Zemgus Girgensons

sr edler

gold is not reality
Mar 20, 2010
11,920
6,348
They don't call him Zemgod for nothing.

Just look at his last 7 years: 18, 16, 15, 18, 19, 18 and 16 points. You can't accuse this guy of being inconsistent.

Nah, it isn't just you. It just sounds progressive and hip to say he's fine and you're ignorant "lol".

As a Sabres fan, he's fine for what he does but he definitely is a disappointment in terms of the pick that we spent on him. He's got hands of cement and a lousy shot but he's a good character guy so it's not like he's bad for the team. But at the same time, it's bizarre for people to not call him a disappointment. He was supposed to become a Kunitz-type or someone who could at least contribute offensively and that has never been the case.

That's the famous Yakupov year, poor top end but still some very solid guys overall (Lindholm, et cetera). The thing is Buffalo took Grigorenko two spots in front of Girgensons which makes it even more disappointing overall. They could have had someone of either Tom Wilson, Hertl, Teräväinen or..... Vasilevskiy.

But what's the highest up in the line-up Girgensons ever played on a consistent basis? Was he ever a second liner?
 

Chainshot

Give 'em Enough Rope
Sponsor
Feb 28, 2002
150,915
100,854
Tarnation
They don't call him Zemgod for nothing.

Just look at his last 7 years: 18, 16, 15, 18, 19, 18 and 16 points. You can't accuse this guy of being inconsistent.



That's the famous Yakupov year, poor top end but still some very solid guys overall (Lindholm, et cetera). The thing is Buffalo took Grigorenko two spots in front of Girgensons which makes it even more disappointing overall. They could have had someone of either Tom Wilson, Hertl, Teräväinen or..... Vasilevskiy.

But what's the highest up in the line-up Girgensons ever played on a consistent basis? Was he ever a second liner?

The tankiest tank year, he was their top line center which was reflected in the 15-15-30 sophomore season. There was also a weird time when he was with Eichel and they had a tiny sample size of excellent shot advantage (and yes, Gus had almost no actual points) because Jack needed someone to cover for him defensively. A year under Housley, he was buried with 88% d-zone starts and STILL put up 19 points.

Gus is a litmus test for me. If someone who watches the team doesn't see his value as a shot suppression guy, that then sticks in my mind whenever I read any of their other content. That includes two of the longest tenured guys who cover the team professionally who don't seem to understand the sport but yet have made a living reporting on it.
 

PunchImlach is Alive

Registered User
Jul 15, 2014
1,361
1,907
Brooklyn, NY
Kind of my point, i found it odd for that kind of a player to consistently stick around so long, especially the same team through multiple rebuilds.

Sounds like it’s just me though…

Didn’t ’mean it like “this guy sucks why is he still playing”

It's probably a lot of the reason he is the player he is. Zemgus has only ever seen the worst of times and has been through so many bad systems that he's now fairly adaptable in the bottom 6. He plays like he's seen everything because he pretty much has.
 

seafoam

Soft Shock
Sponsor
May 17, 2011
60,465
9,771
Feels like yesterday when Girgs and Grigs (Grigorenko) were going to save Buffalo.

They don't call him Zemgod for nothing.

Just look at his last 7 years: 18, 16, 15, 18, 19, 18 and 16 points. You can't accuse this guy of being inconsistent.



That's the famous Yakupov year, poor top end but still some very solid guys overall (Lindholm, et cetera). The thing is Buffalo took Grigorenko two spots in front of Girgensons which makes it even more disappointing overall. They could have had someone of either Tom Wilson, Hertl, Teräväinen or..... Vasilevskiy.

But what's the highest up in the line-up Girgensons ever played on a consistent basis? Was he ever a second liner?
Love me some Zemgod.
 

The Devilish Buffoon

🇵🇸 viva 🇵🇸 free 🇵🇸
Dec 24, 2018
12,214
10,991
Nah, it isn't just you. It just sounds progressive and hip to say he's fine and you're ignorant "lol".

As a Sabres fan, he's fine for what he does
but he definitely is a disappointment in terms of the pick that we spent on him. He's got hands of cement and a lousy shot but he's a good character guy so it's not like he's bad for the team. But at the same time, it's bizarre for people to not call him a disappointment. He was supposed to become a Kunitz-type or someone who could at least contribute offensively and that has never been the case.
Lmfao this board rules
 

acor

Registered User
Jan 13, 2012
1,345
393
He's obviously good enough to stay in the league, but the most impressive is that he managed to stay in the same team that was revolving door in constant rebuild for virually all duration of his career... Yet, one of the only (only one??? is there any longer tenured Sabre than him?) player that was spared from all of those constant purges was bottom sixer...
 

buffalowing88

Registered User
Aug 11, 2008
4,319
1,765
Charlotte, NC
Lmfao this board rules

You jerks.

Last time I have a few beers and post.

But the point still stands. He's extraordinarily good at shot suppression but he was a part of two horrendous picks for the Sabres that year in the first round. If he was such a hot commodity teams would have traded us for him. I have nothing but respect for the guy but it seems like he's stuck to us now.
 

Hostile Offer

Artist formerly known as Eagle Peninsula
Jun 17, 2017
7,722
5,807
Finland
I don't think the odd part is that he's still in the league, but the fact that he's been with the Sabres through some very turbulent times and guys like Girgensons who have limited TOI and offensive contribution tend to get recycled a lot around the league, yet he's still there, doing his thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PensandCaps

TheDawnOfANewTage

Dahlin, it’ll all be fine
Dec 17, 2018
12,321
18,010
zemgus-girgensons-2020-33.jpg


Fantastic peripheral vision. Zemgod smiles upon you.
 

