Teams & Riders Peter Sagan discussion thread.

[Red Rick]

Re:

We can discuss endlessly about Nibali, Gilbert, ... but Froome?
He's excellent GT rider but he would have to diversify to be comparable.

You could say the same for anybody who's not Nibali or Valverde.

"He's a great Classics/GT rider but he would have to diversify to be comparable"

 

[El Pistolero]

I really think Sagan's palmares isn't that great yet. I mean, ofc most riders would still kill to get so many big wins, but if you compare his palmares to the ones of Boonen, Cancellara, Valverde, Nibali, Contador, Froome and others he just isn't quite there yet. I think people see Sagan's immense talent which might very well outweigh the talent of every single rider I mentioned above and assume it means he has also already been as successful as these guys.
But I think there is just no point in comparing him with these riders yet. Why make a comparison Sagan loses, when you know exactly Sagan's palmares is far from being finalized. I think these comparisons kind of give you a false picture of Sagan's success.

Sagan and Valverde both have five big wins, but the former's wins are of much higher calibur and variety. If we look at their other achievements Sagan also performs better. People often underestimate how impressive Sagan's Tour record is. Five green jerseys in his first 5 participations in the Tour is a great achievement. Not to mention his 8 Tour stage wins and the fact that he wore the yellow jersey. Sagan won hilly stages, sprint stages, breakaway stages and echelon stages. Sure, he hasn't won any Giro stages, but that's because the Giro clashes with the rest of his season goals. Valverde won many WT-Tour stage races, but Sagan won many WT one-day races (3 Canadian classics, 3x G-W, 1x E3 Harelbeke). Valverde won FW five times, but I rate Sagan's non-monumental wins higher (again greater variety in his wins and more prestigious races).

 

[Blanco]

I really think Sagan's palmares isn't that great yet. I mean, ofc most riders would still kill to get so many big wins, but if you compare his palmares to the ones of Boonen, Cancellara, Valverde, Nibali, Contador, Froome and others he just isn't quite there yet. I think people see Sagan's immense talent which might very well outweigh the talent of every single rider I mentioned above and assume it means he has also already been as successful as these guys.
But I think there is just no point in comparing him with these riders yet. Why make a comparison Sagan loses, when you know exactly Sagan's palmares is far from being finalized. I think these comparisons kind of give you a false picture of Sagan's success.

I think Boonen, Cancellara, Valverde, Contador and Nibali are still ahead of Sagan. But he's certainly in the same league with Gilbert, Froome and Cavendish. Froome is little debatable here, if he's in the first or in the second group. Based on results only he should be in the first, but with that huge dark cloud looming over his head, I'm closer to put him in the 2nd, and I think he'll be more than happy to stay there (but that's a topic for other side of this forum).

 

[Koronin]

I really think Sagan's palmares isn't that great yet. I mean, ofc most riders would still kill to get so many big wins, but if you compare his palmares to the ones of Boonen, Cancellara, Valverde, Nibali, Contador, Froome and others he just isn't quite there yet. I think people see Sagan's immense talent which might very well outweigh the talent of every single rider I mentioned above and assume it means he has also already been as successful as these guys.
But I think there is just no point in comparing him with these riders yet. Why make a comparison Sagan loses, when you know exactly Sagan's palmares is far from being finalized. I think these comparisons kind of give you a false picture of Sagan's success.

Sagan and Valverde both have five big wins, but the former's wins are of much higher calibur and variety. If we look at their other achievements Sagan also performs better. People often underestimate how impressive Sagan's Tour record is. Five green jerseys in his first 5 participations in the Tour is a great achievement. Not to mention his 8 Tour stage wins and the fact that he wore the yellow jersey. Sagan won hilly stages, sprint stages, breakaway stages and echelon stages. Sure, he hasn't won any Giro stages, but that's because the Giro clashes with the rest of his season goals. Valverde won many WT-Tour stage races, but Sagan won many WT one-day races (3 Canadian classics, 3x G-W, 1x E3 Harelbeke). Valverde won FW five times, but I rate Sagan's non-monumental wins higher (again greater variety in his wins and more prestigious races).

