Jump to content


Photo

What would you offer Thomas Vanek?


  • Please log in to reply
111 replies to this topic

Poll: What would you offer Thomas Vanek?

How long?

You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.

How much?

You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.
Vote Guests cannot vote

#81 That Aud Smell

That Aud Smell

    That Nostalgic Olfactory Blend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,160 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Bobcaygeon, Ontario

Posted 07 July 2017 - 09:13 AM

Trying to reconcile "fantasy hockey" style of roster management against reality.


Okay.

I'm just unclear on what the rotting corpse of Matt Moulson haa to do with giving Vanek a 1x3 contract.

#82 sabreguy

sabreguy

    Fourth Liner

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

Posted 07 July 2017 - 09:44 AM

33 years old, 17 goals, 31 assists, 48 points last season.

nothing, zip, zero, nadda don't want him back.



#83 TrueBlueGED

TrueBlueGED

    #fancystats

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,973 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 July 2017 - 09:55 AM

I know realistically Moulson << Vanek, but the point is that Moulson is on the roster now. If we buy him out and give Vanek a contract, will we realistically save any cap space? and then Moulson would be on our books longer. I think we need to just get the best use we can out of him. He potentially could be used in a fashion similar to how we would envision using Vanek.


Moulson can still tap in some stuff on the PP, but he's useless at even strength
4th line and 2nd unit PP is his only spot if he must be in the lineup (I'd still bury him in Rochester and deal with the cap hit when hoping he retires). Vanek is still effective on a scoring line at even strength. They can't be used similarly.

#84 Saratoga Sabres Fan

Saratoga Sabres Fan

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 948 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Adirondacks

Posted 07 July 2017 - 10:30 AM

I haven't looked the stats up but I'd be curious to see what the difference is in goals between Moulson and Vanek as far as pp vs 5v5.

#85 Taro T

Taro T

    It leads you here despite your destination under the MW tonight.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,258 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 July 2017 - 04:47 PM

Moulson can still tap in some stuff on the PP, but he's useless at even strength
4th line and 2nd unit PP is his only spot if he must be in the lineup (I'd still bury him in Rochester and deal with the cap hit when hoping he retires). Vanek is still effective on a scoring line at even strength. They can't be used similarly.


And, if you're hoping for any pp production out of him he almost HAS to be on the 1st pp unit in Reinhart's role from last season. (Eye test said he was almost shutout on the 2nd unit.) And if you play him there, make sure Eichel &/or Ristolainen skate slowly back into their zone to pick up a cleared puck to give Moulson enough time to at least make whether he was onsides a coach's challenge.

#86 Randall Flagg

Randall Flagg

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,342 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:WNY

Posted 08 July 2017 - 01:50 PM

I haven't looked the stats up but I'd be curious to see what the difference is in goals between Moulson and Vanek as far as pp vs 5v5.

I've been meaning to do this, should get around to it soon. Vanek's 5v5 P/60 is top 10 in the NHL last year, I know that.



#87 inkman

inkman

    Fledgling Member of TSC

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,779 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairport

Posted 08 July 2017 - 02:52 PM

I've been meaning to do this, should get around to it soon. Vanek's 5v5 P/60 is top 10 in the NHL last year, I know that.

Also number 1 in Vanek faces

http://media.gettyim...55499?s=612x612

Edited by inkman, 08 July 2017 - 02:55 PM.


#88 d4rksabre

d4rksabre

    Playground King

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,933 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The big slide

Posted 08 July 2017 - 02:55 PM

Also number 1 in Vanek faces

http://media.gettyim...55499?s=612x612


That's a grade A Vanek face.

#89 Sabres Fan In NS

Sabres Fan In NS

    I'd rather be in Sarajevo, or Istanbul (not Constantinople)

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,393 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

Posted 08 July 2017 - 06:48 PM

That's a grade A Vanek face.

 

Best rendition yet.



#90 IKnowPhysics

IKnowPhysics

    First Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,268 posts

Posted 09 July 2017 - 12:22 PM

Also number 1 in Vanek faces

http://media.gettyim...55499?s=612x612

 

Not bad.

 

Vanek+face.jpg



#91 Saratoga Sabres Fan

Saratoga Sabres Fan

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 948 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Adirondacks

Posted 09 July 2017 - 03:26 PM

I've been meaning to do this, should get around to it soon. Vanek's 5v5 P/60 is top 10 in the NHL last year, I know that.

 

Thanks that would be awesome. I know that from a quick glance Vanek's 17 goals last year 12 of them were even strength. Matty Mo's 14 goals only 3 of them were even strength. Vanek played 68 games, Moulson 81.

 

http://www.hockey-re.../vanekth01.html

http://www.hockey-re.../moulsma01.html



#92 Doohickie

Doohickie

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,619 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth, Texas

Posted 10 July 2017 - 12:37 PM

You're right, but would Vanek's presence really make that much of a difference to this offense?  (Especially in the scenario where Moulson plays in similar situations we would put Vanek in?)

