The Ryan O’Reilly Discussion Quarantine Zone [All ROR Posts Here] (Mod Notes OP)

[joshjull]

It's pointless to bring up ROR's production in Saint Louis because he's getting featured 1C usage he would never get in Buffalo with Eichel in front of him, unless Botts traded Eichel. Sometimes a guy just isn't in his best role due to some circumstance or roster composition issue on his team. Good GM's identify guys like that and get 'em. Good job on Armstrong for doing that, sorry about the goalies.

Have to disagree with you on the bolded.

He isn’t their top offensive center which is the only thing Jack could prevent him from being here. He still has a defensively tilted role. Its just not nearly as pronounced as it was here and he’s had more talented offensive help on the wings (like Tarasenko).

To start the year he was getting a usage closer to how he was used here but that has steadily eased up as the season progressed. But he isn’t getting offensively tilted usage.

I guess what I’m saying is a change of scenery, a tweak to usages and stronger linemates are doing the trick for him.

 

[SabresSharks]

It's getting pretty hard to say we would be better off if we undid this trade and still had ROR

It's easier to make the case now than it was 2 weeks ago, but I still don't buy it. We're all enjoying this incredible run, but let's not forget how it's happened - excellent goaltending, an almost injury-free lineup, lots of OT and shootout wins that could have gone either way, a green head coach making better use of his roster, and the addition of key players not involved in the trade. It's not because the ROR trade itself made the team better.

I'm content that Botts did the best he could in challenging circumstances - a directive to get rid of O'Reilly before his signing bonus became due.

We've got an exciting, young team loaded with potential, and plenty more talent arriving over the next few seasons. I don't much care about The Trade at this point.

 

[joshjull]

Didn’t sound angry or irrational in the slightest to me Nor does it seem disjointed

Duly noted

 

[Royal Thunder]

Skinner - Eichel - Pominville
Sheary - O'Reilly - Reinhart
Rodrigues - Mittelstadt - Okposo
Jaskin - Larsson - Girgensons

Your honor, I rest my case.

Not the Jaskin thing again

I'll take our chances with the current lineup over that going forward. How many points do you think that team would have? I think it's 99% chance it would be less than 34. Not having ROR lumbering around out there for 20 minutes a night totally changes the dynamic of the team.

 

[Doug Prishpreed]

The reality is Botts set out to remake his team from the trade deadline on into the offseason. He wanted to fix the depth, overall talent at various positions and the locker room. The totality of those moves is a big reason for the success we’ve had to date.

Trading ROR was only part of that remake. Did he have to get moved as part of this remake? I have no idea and I’d argue no one on this forum does either. (I believe @Sabresfansince1980 mentioned this as well)

Agree with the first paragraph, but it’s hard to look at the giant ROR-sized hole in the roster at center and not at least admit there’s a solid argument that we’d be much better off if we kept him.

It’s just frustrating that a huge portion of the posters can’t admit that the argument has some logic behind it, which is why the “discussion” never ends. The idea that his personality in the locker room is what what holding us back, or that Tage/VS/PB are driving our success, seems like a much, much harder sell to me.

 

[Montag DP]

And you haven't even touched on the additions of Skinner and Mitts, which cost us nothing off our roster. Nope, it was ROR.

All the improvements (with the exception of Skinner, which pretty much everyone approved of) that so many people told me wouldn't make much difference and that Botterill was an idiot. The tune has changed quite a bit since then.

 

[Aladyyn]

Not the Jaskin thing again

I'll take our chances with the current lineup over that going forward. How many points do you think that team would have? I think it's 99% chance it would be less than 34. Not having ROR lumbering around out there for 20 minutes a night totally changes the dynamic of the team.

lmfao are you serious, that lineup is STACKED

 

[Ralonzo]

So in 38 pages, what I've learned is:

It's subjective whether the downgrade delta between ROR and his replacement on the Sabres roster (Mitts?) exceeds the cumulative upgrade delta of Berglund/Sobotka/Thompson and whatever AHL fodder or perhaps-ready-perhaps-not rookies would probably have been in their stead.

The relative difficulty of upgrading the top-end of a roster versus the bottom is the biggest argument against the trade, and that's valid. The unquantifiable nature of locker room chemistry is the biggest argument for the trade, and that's valid.

At this point I think wins and losses weighs heavy as the ultimate arbiter.

 

[joshjull]

Agree with the first paragraph, but it’s hard to look at the giant ROR-sized hole in the roster at center and not at least admit there’s a solid argument that we’d be much better off if we kept him.

It’s just frustrating that a huge portion of the posters can’t admit that the argument has some logic behind it, which is why the “discussion” never ends. The idea that his personality in the locker room is what what holding us back, or that Tage/VS/PB are driving our success, seems like a much, much harder sell to me.

