Interesting answers by Vanek

[Stoner]

This is what I think goes into it.....

 

Generally a team has 2 forwards on the PK at any one time.

Generally a team has 2 main PK units....which means 4 forwards altogether.

For each unit one of them must take the faceoff

That leaves 2 who might not.... (if a guy gets thrown out then the second forward must take it.)

It is better if all 4 can take a draw but not always necesssary.....

 

So if you don't take faceoffs......that leaves 2 spots.....one was filled by Pomminstein a very good PK guy and actually a guy who can take a draw if he has to....checking quickly....he had to take a shorthanded draw in 7 games last year. Not what you want, but he can do it.

 

it is better if all 4 PK forwards guys can take a draw, because that gives you more options as a coach esp. at home. Even better if one is a right handed shot to draw it to the corner on the forehand when the draw is to the goaltenders left. That person is Tim Connolly who missed the first 10 games ....

 

Sure it is a little like baseball...you are playing percentages over the course of a season...but they make a difference.

 

So Vanek was really competing with Pomminstein for ice time on the PK and with Paille - who was getting most of the second unit time when Connolly went out in December.

 

So the question is really why Pomminstein and not Vanek on the PK....(that one seems obvious to me, Pomminstein is just better (and a R shot)) .....

 

Now if you are going to fault Ruff.....you can talk why Paille and not Vanek....but Ruff was splitting up some of that time between the two. After Vanek's jaw break, the discussion was pretty much over

 

I could be totally wrong...but that's how I see it.

 

Connolly won only roughly a third of his shorthanded faceoffs. Jochen Hecht was near the top of the forward ranks in shorthanded ice time per game, and he's brutal on faceoffs. Both Connolly and Hecht were in the low 40s in overall faceoff percentage.

 

This is good "Inside Hockey" how-they-make-sausage, but it's missing a little context.

 

1. To belabor the point, Lindy said he wanted to make Vanek the best or one of the best two-way players. And he gave him a good look on the penalty kill early on before pretty much giving up on the idea. Now, if coaches teach and his avowed goal was making Vanek a better defensive player (one of the best actually), this puzzles me. Don't being one of the best defensive players in the league and killing penalties go hand in hand?

 

2. Lindy not only cut Vanek's shorthanded ice time very early in the season, he cut his overall ice time even after his very strong start well past the 20-game mark.

 

3. Lindy historically has held up shorthanded ice time as a carrot.

 

I could be wrong too X. I just think there's more to the story than, well, Vanek can't take faceoffs, so that's that. I smell a faint whiff of smoke in Vanek's answer to the question. My gut says this whole issue is a juicy onion with several layers to enjoy.

[VansTheMans]

Id like to see Vanek given more ice time. I have to believe the more time he has on the ice, the better player he'll develop to be.

 

That isn't to say he should just be "handed" PK time; ice time should always be rewarded based upon consistency and effort. However, you can't tell me Derek Roy was playing more consistently than Vanek was in the first 20 games of last season, yet Vanek was only on the PK for the first 10 games.

 

It's good Lindy is tough on Vanek, but it may be wise to start trusting him with a few more responsibilities. Give him a bit, and see where that takes his game. He is undeniably the most talented scorer on the team; perhaps it'd be best to let his ice time show that.

[X. Benedict]

Connolly won only roughly a third of his shorthanded faceoffs. Jochen Hecht was near the top of the forward ranks in shorthanded ice time per game, and he's brutal on faceoffs. Both Connolly and Hecht were in the low 40s in overall faceoff percentage.

 

This is good "Inside Hockey" how-they-make-sausage, but it's missing a little context.

 

1. To belabor the point, Lindy said he wanted to make Vanek the best or one of the best two-way players. And he gave him a good look on the penalty kill early on before pretty much giving up on the idea. Now, if coaches teach and his avowed goal was making Vanek a better defensive player (one of the best actually), this puzzles me. Don't being one of the best defensive players in the league and killing penalties go hand in hand?

 

2. Lindy not only cut Vanek's shorthanded ice time very early in the season, he cut his overall ice time even after his very strong start well past the 20-game mark.

 

3. Lindy historically has held up shorthanded ice time as a carrot.

 

I could be wrong too X. I just think there's more to the story than, well, Vanek can't take faceoffs, so that's that. I smell a faint whiff of smoke in Vanek's answer to the question. My gut says this whole issue is a juicy onion with several layers to enjoy.

 

Quite a journey for what I thought was a pretty innocuous comment by Vanek. :lol:

 

Anyway, to finish my fascination with faceoffs..... nobody is going to win too many faceoffs shorthanded...you just don't want the PP unit to win it cleanly. It does explain why Regier wanted Dominic Moore however.