 

I'm taking it as a given that Moulson is playing out his contract.  If they can't move him that's the course of action that makes the most sense over the long haul (no sense in stretching out his cap hit as the result of a buyout).  The only other scenario I can envision is that they bring Vanek in and buy out Moulson.  The cap hit of Vanek + Moulson's buyout amount is not significantly better than just living with Moulson and moving on, especially since buying him out would haunt the cap for several extra years.

 

Maybe there is a creative way to disposition Moulson, but until he is gone I don't see the Sabres picking up Vanek.



#93 Taro T

Taro T

    It leads you here despite your destination under the MW tonight.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,258 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 10 July 2017 - 01:13 PM

You're right, but would Vanek's presence really make that much of a difference to this offense?  (Especially in the scenario where Moulson plays in similar situations we would put Vanek in?)
 
I'm taking it as a given that Moulson is playing out his contract.  If they can't move him that's the course of action that makes the most sense over the long haul (no sense in stretching out his cap hit as the result of a buyout).  The only other scenario I can envision is that they bring Vanek in and buy out Moulson.  The cap hit of Vanek + Moulson's buyout amount is not significantly better than just living with Moulson and moving on, especially since buying him out would haunt the cap for several extra years.
 
Maybe there is a creative way to disposition Moulson, but until he is gone I don't see the Sabres picking up Vanek.

Considering many people don't HATE the idea of having Vanek in the lineup but there's near unanimity of angst seeing Moulson dressing, it probably would make a difference. Even if Vanek only played 4th line, 2pp, & 2nd SO specialist; there is a reasonable chance he could be useful in at least 2 of those roles & given his 5v5 scoring analytics MIGHT not be an anchor on a top 3 line. Whereas Moulson MIGHT be useful on PP2 but IMHO he needs to be on PP1 to show any finish. & there are better options for stand in front of the net &/or high slot finisher to give him that assignment.

Seems to me, they either don't want Vanek or only want him on a 1 year deal. (No sense risking having 2 Moulsons to bury in the minors when Eichel finally starts to get paid & Nylander ideally would be ready to move up from Ra-cha-cha.)

Can't see any reasonable scenario where Moulson gets bought out. Would only expect that in a situation where they can pick up either a stud D-man or the IDEAL winger for Eichel (whomever that is) & money is too tight w/out a Moulson buyout. Considering Boterill doesn't appear to want to bring in really high priced guys from the outside, don't see that as anymore than a true remote possibilty.

If Vanek is brought in Moulson is either designated 13th forward (sorry Deslauriers) or is providing a scoring punch down in Ra-cha-cha. Really hope that's the plan for him anyhow, but expect they will pencil him in at TC & a kid will need to clearly beat him out to displace him. (Which, really shouldn't be that hard to do. Though my expectation is he holds the kids off in September. October & November could be very different stories. ;))

#94 Doohickie

Doohickie

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,619 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth, Texas

Posted 10 July 2017 - 02:25 PM

Considering many people don't HATE the idea of having Vanek in the lineup but there's near unanimity of angst seeing Moulson dressing, it probably would make a difference. Even if Vanek only played 4th line, 2pp, & 2nd SO specialist; there is a reasonable chance he could be useful in at least 2 of those roles & given his 5v5 scoring analytics MIGHT not be an anchor on a top 3 line. Whereas Moulson MIGHT be useful on PP2 but IMHO he needs to be on PP1 to show any finish. & there are better options for stand in front of the net &/or high slot finisher to give him that assignment.

Seems to me, they either don't want Vanek or only want him on a 1 year deal. (No sense risking having 2 Moulsons to bury in the minors when Eichel finally starts to get paid & Nylander ideally would be ready to move up from Ra-cha-cha.)

Can't see any reasonable scenario where Moulson gets bought out. Would only expect that in a situation where they can pick up either a stud D-man or the IDEAL winger for Eichel (whomever that is) & money is too tight w/out a Moulson buyout. Considering Boterill doesn't appear to want to bring in really high priced guys from the outside, don't see that as anymore than a true remote possibilty.

If Vanek is brought in Moulson is either designated 13th forward (sorry Deslauriers) or is providing a scoring punch down in Ra-cha-cha. Really hope that's the plan for him anyhow, but expect they will pencil him in at TC & a kid will need to clearly beat him out to displace him. (Which, really shouldn't be that hard to do. Though my expectation is he holds the kids off in September. October & November could be very different stories. ;))

 

I can agree with most of that.  I just don't see Vanek as that IDEAL winger.



#95 Taro T

Taro T

    It leads you here despite your destination under the MW tonight.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,258 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 10 July 2017 - 02:39 PM

I can agree with most of that.  I just don't see Vanek as that IDEAL winger.