DickSmehlik

Registered User
Oct 23, 2006
3,760
3,776
The Empire State
but he was a part of two horrendous picks for the Sabres that year in the first round. If he was such a hot commodity teams would have traded us for him. I have nothing but respect for the guy but it seems like he's stuck to us now.

He is a huge disappointment for his draft placement. Good 4th liner though.

You guys are way out to lunch. Mildly disappointing maybe but terrible? What was Grigerenko then?

I don't know many terrible picks that are 9th in their draft class in games played and 13th in games played overall for this franchise.
 

Skinnyjimmy08

WorldTraveler
Mar 30, 2012
22,517
11,995
He's the perfect type of player for a team. He is a good bottom 6 guy that will always be extremely inexpensive to keep resigning. He will be one of those guys that later in his career fans are shocked cause he quietly hits 1000 games played
 

Hextall27

Registered User
Nov 6, 2003
49
8
Buffalo
Visit site
This discussion is a perfect example of the over valuing of what it means to be a 1st round pick.

When Buffalo took Grigorenko 12th in the draft he was the biggest wild card. Might be the best talent wise, might bolt back to Russia, might flame out. Hell they couldn’t even agree on his age. We all know how that went.

They then took zemgus 2 picks later because he was seen as the safest pick in the draft. Mid tier 2nd line center at best, defensive bottom 6 at worst. He was never projected to be an offensive phenom.

He’s now pretty much reached his expected projection- a hard to play against, safe, great teammate, defensively sound, bottom 6 guy.

Would’ve liked more offense though but not upset that he’s still on the team.
 

CraigBillington

Registered User
Dec 10, 2010
1,681
1,461
I am in a 32 team sths sim league, Girgensons is my #1 centre on a 5th place team with 79 points in 71 games.
 

biturbo19

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
25,881
10,951
Then you obviously don’t watch much Sabres hockey. The guy doesn’t take a shift off. He didn’t live up to his draft pedigree but is exactly the type who f bottom 6 player teams drool over for the playoffs.

Was he too rough on your team tonight?

I normally absolutely despise this whole, "you must not have watched him" retort. I find it dismissive and often used in place of an actual argument.

But in this case, i genuinely do have to wonder if it's the case here. Certainly, if they've watched a significant amount of Sabres hockey and haven't noticed Girgensons at all, they at very least, aren't watching for a lot of important things away from the puck that make a difference.

He's about as good, and "noticeable" as you're going to get from a bottom-6/4th line grinder. He's rangy, physical, energetic, responsible with the puck, positions himself well defensively and works hard every shift. He embraces his role and fills with with aplomb. Pretty much exactly what you'd like to see out that role player. Rather than a guy who pulls off a highlight reel dangle every third game, but spends the rest of the time giving a coach endless grief.

He also kind of stands out visually, as he's got some slightly peculiar mechanics to the way he gets around. :laugh: Kind of a little bit like Brady Skjei, where they both get around more than fine...but look a little different doing it.

Nah, it isn't just you. It just sounds progressive and hip to say he's fine and you're ignorant "lol".

As a Sabres fan, he's fine for what he does but he definitely is a disappointment in terms of the pick that we spent on him. He's got hands of cement and a lousy shot but he's a good character guy so it's not like he's bad for the team. But at the same time, it's bizarre for people to not call him a disappointment. He was supposed to become a Kunitz-type or someone who could at least contribute offensively and that has never been the case.

I still remember the loft "Kesler type" upside projections. People getting carried away with that one year where he played a de facto top line scoring role for a while and actually posted some points.

But realistically...he's carved out a pretty solid career, all things considered. He's not a star, but even with those Kesler-lite projections at the draft, he was always seen as more of a "high floor, low ceiling" type player. You hope for better, but a long career as a pretty ideal Bottom-6 grinder isn't hugely disappointing given his draft profile, and what happened with a bunch of other guys in that draft class.


This discussion is a perfect example of the over valuing of what it means to be a 1st round pick.

When Buffalo took Grigorenko 12th in the draft he was the biggest wild card. Might be the best talent wise, might bolt back to Russia, might flame out. Hell they couldn’t even agree on his age. We all know how that went.

They then took zemgus 2 picks later because he was seen as the safest pick in the draft. Mid tier 2nd line center at best, defensive bottom 6 at worst. He was never projected to be an offensive phenom.

He’s now pretty much reached his expected projection- a hard to play against, safe, great teammate, defensively sound, bottom 6 guy.

Would’ve liked more offense though but not upset that he’s still on the team.

Yeah. People seem to only look for the "upside" homerun picks. The reality is, a lot of picks even in the 1st round, bust out of the league entirely. Especially in weaker draft classes. Getting a good solid player for that long is pretty solid "value" for a draft pick. Not spectacular, but you have to be reasonably content with that.


I think people would be surprised too, at what a guy like Girgensons would've returned if he'd been moved at the deadline at some point rather than remaining a Sabre. I think that might've given some folks more of a gauge on the "value" of that sort of "premium bottom-6 forward" who brings some size, physicality, responsible two-way play, and a good honest effort every shift. Maybe that would've altered the perception of what "value" the Sabres got out of that initial draft pick. But they obviously preferred to just keep him around...because of the value that type of guy has to a team. Even to a team that's spent most of his tenure in a cyclical rebuild mode.
 

Chainshot

Give 'em Enough Rope
Sponsor
Feb 28, 2002
150,915
100,854
Tarnation
true, But better players were taken right after him.

Yes, and the front office discussed that when they made the pick - went for the talented gamble with Greg O'Renko and then the super safe pick with Girgensons. What few were expecting was Regier, after years of taking his time with prospects, rushing both into the pro game.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad