HFBoards

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

Vanek more of an impact than Roy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-23-2011, 12:07 PM
  #1
MyersMagic57*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: South Buffalo, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,420
vCash: 500
Vanek more of an impact than Roy?

Without Roy so far this season we have been 7-4-1
With Roy we were 14-17-4

In the 12 games played without Roy Vanek is 5-9-14 which is better than Roy's PPG production thus far.

While obviously you can't determine that through 12 games but Vanek's production has increased without Roy centering his line and well he hasn't exactly had strong players on his line to help his production.

So my question is, is Vanek the better player based on these stats?

MyersMagic57* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2011, 12:11 PM
  #2
Ron Barr
Doing it to Death
 
Ron Barr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: bdddddddet
Posts: 5,820
vCash: 500
If we wait until it's been 35 games without Roy, I guarantee our record would be about the same without him. Just under .500.

We don't have any true difference makers in our line-up. There isn't a single player on our team where if they aren't in the line-up, we're basically screwed. Miller would be the closest thing to that kind of player, but even he isn't as good as he was last year. It's a good thing to have that kind of balance, but it's not a good thing to only have average players, and no true stars who can take your team to the next level.

Ron Barr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2011, 12:13 PM
  #3
Havok89
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vile21 View Post
Without Roy so far this season we have been 7-4-1
With Roy we were 14-17-4

In the 12 games played without Roy Vanek is 5-9-14 which is better than Roy's PPG production thus far.

While obviously you can't determine that through 12 games but Vanek's production has increased without Roy centering his line and well he hasn't exactly had strong players on his line to help his production.

So my question is, is Vanek the better player based on these stats?
I'm sure Vanek will eventually dissapeer again for about 5 games and his numbers will drop. However, theyre two completely different players. Roy makes players around him better and is probobly the more complete player out of the two. Vanek is a pure goal scorer and his stats would be much higher if he would shoot the damn puck more.

Havok89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2011, 12:13 PM
  #4
MyersMagic57*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: South Buffalo, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,420
vCash: 500
True at least Vanek stepped up in Roy's absence

MyersMagic57* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2011, 12:14 PM
  #5
LGBuffalo
Registered User
 
LGBuffalo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: E PA
Country: United States
Posts: 188
vCash: 500
I think it's just a mindset with Vanek. With Roy in the lineup, Vanek could coast in most instances, and Derek would at least tee-up a nice opportunity for him. Without Derek there, Vanek has had to take liberties on his own and create his own offense. So to me, this is a really different situation that we've never seen Thomas in before.

LGBuffalo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2011, 12:26 PM
  #6
Timbo Slice
Tank Nation
 
Timbo Slice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 15,563
vCash: 500
I need more of a sample size before even wondering if Vanek is better without Roy.

Timbo Slice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2011, 01:19 PM
  #7
Montag DP
Sabres fan in...
 
Montag DP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: ...Atlanta
Country: United States
Posts: 6,608
vCash: 500
Is it not common knowledge by now that Vanek is a streaky player? Luckily he's having a hot streak now that Roy went down, just as he was in a slump beforehand. I don't think it has much at all to do with Roy not being here, but if it does, it's a purely a head issue with Vanek.

Montag DP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2011, 01:41 PM
  #8
thefifagod
I'm The Survivor
 
thefifagod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,043
vCash: 500
The title of the thread is misleading; add without Roy in. To the point, I want a larger sample size but I do believe that Roy isn't the playmaker that Vanek needs. That's not taking anything away from Roy, he played great this year, but that's my opinion. I'll wait until the end of the year to see if the numbers justify that belief. Then again, Roy is a better playmaker than anyone we have at the moment so it's kind of hard to say. A pure playmaking center to play with Vanek would be a dream scenario but odds are very low that will happen.

thefifagod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2011, 03:59 PM
  #9
Loungie
Registered User
 
Loungie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 655
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefifagod View Post
The title of the thread is misleading; add without Roy in. To the point, I want a larger sample size but I do believe that Roy isn't the playmaker that Vanek needs. That's not taking anything away from Roy, he played great this year, but that's my opinion. I'll wait until the end of the year to see if the numbers justify that belief. Then again, Roy is a better playmaker than anyone we have at the moment so it's kind of hard to say. A pure playmaking center to play with Vanek would be a dream scenario but odds are very low that will happen.
Exactly with Darcy as GM. Time to clean house...

