility since it could actually happen.
be careful what you wish for. This is regier we are talking about. he might use the cap space on shaone morrison and ville leino

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2012, 12:34 AM
  #11
kirby11
Registered User
 
kirby11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Cleveland, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 2,183
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jBuds View Post
Seriously. Should you? Bigger return, bigger dollar figure off the books (allowing for more to come back our way in return), taking away from an area of more depth (wing) than at center... and a shakeup to the original core.

I know we've thrown it around. I know we all realize nobody is untouchable. But for all the energy that is out there that wants to see Roy driven out of town...some could be spared towards trading Vanek, gaining assets, shaking the core, and getting closer to our goal.

The more I see the market waiting on Parise's move, the higher I see Vanek's price going. In a good way. Could we use him as a chip for those interested in ZP with backup plans of Ryan and Nash?

Regier said that he is "having conversations about the guys who you would think he would be inquiring about"... Alluding to trades, likely (IMO) Ryan. Then you take Capaccio's advice and write down the list of old core vs. new core. One of the oldies (Vanek, Roy, Stafford) has to go. I wonder if this option is something to consider, since we've spoken a ton about Roy and a bit about Stafford.
I've fully jumped on the Vanek/Vanek+ for Pavelski/Clowe train. I like vanek, he's very good at what he brings to the table...but the fact remains, he's a perennial 30 goal scorer who makes around $7 mil. His main worth is in goal scoring. his 2 way game has improved, but it's not great. Ditto for his PKing ability. and he gets banged up a ton around the net, which decreases his effectiveness and causes him to miss games. I don't see him as a cornerstone player. If we moved him, could he help another team over the top with timely goal scoring a la Jeff Carter? Maybe. But I don't think he can help THIS team that much.

kirby11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2012, 12:35 AM
  #12
buffalowing88
Registered User
 
buffalowing88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,467
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
be careful what you wish for. This is regier we are talking about. he might use the cap space on shaone morrison and ville leino
Or Ehrhoff or Regehr or God forbid he put it to locking up talent like Myers.

buffalowing88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2012, 12:41 AM
  #13
thefifagod
I'm The Survivor
 
thefifagod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,132
vCash: 500
As with everyone else it depends on the return. My focus wouldn't be to move him. This team could be in bigger trouble offensively without Vanek producing while playing against other teams' top defenders.

thefifagod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2012, 12:44 AM
  #14
Myllz
ARF ARF ARF ARF ARF
 
Myllz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle
Country: United States
Posts: 14,188
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
be careful what you wish for. This is regier we are talking about. he might use the cap space on shaone morrison and ville leino
Which is why it depends on how it's used or what the return is.

Myllz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2012, 12:49 AM
  #15
sba
....
 
sba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Islip Terrace, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,574
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to sba
I'd want to see the return Nash gets first.

sba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2012, 12:52 AM
  #16
McTank
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,852
vCash: 500
Crazy shakeup idea:
Pominville for Ryan
Vanek for Nash
Roy for Clowe
Sign Semin

Nash-Hodgson-Ryan
Semin-Grigorenko-Clowe
Foligno-Ennis-Stafford

And for the sake of my lines looking good I'm pretending we convinced the other team to take Leino in one of those deals

McTank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2012, 01:03 AM
  #17
thefifagod
I'm The Survivor
 
thefifagod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,132
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheyAreGoodScaryGood View Post
Crazy shakeup idea:
Pominville for Ryan
Vanek for Nash
Roy for Clowe
Sign Semin

Nash-Hodgson-Ryan
Semin-Grigorenko-Clowe
Foligno-Ennis-Stafford

And for the sake of my lines looking good I'm pretending we convinced the other team to take Leino in one of those deals
No chance Anaheim does it, I wouldn't do vanek for Nash, doubt SJ does that barring a second move and Semin is a possibility. Counting on those 3 to be our top 9 centers next year is also a mistake IMO but my main problem is those trades

thefifagod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2012, 01:07 AM
  #18
Sentrix
Registered User
 
Sentrix's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Buffalo
Country: United States
Posts: 81
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheyAreGoodScaryGood View Post
If we trade vanek I want all 3 of them gone, if we trade the best player from the core we might as well just get them all out
That makes no sense. "Cores" of players aren't inseparable. They're all individual players that can form new chemistry on/off the ice.

