Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
GASabresIUFAN

Jimmy “Dishes” Vesey - future star or the next Sheary?

Recommended Posts

Vesey is playing this season for a big UFA deal, much like Skinner did last year.  Jack turned Skinner into a 40 goal man and we responded with a contract we may regret in a few years.  

Vesey has 3 seasons under his belt with 16, 17, and 17 goals.  Consistent and uninspiring other than his 16 EVG would have been 4th on the Sabres. 

Jbot describes him as a big kid who is willing to go to the net to score; a skill we desperately need.  Odds are that he plays this season on Boston buddy Jack’s RW or somewhere on the other Boston Buddy Erod’s line. My guess he also gets some PP time on the 2nd PP.

So what can we expect this season?  More of the same or will he step up and cross the 20 goal threshold for the first time?  He did score 5 PP goals his rookie year, but has played sparingly on the PP since.

The competition between Vesey and Goal-ofsson for Jack’s wingman will likely be the biggest stories of camp.  If Vesey locks down that job by thriving on that line, that probably changes the calculus for him at season’s end.  Do you stay or -re-sign?  

My initial thoughts are that he wins the job out of camp, scores 21-23 goals and re-signs this off-season. For 4 years a 4 per season.

Edited by GASabresIUFAN
  • Like (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know what you mean by 'future star'?

I think he will be a good player for the Sabres and will likely be given a chance to play with Jack and Jeff, which will help his goal production into the 20 - 25 range, especially if he gets some PP time too.

Does that make him a star?  25 goals is very good.  If he makes that he will be a 'star' on the Sabres and will likely get the contract you mentioned.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Vesey is playing this season for a big UFA deal, much like Skinner did last year.  Jack turned Skinner into a 40 goal man and we responded with a contract we may regret in a few years.  

Vesey has 3 seasons under his belt with 16, 17, and 17 goals.  Consistent and uninspiring other than his 16 EVG would have been 4th on the Sabres. 

Jbot describes him as a big kid who is willing to go to the net to score; a skill we desperately need.  Odds are that he plays this season on Boston buddy Jack’s RW or somewhere on the other Boston Buddy Erod’s line. My guess he also gets some PP time on the 2nd PP.

So what can we expect this season?  More of the same or will he step up and cross the 20 goal threshold for the first time?  He did score 5 PP goals his rookie year, but has played sparingly on the PP since.

The competition between Vesey and Goal-ofsson for Jack’s wingman will likely be the biggest stories of camp.  If Vesey locks down that job by thriving on that line, that probably changes the calculus for him at season’s end.  Do you stay or -re-sign?  

My initial thoughts are that he wins the job out of camp, scores 21-23 goals and re-signs this off-season. For 4 years a 4 per season.

Barring Ristolainen turning into a RW (or dare we dream 2C), would agree the 1RW role is his to lose as they look for a younger Pominville that can click w/ Eichel but by being younger can actually stay useful beyond 20% of the season.

My guessis regardless of whether he's with Eichel or not after the 1st 5 games, he'll have a larger rolein Buffalo and would expect 21-22 goals from him.  If he clicks with Jack &/or finds PP1 time, could see 28-31 goals at a very top end.

As you say, he's playing for a contract and he's playing w/ buddies from college days (though from a different school) that should be for a bump of 5-6 goals alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Future Star?  No.

Next Sheary?  I like Sheary's game, he hustles, creates turnovers on the forecheck, can skate well and plays with pace.     I believe he bounces back in a big way this season.

Vesey I see as a depth guy, bottom of the lineup... just because he's a giant douchebag.    

That said, Vesey did have a modest +3.25 TRpm last season compared to Sheary's -7.34.... but the douchebag factor is too big in this case, I can't accept him as a Sabre just yet.

  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, pi2000 said:

Future Star?  No.

Next Sheary?  I like Sheary's game, he hustles, creates turnovers on the forecheck, can skate well and plays with pace.     I believe he bounces back in a big way this season.

Vesey I see as a depth guy, bottom of the lineup... just because he's a giant douchebag.    

That said, Vesey did have a modest +3.25 TRpm last season compared to Sheary's -7.34.... but the douchebag factor is too big in this case, I can't accept him as a Sabre just yet.

God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
Courage to change the things I can,
And wisdom to know the difference.

omaha boys GIF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mostly agree with pi.

