Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens
Canadiens de Montreal

Thomas Vanek


Recommended Posts

Guest mrsmarkov

I think it was worse because he was a defensive liability and was making Bourque at his worst look good. I have no problem with slumps, but if you are taking ten second shifts and not moving your legs to create space out there that is different. As for the kick to the curb part Therrien showed some class by not benching him. This is professional sports and when I see players go through the motions they often need help with other issues. I wish him all the best. Perhaps the let down is from hoping he'd shine and we could keep him around for a while, but that thought has long since passed. Good luck Thomas.

There's no point putting in my two cents. I agree with this completely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not disagreeing with anyone that Thomas under-performed in the Boston and NY series, but we also saw how good he was in the regular season and he led us in goals against Tampa. As I said, players like Pacioretty, Plekanec, Gionta, Desharnais, and so on also had disappointing playoffs when compared to how they played in the regular season, but I wouldn't just say they were useless on account of one post-season, just as I wouldn't say Bourque was invaluable simply because he had a great playoffs. I think it's a mistake to judge Vanek on such a small sample size.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd consider bringing Vanek back to see how he does in a full season here, but only at a reduced price. He's likely going to sign for far more than I would offer, and for far longer. I just didn't see any level of enthusiasm from him in the playoffs, and changing lines just sounds like an excuse. Of course, I wouldn't be too excited myself if I went to Montreal to play with Desharnais, Eller, or Plekanec, as my center.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mrsmarkov

I'm not disagreeing with anyone that Thomas under-performed in the Boston and NY series, but we also saw how good he was in the regular season and he led us in goals against Tampa. As I said, players like Pacioretty, Plekanec, Gionta, Desharnais, and so on also had disappointing playoffs when compared to how they played in the regular season, but I wouldn't just say they were useless on account of one post-season, just as I wouldn't say Bourque was invaluable simply because he had a great playoffs. I think it's a mistake to judge Vanek on such a small sample size.

Maybe so, but Vanek actually appeared to be the only one out of the players listed that actually didn't care about performing well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Might as well move this thread to ex-habs now. :lol:

stevekouleas: RT @renlavoietva: Thomas Vanek agent, Steve Bartlett confirmed his client will hit the market on July 1st. #tvasports #canadiens #nhl

Well, to tell the full story, he also said Montreal was among his list of candidate cities and that he didn't have a particular location he wanted to go to but that rather his decision would be based partly on the contract and mainly on the team's ability to win. To be honest, I don't see Vanek opting to return here, but I didn't think we'd trade for him to begin with, so you never know... stranger things have happened, and we really don't have a replacement lined up for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it would have been nice if they hadnt made it public (his intention to test the FA market) - we could have possibly gotten a 3-4th round pick for his rights but now I suspect there are very few teams who would pay anything at a chance to talk to him first....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, to tell the full story, he also said Montreal was among his list of candidate cities and that he didn't have a particular location he wanted to go to but that rather his decision would be based partly on the contract and mainly on the team's ability to win. To be honest, I don't see Vanek opting to return here, but I didn't think we'd trade for him to begin with, so you never know... stranger things have happened, and we really don't have a replacement lined up for him.

I would be shocked if he remained a Hab.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be shocked if he remained a Hab.

I wouldn't be, and here's why I feel there's maybe a 60% chance he remains a Hab. If Ted is correct by saying "rather his decision would be based partly on the contract and mainly on the team's ability to win." (and I see no reason to doubt him), then Vanek wants to play for a winner (plus a decent contract). We went to the final 4, out of 30 teams. We're getting younger, and bigger. We have a world class goalie,, a Norris winner,,, Look at the teams that didn't make the POs, and then look at the teams that got bounced in the 1st round. Does anyone feel that he will sign with them? IMO, he will sign with a team that made the final 8, and we have as good a chance as any of those other 7 teams to sign him.

