Jump to content


The Oft-Injured Thomas Vanek


  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

#1 bob_sauve28

bob_sauve28

    Second Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,646 posts

Posted 07 April 2013 - 09:48 AM

Are people finally willing to admit the obvious that Vanek should have been let go for those draft picks from Edmonton? We have done nothing with him, those picks plus the salary space to sign other players would have been way better

#2 Peppy22

Peppy22

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 763 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Berlin, Germany

Posted 07 April 2013 - 10:00 AM

That's all speculation. No one knows who we would have gotten with those draft picks.

Thomas Vanek has won many games for the Sabres and just because he missed a few games every season doesnt make him a total failure.

81 82 82 73 71 78 80

those are his regular season games numbers

#3 ParkMeadow

ParkMeadow

    Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 157 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 April 2013 - 10:02 AM

We are really not going there again, are we?

Think we should've kept Briere and/or Drury too?

#4 bunomatic

bunomatic

    bunomatic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,770 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nanaimo,B.C.,Canada

Posted 07 April 2013 - 10:15 AM

All I can say in reply to this is Vanek has been a warrior for this franchise and sure he's missed games but he takes a boatload of abuse. I still believe you have to get maximum return and trade him for picks and or prospects when the time is right. He'll sign elsewhere otherwise. No extension for Thomas please.

#5 waldo

waldo

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,457 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 07 April 2013 - 12:08 PM

" Oft- Injured" Vanek...is this  hypothesis or a fact. If a fact please put some stats to support the statement or,  perhaps it is just another fan generated opinion or hypothesis. As a fan I wonder how  Vanek's  injury record compares to the NHL average for other players in his salary and production ranges who take similar levels of abuse. Over the past 6-8 seasons, has Vanek missed more or less games than a Malkin, Crosby,  meaning guys who put up 240 plus goals over a five to eight year period.

Edited by waldo, 07 April 2013 - 12:11 PM.


#6 Tondas

Tondas

    Top Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 281 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 April 2013 - 12:17 PM

I know TV currently makes his living in front of the net (including on the PP), but takes a beating there.  To keep him on the ice more, maybe they move him more to the outside and let him snipe more goals than have him stand in front and have them go in off is body.

#7 Neuvirths Glove

Neuvirths Glove

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,259 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth, Texas

Posted 07 April 2013 - 12:25 PM

Yeah, no kiddin'.  Scott is reasonably okay with a stick, just not that mobile.  Put him in the slot on the power play.

#8 PASabreFan

PASabreFan

    Resistance is futile

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,243 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 07 April 2013 - 12:28 PM

Glatt him?

#9 IKnowPhysics

IKnowPhysics

    Second Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,684 posts

Posted 07 April 2013 - 12:31 PM

If we move him, even as a rental, we'll get good return.  He should be able to fetch about what Pominville garnered, and probably a little more.  For comparison:

Rental:
Vanek <-> 1st round pick, 3rd round prospect, 5th round prospect (similar to Iginla)
Vanek <-> 2nd round pick (conditional to 1st rounder if they win 2 playoff series), 2nd round prospect, 5th round prospect (similar to Jagr)

One year:
Vanek <-> 1st round pick, 2nd round pick, 2nd round prospect, 2nd round G prospect (similar to Pominville without the 4th)
The trade value thread puts Vanek from a 1st, 2nd, 3rd (like Pominville) up to two 1sts and a top prospect.

---

Take a look at his approximate trade value:
2007 Four 1st round picks
2013 One 1st round pick, Three 2nd round picks
2014 One 1st round pick, One 2nd round pick, One 5th round pick

Concerning 2007-2013: if you remember that Vanek led the Sabres in goals five out of six years (finished 2nd last year to Pommer) and helped keep this team competitive in a time when not many else were, it helps take the edge off.  He's been fun to watch.  In my mind, probably worth the price of admission of the difference between three 1sts and three 2nds.
Concerning 2013-2014: the opportunity cost of keeping Vanek until the next deadline could roughly be the difference of two 2nd rounders vs a 5th rounder.  I think that's a justifiable price for a team-leading scorer for a year, and one that can be paid just to keep this team watchable, but if tear down/rebuild is the only priority, I could understand the other point of view.

#10 bob_sauve28

bob_sauve28

    Second Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,646 posts

Posted 07 April 2013 - 12:32 PM

View Postwaldo, on 07 April 2013 - 12:08 PM, said:

" Oft- Injured" Vanek...is this  hypothesis or a fact. If a fact please put some stats to support the statement or,  perhaps it is just another fan generated opinion or hypothesis. As a fan I wonder how  Vanek's  injury record compares to the NHL average for other players in his salary and production ranges who take similar levels of abuse. Over the past 6-8 seasons, has Vanek missed more or less games than a Malkin, Crosby,  meaning guys who put up 240 plus goals over a five to eight year period.

