bob_sauve28 Posted June 5, 2014 Report Share Posted June 5, 2014 http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/guy-lafleur-torches-max-pacioretty--thomas-vanek---they-can-stay-home-155307895.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyldnwoody44 Posted June 5, 2014 Report Share Posted June 5, 2014 Uh oh, another vanek debate in 3....2.....1..........GRIMACE!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sloth Posted June 5, 2014 Report Share Posted June 5, 2014 Uh oh, another vanek debate in 3....2.....1..........GRIMACE!!!!! Vanek doesn't vanish. He just...crap, I give up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyldnwoody44 Posted June 5, 2014 Report Share Posted June 5, 2014 Vanek doesn't vanish. He just...crap, I give up. Lol, is that what he literally says... "crap, I give up" then slowly makes his way back to the bench ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted June 5, 2014 Report Share Posted June 5, 2014 Uh oh, another vanek debate in 3....2.....1..........GRIMACE!!!!! I'm not sure there is much debate anymore Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted June 5, 2014 Report Share Posted June 5, 2014 I'm not sure there is much debate anymore AND I THINK THERE IS. THERE IS TOTALLY AT LEAST ONE VANEK DEBATE LEFT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dEnnis the Menace Posted June 5, 2014 Report Share Posted June 5, 2014 AND I THINK THERE IS. THERE IS TOTALLY AT LEAST ONE VANEK DEBATE LEFT. :doh: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted June 5, 2014 Report Share Posted June 5, 2014 OK, serious question: for all those who felt Vanek was an "elite" player or for that matter a top-25 NHL player: do you still feel that way? If you were a GM, and Vanek's agent told you it was going to cost $7MM x 7 years to get Vanek, would you do it? No mockery will ensue (from me, anyway). This is a safe place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dEnnis the Menace Posted June 5, 2014 Report Share Posted June 5, 2014 (edited) OK, serious question: for all those who felt Vanek was an "elite" player or for that matter a top-25 NHL player: do you still feel that way? If you were a GM, and Vanek's agent told you it was going to cost $7MM x 7 years to get Vanek, would you do it? No mockery will ensue (from me, anyway). This is a safe place. I've always loved Vanek's talent...but I don't feel he is elite or even top 25. Top 25 players give 100% effort 100% of the time. He doesn't and hasn't in a long time. so no I wouldn't Edited June 5, 2014 by dEnnis the Menace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted June 5, 2014 Report Share Posted June 5, 2014 OK, serious question: for all those who felt Vanek was an "elite" player or for that matter a top-25 NHL player: do you still feel that way? If you were a GM, and Vanek's agent told you it was going to cost $7MM x 7 years to get Vanek, would you do it? No mockery will ensue (from me, anyway). This is a safe place. I thought he was short of elite and still do. I think he'll get near $7 mill. Just not for a deal that long. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted June 5, 2014 Report Share Posted June 5, 2014 OK, serious question: for all those who felt Vanek was an "elite" player or for that matter a top-25 NHL player: do you still feel that way? If you were a GM, and Vanek's agent told you it was going to cost $7MM x 7 years to get Vanek, would you do it? No mockery will ensue (from me, anyway). This is a safe place. Didn't we do this before, and we found out the poll you made back in the day had a whopping two people saying he was elite? Anyway, I still think he's an elite offensive player, and if I were on a team that had a window of contention for the next several seasons I would absolutely shell out that contract. If you're not willing to pay $7MM for Vanek, just keep in mind Ryane Clowe got $4.9MM and David Clarkson got $5.3MM with an artificially lowered cap...so if you pass on Vanek and want "value" in the UFA market, you're going to end up with something like that. Frankly, I expect Vanek to be undervalued by GMs this summer while Gaborik gets overvalued, simply because of their respective playoff runs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted June 5, 2014 Report Share Posted June 5, 2014 Didn't we do this before, and we found out the poll you made back in the day had a whopping two people saying he was elite? Anyway, I still think he's an elite offensive player, and if I were on a team that had a window of contention for the next several seasons I would absolutely shell out that contract. If you're not willing to pay $7MM for Vanek, just keep in mind Ryane Clowe got $4.9MM and David Clarkson got $5.3MM with an artificially lowered cap...so if you pass on Vanek and want "value" in the UFA market, you're going