Vanek ABSOLUTELY isn't.

But his relatively low $ contract wouldn't be the one to cause the Sabres to buyout Moulson next season.

One, or both, contracts could get buried in Ra-cha-cha next year if necessary should Vanek get a 1 year deal & then another one next year.

#96 inkman

inkman

    Fledgling Member of TSC

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,779 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairport

Posted 10 July 2017 - 03:49 PM

I'd offer Tom a handy in the Harbor Center parking garage

#97 iTInSn

iTInSn

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,234 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:WNY

Posted 10 July 2017 - 04:01 PM

I'd offer Tom a handy in the Harbor Center parking garage

Man hands usually=no thanks....

#98 inkman

inkman

    Fledgling Member of TSC

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,779 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairport

Posted 10 July 2017 - 04:03 PM

Man hands usually=no thanks....


Just close your eyes and think of a less fugly bald tattooed guy with softer hands

#99 Doohickie

Doohickie

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,619 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth, Texas

Posted 10 July 2017 - 04:07 PM

That doesn't help.  :blink:



#100 SwampD

SwampD

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,632 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Jersey, orig. NT

Posted 10 July 2017 - 04:09 PM

I'd offer Tom a handy in the Harbor Center parking garage

You really want to see Vanek face, don't you?



#101 inkman

inkman

    Fledgling Member of TSC

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,779 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairport

Posted 10 July 2017 - 04:13 PM

You really want to see Vanek face, don't you?


Among other body parts

#102 PromoTheRobot

PromoTheRobot

    Second Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,899 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 10 July 2017 - 04:41 PM

Is anyone interested in TV? Not seeing any buzz.



#103 Radar

Radar

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 628 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Western New York

Posted 10 July 2017 - 04:44 PM

Is anyone interested in TV? Not seeing any buzz.


No.

#104 Sabres Fan In NS

Sabres Fan In NS

    I'd rather be in Sarajevo, or Istanbul (not Constantinople)

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,393 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

Posted 11 July 2017 - 10:39 AM

Is anyone interested in TV? Not seeing any buzz.

 

Got rid of it 20 years ago.  Too much buzz.



#105 FuhrFury

FuhrFury

    Fourth Liner

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

Posted 11 July 2017 - 11:17 AM

Is anyone interested in TV? Not seeing any buzz.

 

What was the reason again why we thought Vanek was coming back to Buffalo? Because Pominville came back? I don't believe JBOT has even contacted Vanek's agent.



#106 ubkev

ubkev

    First Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,304 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pennsyltucky via Upstate NY

Posted 11 July 2017 - 11:22 AM

What was the reason again why we thought Vanek was coming back to Buffalo? Because Pominville came back? I don't believe JBOT has even contacted Vanek's agent.


Because he was on buffalo radio on June 30th.

#107 We've

We've

    Self-appointed Expert

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,914 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:in your head

Posted 11 July 2017 - 11:22 AM

What was the reason again why we thought Vanek was coming back to Buffalo? Because Pominville came back? I don't believe JBOT has even contacted Vanek's agent.

And he did a radio interview in Buffalo.

#108 NNYSABRESMAN

NNYSABRESMAN

    Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 114 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:WATERTOWN, N.Y.

Posted 11 July 2017 - 12:23 PM

A dozen wings at Duff's as He's passing through town!

#109 ericcomposer72

ericcomposer72

    Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 11 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NYC

Posted 13 July 2017 - 01:23 PM

Reports are that he's been talking to 5 teams, correct? Anything further?

 

I'd suppose that even if GMBOT was extremely interested, he would have let Vanek's agent know that they can't really go anywhere until Eichel's extension is done.

 

I'm still in favor of trading Moulson for a draft pick, retaining half his salary, and using the $ that comes off the books with the other half to sign Vanek to 1-2 years.



#110 Sabre fan

Sabre fan

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 564 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Coboconk, Ontario

Posted 13 July 2017 - 01:25 PM

Sounds great but one big problem...NO ONE WILL TAKE MOULSON. there is no way to work Vanek in with Moulson still here and if GMJB could have got rid of matty he would be long gone.



#111 Sabres Fan In NS

Sabres Fan In NS

    I'd rather be in Sarajevo, or Istanbul (not Constantinople)

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,393 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

Posted 13 July 2017 - 01:31 PM

 

:flirt:



#112 ericcomposer72

ericcomposer72

    Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 11 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NYC

Posted 13 July 2017 - 02:09 PM

Sounds great but one big problem...NO ONE WILL TAKE MOULSON. there is no way to work Vanek in with Moulson still here and if GMJB could have got rid of matty he would be long gone.

 

You don't think anyone would take Moulson for 2mil/yr?

 

 

EDIT: 2.5 cap hit both years, 2.5 for one year and 1.5 for one year in actual salary because his contract was front-loaded.


Edited by ericcomposer72, 13 July 2017 - 02:11 PM.