Trade: Ryan O'Reilly to St Louis Blues

[SwampD]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Are you asking if people are using stats to justify or refute keeping ROR? What else should they use? Anecdotal evidence?

What's your argument then? Why wouldn't we be better with ROR, you can't use a single stat.

How about the Sabres record to this point? Can I use that stat?

[woods-racer]

I believe the Sabres would be a much better team if a player with ROR's stats was still on the team or added to the team in the off season.

I don't believe the team would be better with ROR.

I will run with a GM's instinct that there was something making the team worse that should have been better on paper.

I'm sure JBott's knew the on paper concept of ROR, his stats, but his chemistry was killing the most important stat. Wins and losses.

Edited February 14, 2019 by woods-racer

[LGR4GM]

18 minutes ago, SwampD said:

How about the Sabres record to this point? Can I use that stat?

Sure, let's compare it to last year when ROR was here. 

7 minutes ago, woods-racer said:

I believe the Sabres would be a much better team if a player with ROR's stats was still on the team or added to the team in the off season.

I don't believe the team would be better with ROR.

I will run with a GM's instinct that there was something making the team worse that should have been better on paper.

I'm sure JBott's new the on paper concept of ROR, his stats, but his chemistry was killing the most important stat. Wins and losses.

I think this is good. 

[...]

2 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Are you asking if people are using stats to justify or refute keeping ROR? What else should they use? Anecdotal evidence?

What's your argument then? Why wouldn't we be better with ROR, you can't use a single stat.

You're being unnecessarily sensitive on this matter.  You're also lumping me with the stat-haters.  I like stats and think they are a fine tool for assessing situations.

I wrote my last response while sitting on the toilet, so excuse me if it wasn't clear.

The discussion has been since, effectively, the beginning of the season that ROR made the team better and the justification has been his stats.

The stats-only guys are clearly ignoring that there is more to factoring in a player's worth to a team that just stats.  And am I asking if you disagree with that.

As to whether we'd be better with ROR, it's a pointless question.  A POINTLESS QUESTION.  He's gone and he's likely not coming back.

You might say "woah, ..., it does have a point because it weighs into whether JBott is managing the roster effectively." 

If the team's record is better at the end of the season then JBott has managed the roster effectively including getting rid of ROR.

Of course, you might then say "woah, ..., if ROR were here the team would be even better!" 

Which you can not prove, ever, and doesn't matter because it's postulating on a circumstance that isn't real.  Therefore, pointless.

Edited February 14, 2019 by ...

[LGR4GM]

We didn't win the ROR trade. Unless a bunch changes that's probably going to be how it is. For some reason though, we're better without him as a team. 

1 minute ago, ... said:

You're being unnecessarily sensitive on this matter.  You're also lumping me with the stat-haters.  I like stats and think they are a fine tool for assessing situations.

I wrote my last response while sitting on the toilet, so excuse me if it wasn't clear.

The discussion has been since, effectively, the beginning of the season that ROR made the team better and the justification has been his stats.

The stats-only guys are clearly ignoring that there is more to factoring in a player's worth to a team that just stats.  And am I asking if you disagree with that.

As to whether we'd be better with ROR, it's a pointless question.  A POINTLESS QUESTION.  He's gone and he's likely not coming back.

You might say "woah, ..., it does have a point because it weighs into whether JBott is managing the roster effectively." 

If the team's record is better at the end of the season then JBott has then managed the roster effectively including getting rid of ROR.

Of course, you might then say "woah, ..., if ROR the team would be even better!" 

Which you can not prove, ever, and doesn't matter because it's postulating on a circumstance that isn't real.  Therefore, pointless.

Yes there is more than stats to why a player works. It is just another tool. 

[...]

2 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

We didn't win the ROR trade. Unless a bunch changes that's probably going to be how it is. For some reason though, we're better without him as a team. 

Yes there is more than stats to why a player works. It is just another tool. 

See!  You didn't have as much of an issue with what I said as you thought you did.

[LGR4GM]

Yes it is pointless at this stage. 