 

1. Yep to some degree. But Vanek isn't close to being the best two way player on the team yet, let alone the NHL. He takes a lot of stick penalties on the backcheck.....I think he's improved and has shown a lot more hustle in this department. Generally I think Lindy would be happy with a solid backcheck and better plus/minus numbers.

 

2. I don't dispute that.

 

3. A Historical Carrot? I can't think of any other examples.

[Stoner]

Quite a journey for what I thought was a pretty innocuous comment by Vanek. :lol:

 

Anyway, to finish my fascination with faceoffs..... nobody is going to win too many faceoffs shorthanded...you just don't want the PP unit to win it cleanly. It does explain why Regier wanted Dominic Moore however.

 

1. Yep to some degree. But Vanek isn't close to being the best two way player on the team yet, let alone the NHL. He takes a lot of stick penalties on the backcheck.....I think he's improved and has shown a lot more hustle in this department. Generally I think Lindy would be happy with a solid backcheck and better plus/minus numbers.

 

2. I don't dispute that.

 

3. A Historical Carrot? I can't think of any other examples.

 

3. Miro? I don't recall that he killed penalties early in his time with Ruff. Then he was a prominent second unit type guy off and on for the rest of his career in Buffalo IIRC. I'd also venture to bet Satan's ice time was a lot higher than Vanek's.

[Alaska Darin]

Color me crazy but I don't want to see my leading goal scorer wasting a ton of energy killing penalties. If that's the case, your team generally has a serious depth problem. Know your role, Thomas.

[shrader]

Color me crazy but I don't want to see my leading goal scorer wasting a ton of energy killing penalties. If that's the case, your team generally has a serious depth problem. Know your role, Thomas.

 

It really depends on the player. The all time shorthanded goals list is littered with names like Gretzky, Lemieux, Yzerman, and Messier (also pretty Oiler heavy). Those kind of guys can kill all they want, but yeah, Vanek isn't one of those guys.

[Stoner]

It really depends on the player. The all time shorthanded goals list is littered with names like Gretzky, Lemieux, Yzerman, and Messier (also pretty Oiler heavy). Those kind of guys can kill all they want, but yeah, Vanek isn't one of those guys.

 

Dude scored two shorthanded goals in the first three games of the season!

[SwampD]

It really depends on the player. The all time shorthanded goals list is littered with names like Gretzky, Lemieux, Yzerman, and Messier (also pretty Oiler heavy). Those kind of guys can kill all they want, but yeah, Vanek isn't one of those guys.

Not as long as Lindy is his coach. He doesn't even have him out there at the end of games when we are only down by one.

 

 

 

(I don't really hate Lindy as much as it might seem...it's just fun)

[wjag]

So after reading all the analysis, which by the way was probably one of the best threads ever for technical content, I conclude that Lindy concluded that Vanek couldn't/wouldn't be one of the best two-way players ever... Ever think that maybe he just didn't have the stamina to play all game, game-in, game-out?

 

The lack of PK time never really troubled me. The lack of ES time always did/does. You have to ask why he consistently logs less time than other forwards by as much as 25%. Maybe he just doesn't have the stamina.

[X. Benedict]

It really depends on the player. The all time shorthanded goals list is littered with names like Gretzky, Lemieux, Yzerman, and Messier (also pretty Oiler heavy). Those kind of guys can kill all they want, but yeah, Vanek isn't one of those guys.

Thanks for that.

 

at the risk of belaboring a point.....Yzerman, Gretsky, Lemieux were the best faceoff men on their teams, Messier was second best for a while... :lol:

 

There is a real connection between winning possession and shorthanded goals....the shorties are a bonus, they were out there to win possession.

[X. Benedict]

So after reading all the analysis, which by the way was probably one of the best threads ever for technical content, I conclude that Lindy concluded that Vanek couldn't/wouldn't be one of the best two-way players ever... Ever think that maybe he just didn't have the stamina to play all game, game-in, game-out?

 

The lack of PK time never really troubled me. The lack of ES time always did/does. You have to ask why he consistently logs less time than other forwards by as much as 25%. Maybe he just doesn't have the stamina.

 

I might be in the minority here, but part of this is that Vanek is spending a lot of time in the kitchen working for position....i think it is a little like being a greco-roman wrestler in terms of stamina, although he isn't in the boards, he has more constant body contact than any forward getting more ice-time than him.