Valverde has also won Clasica San Sebastian a couple of times. That is also a WT one day race.

 

[Billie]

Re: Re:

Sagan will be one of the best cyclist of all times when he will retire , comparison with Valverde are stupid , you have to compare with boonen , cancellara , Gilbert , and now he is better of all of this so imagine at the end

I imagine "being better" is having the better palmarès .... anything else is "personal taste" ...
now Tom Boonen and Philippe Gilbert had most of their big wins in classics and albeight both have more monuments than Peter has today (and it is questionable if Peter will beat Tom's 7), Peter's other success (World's, TdF stage wins, green jerseys, ...) may outweight this ,,,
However he clearly is not on par with Spartacus yet, who also won 8 stages at TdF and wore the yellow jersey 29 times (more than any rider without winning Le Tour), was many time world time trial champion and won olympic gold and a few 2nd tier tours (Tour de Suisse, Tirreno Adriatico), whereas Peter only won 3rd tier tours (Pologne, California) ...
Peter is catching up, but in my opinion is not there yet ....

just so happens that those were in the years without bonis. easy to keep yellow after a prologue when there are no bonis

 

[d-s3]

Re: Re:

We can discuss endlessly about Nibali, Gilbert, ... but Froome?
He's excellent GT rider but he would have to diversify to be comparable.

You could say the same for anybody who's not Nibali or Valverde.

"He's a great Classics/GT rider but he would have to diversify to be comparable"

Not really.
Sagan can do cobbles, sprint, punchy finales. He's visible all season long.
Similar Valverde, just another subset of skills *in several areas*.
Nibali has GT wins and surprises (positively) in classics.
...

But Froome (so far) is one-trick-pony (albeit excellent).
He does not even try something else.

For me, the ability to be a factor in various types of races plays a big role.

 

[Jancouver]

I really think Sagan's palmares isn't that great yet. I mean, ofc most riders would still kill to get so many big wins, but if you compare his palmares to the ones of Boonen, Cancellara, Valverde, Nibali, Contador, Froome and others he just isn't quite there yet. I think people see Sagan's immense talent which might very well outweigh the talent of every single rider I mentioned above and assume it means he has also already been as successful as these guys.
But I think there is just no point in comparing him with these riders yet. Why make a comparison Sagan loses, when you know exactly Sagan's palmares is far from being finalized. I think these comparisons kind of give you a false picture of Sagan's success.

I think Boonen, Cancellara, Valverde, Contador and Nibali are still ahead of Sagan. But he's certainly in the same league with Gilbert, Froome and Cavendish. Froome is little debatable here, if he's in the first or in the second group. Based on results only he should be in the first, but with that huge dark cloud looming over his head, I'm closer to put him in the 2nd, and I think he'll be more than happy to stay there (but that's a topic for other side of this forum).

Of boy. How dare you to use the word "Cavendish" in one sentence with "Sagan"?!

Cav is a one-trick-pony that can only win flat stages with flat sprints while Sagan is one of the most versatile riders in the current peloton.

 

[Red Rick]

Sagan's participation for the AGR confirmed

https://www.telesport.nl/artikel/148400/wielersport/sagan-na-vijf-jaar-terug-amstel-gold-race

 

[Blanco]

I really think Sagan's palmares isn't that great yet. I mean, ofc most riders would still kill to get so many big wins, but if you compare his palmares to the ones of Boonen, Cancellara, Valverde, Nibali, Contador, Froome and others he just isn't quite there yet. I think people see Sagan's immense talent which might very well outweigh the talent of every single rider I mentioned above and assume it means he has also already been as successful as these guys.
But I think there is just no point in comparing him with these riders yet. Why make a comparison Sagan loses, when you know exactly Sagan's palmares is far from being finalized. I think these comparisons kind of give you a false picture of Sagan's success.

I think Boonen, Cancellara, Valverde, Contador and Nibali are still ahead of Sagan. But he's certainly in the same league with Gilbert, Froome and Cavendish. Froome is little debatable here, if he's in the first or in the second group. Based on results only he should be in the first, but with that huge dark cloud looming over his head, I'm closer to put him in the 2nd, and I think he'll be more than happy to stay there (but that's a topic for other side of this forum).

Of boy. How dare you to use the word "Cavendish" in one sentence with "Sagan"?!

Cav is a one-trick-pony that can only win flat stages with flat sprints while Sagan is one of the most versatile riders in the current peloton.

I agree, but that one-trick-pony won 30 Tour stages. He's 2nd behind freaking Eddy Merckx! And also won WC (+ silver medal) and MSR, overall about 150 victories. I don't like him either, but you can't deny that he's one of the greats of the current peloton. Froome is also a one-trick-pony. Versatility has nothing to do with that.

 

[Blanco]

I really think Sagan's palmares isn't that great yet. I mean, ofc most riders would still kill to get so many big wins, but if you compare his palmares to the ones of Boonen, Cancellara, Valverde, Nibali, Contador, Froome and others he just isn't quite there yet. I think people see Sagan's immense talent which might very well outweigh the talent of every single rider I mentioned above and assume it means he has also already been as successful as these guys.
But I think there is just no point in comparing him with these riders yet. Why make a comparison Sagan loses, when you know exactly Sagan's palmares is far from being finalized. I think these comparisons kind of give you a false picture of Sagan's success.

Sagan and Valverde both have five big wins, but the former's wins are of much higher calibur and variety. If we look at their other achievements Sagan also performs better. People often underestimate how impressive Sagan's Tour record is. Five green jerseys in his first 5 participations in the Tour is a great achievement. Not to mention his 8 Tour stage wins and the fact that he wore the yellow jersey. Sagan won hilly stages, sprint stages, breakaway stages and echelon stages. Sure, he hasn't won any Giro stages, but that's because the Giro clashes with the rest of his season goals. Valverde won many WT-Tour stage races, but Sagan won many WT one-day races (3 Canadian classics, 3x G-W, 1x E3 Harelbeke). Valverde won FW five times, but I rate Sagan's non-monumental wins higher (again greater variety in his wins and more prestigious races).

Valverde has also won Clasica San Sebastian a couple of times. That is also a WT one day race.

He left that out on purpose, don't be bothered, he always does that.

 

[virenque216]

Does anyone know when Sagan decides if he rides Amstel Gold Race? Surely it must be soon, I remember in 2012 he was impressive when he dropped Gilbert on Cauberg,just to be pipped by Gasparotto and Vanendert to the line, he also rode year after when Kreuziger won, that edition was ridden very hard in the last 70km and he was completely cooked up the last climb and finished 36th, that spring he was very impressive where he almost hung on to Cancellara in Ronde and destroyed Gilbert in Brabantsje Pijl, though he skipped Roubaix.
It will be great to compare his performance compared to 2012 and 2013 when I believe he was in better climbing form then now and slimmer.

 

[Roku]

How on earth could Cavendish be in the same league as Sagan?

Cavendish "only" won a WC, a MSR, plus 30 TDF stages.
Sagan won 3 WC, PR, RVV, 10 TDF stages, 5 TDF green jerseys... just by winning the three WC he is undoubtedly superior than Cavs

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

I really think Sagan's palmares isn't that great yet. I mean, ofc most riders would still kill to get so many big wins, but if you compare his palmares to the ones of Boonen, Cancellara, Valverde, Nibali, Contador, Froome and others he just isn't quite there yet. I think people see Sagan's immense talent which might very well outweigh the talent of every single rider I mentioned above and assume it means he has also already been as successful as these guys.
But I think there is just no point in comparing him with these riders yet. Why make a comparison Sagan loses, when you know exactly Sagan's palmares is far from being finalized. I think these comparisons kind of give you a false picture of Sagan's success.

I think Boonen, Cancellara, Valverde, Contador and Nibali are still ahead of Sagan. But he's certainly in the same league with Gilbert, Froome and Cavendish. Froome is little debatable here, if he's in the first or in the second group. Based on results only he should be in the first, but with that huge dark cloud looming over his head, I'm closer to put him in the 2nd, and I think he'll be more than happy to stay there (but that's a topic for other side of this forum).

