Place Your Bets! (Vanek, Miller trade edition)

[darksabre]

 

 

No secret we don't always see eye to eye but I completely agree with this post.

 

Is it possible that playing fantasy hockey somehow levels perceptions? I find that it really helps a fan to be educated on what certain players contribute and how they compare to their peers.

[TrueBlueGED]

Is it possible that playing fantasy hockey somehow levels perceptions? I find that it really helps a fan to be educated on what certain players contribute and how they compare to their peers.

 

I think you're on to something here.

[deluca67]

I'm talking about the last few years, including right now. Bring back Pominville, and a line with him Vanek and Hodgson isn't much less offensive than most other teams top lines save for a couple of outliers. Fast forward to today, it's not out of the possibility that Vanek and Hodgson can't flourish with somebody else. Yes, many Sabres fans routinely overvalue the rest of the players in the league.

We've all watched Pominville and Vanek carry this team offensively, in the end they are unable to sustain that level of play. You can't expect Vanek to continue to carry players like Hodgson or whoever you want to throw in as the default #1 center. I want to see Vanek skate with a center that is at a comparable skill level.

Is it possible that playing fantasy hockey somehow levels perceptions? I find that it really helps a fan to be educated on what certain players contribute and how they compare to their peers.

This is 100% correct. Not just fantasy hockey, fans pretty much have the ability to watch every game and have instant access to highlights. Growing up access to other teams was limited to hockey cards, the hockey news and a 3 minute spot on the nightly news.

[ubkev]

For what its worth only two players have scored 60+ goals in the era of the Rocket Richard trophy. It does not happen often and it is a very special achievement with how hockey is played today.

 

Since the post lockout scoring has died down Vanek is no longer a 40 goal scorer. He's not a fluke like Brad Boyes either, he's a good to very good player and he has a plus shot from anywhere but he's never hitting 60 goals.

 

I agree with others, I think it was TB who said he may have a Corey Perry like season. I think that's the best you can get out of Vanek when it comes to goals.

[Hoss]

Your statement makes no sense. 100 points is a stretch as you say but he could "pot" mid 70's regularly. So you think he can "pot" 70+ but can't get at least 30 assists? C'mon you surely don't think that do you? Unless you don't know what "pot" means? Do you?

 

Yea, a few of my friends have been arrested because of it. Hopefully Vanek doesn't get arrested. At least not while he's still here. :unsure:

[...]

To "pot" means to make a goal. It does not mean achieve a point regardless of method (in this case goal or assist). Technically, DI is correct in parsing trueblue's statement the way he (? assuming) did.

[Hoss]

To "pot" means to make a goal. It does not mean achieve a point regardless of method (in this case goal or assist). Technically, DI is correct in parsing trueblue's statement the way he (? assuming) did.

 

But TrueBlue's point was clear. DI was just being... well... a DI.

[JJFIVEOH]

We've all watched Pominville and Vanek carry this team offensively, in the end they are unable to sustain that level of play. You can't expect Vanek to continue to carry players like Hodgson or whoever you want to throw in as the default #1 center. I want to see Vanek skate with a center that is at a comparable skill level.

 

 

Very few players are able to sustain that level of play. Vanek carrying Hodgson? Hodgson is pretty good at carrying himself and proving he could be a bonafide #1 center in the very near future. Not just a team's #1 center, but a legitimate #1 center. I agree with the rest, Vanek's numbers probably wouldn't be much better if he were on a different team. However, he is extremely difficult to replace and convincing him/signing him to an extension should be #1 on Darcy's priority list at the moment.

 

No secret we don't always see eye to eye but I completely agree with this post.

 

We'll have plenty more opportunities before the season starts. :D

[deluca67]

Very few players are able to sustain that level of play. Vanek carrying Hodgson? Hodgson is pretty good at carrying himself and proving he could be a bonafide #1 center in the very near future. Not just a team's #1 center, but a legitimate #1 center. I agree with the rest, Vanek's numbers probably wouldn't be much better if he were on a different team. However, he is extremely difficult to replace and convincing him/signing him to an extension should be #1 on Darcy's priority list at the moment.

