TSN: Vanek to Columbus

Double-Shift Lasse

Just post better
Dec 22, 2004
33,355
14,030
Exurban Cbus
I'll try and sum this up. Fans are tribal and tend to be very unforgiving. They also tend to suck at player evaluation as it pretty much stops at stats. With the invention of advanced stats in the age of asking of simply asking Google, we've losing the ability for critical thought.

The bar of terrible is pretty much if enough fans say it and they can parrot it (he's slow, as an example). The rest of the fans will just tend to pile on. We had that starting with Jenner recently.

This is true and funny as we’re saying the same thing about ‘the media’ in another thread.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Viqsi

The Wheelchair

Registered User
Jun 13, 2015
695
298
Ottawa
Maybe -- and hear me out on this -- people tend to be tribal and, in areas where their level of interest exceeds their level of expertise, often will default to agreeing with the general consensus of those they perceive as their peers.
 

Daisy Ridley

Registered User
Feb 28, 2018
296
225
Okay, I am obviously a bit biased as I am Austrian. But still, I cannot see why Vanek has a long history of being terrible. Vanek has never had a season with less than 40 points in his whole career. He is currently the player with the second most points this season on the CBJ roster. Okay, I agree that he is slow and I agree that defensively he can be a liability on some nights. But even so, a guy who usually scores 20+ goals and around 50 points can't be called terrible, even if he is bad defensively.
Agreed, people knock him just to jump on the hate wagon. He deserves some playoff criticism, but regular season he has been a consistent producer. Nucks fans were just salty they gave away a 20 goal scorer for peanuts, so they tried to dismiss him as useless and then others buy into that narrative.
 

borisbadenough

Registered User
Mar 25, 2013
1,234
13
Maybe -- and hear me out on this -- people tend to be tribal and, in areas where their level of interest exceeds their level of expertise, often will default to agreeing with the general consensus of those they perceive as their peers.

No room for objectivity here. Rational thoughts have been banned on this issue. After reading your post I think I need some safe time in the quiet room on campus. lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jaxs

Hit the post

I have your gold medal Zippy!
Oct 1, 2015
22,288
14,030
Hiding under WTG's bed...
Not sure 10 decent games calls for a feast of crow with a side order of foot in mouth.

I'm happy that he's working out & has found chemistry with Boone but he has to continue to perform into the playoffs. I expected nothing from him & have been pleasantly surprised. Maybe this is the "perfect situation" you keep hearing about but it's still too early to tell.

If he goes totally AWOL again come playoff time it all becomes a waste of time.
Have to consider you gave up nothing of any real value to acquire him though.
 

CBJx614

Registered User
May 25, 2012
14,846
6,450
C-137
Have to consider you gave up nothing of any real value to acquire him though.
Not to mention, we wouldn't likely have been in the race for the playoffs had it not been for acquiring both Cole and Vanek. We could very well be sitting behind Florida calculating the odds of us getting a lottery pick and complaining about how terrible the team is and how everyone needs traded or fired for not making the playoffs.
 

Viqsi

"that chick from Ohio"
Oct 5, 2007
53,660
30,952
40N 83W (approx)
First it was Letestu who was the awesome deadline acquisition because suddenly we could roll all four lines again and he scored in his redebut.

Then it was Cole who was the awesome deadline acquisition because of Beard Brothers Shutdowns Inc.

Now it's Vanek who's the awesome one because points points points points OMG all the points.


...are we ever going to make up our minds on this one? ;) :D
Hail to the Drunken Master.
 

MoeBartoli

Checkers-to-Jackets
Jan 12, 2011
13,954
10,153
Vanek is playing a professional and inspired game. There's no question - or shouldn't be - that he's a skilled offensively player. His knack for tip-ins/redirects is a plus on a team which is so-so in that department.

He's not the fastest skater, but his hockey IQ is high which compensates whereas many who lack speed also lack the skill and IQ to overcome a speed deficiency. It's knowledge he seems willing to share with younger players.