I don’t disagree that an argument can be made that we would have been better off to keep him. But there is also an argument to be made that we needed to part ways with him to allow the room to reboot and others to step up into bigger rolls (on ice and in room). Neither is a horrible or crazy position and neither can be proven to be true 100%. So we have the back and forth that goes on and on over the trade.

 

[Aladyyn]

So in 38 pages, what I've learned is:

It's subjective whether the downgrade delta between ROR and his replacement on the Sabres roster (Mitts?) exceeds the cumulative upgrade delta of Berglund/Sobotka/Thompson and whatever AHL fodder or perhaps-ready-perhaps-not rookies would probably have been in their stead.

The relative difficulty of upgrading the top-end of a roster versus the bottom is the biggest argument against the trade, and that's valid. The unquantifiable nature of locker room chemistry is the biggest argument for the trade, and that's valid.

At this point I think wins and losses weighs heavy as the ultimate arbiter.

I'm going to heavily disagree with that one. Too much turnover to pin all of it on ROR.

 

[Royal Thunder]

lmfao are you serious, that lineup is STACKED

So would we be undefeated? It's not always as simple as A + B = C, ask the Blues! There's a lot of smoke around ROR at this point, if you refuse to see it that's on you. One thing about the current team is there is a ton of competition in the bottom 6, in large part due to the ROR return.

Btw this banter is all in good fun man, I know we've been arguing about this since the summer but I fully respect your knowledge and passion for the team and the game. These conversations are all in the spirit of healthy fanaticism. We're all on the same side here

 

[Doug Prishpreed]

I don’t disagree that an argument can be made that we would have been better off to keep him. But there is also an argument to be made that we needed to part ways with him to allow the room to reboot and others to step up into bigger rolls (on ice and in room). Neither is a horrible or crazy position and neither can be proven to be true 100%. So we have the back and forth that goes on and on over the trade.

Agree with you 100%. I guess I just see one "side" as partaking in the discussion in good faith, having a lot of very specific reasons to make their case, where the other side is using one single quote from Vogl's mail bag, and maybe a Paul Hamilton utterance.

Your Skinner analogy is perfect -- did they really need to move on from him to get better? It's an almost philosophical question, where no one will change anyone's mind once they have a belief. But there's no reason the discussion needs to become toxic, nor do we need to resort to trolling (not accusing you of either, obviously).

With the team winning, I'm over caring about the trade, I've made my peace -- but I do think the topic continues to be as relevant a topic as anything on here.

 

[BFLO]

This trade could also turn out just like the Hall for Larsson trade. Edmonton made the playoffs that first season with Larsson and he has played well for them, but basically everyone is in agreement that The Oilers would be better off if they had kept Hall. The Sabres are on pace to make the playoffs this season but it's really hard to argue that our roster is better without ROR, even if they are playing well right now.

 

[Jeremy2020]

This thread should just die. Too many posters married to their own agenda and it's just going around in circles.

 

[DolanPlsGoSabres]

This thread should just die. Too many posters married to their own agenda and it's just going around in circles.

Then the ROR discussion will bleed off to other threads. Nobody wants that.

 

[Dirty Dog]

This trade could also turn out just like the Hall for Larsson trade. Edmonton made the playoffs that first season with Larsson and he has played well for them, but basically everyone is in agreement that The Oilers would be better off if they had kept Hall. The Sabres are on pace to make the playoffs this season but it's really hard to argue that our roster is better without ROR, even if they are playing well right now.

Well yea, because our trade was about futures. I don't get whats so crazy complicated about that (not saying you, but i see a lot of people making that point). The trade clearly makes us worse on paper for this season talent-wise, but thats TBD if thats the case in 2-3 years. The skinner trade is the opposite for us.

The larsson trade was a 1 for 1 when one player in a different class than the other and need was a big talking point.

 

[BFLO]

Well yea, because our trade was about futures. I don't get whats so crazy complicated about that (not saying you, but i see a lot of people making that point). The trade clearly makes us worse on paper for this season talent-wise, but thats TBD if thats the case in 2-3 years. The skinner trade is the opposite for us.

The larsson trade was a 1 for 1 when one player in a different class than the other and need was a big talking point.

I mean that it could turn out well for us the first season like it did for edmonton, even if we clearly lost the trade going forward.

 

[thomas vanek]

So in 38 pages, what I've learned is:

It's subjective whether the downgrade delta between ROR and his replacement on the Sabres roster (Mitts?) exceeds the cumulative upgrade delta of Berglund/Sobotka/Thompson and whatever AHL fodder or perhaps-ready-perhaps-not rookies would probably have been in their stead.