 

 

 

We'll have plenty more opportunities before the season starts. :D

Hodgson has a long way to go to prove he is a top two center, not just a legit #1 center. He has shown offensive talent, just not offensive talent at a level where the lack of grit and being one dimensional can be ignored. We might have different expectations of what a #1 NHL center should bring to the rink, right now Hodgson hasn't shown, IMO, the qualities of what I consider a complete game needed to be a true #1. Based on what Hodgson has shown to date, the ideal slot for him would be a #3 center playing the 2nd PP center slot occasional stepping up to #2 when dictated by injuries or a Hodgson hot streak.

[Trettioåtta]

Hodgson has a long way to go to prove he is a top two center, not just a legit #1 center. He has shown offensive talent, just not offensive talent at a level where the lack of grit and being one dimensional can be ignored. We might have different expectations of what a #1 NHL center should bring to the rink, right now Hodgson hasn't shown, IMO, the qualities of what I consider a complete game needed to be a true #1. Based on what Hodgson has shown to date, the ideal slot for him would be a #3 center playing the 2nd PP center slot occasional stepping up to #2 when dictated by injuries or a Hodgson hot streak.

 

You will never had a player like Coho on the third line (unless they are on their initial contract). He was on pace to score 55 points. How many teams have a 55 point third line centre?

[deluca67]

You will never had a player like Coho on the third line (unless they are on their initial contract). He was on pace to score 55 points. How many teams have a 55 point third line centre?

Considering offense is all he brings to a team he'll need to increase that production a great deal to be a top 2 center. Hodgson may end up being a tweener, not prolific enough offensively to carry a top 2 spot yet talented enough where centering a third line may seem like a luxury.

[Dannepanne]

Vanek wouldn't get 100 points being on a vanek-crosby-malkin line. How come everyone praises him so much when he's about to leave? A few months ago he was lazy, injury prone, on the wrong side off his career and played the wrong style for his skillset. I do like Vanek and he is very skilled, but i don't see him being anything more than a 60-80 points guy (30-40 goals).

[TrueBlueGED]

Considering offense is all he brings to a team he'll need to increase that production a great deal to be a top 2 center. Hodgson may end up being a tweener, not prolific enough offensively to carry a top 2 spot yet talented enough where centering a third line may seem like a luxury.

 

Two things. First, I think you are greatly overestimating how much offense #2 centers produce. Most are in that 50 point range. Second you certainly don't appear to be adhering to the traditional center breakdown. Second line centers tend to be those who need sheltered minutes because they have an incomplete two way game for one reason or another. Hodgson, at this point in his career, is already almost a prototypical #2, and there's still growth potential there.

[Ross Rhea]

Vanek wouldn't get 100 points being on a vanek-crosby-malkin line. How come everyone praises him so much when he's about to leave? A few months ago he was lazy, injury prone, on the wrong side off his career and played the wrong style for his skillset. I do like Vanek and he is very skilled, but i don't see him being anything more than a 60-80 points guy (30-40 goals).

 

And he generally does that with no other support. If he played on a team with other good players, and goal scorers, the opponents would have to focus on stopping just more than Vanek. In Buffalo, opponents just have to stop him and that's it. I would like to see what Vanek could do if he consistently didn't have to play against the opponents best players and top D pairing. Oh yeah, and how bad has the PP sucked under Ruff and Vanek was still able to be a league leader in PP goals.

 

I think Vanek could be a superstar. What kind of stats would Kuntiz or C Perry or somebody similar, have had if it were them playing here with equal garbage to what Vanek has had, instead of Vanek? I'm betting they wouldn't be close to putting up the same numbers as Vanek.

[deluca67]

Two things. First, I think you are greatly overestimating how much offense #2 centers produce. Most are in that 50 point range. Second you certainly don't appear to be adhering to the traditional center breakdown. Second line centers tend to be those who need sheltered minutes because they have an incomplete two way game for one reason or another. Hodgson, at this point in his career, is already almost a prototypical #2, and there's still growth potential there.

