SwampD Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 Difference from what? I didn't try and set a context. The way you wrote it made it sound like "botton 4 in the conference (or league)". Big difference Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 The way you wrote it made it sound like "botton 4 in the conference (or league)". Big difference Well, then that's your problem not mine. I was just referencing the quote so folks knew which quote I was referring to. What, I have to find these things and post them explicitly so there are no misunderstandings? The quote was discussed on WGR yesterday and is around. YES, BOTTOM FOUR IN THE PLAYOFFS. Still doesn't matter. He said they have to "HOPE" to make the bottom four. I think it's a pretty woeful comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 Well, then that's your problem not mine. I was just referencing the quote so folks knew which quote I was referring to. What, I have to find these things and post them explicitly so there are no misunderstandings? The quote was discussed on WGR yesterday and is around. YES, BOTTOM FOUR IN THE PLAYOFFS. Still doesn't matter. He said they have to "HOPE" to make the bottom four. I think it's a pretty woeful comment. If you're referencing a quote it is your responsibility to post the entire quote. Basic forum etiquette. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 So he is here because the Sabres actual value his play over the last few seasons and wanted him back to upgrade the defence? Does seem a bit strange, innit? OTOH, most coaches and GMs like veteran defensemen, and the Sabres' group is pretty green -- so a 1-year flyer on Hank, with the bonus of his prior good chemistry with Myers, isn't crazy. I still think Tallinder is here as a placeholder that can be traded/waived if one of the rookies looks ready. Also quite possible. I don't think anyone is/has been saying he hates Buffalo Everything he has said to this point though has more to do with him not wanting to stick around through a complete tear-down rebuild situation and is open to going to a new team when he become a FA. He struggled to stay in the lineup in NJ and was a healthy scratch a bunch of times IIRC They would have probably gotten the same out of just playing one of the rookies or signing another FA, instead they brought back another "blast from the past" whos only explanation fans had for bringing him back was that it can be a last ditch attempt to help reunite the spark he had with Myers. Well, it's quite possible Vanek is just being PR-savvy. There is nothing to be gained for him to say that he doesn't like it here and is definitely going to UFA. As for the only explanation the fans had for Tallinder's return: who cares what explanation the fans came up with? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 If you're referencing a quote it is your responsibility to post the entire quote. Basic forum etiquette. I couldn't find it at the time. Guilty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted September 12, 2013 Report Share Posted September 12, 2013 NoActually it kind of does, cause if he was that highly coveted/valued, he would have been traded by now and there would have been constant attention/trade watches for him, remember when the Rick Nash trade watches? Nash was traded in what, July? It was also public knowledge he requested the trade and the Jackets were actively trying to move him. Vanek hasn't requested a trade, and at best we know the Sabres were listening to offers, which is quite different than shopping him. The lack of a trade says nothing about Vanek's value. Frankly I'm in agreement with other who think the Sabres think they're pretty good and can convince Vanek to sign, so they're in no hurry to move him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted September 13, 2013 Report Share Posted September 13, 2013 Nash was traded in what, July? It was also public knowledge he requested the trade and the Jackets were actively trying to move him. Vanek hasn't requested a trade, and at best we know the Sabres were listening to offers, which is quite different than shopping him. The lack of a trade says nothing about Vanek's value. Frankly I'm in agreement with other who think the Sabres think they're pretty good and can convince Vanek to sign, so they're in no hurry to move him. At what cost? :blink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted September 13, 2013 Report Share Posted September 13, 2013 At what cost? :blink: Market? :cry: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted September 13, 2013 Report Share Posted September 13, 2013 Whats market rate next year Market? :cry: What's market rate for him next year with a cap increase? 9.5 x 5? :cry: Not for me thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted September 13, 2013 Report Share Posted September 13, 2013 Whats market rate next year What's market rate for him next year with a cap increase? 9.5 x 5? :cry: Not for me thanks! I have no idea what it will be (probably not 9.5 per, more 7-8 ish per is my guess), but why would a player sign for less than market as a ufa, especially one who is 29-30 years old and has 250+ goals in eight seasons ? :blink: Good thing for him you are not the GM huh? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted September 13, 2013 Report Share Posted September 13, 2013 Whats market rate next year What's market rate for him next year with a cap increase? 9.5 x 5? :cry: Not for me thanks! There is NFW Vanek gets $9MM per year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted September 13, 2013 Report Share Posted September 13, 2013 I have no idea what it will be (probably not 9.5 per, more 7-8 ish per is my guess), but why would a player sign for less than market as a ufa, especially one who is 29-30 years old and has 250+ goals in eight seasons ? :blink: Good thing for him you are not the GM huh? lol There is NFW Vanek gets $9MM per year. Some idiot GM (Holmgren, Sather say hello) with a bump in the cap and expectations of another bump might just do something that incredibly stupid and it wouldn't surprise me one bit. Or maybe some bottom dweller that dazzles Vaneks eyes with that kind of an offer? Florida maybe? I did say not for me thanks! :blink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted September 13, 2013 Report Share Posted September 13, 2013 Some idiot GM (Holmgren, Sather say hello) with a bump in the cap and expectations of another bump might just do something that incredibly stupid and it wouldn't surprise me one bit. Or maybe some bottom dweller that dazzles Vaneks eyes with that kind of an offer? Florida maybe? I did say not for me thanks! :blink: the dollar has lost 25 % of its value in the last six years... so 25% of 7 is 1.4. 