Guest Sloth Posted March 30, 2010 Report Posted March 30, 2010 People should remember Vanek has been playing the entire season w/ a minor injury and he has not been able to play at 100%. I'm not trying to make excuses for the guy, but Vanek's name should not even be brought up in offseason trade talks. He is one of the few Sabres that can actually stand in front of the net. All teams need players that can do that. Vanek is a very important player for the Buffalo Sabres. The young players will continue to do well and improve if Vanek is on the ice. The Sabres do need "veterans." As for Stafford, it wouldn't bother me at all if the Sabres traded him. Stafford is another Paille. The guy has so much potential and he shows glimpses of it here and there, but Stafford is not consistent. Buffalo should trade the guy when they can.
wjag Posted March 30, 2010 Author Report Posted March 30, 2010 People should remember Vanek has been playing the entire season w/ a minor injury and he has not been able to play at 100%. I'm not trying to make excuses for the guy, but Vanek's name should not even be brought up in offseason trade talks. He is one of the few Sabres that can actually stand in front of the net. All teams need players that can do that. Vanek is a very important player for the Buffalo Sabres. The young players will continue to do well and improve if Vanek is on the ice. The Sabres do need "veterans." As for Stafford, it wouldn't bother me at all if the Sabres traded him. Stafford is another Paille. The guy has so much potential and he shows glimpses of it here and there, but Stafford is not consistent. Buffalo should trade the guy when they can. I never intended this to be a trade TV thread. I was really trying to steer the conversation to whether Buffalo should abandon the offense that parks him in front of the net for a tip drill.
static70 Posted March 30, 2010 Report Posted March 30, 2010 I never intended this to be a trade TV thread. I was really trying to steer the conversation to whether Buffalo should abandon the offense that parks him in front of the net for a tip drill. Ok, well, lets bring it back to that direction, and my apologies, never meant as a trade him issue either. But, with this being the case, lets look at how they intend to get away from that tip drill philosophy they have now. I am going to assume they keep him with Roy, since there is no Center upgrade in the forseeable future. That leaves the RW position. We had Max as a speedy RWer. He is back to his normal Max self in Atlanta, which I would immediately draw a conclusion that it is the coach which is forcing this direction on the players, hence the scoring suffers. Could it be then, Lindy's system as he attmepts to turn these guys to fit that system? If that is the case, was this the right time to do so given Miller's obvious stepped up performance? I will agree with others that Miller has benefited some from the defensive play in front of him, but it should be clear that he has also elevated his play a bit. With these questions in mind, and given our fortunes with our record, is there even a need to address these questions? My opinion is yes, there is. No matter how well we doing now, I see inconsistency in the players, and I see we are currently #3, not #1 in the conference. #3 is great, don't get me wrong, but there is also the variable of competitiveness in the Eastern Conference. Many teams in this conference are somewhat or much worse now than in the past. Our division is weaker, which the team has benefited from as well. With these variables known, take a look at Wash. specifically, but also Pitt and NJ. We face Pitt or NJ and, in my view, its a coin toss. We face Wash. with their current jaugernaught and its a hang on for dear life scenairio in my book. I just don't see this current roster going toe to toe with Wash. in the playoffs. So, from my point of view, whether Vanek is moved, or a RW component brought in to compell the offense to hustle as a team such as Wash. does would be the common sense goal to achieve. This team has done well for itself in a depleted competition pool conference wise, but they will have to face these seasoned opponents that clearly have more offensive upside, that smacks of depending on Miller to carry the day. We tried that once before with an world goalie who was much better than Miller and failed. What is the reasoning behind this approach and preceiving it will succeed now?
shrader Posted March 30, 2010 Report Posted March 30, 2010 The lack of a top tier offensive threat on the point is the main reason for his drop in numbers this year. If they can't get the puck on the net consistently, he can't tip those shots or clean up the garbage. Does that mean they need to move him away from the net a bit? I'm not so sure on that one.
thesportsbuff Posted March 30, 2010 Report Posted March 30, 2010 To be honest, I'm not a big fan of Vanek. In fact, his high point with the Sabres in my eyes was scoring that ridiculous (yet somehow effective) "around-the-world" shot in the shootout against Hasek with Ottawa in 06. I'm okay with him being on the team, because as we all know losing him AND briere and drury and mckee would have been devastating. But he has really not panned out to be as good of a player as we had hoped. I know he has been injured but I think teams know the story on him by now; stand in front of the net and deflect pucks. I think Buffalo needs to lose the commitment to him -- not in terms of contract, because I doubt many teams would be willing to take on his salary -- but I think Vanek should be looked at as more of a 2nd/3rd line player than a 1st/2nd line player. Once this happens, they can make whatever moves necessary to improve their Top 6 (now that Vanek would not be a part of it).
static70 Posted March 30, 2010 Report Posted March 30, 2010 I was looking at a different type of transition game shrader. Vanek does not have the ability to take the outside, he doesn't have the speed. He has never shown the ability to go through the defense up the middle either. Were looking for more consistency from this line, I would think that this drop off of production can be acheived a couple of ways here for Lindy, specifically tailored to Vaneks hands. For the transition game I would have anyone skating with Vanek on the fly entering the zone try to cut across to the outside and have Vanek slide up in the middle lane. Couldn't hurt since he does have a decent shot. For the zone setup, Keep Vanek off to the side or further up in the lower face off circle. Put Stafford infront of the net or Kennedy if thats who he is playing with. There has to be a different way to get Vanek enough space to use those hands.
