Darcy Regier, do you trust him with the rebuild?

[LTS]

If you believe that TP is calling the shots and screwing the team then I would suggest you just give up all hope and find something more productive to do with your life. I'm not saying you are right or wrong, but if you believe it to be true then you also recognize he's not going anywhere for awhile.

 

You can't blame DR, solely, for the problems of this team. I get the entire, he's responsible for everything mentality but... can we honestly give no credence to the ownership issues of Golisano and Quinn? If we believe that they had no impact on decisions (regardless of expenditures on salaries) then I suppose you can go all in on DR. I happen to think that Golisano and Quinn put certain constraints on the KIND of spending that could occur. In that case DR has a set of parameters to work within and that will impact what you can do.

 

In addition, most people on here have been saying that Ruff was part of the problem. Sure, Regier hired him and retained him. Perhaps he should have let him go sooner but even with an ownership change there was this theory that Ruff was a really great coach and just needed some more players. The owner thought it and so that makes it hard to get rid of the coach. Finally the results were in and a change has been made.

 

Now we are seeing players sacrifice themselves more, finish hits, and play with a bit more desire than they did prior to Ruff leaving. Is it the coach or is a change in atmosphere to players who are willing to be that hardest working team in hockey? The players here are all part of Regier's decision making process. The talent may be at a lower level but the games are certainly getting better.

 

I'm not going to say anything about "burning a year" on a player. If he's good he'll get paid and if not then we didn't burn anything. Until we see the situation where we can say "Gee, if only we had that 1 year remaining" I'll not judge DR on that move. You can talk about depth at "C" but could they have done that without blowing up the roster sooner and trading other people away? The depth that was out there was either not coming to Buffalo in the UFA market or cost too much in the trade market. Could the Sabres have signed a 3rd/4th line center? Sure.. but that wouldn't have made lines 1 and 2 any better. Leino going down with the injury right before the season started also changed things. So (as I mentioned in the Grigorenko thread). The easy money is to keep the kid up and provide roster flexibility. Once Porter came up he would need to clear waivers and if that didn't happen they would be really short at C with no easy way to add depth.

 

I doubt there was a GM in the league that would not have given Myers his contract at that point in time. Just because it hasn't worked the way people think it should have doesn't make it a bad decision. Especially if all the other GMs (even those that have won Cups would have done it too).

 

Leino? Didn't mesh with Ruff. In his shortened time this year I've seen player who exhibited a hard work mentality, puck control and was approaching a point per game player. I can't judge him, even at 4.5 million until I can see a season from the guy.

 

Ehrhoff? He's a +12 on a team that sucks. That's saying something. It's certainly better than Stafford's -12.

 

Stafford? Everyone makes a mistake sometime.

 

Do I think he's the right guy for the job? I don't know but I'm positive he's not going to be the guy doing the job after the final game of the season this year.

[Stoner]

LTS, Pegula is not going to chase me away. I've survived worse. I bet I'll be enjoying the Sabres in my own way long after he's moved on. (And I won't take a back seat to a schmuck who didn't know the team was for sale in 2002-2003.)

[nfreeman]

 

You can't blame DR, solely, for the problems of this team. I get the entire, he's responsible for everything mentality but... can we honestly give no credence to the ownership issues of Golisano and Quinn? If we believe that they had no impact on decisions (regardless of expenditures on salaries) then I suppose you can go all in on DR. I happen to think that Golisano and Quinn put certain constraints on the KIND of spending that could occur. In that case DR has a set of parameters to work within and that will impact what you can do.

 

I'm not going to say anything about "burning a year" on a player. If he's good he'll get paid and if not then we didn't burn anything. Until we see the situation where we can say "Gee, if only we had that 1 year remaining" I'll not judge DR on that move.

 

Do I think he's the right guy for the job? I don't know but I'm positive he's not going to be the guy doing the job after the final game of the season this year.

 

1. I agree that TG/LQ created major problems. However, I also think that they largely backed off beginning in the summer of 2008, which is when everyone got fat contract extensions, and that he's had pretty much a free hand and a limitless pile of money since February 2011 -- and that that is enough time to build a much better team than what we're seeing now.

 

2. As for burning a year of their rights in Griggy -- I'm not hung up on keeping him here for the 10 games. I'm more focused on what seems like an accidental burning of a year of his time before becoming a FA -- it sounds like they didn't realize that games for which he was healthy-scratched counted towards the limit. Even if it's not earthshattering, I find it unacceptable that they would just make a mistake like that -- especially since it's the kind of thing that can end up costing millions of dollars or forcing a team to jettison someone else a year too early, etc.

