Pegula Sports Entertainment, behind the scenes

[That Aud Smell]

(That writing reads fine to me.)

[Stoner]

13 hours ago, Taro T said:

Not positive that journalism is dead, but for the most part reporting is.  

Very few Wawrow's left out there.

Are you saying there are few Wawrows left covering the Sabres? Or few writers of Wawrow's quality left in journalism?

Because I'm pretty sure AP employs many Wawrows to cover sports.

[WildCard]

10 hours ago, Pimlach said:

Airline stocks are not great growth investments.  Sure there may be value for some of them when the inevitable recovery comes To those willing to wait.  There will more consolidation too. 
 

Im riding the Tech boom now.  Bought a bunch of QQQ after Covid hit.  

I did a variety of stocks, airlines being one of them. For tech I got into MDB and MSFT. Never heard of QQQ though, looks like it's done you well

[LabattBlue]

1 hour ago, That Aud Smell said:

(That writing reads fine to me.)

What a joke. Nepotism at it’s finest. I have absolutely no faith that Kymmy got it right with Kevyn as her choice for GM. 

[Taro T]

2 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

Are you saying there are few Wawrows left covering the Sabres? Or few writers of Wawrow's quality left in journalism?

Because I'm pretty sure AP employs many Wawrows to cover sports.

Am saying there are few individuals left that simply tell the when, where, what, & how of the story.  You know, actually reporting rather than editorializing.

Just tell the story.  Forget the (often misguided &/or simply wrong) attempts to explain / interpret the story.  

[dudacek]

Surprised this hasn’t gotten more attention given the suggestions they were in trouble in the wake of the recent layoffs:

”Pegulas’ net worth has not yet diminished during the economic downturn. In fact, from March 18, 2020 through June 17, it actually increased by 2% – from $5.0 billion to $5.1 billion.”

Looks to me more like a company taking steps to capitalize as best it can on the current climate than a company struggling to survive.

[Zamboni]

18 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Am saying there are few individuals left that simply tell the when, where, what, & how of the story.  You know, actually reporting rather than editorializing.

Just tell the story.  Forget the (often misguided &/or simply wrong) attempts to explain / interpret the story.  

I think also there’s a lot of people who don’t understand what editorializing really is. They really think that it’s part of the story and don’t recognize it as editorializing/opinion/bias.

[dudacek]

18 minutes ago, Zamboni said:

I think also there’s a lot of people who don’t understand what editorializing really is. They really think that it’s part of the story and don’t recognize it as editorializing/opinion/bias.

And, conversely, they don’t recognize real journalism for what it is, and dismiss it as agenda-driven propaganda.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

35 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Surprised this hasn’t gotten more attention given the suggestions they were in trouble in the wake of the recent layoffs:

”Pegulas’ net worth has not yet diminished during the economic downturn. In fact, from March 18, 2020 through June 17, it actually increased by 2% – from $5.0 billion to $5.1 billion.”

Looks to me more like a company taking steps to capitalize as best it can on the current climate than a company struggling to survive.

The rich getting richer everyday ...

[That Aud Smell]

2 hours ago, LabattBlue said:

What a joke. Nepotism at it’s finest. I have absolutely no faith that Kymmy got it right with Kevyn as her choice for GM. 

I need this joke explained. Is it just a function of how Kevyn spells his name?

[LabattBlue]

14 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

I need this joke explained. Is it just a function of how Kevyn spells his name?

Yep.  Nothing more than that.

[Gabrielor]

I remember in 2014 wishing the Pegula's would lose the Bills' bid, because I knew it would take away attention they should be putting on the Sabres.

I think, especially in the case of the 50th anniversary, they didn't oversee much directly, and just let people they trusted handle it. Turns out, these trusted folks didn't really care about the details. Sadly, their trust-issue solution appears to be elevating family of suspect qualification. They just aren't thinking 2+ moves ahead; too reactionary.

Also, I'm still not 100% sure on the Botterill firing. I want to believe they fired him for the right reason (he was a joke), but I can't shake the feeling that it was for the wrong reasons ($$).

[dudacek]

20 minutes ago, Gabrielor said:

 

Also, I'm still not 100% sure on the Botterill firing. I want to believe they fired him for the right reason (he was a joke), but I can't shake the feeling that it was for the wrong reasons ($$).

I think the remake of the hockey department was clearly the straw.

