Thomas Vanek

[qcsabresfan84]

I hate to complain about Vanek, because he has so much talent and I've seen him succeed before. The problem though, is that he's got six goals this season. Now once the free trial of Center Ice ended, I havent been able to watch any of the games, so before I complain, can someone who's been watching please tell me what's going on with him?

Is he just not capitalizing on his opportunities? Is he getting bad bounces? Or is he not playing hard enough and not skating hard to the net? If he's just getting bad bounces then I can't really complain about that, because I know that streaks like that can happen. When I used to play, sometimes it would feel like I was doing everything right and playing great just not finding the net or getting the bounces. It happens, so that wouldn't upset me about Vanek. But if he is not skating hard and getting into the right positions then that would piss me off because its a huge waste of talent.

Can someone please let me know what's going on with him?

[Ingtar33]

I hate to complain about Vanek, because he has so much talent and I've seen him succeed before. The problem though, is that he's got six goals this season. Now once the free trial of Center Ice ended, I havent been able to watch any of the games, so before I complain, can someone who's been watching please tell me what's going on with him?

Is he just not capitalizing on his opportunities? Is he getting bad bounces? Or is he not playing hard enough and not skating hard to the net? If he's just getting bad bounces then I can't really complain about that, because I know that streaks like that can happen. When I used to play, sometimes it would feel like I was doing everything right and playing great just not finding the net or getting the bounces. It happens, so that wouldn't upset me about Vanek. But if he is not skating hard and getting into the right positions then that would piss me off because its a huge waste of talent.

Can someone please let me know what's going on with him?


I think it's a two fold problem...

1) he's a winger without a quality center... say what you will about Roy (and i think he makes a fine 2nd or 3rd center) but he's not a no.1 center. That makes a winger's job a little hard

2) he's on the first line with a 2nd or 3rd line center drawing the other team's top defensive lines. Now... he still scores a lot... and probably will be close to 40 goals again this season, but without a better center to feed him the puck through traffic it's hard to score against top defensive lines



i guess if you want to throw in another issue... he's like Dave Andreychuk in that he's best within 15 feet of the net. and unless you're controlling the puck in the offensive zone, and have a center that can get him the puck through a solid defensive unit... it will be hard for him to get a lot of his "choice" opportunities.

That's not to say he's not pretty good with the puck, he clearly is. But he's not good enough to do it all by himself all the time.

and yes... sometimes he "floats" taking shifts off. No where near as badly as he used to be (his first year namely) but it still happens.

[DMBcrew36]

We should've let Edmonton take him in exchange for 3 first rounders or whatever it was we would've gotten for letting Edmonton steal him with the offer sheet.

He is WAY overpaid right now.

[OpIv37]

We should've let Edmonton take him in exchange for 3 first rounders or whatever it was we would've gotten for letting Edmonton steal him with the offer sheet.

He is WAY overpaid right now.
that's revisionist history. Remember, we lost drury and briere that off season as well. If we lost vanek for draft picks, then we'd probably miss thenplayoffs for 2 or 3 years while... Oh wait, nevermind.

[SabreEleven]

The 2008 Sabres are starting to peek their head out...Which one is here to stay?

[Michael82]

The 2008 Sabres are starting to peek their head out...Which one is here to stay?
Once Grier comes back, it will be the 2009 Sabres. :pray:

[rbochan]

that's revisionist history. Remember, we lost drury and briere that off season as well. If we lost vanek for draft picks, then we'd probably miss thenplayoffs for 2 or 3 years while... Oh wait, nevermind.
Poor, poor Vanek. If only he was given bags full of fresh hundred dollar bills every game to wipe away his tears... Oh wait...

[JD]

Kaleta has half as many goals as him, what a ****ing shame. Miro Satan Jr.

[JD]

We should've let Edmonton take him in exchange for 3 first rounders or whatever it was we would've gotten for letting Edmonton steal him with the offer sheet.

He is WAY overpaid right now.

Wasn't it 4 first rounders?

[THATHURMANATOR]

that's revisionist history. Remember, we lost drury and briere that off season as well. If we lost vanek for draft picks, then we'd probably miss thenplayoffs for 2 or 3 years while... Oh wait, nevermind.
Please imagine if we let him go too how much you would be complaining...

[SabreEleven]

We are complaining with him, Corey, but of course, if went to Edmonton he would have 50 to 60 goals a year and the complaining would be unbearable.

[DMBcrew36]

Please imagine if we let him go too how much you would be complaining...

You have a point. The City of Buffalo would have flipped out if we let Vanek walk with that offer-sheet since we had just lost Briere and Drury. If the Briere and Drury situation had NOT just happened, letting Vanek go may have been an option. Of course, the organization was also set on showing other teams that poaching our talent was not how you do business.