 

3. Interesting that you are confident that he's going to be let go after this season. I wish I agreed with you.

[LabattBlue]

2. As for burning a year of their rights in Griggy -- I'm not hung up on keeping him here for the 10 games. I'm more focused on what seems like an accidental burning of a year of his time before becoming a FA -- it sounds like they didn't realize that games for which he was healthy-scratched counted towards the limit. Even if it's not earthshattering, I find it unacceptable that they would just make a mistake like that -- especially since it's the kind of thing that can end up costing millions of dollars or forcing a team to jettison someone else a year too early, etc.

 

Absolutely inexcusable. Should have been fired on the spot. I wonder if Pegula is even aware of this "mistake"?

[nfreeman]

Absolutely inexcusable. Should have been fired on the spot. I wonder if Pegula is even aware of this "mistake"?

 

I'm sure he's aware of it, if in fact it happened (I don't think it was 100% confirmed).

[spndnchz]

I'm sure he's aware of it, if in fact it happened (I don't think it was 100% confirmed).

 

I thought we cleared that up, no? The rule in the CBA that the 23 games refers to is actually 40 in a full season. It's in reference to an AHL'r and says nothing about Junior players. The 6 games burned his year contract and UFA wise.

 

FWIW, I don't think they were too worried about it. They thought, we thought, players thought, he was ready.

[Robviously]

I thought we cleared that up, no? The rule in the CBA that the 23 games refers to is actually 40 in a full season. It's in reference to an AHL'r and says nothing about Junior players. The 6 games burned his year contract and UFA wise.

 

FWIW, I don't think they were too worried about it. They thought, we thought, players thought, he was ready.

The confusion was whether "games" meant "games played" or "games on active roster." The Sabres thought it was the first, but according to the head writer from The Hockey News (whose source is supposedly someone with access to the CBA), it was the latter and the Sabres screwed up. Mike Harrington says no one at TBN has been able to confirm one way or the other.

 

It probably won't have a huge impact down the road (it'll have NO impact if Grigorenko sucks), but the inattention to detail by the Sabres is the disturbing part. No one wanted to pick up a phone and find out what the rules were regarding how they're developing their no.1 prospect?

[nfreeman]

I thought we cleared that up, no? The rule in the CBA that the 23 games refers to is actually 40 in a full season. It's in reference to an AHL'r and says nothing about Junior players. The 6 games burned his year contract and UFA wise.

 

FWIW, I don't think they were too worried about it. They thought, we thought, players thought, he was ready.

 

Well, that's what I meant about not confirmed. If you're right (as I expect you are), then there was no mistake regarding Griggy. I had no problem with keeping him up past the 6 games.

 

Going once....going twice....anyone got anything contra to Chz's position on this?

[IKnowPhysics]

The rule in the CBA that the 23 games refers to is actually 40 in a full season. It's in reference to an AHL'r and says nothing about Junior players. The 6 games burned his year contract and UFA wise.

Absolutely inexcusable. Should have been fired on the spot. I wonder if Pegula is even aware of this "mistake"?

Absolutely inexcusable. Should have been banned on the spot. I wonder if Chz is even aware of this "mistake"?

[Eleven]

Well, that's what I meant about not confirmed. If you're right (as I expect you are), then there was no mistake regarding Griggy. I had no problem with keeping him up past the 6 games.

 

Going once....going twice....anyone got anything contra to Chz's position on this?

 

I thought it hadn't been conclusively established whether he had to be up here for MORE than 23 games or for just 23 games--and that there was another team in the same boat, etc. Maybe it was and I don't remember.

[Robviously]

I thought it hadn't been conclusively established whether he had to be up here for MORE than 23 games or for just 23 games--and that there was another team in the same boat, etc. Maybe it was and I don't remember.

Just to refresh everyone's memory, here's Ken Campbell's column: http://www.thehockey...u-too-long.html

 

Many hockey observers were left scratching their heads when the Sabres returned Grigorenko to the Quebec Remparts last Friday, followed two days later by the Devils returning Matteau to the Blainville-Boisbriand Armada for the Quebec League playoffs. That both players were returned to their junior teams was not surprising, but the fact the Devils and Sabres waited so long that they handed the players an accrued season when it comes to free agency makes it a little mind-boggling.

