So What Really Does Stop This Team From being Good

[IKnowPhysics]

And don't get me started on cold fusion.

[Stoner]

Hey Physics, quick, name the best hockey person Terry has hired.

[That Aud Smell]

tries to hire good hockey people to run his hockey team

Hey Physics, quick, name the best hockey person Terry has hired.

 

Aye, there's the rub.

 

BTW, what's with the hyperlink buffet in IKP's post?

[Stoner]

Aye, there's the rub.

 

BTW, what's with the hyperlink buffet in IKP's post?

 

Gotta hand it to IKP. Heckuva post. It was quite a fairy tale though.

[IKnowPhysics]

Good clarification, PA. Ilitch directly hired his first GM. Technically, Pegula hasn't yet hired any hockey person, only extended the contract for his GM. He's hired only non-hockey people. Darcy hired Ron Rolston and the scouting staff. Ron Rolston hired his assistants.

 

BTW, what's with the hyperlink buffet in IKP's post?

 

I cite sources.

 

Gotta hand it to IKP. Heckuva post. It was quite a fairy tale though.

 

But much better reading than your nightmares, and much more fact-based.

[Stoner]

So maybe Darcy is too much of a "yes" man, which would then explaing why Terry kept and is keeping him around? Hmmm....

 

That's a good theory. Also, Terry, perhaps not knowing much about Regier, and having paid attention only when the Sabres were good, relied too much on his advisors, guys on the business side like Ken Sawyer, Ted Black and Cliff Benson. Those three had to be impressed by the shape the team was in financially. The value of the team had grown a lot, the arena was pretty much full, there was a waiting list for season tickets, the fan base was fervent, merch sales were healthy and so on. Why would they recommend a change? Again, is it really about a Cup for those guys?

 

Also, maybe Terry invited Darcy and Lindy to Bible study and only Darcy showed up.

 

Seriously, the fact Regier is still here is just, well, batshit crazy.

 

Good clarification, PA. Ilitch directly hired his first GM. Technically, Pegula hasn't yet hired any hockey person, only extended the contract for his GM. He's hired only non-hockey people. Darcy hired Ron Rolston and the scouting staff. Ron Rolston hired his assistants.

 

Doesn't it kind of feel like you won the battle and lost the war? If you're not hiring good hockey people, what do you have, really?

 

 

 

But much better reading than your nightmares, and much more fact-based.

 

People like skeery stories better.

[That Aud Smell]

I cite sources.

 

I should say. Makes for labor-intensive quoting of your code is all.

 

Seriously, the fact Regier is still here is just, well, batshit crazy.

 

It truly is a mystery.

[Ghost of Dwight Drane]

Here's some fact based info. This is Pegula's 4th season as owner (he was in full control by trade deadline 1st year and took credit for miraculous run to 8th). The team has been at the top of the league at cash outlay on players, top notch facilities were put in place, the scouting staff was doubled, the coach changed, and somehow.......they are about to field a team with the lowest expectations of possibly any since their inception in 1970. All while the GM was given a 5 year extension even after taking a Golden Parachute as the sale of the team was closing. "Someone please, tell me something he has done wrong?" If someone is excited about 10 years of Terry Pegula, well, we're going on Year #4 and all we have to show for it is an entrenched puppet and a whole lot of dog excrement. Oh, and enjoy your 30% increase in ticket prices since 2010.......

 

Edit: Sorry....Tickets are ONLY up 15-25% across all levels since the end of the '10-'11 season.....

[LGR4GM]

...February 2011 to September 2013 is going into year 4? Who the f##k taught you how to do math?

 

As for the rest of it I think we were foolish to think TP could get it right perfectly from the get go but from what I have seen since the Hodgson trade I think they are moving in the correct direction now. Should DR be gone, probably yea, but he is not going anywhere anytime soon. Also this team should have had low expectations for the last 7 years but we ate the ###### we were fed for the most part. Now they have said, "yup this is a rebuild and it will be tough" and to me personally that tells me a lot and is a lot better than blowing sunshine sparkles and unicorns up my ass. It will be 3 years in February since Terry became owner, verdict is still out.

 

As for the ticket prices, you are right. It is BS that they have raised them the way they did considering how craptastic the team has been.

[IKnowPhysics]

Doesn't it kind of feel like you won the battle and lost the war? If you're not hiring good hockey people, what do you have, really?

