Marian Gaborik

[ca5150]

Where was he in the big time games? Boston- 0 goals, Anaheim- 0 goals, @Pitt- 0 goals, Pitt- 0 goals and not one shot on net, also a -1 rating.

So you tell me again how he's lighting the world on fire.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

Well unlike yourself, I respect that you can have your own opinion and my opinion is different, that's what makes this site great! I am basing my opinion on 35 years of playing hockey at all levels. I'm sure you have played many years yourself and you are allowed to see the game however you want. But you tend to just sit on top the mountain like your opinion is gospel and most others, if they disagree with you, are the village idiot. I think Gaborik could be all of those things you have said, but as of now, he's simply not, in my opinion. He has a couple more gears to reach the 40 goal player, he is leaning towards the player that was in Torts doghouse, again, in my opinion.

Wait, I'm the one in the ivory tower? Sounds like you're the one trying to elevate the value of your opinion. Why else would your 35 years of playing the game at all levels matter, if all opinions are created equal, as you suggest?

If you don't like that I see things differently than you, I get that. But your reaction is way over the top. And you're way wrong about how I value my opinion vs. others. There's evidence of this in my posting, if you'd care to look for it, rather than take immediate offense.

I'm saying I see Gaborik doing all the things you said he wasn't. Sounds like the kind of thing that, in your opinion, makes this site great!

 

[Samkow]

I'd like to see what our best winger can do with our best center. Time for a Foligno-Johansen-Gaborik line.

I get that some of Johansen's success comes from playing on the 2nd line and drawing inferior defensive matchups, but if Saturday becomes a trend, I'd hope Richards gives them a shot at playing together. I think Joey is ready to be the 1st line center he was projected to be.

 

[Matt]

There must be some reason Wild fans called him Mary Ann

 

[major major]

There must be some reason Wild fans called him Mary Ann

Ethnocentrism?

A child-like sense of humor?

A lack of creativity?

Of course, it is also because European players who happen to also not play physical hockey are feminized. Marian is Slovakian and doesn't play physical, ergo Mary Ann.

The only question, from my perspective: is there anything more to Gaborik than what we're seeing? Were Wild fans 10 years ago wondering if he was going to turn into a more competitive-seeming player at some point? Were Ranger fans also wondering that? You can ask them, but I'm guessing they were wondering this because its the same Gabby. The Gabby you see is the Gabby you get: a floating but nonetheless productive scorer.

 

[TaketheCannoli]

Where was he in the big time games? Boston- 0 goals, Anaheim- 0 goals, @Pitt- 0 goals, Pitt- 0 goals and not one shot on net, also a -1 rating.

So you tell me again how he's lighting the world on fire.

Just a wild hunch, but when a team has but one dangerous scorer, its a bit easier to concentrate on taking him away.

You know, sort of like they did to Rick Nash when he was a Jacket.

 

[ca5150]

Just a wild hunch, but when a team has but one dangerous scorer, its a bit easier to concentrate on taking him away.

You know, sort of like they did to Rick Nash when he was a Jacket.

I see your point, though, he's regarded as a "world class player" and I just haven't seen it this year. He's got 5 goals, and one was a meaningless empty netter, one in a blowout against pitiful Buffalo. The only "big" goal was the Toronto one. I am waiting to see an end to end rush, like the Atkinson goal. Or a dazzling move that results in a goal. He floats through the neutral zone and goes wide, never makes a move to the middle, then passes it. The Toronto goal was a nice pass and slam dunk, I could have scored that goal. Just want to see more for 7 million a year. I'm not totally putting him down like Umberger or something. Just not impressed so far...

 

[major major]

I see your point, though, he's regarded as a "world class player" and I just haven't seen it this year. He's got 5 goals, and one was a meaningless empty netter, one in a blowout against pitiful Buffalo. The only "big" goal was the Toronto one. I am waiting to see an end to end rush, like the Atkinson goal. Or a dazzling move that results in a goal. He floats through the neutral zone and goes wide, never makes a move to the middle, then passes it. The Toronto goal was a nice pass and slam dunk, I could have scored that goal. Just want to see more for 7 million a year. I'm not totally putting him down like Umberger or something. Just not impressed so far...

