Vanek's status moving forward (trade/extend/let contract play out?)

[Karate Johnson*]

He's banged up every year, several times a year.

That's why Its hard to commit to him long term. He's not likely to stay healthier as he get older

 

[jBuds]

I'm wondering what his thoughts are about today. I'm sure he's not pleased with Pominville-for-futures.

 

[Karate Johnson*]

I would bet that he'll be gone.

 

[Rhett4]

I'm wondering what his thoughts are about today. I'm sure he's not pleased with Pominville-for-futures.

Michael Russo ‏@Russostrib 7m

Just talked to Pominville's linemate, Thomas Vanek: "The #mnwild, they're lucky. They just got a great player,as good as a guy as there is."

 

[Myllz]

I wonder if he's sad he didn't get sent to Minnesota. Stafford, too.

 

[Chainshot]

I agree with Hamilton at this time -- I don't expect Vanek in the lineup as of training camp next season after today's events and Regier's comments. This isn't a one-year retooling.

 

[Rhett4]

I agree with Hamilton at this time -- I don't expect Vanek in the lineup as of training camp next season after today's events and Regier's comments. This isn't a one-year retooling.

Draft trade? I wonder what kind of haul he brings back. I'd rather take young NHL players back at that time, like Philly getting Simmonds. Or a top 10 pick+ like the Pens snagged for Staal. Hmm. The possibilities.

 

[Karate Johnson*]

I agree with Hamilton at this time -- I don't expect Vanek in the lineup as of training camp next season after today's events and Regier's comments. This isn't a one-year retooling.

Is it fun? No.

But if done right is it the best possible way to build a winning team? Absolutely.

Keeping Pom, Vanek, and Miller for $20 Million in cap the next 7 years would prohibit us from retaining up an comers an adding UFA's to a new core a few years down the road.

Blowing it up and rebuilding is, as I and others have stated, the right decision at this time.

We're fighting for last in the league with the highest payroll.... Something is broken beyond repair if that's the case.

 

[jBuds]

I agree with Hamilton at this time -- I don't expect Vanek in the lineup as of training camp next season after today's events and Regier's comments. This isn't a one-year retooling.

And obviously, if he doesn't want to be here, we wouldn't want to keep him. That's a fairly safe deduction on my part, I'd think.

 

[1TuchAnd1NoTuch]

Trade or extend, no chance I keep him past the deadline if he isnt signed

 

[La Cosa Nostra]

Ok say we get rid of Vanek. You want to just play a bunch of kids together? It sure is working out for Edmonton. We need SOME veteran presence / scoring. I know he said he doesn't want to stay here for a long rebuild but if we do end up with Mackinnon or Drouin and Hodgson and Ennis continue their development I don't think we will be that bad next year.

 

[vcv]

Ok say we get rid of Vanek. You want to just play a bunch of kids together? It sure is working out for Edmonton. We need SOME veteran presence / scoring. I know he said he doesn't want to stay here for a long rebuild but if we do end up with Mackinnon or Drouin and Hodgson and Ennis continue their development I don't think we will be that bad next year.

I would a Vanek trade would bring in some help on offense...

 

[jBuds]

Ok say we get rid of Vanek. You want to just play a bunch of kids together? It sure is working out for Edmonton. We need SOME veteran presence / scoring. I know he said he doesn't want to stay here for a long rebuild but if we do end up with Mackinnon or Drouin and Hodgson and Ennis continue their development I don't think we will be that bad next year.

It's working out for Edmonton. It's not going to be an overnight success recipe, but the more experience they get, the better they play. They started slow, and now find themselves fighting.

Next year will be an improvement. And the year after that, even more. It's absolutely something we "wait for"

 

[wshahbaz]

I don't want to trade Vanek for more picks..

And wait 5 years for those players to develop...we have enough prospects on this team.

 

[jBuds]

I don't want to trade Vanek for more picks..

And wait 5 years for those players to develop...we have enough prospects on this team.

We're going to have to wait 3-5 years for our current group to be ready, anyways, what difference would it make if we added more bodies to that mix?

TOTALLY okay with a rebuild. Willing to be very, very patient.