Loungie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2011, 04:24 PM
  #10
mgeise
Registered User
 
mgeise's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Buffalo
Country: United States
Posts: 3,408
vCash: 500
I don't like Vanek and Roy on the same line. In a perfect world, we'd have a great setup center to play with Vanek and then have Roy on the other top six line.

mgeise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2011, 08:28 PM
  #11
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 32,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vile21 View Post
Without Roy so far this season we have been 7-4-1
With Roy we were 14-17-4

In the 12 games played without Roy Vanek is 5-9-14 which is better than Roy's PPG production thus far.

While obviously you can't determine that through 12 games but Vanek's production has increased without Roy centering his line and well he hasn't exactly had strong players on his line to help his production.

So my question is, is Vanek the better player based on these stats?
Its 13gms now without Roy.

In those game Vanek has 3g 4a 7pts on PP. Its a big reason for his production and has little to do with his center at ES. Thats actually a common theme. He gets roughly half his points on the PP when he is clicking.


As for not playing with anyone, Pommer (he of the 24pts in 24gms) was added as his linemate 1 or 2 games after Roy went down. Thats when Vanek's production started to heat up again. He had no points in the first two games without Roy.


As someone else pointed out, Vanek is streaky.

-first 4gms of the season -> 0 pts -4
-next 6gms -> 4g 3a 7pts +1 (2g 1a 3pts on PP)
-5gms -> 0 pts -5
-15gms -> 9g 9a 18pts (4g 5a 9pts on PP)
-7gms -> 0pts -4
-9gms -> 5g 9a 14pts +1 (3g 4a 7pts on PP)
-last 2 gms -> 0pts -3

Time will tell if these last two games are the beginning of another cold streak or not.


He had two similar runs earlier in the year. The difference thats interesting is he was more of a playmaker (almost twice as many assists than goals) during this last run.



I've always found it odd that when Vanek does well he is a superstar that makes those around him better (Obviously since he appearantly plays with no one). But when he struggles its his linemates or coaches that are to blame.


Last edited by joshjull: 01-23-2011 at 08:42 PM.
joshjull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2011, 09:31 PM
  #12
Moskau
Registered User
 
Moskau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Western New York
Posts: 9,748
vCash: 100
We can all at least agree that Roy is addition by subtraction on the Powerplay right? He just slows down the play way too much and goes for so many low percentage plays around the half boards.

Moskau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2011, 09:52 PM
  #13
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 33,229
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
Its 13gms now without Roy.

In those game Vanek has 3g 4a 7pts on PP. Its a big reason for his production and has little to do with his center at ES.
Thats actually a common theme. He gets roughly half his points on the PP when he is clicking.

.
and who is it, that isn't on the PP turning over pucks, shooting into defenders shins, and generally slowing down the movement on the PP?

Vanek is better without Roy

is the team better without Roy? doubtful... but the current streak sure enhances the opinion that Roy is individually successful... and that's all.

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2011, 10:49 PM
  #14
Zip15
Registered User
 
Zip15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 17,018
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moskau View Post
We can all at least agree that Roy is addition by subtraction on the Powerplay right? He just slows down the play way too much and goes for so many low percentage plays around the half boards.
I would narrow that statement a bit. He would slow down the play on the half-wall, but I thought he was quite good on the point this year. He showed an ability to get his shot on net, which few of the defenders do, and, generally, I thought he made better decisions up there.

The PP looks better run though Ennis, though.

Zip15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2011, 11:27 PM
  #15
jBuds
pretty damn valuable
 
jBuds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NYC Suburbs
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 26,847
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zip15 View Post
I would narrow that statement a bit. He would slow down the play on the half-wall, but I thought he was quite good on the point this year. He showed an ability to get his shot on net, which few of the defenders do, and, generally, I thought he made better decisions up there.

The PP looks better run though Ennis, though.
I would narrow the statement in the sense that Roy's our #1 center and, playing on the same unit as Vanek or not, is a playmaker who can produce and contribute to the unit's success.

I also think Roy settled down a lot in the sense of less shots blocked, less of those "perfect pass" attempts, and is showing more awareness this year than in season's prior.