You don't "shelter" players on the 2nd line. You "shelter" them on the 3rd and 4th lines. Which is where Hodgson belongs unless he can somehow greatly increase his offensive production or finds a second aspect to his game to compliment his offensive production. Right now Hodgson is a lessor Derek Roy without the defensive game.

[waldo]

 

 

And he generally does that with no other support. If he played on a team with other good players, and goal scorers, the opponents would have to focus on stopping just more than Vanek. In Buffalo, opponents just have to stop him and that's it. I would like to see what Vanek could do if he consistently didn't have to play against the opponents best players and top D pairing. Oh yeah, and how bad has the PP sucked under Ruff and Vanek was still able to be a league leader in PP goals.

 

I think Vanek could be a superstar. What kind of stats would Kuntiz or C Perry or somebody similar, have had if it were them playing here with equal garbage to what Vanek has had, instead of Vanek? I'm betting they wouldn't be close to putting up the same numbers as Vanek.

 

+1

 

 

 

You will never had a player like Coho on the third line (unless they are on their initial contract). He was on pace to score 55 points. How many teams have a 55 point third line centre?

 

He was on pace to score 55 pts because he played on a line he would not get a chance to play on for most other teams. Meaning he played with POM and a guy who created a ton of time and space for him on the ice. Take away that talent and his numbers suffer dramatically. All players prosper by playing with skilled players. Pom is gone, Vanek next. Watch his numbers when that happens. We will then know what we have when he is not on the ice with a guy who sucks two defenders to him when he touches the puck in the offensive zone and knows when and how to make the pass.. Delucca is on the money with his take above. I did notice late last year that Cody was becoming a bit more shoot first (d Roy)than he was earlier. Which was a negative imo when the shot does not have a purpose and just ends up losing the zone for you.. He was there to move the puck , work the boards, make the pass and go to the net.

[TrueBlueGED]

You don't "shelter" players on the 2nd line. You "shelter" them on the 3rd and 4th lines. Which is where Hodgson belongs unless he can somehow greatly increase his offensive production or finds a second aspect to his game to compliment his offensive production. Right now Hodgson is a lessor Derek Roy without the defensive game.

 

That just isn't true. The 3rd line is traditionally a checking line, which gets tasked with the toughest matchups and most defensive responsibility. Your top line faces E other team's checking line and top defensive pair. That leaves the soft meaty minutes to the second line. Not every team adheres strictly to this, but it's generally how things work out.

[deluca67]

That just isn't true. The 3rd line is traditionally a checking line, which gets tasked with the toughest matchups and most defensive responsibility. Your top line faces E other team's checking line and top defensive pair. That leaves the soft meaty minutes to the second line. Not every team adheres strictly to this, but it's generally how things work out.

You are referring to how things were done 10-20 years ago. Looking at the top teams in the league what you have described is clearly not the case. Malkin, Jeff Carter and Krejci are not being "sheltered" on the second line.

 

You need to move away from the Regierian Departmentalizing of a roster and move away from one-dimensional players. You need top six players that can skate, be physical and dominate on the fore-check as well not be a train wreck in the defensive zone. The bottom six need to be versatile, physical, defensively responsible and provide the secondary scoring needed to compete.

[JJFIVEOH]

You are referring to how things were done 10-20 years ago. Looking at the top teams in the league what you have described is clearly not the case. Malkin, Jeff Carter and Krejci are not being "sheltered" on the second line.

 

You need to move away from the Regierian Departmentalizing of a roster and move away from one-dimensional players. You need top six players that can skate, be physical and dominate on the fore-check as well not be a train wreck in the defensive zone. The bottom six need to be versatile, physical, defensively responsible and provide the secondary scoring needed to compete.

 

First line forwards don't necessarily need to be such multi-dimensional players. First line forwards aren't going to playing against the opposition's top line, therefore defending isn't as much an issue. Isn't that why we have defensemen? Hodgson looked very fluid and natural out there, it seems like most things he did just came naturally, he didn't force himself to do certain things. There is a ton of potential there, and he's going to be criticized because of his defense? Really? It's not his job to defend.