Malkin and Crosby??? Seriously, you are comparing Vanek to superstars? No way! He should have been let go!

#11 JJFIVEOH

JJFIVEOH

    Second Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,506 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Boca Raton, FL

Posted 07 April 2013 - 01:07 PM

27 games in 7 seasons is hardly 'oft'.

#12 d4rksabre

d4rksabre

    This pleases Nikita

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,355 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 April 2013 - 01:14 PM

Come on bob, you're a longstanding poster here. What's with the noob thread?

#13 waldo

waldo

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,457 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 07 April 2013 - 01:57 PM

View Postbob_sauve28, on 07 April 2013 - 12:32 PM, said:



Malkin and Crosby??? Seriously, you are comparing Vanek to superstars? No way! He should have been let go!

You like quantum leaps huh!.. read more slowly. "Production range". The three have different skill levels and skill sets. They play different games  but their games are similar in the degree of physical abuse they absorb  imo (although I think Vanek has taken more abuse because of his net presence on the pp over seven seasons) . They are all in the same production range. Maybe you can tell me how many goals Malkin , Crosby and Vanek have scored over their NHl careers, include assists if you with but that would be a little unfair because you would be  comparing a wingers assists  to a center. Total games played, goals scored  , assists, may work.. Do you think you will find a huge differential?

Then you can tell me which of the three have played with the most talented line mates and on better teams over that period if you wish.. (I think they have all played between 7-8 NHL seasons if memory serves me?) Malkin and Crosby probably have fewer games played due to injury but there is not enough of a game differential to neuter my point. Vanek has been a far better player over the last eight seasons than most fans here realize  . Maybe a list of active players that have put up more than 250 goals in the last 7 1/2 seasons could be interesting too.

Edited by waldo, 07 April 2013 - 02:31 PM.


#14 JJFIVEOH

JJFIVEOH

    Second Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,506 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Boca Raton, FL

Posted 07 April 2013 - 02:10 PM

Past 7 seasons:  http://www.quanthock...yers-stats.html

Vanek #5 in goals

Past 8 seasons: http://www.quanthock...yers-stats.html

Vanek #7 in goals

#15 Tondas

Tondas

    Top Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 281 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 April 2013 - 02:17 PM

View PostJJFIVEOH, on 07 April 2013 - 01:07 PM, said:

27 games in 7 seasons is hardly 'oft'.
True enough.  But TV always seems to have 10 or so games a year where he is hurt, but plays anyway, and is totally ineffective.  You can always tell when TV is injured.  The decline in his play is obvious.

#16 waldo

waldo

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,457 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 07 April 2013 - 02:24 PM

View PostJJFIVEOH, on 07 April 2013 - 02:10 PM, said:

Past 7 seasons:  http://www.quanthock...yers-stats.html

Vanek #5 in goals

Past 8 seasons: http://www.quanthock...yers-stats.html

Vanek #7 in goals

thanks for the stats....Yet the fans here crap all over him .he is lazy, not a leader, injured too often etc etc.  ..#7 playing without a center,  on a average team with one scoring line in most years, always playing against the opposing teams shutdown line. With just little ole  POM ( a great player) and the much maligned Derrick Roy and Hecht.. (lol) I wonder what his goal totals would have looked like had he played as a winger with Crosby or Malkin for the past eight seasons...That's the sin in it all. You have players like Miller, Pom and Vanek and you do not give them what they nee to maximize their potential.

who were the top ten wingers?

Edited by waldo, 07 April 2013 - 04:04 PM.


#17 qwksndmonster

qwksndmonster

    Livve Neilo

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,335 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Horseheads

Posted 07 April 2013 - 03:14 PM

Wannik is a lazy Russian.

He definitely seems to spend the second half of seasons playing hurt and not producing as much.  This season he's actually missing games, which worries me for the future.

But not really because it doesn't look like he'll be here for long :(

#18 LTS

LTS

    Who's next?

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,030 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Mendon, NY (by way of Tonawanda)

Posted 07 April 2013 - 04:05 PM

Vanek is an enigma.  If you could pick one of the following players or Vanek, would you choose Vanek?

Seguin, Kovalchuk, Parise, Stamkos, Crosby, Malkin, E. Staal, Ovechkin, Giroux, Nash, Alfredsson, Kopitar, Sedins, Datsyuk, Zetterberg, J. Thornton, Getzlaf, Perry, Selanne, B. Richards, Landeskog, Duchesne, Benn, Kane, Toews, Hall, Tavares?

There might be 1 or 2 in there but I'm not sure how many more.  He's a solid player, when he's productive.  He does disappear for games and it's usually around an injury that he tried to play through.  I've always been torn on Vanek.  I still think they should have let him go for 4 1st rounders.  