He's not a giant douchebag. Just a douchebag.

Sheary will bounce back. But not in a big way (he didn't fall far from year prior). I expect to see him at his average of 18 goals and 25 assists (+/-). Which is just a few more points than his 34 he got last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sheary was a fast break-out guy on a team that couldn't make a break-out pass.  He's always been miscast here, unless our system will utilize his zone breakout speed correctly.  Our new defenders and coach gives us hope in this regard.  He has a nice shot on the breakaway, but never dekes, and his production is highly dependent on his shooting % for the month.  Despite his size, he's never been much of a forechecker or turnover machine, and this is why his role is vastly limited to top-6 or bust, and requires better linemates to maintain consistent results.  He also gets a fair amount of points on the PP2, and without him there he isn't contributing to his salary.

Vesey is a volume shooting player who likes to drive to the net.  He has some size, though doesn't necessarily use it.  Total contrast to the perimeter type players Buffalo has now.  May not be the most skilled, but he's the type of ying to fit this team's yang.  I think his success relies largely on his teammates, and either he becomes a finisher for Eichel, or the offensive spark to the endless Larsson/Girgensons cycle; he can find a place anywhere in the line-up.  Botterill has mentioned he is a 'Top-9' player, so we probably won't see the latter scenario.  He doesn't need the PP to get points, which is good for a Buffalo team who has enough talented players who are better deserving of those minutes.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's a future middle six player, so not a star. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m quite surprised at the reticence here to play our best players with linemates who aren’t our best players.

Drury didn’t play with Danny, he played with a 3rd liner in Grier. Briere played with a 3rd liner in Hecht. Some talented kids on that team put up a whack of points playing as a 3rd line.

Last year our middle six sucked. Im not saying peeling 10 per cent off our 1st line to add 20 per cent to our next two lines is the answer, but it might be if we can get chemistry from combos like Vesey/Eichel Reinhart/Sheary and Victor/Johansson.

Im glad Krueger is trying different things. It only becom3s a problem if it fails and he sticks with it.

Edited by dudacek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My resistance to moving both Jeff AND Sam off the top line is based on the way the league seems to be structured right now. The top line Cs of other teams are playing with 1 really good and sometimes 2 really good players. 

In a league where even the great McDavid is playing with a 105 point, top 5 pick Draisaitl, the poster boy for young, two way play is being teamed with the league’s leading scorer in Kucherov, and I have to watch local boy Scheifele consistently rank above Eichel in top Cs list playing with Connor and Wheeler, I’d like to see Jack have at least some top help. 

Edited by Thorny
  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Thorny said:

My resistance to moving both Jeff AND Sam off the top line is based on the way the league seems to be structured right now. The top line Cs of other teams are playing with 1 really good and sometimes 2 really good players. 

In a league where even the great McDavid is playing with a 105 point, top 5 pick Draisaitl, the poster boy for young, two way play is being teamed with the league’s leading scorer in Kucherov, and I have to watch local boy Scheifele consistently rank above Eichel in top Cs list playing with Connor and Wheeler, I’d like to see Jack have at least some top help. 

Me too. But you still have to do what's best for the team with the players you've got.

And until Botts trades for a second -line centre, I'm not sure why Vesey/Eichel/Sheary, Skinner/Casey/Samson, Mojo/ERod/VO is significantly better — or worse — than Skinner/Eichel/Mojo, VO/Casey/Samson, Vesey/ERod/Sheary.

Play and see what they got.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Thorny said:

My resistance to moving both Jeff AND Sam off the top line is based on iphe way the league seems to be structured right now. The top line Cs of other teams are playing with 1 really good and sometimes 2 really good players. 

It's not just that the top line would be going against other top lines with only Eichel as a true top liner.  (And definitely having covering against a good cycle being his biggest weakness.)

There's also the "enjoyment of coming to work" factor (for lack of a better term) to consider.  The top guys want to be playing together because that gives them the best chance of gettinginto that zone where they start to dominate and just have fun.  Clearly, Krueger isn't going to be putting both Girgensons & Larsson on  Eichel's wings, but Sheary & Vesey (just chose that pair because that's who's there tonight) could be nearly as bad.  Of course, Sheary could also look as good on Jack's wing as he does at 3v3 and Vesey might pop that same magic with Jack that Pominville kept showing for about 4 weeks.  Which will go a long way towards making other things better.