[wjag]

I might be in the minority here, but part of this is that Vanek is spending a lot of time in the kitchen working for position....i think it is a little like being a greco-roman wrestler in terms of stamina, although he isn't in the boards, he has more constant body contact than any forward getting more ice-time than him.

Great point. He is getting tagged in front of the net all the time.. Probably is wearing him down.

[Stoner]

I might be in the minority here, but part of this is that Vanek is spending a lot of time in the kitchen working for position....i think it is a little like being a greco-roman wrestler in terms of stamina, although he isn't in the boards, he has more constant body contact than any forward getting more ice-time than him.

 

What was the scouting report on Vanek coming out of Minny? Goes to the net and takes a beating in limited ice time... could be top two-way player... perfect for penalty killing role? Don't think so.

 

How did he score those two game-winning goals in the Frozen Four in Buffalo? Tip-ins? No.

 

Yeah, to no one's surprise, this thread is all about how Lindy Ruff has no clue how to coach talent. He's treating Vanek like the rusty nail that needs to be pounded down. "I'll turn this kid into an NHL player, just like me." No problem with Vanek's goal numbers so far, but he could be so much more, and would be so much more in another system, under another coach.

 

I ask again. Is Alexander Ovechkin the same player with Ruff as coach? Are Crosby and Malkin? Didn't those organizations basically have to bring in coaches to get the hell out of the way?

[tom webster]

What was the scouting report on Vanek coming out of Minny? Goes to the net and takes a beating in limited ice time... could be top two-way player... perfect for penalty killing role? Don't think so.

 

How did he score those two game-winning goals in the Frozen Four in Buffalo? Tip-ins? No.

 

Yeah, to no one's surprise, this thread is all about how Lindy Ruff has no clue how to coach talent. He's treating Vanek like the rusty nail that needs to be pounded down. "I'll turn this kid into an NHL player, just like me." No problem with Vanek's goal numbers so far, but he could be so much more, and would be so much more in another system, under another coach.

 

I ask again. Is Alexander Ovechkin the same player with Ruff as coach? Are Crosby and Malkin? Didn't those organizations basically have to bring in coaches to get the hell out of the way?

 

And I would ask, does Mike Modano become the great two way player without Hitchcock's coaching. Vanek has a better chance of molding himself into an all around player like Modano then he does of becoming the player Ovechkin or Malkin are.

[X. Benedict]

What was the scouting report on Vanek coming out of Minny? Goes to the net and takes a beating in limited ice time... could be top two-way player... perfect for penalty killing role? Don't think so.

 

How did he score those two game-winning goals in the Frozen Four in Buffalo? Tip-ins? No.

 

Yeah, to no one's surprise, this thread is all about how Lindy Ruff has no clue how to coach talent. He's treating Vanek like the rusty nail that needs to be pounded down. "I'll turn this kid into an NHL player, just like me." No problem with Vanek's goal numbers so far, but he could be so much more, and would be so much more in another system, under another coach.

 

I ask again. Is Alexander Ovechkin the same player with Ruff as coach? Are Crosby and Malkin? Didn't those organizations basically have to bring in coaches to get the hell out of the way?

 

cbc 2003 draft prospects

 

6. Thomas Vanek LW/RW, U. of Minnesota (WCHA)

 

Date of birth: Jan 19, 1984 Place of birth: Graz, Austria HT: 6-2 WT: 208 Shoots/Catches: R The next Ilya Kovalchuk or Pavel Brendl. It's hard to get a consensus on what the future will hold for Thomas Vanek. There's no doubt that the kid has an offensive upside, registering 31 goals in 45 games in his freshman season with Minnesota, but many doubt his work ethic. Like Brendl, Vanek has the rare ability to create scoring chances, but is a huge defensive liability. NHL coaches hate those type of players.

 

 

That's pretty consistent with other things you'll find....you'll also find stuff like natural goal scorer, great hands, etc.

 

 

 

I get your question......but how about this......how would Ruff and the organization have done handling Nikolai Zherdev, the player chosen before Vanek?

[Stoner]

"He's a great physical specimen, being barely 19 years old. He's powerful and he's got everything. He can skate like the wind and has the quickest hands I've seen on a kid that age in a long time. "The rap on him is that some nights he doesn't show up. Personally, I think that's more of a function of the way he plays. He's not one of those guys who runs in and stirs everything up. He plays by reading what's going on and reacting to what happens. To say that he's lazy or doesn't have good work habits is silly...."

 

That's from an NHL scout, unnamed. http://www.insidecollegehockey.com/7Archiv...draft8_0135.htm

[Stoner]

And I would ask, does Mike Modano become the great two way player without Hitchcock's coaching. Vanek has a better chance of molding himself into an all around player like Modano then he does of becoming the player Ovechkin or Malkin are.