 

Not really, because the war hasn't been decided yet (maybe it's never decided? ugh).

 

From a fan perspective, firing Darcy makes some sense: DR's been here a long time, etc, fans want change, and with Lindy gone, he's the last man standing. I get it.

 

But to get Pegula's point of view, you have to look at the mangement/ownership perspective: people I trust tell me this GM's good, and I don't want to judge this guy based on his performance under a different owner with a different philosophy and different resources. I want to judge his performance based on his work here, under my ownership and my philosophy and my resources. We've got an alright team that's close to being a contender, what should we do? Get free agents and try to make a push? Alright, go get 'em. Got 'em? Good. We didn't win. How do we win? Draft elite players and bring in a different coach? Alright, let's do it.

 

Darcy is telling Terry what needs to happen, albeit in his opinion, to win a Cup, and then Darcy is trying to do those things. If Darcy fails to do what he says is necessary, and the responsibilty for losing falls on him, then he should be fired. The free agent business was a decent attempt, but the players underperformed, so the GM ships the players and changes the coach. If Rolston doesn't work out, or if a lot our draft picks don't pan out, or if we start making retardo trades, or if we let Vanek and/or Miller go to UFA without return, then there's an outstanding case for Regier to be fired due to poor performance under Pegula's ownership.

 

I understand why Darcy is still here, examining from Pegula's perspective.

 

And because the plan going forward is to blow it up and draft well, evidence I've seen suggests that Darcy Regier may be better than many for this particular phase, with no small amount of help from Kevin Devine. Is it odd that a GM has had this much tenure with one team? Yeah. Is it bat ###### crazy that that particular GM is still here right now? Not entirely.

[SwampD]

Sorry to disagree. It's crazy.

[darksabre]

 

 

Not really, because the war hasn't been decided yet (maybe it's never decided? ugh).

 

From a fan perspective, firing Darcy makes some sense: DR's been here a long time, etc, fans want change, and with Lindy gone, he's the last man standing. I get it.

 

But to get Pegula's point of view, you have to look at the mangement/ownership perspective: people I trust tell me this GM's good, and I don't want to judge this guy based on his performance under a different owner with a different philosophy and different resources. I want to judge his performance based on his work here, under my ownership and my philosophy and my resources. We've got an alright team that's close to being a contender, what should we do? Get free agents and try to make a push? Alright, go get 'em. Got 'em? Good. We didn't win. How do we win? Draft elite players and bring in a different coach? Alright, let's do it.

 

Darcy is telling Terry what needs to happen, albeit in his opinion, to win a Cup, and then Darcy is trying to do those things. If Darcy fails to do what he says is necessary, and the responsibilty for losing falls on him, then he should be fired. The free agent business was a decent attempt, but the players underperformed, so the GM ships the players and changes the coach. If Rolston doesn't work out, or if a lot our draft picks don't pan out, or if we start making retardo trades, or if we let Vanek and/or Miller go to UFA without return, then there's an outstanding case for Regier to be fired due to poor performance under Pegula's ownership.

 

I understand why Darcy is still here, examining from Pegula's perspective.

 

And because the plan going forward is to blow it up and draft well, evidence I've seen suggests that Darcy Regier may be better than many for this particular phase, with no small amount of help from Kevin Devine. Is it odd that a GM has had this much tenure with one team? Yeah. Is it bat ###### crazy that that particular GM is still here right now? Not entirely.

 

Nailed it.

[IKnowPhysics]

Sorry to disagree. It's crazy.

 

Haters gonna hate, study confirms.

 

Just kidding. No big deal.

 

To me, it's crazier to rant and piss and moan about things that we can't, or even know won't, change, especially when, even in the context of professional sports fandom, they're 1st world problems. It's even crazier to me to do so based on scant or circumstantial evidence.

[TrueBlueGED]

Not really, because the war hasn't been decided yet (maybe it's never decided? ugh).

 

From a fan perspective, firing Darcy makes some sense: DR's been here a long time, etc, fans want change, and with Lindy gone, he's the last man standing. I get it.

 

But to get Pegula's point of view, you have to look at the mangement/ownership perspective: people I trust tell me this GM's good, and I don't want to judge this guy based on his performance under a different owner with a different philosophy and different resources. I want to judge his performance based on his work here, under my ownership and my philosophy and my resources. We've got an alright team that's close to being a contender, what should we do? Get free agents and try to make a push? Alright, go get 'em. Got 'em? Good. We didn't win. How do we win? Draft elite players and bring in a different coach? Alright, let's do it.