I also wonder if there were philosophical differences on how to use the cap space Botterill had accumulated this summer.

 

[JohnC]

43 minutes ago, Gabrielor said:

I remember in 2014 wishing the Pegula's would lose the Bills' bid, because I knew it would take away attention they should be putting on the Sabres.

I think, especially in the case of the 50th anniversary, they didn't oversee much directly, and just let people they trusted handle it. Turns out, these trusted folks didn't really care about the details. Sadly, their trust-issue solution appears to be elevating family of suspect qualification. They just aren't thinking 2+ moves ahead; too reactionary.

Also, I'm still not 100% sure on the Botterill firing. I want to believe they fired him for the right reason (he was a joke), but I can't shake the feeling that it was for the wrong reasons ($$).

Botterill would have been retained if he would have gone alone with the new Pegula organizational austerity plan. It was pointed out that after it was announced that he was going to be retained on the last year of his contract that there were further discussions with him about the direction of the franchise. He disagreed with the plan to slim down the staff that he hired. So the owners fired him. 

From a business standpoint the way in which the owners responded to the current turbulent economic climate it is understandable and reasonable what they did. To fortify their position and weaken the GM's standing is that when the status quo is not yielding the expected outcome then arguing to maintain it is not a persuasive position to maintain.  

[Gabrielor]

14 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Botterill would have been retained if he would have gone alone with the new Pegula organizational austerity plan. It was pointed out that after it was announced that he was going to be retained on the last year of his contract that there were further discussions with him about the direction of the franchise. He disagreed with the plan to slim down the staff that he hired. So the owners fired him. 

From a business standpoint the way in which the owners responded to the current turbulent economic climate it is understandable and reasonable what they did. To fortify their position and weaken the GM's standing is that when the status quo is not yielding the expected outcome then arguing to maintain it is not a persuasive position to maintain.  

 

Saddens me that his firing, from a hockey perspective, is more serendipity than logical decision. It's strange that the Pegulas' would dismiss him for wanting to down-size the department, either due to covid or to losing, but wouldn't dismiss him for hockey decisions that put them in a losing position to begin with (O'Reilly, Scandella for Frolik , 6th for a worse 6th, cap genius with overages on a 25th place team, the list goes on..)

It means we aren't out of the woods yet on potential dumb hockey decisions. I'm oh so antsy to gauge Adams, because I think we'll get a good understanding of whether or not there's hope for the Eichel era this off-season.

Edited August 5, 2020 by Gabrielor

[JohnC]

6 minutes ago, Gabrielor said:

 

Saddens me that his firing, from a hockey perspective, is more serendipity than logical decision. It's strange that the Pegulas' would dismiss him for wanting to down-size the department, either due to covid or to losing, but wouldn't dismiss him for hockey decisions that put them in a losing position to begin with (O'Reilly, Scandella for Frolik , 6th for a worse 6th, cap genius with overages on a 25th place team, the list goes on..)

It means we aren't out of the woods yet on potential dumb hockey decisions. I'm oh so antsy to gauge Adams, because I think we'll get a good understanding of whether or not there's hope for the Eichel era this off-season.

Botterill is rightly evaluated for his performance over the last three years. On the other hand the decisions that are going to be made this offseason by Adams and staff are the same decisions that Botterill would have faced if he were retained. I'm very aware that my opinion on him is contrary to most others opinion of him. It should be acknowledged that the former GM put the Sabres in a good situation to rework and upgrade the roster for next season. He had a more long turn plan to rework the roster and salary structure.  Not only did time run out for him his reluctance to sync with the owners' altered plans contributed to his departure. 

[PromoTheRobot]

1 hour ago, Gabrielor said:

I remember in 2014 wishing the Pegula's would lose the Bills' bid, because I knew it would take away attention they should be putting on the Sabres.

I think, especially in the case of the 50th anniversary, they didn't oversee much directly, and just let people they trusted handle it. Turns out, these trusted folks didn't really care about the details. Sadly, their trust-issue solution appears to be elevating family of suspect qualification. They just aren't thinking 2+ moves ahead; too reactionary.

Also, I'm still not 100% sure on the Botterill firing. I want to believe they fired him for the right reason (he was a joke), but I can't shake the feeling that it was for the wrong reasons ($$).

