Jump to content

Stafford needs to go


Eleven

Recommended Posts

Just listened to Nolan's presser after practice this morning. Based on Nolan's comments I wouldn't be surprised if Stafford is one of the captains or the captain for the rest of the season. Nolan was impressed with how Stafford handled himself after the Miller/Ott trade and Nolan also said the captaincy would be passed around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just listened to Nolan's presser after practice this morning. Based on Nolan's comments I wouldn't be surprised if Stafford is one of the captains or the captain for the rest of the season. Nolan was impressed with how Stafford handled himself after the Miller/Ott trade and Nolan also said the captaincy would be passed around.

I just heard that in the video.

 

My reaction was : What!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see why Stafford wouldn't be considered one of the leaders. Put his lack of production (pre-Nolan) aside and he's not that bad of a player. Every interview I've heard with him is professional, he's taken all the criticism with a grain of salt and when he's not producing he does bring other aspects to his game. He's not a liability. I think it's way too early for Z to be a captain, or even an A for that matter. Myers might be due for an A soon. But the captain, in my opinion, should be Ehrhoff or Stafford. Stafford might deserve it more because he does have seniority.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is fine. Captains in this team usually get traded, so this may work out for the best. It does seem to indicate, however, Drew isn't getting traded any time soon.

 

Ha--has there ever been a team that trades more of its captains?

 

Meehan

Schoenfeld (ok, not captain at time of trade)

Gare

Ruff

Foligno

Ramsey

LaFontaine

Peca

Barnes

Pominville

Vanek

Ott

 

Sure, give Stafford the C!

Edited by Eleven
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see why Stafford wouldn't be considered one of the leaders. Put his lack of production (pre-Nolan) aside and he's not that bad of a player. Every interview I've heard with him is professional, he's taken all the criticism with a grain of salt and when he's not producing he does bring other aspects to his game. He's not a liability. I think it's way too early for Z to be a captain, or even an A for that matter. Myers might be due for an A soon. But the captain, in my opinion, should be Ehrhoff or Stafford. Stafford might deserve it more because he does have seniority.

 

I'm normally not a fan of giving a really young player the C, especially if they're not a star...but man, Zemgus is *that* guy. I've been very hesitant to jump on board with his super fast development curve, but he's handled it well at every turn. I'm done doubting him, give him the C and let him run with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm normally not a fan of giving a really young player the C, especially if they're not a star...but man, Zemgus is *that* guy. I've been very hesitant to jump on board with his super fast development curve, but he's handled it well at every turn. I'm done doubting him, give him the C and let him run with it.

 

In Nashville the consensus was that everyone knew from day 1 that Shea Weber would eventually be captain. He just had "it." It was only a matter of time... I think Zemgus might be in that category. Given age they will wait a bit, but he has "future captain" written all over him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ha--has there ever been a team that trades more of its captains?

 

Meehan

Schoenfeld (ok, not captain at time of trade)

Gare

Ruff

Foligno

Ramsey

LaFontaine

Peca

Barnes

Pominville

Vanek

Ott

 

Sure, give Stafford the C!

 

I know Briere and Drury walked away, but they could almost be on this list too..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Nashville the consensus was that everyone knew from day 1 that Shea Weber would eventually be captain. He just had "it." It was only a matter of time... I think Zemgus might be in that category. Given age they will wait a bit, but he has "future captain" written all over him.

but but i don't want lord Z traded :(
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, 3 straight Sabres captains traded and counting... I guess Leino should get the "C!"

 

Lafontaine, Peca, Barnes, Drury, Briere, Rivet (waived), Pominville, Vanek, Ott - The list is long and distinguished.

Edited by Kristian
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i dont see why people are still flipping out about stafford. the guy has completely changed his game by showing more and more effort and producing and battling. he is now being called a leader from ted nolan, a guy whose opinion i respect on this very issue. we should be happy as heck that he has turned a corner. is that not what you want? for our players to realize and strive for their max potential? give the guy a break and move on. if there is a trade that makes the sabres better in the long run, then obviously we should go for it. but addition by subtraction, or buying out stafford are just two things i think we are wasting so much negative energy on. i want him to succeed. and as someone has posted above, the guy, despite being a whipping boy and taking on tons of criticism, has never lashed out and has been professional.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm normally not a fan of giving a really young player the C, especially if they're not a star...but man, Zemgus is *that* guy. I've been very hesitant to jump on board with his super fast development curve, but he's handled it well at every turn. I'm done doubting him, give him the C and let him run with it.