Unheralded in the rise of the PP to the top-15 of the league is Jordan Leopold... but that's for another thread.

jBuds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 09:39 AM
  #16
Dabs21Nike
Registered User
 
Dabs21Nike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Tonawanda
Country: United States
Posts: 1,139
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
I've always found it odd that when Vanek does well he is a superstar that makes those around him better (Obviously since he appearantly plays with no one). But when he struggles its his linemates or coaches that are to blame.
I have always thought about this as well. Vanek is a streaky player. He has his strong games and his poor games, but a lot of that comes back on him. If he wants to be considered one of the top players in the league, he has to take over games at times and on a somewhat consistant basis. Star players don't just disappear for 8-10 game stretches regardless of who their linemates are.

Dabs21Nike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 09:49 AM
  #17
Chainshot
Global Moderator
Give 'em Enough Rope
 
Chainshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Costa Rica
Country: Costa Rica
Posts: 56,236
vCash: 500
Awards:
It seems Vanek and Pominville have clicked moreso than Vanek without Roy (or without Stafford regardless of wing) or even without Connolly. They're making the offense work right now, together or separately. Tom was on a hot-streak and it seemed like things worked well one another.

__________________
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
01-24-2011, 10:54 AM
  #18
Moskau
Registered User
 
Moskau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Western New York
Posts: 9,748
vCash: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by jBuds View Post
I would narrow the statement in the sense that Roy's our #1 center and, playing on the same unit as Vanek or not, is a playmaker who can produce and contribute to the unit's success.
But he doesn't. Just because he's the #1 Center on the team does not mean he is the best option for the PP. On most teams that is the case but some players just don't have a mind that works on the PP. Derek Roy is one of those guys.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jBuds
I also think Roy settled down a lot in the sense of less shots blocked, less of those "perfect pass" attempts, and is showing more awareness this year than in season's prior.
But he isn't. And even if he was it hasn't contributed to a better PP. The PP with Roy is still bottom 5 in the league.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jBuds
Unheralded in the rise of the PP to the top-15 of the league is Jordan Leopold... but that's for another thread.
Jordan Leopold played the point when Derek Roy was still in the line-up. The result? A bottom 5 PP. You are acting like the powerplays rise to top 15 has been a gradual process all season long. It hasn't. It literally started to climb as soon as Roy was out of the line-up and only then did it begin.

I like Roy and want him on the team. I just don't want him on the 1st PP unit ever again unless he learns how to run one.

How many times this year and last year did we say "Man if the PP didn't go 0-7 we would have won that game". I can think of 4 pretty big games last year where we said that in the spring.

It's an unusual twist of fate but if this team rides the powerplay into the playoffs somehow we will have made them because of the very reason so many people thought the season was over, Roy's injury.

Moskau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 12:21 PM
  #19
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 33,229
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moskau View Post
But he doesn't. Just because he's the #1 Center on the team does not mean he is the best option for the PP. On most teams that is the case but some players just don't have a mind that works on the PP. Derek Roy is one of those guys.


But he isn't. And even if he was it hasn't contributed to a better PP. The PP with Roy is still bottom 5 in the league.



Jordan Leopold played the point when Derek Roy was still in the line-up. The result? A bottom 5 PP. You are acting like the powerplays rise to top 15 has been a gradual process all season long. It hasn't. It literally started to climb as soon as Roy was out of the line-up and only then did it begin.

I like Roy and want him on the team. I just don't want him on the 1st PP unit ever again unless he learns how to run one.

How many times this year and last year did we say "Man if the PP didn't go 0-7 we would have won that game". I can think of 4 pretty big games last year where we said that in the spring.

It's an unusual twist of fate but if this team rides the powerplay into the playoffs somehow we will have made them because of the very reason so many people thought the season was over, Roy's injury.
The truth hurts...

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 01:15 PM
  #20
Kruschiki
Registered User
 
Kruschiki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 13,822
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moskau View Post
. I can think of 4 pretty big games last year where we said that in the spring.
I can think of 4 in the Boston series.

Kruschiki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 02:25 PM
  #21
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 32,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jame View Post
and who is it, that isn't on the PP turning over pucks, shooting into defenders shins, and generally slowing down the movement on the PP?
The PP without question has been great lately. I also agree getting Roy of the wall (he was moved to the point prior to his injury) also helped it improve. Then it really took off the last few weeks when Ennis got a more prominant role due to Stafford's injury on top of Roy's. In his last 6 gms Ennis has 2g 4a 6pts on the PP.

