LoveAndWarrener Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 I think it goes neglected how much of a beating Vanek takes in front of the net to earn good position to score some of those goals. The people calling him soft must be watching other parts of the ice. I don't get it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 Let us take a look at 2009 to present. In 2009 Matt Moulson finally made the permanent transition from the AHL to the NHL which is the reason I am starting with that year. I am not counting this seasons stats so it ends with the regular season stats of the 2012/2013 season. From 2009-2013: Thomas Vanek - 106g, 122a, for 228pts Matt Moulson - 112g, 102a, for 214pts What this seems to equate to is that we traded Vanek's goal scoring prowess for better goal scorer with less assists plus we added picks. Now in the media and around the board a lot ppl have said that Tavares has inflated Moulson's numbers and that he is a average player who will see a big drop in his production. Until that does indeed happen, which I think is unlikely given how Hodgson passes, it seems Moulson may give us a little more in the goals department but overall Darcy got a very similar player back. Now obviously they have different styles of play but this trade is very interesting given that we saw Moulson's scoring already and the instant chemistry he generated with Hodgson. Games played? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 Let us take a look at 2009 to present. In 2009 Matt Moulson finally made the permanent transition from the AHL to the NHL which is the reason I am starting with that year. I am not counting this seasons stats so it ends with the regular season stats of the 2012/2013 season. From 2009-2013: Thomas Vanek - 106g, 122a, for 228pts Matt Moulson - 112g, 102a, for 214pts What this seems to equate to is that we traded Vanek's goal scoring prowess for better goal scorer with less assists plus we added picks. Now in the media and around the board a lot ppl have said that Tavares has inflated Moulson's numbers and that he is a average player who will see a big drop in his production. Until that does indeed happen, which I think is unlikely given how Hodgson passes, it seems Moulson may give us a little more in the goals department but overall Darcy got a very similar player back. Now obviously they have different styles of play but this trade is very interesting given that we saw Moulson's scoring already and the instant chemistry he generated with Hodgson. This I think is the major draw back to Moulson is that he isn't as much of a two-way guy. Vanek definitely is better in his own end. I would hold off on talking about the instant chemistry they have after a few games, It seems like every player that gets moved always has one of their best games in the first game they play in with their new team. If he continues scoring like he did on Monday, then we can talk about chemistry. The commander is absolutely right about premature conclusions about Moulson and Hodgy. I will also say that Ennis looked a lot better to me the other night than Hodgy did. In any case that line was much better than any Hodgy-Vanek line was at any point this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skaught Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 The commander is absolutely right about premature conclusions about Moulson and Hodgy. I will also say that Ennis looked a lot better to me the other night than Hodgy did. In any case that line was much better than any Hodgy-Vanek line was at any point this season. Wasn't that the first game this season that Ennis played on the top line? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 Games played? Moulson 293, or 0.382gpga Vanek 267, or 0.397gpga Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FolignosJock Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 (edited) Games played? Since Moulson became a regular he has 315 games played 120 goals and 105 assists. Over that same time frame Vanek has 281 games played 110 goals and 127 assists. So vanek has 237 points/281 games good for 0.843 PPG Moulson is at 225/315 for 0.714 PPG. Note: This throws out two of vaneks top 3 offensive seasons. One which I highly doubt Moulson will ever come close to (GP82 G43 A41 P84 +47) Edited October 30, 2013 by FolignosJock Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 That being said a new fire seemed to be driving Ennis during last game, if he keeps this up moulson will have another player on his line to feed him pucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 Leadership, maybe. He's very responsible in his own end. This I think is the major draw back to Moulson is that he isn't as much of a two-way guy. Vanek definitely is better in his own end. I may give Vanek the nod being better in his own end. But coming back to his own end he is most definately not better.So I'll take this guys point production and ability for far less money than Vanek gets and probably a much better guy in the room too. I am not missing Vanek. Adios. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FolignosJock Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 I may give Vanek the nod being better in his own end. But coming back to his own end he is most definately not better.So I'll take this guys point production and ability for far less money than Vanek gets and probably a much better guy in the room too. I am not missing Vanek. Adios. You will be in a month Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTS Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 I think it goes neglected how much of a beating Vanek takes in front of the net to earn good position to score some of those goals. The people calling him soft must be watching other parts of the ice. I don't get it. Yes.. he took hits in front of the net. He didn't really ever get a body on people on the ice and he usually lagged behind the play when it turned back towards the Sabres zone. There is more than just the slot in front of the opposition net to playing hockey. Vanek has talent, it's his choice to apply it. You can point to his OT goal against Washington as proof. He can chase people down. He has excellent stick skills to shoot and steal the puck. He has speed when he wants to use it. He just doesn't do it all the time. As for the conditional pick they discussed on WGR the possibility that Darcy asked for it. I thought the reasoning was fairly solid too. The Isles gained very little out of this. They can flip Vanek but do we think they'll get more than they would have gained by flipping Moulson? if they can only replace it then they basically lost Moulson for nothing. The Sabres on the other hand can flip a player who hasn't been declared as going to Minnesota yet and has proven goal scoring ability. If the Isles are picking 1-10 this year the Sabres get a 1st round pick in a deep draft in 2015. They can get another 1st rounder this year if they flip Moulson as well. If the Islanders do make the playoffs or pick 11-30 then the Sabres get a 1st rounder this year and can still flip Moulson for a 1st rounder next year, etc. I dunno, the Sabres seem to have a ton of upside here whereas the Islanders can only hope to flip Vanek to replace what they gave up in the first place and if they are flipping Vanek that means they expect to miss the playoffs or not have a chance in which case they could be in the 1-10 range. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Crotch Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 You will be in a month Missing what? We were the worst team in hockey with Vanek... it's not like moving Vanek now is going to hurt our won-loss total this year. We can dissect scoring stats all we want, but we weren't winning with guys like Vanek and Pommer at the top of the food chain. Time for a change. From my perspective, it sounds like they offered a pile of cash to Thomas and he made it clear he wanted out no matter what. So, why have a guy on your roster for 2/3 of a season who doesn't want to be there? That destroys team chemistry as much as anything. I think it is the correct move to trade hm sooner rather than later (yes, I am giving Darcy some credit for once). I'm kind of shocked we got a cheaper comparable natural goal scorer in return, in addition to the first and second round pick. I've always liked Matt Moulson and would love for him to stick around (doubt it will happen), but I don't see swapping him for Vanek as hurting the team one bit for the rest of the season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FolignosJock Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 Missing what? We were the worst team in hockey with Vanek... it's not like moving Vanek now is going to hurt our won-loss total this year. We can dissect scoring stats all we want, but we weren't winning with guys like Vanek and Pommer at the top of the food chain. Time for a change. From my perspective, it sounds like they offered a pile of cash to Thomas and he made it clear he wanted out no matter what. So, why have a guy on your roster for 2/3 of a season who doesn't want to be there? That destroys team chemistry as much as anything. I think it is the correct move to trade hm sooner rather than later (yes, I am giving Darcy some credit for once). I'm kind of shocked we got a cheaper comparable natural goal scorer in return, in addition to the first and second round pick. I've always liked Matt Moulson and would love for him to stick around (doubt it will happen), but I don't see swapping him for Vanek as hurting the team one bit for the rest of the season. I dont either and it was for sure a good move and impressive fleecing of the Isles but Vanek is going to thrive there. We are going to see how impressive he could have been with elite talent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 Since Moulson became a regular he has 315 games played 120 goals and 105 assists. Over that same time frame Vanek has 281 games played 110 goals and 127 assists. So vanek has 237 points/281 games good for 0.843 PPG Moulson is at 225/315 for 0.714 PPG. Note: This throws out two of vaneks top 3 offensive seasons. One which I highly doubt Moulson will ever come close to (GP82 G43 A41 P84 +47) Anyone have their shot totals? I'm curious about something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrico Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 You will be in a month Not if you're part of Tank Nation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 Not if you're part of Tank Nation. Tank You Sabres? :angel: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrico Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 Tank You Sabres? :angel: :lol: I chuckled. After the Isles game Vanke says "The atmosphere was great - I haven't been in a game like that for a long time." I know it's probably true but I just hate these subtle parting shots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 (edited) I don't know where to post this, but this seems like as good a thread as any Edited October 30, 2013 by wjag Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Crotch Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 Anyone have their shot totals? I'm curious about something. Moulson is at 14.1% for his career, while Vanek is at 15.1%. BTW - Moulson is tied for 4th in the NHL in goals so far this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 Moulson is at 14.1% for his career, while Vanek is at 15.1%. BTW - Moulson is tied for 4th in the NHL in goals so far this year. Shooting percentage is not too much different then. What about shot totals? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 Shooting percentage is not too much different then. What about shot totals? If you have the percentage and you have the goals, you oughtta be able to come up with the shot totals in about 10 seconds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FolignosJock Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 If you have the percentage and you have the goals, you oughtta be able to come up with the shot totals in about 10 seconds. I think he is messing with people to make them be his stat monkey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Crotch Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 (edited) Shooting percentage is not too much different then. What about shot totals? I'm too lazy to do the math. But, this year Vanek has taken 51 shots and Moulson has taken 32. Total shots year-by-year are fairly similar. BTW - the guy who is absolutely abysmal is Drew Stafford. 5% last year and 3% so far this year. This guy screams "awful contract." Edited October 30, 2013 by Potato Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FolignosJock Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 Vanek Career : 1,686 15.1 Moulson Career: 891 14.1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 :lol: I chuckled. After the Isles game Vanke says "The atmosphere was great - I haven't been in a game like that for a long time." I know it's probably true but I just hate these subtle parting shots. What? He hasn't been on the losing end of a game with no points and minimal effect "for a long time?" Really? I can appreciate that European translations aren't always indicative of the true intent of a message. But phuck that. GO SABRES!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted October 30, 2013 Report Share Posted October 30, 2013 If you have the percentage and you have the goals, you oughtta be able to come up with the shot totals in about 10 seconds. Someone from RIT who can't do simple math. How is this possible? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.