Right now he sits at 24 goals, tied for 61st in the league. If slot 61 doesn't seem impressive, look at it another way. On average, each team has on 2 players with 24 or more goals. That's a pretty big deal, especially for a team prone to droughts late last year and much of this year.

I've been all in pretty much since trade day on trying to sign him for next season if a $2.0-2.5M deal can be done and nothing I've seen changes my mind about that.
 

Forepar

Registered User
Nov 6, 2011
1,232
702
South-Central Ohio
Vanek is playing a professional and inspired game. There's no question - or shouldn't be - that he's a skilled offensively player. His knack for tip-ins/redirects is a plus on a team which is so-so in that department.

He's not the fastest skater, but his hockey IQ is high which compensates whereas many who lack speed also lack the skill and IQ to overcome a speed deficiency. It's knowledge he seems willing to share with younger players.

Right now he sits at 24 goals, tied for 61st in the league. If slot 61 doesn't seem impressive, look at it another way. On average, each team has on 2 players with 24 or more goals. That's a pretty big deal, especially for a team prone to droughts late last year and much of this year.

I've been all in pretty much since trade day on trying to sign him for next season if a $2.0-2.5M deal can be done and nothing I've seen changes my mind about that.

I like the goals, think it was a great find for this season. He has been a godsend for offense when CBJ most needed it. He could disappear now and the pickup would have been more than worth the cost for this season alone.

Signing him to a ONE year deal for $2.0-2.5? Probably makes sense - but I like the fact that the CBJ has the luxury of seeing how he performs in the playoffs. A 14-game preview just isn't enough of a sample size for me, as good as it has been.
If in the playoffs he disappears or the lack of speed liability becomes visibly greater during the playoffs, then I might pass on re-signing him, although a price tag at $2.0 makes it very tempting to see if he rebounds. I want the current Vanek for $2.0-2.5 M, not a slower and older version. The other data that makes me inclined to re-sign Vanek is that what seemed like great organizational depth in the F group does not appear to be currently fact. No offense to Broadhurst, but if that is the best call up from Cleveland available at F right now, then the IMMEDIATE prospect pool for next year is close to empty. Abramov, Texier, etc... may be ready soon, but likely not until 19-20 season, at the earliest. And Dubi's struggles don't help the immediate future F scenario either (I hope he's not done, but still adjusting to injury, visor, reduced role, so holding out for playoff Dubi). But it looks like CBJ will have a need next year up front. Having said that, if another club offers Vanek multiple years, let him go. This isn't Letestu, McKenzie, etc... Vanek has no speed and no extra gear to combat the ever-increasing speed in the NHL game. Part of Vanek's appeal is that Andy has been injured - would Vanek have gotten enough ice-time to blossom if Andy hadn't been injured? On what line? And I'd be the first to admit Andy's 2nd half was nowhere near his first half, but he isn't going anywhere either.

I would probably pass on a contract for more than one year, even if salary/cap hit at $2.0. Too much mileage on those tires (Vanek is 34 now, turns 35 January 2019). Further, we will need cap space in summer of 2019 to give flexibility to deal with Bob, Panarin, etc... $2.0 doesn't sound like much, but I didn't say sign any one of them, I said flexibility to work deals. If the decision is to trade Bob (not my leaning now), having cap space to take on a F with a significant salary hit in exchange (like a Tavares, etc...) will be just as important as it would be to keep Bob. CBJ will also have a better handle next summer on whether any of the presently not ready kids are ready, whether Dubi has been bought out, whether any other FA's become available. If CBJ can maneuver the cap issues with Bob, Bread, etc...and if Vanek performs well next season, CBJ could offer him another year THEN...it might cost a little more for that year then, but I prefer the flexibility ahead of time over the $1.0M in annual savings we might gain by signing Vanek to a 2-yr deal.
 