You don't know Gaborik at all. Stop waiting. He used to score goals with blazing straight ahead speed, smarts, and a wicked fast release. He's now a bit slower and doesn't have the release anymore, and I argue he's smarter. Eberle-Datsyuk style agility and dazzling moves have never been his bread and butter.

 

[ca5150]

Wait, I'm the one in the ivory tower? Sounds like you're the one trying to elevate the value of your opinion. Why else would your 35 years of playing the game at all levels matter, if all opinions are created equal, as you suggest?

If you don't like that I see things differently than you, I get that. But your reaction is way over the top. And you're way wrong about how I value my opinion vs. others. There's evidence of this in my posting, if you'd care to look for it, rather than take immediate offense.

I'm saying I see Gaborik doing all the things you said he wasn't. Sounds like the kind of thing that, in your opinion, makes this site great!

I think he disappears in the big games, look at the stats closer than 5 goals in 13 games. the combined record of teams he has scored against, 31-36-8. Teams he has been goal-less against 72-39-6. It's easy to capitalize against bad teams. No power play goals, no game winning goals. And is on a 3 game pointless streak when we played 2 first place teams. What am I missing that you think he's doing so well?

 

[ca5150]

You don't know Gaborik at all. Stop waiting. He used to score goals with blazing straight ahead speed, smarts, and a wicked fast release. He's now a bit slower and doesn't have the release anymore, and I argue he's smarter. Eberle-Datsyuk style agility and dazzling moves have never been his bread and butter.

Whatever his style is now, I just want him to show up in the important games. No shots against Pitt at home...No goals at Pitt or at home to Anaheim. That's not smarts, that's not going to the tough areas and making things happen.

 

[ca5150]

After last night, 5 game streak with zero points for the superstar. Per Porty, Richards was having a long talk after practice ended with Gaborik. I would bet it's not to praise his outstanding play, as many of you would have it...Take out the Buffalo 3 pt game against a worthless team, and he has 7 pts in 14 games. Since you all love doing the math, that's 41 pts in an 82 game season. Still think he's playing great?

 

[Samkow]

After last night, 5 game streak with zero points for the superstar. Per Porty, he was having a long talk after practice ended with Gaborik. I would bet it's not to praise his outstanding play, as many of you would have it...Take out the Buffalo 3 pt game against a worthless team, and he has 7 pts in 14 games. Since you all love doing the math, that's 41 pts in an 82 game season. Still think he's playing great?

I may not have the 35 years of hockey playing experience you have, but why do we not get to count one of Gaborik's good games? Can I take out one of his 0-point games against a good team?

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

After last night, 5 game streak with zero points for the superstar. Per Porty, he was having a long talk after practice ended with Gaborik. I would bet it's not to praise his outstanding play, as many of you would have it...Take out the Buffalo 3 pt game against a worthless team, and he has 7 pts in 14 games. Since you all love doing the math, that's 41 pts in an 82 game season. Still think he's playing great?

Damn, man, with the animosity. The rest isn't enough to support your contention?

Who was having a long talk with Gaborik? Portzline?

So we are allowed now to just selectively discount facts in evidence that we find inconvenient?

 

[ca5150]

Damn, man, with the animosity. The rest isn't enough to support your contention?

Who was having a long talk with Gaborik? Portzline?

So we are allowed now to just selectively discount facts in evidence that we find inconvenient?

Richards was having a long talk with Gaborik on the ice after practice, as reported by Portzline.

 

[ca5150]

I may not have the 35 years of hockey playing experience you have, but why do we not get to count one of Gaborik's good games? Can I take out one of his 0-point games against a good team?

Spin it however you want it, dude isn't performing against the teams with winning records. I hope he figures it out and becomes all world, but my gut is telling me it's more of a 'the more you push him, the more he becomes Jeff Carter.' I hope I'm very wrong, we shall see how it plays out over the next month and check back in.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

Richards was having a long talk with Gaborik on the ice after practice, as reported by Portzline.

Aaron Portzline ‏@Aportzline 18s
#CBJ coach Todd Richards is meeting with every player today.