I agree Roy isn't PPQB but he can and has been an effective member of a good PP.

05-06 -> 3rd
06-07 -> 17th
07-08 -> 14th
08-09 -> 7th
09-10 -> 17th

We haven't exactly been a PP powerhouse but we did have a pretty good one in 08-09 with Roy being pretty productive. He led the team with 30 PPpts. Vanek led the team and the NHL with 20 PP goals that year.

Quote:
Vanek is better without Roy
Based on what exactly?

You can try avoid answering this again and assert I can't change my mind on players (which isn't true and you know that). But nothing thats happened this season or any season since they've played together supports this assertion.


Vanek can have success without Roy and I would never assert Vanek needs Roy to be successful. But there is nothing to back up the assertion that Vanek is better without Roy.

-Roy centered Vanek during the 43g 41a 84pt season when Vanek had ES totals that were tops in the NHL. Vanek's ES numbers that year 28g (6th) 34a (tied for 12th) 62pts (3rd)

-Two straight seasons (07-08 + 08-09) with Roy as a key part of our #1 PP unit. Vanek was 2nd in the NHL in PP goals with 19 and 1st in PP goals with 20.


So helping Vanek to career highs in ES goals, assists and points which were tops in the NHL that season. Then helping him to the top of the NHL in PP goal scoring two seasons in a row means nothing.


I'm not saying Roy was the only reason these things happened but he was a big part of it.

Basically you don't like Roy so he is of no use to a player you do like .... Vanek.

Quote:
is the team better without Roy? doubtful... but the current streak sure enhances the opinion that Roy is individually successful... and that's all


No team wins based completely on one player. Some may be more important that others but it takes a collection of talent to win.


Your take on this is so assbackwards. We can win without Roy but that doesn't mean we aren't better team with him in the lineup.

The Pens were 5-4-1 in the 10gms prior to Crosby leaving the lineup. In the 8gms since he has been out they've gone 4-3-1 and thats with Malkin playing hurt and missing 3 of those 8 games.

After struggling to adjust to Crosby's absence and losing 3 straight games. The Pens have gone 4-1 in their last 5gms(Malkin missed the last 2 games).

No one in their right mind would take those numbers and argue the Pens are better off without Crosby in the lineup (or Malkin). What they would say is others are stepping up in the absense of their best player (players actually with Malkin injured and in and outof the lineup).

Yet you have such a hard on for Roy that you are pouncing on anything to attack him and discredit him as a player. If the Pens can get it going without Crosby who is far better than Roy, Its not really earth shattering the Sabres are rallying and playing well without Roy.

But this is not shocking coming from you. Instead of praising the players that have stepped up and praising Lindy for making adjustments. You've taken this opportunity to pummel Roy and somewhat bizarely claim the teams success without Roy proves Ruff is a bad coach.

Going 8-4-1 without Roy, Stafford in and out of the lineup, Connolly playing injured again, Myers struggling and Hecht as our #1 center seems like some amazing juggling and adjusting act on Lindy's part.

joshjull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 03:02 PM
  #22
Jame
Dream '16
 
Jame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Country: Pitcairn Islands
Posts: 33,229
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
Based on what exactly?

You can try avoid answering this again and assert I can't change my mind on players (which isn't true and you know that). But nothing thats happened this season or any season since they've played together supports this assertion.
Sometimes I wonder if you actually watch the games (i know you do). Every single opinion of yours is something that can be grasped by looking at the box score, or NHL.COM stat sheets.

How much more often do you FEEL the puck is on the team's best goal scorers stick, since Roy got injured?

Do you not SEE a difference in our zone possession on any line that Vanek has been on since Roy got injured?

How much more effective how our PP entries been since Roy got injured?


Quote:
Vanek can have success without Roy and I would never assert Vanek needs Roy to be successful. But there is nothing to back up the assertion that Vanek is better without Roy.
Nothing besides the time Vanek has played without Roy...

Quote:
-Roy centered Vanek during the 43g 41a 84pt season when Vanek had ES totals that were tops in the NHL. Vanek's ES numbers that year 28g (6th) 34a (tied for 12th) 62pts (3rd)

-Two straight seasons (07-08 + 08-09) with Roy as a key part of our #1 PP unit. Vanek was 2nd in the NHL in PP goals with 19 and 1st in PP goals with 20.
Watch the game and tell me your OPINION.

