Vanek right back to his old self

[OpIv37]

I didn't watch the whole game against the Leafs, but he missed on at least 3 chances in the first period.

He missed several chances against the Islanders and went back to his old habit of taking offensive zone penalties.

As I said before, this team cannot win when the best player makes these kinds of mistakes.

In fact, the whole line has gone to sleep. Hogson is following in Vanek's footsteps in terms of missing opportunities. Pominville is gun-shy and passes rather than shoots, which is not surprising because I can't remember the last time he put a snapshot on net, let alone scored on one.

And yes, I know what some of you will say: there are plenty of others on the team more worthy of criticism, players on other teams miss opportunities and take bad penalties as well, etc, but other people making mistakes does NOT get Vanek off the hook. The point is, and always has been, that this team won't win unless Vanek is perfect. At the start of the season when Vanek was racking up points, the team was at least winning some games and in most of the losses. Since he's gotten into one of his trademark slumps, the team has become a complete pushover.

Vanek isn't consistent enough to do it himself and no one on the team is capable of stepping up.

[YardRat]

Re: Vanek right back to his old self

You've been dying to post this thread for a week or so, haven't you.

[OpIv37]

Re: Vanek right back to his old self

I took a lot of **** for my stance on Vanek before.

Well look what happened....

Same **** happens all the time on this board- I say something that's correct but unpleasant. I take a lot of **** because no one wants to hear it. It turns out to be right.

All I want is for people to respond to what I say based on the merits instead of just getting pissed because its nnot what they want to hear.

[OpIv37]

Re: Vanek right back to his old self

But anyway, enough about me- back on topic.

What the hell happened to the "big line?" Is it time to demote Hogson or Pominville and see what Grigs can do with more talent?

[Skooby]

Re: Vanek right back to his old self

He still is at or near #1 for total points, so this is pre-mature.

[OpIv37]

Re: Vanek right back to his old self

He still is at or near #1 for total points, so this is pre-mature.

Two points in his last 7 games. Only one was even strength. Both points came in the Pitt game, which means he's gone scoreless in 6 of the last 7 games, and 7 of the last 10.

In the first 8 games, he tore it up and had 19 points, with at least 1 point in each game. In the last 10, he's had a mere six points and has been held scoreless 7 times.

What was premature was the credit I was giving Vanek. He's is same old streaky self. Flashes of brilliance interrupted by bouts of mediocrity.

[Skooby]

Re: Vanek right back to his old self

Two points in his last 7 games. Only one was even strength. Both points came in the Pitt game, which means he's gone scoreless in 6 of the last 7 games, and 7 of the last 10.

In the first 8 games, he tore it up and had 19 points, with at least 1 point in each game. In the last 10, he's had a mere six points and has been held scoreless 7 times.

What was premature was the credit I was giving Vanek. He's is same old streaky self. Flashes of brilliance interrupted by bouts of mediocrity.

I guess we can't blame the team play for Vanek then, no way he could be dejected / out of sorts with a new coach and all.

[OpIv37]

Re: Vanek right back to his old self

I guess we can't blame the team play for Vanek then, no way he could be dejected / out of sorts with a new coach and all.

Once again, players are responsible for their own performance. The lack of performance by the rest of the team does doesn't get Vanek off the hook.

As far as the new coach, these guys are supposed to be professionals and be able to handle that stuff. But, even if you accept that as a legit excuse and throw out games after Ruff was fired, only the last 2 were under the new coach, which still means 8 great games followed by 8 that were average at best.

[OpIv37]

Re: Vanek right back to his old self

And to be perfectly honest, I've only missed 1 2/3 games this year so I was aware that Vanek is in a slump but I didn't even realize how bad it was until I looked at the stats today.

[Captain Obvious]

Re: Vanek right back to his old self

You've been dying to post this thread for a week or so, haven't you.

It's a annual thread or whenever Vanek goes 3 straight games without getting a point. Sidney Crosby or Evgeni Malkin have never in there careers gone 3 staright games without getting at least one point.

[OpIv37]

Re: Vanek right back to his old self

It's a annual thread or whenever Vanek goes 3 straight games without getting a point. Sidney Crosby or Evgeni Malkin have never in there careers gone 3 staright games without getting at least one point.

Have Crosby and Malkin ever had TWO 3-game pointless streaks in a 7 game span? I highly doubt it.

