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

Wondering about Vanek

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-10-2010, 01:21 PM
  #76
struckbyaparkedcar
Zemgus Da Gawd
 
struckbyaparkedcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Upstate NY
Country: Cote DIvoire
Posts: 10,614
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
Couple of things on this

1) You only want an elite proven offensive player back for him. But Vanek isn't one himself. So why would you put a ridiculous precondition like that on trading him.

2) Vanek is the best PP goal scorer on this team. Thats where it ends in terms of him being better offensively than our other forwards.


3) If a trade for Vanek comes along that makes the team better. Then you trade him. Since making the team better is more important/relevant than the fact that they had paid the first two years of his front load contract. When they matched that offersheet they had reasons to do it that went beyond what Vanek brought to the table as a hockey player. Those reasons are no longer in play. I highly doubt there would be a huge uproar if he was moved now. Right or wrong the reaction would probably be quite the opposite.


I don't advocate trading Vanek just yet. But the idea that he is somehow untouchable, which is what your post implies, is a bit much to swallow. Regardless of why it happened, Vanek is the highest paid player on the team. Thats in cap hit (7.14mil) and actual salary (6.4mil). He will be the highest paid player for the next several years with Miller right behind him at 6.25mil.


The point being is at some point they have to decide if he brings enough to the table to warrant paying him like that. Or would the be better off with hypthetically 2 or even 3 players that make that amount combined? Ottawa mving out Heatley being an example of this. I'm well aware of that the situations and players are different. But the point still stands that they got better as a team after he was traded.

Having said that all of the above I'm not advocating trading him just yet. As others have pointed out this season is an off year for him offensively but on the positive side his overall game as grown. Hopefully he gets is offense going soon and this is a moot arguement.
1) Why would a 1st place team trade a player for someone who isn't an upgrade?
2) Overall offensively I'd say that you're underrating him. He's the teams best goalscorer and top 2-3 offensive player in general.
3) Ottawa didn't get better by trading Heatley. They got better by getting a better coach and adding offensive depth with Kovalev and defensive depth with Karlsson making the jump. They didn't shed salary with the Heatley deal initially, either. They only did so by waiving Cheechoo.

I'll elaborate later, I'm going out the door right now.

struckbyaparkedcar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-10-2010, 01:34 PM
  #77
Zip15
Registered User
 
Zip15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 17,279
vCash: 500
As usual, the context is getting lost. The sole issue to me is whether Buffalo would be a better team by trading Vanek for Fisher and Cowen, and using the 1st obtained in that deal to poach a player like Sharp. I think the answer is a resounding yes. Outside of Miller and maybe Myers, I'd trade every player on this team for that package.

Zip15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-10-2010, 01:40 PM
  #78
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 33,744
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zip15 View Post
As usual, the context is getting lost. The sole issue to me is whether Buffalo would be a better team by trading Vanek for Fisher and Cowen, and using the 1st obtained in that deal to poach a player like Sharp. I think the answer is a resounding yes. Outside of Miller and maybe Myers, I'd trade every player on this team for that package.
and since you are acquiring TWO centers, it makes more sense to do a hypothetical deal for Roy

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-10-2010, 01:59 PM
  #79
Chainshot
Global Moderator
Give 'em Enough Rope
 
Chainshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Costa Rica
Country: Costa Rica
Posts: 56,675
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
and since you are acquiring TWO centers, it makes more sense to do a hypothetical deal for Roy
Or he stays on the wing. Either way, it's freeing the team up to shop any of their other core forwards to continue to go in a new direction.

And again, I'm waiting to see how Vanek handles the playoffs. Who knows, he might resurrect his playoff/late game heroics and make all this moot.

__________________
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. - Aristotle
Chainshot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-10-2010, 02:07 PM
  #80
HockeyH3aven
#Flynnsanity
 
HockeyH3aven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Buffalo NY
Country: United States
Posts: 6,205
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
Vanek scored 40 goals last year... But I think he's having a better season this year. I think he's shown a lot of growth as a player.

Now if someone could just teach him how to take a decent stride
There's no doubt if he's even an average skater in NHL terms he's a borderline elite level player. Unfortunately he seems to be far from it.

HockeyH3aven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-10-2010, 02:27 PM
  #81
Zip15
Registered User
 
Zip15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 17,279
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
and since you are acquiring TWO centers, it makes more sense to do a hypothetical deal for Roy
Both Roy and Sharp can play LW. Most Sabres fans would prefer Roy at LW, and Hawk fans think Sharp is more effective at LW. Or, they could go with a Connolly-Roy-Fisher-Gaustad lineup down the middle. Also, it keeps options open if Connolly wants $6 million per year after next season.