Tell me what you thought about Tallinder? He was a statistically very good top pairing defensemen for 5 post lockout seasons on a team that made the playoffs 3 times. Statistically, he met every expectation. But you didn't like how soft he was, how he played the game, etc. The stats told ONE story... and your VIEWING told a slightly different one... didn't it?

My viewing tells a slightly different story when it comes to Roy/Vanek. It's not worth debating if all you have is the stat sheet. If all you had was the stat sheet in a conversation about Tallinder, it would be the same story.


Quote:
Basically you don't like Roy so he is of no use to a player you do like .... Vanek.

Basically, I think BOTH players have massive holes in their games. BOTH players lack the total package qualities to ever be superstars/elite.

Basically, I think Roy is an INDIVIDUALLY talented hockey player, who would produce, relative to his career, regardless of his linemates. But... I also think his individually style of play hurts his linemates in the consistency/production departments.


No team wins based completely on one player. Some may be more important that others but it takes a collection of talent to win.


Quote:
Your take on this is so assbackwards. We can win without Roy but that doesn't mean we aren't better team with him in the lineup.
I think it's very simple
1. Roy is good
2. the team will win at about the same pace with or without him...
3. Team will miss Roy's production...
BUT
...Production of others will improve in his absence (yes, i think Roy hinders the play of his linemates, and I've stood by that statement for 3 years)

Quote:
The Pens were 5-4-1 in the 10gms prior to Crosby leaving the lineup. In the 8gms since he has been out they've gone 4-3-1 and thats with Malkin playing hurt and missing 3 of those 8 games.

After struggling to adjust to Crosby's absence and losing 3 straight games. The Pens have gone 4-1 in their last 5gms(Malkin missed the last 2 games).
A crosby example... incredible

Quote:
No one in their right mind would take those numbers and argue the Pens are better off without Crosby in the lineup (or Malkin). What they would say is others are stepping up in the absense of their best player (players actually with Malkin injured and in and outof the lineup).

Yet you have such a hard on for Roy that you are pouncing on anything to attack him and discredit him as a player. If the Pens can get it going without Crosby who is far better than Roy, Its not really earth shattering the Sabres are rallying and playing well without Roy.
Roy's absense and subsequent team production is factual evidence to a position I've held for years now.

Quote:
But this is not shocking coming from you. Instead of praising the players that have stepped up and praising Lindy for making adjustments. You've taken this opportunity to pummel Roy and somewhat bizarely claim the teams success without Roy proves Ruff is a bad coach.
For keeping a line together that I have felt is fatally flawed for years... yes, I am going to claim evidence when it supports an objective opinion I've held for quite some time.

Quote:
Going 8-4-1 without Roy, Stafford in and out of the lineup, Connolly playing injured again, Myers struggling and Hecht as our #1 center seems like some amazing juggling and adjusting act on Lindy's part.
credit where credit is due... too bad it took near catastrophic situation to compel such a change.

Jame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 08:44 PM
  #23
SabresFanNorthPortFL
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: North Port, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 1,751
vCash: 500
I can't figure this out. After the Boston game, where Vanek had his best game of the season, he has a game against the Islanders where he is on the ice for 13:00?!?!?!?!!??!!??!!?!?

13:00 minutes?????

Your superstar has 13:00 friggin minutes 2 games after dominating????

I just can't grasp why Vanek is not playing 20+ minutes per game. I just can't. Vanek is a Stallion, the one true guy on this team who poses all the tools, including size. AND never has our game plan been around him, never.

It is so sad.

When Roy, Connolly and Stafford are all out of the line-up, you don't ride Vanek????

WTF

I said it the Boston game night, he took the game over (with Gerbe). He attacked, the puck didn't leave his stick, he out hustled a Boston defensman down the ice into their zone and controlled the puck for a scoring chance. He was our superstar that night....as Ruff used him (and Pomminville), or better yet, force fed them more minutes and it looked like Vanek was able to get more into the game.

"more into the game"

It's what Ovie does, thorton, Stamkos, Crosby...some shifts they might look like the "float" through a shift but they are getting into the flow of the game...Vanek did that against the Bruins....how the #$%^&*() is our superstar supposed to get into the flow being on the ice for 13:00 minutes????

