tom webster Posted March 20, 2008 Report Posted March 20, 2008 Not to mention that Roy signed his contract before this season, where he really showed his worth. Pominville will be negotiating after this season (obviously), so there is less uncertainty about his future potential. Roy is looking like a great deal, but it could have turned out to be an overpriced contract -- i.e., it looks like good foresight by Regier. Pominville has now shown that he can produce even without Briere and even without Hecht (during his injury), plus he's now shown that he can be a leader, too. All of these are reasons why I'd start with Roy's deal or, at least, why I think that they will end up above it. You want some sobering numbers, Pomminstein is now 19th in the league in scoring. Check the contracts of the other 18 players besides Malkin who is still on his entry level deal. Ribiero and Getzlaff signed new deals this year at 5 per and 5.35 per and the rest I believe are considerably higher. Ribiero's 5 for 25 seems like it might be a good fit especially considerring his age (28)
inkman Posted March 20, 2008 Report Posted March 20, 2008 Jason Pominville=Luc Robitaille+better defense I coined him Luc Robitaille when he first came into the league because you always heard those things that he couldn't do and he always seemed to have to porve his worth. It would be nice to see him put up those kind of numbers that Luc did. Great minds... ;)
carpandean Posted March 20, 2008 Report Posted March 20, 2008 You want some sobering numbers, Pomminstein is now 19th in the league in scoring. Tied for 17th, actually. ;) (With 1 less game than Eric Staal, who is also tied for 17th) I just saw that, too, and went "damn, he's getting up there in pretty good company!" Edit: he is only (mild sarcasm) tied for 21st in points/game among player who have played in at least 49 games (had to use 49 since Sid the Kid is #1 and has played exactly 49; only one other player on that list has less than 60, Stastny at 59) with 1.00 points/game, with Roy right behind him at 0.99 points/game. A few people with short (5-10 games) injuries are more productive.
LabattBlue Posted March 20, 2008 Report Posted March 20, 2008 Great minds... ;) Pominville is going to be a very good player for a long time in the NHL and I hope they are all with the Sabres, but Robitaille was a GREAT scorer. He came into the NHL as a 20 year old rookie and ripped off 8 straight 40+ goal seasons. Is Pominville a better defensive player? Absoultely, but he is "Robitaille lite" as far as offense goes. http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdispla...?pid%5B%5D=4616
LabattBlue Posted March 20, 2008 Report Posted March 20, 2008 Tied for 17th, actually. ;) (With 1 less game than Eric Staal, who is also tied for 17th) I just saw that, too, and went "damn, he's getting up there in pretty good company!" ...and with this great success, his price keeps going up and up! :o
tom webster Posted March 20, 2008 Report Posted March 20, 2008 Pominville is going to be a very good player for a long time in the NHL and I hope they are all with the Sabres, but Robitaille was a GREAT scorer. He came into the NHL as a 20 year old rookie and ripped off 8 straight 40+ goal seasons. Is Pominville a better defensive player? Absoultely, but he is "Robitaille lite" as far as offense goes. http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdispla...?pid%5B%5D=4616 Granted, Robitaille was a great scorer but you know as well as anyone, the league was a lot different back than. There was only one team that scored less than the toip team is likely to score this year.
inkman Posted March 20, 2008 Report Posted March 20, 2008 ...but Robitaille was a GREAT scorer. I can't argue that but I would like to add the footnote that he played with a certain #99 from 88-94, which encompassed all but one of his 40 goal seasons.
nobody Posted March 20, 2008 Report Posted March 20, 2008 If they can sign him to the same numbers as Roy they will be lucky.
shrader Posted March 20, 2008 Report Posted March 20, 2008 Granted, Robitaille was a great scorer but you know as well as anyone, the league was a lot different back than. There was only one team that scored less than the toip team is likely to score this year. That and goalies didn't have more padding than the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man back then. That's one rule change the league keeps pushing that actually makes sense. Now if only the union would wake up and realize they won't be risking the safety of their goalies.
tom webster Posted March 20, 2008 Report Posted March 20, 2008 That and goalies didn't have more padding than the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man back then. That's one rule change the league keeps pushing that actually makes sense. Now if only the union would wake up and realize they won't be risking the safety of their goalies. Save for the masks, defensemen now are better protected than goalies frmo that era. Anyone watching the NHL network will notice three things; 1) white dashers 2) smaller, slower players 3) tiny goaltenders who rarely venture out of their crease
X. Benedict Posted March 20, 2008 Report Posted March 20, 2008 I can't argue that but I would like to add the footnote that he played with a certain #99 from 88-94, which encompassed all but one of his 40 goal seasons. You are missing the real footnote. He played with Larry Playfair those first 3 years or so. ;)
That Aud Smell Posted March 20, 2008 Report Posted March 20, 2008 What everyone seems to be missing is that Pomminstein is going to be within one year of unrestricted free agency. ... My guess you are looking at a three year deal unless Buffalo commits to a lot more than $4 million per. Probably between 5 and 6 million per. Good for him. Not to mention that Roy signed his contract before this season, where he really showed his worth. Pominville will be negotiating after this season (obviously), so there is less uncertainty about his future potential. ... All of these are reasons why I'd start with Roy's deal or, at least, why I think that they will end up above it. Great points all - thanks. I didn't have any sense of where Pominville was vis-a-vis UFA. Given all that, I tend to agree with the # above from Ink. For some reason, I have strong confidence that they'll do what needs to be done to keep Pominville here long-term - they didn't bat an eye when it came to keeping Vanek - I expect a similar level of commitment to Pominville - my revised guess (prayer?) would be 6/34.5.
