Yeah - I was thinking about when the commentators were wondering about who Sagan compares to from the past. They claimed that there was no-one like him since Merckx - but surely he is basically the modern equivalent of Kelly. Dominant in one-day races and points classifications but not (yet?) the right body type for the grand tour GC. I wonder if he will/could become a GC rider? Presumably right now he wants a few more monuments, but if he achieves that could he try to contend in the grand tours? Kelly had a similar development in his career - it took him a while to start winning monuments but then he became dominant and his Vuelta win came towards the end of his career.
No. He's not a grand tour winner and never will be. He'll be a 1 day racer and points jersey man similar to Cancellara and Boonen in 1 day races and Erik Zabel in the Grand tours.
I think he led out the sprint too early in MSR. Should have waited for Kwiatowski to make the first move and then went.
Well.... for the sake of argument, I'd respond by saying that he is a better climber than Boonen/Cancellara. He'll never be a pure climber like Froome/Quintana but but neither was Wiggins who lost a lot of weight and used a strong team/time trial ability/favourable course to squeeze out a TdF win. Anyway, just speculating. I guess he is doing OK as is (and I prefer watching the classics to the GTs anyway)
Sagan is a totally different build to Kelly, and won't be a contender for yellow in a grand tour. We don't even know at this stage if Kelly still could be (in this era), such is the specialist nature of cycling now. I just wonder how they would have faired head to head...more as a hypotheses. I think it would have been magic. If you threw in Merckx, just epic.