 

The fact both players played beyond the five-game limit that burned a year off their entry-level deals was, relatively speaking, consequential. But contrary to popular belief, the Devils and Sabres did indeed burn a year off the accrued seasons requirement for both players, meaning Matteau and Grigorenko will be eligible for unrestricted free agency one year earlier than they would have been if they were returned to junior before hitting the required amount of games.

 

NHL rules state that any player who is on the active roster for 40 games is awarded an accrued season, regardless of how many games the player actually plays. But THN.com has learned that because of the truncated season, that 40-game limit was pro-rated to 23.4 games to accommodate for a 48-game season. Matteau was on the roster for the Devils’ first 29 games of the season, 17 in which he saw action. Grigorenko was on Buffalo’s roster for 27 games, playing in all but five of them.

 

Both the Devils and Sabres probably agree the best place for both these players would probably be the American League, but neither was eligible to play there so it was either the NHL or major junior hockey. But what continues to mystify is the timing of all of this. The Sabres played their 23rd game of the season March 3 against the New York Rangers. Grigorenko played sparingly in three of the next four games, including just 4:51 in his last game before being shipped back to junior. The Devils, meanwhile, played their 23rd game of this season March 5 against the Tampa Bay Lightning. Matteau was a healthy scratch for that game, then sat out three of the next six before his demotion.

[nfreeman]

Just to refresh everyone's memory, here's Ken Campbell's column: http://www.thehockey...u-too-long.html

 

That is indeed what I was thinking of. Thanks.

 

However: I'd like to hear this confirmed by an NHL or Sabres source before concluding that Campbell (and certainly Harrington) is right -- especially because it's hard to believe that no one on the Sabres or Devils checked this with the NHL.

 

If he is right, I still think it's an unacceptable mistake that DR is accountable for.

[Eleven]

Thanks for the recapitulation.

 

Has any other source confirmed THN's interpretation?

 

And I don't really care one way or the other as far as the argument regarding Regier goes; I just want to know what's really going to happen w/ Grigo.

[Robviously]

That is indeed what I was thinking of. Thanks.

 

However: I'd like to hear this confirmed by an NHL or Sabres source before concluding that Campbell (and certainly Harrington) is right -- especially because it's hard to believe that no one on the Sabres or Devils checked this with the NHL.

 

If he is right, I still think it's an unacceptable mistake that DR is accountable for.

I emailed Mike Harrington at TBN a couple weeks back and he said that while everyone at the News was aware of Campbell's article, they weren't able to confirm or deny it. The thinking is that both the Sabres and Devils thought it was "games played" (which fits with what they did) but got it wrong. Apparently everyone is working with an "outline" of the new CBA and not the new CBA itself.

 

Nevertheless, why not make phone calls and double check? A huge part of the team's future hinges on Grigorenko's development. You'd think they'd do everything possible to make sure they got everything right with respect to him.

 

Thanks for the recapitulation.

 

Has any other source confirmed THN's interpretation?

 

And I don't really care one way or the other as far as the argument regarding Regier goes; I just want to know what's really going to happen w/ Grigo.

See above. No one at TBN has tracked down a solid answer yet.

[IKnowPhysics]

TBN doesn't have all of the answers?

[Taro T]

That is indeed what I was thinking of. Thanks.

 

However: I'd like to hear this confirmed by an NHL or Sabres source before concluding that Campbell (and certainly Harrington) is right -- especially because it's hard to believe that no one on the Sabres or Devils checked this with the NHL.

 

If he is right, I still think it's an unacceptable mistake that DR is accountable for.

If the definitions of "accrued season" and "active roster" are the same under the new CBA as the old CBA it would have been prudent for Regier and Lamiorello to figure the 24th game their player was earning NHL salary would give the player an accrued season. Unless they had reason to believe the definitions had changed, I maintain the same opinion.

 

Since I haven't seen the new CBA (has it been finalized yet?), it's impossible currently to say whether DR & LL are right or wrong, but it looks from here like they're probably wrong. (Obviously would need to see the new CBA to finalize the conclusion.)

 

And as an aside, the reason people are making a distinction between the 5 games (10 in a full season) and 23/40 game thresholds is that under the old CBA a player gained a year of professional experience by PLAYING in his 10th game. Years of professional experience governing the length of the entry level deal. Being on a team's roster for 40 games gives the player an accrued year of NHL experience. Accrued NHL experience being relevant for FA and pensions. IF those are still written up using the same language of the old CBA in the new one, then Grigs now has a year of professional experience under his belt and has also accrued a year of NHL experience.

[spndnchz]

It's "on roster" but the CBA refers to an AHL player, not Juniors player. Whose to say "the Sabres got it wrong" or "Darcy messed up"?