But in retrospect, I would rather have those 1st round picks. I guess it's something to remember in the future if any of our guys get offer sheets.

[OpIv37]

Please imagine if we let him go too how much you would be complaining...
Of course I would have. The team failed to re sign either Briere or Drury, so when Edmonton signed the offer sheet, we were ****ed. Either pay top dollar for slightly above average talent, or lose our top 3 scorers at once. The fo created a situation where there was no good option, so I would have *****ed either way.

In hindsight, we should have let him go. We didn't make the playoffs with him, and by now some of those draft picks might have been contributing. In addition, we'd have an extra $7 mil in cap space for FA's. Of course, there was no way of truly knowing this at the time, but it would have been nice if this fo could have recognized that they didn't have playoff talent on this roster without briere and drury.

[RockStar36]

Just wondering because I don't see a ton of Flyers or Rangers games, but have Drury or Briere really been worth they money they are being paid?

Last I heard the Flyers were desperately trying to trade Briere during the Summer and get out of his huge contract.

[BlackMetalNinja]

Just wondering because I don't see a ton of Flyers or Rangers games, but have Drury or Briere really been worth they money they are being paid?

Last I heard the Flyers were desperately trying to trade Briere during the Summer and get out of his huge contract.Well that sort of revisionist history is perfectly alright around here, because it shows the incompetence of the organization... They never would have tanked if we kept them... or else they would have, and then everybody could ***** about overpaying them instead!

[DMBcrew36]

Just wondering because I don't see a ton of Flyers or Rangers games, but have Drury or Briere really been worth they money they are being paid?

Last I heard the Flyers were desperately trying to trade Briere during the Summer and get out of his huge contract.

Briere has rarely been healthy since moving to Philly so he most certainly has not provided fair return on investment. He plays relatively well when he is in, though.

It's hard to say whether Drury has been worth his pay. He has 6 points in 18 games, is 50% on faceoffs, and is a -3 so far this year. It's hard to measure intangibles though, such as leadership, and he has never been below 50% on faceoffs since coming into the league.

IMO, neither of them have really lived up to their contract, but I think Drury comes close with his intangibles and the fact that he is not as prone to injury.

[OpIv37]

Just wondering because I don't see a ton of Flyers or Rangers games, but have Drury or Briere really been worth they money they are being paid?

Last I heard the Flyers were desperately trying to trade Briere during the Summer and get out of his huge contract.

I haven't watched them much either so I can't really answer that. I do know that without them, the Sabres went from 2 consecutive trips to the conf finals and Presidents Trophy winner to out of the playoffs. It may have been a case of the whole being more than the sum of it's parts.

[OpIv37]

Well that sort of revisionist history is perfectly alright around here, because it shows the incompetence of the organization... They never would have tanked if we kept them... or else they would have, and then everybody could ***** about overpaying them instead!

Well it's really not that difficult. The team was good when they were here. The team sucked when they left.

To be perfectly honest, letting them go doesn't bother me as much as not replacing them. When they were here, the Sabres were good but still not quite good enough to win the Cup, which is the goal. So, something had to change. But to expect the team to get better by letting two of the best players walk and replacing them with guys we already had? That's just asinine. If the team wasn't good enough to win the Cup, the team minus the two best players certainly isn't good enough to win the Cup.

[DMBcrew36]

Honestly, I think Kotalik is one guy who is missed, at least on powerplay. He is giving the Rangers a huge boost on the powerplay. Ranger nation is in love with his hard shot.

[Ingtar33]

Of course I would have. The team failed to re sign either Briere or Drury, so when Edmonton signed the offer sheet, we were ****ed. Either pay top dollar for slightly above average talent, or lose our top 3 scorers at once. The fo created a situation where there was no good option, so I would have *****ed either way.


slightly above average talent? You do know you're talking about a 40 goal scorer right?

How many of those are there in the league? 10? 20? no more then that. I know we don't have any more of those on this squad.

Only Sabres fans would want to run a 40 goal scorer and future 500 goal scorer (for his career) off the team.

[DMBcrew36]

slightly above average talent? You do know you're talking about a 40 goal scorer right?

How many of those are there in the league? 10? 20? no more then that. I know we don't have any more of those on this squad.

Only Sabres fans would want to run a 40 goal scorer and future 500 goal scorer (for his career) off the team.

I'm sorry but Vanek disappears for too long sometimes. The guy is a ghost for 59:30 of most games. The guy is supposed to be our franchise forward and he's being paid as such.

[BlackMetalNinja]

Well it's really not that difficult. The team was good when they were here. The team sucked when they left.