If I had to throw one franchise overboard it would be the Sabres. The Bills are #1 and I'm glad Pegs bought 'em. 

[JohnC]

9 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

If I had to throw one franchise overboard it would be the Sabres. The Bills are #1 and I'm glad Pegs bought 'em. 

From a financial standpoint the Pegulas will not get rich owning the Sabres. The economics of hockey are not close to the gilded economics of the NFL. But that is not to say that the Sabres are a lost cause from a fanbase standpoint. If the Sabres can get their house in order and remake this stuttering team into a seriously cup contending team this fanbase will be on fire. The past and the present don't necessarily have to reflect the future. With some smart personnel decisions this offseason this team can be put back on track with the arena filled with aroused fans. Success breeds success. 

[dudacek]

26 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Botterill is rightly evaluated for his performance over the last three years. On the other hand the decisions that are going to be made this offseason by Adams and staff are the same decisions that Botterill would have faced if he were retained. I'm very aware that my opinion on him is contrary to most others opinion of him. It should be acknowledged that the former GM put the Sabres in a good situation to rework and upgrade the roster for next season. He had a more long turn plan to rework the roster and salary structure.  Not only did time run out for him his reluctance to sync with the owners' altered plans contributed to his departure. 

I don't have many issues with what Botterill preached.

I have considerable issues with his execution: he showed little acumen in his ability to rate and acquire players and I am increasingly questioning his judgement in his hockey department hires.

In short, he was probably a capable administrator, who was in over his head as a leader and a visionary and seemingly maxed out his skillset as hockey bureaucrat/assistant GM.

Edited August 5, 2020 by dudacek

[Gabrielor]

30 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Botterill is rightly evaluated for his performance over the last three years. On the other hand the decisions that are going to be made this offseason by Adams and staff are the same decisions that Botterill would have faced if he were retained. I'm very aware that my opinion on him is contrary to most others opinion of him. It should be acknowledged that the former GM put the Sabres in a good situation to rework and upgrade the roster for next season. He had a more long turn plan to rework the roster and salary structure.  Not only did time run out for him his reluctance to sync with the owners' altered plans contributed to his departure. 

Given your position, and since you don't seem to mind discussing it:

His plan had too many failings of this own doing. We're a team that lacks NHL talent, lacks prospect pool talent, lacks picks, and is up against the cap, so much that overage costs will incur. Those 4 conditions shouldn't be possible simaltaneously.

He championed youth and building from the draft (great idea), but failed to put proper NHLers ahead of those developing (which is why Mittelstadt is tanking), and burned all kinds of picks on temporary players making little/no impact. Meanwhile, you can argue that Rochester's recent success was largely on the backs of guys who are career AHLers, and wouldn't end up effecting the Sabres. He also let Phil Housley coach more than one year after gaming a near 80 point team tank to last place. (and I won't belabor O'Reilly here, but we'll see it on all-time worst lists forever now)

Don't read this as any kind of attack. I'm merely curious in how someone could view Jason Botterill as anything other than the primary reason we're a NHL laughingstock.

 

23 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

If I had to throw one franchise overboard it would be the Sabres. The Bills are #1 and I'm glad Pegs bought 'em. 

 

I'm controversially a Buffalo-born Sabres fan who roots for the San Francisco 49ers, not the Bills, so I was fine with the Sabres as the focus ? 

Edited August 5, 2020 by Gabrielor

[shrader]

Sometimes the wrong reason for some reason can still be a good reason.

[JohnC]

Just now, Gabrielor said:

Given your position, and since you don't seem to mind discussing it:

His plan had too many failings of this own doing. We're a team that lacks NHL talent, lacks prospect pool talent, lacks picks, and is up against the cap, so much that overage costs will incur. Those 4 conditions shouldn't be possible simaltaneously.

He championed youth and building from the draft (great idea), but failed to put proper NHLers ahead of those developing (which is why Mittelstadt is tanking), and burned all kinds of picks on temporary players making little/no impact. Meanwhile, you can argue that Rochester's recent success was largely on the backs of guys who are career AHLers, and wouldn't end up effecting the Sabres. He also let Phil Housley coach more than one year after gaming a near 80 point team tank to last place. (and I won't belabor O'Reilly here, but we'll see it on all-time worst lists forever now)

Don't read this as any kind of attack. I'm merely curious in how someone could view Jason Botterill as anything other than the primary reason we're a NHL laughingstock.

