Stoner Posted April 11, 2018 Author Report Posted April 11, 2018 Fixed. Nice! You're sharp right out of the gate today. On time, as Phil says. If only the Sabres could be this ready to play every night. Quote
Sabel79 Posted April 11, 2018 Report Posted April 11, 2018 It's interesting that Golisano, who said he charged his management with breaking even, got much better results. Throwing money at the problem in 2011 got the whole shebang off to a bad start and was the beginning of the end. Some ridiculous free agent contracts were also doled out later, adding to the misery. I'd that this was more catching lightning in a bottle as opposed to OSP having any positive impact. Coming out of the '04 lockout, all teams were required to work under budget restrictions that Darcy had been dealing with for years. He had a year to look at the changes being made to the game and shaped the roster accordingly. They came back flying and, well, cusps. Then the time came to actually write a check or two. Nope. Darcy definitely made bad decisions with the windfall he got through Pegula's purchase. Then GMTM... ugh. Quote
Stoner Posted April 11, 2018 Author Report Posted April 11, 2018 Days gone by, you posited that Pegula was a problematic owner because he cared *too much* about the Sabres (perhaps for the wrong reasons) — and that his unwelcome meddling flowed from his obsession with his shiny new toy. Now you posit that Pegula is a problematic owner because he doesn’t care enough about the team? And where did I posit this? I think I posited that the problem is his ability to put together a strong team of hockey people. Do you not remember the days of an accountant, a lawyer and a finance guy walking into a bar in the Cobblestone District? A dinner date that got hot and heavy with Patty, who had to say he wasn't ready to go all the way into the GM's chair? And so on. I never said I wanted Pegula not to care. An owner can care, a lot, and not meddle. That said, when your owner goes on The Instigators during a disaster of a season and doesn't talk to the fans or speak the name "Sabres" and only touches on them for a moment in the context of the World Juniors -- then is lobbed a softball after the Bills made the playoffs, was asked about the long road for both of his franchises before this moment of success, and he doesn't say the obvious, "Sabres fans, we're coming for ya"... run-on sentence... did I feed the cat, was there always hair there? I digress. Quote
darksabre Posted April 11, 2018 Report Posted April 11, 2018 Nice! You're sharp right out of the gate today. On time, as Phil says. If only the Sabres could be this ready to play every night. :P Quote
Eleven Posted April 11, 2018 Report Posted April 11, 2018 Presumably Terry would attach the same stipulation to the purchase that Golisano did. Also, the league has to approve sales. I've always operated under the assumption that the Buffalo market is too valuable for the league to allow it to move. Where has that gotten us? It's interesting that Golisano, who said he charged his management with breaking even, got much better results. Throwing money at the problem in 2011 got the whole shebang off to a bad start and was the beginning of the end. Some ridiculous free agent contracts were also doled out later, adding to the misery. Don't NHL owners tend to be guys who are willing to spend (ego), knowing that they can make it back when they sell the team? It hasn't gotten the Sabres anywhere lately, that's for sure, but I'd rather they have the ability to spend than not. Quote
That Aud Smell Posted April 11, 2018 Report Posted April 11, 2018 (edited) I'm solidly in the camp that the Sabres were prelude to the Bills and that he's lost some interest. Is Terry on the scouting trip to see Darnold? That's really where his action is. Now you posit that Pegula is a problematic owner because he doesn’t care enough about the team? And where did I posit this? I am confusion. America, explain. Edited April 11, 2018 by That Aud Smell Quote
Taro T Posted April 11, 2018 Report Posted April 11, 2018 (edited) At this point, I don't think relocation is a risk. The bigger risk is the lack of deep pockets.This. And an inability to spend to the cap & short staffing the scouting department would doom this team to perrenially primarily being an also ran. Yeah, they're worse than an also ran at present, but if the right GM/ Head of Hockey Operations is in pkace they don't have to stay one. Presumably Terry would attach the same stipulation to the purchase that Golisano did. Also, the league has to approve sales. I've always operated under the assumption that the Buffalo market is too valuable for the league to allow it to move. Where has that gotten us? It's interesting that Golisano, who said he charged his management with breaking even, got much better results. Throwing money at the problem in 2011 got the whole shebang off to a bad start and was the beginning of the end. Some ridiculous free agent contracts were also doled out later, adding to the misery. Don't NHL owners tend to be guys who are willing to spend (ego), knowing that they can make it back when they sell the team? Golisano caught lightning in a bottle & then pissed in the bottle. He had one of the few teams that was under the new salary cap prior to cap implementation & the imposition of the cap allowed the Sabres the opportunity to dump Satan as well. He also had a scouting department that had been working well. The Sabres were consistently rated top 10 & usually top 5 in scouting in the 90's. Golisano forced the team into a situation where only 3 players had contracts at the end of '05-'06 (to paraphrase the damous quote: my preference would be to gave everyone on a 1 day contract). Briere & McKee should've gotten multiyear deals coming out of the lockout. Golisano didn't sign the 5 year contract that Regier had negotiated w/ Drury early in the '06-'07 season. Thus directly leading to his departure. Under Golusano's ownership, the scouting department was gutted for video scouting & minority owner Quinn handcuffed Regier into matching Vanek's offer from the Eulers. I will always be thankful that Golisano stepped up to keep the team in town. Hammister was severely undercaputalized & likely would've moved the team like he did w/ the Destroyers when his Sabres cash flow issues inevitably became too great. (Following Art Modell's Cleveland Browns model.) But Golisano took a team that should've been a legit contender for the SC, if not favorite to win it, and turned it into an afterthought overnight literally (7/1/7). And that was unnecessary and stinks. Edited April 11, 2018 by Taro T Quote