You show me where posters in this thread expect Richards to lavish praise on Gaborik, and where posters in this thread love to do math, and answer the question about selective information, and I'll give you my take on Gaborik's recent play, last night in particular.

 

[blahblah]

Damn, man, with the animosity. The rest isn't enough to support your contention?

Meh, vendetta posting with the newest whipping boy.

He was fine a week ago. I expect his point production to drop some against the better teams.

With all these quotes I'm seeing from a specific poster, all I can say is that he's using analogies that no one else is.

I haven't seen anyone in this tread say "he's lighting the world on fire"; so we just have to discount the source of the quotes as someone exercising hyperbole and misrepresenting the views of others.

I am one of Gaborik's biggest fans. I can also tell you that he is very streaky. I can also tell you that if we were winning games there would be less focus on his slump. Players like Gaborik are lightning rods, so it would still exist. But not as bad.

I've seen some reasonable arguments against not signing him. I have seen, at best, moderate support. It's simply a poster trying to invent controversy that doesn't exist.

Personally I would like to have him back depending on term and dollars. The true gauge will come when we get Horton in the lineup. Hopefully on separate lines.

 

[ca5150]

You show me where posters in this thread expect Richards to lavish praise on Gaborik, and where posters in this thread love to do math, and answer the question about selective information, and I'll give you my take on Gaborik's recent play, last night in particular.

The very reason there is a thread, the very first post the guy started with forcasting out to 82 games, based on the games he's been here!

Ok, so I'm interested in your take on his play for the whole season, not just last night.

 

[Fro]

Spin it however you want it, dude isn't performing against the teams with winning records. I hope he figures it out and becomes all world, but my gut is telling me it's more of a 'the more you push him, the more he becomes Jeff Carter.' I hope I'm very wrong, we shall see how it plays out over the next month and check back in.

using your methods, technically he's worse than jeff carter, b/c at least carter was on pace to score 30 goals here...

 

[ca5150]

using your methods, technically he's worse than jeff carter, b/c at least carter was on pace to score 30 goals here...

Good point!

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

The very reason there is a thread, the very first post the guy started with forcasting out to 82 games, based on the games he's been here!

One poster does math, none expect the coach to single him out for praise...

Ok, so I'm interested in your take on his play for the whole season, not just last night.

...and you won't let me selectively pick and choose?

 

[ca5150]

One poster does math, none expect the coach to single him out for praise...



...and you won't let me selectively pick and choose?

I'm waiting for your take on Gaborik, that's all I'm interested in, not picking apart. I never expected the coach to single him out for praise, I'm not following you, and don't expect an explanation. Just give me your take on Gaborik's season, break down each game if you want, the more detail the better! change my mind!

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

I'm waiting for your take on Gaborik, that's all I'm interested in, not picking apart. I never expected the coach to single him out for praise, I'm not following you, and don't expect an explanation. Just give me your take on Gaborik's season, break down each game if you want, the more detail the better! change my mind!

I told you I would do so after you addressed a few points. You've explained the "you guys like to do the math," although it was really just one poster. But you've failed to address this...

I would bet it's not to praise his outstanding play, as many of you would have it

...or this.

Take out the Buffalo 3 pt game against a worthless team

You were asked twice about this selective use of stats, and I followed up on it when you told me you wanted my "take on his play for the whole season, not just last night," wondering why I can't also be selective.

 

[ca5150]

I told you I would do so after you addressed a few points. You've explained the "you guys like to do the math," although it was really just one poster. But you've failed to address this...



...or this.



You were asked twice about this selective use of stats, and I followed up on it when you told me you wanted my "take on his play for the whole season, not just last night," wondering why I can't also be selective.

as many of you would have it, is to say that many people on here have praised his play and I said Richards didn't pull him aside to praise his play. be as selective as you want, lets hear it, tell me how he's playing so well and i'm not able to see it

 

[ca5150]

I told you I would do so after you addressed a few points. You've explained the "you guys like to do the math," although it was really just one poster. But you've failed to address this...



...or this.



You were asked twice about this selective use of stats, and I followed up on it when you told me you wanted my "take on his play for the whole season, not just last night," wondering why I can't also be selective.

by, "you guys", I mean Gaborik apologists and they are many across numerous outlets, not just this thread.