It is on the face of it bizarre to suggest that alleged clinic issues might relegate one rider while proven clinic issues apparently do not relegate two others. A discussion for the other place however.

 

[KGB]

2012 was probably Sagan's strongest season.In Brabantsje Pijl he smoked GVA(Gilbert helper that time)and even Gilbert at line.Was super strong Sagan whole year.

 

[Krokro]

Zinoviev Letter, you just won the Interwebz. Fully agreed. It's such non sense..

 

[tobydawq]

Re:

2012 was probably Sagan's strongest season.In Brabantsje Pijl he smoked GVA(Gilbert helper that time)and even Gilbert at line.Was super strong Sagan whole year.

2013. But I think 2016 was better - climbing-wise, 2013 was best though.

 

[Koronin]

Re:

Does anyone know when Sagan decides if he rides Amstel Gold Race? Surely it must be soon, I remember in 2012 he was impressive when he dropped Gilbert on Cauberg,just to be pipped by Gasparotto and Vanendert to the line, he also rode year after when Kreuziger won, that edition was ridden very hard in the last 70km and he was completely cooked up the last climb and finished 36th, that spring he was very impressive where he almost hung on to Cancellara in Ronde and destroyed Gilbert in Brabantsje Pijl, though he skipped Roubaix.
It will be great to compare his performance compared to 2012 and 2013 when I believe he was in better climbing form then now and slimmer.

Apparently he's confirmed for Amstel
http://www.velonews.com/2018/04/news/roubaix-champ-sagan-confirmed-amstel-gold_462803

 

[El Pistolero]

I really think Sagan's palmares isn't that great yet. I mean, ofc most riders would still kill to get so many big wins, but if you compare his palmares to the ones of Boonen, Cancellara, Valverde, Nibali, Contador, Froome and others he just isn't quite there yet. I think people see Sagan's immense talent which might very well outweigh the talent of every single rider I mentioned above and assume it means he has also already been as successful as these guys.
But I think there is just no point in comparing him with these riders yet. Why make a comparison Sagan loses, when you know exactly Sagan's palmares is far from being finalized. I think these comparisons kind of give you a false picture of Sagan's success.

I think Boonen, Cancellara, Valverde, Contador and Nibali are still ahead of Sagan. But he's certainly in the same league with Gilbert, Froome and Cavendish. Froome is little debatable here, if he's in the first or in the second group. Based on results only he should be in the first, but with that huge dark cloud looming over his head, I'm closer to put him in the 2nd, and I think he'll be more than happy to stay there (but that's a topic for other side of this forum).

You mean the same huge dark cloud that is over Valverde's head? Oh wait, his cloud is far darker.

 

[El Pistolero]

I really think Sagan's palmares isn't that great yet. I mean, ofc most riders would still kill to get so many big wins, but if you compare his palmares to the ones of Boonen, Cancellara, Valverde, Nibali, Contador, Froome and others he just isn't quite there yet. I think people see Sagan's immense talent which might very well outweigh the talent of every single rider I mentioned above and assume it means he has also already been as successful as these guys.
But I think there is just no point in comparing him with these riders yet. Why make a comparison Sagan loses, when you know exactly Sagan's palmares is far from being finalized. I think these comparisons kind of give you a false picture of Sagan's success.

Sagan and Valverde both have five big wins, but the former's wins are of much higher calibur and variety. If we look at their other achievements Sagan also performs better. People often underestimate how impressive Sagan's Tour record is. Five green jerseys in his first 5 participations in the Tour is a great achievement. Not to mention his 8 Tour stage wins and the fact that he wore the yellow jersey. Sagan won hilly stages, sprint stages, breakaway stages and echelon stages. Sure, he hasn't won any Giro stages, but that's because the Giro clashes with the rest of his season goals. Valverde won many WT-Tour stage races, but Sagan won many WT one-day races (3 Canadian classics, 3x G-W, 1x E3 Harelbeke). Valverde won FW five times, but I rate Sagan's non-monumental wins higher (again greater variety in his wins and more prestigious races).

Valverde has also won Clasica San Sebastian a couple of times. That is also a WT one day race.

He left that out on purpose, don't be bothered, he always does that.