Eleven Posted April 11, 2018 Report Posted April 11, 2018 I am confusion. America, explain. There was never an "alternate reality" that PA didn't at least flirt with, if not propose to. Pegula isn't interested in hockey at all. That's why he built that football stadium at Penn State. Quote
Stoner Posted April 11, 2018 Author Report Posted April 11, 2018 This. And an inability to spend to the cap & short staffing the scouting department would doom this team to perrenially primarily being an also ran. Yeah, they're worse than an also ran at present, but if the right GM/ Head of Hockey Operations is in pkace they don't have to stay one. Golisano caught lightning in a bottle & then pissed in the bottle. He had one of the few teams that was under the new salary cap prior to cap implementation & the imposition of the cap allowed the Sabres the opportunity to dump Satan as well. He also had a scouting department that had been working well. The Sabres were consistently rated top 10 & usually top 5 in scouting in the 90's. Golisano forced the team into a situation where only 3 players had contracts at the end of '05-'06 (to paraphrase the damous quote: my preference would be to gave everyone on a 1 day contract). Briere & McKee should've gotten multiyear deals coming out of the lockout. Golisano didn't sign the 5 year contract that Regier had negotiated w/ Drury early in the '06-'07 season. Thus directly leading to his departure. Under Golusano's ownership, the scouting department was gutted for video scouting & minority owner Quinn handcuffed Regier into matching Vanek's offer from the Eulers. I will always be thankful that Golisano stepped up to keep the team in town. Hammister was severely undercaputalized & likely would've moved the team like he did w/ the Destroyers when his Sabres cash flow issues inevitably became too great. (Following Art Modell's Cleveland Browns model.) But Golisano took a team that should've been a legit contender for the SC, if not favorite to win it, and turned it into an afterthought overnight literally (7/1/7). And that was unnecessary and stinks. Darcy had the idea for video scouting pre-Tom. Darcy always had to think that way from Day One of his tenure. The lean-ness seemed in some way to contribute to success — to a point of course. With owners who could have put the team over the top, my goodness, how many Cups could the Sabres have won under Darcy with a little luck? Two? Three? Four? Now, Terry will be able to make a push to put the Sabres over the top, the only problem is they can't get off the bottom rung of the ladder. I am confusion. America, explain. It was just an observation. His losing some interest is not "problematic" for me. I'm glad he (apparently) did. I still think he cares, he's just flying to see QBs now and not defensemen who are on the fence. As you said, if Botterill was a good hire, then things could start running in the appropriate way. After one season, you have to be skeptical that this first-time GM out of Terry's fetish factory, who hired a former Sabre as a first-time coach, who hired Billy Hajt's kid out of an assistant job in the AHL to run the defense as a first-time NHL assistant is the answer. But we shall see. Quote
Taro T Posted April 11, 2018 Report Posted April 11, 2018 Darcy had the idea for video scouting pre-Tom. Darcy always had to think that way from Day One of his tenure. The lean-ness seemed in some way to contribute to success — to a point of course. With owners who could have put the team over the top, my goodness, how many Cups could the Sabres have won under Darcy with a little luck? Two? Three? Four? Now, Terry will be able to make a push to put the Sabres over the top, the only problem is they can't get off the bottom rung of the ladder. It was just an observation. His losing some interest is not "problematic" for me. I'm glad he (apparently) did. I still think he cares, he's just flying to see QBs now and not defensemen who are on the fence. As you said, if Botterill was a good hire, then things could start running in the appropriate way. After one season, you have to be skeptical that this first-time GM out of Terry's fetish factory, who hired a former Sabre as a first-time coach, who hired Billy Hajt's kid out of an assistant job in the AHL to run the defense as a first-time NHL assistant is the answer. But we shall see. Well, considering with the ownership he did have, it would have required very little luck to have had 3 championships ('99, '01, '06) at a minimum, will stick w/ 3 being the answer. ;) Quote
Eleven Posted April 11, 2018 Report Posted April 11, 2018 Well, considering with the ownership he did have, it would have required very little luck to have had 3 championships ('99, '01, '06) at a minimum, will stick w/ 3 being the answer. ;) Would have been able to keep Hasek and Peca, too... Quote