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Are you asking if people are using stats to justify or refute keeping ROR? What else should they use? Anecdotal evidence?

What's your argument then? Why wouldn't we be better with ROR, you can't use a single stat.

So are you saying that Colorado should've never gotten rid of ROR?

[LGR4GM]

12 minutes ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

So are you saying that Colorado should've never gotten rid of ROR?

What on earth does Colorado have to do with this?

[Wyldnwoody44]

All the way into February, sabres on a playoff cusp, and we're still talking ROR....i kinda Expect this when it's off season or we're just plain bad. But I didn't think it would continue this far. 

 

In saying that, I do realize that our lack of a #2 center is hurting us and that this is correlated, but overall, no one knows. Maybe ROR takes out Dahlin or Skinner in practice on accident, maybe he regresses, no one knows what would have happened. 

Enjoy the team now and the growth, maybe Thompson becomes a thing (maybe not) maybe we get our Datsyuk with that pick we got. 

 

Spilt milk is spoiled, buy a new gallon and drink down the refreshment that is new Sabres hockey

[Ripper]

52 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

 We didn't win the ROR trade. Unless a bunch changes that's probably going to be how it is. For some reason though, we're better without him as a team. 

 

Hold on now.  The result is inconclusive at best and a bunch doesn't have to change.  We don't know who the draft pick - obtained in the ROE trade - will be yet and how that will turn out.  ROR was drafted 2nd round (33rd) in 2009.  We will definitely have a pick which will be lower and possibly better.

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

28 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

What on earth does Colorado have to do with this?

Think about it, you seem like an intelligent guy.The question around here seems to be "how good would we be if we hadn't traded ROR?"

I ask, "How good would Colorado be if they hadn't traded ROR?". And, "why did they trade him?" Was the Avs GM an idiot for trading him? Was Murray an idiot for thinking ROR would be the difference in making us a success? Was JBott an idiot for trading ROR? Will the Blues be sorry any time soon for making the trade? All good questions and no "real" answers.

I think ROR is a very good hockey player and I'll leave it at that.

[LGR4GM]

11 minutes ago, Ripper said:

Hold on now.  The result is inconclusive at best and a bunch doesn't have to change.  We don't know who the draft pick - obtained in the ROE trade - will be yet and how that will turn out.  ROR was drafted 2nd round (33rd) in 2009.  We will definitely have a pick which will be lower and possibly better.

I'm very aware of not only that pick but what it can get us. However, 60pt 2 way centers are still hard to get. To win that trade we have no nail that pick. 

6 minutes ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

Think about it, you seem like an intelligent guy.The question around here seems to be "how good would we be if we hadn't traded ROR?"

I ask, "How good would Colorado be if they hadn't traded ROR?". And, "why did they trade him?" Was the Avs GM an idiot for trading him? Was Murray an idiot for thinking ROR would be the difference in making us a success? Was JBott an idiot for trading ROR? Will the Blues be sorry any time soon for making the trade? All good questions and no "real" answers.

I think ROR is a very good hockey player and I'll leave it at that.

No idea. There's just too many variables. 

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

I'm very aware of not only that pick but what it can get us. However, 60pt 2 way centers are still hard to get. To win that trade we have no nail that pick. 

No idea. There's just too many variables. 

Can I ask you a "stats guy" question?

If you were to pick one(1) asset ROR has that would suit any team....would you say his face-off abilities? 

[LGR4GM]

17 minutes ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

Can I ask you a "stats guy" question?

If you were to pick one(1) asset ROR has that would suit any team....would you say his face-off abilities? 

Shot suppression, unless I'm remembering wrong he was good at that. 

Edited February 14, 2019 by LGR4GM

[WildCard]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Shot suppression, unless I'm remembering wrong he was good at that. 

Fantastic at it. His real bonus is his neutral zone work though. The guy just does not lose in the neutral zone

Edited February 14, 2019 by WildCard

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Shot suppression, unless I'm remembering wrong he was good at that. 

