beerme1 Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Moulson should do the honorable thing and retire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norcal Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 NFW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkard Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 I'd definitely trade Moulson for Vanek. I'd give Vanek a shot to make the team next year as well but would have no problem sending him down to Rochester is his performance and effort warranted it. 1 season of Vanek's cap hit is way better than 3 more seasons of Moulson's cap hit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Yes. O'Reilly's been getting killed in betting this year and needs a mentour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 I don't want to say I told you so as the leader of the "I hate Thomas Vanek" bandwagon but... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 I don't want to say I told you so as the leader of the "I hate Thomas Vanek" bandwagon but...Thomas Vanek was never the problem here. Darcy was. Vanek was just the best forward on our poopy team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi2000 Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 spam thread, get rid of it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Great thread name, Mustache. :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Thomas Vanek was never the problem here. Darcy was. Vanek was just the best forward on our poopy team. Also, Lindy squashed his offensive talent. He just took that beautiful flower and he ground out his cigarette on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Also, Lindy squashed his offensive talent. He just took that beautiful flower and he ground out his cigarette on it.Can you imagine how intense the Vanek face was when he heard Lindy say "two-way player."? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Even if he does and is, he still won't be useful for the length of his awful awful deal. He signed that contract and simultaneously turned 1000 years old. Â Its really not that bad and one of the best buy out contracts there are next summer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 I'm beginning to wonder whether Parise was just joking around when he said Vanek's nickname was "Selke." Thomas Vanek was never the problem here. Darcy was. Vanek was just the best forward on our poopy team.  I dunno, man. There's talent there. But he's now been part of two teams that became soulless lifeless husks during a period of time when he was expected to produce top-line numbers.  Bad luck? Or is he just bad news? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 I'm beginning to wonder whether Parise was just joking around when he said Vanek's nickname was "Selke." Â Â I dunno, man. There's talent there. But he's now been part of two teams that became soulless lifeless husks during a period of time when he was expected to produce top-line numbers. Â Bad luck? Or is he just bad news? I think he's just old. And he was never that bad for the Canadiens.As for looking through a "character guy" or "good vet" lens, Vanek is definitely bad news. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 I think Moulson will rebound next year and still be useful to us. Congratulations on failing the field sobriety test. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Congratulations on failing the field sobriety test. Y'all are going to eat your words. Moulson plays better next year and smaller goalie equipment has no effect on scoring. Get ready. :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Y'all are going to eat your words. Moulson plays better next year and smaller goalie equipment has no effect on scoring. Get ready. :P I'm with you on the goalie equipment, anyway :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Moulson should do the honorable thing and retire. I'm sure you would and leave $20M on the table..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Â "two-way player." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 I don't like Vanek at all, but I would trade Moulson for him in a second for the reasons TBPhD mentioned. Â What a freaking waste of talent he's turned out to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewookie1 Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 I'm sure you would and leave $20M on the table.....  Well in theory he could, then get signed to a 20m contract over 4 years to work at Harbor Center. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 Also, Lindy squashed his offensive talent. He just took that beautiful flower and he ground out his cigarette on it. I assume you're joking? As in "ha ha, can you believe how wrong I was about Vanek?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted March 25, 2016 Report Share Posted March 25, 2016 I'm sure you would and leave $20M on the table..... What if there's a real connection, an almost father-son relationship, between Matt and Jack, and Matt thinks his contract will hurt Jack's chances at winning? Does that move the needle? I don't like Vanek at all, but I would trade Moulson for him in a second for the reasons TBPhD mentioned. Â What a freaking waste of talent he's turned out to be. He does have 318 goals in the NHL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#freejame Posted March 25, 2016 Report Share Posted March 25, 2016 Odd, accidentally discovered, stat of the day. Mike Foligno had more career goals (355) than Danny Gare (354). Ray Sheppard (357) had more goals than both of them.  Anybody know why we gave Sheppard away for a dollar in 1990? I know he had a bad start to that season but that seemed like an odd thing at the time and given that I was only 9 I wasn't really tuned into the off-ice stuff. It seems incomprehensible that there was no trade market for a guy who scored 38 and 22 goals in his first two seasons. I know he was slow but still... On a similar note does anyone know why we retired Gare's number? Or Horton's? Or LaFontaine's? If you asked me it would be 11 and 39. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted March 25, 2016 Report Share Posted March 25, 2016 I'm sure you would and leave $20M on the table..... Â Â I would not sir. But I suggest that he should. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted March 25, 2016 Report Share Posted March 25, 2016 On a similar note does anyone know why we retired Gare's number? Or Horton's? Or LaFontaine's? If you asked me it would be 11 and 39. This must be rerun day on SabreSpace. Vanek, retired numbers and I just read the Sabres are raising ticket prices 4% next season, yet another increase under Pegula. Every year now. 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.