Sentrix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2012, 01:10 AM
  #19
jBuds
pretty damn valuable
 
jBuds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NYC Suburbs
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 27,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sentrix View Post
That makes no sense. "Cores" of players aren't inseparable. They're all individual players that can form new chemistry on/off the ice.
Of course. He was missing my point entirely, so I didn't bother.

jBuds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2012, 01:13 AM
  #20
La Cosa Nostra
Eichel welcome 2 BUF
 
La Cosa Nostra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,545
vCash: 500
Trade Vanek and lose one of the best power play options in the league?No way,our anemic pp can't afford to trade Vanek.

La Cosa Nostra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2012, 01:24 AM
  #21
jBuds
pretty damn valuable
 
jBuds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NYC Suburbs
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 27,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Layne Staley View Post
Trade Vanek and lose one of the best power play options in the league?No way,our anemic pp can't afford to trade Vanek.
The powerplay finished 16th. To me, for the vast majority of the season, it was horrendous and tough to watch/stomach. I don't question Vanek's ability to score on the powerplay, as you would be foolish to do so... but I'm not sure what kind of indictment the ranking is on his abilities as the lynchpin of a PP...


Again, not trashing him. Just trying to bring an alternate perspective.

jBuds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2012, 01:39 AM
  #22
Karate Johnson
Zemgus is my Copilot
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 3,502
vCash: 500
I don't want to resign him to the contract/term he'll get in 2 years for many of the reasons states (decline, cost, nagging injuries due to play style)

I'd prefer to get something instead of him walking in 2 years.


So absolutely listen to offers between now and then.

And that goes for anyone over 26-27.

Karate Johnson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2012, 01:39 AM
  #23
dma0034
Registered User
 
dma0034's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,291
vCash: 500
Yes because Vanek is the problem with the Sabres.... you know the leading goal scorer for them the last decade or so.
Does everyone forget how he excelled in his role as unofficial captain before injuries kicked in. He is one of the few players that stand in front of the net and take the punishment. If the Sabres were able to get a player to take that role from him he could become the sniper on the Powerplay.

dma0034 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2012, 01:50 AM
  #24
jBuds
pretty damn valuable
 
jBuds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NYC Suburbs
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 27,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dma0034 View Post
Yes because Vanek is the problem with the Sabres.... you know the leading goal scorer for them the last decade or so.
Does everyone forget how he excelled in his role as unofficial captain before injuries kicked in. He is one of the few players that stand in front of the net and take the punishment. If the Sabres were able to get a player to take that role from him he could become the sniper on the Powerplay.
http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...47&postcount=6

Second paragraph.

jBuds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2012, 02:01 AM
  #25
Lloydchristmas138
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 159
vCash: 500
I'd like to hold on to Vanek because I'm buying that injuries really hurt his play in the 2nd half of last year. It wasn't long ago that Vanek just seemed like an absolute stud. Not to sound too much like Darcy himself but the shakeup of the old core shouldn't be rushed for the sake of change. Vanek, Pominville, and to a lesser extent Stafford can be the survivors of that group. So long Roy, Gaustad.

*Wishful thinking* Putting on my Buddy Nix cap, its about identifying your top talent and cut the dead weight and let the youth/vets compete for spots. One of my biggest peeve with the Sabres recently has been questioning if the best lineup we could have is playing.

I might be in the minority but I think there's a real good chance we could see Grigorenko, Armia, and Girgensons after this following year, even if not they're certainly part of the plan of the future. Depth wise let's take a possible top 9 sneak peak:

Vanek - Grigorenko -Armia
Girgensons -Hodgson -Pominville
Foligno - Ennis - Stafford

Point being, I don't mess with that framework too much, but it leaves me with trading chips of Roy, Adam, Leino, Gerbe, Tropp, (or Stafford honestly) that wouldn't hurt the team too bad right now. Not the greatest bargaining chips but IMO all of those players can play in a top 9 role and shouldn't be a part of our next forward core over the guys I mentioned above.

Sorry for the rant/

Lloydchristmas138 is offline   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 09:39 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.