And if Rodrigues & Skinner click and Mittelstadt & Reinhart click, then everybody's happy all split up (even if all 3 big guns each run their own line) but if they're losing and Mittelstadt can't bury chances that he should, then stuff falls apart & snowballs.

Not saying ANY of that will happen.  But should they turn to having each drive a line (which likely ISN'T the plan) that's more likely to blow up than having 2 of them working together and the 3rd guy driving whomever the 4 & 5 forwards turn out to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are getting deep into wishful thinking territory IMO if we expect 2 of our 3 top lines to be driven by a winger.

19 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Me too. But you still have to do what's best for the team with the players you've got.

And until Botts trades for a second -line centre, I'm not sure why Vesey/Eichel/Sheary, Skinner/Casey/Samson, Mojo/ERod/VO is significantly better — or worse — than Skinner/Eichel/Mojo, VO/Casey/Samson, Vesey/ERod/Sheary.

Play and see what they got.

 

To me it's because we aren't going to get the Skinner we saw last season if he's playing with Casey. It's not as simple as moving our two wingers off the top line and letting them do what they did last year throughout the lineup. 

Edited by Thorny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Me too. But you still have to do what's best for the team with the players you've got.

And until Botts trades for a second -line centre, I'm not sure why Vesey/Eichel/Sheary, Skinner/Casey/Samson, Mojo/ERod/VO is significantly better — or worse — than Skinner/Eichel/Mojo, VO/Casey/Samson, Vesey/ERod/Sheary.

Play and see what they got.

 

Every time Jack hasn't played with Skinner in his career, he's handily lost his matchups against other teams' counter to him, while our depth had the same problem. I don't think the addition of Vesey and Johansson fundamentally changes this. We need another dynamic skater to make a 2nd line with Sam, so that we have two lines that can relieve pressure off each other and win matchups against elite players.

Jack and Jeff can do it themselves for about a third of a year,  but without anything behind them to key in on, they became overwhelmed. Adding mediocre middle sixers (hopefully Johansson can be a little better than that descriptor) doesn't fundamentally change this problem. Especially when you reason that they allow you to split Jack and Jeff up. Because that just takes assists off of Jack's plate and goals off of Jeff's, while still running out lines that will probably not outscore opponents over the long haul.

Simply put, this team should offer sheet Brayden Point at 12 million dollars 

Edited by Randall Flagg
  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL I think the debate I've been having with you guys all summer consists of: "Maybe we should try this"/"No, that's not going to work, we need another centre."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, dudacek said:

LOL I think the debate I've been having with you guys all summer consists of: "Maybe we should try this"/"No, that's not going to work, we need another centre."

As much as I think Botterill has thus far failed to adequately address the top 6 this summer, I've come up with and detailed lineups that I think *could* work based on the current set-up of players. 

Don't see the need to completely disregard all that just because I don't think both Jeff AND Sam should be moved off line one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just for the record, Jeff without Jack last season: 21 games, 7 goals, 3 assists, 10 points, all at ES. This would have made him roughly a 27 goal, 39 point guy projected over a full season. 

Eichel without Skinner: 15 games, 6 goals, 8 assists, 14 points. The key: most of these are power play points. In 15 games without Skinner, at even strength, Jack scored 5 goals and zero assists. This is 0.33 goals per game at ES, and 0.3 points per game at ES without Jeff. This is contrasted with 15 goals, 51 points at even strength in 61 games with Jeff, or 0.25 goals per game but 0.84 points per game at ES. 

Eichel literally picked up zero even strength assists in fifteen games without Jeff playing on his wing. This is our playmaking franchise center, and this is how bad Sheary was with him compared to Skinner last year. Jack's overall even strength production increased by 280% with Skinner over another linemate on his left side (Sheary), something glaring that was partially hidden by the fact that he still got to play with him and other good players on the power play. This is why the Crosby narrative drives me nuts with Jack, while all other superstars ride shotgun with their other superstars. Unless we really think that a guy a team with horrible depth was happy to dump for a 3rd rounder can replicate what Jeff did with our captain, I'm going to be incredibly skeptical of this working for our team. 