[Huckleberry]

Wish the summer was over already, so we could see the kids in action instead of talking about it.

[TrueBlueGED]

You are referring to how things were done 10-20 years ago. Looking at the top teams in the league what you have described is clearly not the case. Malkin, Jeff Carter and Krejci are not being "sheltered" on the second line.

 

You need to move away from the Regierian Departmentalizing of a roster and move away from one-dimensional players. You need top six players that can skate, be physical and dominate on the fore-check as well not be a train wreck in the defensive zone. The bottom six need to be versatile, physical, defensively responsible and provide the secondary scoring needed to compete.

 

Malkin is a special case, the Bruins don't have your traditional 1-2-3 model, and Carter plays wing. Funny you mention departmentalizing a roster...the Canucks have had the most specialized forward group in the league for years, and they haven't exactly been unsuccessful. Given the option of course I'd rather have a roster of solid two way players with high offensive ceilings, but there just isn't enough of them to go around. Specialization is a necessity.

[deluca67]

First line forwards don't necessarily need to be such multi-dimensional players. First line forwards aren't going to playing against the opposition's top line, therefore defending isn't as much an issue. Isn't that why we have defensemen? Hodgson looked very fluid and natural out there, it seems like most things he did just came naturally, he didn't force himself to do certain things. There is a ton of potential there, and he's going to be criticized because of his defense? Really? It's not his job to defend.

If you going to have a one-dimensional forward on the top line that player needs to be off the charts in that one-dimension. Hodgson is not at the level.

 

"It's not his job to defend?" I have no doubt his coach, and pretty much any coach, would feel differently.

 

Malkin is a special case, the Bruins don't have your traditional 1-2-3 model, and Carter plays wing. Funny you mention departmentalizing a roster...the Canucks have had the most specialized forward group in the league for years, and they haven't exactly been unsuccessful. Given the option of course I'd rather have a roster of solid two way players with high offensive ceilings, but there just isn't enough of them to go around. Specialization is a necessity.

The window on Vancouver is closing and they have zero Cups to show for it.

[JJFIVEOH]

If you going to have a one-dimensional forward on the top line that player needs to be off the charts in that one-dimension. Hodgson is not at the level.

 

"It's not his job to defend?" I have no doubt his coach, and pretty much any coach, would feel differently.

 

 

At this point in time, Hodgson's defense is the last thing to be concerned about. When your top 3 centers are all 23 and younger (one hasn't even played in the NHL yet), the last thing on anybody's mind is working on their defense. At least for Hodgson and Grig.

[deluca67]

At this point in time, Hodgson's defense is the last thing to be concerned about. When your top 3 centers are all 23 and younger (one hasn't even played in the NHL yet), the last thing on anybody's mind is working on their defense. At least for Hodgson and Grig.

Hodgson doesn't have the offensive game to be one-dimensional. If he doesn't develop his all around game then he'll never be a legit top-2 center. He may end up a default one or two on teams like Buffalo or other bottom feeders. He'll never be a #1 or #2 on a legitimate contender unless he brings more game to the rink.

 

As far as Grigorenko and Girgensons, the ideal scenario is for both to easily surpass Hodgson over the next two to three years. These are two big bodied kids that can shape the future of this franchise if the Sabres can develop these kids and maximize their skill and size.

 

Back to Hodgson, it seems, IMO, that you are attempting to devalue the need for Hodgson to develop more of an all around game because you see in him exactly what I see. That it's just not in him.

[Hoss]

At this point in time, Hodgson's defense is the last thing to be concerned about. When your top 3 centers are all 23 and younger (one hasn't even played in the NHL yet), the last thing on anybody's mind is working on their defense. At least for Hodgson and Grig.

 

People underrate defense SO much. In most sports defense is just as important. In hockey, as far as forwards go, I do think the defense is a little less important than offense, but to say that he doesn't need to work on his defense is crazy talk. To be a true, all-around top six center then he'll need to work on defense. A lot.