Ok, Vanek played hurt the last half of the year. Instead of trading away the guy that has averaged 33 goals a season for his career, why don't we put some damn players around him.
- Powerslave

So your argument for NOT trading a guy is that he has lingering injuries? and we should pay 7.2 mil for a forward that can only play maybe half the year healthy?

Vanek for Stastny is a dumb idea. Vanek for Nash, on the other hand, isn't. They're comparable, but simply just doing something different, even moving sideways, isn't a bad thing.
- buffalofan19

I agree and as I said before I think Nash is a top 5 NHL player, put him with any kind of talent and he'll be a beast and scoring machine. Out of all these trade rumors Nash has always been my clear cut favorite.

You have to add to your scoring not one for one it. Vanek for Stastny would be completely pointless. Put Vanek with a player that can feed him the puck as well as score and he's back to a 40+ goal season

As shown by his timeline from 12 begore until the signing of Parise an Sutter, hockeyinsiderr knows nothing.
- mrpurple

Brandon sutter?

i wouldnt say knows nothing. He did call the matt carle signing at the precise time.

No one besides the minnesota reporter had parise and suter signing correct.

You have to add to your scoring not one for one it. Vanek for Stastny would be completely pointless. Put Vanek with a player that can feed him the puck as well as score and he's back to a 40+ goal season
- BarUpHockey19

Maybe maybe not.Pomminville doesnt seem to have a problem scoring without that so called number one center does he ?

You have to add to your scoring not one for one it. Vanek for Stastny would be completely pointless. Put Vanek with a player that can feed him the puck as well as score and he's back to a 40+ goal season
- BarUpHockey19

his career shooting % is over 15% for the regular season, over 18% for the playoffs...

maybe dipsy doodle derek should have gotten him the puck more

So your argument for NOT trading a guy is that he has lingering injuries? and we should pay 7.2 mil for a forward that can only play maybe half the year healthy?
- Havic03

No, my argument for not trading away the guy is that he scores goals for us and that he's WILLING to play hurt.

Maybe maybe not.Pomminville doesnt seem to have a problem scoring without that so called number one center does he ?
- buffalo 1

pommer lead the team in goal-scoring once...last season...if vanek had any kind of second half, he'd have lead the team in that department for the fifth straight season

his career shooting % is over 15% for the regular season, over 18% for the playoffs...

maybe dipsy doodle derek should have gotten him the puck more
- b0s0o1

He has the best shooting% of anyone in the NHL who isn't an outlier because they have taken too few shots. Get someone to feed him the puck!

No, my argument for not trading away the guy is that he scores goals for us and that he's WILLING to play hurt.
- Powerslave

So again your willing to pay 7.2 mil for a guy that cant produce half the year because he's hurt... I wont lie I'm lost in this logic....


And the last time Vanek scored 40 goals....guess who was his center most of the year

So again your willing to pay 7.2 mil for a guy that cant produce half the year because he's hurt... I wont lie I'm lost in this logic....


And the last time Vanek scored 40 goals....guess who was his center most of the year
- Havic03

So, who are you trading Vanek for again?

So, who are you trading Vanek for again?
- Powerslave

Vanek for Stastny=no way!!
Vanek+ for Nash=absolutely

pommer lead the team in goal-scoring once...last season...if vanek had any kind of second half, he'd have lead the team in that department for the fifth straight season
- b0s0o1

Maybe maybe not still the fact is Pomminville did it without the so called number one center argument.IMO Pomminville is the one consistant scroring winger we have and he just gets it done no matter what.I think if you added shootout goals hed finish ahead of Vanek.Im not trashing Vanek just saying.As for Nash who cares I think some team will over pay for him and his (potential).I still like Getzlaf for what this team needs .

So, who are you trading Vanek for again?
- Powerslave

Anyone who's more cost effective and grants the team more options. Put a great center up and Jpoms number and whoever is number 1 LW's numbers go up... im not saying we HAVE to trade vanek im just saying it shouldnt be off the table Its the Buffalo Sabres not Thomas Vanek & Friends

Vanek for Stastny=no way!!
Vanek+ for Nash=absolutely
- sabresfandan

Agreed... As long as then++ isn't another top 6 player or Myers, ehrhoff, or mcnabb

Agreed... As long as then++ isn't another top 6 player or Myers, ehrhoff, or mcnabb
- JVince11

Vanek,Adam and a draft pick for Nash.