 

 

First, I don't consider your response as an attack and don't take it as such.

On the issue of player development I do agree that Mitts and Tage were rushed. That was a mistake. That is not to say that both of them have been irredeemably been damaged. Tage should be a contributor this season. With Mitts I'm not sure. 

Where I disagree with most posters here is that I believe that Botts had a more long term plan than most people here were willing to tolerate. I'm not arguing that he has been a resounding success because it is obvious that it is not the case. What I do believe is this franchise from a talent standpoint is not as barren as most people portray it to be. It's my opinion that if this staff can make a few consequential personnel decisions this offseason this roster will be be meaningfully upgraded. And I do believe that it was the fired GM who put this franchise in a good position to be able to make those decisions. Will this regime take advantage of the situation this offseason? I certainly hope so. 

 

[Gabrielor]

2 hours ago, JohnC said:

First, I don't consider your response as an attack and don't take it as such.

On the issue of player development I do agree that Mitts and Tage were rushed. That was a mistake. That is not to say that both of them have been irredeemably been damaged. Tage should be a contributor this season. With Mitts I'm not sure. 

Where I disagree with most posters here is that I believe that Botts had a more long term plan than most people here were willing to tolerate. I'm not arguing that he has been a resounding success because it is obvious that it is not the case. What I do believe is this franchise from a talent standpoint is not as barren as most people portray it to be. It's my opinion that if this staff can make a few consequential personnel decisions this offseason this roster will be be meaningfully upgraded. And I do believe that it was the fired GM who put this franchise in a good position to be able to make those decisions. Will this regime take advantage of the situation this offseason? I certainly hope so. 

 

 

I made a big HFBoards post forever ago on our Defensive unit and pipeline vs Murray's last season. It was night and day. I still hold a large amount of hope for that pipeline, because of the various flavors it has: the Superstar (Dahlin) the Hjalmarsson (Johnson, Jokiharju) the toughness (Samuelsson, Borgen), the offense (Laaksonen), the transition (Bryson). So yeah, he built that very well (if at the expense of forwards with the Johnson/Samuelsson picks)

Regardless of the setup, I wouldn't have had much faith in this offseason if he was still here. History shows his 'good moves' count is 2, with room to argue for mayyybe a couple more. In 3 years.

 

I've probably taken this thread way off topic though, so I'll circle back to: I think Botterill was a terrible GM, and I hope that the bad moves / planning / team building / rushing prospects ends with him, and isn't also a trickle-down from the Pegulas.

 

 

 

[Thorner]

5 hours ago, dudacek said:

I think the remake of the hockey department was clearly the straw.

I also wonder if there were philosophical differences on how to use the cap space Botterill had accumulated this summer.

 

This is my reading too - the final straw, but I don't think that straw carries that much weight if they weren't reasonably dissatisfied with his performance. 

[JohnC]

19 hours ago, dudacek said:

I think the remake of the hockey department was clearly the straw.

I also wonder if there were philosophical differences on how to use the cap space Botterill had accumulated this summer.

 

Your first sentence is exactly what I have been propounding on the Botterill issue. My contention is that he would have been retained if he would have been willing to implement the organizational restructure that the owners sought. Kim stated after his release that they had numerous discussions with him after the season that came to no avail. Which clearly indicates that he wasn't on board. So he was fired. 

I'm not criticizing the owners because they were presiding over a franchise that was hemorrhaging money (one report was $37 m) with the results not coming close to being satisfactory. Terry P pointed out that under the revamp the scouting department would have less staff, less travel and more video. A change in the operation reflecting the imperative in cutting costs. That's not necessarily a bad thing because when faced with a fiscal calamity you are often forced to be more creative in how you operate. 

Kevin Adams was an in-house staffer who wasn't part of the hockey operation. He was spearheading the business side of the hockey enterprise that included youth hockey. You don't find it odd that there was no GM search process to find a replacement for the fired GM? The point that I'm driving at is that the imperative to change how the operation was run related to financial considerations. 

Make no mistake about what I'm saying here. I'm not criticizing the owners in dramatically changing how their hockey business was going to be run. And I do believe that this more austere (smaller) organization has a better ability to be more nimble and cohesive. When all is said and done the success of the franchise relates to the staff making better decisions. You can be a smaller outfit with less operating costs and still be a successful operation.