Last edited:

Jovavic

Gaslight Object Project
Oct 13, 2002
15,102
2,769
New Born Citizen Erased
I don't know if he'll be old enough to have bonuses in his contract, but that should be looked in to if he can. Throw 2 million guaranteed then maybe an extra 500k for 50 points?
 

MoeBartoli

Checkers-to-Jackets
Jan 12, 2011
13,954
10,153
I like the goals, think it was a great find for this season. He has been a godsend for offense when CBJ most needed it. He could disappear now and the pickup would have been more than worth the cost for this season alone.

Signing him to a ONE year deal for $2.0-2.5? Probably makes sense - but I like the fact that the CBJ has the luxury of seeing how he performs in the playoffs. A 14-game preview just isn't enough of a sample size for me, as good as it has been.
If in the playoffs he disappears or the lack of speed liability becomes visibly greater during the playoffs, then I might pass on re-signing him, although a price tag at $2.0 makes it very tempting to see if he rebounds. I want the current Vanek for $2.0-2.5 M, not a slower and older version. The other data that makes me inclined to re-sign Vanek is that what seemed like great organizational depth in the F group does not appear to be currently fact. No offense to Broadhurst, but if that is the best call up from Cleveland available at F right now, then the IMMEDIATE prospect pool for next year is close to empty. Abramov, Texier, etc... may be ready soon, but likely not until 19-20 season, at the earliest. And Dubi's struggles don't help the immediate future F scenario either (I hope he's not done, but still adjusting to injury, visor, reduced role, so holding out for playoff Dubi). But it looks like CBJ will have a need next year up front. Having said that, if another club offers Vanek multiple years, let him go. This isn't Letestu, McKenzie, etc... Vanek has no speed and no extra gear to combat the ever-increasing speed in the NHL game. Part of Vanek's appeal is that Andy has been injured - would Vanek have gotten enough ice-time to blossom if Andy hadn't been injured? On what line? And I'd be the first to admit Andy's 2nd half was nowhere near his first half, but he isn't going anywhere either.

I would probably pass on a contract for more than one year, even if salary/cap hit at $2.0. Too much mileage on those tires (Vanek is 34 now, turns 35 January 2019). Further, we will need cap space in summer of 2019 to give flexibility to deal with Bob, Panarin, etc... $2.0 doesn't sound like much, but I didn't say sign any one of them, I said flexibility to work deals. If the decision is to trade Bob (not my leaning now), having cap space to take on a F with a significant salary hit in exchange (like a Tavares, etc...) will be just as important as it would be to keep Bob. CBJ will also have a better handle next summer on whether any of the presently not ready kids are ready, whether Dubi has been bought out, whether any other FA's become available. If CBJ can maneuver the cap issues with Bob, Bread, etc...and if Vanek performs well next season, CBJ could offer him another year THEN...it might cost a little more for that year then, but I prefer the flexibility ahead of time over the $1.0M in annual savings we might gain by signing Vanek to a 2-yr deal.
The 14 games simply reinforce my desire to sign him in that he seems to fit. But my view is his career as has shown his floor is basically 20 goals. And I'll take the 20 along with the assists he will deliver.
 

MrRuin

Registered User
Sponsor
Apr 7, 2004
1,085
159
Somewhere in time
I think it is pretty clear that if Vanek has a decent playoff he will command much more than 2mil$. He is already worth more than that. Someone said he is already old but I think his game, which was never based on speed, translates very well into later career years. If you have guys opening space for him, like Jenner does for example, he is and will be very effective.

Down to the facts: Vanek is a perennial 20 goals/50 points player with a defensive weaknesses. He will be a FA in summer.

If you think you can sign a player like that - after a decent playoff like people are suggesting because otherwise they wouldn't even spend the cash at all - to a contract worth 2 mil $ you will be in for a surprise. However good he is playing now everything depends on the handful of games in the playoffs. If he performs he will be much more expensive. If not he may be looking at a bottom feeder team contract again. For CBJ it's tricky...if he plays well, he will command a higher contract. I would offer term for less money.