[OpIv37]

Re: Vanek right back to his old self

It's a annual thread or whenever Vanek goes 3 straight games without getting a point. Sidney Crosby or Evgeni Malkin have never in there careers gone 3 staright games without getting at least one point.

And your passive-aggressive unwillingness to engage me directly is getting old. You either wait until someone else engaged me and quote them with an indirect shot at me, or you quote me once then run and hide. If you object to something I say, argue it out like a real man and quit the chicken **** nonsense.

[Skooby]

Re: Vanek right back to his old self

And your passive-aggressive unwillingness to engage me directly is getting old. You either wait until someone else engaged me and quote them with an indirect shot at me, or you quote me once then run and hide. If you object to something I say, argue it out like a real man and quit the chicken **** nonsense.

If a season's final tally was determined by a small sample, then the Sabres could be Stanley Cup Champions or close based on that. You have to take the entire season & average it out to see how they player / team did, then go into the breakdown. Right now, Vanek is near the top of the league. It's hard to argue with the current sample & if he scores 5 points in his next game, you'll look like a putz.

1 Steven Stamkos, C TB 17 12 14 26 2 12 1.53 59 20.3 0 4 5 0 0
2 Thomas Vanek, LW BUF 18 12 13 25 1 14 1.39 69 17.4 0 5 3 1 0
Sidney Crosby, C PIT 18 7 18 25 8 8 1.39 68 10.3 0 2 8 0 0
4 John Tavares, C NYI 18 12 11 23 -4 12 1.28 72 16.7 1 5 6 0 0
Patrick Kane, RW CHI 17 9 14 23 9 2 1.35 46 19.6 1 3 4 0 0
Martin St. Louis, RW TB 17 4 19 23 2 2 1.35 44 9.1 1 2 7 0 0
7 Jakub Voracek, RW PHI 20 7 15 22 -4 6 1.10 52 13.5 2 3 5 0 0
Henrik Zetterberg, C DET 18 5 17 22 1 10 1.22 61 8.2 1 2 6 1 0
9 Matt Moulson, LW NYI 18 9 12 21 -5 4 1.17 70 12.9 0 6 4 0 0
Mike Ribeiro, C WSH 17 6 15 21 0 14 1.24 23 26.1 0 5 7 0 0

[OpIv37]

Re: Vanek right back to his old self

If a season's final tally was determined by a small sample, then the Sabres could be Stanley Cup Champions or close based on that. You have to take the entire season & average it out to see how they player / team did, then go into the breakdown. Right now, Vanek is near the top of the league. It's hard to argue with the current sample & if he scores 5 points in his next game, you'll look like a putz.

1 Steven Stamkos, C TB 17 12 14 26 2 12 1.53 59 20.3 0 4 5 0 0
2 Thomas Vanek, LW BUF 18 12 13 25 1 14 1.39 69 17.4 0 5 3 1 0
Sidney Crosby, C PIT 18 7 18 25 8 8 1.39 68 10.3 0 2 8 0 0
4 John Tavares, C NYI 18 12 11 23 -4 12 1.28 72 16.7 1 5 6 0 0
Patrick Kane, RW CHI 17 9 14 23 9 2 1.35 46 19.6 1 3 4 0 0
Martin St. Louis, RW TB 17 4 19 23 2 2 1.35 44 9.1 1 2 7 0 0
7 Jakub Voracek, RW PHI 20 7 15 22 -4 6 1.10 52 13.5 2 3 5 0 0
Henrik Zetterberg, C DET 18 5 17 22 1 10 1.22 61 8.2 1 2 6 1 0
9 Matt Moulson, LW NYI 18 9 12 21 -5 4 1.17 70 12.9 0 6 4 0 0
Mike Ribeiro, C WSH 17 6 15 21 0 14 1.24 23 26.1 0 5 7 0 0

Lmao. You lecture me on sample size then you use a sample size that's maybe 35% of a shortened season and less than a quarter of a full season.

[Skooby]

Re: Vanek right back to his old self

Lmao. You lecture me on sample size then you use a sample size that's maybe 35% of a shortened season and less than a quarter of a full season.

Point was to not judge one athlete's accomplishment on a small sample while near leading the league in points, maybe it wasn't clear to you based on one man's efforts thus far.