Vanek for Stastny=no way!!
Vanek+ for Nash=absolutely
- sabresfandan

I'm all for the Vanek for Nash, if ONLY to shake things up further.

However - and I'm not saying you are in this group - there are people out there who think that Rick Nash is soooooo much better than Thomas Vanek. To them I say:

Nash: 32.1 goals/year

Vanek 32.8 goals/year

Anyone who's more cost effective and grants the team more options. Put a great center up and Jpoms number and whoever is number 1 LW's numbers go up... im not saying we HAVE to trade vanek im just saying it shouldnt be off the table Its the Buffalo Sabres not Thomas Vanek & Friends
- Havic03

fine, but just know that with Van gone, our top LWers become:

Leino
Foligno
Ott
Gerbe
Scott

Who had a combined 51 goals last year.

I'm all for the Vanek for Nash, if ONLY to shake things up further.

However - and I'm not saying you are in this group - there are people out there who think that Rick Nash is soooooo much better than Thomas Vanek. To them I say:

Nash: 32.1 goals/year

Vanek 32.8 goals/year
- Powerslave

Slave... Goals are the same I would agree... But look at defensive stats... Hits, takeaways, blocked shots, lack of giveaways... Nash just smashes vanek..

Nash is a very high quality captain and can play both pp and pk..

I'm all for the Vanek for Nash, if ONLY to shake things up further.

However - and I'm not saying you are in this group - there are people out there who think that Rick Nash is soooooo much better than Thomas Vanek. To them I say:

Nash: 32.1 goals/year

Vanek 32.8 goals/year
- Powerslave

Nash has literally had nobody with him in Columbus. It'd be nice to get some insider info from Homer, haven't seen him on in days.

fine, but just know that with Van gone, our top LWers become:

Leino
Foligno
Ott
Gerbe
Scott

Who had a combined 51 goals last year.
- Powerslave

Fine but with trading away Vanek... say hypothetically for Stat you lost what 500k in pay and leave yourself roughly 5 mil in the bank (because we have to resign ennis yet) you still have options to pick up another wing that is better then provided list

Slave... Goals are the same I would agree... But look at defensive stats... Hits, takeaways, blocked shots, lack of giveaways... Nash just smashes vanek..

Nash is a very high quality captain and can play both pp and pk..
- JVince11

Link?

Not saying you are wrong, but please show me.

anyway, like I said, I'm all for the deal, but it better not be much more than Vanek going the other way. Perhaps a couple 2nd round picks or something, or at worst no more than a 1st.

Unless Garth is brokering the deal, in which case we can sweeten the pot with Sekera!

Fine but with trading away Vanek... say hypothetically for Stat you lost what 500k in pay and leave yourself roughly 5 mil in the bank (because we have to resign ennis yet) you still have options to pick up another wing that is better then provided list
- Havic03

Have you seen the free agent list?

Atrocious.

And if you're trading for one, it has to be a guy that can at least pop in 25. And who's giving those guys away?

If the deals make sense, then by all means, let's do it. I'm 41 years old, have been a lifelong Sabres fan (since late 70's), and have seen more guys come and go than a Texas whorehouse. I know at some point, most of these guys on this team now won't be here in 3-4 years. So, If trading away our top goal scorer makes sense, then let's do it.

Otherwise, build around the guy.

we do not need another center, ennis, coho and grigs have a ton of skill and potential and if grigs doesn't make it then center a veteran . Plus it gives us 3 good centers like in 06-07. and ennis and coho are off limits for trades

We cant trade vanek cuz we have no depth at LW. foligno will be a ryan callahan type player which is something we need desperately.if we can get a top-6 winger with dmen, adam and picks then we should.or sign semin even though he can be a coach killer i think he has something to prove after everyone was talking s**t about him but nothing more then 2 years.

next we should offer sheet weber with a HUGE contract. giving up 4 1st rounders doesnt matter cuz we have success with drafting in the later rounds and if weber doesnt sign or the offer is matched then oh well we dont play them a lot. if we do sign him then leo,sekera, pardy can be traded to them for 7th round picks for more compensation

This is what our line up can look like and i know that there is a 1% chance of this happening but we can dream
http://www.capgeek.com/ca...lator/roster.php?id=11729

i dont know what's funnier.

stastny for vanek

or
steve ott penciled in on the first line.