But anything can happen. I like what's happening in CBJ with Vanek on board. He should like it too, it has been a long time since he actually played on a team that competed for the ultimate prize.
 
Last edited:

DJA

over the horizon radar
Sponsor
Apr 17, 2002
21,061
5,892
Beyond the Infinite
If Vanek wants pretty much a guaranteed shot at playoff hockey, a little stability in the offseason, and continue playing with good players, I don’t see why on earth he wouldn’t sign a $2 to $2.5 mil one year contract with us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Johnny Jacket

hardkorejackets

Registered User
Nov 6, 2013
768
187
Coldwater, OH
I think it is pretty clear that if Vanek has a decent playoff he will command much more than 2mil$. He is already worth more than that. Someone said he is already old but I think his game, which was never based on speed, translates very well into later career years. If you have guys opening space for him, like Jenner does for example, he is and will be very effective.

Down to the facts: Vanek is a perennial 20 goals/50 points player with a defensive weaknesses. He will be a FA in summer.

If you think you can sign a player like that - after a decent playoff like people are suggesting because otherwise they wouldn't even spend the cash at all - to a contract worth 2 mil $ you will be in for a surprise. However good he is playing now everything depends on the handful of games in the playoffs. If he performs he will be much more expensive. If not he may be looking at a bottom feeder team contract again. For CBJ it's tricky...if he plays well, he will command a higher contract. I would offer term for less money.

But anything can happen. I like what's happening in CBJ with Vanek on board. He should like it too, it has been a long time since he actually played on a team that competed for the ultimate prize.

If Vanek has a good playoffs, I think his AAV will be closer to 3 million. But, I think we should offer around 2.5-2.75 million for 1 year.

Vanek's probably not a good idea to offer a term contract from the Blue Jacket's perspective for a couple of reasons... And, i don't expect you to know this either. But, the reason we list a 1 year contract for him is with all of the big money expiring contracts/free agents that we have upcoming in 2019. In 2019 we will have Panarin (UFA), Bobrovsky (UFA), Werenski (RFA) that summer. That will require a lot of salary. We've speculated letting Bobrovsky go for how much money he will command, but I still think management would like to keep him around (if possible). Not that it will heavily influence management's decision, but if you were to poll the casual CBJ fans- Bobrovsky would probably be the most recognizable player. He's been here since summer of 2012, I believe. Also, we have a prospect in Abramov that should be competing for a NHL job in a year or two.
 

EDM

Registered User
Mar 8, 2008
6,222
2,004
That does not make a one year contract to Vanek either improbable or a bad idea.
 

The Jones Zone

Registered User
Nov 27, 2013
6,082
2,521
Raleigh, NC
Assuming He continues to put up points, the only thing that may allow the Jackets to be able to afford to re-sign him is his defense, or lack of it


While He has been good in the short term, and not had any terrible moments on D, could Torts go an entire 82 game season and not loose it when He doesn't compete on defense? I'm not sure. If I had to guess today, I say he does not get re-signed in Columbus
 

borisbadenough

Registered User
Mar 25, 2013
1,234
13
I guess the question is what is a 34 year old ,25 goal 60 pt offensive minded winger with a 30+goal, 70 pt upside, who can still play with any top six when necessary and on your number 1 pp,(if you know how to use him correctly) worth in the market?


We will find out but imo the answer will not be found in Columbus and it will be more than be 3 mil.
 
Last edited:

Byrral

Registered User
Aug 2, 2006
5,784
2,321
Columbus, Ohio
It will be determined in Columbus if he plays here next year or not. If he wants term or big dollars he will not be playing here. No offense to Vanek as he seems a good fit. If he wants to sign a team friendly one year contract he should be welcomed back. If not, we appreciate your contribution and wish you nothing but good luck in the future. Similar to Sam Gagner last season.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->