Taro T Posted April 11, 2018 Report Posted April 11, 2018 Would have been able to keep Hasek and Peca, too... He would have. But it's presumptuous to say the Sabres would've won over the entire field in '02 & '03 & then in '07, '08, & '09. The loaded Detroit squads only won 3 during that entire decade. Even when you do everything right, you still need some luck. Quote
Eleven Posted April 11, 2018 Report Posted April 11, 2018 (edited) He would have. But it's presumptuous to say the Sabres would've won over the entire field in '02 & '03 & then in '07, '08, & '09. The loaded Detroit squads only won 3 during that entire decade. Even when you do everything right, you still need some luck. And clean shinpads.* *it's a meme, for those who weren't around in 2006. I don't actually believe that McKee's shinpads were dirty. Edited April 11, 2018 by Eleven Quote
That Aud Smell Posted April 11, 2018 Report Posted April 11, 2018 It was just an observation. His losing some interest is not "problematic" for me. I'm glad he (apparently) did. I still think he cares, he's just flying to see QBs now and not defensemen who are on the fence. As you said, if Botterill was a good hire, then things could start running in the appropriate way. After one season, you have to be skeptical that this first-time GM out of Terry's fetish factory, who hired a former Sabre as a first-time coach, who hired Billy Hajt's kid out of an assistant job in the AHL to run the defense as a first-time NHL assistant is the answer. But we shall see. Gotcha. Okay. We are definitely in agreement as to the bolded pieces. The stuff in the second paragraph is not terribly concerning to me, save for the fact that team (and especially the D) is an unmitigated tire fire. Which is to say: I think Housley got the job because of things like his connection to USA Hockey (to which Pegula is aligned) and his success with the Preds. That he's a former Sabre was just icing on the cake, as they say -- not a determining factor. I'm not sure what to make of Housley's Hajt hire -- this is probably the first time I've even considered it. The D definitely sucked. But I think that is overwhelmingly because our D corps lacks NHL talent and/or NHL hockey IQ. I've really come around to Risto being a dumb-dumb on the ice -- it explains so much. Without Risto being good, the team indisputably lacks a top-2 D-man. (That is bad.) Quote
Marvelo Posted April 12, 2018 Report Posted April 12, 2018 Yes...Terry/Kim obviously don't know what they're doing and only make things worse, but no owner in his right mind would keep the team in Buffalo. Quote
Eleven Posted April 12, 2018 Report Posted April 12, 2018 Yes...Terry/Kim obviously don't know what they're doing and only make things worse, but no owner in his right mind would keep the team in Buffalo. Are you being sarcastic or are you really this miserable/angry/whatever? Quote
Eleven Posted April 12, 2018 Report Posted April 12, 2018 Botterill on Pegula: "His level of anger is fairly high. It is high. And I don't blame him." Doesn't seem disinterested to me. Quote
Sabres Fan in NS Posted April 12, 2018 Report Posted April 12, 2018 Are you being sarcastic or are you really this miserable/angry/whatever? He has been on this tangent for a long time now. So, no to the sarcasm. Quote
Stoner Posted April 12, 2018 Author Report Posted April 12, 2018 (edited) He has been on this tangent for a long time now. So, no to the sarcasm. Tangent, new twist on narrative. Points for creativity anyway. Or maybe you got a thesaurus for your birthday. Botterill on Pegula: "His level of anger is fairly high. It is high. And I don't blame him." Doesn't seem disinterested to me. Who said he was disinterested? Smell? I said that he had lost some interest. But what do I have to go on? He used to be on the ice before games, on TV in his box during games, on the radio talking about the Sabres, speaking at groundbreakings etc. Now the rare occasion we do hear from him, it's, "Sabres? The who now?" Edited April 12, 2018 by PASabreFan Quote
Sabres Fan in NS Posted April 12, 2018 Report Posted April 12, 2018 Tangent, new twist on narrative. Points for creativity anyway. Or maybe you got a thesaurus for your birthday. I think tangent is the correct word. His bad owner argument has touched the curve many times, but has never crossed it at any point, IMO. Quote
That Aud Smell Posted April 12, 2018 Report Posted April 12, 2018 Who said he was disinterested? Smell? I said that he had lost some interest. But what do I have to go on? He used to be on the ice before games, on TV in his box during games, on the radio talking about the Sabres, speaking at groundbreakings etc. Now the rare occasion we do hear from him, it's, "Sabres? The who now?" Haha, motherplucker, YOU JUST SAID he was disinterested! (In the same brief post wherein you were denying having suggested it?!) Quote
Stoner Posted April 12, 2018 Author Report Posted April 12, 2018 He's lost interest. How hard is that to understand? Quote
That Aud Smell Posted April 12, 2018 Report Posted April 12, 2018 I said that he had lost some interest. He's lost interest. How hard is that to understand? Man, you are harder to get a handle on than a greased pig. Losing some interest is one thing. Losing interest is another. In all events, I think it bodes well for the Sabres that Pegula's attention is focused on the Bills. As long as PSE continues to cut checks (and as long as JBOTS can dooo eeet), the Sabres will have a terrific opportunity to become great. Quote
Weave Posted April 12, 2018 Report Posted April 12, 2018 We really take wording of posts way too literally here. I mean, I know it is all we have to go on, but none of us have the grasp of the language AND (or?) the disire to spend the time to carefully craft our posts to ensure the nuance is well worded. It’s online tavern talk. Half a step up from radio caller Stephen from Cheektowaga. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.