Just how bad has it become?

[Xray]

You've seriously lost it man. There's so much wrong with this post it's not even funny. I'm not even gonna waste my time responding to this.

In others words you don't have much by way of substance to support this 'leader' stuff you glow about.

 

It was an incident that happened AFTER the Gomez one, where Gaustad responded to a run at Miller as if he was reminded that this is what he is expected to bring to the team.

 

Other than that his fights are mostly his own battles where he decides to drop the gloves.

 

I file this exaggerated 'leader' stuff under Hockey Speak.

They've been doing a full scale Madison Avenue sell job on Gaustad ever since they dismantled the ECF team.

[Chemich]

If the Sabres find a way to play .500 hockey the rest of the season(and this is questionable after 21 games of crap), they will finish a WHOPPING 5 points ahead of last years non-playoff pace. While they are probably safe in terms of making the playoffs, they could easily slide down to 7th by seasons end.

 

October/early November that saw them start with a 12-3-1 record seems like so long ago. :(

 

Strangely enough, with this post in mind, we clinched the playoffs.

[nfreeman]

Wasn't it Connolly who was the only Sabre to retaliate the one episode where Miller was run and injured.

Gaustad did nothing, so how was he a 'leader' (if that is what you say your criteria for a leader is)?

Not a peep out of Gaustad.

 

Gaustad has a grand total of 4 majors for the season in case you weren't aware.

Majors don't necessarily mean a fighting major, so at most he was in 4 fights this season.

 

4!

A grand total of 4!

 

How many of those 4 fights (if all 4 majors are fights) can be defined as him stepping in for someone else in the tradition of players like Rob Rsy?

 

I can only recall one case this season when he dropped the gloves in reply to an opposing player taking liberties with a Sabres (miller).

 

So to be clear these 4 fights coupled with a willingness , like most every other Sabres, to push and shove in a scrum, is what separates him as a leader?

 

By your criteria Andrew Peters is the departed leader of the Sabres/

Gaustad wasn't on the ice when Gomez ran Miller. Tallinder was the one who had the front-row seat and just moved on.

 

Now, you can believe that Gaustad should've gone after Gomez on the next shift, and this is a legitimate view. However, it was a critical late-season game for a team desperately trying to make the playoffs. I'm pretty confident based on Lindy's quotes at the time that Lindy told the team not to respond after the fact.

 

Do you think "most every other Sabres" come to their teammates' defense in post-whistle scrums? Really? I see about half of them mailing it in (ie showing up but not showing any fire), 25% skipping it entirely and 25% showing up with fire.

 

As for fighting majors, Gaustad has 4, the same # as Phaneuf, Tootoo, Schenn, Wisniewski and Mike Richards.

 

For the record, you could have made the same (reasonably valid) hockey point in a much less obnoxious fashion. I ask again: exactly WTF is your problem?

 

Do you think any of the bottom 6 has had a good season outside of Kaleta?

 

You mentioned Pittsburgh's 3rd line center as being better than any Buffalo forward, so you should know which Stall you referred to.

LOL, at least I assumed you did.

As for the bottom 6: I think Gaustad, Grier, Kaleta and Kennedy (if he still counts as bottom 6) have all had pretty good seasons. Mair and Ellis are limited but have also had pretty decent seasons within their limitations.

 

I didn't remember which Staal (not "Stall") I had referred to earlier. How 'bout that! LOL! The key point of course is not my faulty memory but the fact that any of them is better than any forward on the Sabres (and I include the defenseman -- ie I'd trade any Sabres forward for him). Do you have a clever response for that? Is there a Sabres forward you'd rather have than any of the Staals? LOL!

[Chemich]

I'd rather have Thomas Vanek than Jared Staal.

[Xray]

Gaustad wasn't on the ice when Gomez ran Miller. Tallinder was the one who had the front-row seat and just moved on.

 

Now, you can believe that Gaustad should've gone after Gomez on the next shift, and this is a legitimate view.

I most certainly do believe he should have, and he has had plenty of chances in subsequent games.

 

Do you think "most every other Sabres" come to their teammates' defense in post-whistle scrums? Really?

Yes, really.

As far as the pushing and shoving I don't so any lack of involvement.

 

As for fighting majors, Gaustad has 4, the same # as Phaneuf, Tootoo, Schenn, Wisniewski and Mike Richards.

Yeah I suppose you could go through the stats and find some players with the same amount of fighting majors.

I don't see how that argues against my point.

All this garbage about Gaustad being an enforcer is highly exaggerated.

 

How many of these players you mention have a role that matches Gaustad?

Mike Richards is 30 goal scorer, not a lunch pail 4th liner!

Phaneuf is a top pair Dman!

Schenn?

 

And what sense in saying here's some other players that don't have many majors?

It doesn't change anything.

 

I exposed that claim as being BS for the most part, and it still is BS.

Listing other players who only have 4 majors won't change that.

 

 

 

I think Gaustad, Grier, Kaleta and Kennedy (if he still counts as bottom 6) have all had pretty good seasons. Mair and Ellis are limited but have also had pretty decent seasons within their limitations.

Grier has been a good penalty killer and that's it.

Gaustad isn't anything close to this hero player his fan club makes him out to be.

Both these players are slow skating 5 on 5 liabilities.

 

Ellis has produced next to nothing on offense this season.

The best way to describe him is he's a 4th liner who doesn't get beat by other 4th liners.

 

Kennedy shouldn't be playing on 4th lines, or 3rd lines unless it's on a roster that has some skill on the 3rd line.

 

 

 

I didn't remember which Staal (not "Stall") I had referred to earlier. How 'bout that! LOL! The key point of course is not my faulty memory but the fact that any of them is better than any forward on the Sabres (and I include the defenseman -- ie I'd trade any Sabres forward for him). Do you have a clever response for that? Is there a Sabres forward you'd rather have than any of the Staals? LOL!

I don't even know what to say to that other than don't quit your day job.

[nfreeman]

Yeah I suppose you could go through the stats and find some players with the same amount of fighting majors.

I don't see how that argues against my point.

All this garbage about Gaustad being an enforcer is highly exaggerated.

 

How many of these players you mention have a role that matches Gaustad?

Mike Richards is 30 goal scorer, not a lunch pail 4th liner!

Phaneuf is a top pair Dman!

Schenn?

 

And what sense in saying here's some other players that don't have many majors?

It doesn't change anything.

 

I exposed that claim as being BS for the most part, and it still is BS.

Listing other players who only have 4 majors won't change that.

 

I don't even know what to say to that other than don't quit your day job.

Who said anything about Gaustad being an enforcer? His role on this team isn't to be a Peters/Parros/Boogard. It's to play with toughness, win faceoffs, occupy the front of the net and be a solid teammate. Your "point" was that Gaustad only has 4 fighting majors and therefore isn't very tough or aggressive. It was a bad argument, since there just aren't that many NHL players anymore with large numbers of fighting majors. Accordingly, I mentioned a bunch of guys with the same # of fighting majors who are well-known in the league as being tough players. Your response was nonsense, especially the part when you talked about how great your response was.

 

As far as that goes, saying you exposed something as being BS isn't the same as actually exposing it as BS. It's just saying it. There's a consistent strand in your posts in which you talk about how smart you are and how great your "arguments" are. It sounds a lot like a loser fabricating tall tales about how much money he has or how many women he's had. It's transparent big talk that no one respects.

 

As for the Staal point, I assume you are giving up on that one? i.e. you admit that any of the Staals is a better player than any forward on the Sabres?