 

Darcy is telling Terry what needs to happen, albeit in his opinion, to win a Cup, and then Darcy is trying to do those things. If Darcy fails to do what he says is necessary, and the responsibilty for losing falls on him, then he should be fired. The free agent business was a decent attempt, but the players underperformed, so the GM ships the players and changes the coach. If Rolston doesn't work out, or if a lot our draft picks don't pan out, or if we start making retardo trades, or if we let Vanek and/or Miller go to UFA without return, then there's an outstanding case for Regier to be fired due to poor performance under Pegula's ownership.

 

I understand why Darcy is still here, examining from Pegula's perspective.

 

And because the plan going forward is to blow it up and draft well, evidence I've seen suggests that Darcy Regier may be better than many for this particular phase, with no small amount of help from Kevin Devine. Is it odd that a GM has had this much tenure with one team? Yeah. Is it bat ###### crazy that that particular GM is still here right now? Not entirely.

 

It's not entirely crazy. But at the same time, the team has gotten objectively worse every year since Pegula took over. At some point I'd like to think Pegula will make the connection between that and Regier.

[Stoner]

Physics, come on. Are you really suggesting Darcy took the 2011 spending spree plan to Terry, and Terry merely signed on? Wasn't it Darcy on the radio last winter saying he fundamentally disagrees with that philosophy of building a team, in what was a virtual, "hey, don't blame me, it wasn't my idea"? Wasn't it Terry telling state-run Sabres radio that he wanted to sign those players, that it was his decision? We know Darcy's M.O. as well as we know our own. On day one for Terry, he told a story about how he challenged Darcy to expand the hockey department and Darcy came to him with a plan that was too "sublime" so he had Darcy gin it up more. I assume that's how the Sabres ended up with so many scouts and chairs in the players' lounge that massage the ABC.

[deluca67]

Not really, because the war hasn't been decided yet (maybe it's never decided? ugh).

 

From a fan perspective, firing Darcy makes some sense: DR's been here a long time, etc, fans want change, and with Lindy gone, he's the last man standing. I get it.

 

But to get Pegula's point of view, you have to look at the mangement/ownership perspective: people I trust tell me this GM's good, and I don't want to judge this guy based on his performance under a different owner with a different philosophy and different resources. I want to judge his performance based on his work here, under my ownership and my philosophy and my resources. We've got an alright team that's close to being a contender, what should we do? Get free agents and try to make a push? Alright, go get 'em. Got 'em? Good. We didn't win. How do we win? Draft elite players and bring in a different coach? Alright, let's do it.

 

Darcy is telling Terry what needs to happen, albeit in his opinion, to win a Cup, and then Darcy is trying to do those things. If Darcy fails to do what he says is necessary, and the responsibilty for losing falls on him, then he should be fired. The free agent business was a decent attempt, but the players underperformed, so the GM ships the players and changes the coach. If Rolston doesn't work out, or if a lot our draft picks don't pan out, or if we start making retardo trades, or if we let Vanek and/or Miller go to UFA without return, then there's an outstanding case for Regier to be fired due to poor performance under Pegula's ownership.

 

I understand why Darcy is still here, examining from Pegula's perspective.

 

And because the plan going forward is to blow it up and draft well, evidence I've seen suggests that Darcy Regier may be better than many for this particular phase, with no small amount of help from Kevin Devine. Is it odd that a GM has had this much tenure with one team? Yeah. Is it bat ###### crazy that that particular GM is still here right now? Not entirely.

Where is this evidence? Regier's draft record has been less than stellar over the years so I am really interested to see this "evidence." I would also like to know who are these people telling Pegula that Regier is a good GM.

 

The only reason for Regier retaining his job with the Sabres that makes any sense is his status as the quintessential "yes man." There are no solid "hockey reasons" to keep Regier around. Pegula want's someone in that position that is easily manipulated into allowing Pegula to feel like he is part of the process. That is more important to Pegula than anything, that is the only viable explanation for allowing Regier to continue to guide this franchise into NHL obscurity.