The relative difficulty of upgrading the top-end of a roster versus the bottom is the biggest argument against the trade, and that's valid. The unquantifiable nature of locker room chemistry is the biggest argument for the trade, and that's valid.

At this point I think wins and losses weighs heavy as the ultimate arbiter.

The best, objective analysis in this entire thread. Thank you.

 

[Gordo21]

The biggest difference between this years team and last years, is the replacement of Lehner.

Of course, I do like the other moves Botterrill has made as well, as I believe they have all helped to improve this team in one way or another. He is a refreshing change from the gambling, squandering of assets , GM's the Pegulas' have hired in the past.

 

[brian_griffin]

Tage has the upside to be better than ROR even if ROR is better now (and Berglund and Sobotka compensate for that with quality depth). Also we have a 1st round pick that is looking tastier with each day passed. Either teens 2019 or maybe lotto 2020 pick. That's the cherry on the whole serviceable line cake.

O' Really?

Based on what specifically? I find no reason to believe that Tage Thompson has even close to that much upside, especially on the defensive side of the puck. That isn't to say Thompson lacks upside, nor that he may fill a useful / essential role for BUF. But I would expect an ostrich to fly sooner than Tage Thompson is viewed as surpassing ROR's zenith in either a single season or for a career. Check back in 6-8 years.

Not the Jaskin thing again

I'll take our chances with the current lineup over that going forward. How many points do you think that team would have? I think it's 99% chance it would be less than 34. Not having ROR lumbering around out there for 20 minutes a night totally changes the dynamic of the team.

Put Elie or Wilson instead of Jaskin. IMO, you're focused on the wrong item - a depth winger - vs. the center depth. You're also discrediting the huge impact goaltending has had this season.

So in 38 pages, what I've learned is:

It's subjective whether the downgrade delta between ROR and his replacement on the Sabres roster (Mitts?) exceeds the cumulative upgrade delta of Berglund/Sobotka/Thompson and whatever AHL fodder or perhaps-ready-perhaps-not rookies would probably have been in their stead.

The relative difficulty of upgrading the top-end of a roster versus the bottom is the biggest argument against the trade, and that's valid. The unquantifiable nature of locker room chemistry is the biggest argument for the trade, and that's valid.

At this point I think wins and losses weighs heavy as the ultimate arbiter.

I think the bolded is simplistic. As others noted, goaltending and defensive depth / health has been a far greater difference.

This thread should just die. Too many posters married to their own agenda and it's just going around in circles.

 

[Zip15]

The biggest difference between this years team and last years, is the replacement of Lehner.

Of course, I do like the other moves Botterrill has made as well, as I believe they have all helped to improve this team in one way or another. He is a refreshing change from the gambling, squandering of assets , GM's the Pegulas' have hired in the past.

The biggest reason for the overall turnaround is the ability to score goals. Our GA/game this season (2.75) isn't all that different than in 2016-17 (2.82) when we were a sub-.500 hockey team. Based simply on averages, this team would've given up only a goal or two less than the 2016-17 team, to date. But the last two iterations of the Sabres only scored about 2.4 GF/game. This club is averaging slightly over 3.0 GF/game. Over 24 games, that's about a 14 or 15 goal improvement.

Strictly speaking, if you want to just limit it to last year, sure, the goaltending improvement has mattered. But we sucked before last year. And the biggest reason for our suck over the previous three seasons wasn't the goaltending, it was the inability to score goals.

 

[Panthaz89]

So would we be undefeated? It's not always as simple as A + B = C, ask the Blues! There's a lot of smoke around ROR at this point, if you refuse to see it that's on you. One thing about the current team is there is a ton of competition in the bottom 6, in large part due to the ROR return.

Btw this banter is all in good fun man, I know we've been arguing about this since the summer but I fully respect your knowledge and passion for the team and the game. These conversations are all in the spirit of healthy fanaticism. We're all on the same side here

except the Blues problems are mainly the goaltenders...Laine beat em 5 times in 5 shots and could of beaten the Blues 4 goals by himself because of this...Bogosian gave the puck away in front of the net for Laine and Hutton robbed him taking away what would of been a regulation loss instead of a SO win. The Blues also let Hutton go to FA for us to steal which is a big reason why they suck since he was doing great for them in his role last year and them basically giving us Hutton is much bigger swing than the trade will ever be value wise. This year ROR would of more than likely done more for us but in the future this could very well be a big one for the Sabres when ROR hits his 30s.