To be perfectly honest, letting them go doesn't bother me as much as not replacing them. When they were here, the Sabres were good but still not quite good enough to win the Cup, which is the goal. So, something had to change. But to expect the team to get better by letting two of the best players walk and replacing them with guys we already had? That's just asinine. If the team wasn't good enough to win the Cup, the team minus the two best players certainly isn't good enough to win the Cup.And how many times have we been through this? I asked you numerous times who you thought would have fit the bill and still been economically viable, you're only response has ever been "that's not my job to figure out". We've all agreed that the FO for the Sabres didn't handle things in the most ideal of manners, but their options were also pretty limited in the whole deal. I wish it were as cut and dry as we should have kept those two guys, but that's not how it works, nor are their a list of players who provide the type of talent those guys were at the time for a magically cheaper price.

The whole point of my previous post, as always, is that no matter what way it shook out, the same group of people here would have been *****ing about it one way or the other.

[RockStar36]

I really am trying to avoid the argument but it's so easy to get sucked back in.

With a cap, their hands really were tied. With Briere, Drury, and Campbell, you sign those guys and you're letting go a ton more. The Sabres made a decision to let them leave and get huge paydays so they could better spread out their money. I really believe it was their plan. They realized that they went to two straight ECF's and couldn't get over the hump and had to made a decision on those two, and decided they need to prepare for future years because those two weren't pushing you over the top.

[OpIv37]

slightly above average talent? You do know you're talking about a 40 goal scorer right?

How many of those are there in the league? 10? 20? no more then that. I know we don't have any more of those on this squad.

Only Sabres fans would want to run a 40 goal scorer and future 500 goal scorer (for his career) off the team.
First, I never said anything about running him off the team. The options were let him walk, or give up 7 million a season in cap space and turn down 4 draft picks to keep him.

Second, Vanek may be a a scorer but he's not a leader. You can't build a franchise around a guy like that. And so far this year, he's not even scoring.

Do you honestly think Vanek is doing more for this
franchise than 7 million in cap space and 4 draft picks could? I don't.

[OpIv37]

I really am trying to avoid the argument but it's so easy to get sucked back in.

With a cap, their hands really were tied. With Briere, Drury, and Campbell, you sign those guys and you're letting go a ton more. The Sabres made a decision to let them leave and get huge paydays so they could better spread out their money. I really believe it was their plan. They realized that they went to two straight ECF's and couldn't get over the hump and had to made a decision on those two, and decided they need to prepare for future years because those two weren't pushing you over the top.
Well so far their plan has gotten us two years of no playoffs and a third year that's looking like a rerun of the second year: start hot but cool off by thanksgiving.

Also, if their plan was to tear down and rebuild, why keep Vanek? Just let him go with everyone else.

[OpIv37]

And how many times have we been through this? I asked you numerous times who you thought would have fit the bill and still been economically viable, you're only response has ever been "that's not my job to figure out". We've all agreed that the FO for the Sabres didn't handle things in the most ideal of manners, but their options were also pretty limited in the whole deal. I wish it were as cut and dry as we should have kept those two guys, but that's not how it works, nor are their a list of players who provide the type of talent those guys were at the time for a magically cheaper price.

The whole point of my previous post, as always, is that no matter what way it shook out, the same group of people here would have been *****ing about it one way or the other.
Because they ****ed up and put themselves in a situation where they couldn't win. Any time the team isn't winning, we have every right to be *****ing.

[RockStar36]

Well so far their plan has gotten us two years of no playoffs and a third year that's looking like a rerun of the second year: start hot but cool off by thanksgiving.

Also, if their plan was to tear down and rebuild, why keep Vanek? Just let him go with everyone else.

Not tear down completely, but build around the younger core guys like Roy, Vanek, Connolly, Pominville, etc.

And yes, two years and no playoffs. Considering the other teams we all cheer for, that sounds great.

And it is so freakin early to say this year is like last. They have had a few injuries to key people (Grier) and they are still fine. I'd like to see how they last through December but it way too early to write off the season.

[Crisis]

btw, most ranger fans want to practically give away drury- for what its worth

[BlackMetalNinja]

btw, most ranger fans want to practically give away drury- for what its worthClearly it's worth nothing here, just like the Flyers looking to dump Briere's salary in the offseason. Somehow those guys would still be gold if they played for us though.

[OpIv37]

Clearly it's worth nothing here, just like the Flyers looking to dump Briere's salary in the offseason. Somehow those guys would still be gold if they played for us though.

Because clearly we're doing so well without them :rolleyes:

[RockStar36]

Because clearly we're doing so well without them :rolleyes:

No sense living in the past.

The Sabres are currently ahead of both Philadelphia and New York with less games played.

It's a natural cycle. They couldn't get over the hump with those guys, so it was time to regroup.

Again, how come it seems like you're willing to give your other teams a break when they do this but the Sabres are beaten to death for it?

[OpIv37]

No sense living in the past.

The Sabres are currently ahead of both Philadelphia and New York with less games played.