A classic that calls itself classic in its official name is about as credibe as a country that has "Democratic" in its official name. Other reasons why the CSS is a joke: poor organisation (GVA lost this race because he was hit by a motor-bike in the final), very poor broadcasts (low quality or no picture at all), it has no history and poor place on the calendar means that nobody peaks for this joke of a race.

 

[Eli]

I really think Sagan's palmares isn't that great yet. I mean, ofc most riders would still kill to get so many big wins, but if you compare his palmares to the ones of Boonen, Cancellara, Valverde, Nibali, Contador, Froome and others he just isn't quite there yet. I think people see Sagan's immense talent which might very well outweigh the talent of every single rider I mentioned above and assume it means he has also already been as successful as these guys.
But I think there is just no point in comparing him with these riders yet. Why make a comparison Sagan loses, when you know exactly Sagan's palmares is far from being finalized. I think these comparisons kind of give you a false picture of Sagan's success.

I think Boonen, Cancellara, Valverde, Contador and Nibali are still ahead of Sagan. But he's certainly in the same league with Gilbert, Froome and Cavendish. Froome is little debatable here, if he's in the first or in the second group. Based on results only he should be in the first, but with that huge dark cloud looming over his head, I'm closer to put him in the 2nd, and I think he'll be more than happy to stay there (but that's a topic for other side of this forum).

It is on the face of it bizarre to suggest that alleged clinic issues might relegate one rider while proven clinic issues apparently do not relegate two others. A discussion for the other place however.

THIS!!!!

 

[Blanco]

I really think Sagan's palmares isn't that great yet. I mean, ofc most riders would still kill to get so many big wins, but if you compare his palmares to the ones of Boonen, Cancellara, Valverde, Nibali, Contador, Froome and others he just isn't quite there yet. I think people see Sagan's immense talent which might very well outweigh the talent of every single rider I mentioned above and assume it means he has also already been as successful as these guys.
But I think there is just no point in comparing him with these riders yet. Why make a comparison Sagan loses, when you know exactly Sagan's palmares is far from being finalized. I think these comparisons kind of give you a false picture of Sagan's success.

I think Boonen, Cancellara, Valverde, Contador and Nibali are still ahead of Sagan. But he's certainly in the same league with Gilbert, Froome and Cavendish. Froome is little debatable here, if he's in the first or in the second group. Based on results only he should be in the first, but with that huge dark cloud looming over his head, I'm closer to put him in the 2nd, and I think he'll be more than happy to stay there (but that's a topic for other side of this forum).

It is on the face of it bizarre to suggest that alleged clinic issues might relegate one rider while proven clinic issues apparently do not relegate two others. A discussion for the other place however.

What I meant is that he will most probably lose one GT victory, and it's not the same if you have 5 or 4 GT wins. Valverde and Contador already lost their wins.

 

[KGB]

Sagan replay to Tommeke:"I was talking about if you don't work together then Quick-Step are going to win. I was not complaining I was just saying what was true. Like, wake up guys,“ he said. „For Tom Boonen, I have lots of respect and I watched him when I was little and for these races, he was the big idol and big rider. I can't say anything against him, I just have respect.“

 

[Blanco]

I really think Sagan's palmares isn't that great yet. I mean, ofc most riders would still kill to get so many big wins, but if you compare his palmares to the ones of Boonen, Cancellara, Valverde, Nibali, Contador, Froome and others he just isn't quite there yet. I think people see Sagan's immense talent which might very well outweigh the talent of every single rider I mentioned above and assume it means he has also already been as successful as these guys.
But I think there is just no point in comparing him with these riders yet. Why make a comparison Sagan loses, when you know exactly Sagan's palmares is far from being finalized. I think these comparisons kind of give you a false picture of Sagan's success.

I think Boonen, Cancellara, Valverde, Contador and Nibali are still ahead of Sagan. But he's certainly in the same league with Gilbert, Froome and Cavendish. Froome is little debatable here, if he's in the first or in the second group. Based on results only he should be in the first, but with that huge dark cloud looming over his head, I'm closer to put him in the 2nd, and I think he'll be more than happy to stay there (but that's a topic for other side of this forum).