 

Players who spent more than 40 NHL games on NHL roster (or on Injured Reserve or Injured Non-Roster) during the season, and who subsequently

played in the AHL during the next season, would not have any of their AHL games count toward the professional "games played" criteria.

 

Interpret that.

[rickshaw]

I believe Reiger has compiled some very good young talent over the years and also made some nice trades. He's got some good picks coming up as well as number 1's.

Having said that, I do not believe he's going to be the man leading this team in the off season. While his picks and players have looked good on paper, it seems to me the "mix" of his teams is t right. Too many skilled guys with not enough toughness. Too many plumbers and not enough skill.

So I believe he's not as bad as many make him out to be but it's clearly time for him to go and let a NEW culture direct this team.

 

on a side note. We all seem to think we know it all but there is so much we never ever hear about. One example is injuries in the off season. I will not name the player or the facts (I swore to the person who told me that I wouldn't spill the beans) but I know that one of our players who has played rather poorly was injured and has had some surgeries, plural, in the past few off seasons. This player has also worked out on his own or with his own people and not participated in the training that goes on with the likes of Shea weber, Jordan tootoo, Scott hatrnell to name a few. This player has been advised to workout with the other 40 odd players who come to Kelowna in the summer because they all push each other. The player is rather shy though so ...

Again believe me or don't but this info comes from a 100% reliable source. I will not name the player.

My point after all of this is sometimes things are happening that we know nothing about. And when players have procedures done that don't happen in season or cause players to miss games , the team doesn't need to talk about it.

[IKnowPhysics]

One example is injuries in the off season. I will not name the player or the facts (I swore to the person who told me that I wouldn't spill the beans)

It was the Russian Mafia in Afinogenov's study with the lead pipe.

 

but I know that one of our players who has played rather poorly was injured and has had some surgeries, plural, in the past few off seasons. This player has also worked out on his own or with his own people and not participated in the training that goes on with the likes of Shea weber, Jordan tootoo, Scott hatrnell to name a few. This player has been advised to workout with the other 40 odd players who come to Kelowna in the summer because they all push each other. The player is rather shy though so ...

$2 to show on Tyler Myers.

[Taro T]

It's "on roster" but the CBA refers to an AHL player, not Juniors player. Whose to say "the Sabres got it wrong" or "Darcy messed up"?

 

Players who spent more than 40 NHL games on NHL roster (or on Injured Reserve or Injured Non-Roster) during the season, and who subsequently

played in the AHL during the next season, would not have any of their AHL games count toward the professional "games played" criteria.

 

Interpret that.

Perhaps the new cba refers specifically to ahl players; the old 1 didn't.

 

And what do you mean by "interpret that?"

[Trettioåtta]

It was the Russian Mafia in Afinogenov's study with the lead pipe.

 

 

$2 to show on Tyler Myers.

 

I thought Myers did work out with Weber last off season though

[IKnowPhysics]

I thought Myers did work out with Weber last off season though

Looks like it. http://www.diebytheblade.com/2013/1/16/3881364/tyler-myers-buffalo-sabres-summer-vacation-shea-weber

 

Any other guesses?

[Trettioåtta]

Looks like it. http://www.diebytheb...tion-shea-weber

 

Any other guesses?

 

I agree Myers fits the bill perfectly - especially the Kelowna part.

 

I think it could be Leopold - he seems a bit shy and had a bad year (the two things we know)

 

Other players who have (arguably) played poorly: Pominville, Leopold, Regehr, Foligno, Stafford, Gerbe, Myers, Miller

Of these, I would say only Pommers, Leo, Gerbe and Myers could possibly described as shy

I think Pommers has played well and is an iron man so it would shock me if it was him - also he has no connection to BC

Myers did work out with Weber (but maybe that was false reporting)

Gerbe had surgery but we all knew about it

Thus it is Leopold

[North Buffalo]

Interesting observations have led me to this conclusion about Darcy. He is not bad a trade negotiator, but I am not convinced he has very good forsight as a drafter. Last year's 2 number 1s haven't done much for me yet and Myers is still a work in progress. The Sabres need to find a 1 hit wonder up the middle that can step and play within the next year. JC Miller with the Rangers is a revelation. The Sabres need someone with his talent level mid-draft to succeed next year. Otherwise, I say scrap the whole scouting Dept along with Darcy and start over.

 

Or just don't wait that long, no that draft season is upon us.

[Stoner]

This board's in reruns?