 

Regier needs to go, he is not qualified in any way to complete a re-build. That said, I don't blame Regier for still being here, it's an easy paycheck with apparently zero accountability when it comes to job performance. Miss the playoffs 7 out of 11 years and get a new contract. At this point the additional Regier failures fall on Terry Pegula. He is the only reason this franchise is saddled with Regier and he is the only person who can correct this grievous error.

[Trettioåtta]

Where is this evidence? Regier's draft record has been less than stellar over the years so I am really interested to see this "evidence."

 

Who has drafted better than us?

[deluca67]

It's not entirely crazy. But at the same time, the team has gotten objectively worse every year since Pegula took over. At some point I'd like to think Pegula will make the connection between that and Regier.

For how many years have posters on this board defended Regier saying, "if only he had an owner willing to spend the money." The imaginary "shackles" have been removed and what has Regier been able to do with the money? Put together one of the worst Sabres rosters of all time, that's what.

[deluca67]

Who has drafted better than us?

Teams like Boston, Ottawa and Montreal and that's just within the division.

 

I fully expected this question due to this fallacy of the Sabres are in some golden era of prospects. The Sabres are no more poised now of having a youth movement turn things around than say back when posters we all excited about the level of prospects when Stafford, Paillie, MacArthur and Sekera where just coming up. It's the nature of the beast, there will always be that next group of prospects fans will look to be their saviors.

[Kristian]

For how many years have posters on this board defended Regier saying, "if only he had an owner willing to spend the money." The imaginary "shackles" have been removed and what has Regier been able to do with the money? Put together one of the worst Sabres rosters of all time, that's what.

 

The same crowd conveniently ignores the fact that OSP was happy to spend money on the team, even after the Drury/Briere clusterf*ck, he just didn't want to spend to the cap. Golisano was in no way a penny-pincher like Rigas, even after he lost interest in following the team closely.

 

Regier threw all that money into his beloved core, and assorted 3rd liners, who as we all know, failed miserably.

[deluca67]

The same crowd conveniently ignores the fact that OSP was happy to spend money on the team, even after the Drury/Briere clusterf*ck, he just didn't want to spend to the cap. Golisano was in no way a penny-pincher like Rigas, even after he lost interest in following the team closely.

 

Regier threw all that money into his beloved core, and assorted 3rd liners, who as we all know, failed miserably.

Looking back with hindsight it was a very wise move on Golisano's part. Look at the incredible amount of money of Pegula's money that Regier has already burned through in such a short period of time, Golisano was justified in not just handing Regier a blank check.

[TrueBlueGED]

Teams like Boston, Ottawa and Montreal and that's just within the division.

 

Based on what, exactly? Percentage of draft picks to play a certain number of NHL games? Perform to a certain level? I'm not inherently disagreeing, just curious why you think this (I hope it's more than "they drafted Lucic in the second round").

 

The same crowd conveniently ignores the fact that OSP was happy to spend money on the team, even after the Drury/Briere clusterf*ck, he just didn't want to spend to the cap. Golisano was in no way a penny-pincher like Rigas, even after he lost interest in following the team closely.

 

Regier threw all that money into his beloved core, and assorted 3rd liners, who as we all know, failed miserably.

 

My response would be the raw dollars Golisano was willing to spend wasn't the handcuff. It was how he was willing to spend them, meaning focuses on short term and even money deals, rather than long term and front loaded deals. That was the handcuff aspect IMO.

[Kristian]

Based on what, exactly? Percentage of draft picks to play a certain number of NHL games? Perform to a certain level? I'm not inherently disagreeing, just curious why you think this (I hope it's more than "they drafted Lucic in the second round").

 

 

 

My response would be the raw dollars Golisano was willing to spend wasn't the handcuff. It was how he was willing to spend them, meaning focuses on short term and even money deals, rather than long term and front loaded deals. That was the handcuff aspect IMO.

 

I'm not sure I agree, though I do see your point.

 

I think the Vanek deal showed he was willing to spend money on long term deals as well, though that contract was on Kevin Lowe.

 

We can certainly agree he liked short-term solutions, as he was a stubborn, arrogant fool, thinking he could get by in the NHL with "one-year-deal" policy. But I also think that once he was woken up from that dream, most abruptly, that he adapted his approach.

[nfreeman]

Not really, because the war hasn't been decided yet (maybe it's never decided? ugh).

