bob_sauve28 Posted June 4, 2006 Report Share Posted June 4, 2006 For those of you who want to get rid of the guy just think about Tim Connelly a couple years ago. Vanik has a few years left to prove himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted June 4, 2006 Report Share Posted June 4, 2006 For those of you who want to get rid of the guy just think about Tim Connelly a couple years ago. Vanik has a few years left to prove himself. No question that he has a lot to learn, but also no question that he has to have time to learn. It's frustrating to see other rookies (Gaustad, Pominville) play a more complete game, but Vanek will learn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted June 4, 2006 Report Share Posted June 4, 2006 For those of you who want to get rid of the guy just think about Tim Connelly a couple years ago. Vanik has a few years left to prove himself. Not to nitpik, but Connolly turned 19 during his roookie season, Vanek turned 22 during the past season. There is a big difference between these two ages when being tossed into the NHL fray. Can Vanek build on a 25 goal rookie season that had it's ups and downs? We'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jad1 Posted June 4, 2006 Report Share Posted June 4, 2006 It's weird. Up until Kotalik did it in '03-'04, no Regier-drafted player scored 20 goals in a season. Now Vanek scores 25 and his head's on a chopping block. Maybe it's the result of raised expectations. Give the kid another year to continue to develop his game. He hit the rookie wall after the Olympic break. After all, they can always dump him at the trading deadline. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted June 4, 2006 Report Share Posted June 4, 2006 Eleven, wouldn't Gaustad need 25 goals for his game to be considered more complete than Vanek's? :) Sometimes it seems like Buffalo fans don't like talented guys who score. We prefer the muckers. Maybe we see ourselves in them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knightrider Posted June 4, 2006 Report Share Posted June 4, 2006 Not to nitpik, but Connolly turned 19 during his roookie season, Vanek turned 22 during the past season. There is a big difference between these two ages when being tossed into the NHL fray. Can Vanek build on a 25 goal rookie season that had it's ups and downs? We'll see. I suspect he is being forced to change the way he plays his game more than any of the other rookies. If you look at his stats, he put a lot of shots (35 actually) on the net in the first 10 games. He got 7 assists, but no goals. Those first 10 games were the only time his +/- was postitive. The next 10 games, his shot count was only 24, and his assists were off a couple at 5 and for that 10 games, his +/- was -2. He scored 3 goals though. If you asked which set of games he played better, I think his answer would not be the same as Lindy's. Lindy needs to convince him otherwise. Anyway as the season goes on, the shots don't come near as fast as they did early, and the assists, well he had over half of his assists in the first 20 games (by November 19). When Vanek is Timmy's current age (in three years) and isn't producing, I'll grumble. By the way, when Connolly was 22, he had 25 points (goals and assists) and a +/- of -28. That is slightly worse than the numbers Vanek put up. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted June 4, 2006 Report Share Posted June 4, 2006 Eleven, wouldn't Gaustad need 25 goals for his game to be considered more complete than Vanek's? :) Sometimes it seems like Buffalo fans don't like talented guys who score. We prefer the muckers. Maybe we see ourselves in them. Not what I meant--play the game more completely? Play all parts of the game? Something like that. It's frustrating watching other rookies play all aspects of the game while Vanek plays only one, is what I meant. Vanek still has plenty of time to learn that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob_sauve28 Posted June 4, 2006 Author Report Share Posted June 4, 2006 I suspect he is being forced to change the way he plays his game more than any of the other rookies. If you look at his stats, he put a lot of shots (35 actually) on the net in the first 10 games. He got 7 assists, but no goals. Those first 10 games were the only time his +/- was postitive. The next 10 games, his shot count was only 24, and his assists were off a couple at 5 and for that 10 games, his +/- was -2. He scored 3 goals though. If you asked which set of games he played better, I think his answer would not be the same as Lindy's. Lindy needs to convince him otherwise. Anyway as the season goes on, the shots don't come near as fast as they did early, and the assists, well he had over half of his assists in the first 20 games (by November 19). When Vanek is Timmy's current age (in three years) and isn't producing, I'll grumble. By the way, when Connolly was 22, he had 25 points (goals and assists) and a +/- of -28. That is slightly worse than the numbers Vanek put up. ;) Damn, what a thorough and detailed post. I'll make mental note to always be on your side of an argument :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted June 5, 2006 Report Share Posted June 5, 2006 Don't get me wrong on Vanek...he has offensive skills that are unreal. I don't expect him to be a defensive stud at forward someday, I just want him to be average in his own end, but he is light years away from that point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffalOhio Posted June 5, 2006 Report Share Posted June 5, 2006 I saw what I needed to see on the Spezza goal in game one of the Ottawa series. Vanek just let Spezza skate away from him, right to the open side of the net. Vanek was still coasting when Spezza buried the puck. It's hard for a superstar (which is what he's been everywhere he's played) to play defensively. That is something that has to be learned. That play right there shows me why he was benched during a lot of the playoffs, and I don't have a problem with it. It should light a fire under his butt and get him to give a darn in the defensive zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.