Robviously Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 Where can I sign to bring on a guy who rang up 10M in gambling debts WHILE playing in the league??? I mean he was full go high motor dependable every night for us last time right? There were no disappearing acts. If one guy showed up to play hard every night it was Thomas Vanek. Nathan Paetsch will vouch.Vanek was so lazy that he's only 5th all-time for the Sabres in goals. Terrible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabills Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 (edited) Vanek was so lazy that he's only 5th all-time for the Sabres in goals. Terrible. See, now I'm sold. The "Lazy Vanek" meme is one of my favorite of all time. Gotta get him back. Edited June 30, 2017 by sabills Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GASabresIUFAN Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 I don't think it is a coincidence both Vanek and his agent were on WGR today. They are interested in coming back to Buffalo. His center when he was here was either Connolly or Roy. Wouldn't you want to come and play with ROR or Eichel, especially is Jbot does trade Kane. No retreads please. Also what We've said. Besides former Sabres Jason Botterill, Phil Housley, and maybe Chad Johnson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 His center when he was here was either Connolly or Roy. Wouldn't you want to come and play with ROR or Eichel, especially is Jbot does trade Kane. I'm sure that's the opportunity Thomas sees in a community he likes. The question is, does JBot see the same fit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabre fan Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 Drew Stafford is available as well guys... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 Always thought vanek would be happy to go to Vegas :p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BetterDays06 Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 This is a 100% totally different team than when vanek was here. How can anyone argue that he wouldn't be worth a 2 year deal? Best 5on5 numbers last year. Can get us 50pts at least. Maybe 60+ being Jacks winger. I would absolutely loveeeee to see him here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExWNYer Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 I'll take Vanek if Ennis or Moulson are dealt. Buyout? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BetterDays06 Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 Buyout? Can't, they had to put him on unconditional waivers yesterday to buyout at 5 pm today Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 (edited) This is a 100% totally different team than when vanek was here. How can anyone argue that he wouldn't be worth a 2 year deal? Best 5on5 numbers last year. Can get us 50pts at least. Maybe 60+ being Jacks winger. I would absolutely loveeeee to see him here The only real concern I would have is if he can still play an uptempo game. Yes, he's still scoring, but I can't say I've watched to know what his legs are like. Housley is making alot of noise about icing an attacking gameplan. I've seen the posts talking about not having to keep up with Eichel, and I agree, but he would still have to keep up with the play in general. I'm not sure he still has in his game what Housley needs. If he does still have the legs for our game, sure, bring him along on a series of 1 yr deals. He'd final be back in the role that he was best suited for, support scoring and powerplay specialist. Edited June 30, 2017 by We've Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExWNYer Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 Can't, they had to put him on unconditional waivers yesterday to buyout at 5 pm today Thanks for clarifying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 Vanek is yet another cheap(ish) UFA I'd like to see to help fill the wing depth. And like D4rk, I'd really like to see Eichel play with a smart scoring winger with silky hands. The skating is a reasonable concern, but I always thought Vanek's speed was underrated--he wasn't explosive, but his top end speed was good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 Vanek is yet another cheap(ish) UFA I'd like to see to help fill the wing depth. And like D4rk, I'd really like to see Eichel play with a smart scoring winger with silky hands. The skating is a reasonable concern, but I always thought Vanek's speed was underrated--he wasn't explosive, but his top end speed was good. It just seems like a no brainer to me if the guy is banging down the door to come back here. Just make it happen Botsie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 Yuck. Hard pass. There's a reason multiple coaches and GMs have had Vanek on their teams for a short period and said no thanks to additional servings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 It just seems like a no brainer to me if the guy is banging down the door to come back here. Just make it happen Botsie. The only thing that gives me pause is that Andrew Peters wants to do it. Do I really want to agree with him? :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob_sauve28 Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 How much per year? I wouldn't go over 2 million. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 The only thing that gives me pause is that Andrew Peters wants to do it. Do I really want to agree with him? :lol: Yeah but I'm sure his reasoning is nowhere near as detailed. He's just like "oh that's a guy I know!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 Yuck. Hard pass. There's a reason multiple coaches and GMs have had Vanek on their teams for a short period and said no thanks to additional servings. I don't think this is entirely accurate. The Islanders tried to keep him, but he didn't want to stay there. The Red Wings were in sell mode, and Frank Saravelli has reported that Florida's ownership has mandated cost cutting this offseason. I think the only team you can be confident walked away because they didn't want him anymore was Minnesota. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woods-racer Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 Listened to WGR about bringing Vanek back. Vanek last year had a better points per 60 minutes 5 on 5 than our best 5 on 5 player. He played limited time on the third line with a bad Detroit team, and still produced. Never say never, when the term and money are right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubkev Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 Anyone remember that scene in The Dark Knight, where the joker breaks the pool cue in half and has the 2 guys fight to the death over who gets a spot in his crew? This is how I want it to go down between Vanek and Moulson over number 26. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 The only real concern I would have is if he can still play an uptempo game. Yes, he's still scoring, but I can't say I've watched to know what his legs are like. Housley is making alot of noise about icing an attacking gameplan. I've seen the posts talking about not having to keep up with Eichel, and I agree, but he would still have to keep up with the play in general. I'm not sure he still has in his game what Housley needs. If he does still have the legs for our game, sure, bring him along on a series of 1 yr deals. He'd final be back in the role that he was best suited for, support scoring and powerplay specialist.That's the thing I'm most concerned about. Vanek will be some degree of slow. If Ennis and Moulson are still getting regular time, I don't know if we want to add another winger that can't skate. If the kids make the team or we sign fast guys and he (and Reinhart ;) ) are the only two not-fast guys, then go for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 Chiming in late here: I'd love to see him for the right price. Park him in front of the goalie all day long. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trettioåtta Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 Vanek is coming back baby. No doubts. His best bud in the best town in a promising team. 2 years 7-8 mil. Book it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted June 30, 2017 Author Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 (edited) Sooo....lock up Vanek for 2 years then trade with the Wild for one of their d men and take Pommers in the trade? There is Reinharts wingers? You, sir, are clairvoyant! Edited June 30, 2017 by PromoTheRobot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjones71 Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 You, sir, are clairvoyant! I'll second that! 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.