It's a natural cycle. They couldn't get over the hump with those guys, so it was time to regroup.

Again, how come it seems like you're willing to give your other teams a break when they do this but the Sabres are beaten to death for it?

Because the Sabres went from a President's Trophy to OUT OF THE PLAYOFFS in one off-season as a result of these moves. Like I said, we didn't win the Cup with Briere and Drury so maybe the Sabres did need to regroup. But ****ing REPLACE them. It's 2+ seasons later and we still haven't recovered.

[RockStar36]

I see your point. I'm not sure what they could've done to replace them because they needed cap money for people like Miller, but I do see your point.

[BlackMetalNinja]

I think we've all seen the point... I agree, they didn't handle it so well, but I also agree that I'm not sure what they were supposed to do in terms of replacements with their hands tied financially. My problem is that we're still dwelling on it this far down the road. Nothing is going to change it now so why does it continue to get brought up?

[DMBcrew36]

Do you honestly think Vanek is doing more for this
franchise than 7 million in cap space and 4 draft picks could? I don't.

In retrospect, Regier would have been brilliant to have taken those picks. There would have been an uproar at the time, but it would have been brilliant. It would've netted us at least 3 first-round picks. All one has to do is look around the league and see how all these rookies are playing - Evander Kane in Atlanta, Myers in Buffalo, Del Zotto in NY, Duchene and O'Reilly in Colorado... the list goes on. Young players are stepping in and contributing almost immediately.

[Ingtar33]

well... looking it up on Wiki, it looks like we got the Oiler's pick in 2008 anyway... who turned into Myers.

The only other 1st rounder Edmonton had in 2008 was some guy called Jordan Eberle, who's yet to play a game in the NHL

the 2nd 1st rounder we would have got for Vanek would have been the 2009 draft... and that was some guy called Magnus Pääjärvi-Svensson, who again has yet to play a game in the NHL.

I don't know if we would have got Sam Gagner, the 2007 1st round pick by Edmonton or not... but he's been a 40 point per year player in the NHL.


so.. that's 1 40 point player and 2 players who can't get on the ice. I don't know why we're looking back in "lust" for those picks we could have had for Vanek.

[OpIv37]

well... looking it up on Wiki, it looks like we got the Oiler's pick in 2008 anyway... who turned into Myers.

The only other 1st rounder Edmonton had in 2008 was some guy called Jordan Eberle, who's yet to play a game in the NHL

the 2nd 1st rounder we would have got for Vanek would have been the 2009 draft... and that was some guy called Magnus Pääjärvi-Svensson, who again has yet to play a game in the NHL.

I don't know if we would have got Sam Gagner, the 2007 1st round pick by Edmonton or not... but he's been a 40 point per year player in the NHL.


so.. that's 1 40 point player and 2 players who can't get on the ice. I don't know why we're looking back in "lust" for those picks we could have had for Vanek.

That's assuming the Sabres would have picked the same players. And don't forget about the extra $7 mill per season we would have had in cap space to get FA's.

[DMBcrew36]

That's assuming the Sabres would have picked the same players. And don't forget about the extra $7 mill per season we would have had in cap space to get FA's.

Yeah, I seriously doubt the Sabres pick the same players. And listening to Regier last week during a pre-game with WGR55, he admitted that he was now sticking mostly to North American players... so I seriously doubt he would've picked Magnus.

[Crisis]

well... looking it up on Wiki, it looks like we got the Oiler's pick in 2008 anyway... who turned into Myers.

The only other 1st rounder Edmonton had in 2008 was some guy called Jordan Eberle, who's yet to play a game in the NHL

the 2nd 1st rounder we would have got for Vanek would have been the 2009 draft... and that was some guy called Magnus Pääjärvi-Svensson, who again has yet to play a game in the NHL.

I don't know if we would have got Sam Gagner, the 2007 1st round pick by Edmonton or not... but he's been a 40 point per year player in the NHL.


so.. that's 1 40 point player and 2 players who can't get on the ice. I don't know why we're looking back in "lust" for those picks we could have had for Vanek.

It's funny, we actually got Myers through the Oilers offersheet on Dustin Penner.

Oilers gave a 1st, 2nd, 3rd rounder when the Ducks didn't match the offer sheet for Penner.

The 1st rounder was the 12th overall, which Anaheim then traded to the Kings for the 17th and 28th.

The Kings traded us the 12th overall, for our 13th overall pick and a 3rd rounder in 09..

And with the 12th pick we took Myers.

The 3rd rounder we traded to move up one spot was traded to Calgary who took Ryan Howse, and in exchange the Kings got the #84 pick and #107 pick....which turned into Nicolas Deslauriers and pick #107 was traded to Columbus for more picks....and thats as far as I feel like looking into right now, lol.