 

[wshahbaz]

Ok say we get rid of Vanek. You want to just play a bunch of kids together? It sure is working out for Edmonton. We need SOME veteran presence / scoring. I know he said he doesn't want to stay here for a long rebuild but if we do end up with Mackinnon or Drouin and Hodgson and Ennis continue their development I don't think we will be that bad next year.

exactly. This team is already not developing properly. Why should we add more prospects.

We need veteran players, Vanek can get hot..and tbh the last few playoff runs we had he was arguably the best player on the team.

Bruins series before he got hurt, and in the Flyers series.

 

[wshahbaz]

We're going to have to wait 3-5 years for our current group to be ready, anyways, what difference would it make if we added more bodies to that mix?

TOTALLY okay with a rebuild. Willing to be very, very patient.

You always need veteran presence on your team. Vanek is a guy that this team needs but fans sometimes don't see it b/c of how bad we play as a whole.

And say we make the playoffs, Vanek will probably be our biggest weapon on power plays considering we still have no point man

 

[La Cosa Nostra]

It's working out for Edmonton. It's not going to be an overnight success recipe, but the more experience they get, the better they play. They started slow, and now find themselves fighting.

Next year will be an improvement. And the year after that, even more. It's absolutely something we "wait for"

But we aren't Edmonton. This is our first time in 10 years we MIGHT have a top 5 pick. And before that wasn't it Turgeon in 87? So we have had 2 top 5 picks in 26 years. Edmonton just had 3 #1 picks in a row.

Ron Rolston is technically over a .500 winning pct. He is by no means a "good" coach and yet he is getting results from this team. Adding a Mackinnon or Drouin to our team could do wonders. I just don't want a 3-4 year rebuild. Even Darcy wouldn't use that "R" word and said refresh instead. Keep Vanek and let's add a legit 1st liner with him. If Grigorenko can come in next year and earn a top 6 spot we could surprise. There is talent on this team we all know there is.This team is much better then their results indicate and we all know this.

Edit: we have had 3 top 10 picks since 1987. So I don't think we are going to be this bad next season. It may have been better to bottom out in the past but Pegula realizes he can't expect to be hockey heaven if your a bottom feeder for 3-4 years. We need to avoid this and quickly retool and make a run next year. And I'm confident as long as get a top 4 pick and that player can come in next year and contribute along with a more developed Grigs.

 

[5 Minute Major]

I'm sure Vanek will be gone and I will miss him but it is what it is.

I just wonder if Darcy will surprise us all and make a couple offer sheets to RFA's this summer....guys that can help immediately and have enough experience to help the young guys while making the team competitive. We should have a lot of money to play with if Vanek and Miller are shown the door this summer. Money I don't want going to a UFA. Much rather look the RFA route.

 

[couture23]

I'm willing to rebuild too, but you still need SOME veterans/experienced players.

Extend Vanek, slap the "C" on him and let him influence the abundance of Euros we got coming up.

 

[jBuds]

You always need veteran presence on your team. Vanek is a guy that this team needs but fans sometimes don't see it b/c of how bad we play as a whole.

And say we make the playoffs, Vanek will probably be our biggest weapon on power plays considering we still have no point man

You're not wrong.

But if he doesn't want to be here, I'm fine with getting more assets in return

But we aren't Edmonton. This is our first time in 10 years we MIGHT have a top 5 pick. And before that wasn't it Turgeon in 87? So we have had 2 top 5 picks in 26 years. Edmonton just had 3 #1 picks in a row.

Ron Rolston is technically over a .500 winning pct. He is by no means a "good" coach and yet he is getting results from this team. Adding a Mackinnon or Drouin to our team could do wonders. I just don't want a 3-4 year rebuild. Even Darcy wouldn't use that "R" word and said refresh instead. Keep Vanek and let's add a legit 1st liner with him. If Grigorenko can come in next year and earn a top 6 spot we could surprise. There is talent on this team we all know there is.This team is much better then their results indicate and we all know this.

Edit: we have had 3 top 10 picks since 1987. So I don't think we are going to be this bad next season. It may have been better to bottom out in the past but Pegula realizes he can't expect to be hockey heaven if your a bottom feeder for 3-4 years. We need to avoid this and quickly retool and make a run next year. And I'm confident as long as get a top 4 pick and that player can come in next year and contribute along with a more developed Grigs.