Sherman Posted March 20, 2008 Report Posted March 20, 2008 I've seen several threads like this this year. This one is about Pominville, there were also ones on Roy, Vanek, Paille, Miller and Hecth. Is it safe to say these guys have grown into the leadership roles we thought they should be? I can see the C or an A on any othose players. Get them all signed long term!
BuffalOhio Posted March 20, 2008 Report Posted March 20, 2008 I've seen several threads like this this year. This one is about Pominville, there were also ones on Roy, Vanek, Paille, Miller and Hecth. Is it safe to say these guys have grown into the leadership roles we thought they should be? I can see the C or an A on any othose players. Get them all signed long term! Everyone but Vanek. I just don't see him as leadership material.
wonderbread Posted March 20, 2008 Report Posted March 20, 2008 Everyone but Vanek. I just don't see him as leadership material. As far as Vanek goes...some people have in in them to be leaders some people followers. I think Vanek is still pretty immature yet and hasn't figured out what he will be. I would like to see him in a year or two before I pass verdict on him. As far as I am concerned how he does is a direct reflection of how the team that I love does so I am pro-Vanek.
BuffalOhio Posted March 20, 2008 Report Posted March 20, 2008 As far as Vanek goes...some people have in in them to be leaders some people followers. I think Vanek is still pretty immature yet and hasn't figured out what he will be. I would like to see him in a year or two before I pass verdict on him. As far as I am concerned how he does is a direct reflection of how the team that I love does so I am pro-Vanek. I'm not anti-Vanek, I just don't see him as a leader on the team. He just doesn't seem to have the personality for it.
Sherman Posted March 20, 2008 Report Posted March 20, 2008 I think Vanek can be every bit of a leader as Drury. Remember Drury wasn't the fiery leader, he was the hadr working follow my example type of a leader. for all the pressure Vanek had this year, the way he got himself out of his struggles was hard work. He is not the fiery leader like a Pominville or Roy but if he continues to grow and develop it will be noticed like it was with Drury..
Campy Posted March 20, 2008 Report Posted March 20, 2008 I think Vanek can be every bit of a leader as Drury. Remember Drury wasn't the fiery leader, he was the hadr working follow my example type of a leader. for all the pressure Vanek had this year, the way he got himself out of his struggles was hard work. He is not the fiery leader like a Pominville or Roy but if he continues to grow and develop it will be noticed like it was with Drury.. In terms of monotone delivery, sure, I'll give you that. But Vanek is a lazy player, and that's something no one could ever say about Drury.
LabattBlue Posted March 20, 2008 Report Posted March 20, 2008 I can't argue that but I would like to add the footnote that he played with a certain #99 from 88-94, which encompassed all but one of his 40 goal seasons. Good point. Not to nitpik, but his 1st two seasons(40+ goals) were sans Gretzky....and he had 3 35+ goal seasons later on in his career.
shrader Posted March 20, 2008 Report Posted March 20, 2008 As far as Vanek goes...some people have in in them to be leaders some people followers. I think Vanek is still pretty immature yet and hasn't figured out what he will be. I would like to see him in a year or two before I pass verdict on him. As far as I am concerned how he does is a direct reflection of how the team that I love does so I am pro-Vanek. Vanek has never really had the opportunity to be a leader. He was 18 when he left the USHL. My guess is you don't see all that much leadership yet at that age. He left Minnesota after 2 years and then only spent one year at the AHL level. For the most part, he has always been one of the younger guys everywhere he played (beyond his teenage years anyway). He may not be a leader, but like you said, there is still time to find out. If not, that's fine. Not everyone has to play that role.
Sherman Posted March 20, 2008 Report Posted March 20, 2008 In terms of monotone delivery, sure, I'll give you that. But Vanek is a lazy player, and that's something no one could ever say about Drury. I wouldn't say he is lazy. He may not look like he is going 100 mph all the time but what guy who stands in front of the net does? His 1st and 3rd goal last night. He may have looked lazy but he did what is expected of him. Go to the net and help the team score. He has also been in front of the net this year for plenty of other Sabre goals without registering a point. I'm not saying he is on par with Drury. I am saying he CAN be a leader like Drury. Drury had it pretty easy his first few seasons flying under the radar of Sakic, Forsberg, Blake, Roy... He never lived up to expectations in Calgary. That was the first year the spotlight was on him and expectations were high. Drury developed into the leader he is today. He did it through hard work and I think that is how Vanek seems to be developing.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.