Again, for the millionth time, I'm open to moving Roy for the right deal. I'm not open to moving him for the sole reason that it'll make the fanbase happy but the team worse.

Zip15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-10-2010, 02:28 PM
  #82
Luceni
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Austria
Country: Austria
Posts: 3,660
vCash: 500
You all seem to forget how Vanek has carried the team 2008 autumn....
He can be a game breaker, he can be an elite player. He's showen falshes of that in the past and I wouldn't give up on him after we payed him most of his salary the last three years.

I can't belive this vanek bashing. He's playing solid this year. he just isn able tu put his chances into the net at the moment. That will change, sooner or later.

Luceni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-10-2010, 02:41 PM
  #83
ADoubleD
Registered User
 
ADoubleD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Buffalo, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,797
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luceni View Post
You all seem to forget how Vanek has carried the team 2008 autumn....
He can be a game breaker, he can be an elite player. He's showen falshes of that in the past and I wouldn't give up on him after we payed him most of his salary the last three years.

I can't belive this vanek bashing. He's playing solid this year. he just isn able tu put his chances into the net at the moment. That will change, sooner or later.
We also haven't seen that player since then. I'm not going to bash Vanek, but if I could move that abomination of a contract, and improve the team at the same time I would. That isn't realistic though.

ADoubleD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-10-2010, 02:48 PM
  #84
ChrisObey
Registered User
 
ChrisObey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Austria
Country: Austria
Posts: 114
vCash: 500
Do you remember when he scored 24 goals (including 2 shorties) in 31 games last year? And soon after that he broke his jaw.

I'd like to see that player again.

ChrisObey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-11-2010, 11:48 AM
  #85
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 33,343
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by struckbyaparkedcar View Post
1) Why would a 1st place team trade a player for someone who isn't an upgrade?
2) Overall offensively I'd say that you're underrating him. He's the teams best goalscorer and top 2-3 offensive player in general.
3) Ottawa didn't get better by trading Heatley. They got better by getting a better coach and adding offensive depth with Kovalev and defensive depth with Karlsson making the jump. They didn't shed salary with the Heatley deal initially, either. They only did so by waiving Cheechoo.

I'll elaborate later, I'm going out the door right now.

-I'm addressing a specific poster's thoughts (Doak's) on what would be required to make a Vanek trade make sense. I'm not refering to any of the specific trade proposals in this thread. Btw the hypothetical trades I would be interested in would happen in the summer and no one is in 1st place then.

- I'm not sure how I'm underrating him. He is the best goal scorer because he is far and away the best PP goal scorer on this team. But at ES he is equal when it comes to goal scoring with Roy and Pommer. Playmaking would go to Connolly, Roy and Pommer. I completely agree he is one of the best offensive players on the team. I never said otherwise. What I disagreed with is Doak refering to him as THE BEST offensive player we have.

This is Doak's post

I am only moving Vanek for an elite proven offensive player. You don't trade your best offensive forward after you've paid off his front loaded contract unless you are getting a better player in return.

The sabres don't need to and shouldn't


Thats what my post was in response to nothing else. Re-read my post with that context in mind.

I think whats also being missed in all of this is I'm not advocating trading Vanek. I've been happy with the growth in his game and feel comfortable saying this year is just an off year offensively. My point was a hypothetical one about trading him. That if at some point the team felt trading him would make the team better then they should do it. Using Doak's conditions on any trade involving Vanek would be foolish IMO.


As to your points about the Ottawa situation in relation to a hypothetical Vanek trade. I think you're missing the point.

-Clouston was already there and was a big reason why Heatley left since their rift on how the team was going to play led to Heatley demanding a trade.

-Heatley was traded for lesser offensive players. Adding Kovalev not only doesn't change that point its irrelevant. The Heatley trade didn't free up any cap space so Kovy (or anyone else) could have been added regardless, same goes for Karlson, since they had the space to add.

The Sens got rid of an elite offensive player without getting an elite offensive player back and got better as a team.


Last edited by joshjull: 03-11-2010 at 12:13 PM.
joshjull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-11-2010, 12:26 PM
  #86
Luceni
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Austria
Country: Austria
Posts: 3,660
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
The Sens got rid of an elite offensive player without getting an elite offensive player back and got better as a team.
Don't forget that they still had Alfredsson and Spezza.
The're both at least close to elite as well.

We don't have anyone close to the level of Spezza and Alfredsson on our roster. We can't swallow the fact of losing our best offensive weapon that easy than the sens.
And Kovalev can score goals to imo. He clearly isn't on the level than Heatley, but he is at least a proven scorer.

Luceni 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 08:02 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.