I was just curious as to your answer. I'm not a stats guy.

I'm also curious if any of the other off season trade/signings have upped their game recently that could be another reason for the Blues turn around? ROR seems to be consistent so that doesn't show me that he would be the reason besides the goalie. 

[WildCard]

12 minutes ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

I was just curious as to your answer. I'm not a stats guy.

I'm also curious if any of the other off season trade/signings have upped their game recently that could be another reason for the Blues turn around? ROR seems to be consistent so that doesn't show me that he would be the reason besides the goalie. 

Without looking I'd guess Tarasenko. He was awful to start the year 

[LGR4GM]

I honestly think goaltending has a lot to do with st Louis being better now.

[Ripper]

3 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

I'm very aware of not only that pick but what it can get us. However, 60pt 2 way centers are still hard to get. To win that trade we have no nail that pick. 

Agree

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

2 hours ago, WildCard said:

Without looking I'd guess Tarasenko. He was awful to start the year 

Yea, I was referring to new guys like Bozak, Perron, Maroon, etc.

I guess even a goalie could spike the play of others through  a confidence factor.

 

[LGR4GM]

8 hours ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

Yea, I was referring to new guys like Bozak, Perron, Maroon, etc.

I guess even a goalie could spike the play of others through  a confidence factor.

 

It isn't about spiking the play of others, it is more about their sv%. Jordan Binnington is their new goalie and he has a .927sv% compared to Allen's .898

That's is a huge swing. 2.9 goals per 100 shots. Binnington is 10-1-1 in his 12 starts. We all know what a 10 game win streak does and that is basically what he gave them (not literally but I mean points wise). 

Edited February 14, 2019 by LGR4GM

[shrader]

13 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

I'm very aware of not only that pick but what it can get us. However, 60pt 2 way centers are still hard to get. To win that trade we have no nail that pick. 

 

The growth of a certain 21 year old also has a lot to do with the so called winning of the trade.

[That Aud Smell]

13 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

However, 60pt 2 way centers are still hard to get. To win that trade we have no nail that pick. 

11 hours ago, WildCard said:

Fantastic at it. His real bonus is his neutral zone work though. The guy just does not lose in the neutral zone

Not for nothing: He's trending toward being an 80-point player this season.

With some distance from the trade, and perhaps in light of the numbers he's posting this season, I am more resolute than ever that there were non-on-ice considerations of which we are ignorant, but which have been talked about here as rumours and/or insider information, that compelled this trade to happen. 

For that reason, I think it's a fool's errand to talk about the Sabres potentially winning that trade in terms of hockey assets. 

JBOT did not move a player of ROR's quality in the manner he did without good cause. (Btw, I'm not saying it was the right decision -- just that a rational GM perceived good cause.) This was a bitter, jagged pill to swallow.

 

[shrader]

7 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

Not for nothing: He's trending toward being an 80-point player this season.

With some distance from the trade, and perhaps in light of the numbers he's posting this season, I am more resolute than ever that there were non-on-ice considerations of which we are ignorant, but which have been talked about here as rumours and/or insider information, that compelled this trade to happen. 

For that reason, I think it's a fool's errand to talk about the Sabres potentially winning that trade in terms of hockey assets. 

JBOT did not move a player of ROR's quality in the manner he did without good cause. (Btw, I'm not saying it was the right decision -- just that a rational GM perceived good cause.) This was a bitter, jagged pill to swallow.

 

Everything's trending upward in terms of point production this year.  I'd be curious to see how his numbers compare to the rest of the league relative to where they were in the past.  Just as a quick example, Kucherov leads the league right now and his numbers project out to 126 on the year.  McDavid lead the league last year with 106.  My guess without digging too deeply is that he's performing better relative to the league than he did here at the end of his stay, but some of that boost in production is definitely due to the higher leaguewide scoring.

On a side note, an important thing to keep in mind is that O'Reilly's best point season here was his first.  He dropped and then leveled off the next two years.  Could we see that in St. Louis as well, a quick start out of the gate and then leveling off?