The ONLY factor that might come to play is the way MT handled him. But,,,, if he did sign with us, then MT would/should be able to find good line mates for him to start the season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't be, and here's why I feel there's maybe a 60% chance he remains a Hab. If Ted is correct by saying "rather his decision would be based partly on the contract and mainly on the team's ability to win." (and I see no reason to doubt him), then Vanek wants to play for a winner (plus a decent contract). We went to the final 4, out of 30 teams. We're getting younger, and bigger. We have a world class goalie,, a Norris winner,,, Look at the teams that didn't make the POs, and then look at the teams that got bounced in the 1st round. Does anyone feel that he will sign with them? IMO, he will sign with a team that made the final 8, and we have as good a chance as any of those other 7 teams to sign him.

The ONLY factor that might come to play is the way MT handled him. But,,,, if he did sign with us, then MT would/should be able to find good line mates for him to start the season.

Sorry I am at work so I have been keeping my posts short but if MB throws money at him I would be shocked. Especially based on his playoff performance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it would have been nice if they hadnt made it public (his intention to test the FA market) - we could have possibly gotten a 3-4th round pick for his rights but now I suspect there are very few teams who would pay anything at a chance to talk to him first....

Trade his rights to Minny for Moulson's rights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be shocked if he remained a Hab.

I wouldn't be, and here's why I feel there's maybe a 60% chance he remains a Hab. If Ted is correct by saying "rather his decision would be based partly on the contract and mainly on the team's ability to win." (and I see no reason to doubt him), then Vanek wants to play for a winner (plus a decent contract). We went to the final 4, out of 30 teams. We're getting younger, and bigger. We have a world class goalie,, a Norris winner,,, Look at the teams that didn't make the POs, and then look at the teams that got bounced in the 1st round. Does anyone feel that he will sign with them? IMO, he will sign with a team that made the final 8, and we have as good a chance as any of those other 7 teams to sign him.

The ONLY factor that might come to play is the way MT handled him. But,,,, if he did sign with us, then MT would/should be able to find good line mates for him to start the season.

Im with HRF. Its not that I dont think there's still a fit there, but whenever a player says "im going to test the waters" it generally means he's looking for term. Vanek probably has 3-4 really good years left in him and he can be a game-changer but he's 30 so a 7 year deal would really be worrisome.

If he'd settle for 5 years Id offer something, but still probably not as much as another team - so for both of these reasons I wouldnt expect him to sign with us - BUT -

There's one scenario where i think he may remain a hab next year:

Lets say he wants 7 years. Lets say his value is deflated because of the playoff debacle & teams worried about his consistency. Lets say he really does value winning. Maybe, just maybe, he tries a Marian Hossa 1 year deal. One year, decent money - he resigns with us, hoping we can repeat (but do better) next year. He pumps his value back up (assuming he has a good year) and who knows, could even raise it if he gets a full year of first line minutes with DD & Patches. Then he signs his big 7 year deal somewhere foolish enough to pay him huge money till he's 38.

Its highly unlikely but I think its probably the most feasible scenario to seeing him come back with us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't mind to see him back next year but I'm very doubtful that Bergevin would give him term, and for good reason. Vanek is still an excellent player and is likely still going to be good for 30 goals for a few more years, but if you sign him to a long term deal and in year 4 he's scoring 15 goals at 8M on the cap it gets pretty tough to justify.

Talking about how we'd have him back on a shorter term deal is an exercise in futility, he isn't going to sign a 4 year deal. It's either pay up or lose him, and I just do not like the idea of committing 7 years to a one dimensional player on the wrong side of 30. In strictly hypothetical terms it's a no brainer to bring him back for 8M next year, but when that involves committing to the following 6-7 years at that price I wouldn't be offering that deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The biggest issue isn't so much that he had a bad playoffs as much as that's really the only data we have on him in Montreal (versus say Pacioretty who we at least have proof can play very well here). When the only data point in Montreal is a negative one, that makes any long-term and/or high-salary offer highly unlikely - even though you can argue a UFA offer with no data is equally risky.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I wouldn't be, and here's why I feel there's maybe a 60% chance he remains a Hab. If Ted is correct by saying "rather his decision would be based partly on the contract and mainly on the team's ability to win." (and I see no reason to doubt him), then Vanek wants to play for a winner (plus a decent contract). We went to the final 4, out of 30 teams. We're getting younger, and bigger. We have a world class goalie,, a Norris winner,,, Look at the teams that didn't make the POs, and then look at the teams that got bounced in the 1st round. Does anyone feel that he will sign with them? IMO, he will sign with a team that made the final 8, and we have as good a chance as any of those other 7 teams to sign him.

The ONLY factor that might come to play is the way MT handled him. But,,,, if he did sign with us, then MT would/should be able to find good line mates for him to start the season.

My thoughts exactly kinot. I've said it before, and while they are different styled puck handlers for sure, he has the nicest set of hands since Kovalev played here.

He deserves another chance here, if he was interested in returning. On a line with say, Lars Eller, height and weight, thats a line that could make real damage. Throw on Borque on that line and thats some serious height. Vanek fits the montreal canadien mold so perfectly, I sure hope we've only saw a sample of whats to come with Vanek! (*crosses fingers*) :oB)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just don't see us competing on term. Someone will give him 7 years and I don't see Bergevin willing to go near that.

A few board members mentioned months ago that the only real benefit we have is the option to sign him to eight years. So... I would consider Bergevin in a bind unless he's willing to do THAT. And to me, eight years seems risky.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mrsmarkov

I don't want him at all, but I'd tolerate a one year deal for 7-8 million I guess. Not interested in any term whatsoever. I'm not interested at all, but a year is fine by me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't mind us passing on Vanek. As explosive as he could be, I never felt his style was a great fit - BUT - one thing that became extremely evident is how badly we need a #1 RW. We have Gallagher (and possibly Gionta) as a #2 and #3. On LW we have Patches as #1 and several solid #2-3 etc (Bourque, Bournival and L-shooting centres like Briere, Galchenyuk etc).

If we let Vanek go thats fine but we REALLY need to replace that #1 RW imho.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't mind us passing on Vanek. As explosive as he could be, I never felt his style was a great fit - BUT - one thing that became extremely evident is how badly we need a #1 RW. We have Gallagher (and possibly Gionta) as a #2 and #3. On LW we have Patches as #1 and several solid #2-3 etc (Bourque, Bournival and L-shooting centres like Briere, Galchenyuk etc).

If we let Vanek go thats fine but we REALLY need to replace that #1 RW imho.

This is where I stand as well. I'm not so attached to our bringing Vanek back so much as I don't know that we'll be able to find anyone to replace him if we don't. When you look at the free agent list, there's Gaborik who fits into the same class of scorer, and he's older, more injury-prone, and likely more overrated now based on his Cup win. After that, you're looking at guys like Callahan, Hemsky, Moulson, Stastny, etc. I don't think any of them are an upgrade nor do I think any of them will be considerably cheaper. If the decision is between using Vanek as a top 6 RW or using Gionta or Bourque in that role, we're going to take a big hit in production and in depth if we don't replace Vanek.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. We definitely need a replacement. While guys like Vrbata, Hemsky, Moulson, etc are not an upgrade and will not be much cheaper, they may accept a shorter term. Vrbata on a 3 year deal would be nice. Decent size and has scored 30, but in a small market. Theres always the big market factor with guys like him. Between him, Stastny, Hemsky and Moulson if he's comfortable on the right side, we need that top line RW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't blame Minnesota for being wary but, let's be serious, he's going to get offers. They might not be of the "laughing-on-the-way-to-the-bank" sort he was hoping for but he didn't do himself any favours.

It should be interesting to see what happens with him. Teams looking for the floor might throw a large amount at him whereas more 'contending' teams might be more reluctant to break the bank but will throw something his way, for sure.

Wherever he chooses to go will, in my opinion, say a lot about what he wants. There will be money and there will be potential to chase the Cup or maybe he'll choose a balance and roll the dice.

Once the market opens up, it's really anyone's game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...