You mean the same huge dark cloud that is over Valverde's head? Oh wait, his cloud is far darker.

No, sky is blue above him

 

[Koronin]

I really think Sagan's palmares isn't that great yet. I mean, ofc most riders would still kill to get so many big wins, but if you compare his palmares to the ones of Boonen, Cancellara, Valverde, Nibali, Contador, Froome and others he just isn't quite there yet. I think people see Sagan's immense talent which might very well outweigh the talent of every single rider I mentioned above and assume it means he has also already been as successful as these guys.
But I think there is just no point in comparing him with these riders yet. Why make a comparison Sagan loses, when you know exactly Sagan's palmares is far from being finalized. I think these comparisons kind of give you a false picture of Sagan's success.

Sagan and Valverde both have five big wins, but the former's wins are of much higher calibur and variety. If we look at their other achievements Sagan also performs better. People often underestimate how impressive Sagan's Tour record is. Five green jerseys in his first 5 participations in the Tour is a great achievement. Not to mention his 8 Tour stage wins and the fact that he wore the yellow jersey. Sagan won hilly stages, sprint stages, breakaway stages and echelon stages. Sure, he hasn't won any Giro stages, but that's because the Giro clashes with the rest of his season goals. Valverde won many WT-Tour stage races, but Sagan won many WT one-day races (3 Canadian classics, 3x G-W, 1x E3 Harelbeke). Valverde won FW five times, but I rate Sagan's non-monumental wins higher (again greater variety in his wins and more prestigious races).

Valverde has also won Clasica San Sebastian a couple of times. That is also a WT one day race.

He left that out on purpose, don't be bothered, he always does that.

A classic that calls itself classic in its official name is about as credibe as a country that has "Democratic" in its official name. Other reasons why the CSS is a joke: poor organisation (GVA lost this race because he was hit by a motor-bike in the final), very poor broadcasts (low quality or no picture at all), it has no history and poor place on the calendar means that nobody peaks for this joke of a race.

You mean the same one most of the peloton doesn't pay the Canadian races any attention? Sorry can't include those if you refuse to include San Sebastian.

 

[Blanco]

I really think Sagan's palmares isn't that great yet. I mean, ofc most riders would still kill to get so many big wins, but if you compare his palmares to the ones of Boonen, Cancellara, Valverde, Nibali, Contador, Froome and others he just isn't quite there yet. I think people see Sagan's immense talent which might very well outweigh the talent of every single rider I mentioned above and assume it means he has also already been as successful as these guys.
But I think there is just no point in comparing him with these riders yet. Why make a comparison Sagan loses, when you know exactly Sagan's palmares is far from being finalized. I think these comparisons kind of give you a false picture of Sagan's success.

Sagan and Valverde both have five big wins, but the former's wins are of much higher calibur and variety. If we look at their other achievements Sagan also performs better. People often underestimate how impressive Sagan's Tour record is. Five green jerseys in his first 5 participations in the Tour is a great achievement. Not to mention his 8 Tour stage wins and the fact that he wore the yellow jersey. Sagan won hilly stages, sprint stages, breakaway stages and echelon stages. Sure, he hasn't won any Giro stages, but that's because the Giro clashes with the rest of his season goals. Valverde won many WT-Tour stage races, but Sagan won many WT one-day races (3 Canadian classics, 3x G-W, 1x E3 Harelbeke). Valverde won FW five times, but I rate Sagan's non-monumental wins higher (again greater variety in his wins and more prestigious races).

Valverde has also won Clasica San Sebastian a couple of times. That is also a WT one day race.

He left that out on purpose, don't be bothered, he always does that.

A classic that calls itself classic in its official name is about as credibe as a country that has "Democratic" in its official name. Other reasons why the CSS is a joke: poor organisation (GVA lost this race because he was hit by a motor-bike in the final), very poor broadcasts (low quality or no picture at all), it has no history and poor place on the calendar means that nobody peaks for this joke of a race.

It was part of a very prestigious World Cup (something GW and E3 didn't achieved), and I will not waste my words about value of Canadian classics.