"Spreading the wealth" with Jack and Jeff is going to make both of them worse, and if there's one thing I've written more about than anything else, it's how important prioritizing what maximizes your best players is versus trying to minimize/hide weaknesses with your tail between your legs. If the roster is so bad that we want to neuter Jack and Jeff, fix your roster. If it's too hard to fix your roster, don't make horrifying trades with no reasonable replacement plans.

 

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Thanks (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Thorny said:

As much as I think Botterill has thus far failed to adequately address the top 6 this summer, I've come up with and detailed lineups that I think *could* work based on the current set-up of players. 

Don't see the need to completely disregard all that just because I don't think both Jeff AND Sam should be moved off line one. 

Don't think I'm disregarding it and I am sorry that I'm giving that impression.

I read a lot of absolutes on here and I don't believe in absolutes: Dahlin can't play with Risto; Vesey is horrible; Okposo can't play on the power play; Sheary won't rebound; Skinner has to play with Eichel; Tage should not make this team; Casey will fail if he's on the 2nd line; Sam can't play centre; Pilut should be in the top four: Jokiharju should be in the top 4; Johansson is a top 6 player; Miller will help our top 4; Scandella needs to go...

Most of those things are probably correct. The fun of sports is the not knowing for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dudacek said:

I’m quite surprised at the reticence here to play our best players with linemates who aren’t our best players.

Drury didn’t play with Danny, he played with a 3rd liner in Grier. Briere played with a 3rd liner in Hecht. Some talented kids on that team put up a whack of points playing as a 3rd line.

Last year our middle six sucked. Im not saying peeling 10 per cent off our 1st line to add 20 per cent to our next two lines is the answer, but it might be if we can get chemistry from combos like Vesey/Eichel Reinhart/Sheary and Victor/Johansson.

Im glad Krueger is trying different things. It only becom3s a problem if it fails and he sticks with it.

That team had 3 good centers and enough good wingers to keep those centers well used.  I'd be less concerned about breaking up the big 3 if I thought we had the depth to carry the breakup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dudacek said:

Don't think I'm disregarding it and I am sorry that I'm giving that impression.

I read a lot of absolutes on here and I don't believe in absolutes: Dahlin can't play with Risto; Vesey is horrible; Okposo can't play on the power play; Sheary won't rebound; Skinner has to play with Eichel; Tage should not make this team; Casey will fail if he's on the 2nd line; Sam can't play centre; Pilut should be in the top four: Jokiharju should be in the top 4; Johansson is a top 6 player; Miller will help our top 4; Scandella needs to go...

Most of those things are probably correct. The fun of sports is the not knowing for sure.

I think you actually read real-time criticisms and interpret them as absolutes. These guys are all professional hockey players, so it's not as if Okposo on the power play would be like ME on the power play. But the Sabres making the roster/lineup decisions that regularly get criticized as apparent absolutes are 100% the reasons why we're such a bad hockey team, because that's how hockey works over long periods of time. Typing about these bad decisions in "absolutes" is just an easy way to get across a point rather than qualifying every possible statement in every possible way and tripling the word count of every post as a result, to make it "technically correct." 

Nobody discounts the possibility of some of those things happening. What people do is have a fairly accurate, if rough, estimation of the probability of any of those things being false, multiply those probabilities together as probabilities are supposed to be multiplied, and realize that the chance of the things needing to happen to make our team good again with this setup is pretty low, thus making them angry at why we have to start with such long odds in the first place. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

I think you actually read real-time criticisms and interpret them as absolutes. These guys are all professional hockey players, so it's not as if Okposo on the power play would be like ME on the power play. But the Sabres making the roster/lineup decisions that regularly get criticized as apparent absolutes are 100% the reasons why we're such a bad hockey team, because that's how hockey works over long periods of time. Typing about these bad decisions in "absolutes" is just an easy way to get across a point rather than qualifying every possible statement in every possible way and tripling the word count of every post as a result, to make it "technically correct." 

Nobody discounts the possibility of some of those things happening. What people do is have a fairly accurate, if rough, estimation of the probability of any of those things being false, multiply those probabilities together as probabilities are supposed to be multiplied, and realize that the chance of the things needing to happen to make our team good again with this setup is pretty low, thus making them angry at why we have to start with such long odds in the first place. 

This is the crux of what I've been trying to articulate all offseason. 

