Vanek right back to his old self

[gebobs]

Just because its what the market will bear doesn't mean it's not a mistake. Haynesworth got what the market was bearing at the time. And how many people are in foreclosure because they bought townhouses for $500k and had a mortgage that was 80% of their paycheck?

Prior performance is no guarantee of future results. If only we all could have a crystal ball there would be no need for free markets. Until then, it's the harsh reality of supply and demand. When you have 30 multimillionaires vying for the service of one of the top five or so left wingers in the game, it's a seller's market for sure.

[Skooby]

Plenty of blame to go around. I just don't get why some of you think Vanek is exempt.

It's normally hard to shoot at the only guy that saves the day for the team but you seem to find him as the best target, which is mind-boggling.

[Skooby]

I think this is your problem. No one thinks Vanek doesn't share some responsibility for the team's dismal performance. It's just that of anyone on the team, his share is by far the least. He carries the team on his shoulders night after night. If he has a really good game, they might win. If he doesn't, they probably lose because no one else on the team can be counted on to shoulder the load in his place.

Could this be anymore obvious ?? Stafford is -7 in the +/- category & we're paying him ~$ 4 Million a year, talk about a total clip.

[OpIv37]

I think this is your problem. No one thinks Vanek doesn't share some responsibility for the team's dismal performance. It's just that of anyone on the team, his share is by far the least. He carries the team on his shoulders night after night. If he has a really good game, they might win. If he doesn't, they probably lose because no one else on the team can be counted on to shoulder the load in his place.

No, he doesn't carry the team on his shoulders night after night. 4 points in 8 games and no points in 6 of the last 8.

[OpIv37]

It's normally hard to shoot at the only guy that saves the day for the team but you seem to find him as the best target, which is mind-boggling.

So, the expectations for Vanek should be the same as, say, Stafford or Gerbe? Please.

[OpIv37]

Prior performance is no guarantee of future results. If only we all could have a crystal ball there would be no need for free markets. Until then, it's the harsh reality of supply and demand. When you have 30 multimillionaires vying for the service of one of the top five or so left wingers in the game, it's a seller's market for sure.

So on one hand you say prior performance is no guarantee of future results, but then you go on to justify spending millions of dollars on something with no guarantee of results.

I stand by my statement. Paying market price can still be a mistake.

[SkateZilla]

i think even vanek knows he's getting paid too much.

[Mski]

We only do pay one like that. And every off-season/trade deadline, we neve seem to have the cap room for the best guys (Brad Richards, anyone?). So, maybe the team is cheap or maybe the cap is poorly managed, but when you look at the books, Vanek's cap hit jumps off the page. If there's another reason why we aren't signing guys, I'm still waiting to hear it.

we had the cap room and the money to give him... he simply only wanted to go to new york

[OpIv37]

we had the cap room and the money to give him... he simply only wanted to go to new york

So then why wasn't the cap room used to sign someone else or extend somebody?

People keep saying we have the cap room but the team sure as hell isn't acting like it

[Mski]

So then why wasn't the cap room used to sign someone else or extend somebody?

People keep saying we have the cap room but the team sure as hell isn't acting like it

we did use the cap room on villie leino, erhof

[Skooby]

So, the expectations for Vanek should be the same as, say, Stafford or Gerbe? Please.

Stafford earns ~66% of what Vanek earns & had provided 1/3 his performance. Gerbe was never mentioned, at least by me. You're talking pay for performance & Vanek is at the top of the league for points performance, it's pretty hard to argue with the facts.

[Mski]

Stafford earns ~66% of what Vanek earns & had provided 1/3 his performance. Gerbe was never mentioned, at least by me. You're talking pay for performance & Vanek is at the top of the league for points performance, it's pretty hard to argue with the facts.

and making quite a bit less than most of the guys he's ahead of on that list too

[Skooby]

i think even vanek knows he's getting paid too much.

I think this endless Vanek bashing is weakest this season, he's the only real performer out there making things happen at his position. He's near the top for total points thus far as well, so he's playing up to his contract. Thinking any different is personal hate or jealousy, which is becoming more obvious everyday. When Vanek helped us beat Tampa, first posts mentioned about how he failed to perform during his previous games. He either helps us win or he doesn't & looking at the scoresheets, if he doesn't play we don't win.

I'd turn the spotlight away from league leading performing players to people like Stafford / Ville who are sucking up our resources with very little in return, those arguments I can see being justified.

[OpIv37]

we did use the cap room on villie leino, erhof

I don't recall on Ehrhoff but I believe Leino was already signed when we were pursuing Richards.

[OpIv37]

Stafford earns ~66% of what Vanek earns & had provided 1/3 his performance. Gerbe was never mentioned, at least by me. You're talking pay for performance & Vanek is at the top of the league for points performance, it's pretty hard to argue with the facts.

Vanek is at the top of the league because of a hot streak that included two 5 point games. He's come back to earth now and won't be there much longer. The facts show that Vanek has been a streaky player in the past and that is proving true once again.

As far as Stafford, yeah, he's a streaky contract year player. No doubt about that. But what Stafford doesn't do has no bearing on Vanek. Vanek is responsible for his own performance. "Well he did it too!" is not a valid excuse on e you graduate kindergarten.

[OpIv37]

I think this endless Vanek bashing is weakest this season, he's the only real performer out there making things happen at his position. He's near the top for total points thus far as well, so he's playing up to his contract. Thinking any different is personal hate or jealousy, which is becoming more obvious everyday. When Vanek helped us beat Tampa, first posts mentioned about how he failed to perform during his previous games. He either helps us win or he doesn't & looking at the scoresheets, if he doesn't play we don't win.

I'd turn the spotlight away from league leading performing players to people like Stafford / Ville who are sucking up our resources with very little in return, those arguments I can see being justified.

Personal hate? Jealousy? Please.

On one hand you complain about the team doing bad, and on the other hand, you defend one of the reasons why the team is doing bad. Comparing Vanek to the other heaps of **** on this team is useless. He needs to be compared to the other top players in the league, and long term he never cuts it.

[OpIv37]

It comes down to this: Vanek has some talent but he's not good enough to build a team around.

Unfortunately, this is the ****ty situation that our FO has created for us. Either Vanek plays like a top 3 player in the league every night, or the Sabres lose. So, I'm going to hold him to that standard. He has shown he can do it in bursts. He has not shown that he can do it consistently, and until he does, the criticism will come.

You can argue all day about whether that's fair or realistic, but it's irrelevant because its the reality under which we are forced to live.

[gebobs]

So on one hand you say prior performance is no guarantee of future results, but then you go on to justify spending millions of dollars on something with no guarantee of results.

Is there an alternative?

I stand by my statement. Paying market price can still be a mistake.

That's the gamble anyone takes any time they pay for anything. The greater the cost, the more the risk.

[gebobs]

No, he doesn't carry the team on his shoulders night after night. 4 points in 8 games and no points in 6 of the last 8.

Now you're just playing semantics. If you read the entire context of my post, you would see that I mention just what you said above. The fact that he falters under the onus of carrying the team's fortunes on his back every night does not mean that burden goes away.

In the Sabres 7 wins this year, he only failed to point in one game and had 2+ in five of them. If Vanek doesn't get on the scoresheet, the team loses almost invariably: 1-7.

[gebobs]

It comes down to this: Vanek has some talent but he's not good enough to build a team around.

Sure he is. But how are you going to know until you try? :-)

It can't be up to Vanek to get wins every night. Some of these other schmucks need to step up.