 

From a fan perspective, firing Darcy makes some sense: DR's been here a long time, etc, fans want change, and with Lindy gone, he's the last man standing. I get it.

 

But to get Pegula's point of view, you have to look at the mangement/ownership perspective: people I trust tell me this GM's good, and I don't want to judge this guy based on his performance under a different owner with a different philosophy and different resources. I want to judge his performance based on his work here, under my ownership and my philosophy and my resources. We've got an alright team that's close to being a contender, what should we do? Get free agents and try to make a push? Alright, go get 'em. Got 'em? Good. We didn't win. How do we win? Draft elite players and bring in a different coach? Alright, let's do it.

 

Darcy is telling Terry what needs to happen, albeit in his opinion, to win a Cup, and then Darcy is trying to do those things. If Darcy fails to do what he says is necessary, and the responsibilty for losing falls on him, then he should be fired. The free agent business was a decent attempt, but the players underperformed, so the GM ships the players and changes the coach. If Rolston doesn't work out, or if a lot our draft picks don't pan out, or if we start making retardo trades, or if we let Vanek and/or Miller go to UFA without return, then there's an outstanding case for Regier to be fired due to poor performance under Pegula's ownership.

 

I understand why Darcy is still here, examining from Pegula's perspective.

 

And because the plan going forward is to blow it up and draft well, evidence I've seen suggests that Darcy Regier may be better than many for this particular phase, with no small amount of help from Kevin Devine. Is it odd that a GM has had this much tenure with one team? Yeah. Is it bat ###### crazy that that particular GM is still here right now? Not entirely.

 

Good post.

 

But it's very hard to argue with...

 

It's not entirely crazy. But at the same time, the team has gotten objectively worse every year since Pegula took over. At some point I'd like to think Pegula will make the connection between that and Regier.

 

and...

 

For how many years have posters on this board defended Regier saying, "if only he had an owner willing to spend the money." The imaginary "shackles" have been removed and what has Regier been able to do with the money? Put together one of the worst Sabres rosters of all time, that's what.

 

Where is this evidence? Regier's draft record has been less than stellar over the years so I am really interested to see this "evidence." I would also like to know who are these people telling Pegula that Regier is a good GM.

 

The only reason for Regier retaining his job with the Sabres that makes any sense is his status as the quintessential "yes man." There are no solid "hockey reasons" to keep Regier around. Pegula want's someone in that position that is easily manipulated into allowing Pegula to feel like he is part of the process. That is more important to Pegula than anything, that is the only viable explanation for allowing Regier to continue to guide this franchise into NHL obscurity.

 

Regier needs to go, he is not qualified in any way to complete a re-build. That said, I don't blame Regier for still being here, it's an easy paycheck with apparently zero accountability when it comes to job performance. Miss the playoffs 7 out of 11 years and get a new contract. At this point the additional Regier failures fall on Terry Pegula. He is the only reason this franchise is saddled with Regier and he is the only person who can correct this grievous error.

 

I agree that DR's drafting acumen is overrated and that he needs to go. The part about TP wanting a yes-man is a bridge too far. Every owner in the NHL who wants to be involved in personnel decisions is as involved, and is precisely as involved as he wants to be. That's what being the owner gets you. I'd guess at least half of the owners are at least as involved as TP is. And when was the last time a GM quit because his owner was interfering too much? Answer: never.

 

The same crowd conveniently ignores the fact that OSP was happy to spend money on the team, even after the Drury/Briere clusterf*ck, he just didn't want to spend to the cap. Golisano was in no way a penny-pincher like Rigas, even after he lost interest in following the team closely.

 

Regier threw all that money into his beloved core, and assorted 3rd liners, who as we all know, failed miserably.

 

The problem with TG, IMHO was not the gross dollars that he spent, it was that it was a day late and a dollar short. (Now here was a case of grevious owner interference).

[Sabres Fan in NS]

I agree that DR's drafting acumen is overrated and that he needs to go. The part about TP wanting a yes-man is a bridge too far. Every owner in the NHL who wants to be involved in personnel decisions is as involved, and is precisely as involved as he wants to be. That's what being the owner gets you. I'd guess at least half of the owners are at least as involved as TP is. And when was the last time a GM quit because his owner was interfering too much? Answer: never.

 

Same answer I provided the last time you posed this question ...

 

Feaster in Tampa Bay.

 

 

 

 

:P