 

What if Vanek doesn't view himself that way?

 

All in all, I'm trying to figure out why the guy seems so miserable.

[X. Benedict]

What if Vanek doesn't view himself that way?

 

All in all, I'm trying to figure out why the guy seems so miserable.

 

Miserable?

 

I guess I am missing that.

 

What's your angle here?

 

Ovechkin is the best hockey player alive today and can pull the puck to himself from anywhere.

 

Vanek is just not that kind of player. He might be one of the best players Buffalo has seen on the PP. (yes, with tips...I don't see anything wrong with that...it's a remarkable talent). But Vanek really needs a Center to get the puck to him.

Once he has it, he can create space, even down low. Very hard to do...

 

Vanek needs to work hard to be elite on 5x5 situations over the entire ice. That's not a rip on him, or to say Buffalo isn't getting its money's worth, or that the coaching is bad (I think Vanek has in fact gotten much better....his first two seasons he clearly was a liability on the backcheck). It's just that he's at his best working from the top of the circles down. He won't be winning the Selke anytime soon....but moving his legs on the backcheck is the goal, and covering the point.

 

I think he is going to keep getting stronger, and smarter. He's going to be coming into his best years.

[VansTheMans]

I think he is going to keep getting stronger, and smarter. He's going to be coming into his best years.

 

This I agree on.

 

Vanek has improved greatly the past few years, and Lindy deserves some credit for that.

 

Vanek has taken his coach's criticism to heart, reworked his game a bit and has grown from it. He's a better two way player, he's skating harder and faster than in previous seasons and because of it he is becoming a more complete player. Ruff has been hard on him, but its obviously working.

 

If Vanek continues to put in the work, increases his stamina and is willing to go hard at the opposing team, he'll be one of the best players in the Eastern Conference.

 

Let's be thankful he's grown and is willing to work...something which say a Dany Heatley isn't willing to do.

[Mbossy]

Let's be clear here with all these opinions.

 

Vanek can be great on the PK, but needs to learn how to win a faceoff.

 

He is good on the backcheck, when he's not tired out from being beaten up in front of the net.

 

He can make plays, but if he's the best guy on the ice there are no other players to 'suck' defenders of him ie need Timmay.

 

And he could beat more defenders if he'd just learn something new instead of going for his non-stickhandling pull left move.

 

I expect him to be even better this year, maybe 50 goals, but more "intangibles".

[SwampD]

I'm still trying to recover from X saying Vanek needs to learn to cover the point. When is the last time you saw ANY Sabre cover the point.

 

"Five in, Five Out" :wallbash:

[Stoner]

X: Miserable as in does the guy have teeth? He rarely, and I mean rarely, appears to enjoy scoring a goal. There was some spontaneity in his celebrations early last season, but it appeared to disappear quickly. Joyless is the word I would use.

 

A question: with his amazing hand-eye coordination, shouldn't he be good on faceoffs?

[X. Benedict]

X: Miserable as in does the guy have teeth? He rarely, and I mean rarely, appears to enjoy scoring a goal. There was some spontaneity in his celebrations early last season, but it appeared to disappear quickly. Joyless is the word I would use.

 

A question: with his amazing hand-eye coordination, shouldn't he be good on faceoffs?

 

It's wacky, IMO.

 

Faceoffs are kind of a funny thing. I would liken in to how pitchers watch hitters in baseball even when they aren't

in the game.

 

The good faceoff guys know the linesmen's rhythm, but they also know the other faceoff guys and what they are trying to do, as well as where their linemates are going and going to be. So it is vision, hands, rhythm, the ability to cheat, strength, know-how.

 

Rob Brindamore is just a freak at it. Yannick Perauelt was.

Some guys just have a knack...Brent Peterson..........

 

It is one of those things in which experience makes you better at it I think.

 

But can it be learned and practiced?......I think Dave Andreychuck by the end of his career was taking a ton of them.

he practically reinvented himself as a specialist for Tampa's Cup season.

[shrader]

And let's not forget that the best faceoff guys are some of the best "cheaters" out there.

[X. Benedict]

And let's not forget that the best faceoff guys are some of the best "cheaters" out there.

 

By definition.

 

And Drama queens.Watch Sidney Crosby...he's always btitching at the linesmen about

on-sides and offsides on all close calls....I think if he get them thinking they made a mistake they are less likely to throw him out when he comes in early on faceoffs.

 

I don't know if that is entirely fair. Just a perception.