One of these years, dudacek will have his day, enough of the individual odds will break in our favour at the same time, and the turn around will happen somewhat unexpectedly. Which is what's been mentioned, that "in hindsight" we could have seen it coming, but didn't. The teams-have-success-sometimes-when-it-wasn't-necessarily-predicted thing. 

But most years, it doesn't shake out that way, given the odds. The prediction that we are going to be bad is going to be the most likely outcome until we start winning, and then it won't be anymore. 

Failing a massive off-season of additions. Thought we might see a little something like that this summer, with a Risto deal and such, but it doesn't look like that's going to be the case. 

Edited by Thorny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think dudacek makes good points. The only certainty I can see is that there is absolutely no way to know how this will shake out. Way too many unknowns. 

I am a little amazed at how many people in this thread and others seem locked on the past and on some sort of tweak or variation on last year's line up. Most of those people were Housley haters too. I think you have to throw the lines, pairs, systems, everything from last year out the window and forget about it. This will be a new line up with new ideas. Not one single thing is guaranteed. Kreuger is going to try all kinds of combinations/ideas to see who works well together, who gets his system, and who has chemistry. 

If Jack and Jeff have that chemistry it'll be the dynamic duo but if he sees chemistry with Vesey it'll be him. If Kreuger wants it spread through the line up the big line will be split up. There is simply no way to know at this point. 

Its' all going to be NEW. Good new or bad new who knows, but it won't be the same, that's for sure.

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

I think dudacek makes good points. The only certainty I can see is that there is absolutely no way to know how this will shake out. Way too many unknowns. 

I am a little amazed at how many people in this thread and others seem locked on the past and on some sort of tweak or variation on last year's line up. Most of those people were Housley haters too. I think you have to throw the lines, pairs, systems, everything from last year out the window and forget about it. This will be a new line up with new ideas. Not one single thing is guaranteed. Kreuger is going to try all kinds of combinations/ideas to see who works well together, who gets his system, and who has chemistry. 

If Jack and Jeff have that chemistry it'll be the dynamic duo but if he sees chemistry with Vesey it'll be him. If Kreuger wants it spread through the line up the big line will be split up. There is simply no way to know at this point. 

Its' all going to be NEW. Good new or bad new who knows, but it won't be the same, that's for sure.

And this ^^^ 😄is the point I've been trying to make all offseason.

11 minutes ago, Thorny said:

This is the crux of what I've been trying to articulate all offseason. 

For the record, I agree with most of your points. @Randall Flagg's bit upthread on Jack and Jeff separated is why i love this forum.

It's almost always the certainty I'm debating. I tend to usually come from the perspective of 'how can we make this work?'

Some of you have been dealing with worst-case scenarios almost all your adult fanhood.

It can get better and often does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

I think dudacek makes good points. The only certainty I can see is that there is absolutely no way to know how this will shake out. Way too many unknowns. 

I am a little amazed at how many people in this thread and others seem locked on the past and on some sort of tweak or variation on last year's line up. Most of those people were Housley haters too. I think you have to throw the lines, pairs, systems, everything from last year out the window and forget about it. This will be a new line up with new ideas. Not one single thing is guaranteed. Kreuger is going to try all kinds of combinations/ideas to see who works well together, who gets his system, and who has chemistry. 

If Jack and Jeff have that chemistry it'll be the dynamic duo but if he sees chemistry with Vesey it'll be him. If Kreuger wants it spread through the line up the big line will be split up. There is simply no way to know at this point. 

Its' all going to be NEW. Good new or bad new who knows, but it won't be the same, that's for sure.

Probably because we are sitting here on September 16 with nearly the same roster as last season. For all the crap Housley took, there was no way that roster last year was going to amount to much more than it did, even with best-case-scenario lines. 

Reinhart should be on his own line. Housley missed that, that's the one thing I can comfortably state. Other that that, I won't call it deck chairs on the titanic, I'm sure the lineup can be configured to maximize what we have to an extent, but we aren't a playoff roster right now because of the players on the roster. 

Krueger isn't going to turn us into a winning team through line combinations. If that's all we needed, Botterill should be fired, because he said himself he thought Reinhart should be on his own line yet did not enforce this through Housley. If all we needed to win was line shuffling, should have been done last year while we were in the hunt.

Edited by Thorny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He is probably is going to be roughly a Sheary quality player going forward.  That’s a decent 3rd liner from my point of view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...