 

[Gordo21]

The biggest reason for the overall turnaround is the ability to score goals. Our GA/game this season (2.75) isn't all that different than in 2016-17 (2.82) when we were a sub-.500 hockey team. Based simply on averages, this team would've given up only a goal or two less than the 2016-17 team, to date. But the last two iterations of the Sabres only scored about 2.4 GF/game. This club is averaging slightly over 3.0 GF/game. Over 24 games, that's about a 14 or 15 goal improvement.

Strictly speaking, if you want to just limit it to last year, sure, the goaltending improvement has mattered. But we sucked before last year. And the biggest reason for our suck over the previous three seasons wasn't the goaltending, it was the inability to score goals.

I agree with what you're saying to a certain extent, however I think you're minimizing the change at goaltender somewhat. Our goalies play the puck much better this year, they're able to perform in shootouts, and they're, IMO, guys who you are not afraid to make a mistake in front of. More positive influences to a certain degree.

So I do believe that goaltending is arguably the biggest difference from last year. Of course, we have more depth, the addition of Skinner and Dahlin, some of our younger players have improved, and all these things come into play with respect to how we've improved. Including good old pucks bouncing our way a bit more thus far.

 

[Samsonite23]

Sorry for the the rant. Ignore if you’re tired of this talk. Drank a few tonight.

I just find it strange that some Sabres fans actually think that ROR arrives to a new team and day 1 infects them with some type of loser virus. This doesn’t even allow the time for first impressions when people tend to friendly/upbeat. All the while he is playing out of his mind (playing as well as any player in the league) and giving it his all on the ice.

Do people really believe that he is why the blues are losing? Its blows my mind.

 

[La Cosa Nostra]

The biggest reason for the overall turnaround is the ability to score goals. Our GA/game this season (2.75) isn't all that different than in 2016-17 (2.82) when we were a sub-.500 hockey team. Based simply on averages, this team would've given up only a goal or two less than the 2016-17 team, to date. But the last two iterations of the Sabres only scored about 2.4 GF/game. This club is averaging slightly over 3.0 GF/game. Over 24 games, that's about a 14 or 15 goal improvement.

Strictly speaking, if you want to just limit it to last year, sure, the goaltending improvement has mattered. But we sucked before last year. And the biggest reason for our suck over the previous three seasons wasn't the goaltending, it was the inability to score goals.

Yes our GA is not that much different then previous years. But that also fails to take into account that this is the highest scoring season since 05-06 which makes our GA and overall defense even more impressive.


In a vacuum RoR+2 depth players>Bergy, sobotka and Tage. When you factor in reallocated cap space, better team chemistry and removing RoR to fully let Jack embrace the captaincy and make it his team make this trade go deeper then talent out>talent in.

Like already mentioned the addition of the 3 Blues in the bottom 6 make our team far far better. If RoR is here there is zero chance Skinner has as many goals and also that RoR would be producing as much here.

Some times a player just needs to move on. The fact that we have had more success in 24 games post RoR then the 246 games he was in Buffalo for make this trade even easier to do.

And it is like people are forgetting we have an extremely valuable 1st on the way and a 2nd. Thompson will not be better then RoR. But I believe he will be a big strong 20-25 goal big shot forward which we have none of. And the addition of Berglund and Sobotka over the bottom 6 drivel we had been accustomed too also should be noted. Yes we could have gotten them for picks/they are pure cap dumps and they suck but the truth is all 3 have played there role well.

If the Sabres were floundering toward the bottom I would understand the hate. But we are in the midst of a franchise best winning streak after 5 years of basement play. The Sabres have not compiled a better team since 06-07. We are one of the 6 youngest teams in the league and only 1 player over 28 on the roster is a must have player and that's Hutton. ROR did not fit Botts vision. And considering the moves Botts did so far...

Get Skinner for virtually nothing
Get sheary for virtually nothing
Keep our future #1 in Ullmark for a 6th
Acquire Scandella a top 4 Dman and Poms a solid vet 20 goal scorer for 2 cap dumps .
Sign Carter Hutton for peanuts

I'd say Botts knows a lot better then I or anyone else here about what is best for the team. The fact he was able to transform the team from basement to top tier team in one summer is incredible.

It feels good seeing where we are at. Back near the top of the mountain. A young talented hungry team filled with top young players. A team that never gives up. Sorry but I just dont see a RoR led Sabre team making all these come backs. The team would probably mope around and then make excuses post game after going down 2 or 3 goals instead of storming back and winning like they have.

RoR turns 28 in less then 3 months. He is an average skater at best. His skills will erode far quicker then Skinners will. Skinner is just a far better fit on this team. RoR is not missed in Colorado even though Zads has been not good for them. Only Compher has been a quality asset and RoR>>Compher. But do you see Avs fans still pining for Ror? NO!!!