to end up with something like that. Frankly, I expect Vanek to be undervalued by GMs this summer while Gaborik gets overvalued, simply because of their respective playoff runs. Well, that thread was before the Sabres traded him, and we've now had the benefit of another season's (and post-season's) worth of seeing how he plays. Also, over half of that poll's respondents said that Vanek was a top-20 NHL player. So check yo'self, girlfriend. Also, if Gaborik produces in the playoffs but Vanek doesn't, shouldn't that affect the "overvalued/undervalued" analysis? (FTR, I think that Gaborik is and has always been better than Vanek, but not by a huge margin, and that Vanek produced much better in the playoffs for the Sabres (although still not at a franchise-player level) than he did this year. I was surprised that he fell off the table this year and would kinda expect him to perform better if he gets another shot at the playoffs while he's still got his legs.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob_sauve28 Posted June 5, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 5, 2014 Well, that thread was before the Sabres traded him, and we've now had the benefit of another season's (and post-season's) worth of seeing how he plays. Also, over half of that poll's respondents said that Vanek was a top-20 NHL player. So check yo'self, girlfriend. Also, if Gaborik produces in the playoffs but Vanek doesn't, shouldn't that affect the "overvalued/undervalued" analysis? (FTR, I think that Gaborik is and has always been better than Vanek, but not by a huge margin, and that Vanek produced much better in the playoffs for the Sabres (although still not at a franchise-player level) than he did this year. I was surprised that he fell off the table this year and would kinda expect him to perform better if he gets another shot at the playoffs while he's still got his legs.) I bet Vanek would score a lot too in Gaborik's position, I mean that team is so stacked its impossible to watch everyone. But that's the point, Vanek is great, IMO, as an incredible second/third line player and on power play, but he is not the player in so many ways to carry a team. If that makes sense Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted June 5, 2014 Report Share Posted June 5, 2014 When he disappeared in Buffalo, we blamed everyone but him. Now we have an independent data point. Vanek vanishes when it matters. My guess he will still get a payday Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Amerk Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 Yep. Vanek will get his $$$ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 When he disappeared in Buffalo, we blamed everyone but him. Now we have an independent data point. Vanek vanishes when it matters. My guess he will still get a payday Vanek gets 5 goals 3 assists for 8 pts 21 SOG in 11 games in the Boston and Tampa series. Respectable. Gets demoted to 4th line for the ECF with new line-mates. Looks lost. Vanek didn't set the world on fire. But what the hell was Therrien thinking? Weak coaching move. Put Vanek out in a checking, energy role at 11 minutes and then blame Vanek for his lack of production in that role? Vanek is taking it on the chin. But Therrien really didn't have the balls to scratch him. What's Therrien thinking here? Make the player play his way off the checking line in the ECF? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjag Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 Vanek gets 5 goals 3 assists for 8 pts 21 SOG in 11 games in the Boston and Tampa series. Respectable. Gets demoted to 4th line for the ECF with new line-mates. Looks lost. Vanek didn't set the world on fire. But what the hell was Therrien thinking? Weak coaching move. Put Vanek out in a checking, energy role at 11 minutes and then blame Vanek for his lack of production in that role? Vanek is taking it on the chin. But Therrien really didn't have the balls to scratch him. What's Therrien thinking here? Make the player play his way off the checking line in the ECF? I often wonder what the real story is. Our optic is always so black and white. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 I often wonder what the real story is. Our optic is always so black and white. I'm not really sure. But it seemed to me that flipping Vanek with Gionta wasn't the answer from a coaching standpoint. Vanek hasn't played 3 or 4th line since 2007. That wasn't the reason he was brought in as a rental, to find his way through defensive zone starts. I just find Therrien's moves strange. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 Vanek has been poorly coached his whole NHL career, so I'm sure he felt right at home in Munreal. Maybe (insert name of Minnesota coach I'm too lazy to look up, maybe Herb Brooks? here) will get it right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 Vanek has been poorly coached his whole NHL career, so I'm sure he felt right at home in Munreal. Maybe (insert name of Minnesota coach I'm too lazy to look up, maybe Herb Brooks? here) will get it right. Well he never became the league's "best-two way" player, if that's what you mean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 I've always loved Vanek's talent...but I don't feel he is elite or even top 25. Top 25 players give 100% effort 100% of the time. He doesn't and hasn't in a long time. so no I wouldn't So your standard is one that the guy who wins the Rocket Richard Trophy each year doesn't even qualify for. Overly strict criteria, wouldn't you say? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristian Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 Well he never became the league's "best-two way" player, if that's what you mean. I try not to pick at Lindy - He's gone, people know how I felt about his time here, but in this case I cannot help it - When you publically state your goal is to turn your first 40-goal guy in a decade into the "best two-way player" in the game, you've lost it. Flame away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 Well, that thread was before the Sabres traded him, and we've now had the benefit of another season's (and post-season's) worth of seeing how he plays. Also, over half of that poll's respondents said that Vanek was a top-20 NHL player. So check yo'self, girlfriend. Also, if Gaborik produces in the playoffs but Vanek doesn't, shouldn't that affect the "overvalued/undervalued" analysis? (FTR, I think that Gaborik is and has always been better than Vanek, but not by a huge margin, and that Vanek produced much better in the playoffs for the Sabres (although still not at a franchise-player level) than he did this year. I was surprised that he fell off the table this year and would kinda expect him to perform better if he gets another shot at the playoffs while he's still got his legs.) Well for my own sanity, I hope I didn't name him a top 20 player...his all-around game isn't good enough. However, I think I could make a case for him being a top-20 offensive player and if we're being honest here, offense is what gets forwards paid. Secondly, no, I wouldn't base my contract offers to him Gaborik on this year's playoffs. Making a 7 year investment decision on 20 games? Insanity. In an actual negotiation I'd try to use this year to lowball Vanek, but if I wanted to throw cash at him to months ago, this wouldn't dissuade me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 A friend who is a huge Habs fan insists Vanek must have been hurt, despite what he says. Points to a collision he had with Subban early in the Rangers series, saying he vanished from that point on, but was a weapon prior to that. Also says he played great with Pacioretty and Desharnais and doesn't understand why that line was broken up. I say Vanek is what he always has been - streaky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted June 6, 2014 Report Share Posted June 6, 2014 Vanek has been poorly coached his whole NHL career, so I'm sure he felt right at home in Munreal. Maybe (insert name of Minnesota coach I'm too lazy to look up, maybe Herb Brooks? here) will get it right. Still think it was Lindy's fault that Vanek never got to Ovechkin status, eh? Therrien -- a second NHL coach with substantial playoff success --taking Vanek's measure and not liking what he saw doesn't move the needle for you? Vanek gets 5 goals 3 assists for 8 pts 21 SOG in 11 games in the Boston and Tampa series. Respectable. Gets demoted to 4th line for the ECF with new line-mates. Looks lost. Vanek didn't set the world on fire. But what the hell was Therrien thinking? Weak coaching move. Put Vanek out in a checking, energy role at 11 minutes and then blame Vanek for his lack of production in that role? Vanek is taking it on the chin. But Therrien really didn't have the balls to scratch him. What's Therrien thinking here? Make the player play his way off the checking line in the ECF? But it wasn't really a checking/energy role -- when he got demoted, Briere was his center most of the time. It was more like a third scoring line that Therrien just didn't like/trust enough to give them much ice time. A friend who is a huge Habs fan insists Vanek must have been hurt, despite what he says. Points to a collision he had with Subban early in the Rangers series, saying he vanished from that point on, but was a weapon prior to that. Also says he played great with Pacioretty and Desharnais and doesn't understand why that line was broken up. I say Vanek is what he always has been - streaky. Certainly possible, but if so, why would Therrien publicly throw Vanek under the bus the way he did? 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.