No, we're certainly not. My point was that it is, indeed, working out okay for the Oilers, contrary to what you were hinting at with your sarcasm.

A rebuild will take time and patience. We have the time, and I'm willing to be patient. If it means parting with Vanek in order to garner more depth and versatility/options, so be it.

I don't advocate it. But it seems like we're headed towards that route

 

[1TuchAnd1NoTuch]

I say trade vanek for futures including another 1st and see if we can package our picks to get a 2nd pick in the top 5. That would really speed up the rebuild

 

[Moskau]

Oilers also extended Hemsky though. He hasn't lived up to as much of his potential in his career as Vanek has and he's not exactly living up to the extension either but I'm sure his presence is valuable. But it's a similar situation.

 

[Djp]

Provided that he isn't dealt at the deadline, what is the course of action you prefer regarding Vanek?

I see four options, with the possibility of some of them merging:

1) Trade him in the offseason, attempting to acquire pieces akin to those CBJ got for Nash (depth, picks, prospect)

2) trade him at the deadline next year, as a rental for a contending team, whether or not we are a contender ourselves

3) keep him if we are contenders and let him hit the market at the end of 2014

4) extend him...if so, for how much and how long?

Are you able to speak your preference on the matter now? Or is too much contingent on what happens with the rest of the roster, and subsequently, how we look next year?

Just wondering. Feel free to lay out your preference in the variety of possible circumstances (if we contend next year, if not, if we trade others at this deadline or in the offseason, etc.)... Can you commit to a route yet? I'd love to see some of you lay it out in various ways...

Unlike what others have said, I do not think this is an extended rebuild.

i think the team could turn this around rather quickly and be very competitive in 2014-15. there are a few UFAs that they could persue that year.

They have a strong young core of players.

On Vaenk---i see them talking to him in the summer and trying to sign a 4 yr extension. Sure at the draft they will be getting some offers for him and could move him. Moving him is not their first choice. Any draft day trade offer will have to be big. Like from some team with a top 10 pick who feels they can rebound quickly next year. Similar to Carolina trade with Pittsburgh at last years draft. Some of these teams would be ones who missed the playoffs this year.

If they cant seem to come to a reasonable agreement they will then look to move him and would before the deadline. Drury/Brierre is still too relevent in fans minds. They dont want to see him walk for nothing in return.

Personally i think next season they will be one fo those 3rd-6th place bubble teams for a playoff spot. If it plays out anywhere like this season 5 teams would come from Buffalo's division.

Buffalo isnt that bad of a team.

If you look at their record....they have lost in regulation or OT 6 games they had a 3rd period lead. In all their loses except for 5---they were 1 goal down at some point in the 3rd period. Its not all that much to these results where some of these games were wins or at least point producers. You improve special teams you could easily bounce back next year.

the 2013/14 season:

Vanek-Hodgson-Armia
Foligno-Grigorenko-???
Girgenson(14/15)-Larsson(14/15) -Ott
Leino-Ennis- Stafford

Ehrhoff-Meyers
Sekera-Pysyk
McNabb-Weber

Enroth, Hackett, Makarov (14/15)
2 2013 1sts, 2 2013 2nds, 1 2014 1st, 3 2014 2nds, 1 2015 1st, 2 2015 2nds

Miller, Stafford and Ennis along with some picks could be moved to acquire a RW and a vet Dman as well as other picks. Since the team is young, Leino could also be traded instead of released in summer 2014 by eating some of his contract. A team may say I would like him at a $3M/yr price tag...not his current one.

If you trade Vanek you must get a top line type of winger in return who is under 25.

i also wonder in the draft---would they really want to draft another Center? Would they make an effort to get Drouin? If they draft another center does that mean we then trade Grigorenko or Hodgson??

Moving Vanek and Miller are certain to return 1st round picks.

 

[Chainshot]

Draft trade? I wonder what kind of haul he brings back. I'd rather take young NHL players back at that time, like Philly getting Simmonds. Or a top 10 pick+ like the Pens snagged for Staal. Hmm. The possibilities.

If Homer is still pulling his shenanigans in Philly, revisit the Couturier-based deal around the draft perhaps? There will probably be salary coming back -- it'll be a hockey based deal.