1.4 +7= 8.4 +/- ...thus my guess is 8 ish..assuming washington stops printing money at 98 billion a month...lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristian Posted September 13, 2013 Report Share Posted September 13, 2013 There is NFW Vanek gets $9MM per year. Which is basically what I say every year, about whoever's the cream of the crop that summer. I continue to be schocked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted September 13, 2013 Report Share Posted September 13, 2013 There is NFW Vanek gets $9MM per year. Probably not 9, but Corey Perry got $8.6MM without a bidding war...I can easily see 8+ for Vanek if he hits UFA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted September 13, 2013 Report Share Posted September 13, 2013 8yr/66mil Let him finish his career here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted September 13, 2013 Report Share Posted September 13, 2013 Well, then that's your problem not mine. I was just referencing the quote so folks knew which quote I was referring to. What, I have to find these things and post them explicitly so there are no misunderstandings? The quote was discussed on WGR yesterday and is around. YES, BOTTOM FOUR IN THE PLAYOFFS. Still doesn't matter. He said they have to "HOPE" to make the bottom four. I think it's a pretty woeful comment. So basically your original post was terribly misleading and you refused to make it not be that way because you're lazy? Got it. Quick, name the last star player traded at the opening of training camp. The trade market being closed right now has nothing to do with how teams value Vanek. Good ole' Grant Fuhr was traded at the beginning of the 91 training camp. Mark Messier was traded at the very beginning of that regular season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted September 13, 2013 Report Share Posted September 13, 2013 So basically your original post was terribly misleading and you refused to make it not be that way because you're lazy? Got it. Good ole' Grant Fuhr was traded at the beginning of the 91 training camp. Mark Messier was traded at the very beginning of that regular season. Not but since the 05 lockout who has been traded? Let alone the new CBA. It changed how the league did business. I bet it will be November before anything outside of a minor trade even starts to get talked about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted September 13, 2013 Report Share Posted September 13, 2013 Not but since the 05 lockout who has been traded? Let alone the new CBA. It changed how the league did business. I bet it will be November before anything outside of a minor trade even starts to get talked about. Let's see what preseason injuries occur around the league before writing off any trade activity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted September 13, 2013 Report Share Posted September 13, 2013 Let's see what preseason injuries occur around the league before writing off any trade activity. Again there will not be a major trade in preseason or October . If anything happens it would be like 3rd liner for 3rd liner swap. Unless a team suffers multiple catastrophic injuries in preseason it will be quiet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted September 13, 2013 Report Share Posted September 13, 2013 Does seem a bit strange, innit? OTOH, most coaches and GMs like veteran defensemen, and the Sabres' group is pretty green -- so a 1-year flyer on Hank, with the bonus of his prior good chemistry with Myers, isn't crazy. Also quite possible. Well, it's quite possible Vanek is just being PR-savvy. There is nothing to be gained for him to say that he doesn't like it here and is definitely going to UFA. As for the only explanation the fans had for Tallinder's return: who cares what explanation the fans came up with? Yeah, I would have expected them to pick up a veteran D-man to replace Lydman and Regher, but there were plenty of others available that would have been much bigger upgrades over a guy who was losing icetime in jersey, but weren't Sabres previously. It would make sense that they bring him back and pair him back up with Tyler to try and spark him again. But removing that from the equation, it makes no sense bringing him back. its another "feel good/get the old band back together" move Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted September 14, 2013 Report Share Posted September 14, 2013 Yeah, I would have expected them to pick up a veteran D-man to replace Lydman and Regher, but there were plenty of others available that would have been much bigger upgrades over a guy who was losing icetime in jersey, but weren't Sabres previously. It would make sense that they bring him back and pair him back up with Tyler to try and spark him again. But removing that from the equation, it makes no sense bringing him back. its another "feel good/get the old band back together" move I think this has Pegulas fingers all over it. You know the meddling owner telling the gm what to do who to sign for how long etc etc etc I'm surprised we didn't ship Enroth out to accommodate Hasek! :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IKnowPhysics Posted September 22, 2013 Report Share Posted September 22, 2013 Tallinder cost us nothing. No players (of note), no picks, no weird cap money moved/held. Free defenseman acquired in a time where we want to collect assets, not trade them away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.