Matt Ellis 13:55
Byron 14:30
Grier 13:46
McCormick 14:16

Please someone tell me he got injured. I watched the entire game and there was nothing said. Just why?

Really, someone please tell me why Vanek isn't playing all situations, and getting around 20 minutes per game. Please explain it to me, as I'm stupid and can't figure out the game after watching it, and playing it for over 40 years!!!!!!

Vanek has proved it to me that he deserves more responsibility, more ice time, etc since Roy went down and he continues to give time to others.

Pathetic.

SabresFanNorthPortFL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 09:52 PM
  #24
thefifagod
I'm The Survivor
 
thefifagod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,043
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SabresFanNorthPortFL View Post
I can't figure this out. After the Boston game, where Vanek had his best game of the season, he has a game against the Islanders where he is on the ice for 13:00?!?!?!?!!??!!??!!?!?

13:00 minutes?????

Your superstar has 13:00 friggin minutes 2 games after dominating????

I just can't grasp why Vanek is not playing 20+ minutes per game. I just can't. Vanek is a Stallion, the one true guy on this team who poses all the tools, including size. AND never has our game plan been around him, never.

It is so sad.

When Roy, Connolly and Stafford are all out of the line-up, you don't ride Vanek????

WTF

I said it the Boston game night, he took the game over (with Gerbe). He attacked, the puck didn't leave his stick, he out hustled a Boston defensman down the ice into their zone and controlled the puck for a scoring chance. He was our superstar that night....as Ruff used him (and Pomminville), or better yet, force fed them more minutes and it looked like Vanek was able to get more into the game.

"more into the game"

It's what Ovie does, thorton, Stamkos, Crosby...some shifts they might look like the "float" through a shift but they are getting into the flow of the game...Vanek did that against the Bruins....how the #$%^&*() is our superstar supposed to get into the flow being on the ice for 13:00 minutes????

Matt Ellis 13:55
Byron 14:30
Grier 13:46
McCormick 14:16

Please someone tell me he got injured. I watched the entire game and there was nothing said. Just why?

Really, someone please tell me why Vanek isn't playing all situations, and getting around 20 minutes per game. Please explain it to me, as I'm stupid and can't figure out the game after watching it, and playing it for over 40 years!!!!!!

Vanek has proved it to me that he deserves more responsibility, more ice time, etc since Roy went down and he continues to give time to others.

Pathetic.
He had an upper body injury.

thefifagod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2011, 09:53 PM
  #25
Zip15
Registered User
 
Zip15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 17,018
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by SabresFanNorthPortFL View Post
I can't figure this out. After the Boston game, where Vanek had his best game of the season, he has a game against the Islanders where he is on the ice for 13:00?!?!?!?!!??!!??!!?!?

13:00 minutes?????

Your superstar has 13:00 friggin minutes 2 games after dominating????

I just can't grasp why Vanek is not playing 20+ minutes per game. I just can't. Vanek is a Stallion, the one true guy on this team who poses all the tools, including size. AND never has our game plan been around him, never.

It is so sad.

When Roy, Connolly and Stafford are all out of the line-up, you don't ride Vanek????

WTF

I said it the Boston game night, he took the game over (with Gerbe). He attacked, the puck didn't leave his stick, he out hustled a Boston defensman down the ice into their zone and controlled the puck for a scoring chance. He was our superstar that night....as Ruff used him (and Pomminville), or better yet, force fed them more minutes and it looked like Vanek was able to get more into the game.

"more into the game"

It's what Ovie does, thorton, Stamkos, Crosby...some shifts they might look like the "float" through a shift but they are getting into the flow of the game...Vanek did that against the Bruins....how the #$%^&*() is our superstar supposed to get into the flow being on the ice for 13:00 minutes????

Matt Ellis 13:55
Byron 14:30
Grier 13:46
McCormick 14:16

Please someone tell me he got injured. I watched the entire game and there was nothing said. Just why?

Really, someone please tell me why Vanek isn't playing all situations, and getting around 20 minutes per game. Please explain it to me, as I'm stupid and can't figure out the game after watching it, and playing it for over 40 years!!!!!!

Vanek has proved it to me that he deserves more responsibility, more ice time, etc since Roy went down and he continues to give time to others.

Pathetic.
He's nursing a nagging injury. Read Ruff's post-practice comments today. You could've saved yourself much time and frustration.

Zip15 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 04:53 AM.

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.