View Single Post
02-08-2013, 07:47 PM
Registered User
smoneil's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,728
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Lonewolfe2015 View Post
I'm still confused why McDonagh is proven with 1.5 seasons of play and O'Reilly isn't with 1. O'Reilly was stuck behind two great centers and didn't get his injury shot until last year when Duchy went down. He was producing better than Landeskog for awhile. His defensive play combined with his offense actually elevated him into our number one center role, similar to McD elevating to #1.

If you value both players on their play last season, a #2 defender is pretty close to a #1 center depending on the players in discussion.

You honestly don't appear to know much about O'Reilly, because his game didn't suddenly show up, it simply became effective when being paired with a good winger and not being used primarily in a shutdown role.
You are confused because you are looking at this through homer glasses. I'm not. I have no vested interest in O'Reilly. I'm not proposing trades for him. I don't want him on my favorite team (due to the contract nonsense) and my favorite team doesn't need him (since his position is one we are set at).

First, can Avs fans PLEASE stop resorting to telling everyone who disagrees with them that they either "don't watch O'Reilly" or "don't know much about him"? It's the internet equivalent of "nuh-uh!" and it's ridiculous. The only time I said something like that in this thread was when someone was ripping a player (MDZ) for something (bad defense) that hasn't been the case in over a year. If you see me claiming that O'Reilly has never put up more than 26 points or that he's never put up more than 3rd line production, feel free to use that. Otherwise, it's just sad.

Second--there is no world in which Ryan O'Reilly at his very best was EVER considered to be a #1 center. Ever. He played like a good #2 last year. Don't be ridiculous with the overrating here. He may have played a few games on your top line. That doesn't make him a #1. McDonagh was the Rangers' number one defenseman for all of last season. You'll note that I never referred to him as an actual #1 defenseman (and won't do so until his offense merits such a claim).

Third--players that show their worth don't get "stuck behind" other players. In one breath you claim that he was your number one. In the next, you claim that he couldn't show it because he was behind two better players. Which is it? Ryan McDonagh was behind Staal, Rozsival and Del Zotto when he came up. He won the 2nd pair LD spot by playing better than both MDZ and Rozsival (allowing the Rangers to trade Rozsival and send MDZ to the AHL to work on his defensive play). Derek Stepan was behind Anisimov when he came up. He took the 2nd line C spot away from him. Players do it every year. If O'Reilly played like a #2 center in either of his first two years, he would have been moved up. He didn't. He played like a good shut-down 3rd line center who could chip in a couple of points from time to time.

Finally, the other reason you are confused is because you don't seem to understand the concept of degrees. When McDonagh elevated his game from his rookie year (when he played a #3 role) to his sophomore year (where he played a #2 role), it was an incremental increase. You EXPECT young players to improve a bit from year to year. If McDonagh had been playing on the 3rd pair and suddenly burst onto the scene last year as a top-pairing guy, you'd have an accurate parallel. O'Reilly more than doubled his production from the previous two years. Any GM that DOESN'T raise an eyebrow at that fact isn't doing his job properly.

Again--not saying the O'Reilly isn't a 50+ point second line center. I'm just saying that I'm not going to give up the value that that kind of player would warrant until I know that he's capable of doing it more than once. There have been far too many cases of players playing way over their heads for a year and then falling off the face of the planet.

smoneil is offline   Reply With Quote