 

Oh don't get me wrong, I really look forward to the day when Z is C. We all know it's coming. That's if Ott doesn't come back (crossing my fingers hoping he does). I guess I'm just leery about pushing somebody so young into positions they may not be ready for and then watch them suffer trying to find their game i.e. Myers and Grigorenko. Maybe he is ready, you might be right. I guess my post was more in defense of Stafford than it was against Z. I've got no problem with Stafford at least getting an A back with the way he has progressed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i dont see why people are still flipping out about stafford. the guy has completely changed his game by showing more and more effort and producing and battling. he is now being called a leader from ted nolan, a guy whose opinion i respect on this very issue. we should be happy as heck that he has turned a corner. is that not what you want? for our players to realize and strive for their max potential? give the guy a break and move on. if there is a trade that makes the sabres better in the long run, then obviously we should go for it. but addition by subtraction, or buying out stafford are just two things i think we are wasting so much negative energy on. i want him to succeed. and as someone has posted above, the guy, despite being a whipping boy and taking on tons of criticism, has never lashed out and has been professional.

 

He's never been a whipping boy anywhere other than here, that I've seen.

 

There are two reasons I still want him gone. One, he still doesn't put in a full effort. He still expects the puck to come to him at times, etc., oh, just read the first post in the thread--I still see that from him even though it isn't every night now. Two, he's fooled me once, and he's not going to do it again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just don't get the staff hate this year. Have you all watched the games? He plays hard, strong work ethic, and team player. He's someone you keep around as a veteran presence and someone who can be a bottom six winger that can bring depth scoring

 

Every game, and no, he has not had a strong work ethic every game. It's a mixture of floating and "hey, look, other teams, I can play!"

 

If he's here in October, a contract year, no doubt he's on fire again.

Edited by Eleven
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just don't get the staff hate this year. Have you all watched the games? He plays hard, strong work ethic, and team player. He's someone you keep around as a veteran presence and someone who can be a bottom six winger that can bring depth scoring

I don't consider myself a Staff infection guy. but the underlined is just not true. To quote some of the more incendiary of the staph haters it doesn't pass the eyeball test. I am not saying he is not trying hard, but his game is not built on playing hard (it should be). He try's to play smart not hard Edited by drnkirishone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do';t consider myself a Staff infection guy. but the underlined is just not true. To quote some of the more incendiary of the staph haters it doesn't pass the eyeball test. I am not saying he is not trying hard, but his game is not built on playing hard (it should be). He try's to play smart not hard

 

He tries to play like he's got Messier at center. He doesn't. No one does. Passes aren't tape-to-tape. Pucks don't come to players. It's how he plays without the puck that bugs me. With the puck, he's very good, but he doesn't try to be the guy with the puck.

 

And on EDIT: I think I've said this at least four times in this thread: He's not only a nice guy, but a good person. But he just doesn't have the drive on the ice that I want out of a professional hockey player. If he had Scott's heart, or if Scott had his skill...

Edited by Eleven
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He tries to play like he's got Messier at center. He doesn't. No one does. Passes aren't tape-to-tape. Pucks don't come to players. It's how he plays without the puck that bugs me. With the puck, he's very good, but he doesn't try to be the guy with the puck.

 

And on EDIT: I think I've said this at least four times in this thread: He's not only a nice guy, but a good person. But he just doesn't have the drive on the ice that I want out of a professional hockey player. If he had Scott's heart, or if Scott had his skill...

see I think we have similiar thoughts on his negative plays. where I am thinking differently is I don't see lack of effort or lack drive. I see lack of decisiveness and I see a lack of a killer instinct
Link to comment
Share on other sites

see I think we have similiar thoughts on his negative plays. where I am thinking differently is I don't see lack of effort or lack drive. I see lack of decisiveness and I see a lack of a killer instinct

 

If his play on TV (puck near him, but let's not go get it) doesn't convince: Go to the arena and watch him without the puck. Just focus on 21 for a few shifts. It is astounding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...