Sabres have a Bunch of JAGS

[Curt]

I don’t even know what “best 2-way C” means.

Is that the best defensive C?  The best C who is better at defense than offense?  The best overall C when offensive and defensive contributions are combined?  Is there some list of guys who qualify as 2-way C’s, and another of guys who qualify as 1-way C’s?

Honest question, what’s the criteria?

[bunomatic]

1 hour ago, Curt said:

I don’t even know what “best 2-way C” means.

Is that the best defensive C?  The best C who is better at defense than offense?  The best overall C when offensive and defensive contributions are combined?  Is there some list of guys who qualify as 2-way C’s, and another of guys who qualify as 1-way C’s?

Honest question, what’s the criteria?

Stevie Y

[Curt]

26 minutes ago, bunomatic said:

Stevie Y

Stevie Y is your prototype 2-way C?  He did develop his defensive play throughout his career, but early in his career he was considered a soft 1-way guy who maybe wasn’t the kind of leader you wanted.

Also, this doesn’t answer my question at all.

[bunomatic]

1 hour ago, Curt said:

Stevie Y is your prototype 2-way C?  He did develop his defensive play throughout his career, but early in his career he was considered a soft 1-way guy who maybe wasn’t the kind of leader you wanted.

Also, this doesn’t answer my question at all.

Imo he became the prototypical 2 way center . If it doesn’t answer your question then disregard it. 

[Curt]

7 minutes ago, bunomatic said:

Imo he became the prototypical 2 way center . If it doesn’t answer your question then disregard it. 

I know, but it was the truth about his early career.  He wasn’t always seen as the consummate winner like he was late in his career.

I don’t want to disregard you man, I want to converse!

[bunomatic]

11 minutes ago, Curt said:

I know, but it was the truth about his early career.  He wasn’t always seen as the consummate winner like he was late in his career.

I don’t want to disregard you man, I want to converse!

I suppose Bergeron in Boston is probably a better example for todays game. Or dare I say it ROR in St. Louise. Eichel seems to be developing more of a defensive side recently but has a ways to go. I’d love to get into it more Curt but I really got to hit the hay. 

[PalmTreeMafia]

9 hours ago, Thorny said:

That's really an incredible image, @WildCard

Indeed. There have been multiple incredible images in this thread.

[spndnchz]

[Taro T]

14 hours ago, 7+6=13 said:

Except he's not the best 2-way center right now.  

The point is, so what, he's gone.  We lost the trade by a country mile but the market set O'Relly's value at the time.   It's about what do we do from here.  Building a second line can/should be done.  

I also don't think firing GM's every few years is the way to go.  

The problem is the market was provided an artificial parameter imposed by Sabre management which significantly reduced his market value.

It was an unforced error which will most likely cost ownership far more than the $7.5 MM they kept in their pockets when all is said and done.

(And really hope to have the discipline to not get myself involved in more O'Reilly posts.  We all have said about everything we have to say about it already.  Unless Botterill or Pegula come out and say why the Sabres wouldn't pay the bonus we will all speculate on the prognisis of the trade, but either way they lost it badly.)

[Tondas]

At this point, there is only 1 player I wouldn't trade.  Only 1.

[Ross Rhea]

7 minutes ago, Tondas said:

At this point, there is only 1 player I wouldn't trade.  Only 1.

If Wayne Gretzky was traded anybody can be traded. 

 

Something drastically needs to change, it's stale, it's old and it's not working. 

[Taro T]

59 minutes ago, Ross Rhea said:

If Wayne Gretzky was traded anybody can be traded. 

 

Something drastically needs to change, it's stale, it's old and it's not working. 

How often was Gretzky traded when the owner wasn't broke?

[7+6=13]

11 hours ago, Taro T said:

The problem is the market was provided an artificial parameter imposed by Sabre management which significantly reduced his market value.

It was an unforced error which will most likely cost ownership far more than the $7.5 MM they kept in their pockets when all is said and done.

(And really hope to have the discipline to not get myself involved in more O'Reilly posts.  We all have said about everything we have to say about it already.  Unless Botterill or Pegula come out and say why the Sabres wouldn't pay the bonus we will all speculate on the prognisis of the trade, but either way they lost it badly.)

Of course the Sabres were implicit in his value - it would be impossible not to be.  That's why I don't think spending 7.5 mil on a single player in FA is the answer nor will give us a direct comparison to losing O'Reilly.  

Build a second line totally and that's what will make us relevant.