VansTheMans Posted March 31, 2010 Report Posted March 31, 2010 The offense should be changed up. I think Lindy needs to let the offense just flow. In the Boston game, as many posters have said, the forwards were flying. They looked like the team I remember watching in 06-07. 3 forwards busting through the neutral zone and going on exciting rushes to score the big goal. The speedy offense even sparked our defense to join the rush. Myers had one of his best games of the season. He is at his best when he's active, jumps up on the rush and is capable of creating a juicy scoring opportunity.
Healthy Scratch Posted March 31, 2010 Report Posted March 31, 2010 IMHO, what's missing isn't so much skill, it's the couple of players that have the whole package -- ie skill and guts -- like Kesler, Brenden Morrow, Zetterberg or Crosby. TC, Roy and Vanek have plenty of skill, but they don't have guts like those guys do. And our guys with guts don't have the skill. Best post i've read since joining.
That Aud Smell Posted March 31, 2010 Report Posted March 31, 2010 IMHO, what's missing isn't so much skill, it's the couple of players that have the whole package -- ie skill and guts -- like Kesler, Brenden Morrow, Zetterberg or Crosby. TC, Roy and Vanek have plenty of skill, but they don't have guts like those guys do. And our guys with guts don't have the skill. Best post i've read since joining. freeman (among others) has that effect on newcomers - welcome!
LabattBlue Posted March 31, 2010 Report Posted March 31, 2010 People should remember Vanek has been playing the entire season w/ a minor injury and he has not been able to play at 100%. What injury would that be?
Stoner Posted March 31, 2010 Report Posted March 31, 2010 Best post i've read since joining. You need to start reading my posts.
nfreeman Posted March 31, 2010 Report Posted March 31, 2010 Best post i've read since joining. freeman (among others) has that effect on newcomers - welcome! Thanks to both of you and a hearty welcome to Healthy Scratch. There are many excellent posters on this board and many excellent (and funny) observations. You need to start reading my posts. True dat -- required reading.
inkman Posted March 31, 2010 Report Posted March 31, 2010 Best post i've read since joining. Am I the only one that reads a double entendre with "healthy scratch"? I think my ##### could use a healthy scratch. :-)
That Aud Smell Posted March 31, 2010 Report Posted March 31, 2010 Am I the only one that reads a double entendre with "healthy scratch"? I think my ##### could use a healthy scratch. :-) Best post i've read since joining.
wjag Posted March 31, 2010 Author Report Posted March 31, 2010 I have yet to read my best post since joining, although the one that I always laugh about was PA telling SDS to haul a troll off to Gitmo..
Healthy Scratch Posted March 31, 2010 Report Posted March 31, 2010 Am I the only one that reads a double entendre with "healthy scratch"? I think my ##### could use a healthy scratch. :-) I didn't think about that when i signed up. I suppose we all could use a 'healthy scratch' once in a while!
Eleven Posted April 1, 2010 Report Posted April 1, 2010 Are the Sabres a better team ............................................................. ..............................................without Connolly? No tip drills, but no half-assed fanciness, either.
inkman Posted April 1, 2010 Report Posted April 1, 2010 This topic certainly is intriguing but Lindy will put Vanish and the skill right back in the lineup making it a moot point.
rbochan Posted April 1, 2010 Report Posted April 1, 2010 What injury would that be? Good question. Other than mental illness, I haven't heard about anything else.
Stoner Posted April 1, 2010 Report Posted April 1, 2010 This topic certainly is intriguing but Lindy will put Vanish and the skill right back in the lineup making it a moot point. That sonofabitch.
thesportsbuff Posted April 1, 2010 Report Posted April 1, 2010 Are the Sabres a better team ............................................................. ..............................................without Connolly? No tip drills, but no half-assed fanciness, either. i would say, considering he's played every game this year up until last week and the Sabres are fighting for 2nd in the conference and have won the Northeast, that the Sabres are in fact a better team WITH Connolly
Stoner Posted April 1, 2010 Report Posted April 1, 2010 i would say, considering he's played every game this year up until last week and the Sabres are fighting for 2nd in the conference and have won the Northeast, that the Sabres are in fact a better team WITH Connolly That.
Eleven Posted April 1, 2010 Report Posted April 1, 2010 That. Same goes for Vanek and Ruff, then, right, PA?
Stoner Posted April 1, 2010 Report Posted April 1, 2010 Same goes for Vanek and Ruff, then, right, PA? Vanek, yes. I've always been pro-Vanek.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.