I've never felt that he could carry this team and I think that's the problem I have.  He's a little bit of every kind of superstar but none of it in one area.  He plays in front of the net like Andreychuk and Ciccarelli did, but he doesn't dominate it like he could.  He's an "open area" shooter like Hull but he's never had a guy that could reliably feed him pucks.  He's creative like Crosby but he doesn't consistently breakdown defenses.  He's a lot of everything and not a lot of one thing.

#19 Heimdall

Heimdall

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,561 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brussels, Belgium

Posted 07 April 2013 - 04:54 PM

I'd pick Vanek over half of those easy.

and you got alot of centers i don't compare him with.

#20 LTS

LTS

    Who's next?

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,030 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Mendon, NY (by way of Tonawanda)

Posted 08 April 2013 - 03:47 AM

I have a lot of the players who are near the top of the league in scoring.  I'm not concerned what position they play.  Although I guess that tells us where our money would be better spent.

Really.. over half of them?

#21 bobis

bobis

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 603 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 08 April 2013 - 05:00 AM

View Postbob_sauve28, on 07 April 2013 - 09:48 AM, said:

Are people finally willing to admit the obvious that Vanek should have been let go for those draft picks from Edmonton? We have done nothing with him, those picks plus the salary space to sign other players would have been way better

Can't really say what would have been better, but I have to believe 4 first rounders would have been way way way more expensive than the $7 million per year Vanek signed for had they kept the picks.

View PostJJFIVEOH, on 07 April 2013 - 02:10 PM, said:

Past 7 seasons:  http://www.quanthock...yers-stats.html

Vanek #5 in goals

Past 8 seasons: http://www.quanthock...yers-stats.html

Vanek #7 in goals

Nice stats. Vanek is also 5th in power play goals over the 8 year stretch.

#22 716

716

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,711 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 08 April 2013 - 05:57 AM

Vanek is a skilled sniper but he gets roughed up and you know he's going to miss time every season. He's not a speed demon anyway and you can tell when he's playing hurt...he plays like the Hunchback of Notre Dame. This might be his best statistical year (with a limited schedule) and he's still injured. Vanek without Pominville is going to be like peanut butter without jelly. He's scored many goals for this franchise over the years but signing the offer sheet with Edmonton didn't give me a good feeling and now that his partner is gone, I don't get the feeling he wants to stay.

#23 waldo

waldo

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,457 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 08 April 2013 - 10:31 AM

View PostHeimdall, on 07 April 2013 - 04:54 PM, said:

I'd pick Vanek over half of those easy.

and you got alot of centers i don't compare him with.

good point I would just include wingers in a fair list . If .. you wanted to really get some objective context ..left wingers only

the fans have no idea how good the guy is given his limitations  and they do not seem to understand that he put those numbers up while playing on an average one line team . Its not like Crosby was his center for eight years.. although POM was a very, very, good RW

It will be years before they see a Sabre put up those numbers again over  eight seasons..if we lose him..

he makes everybody he plays with better...look at Roy stats with Vanek.. then without.. Cody stats with/without...Ennis, Pom....and on and on.

Edited by waldo, 08 April 2013 - 10:48 AM.


#24 waldo

waldo

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,457 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 08 April 2013 - 10:53 AM

View Post716, on 08 April 2013 - 05:57 AM, said:

Vanek is a skilled sniper but he gets roughed up and you know he's going to miss time every season. He's not a speed demon anyway and you can tell when he's playing hurt...he plays like the Hunchback of Notre Dame. This might be his best statistical year (with a limited schedule) and he's still injured. Vanek without Pominville is going to be like peanut butter without jelly. He's scored many goals for this franchise over the years but signing the offer sheet with Edmonton didn't give me a good feeling and now that his partner is gone, I don't get the feeling he wants to stay.

You would have turned down the 50 mil  for the 20 mil on the table to play with the Sabres? lol What would your wife say.

View PostLTS, on 08 April 2013 - 03:47 AM, said:

I have a lot of the players who are near the top of the league in scoring.  I'm not concerned what position they play.  Although I guess that tells us where our money would be better spent.

Really.. over half of them?

Elite centers was a reach..lol although goal wise  for those who have played 7-8 seasons he is comparable ..Vanek is not an elite player but he is one of the best lw in the business , has 100 pt potential on a top ten team and will be good for the next five years or so. We do not have to worry about him losing his speed to age.lol

Edited by waldo, 08 April 2013 - 11:01 AM.


#25 R_dudly

R_dudly

    The Kids are making me nervous..

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,617 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Pitts Berg

Posted 08 April 2013 - 12:32 PM

I like Vanek and I don't care about the stats, he resembles my nephew who is also a good guy to boot. That and he looks good in Blue accents his eye's nicely.