Kim Pegula returning next season- Kim Pegula

[sabresparaavida]

I heard from a source to expect something exciting sabres related tomorrow. Not sure what it means exactly, but we'll see.

[dudacek]

3 minutes ago, sabresparaavida said:

I heard from a source to expect something exciting sabres related tomorrow. Not sure what it means exactly, but we'll see.

When was the last time we heard something exciting from the Sabres?

Its going to be a looooonnnnnggggg off-season.

[sabresparaavida]

40 minutes ago, dudacek said:

When was the last time we heard something exciting from the Sabres?

Its going to be a looooonnnnnggggg off-season.

Uhhh... When we won the Dahlin lottery. 

 

He also said something regarding competent ownership, but he is a Pegulas optimist, so we'll see with that.

[dudacek]

3 minutes ago, sabresparaavida said:

Uhhh... When we won the Dahlin lottery. 

 

He also said something regarding competent ownership, but he is a Pegulas optimist, so we'll see with that.

Wow, you mean REALLY exciting. I was just going for interesting.

Ownership? That’s intriguing.

[Zamboni]

1 hour ago, sabresparaavida said:

I heard from a source to expect something exciting sabres related tomorrow. Not sure what it means exactly, but we'll see.

The team has been sold to Elon Musk. The arena will now be run fully on solar, wind and batteries. No more Zamboni. now it will be 30 people during an intermission with buckets of water and squeegees.
And he’s changing the name to the Buffalo $7A@Q€*£¥}! It’s all very exciting! 

[sabresparaavida]

5 minutes ago, Zamboni said:

The team has been sold to Elon Musk. The arena will now be run fully on solar, wind and batteries. No more Zamboni. now it will be 30 people during an intermission with buckets of water and squeegees.
And he’s changing the name to the Buffalo $7A@Q€*£¥}! It’s all very exciting! 

Well, that might give us a home ice advantage.

[That Aud Smell]

1 hour ago, sabresparaavida said:

I heard from a source to expect something exciting sabres related tomorrow. Not sure what it means exactly, but we'll see.

Hmm. Colour me intrigued.

[LGR4GM]

On 6/12/2020 at 10:37 AM, john wawrow said:

I'll reiterate my stance that this site has consistently been over-run by the few, and provides little value, because it has inevitably become a place of condemnation rather than one for discussion or enlightenment.

It's the reason I unsuccessfully asked a few years ago to have my account deactivated, because the discourse here quickly leans toward the toxic, with a prevailing few bullying the narrative into shape.

I'll agree that I made an honest mistake in citing Forbes as the Sabres listed as having $1.9 million in operating profit in 2018-19, as opposed to "revenue."

That said, to conflate these into "whoppers" as alleged by the original poster is but another example of how the supposed discourse here is narrowed and twisted into a few people's point of view, and anyone questioning it is dismissed.

There appears to be no place for contrarian or alternate views, and unlike at TwoBillDrive, where there is healthy discourse, little oversight in how posters are disparaged.

Good luck and I hope you all continue enjoying your circle-jerk exercise.

 

What I fine interesting is that your tone is always this ^ level of arrogance mixed with condescension. You don't engage you just swoop in, yell at us, tell us we "provide little value" and that this place is not for "discussion or enlightenment" and then leave again for months on end. In this very message I am quoting you claim that your contrarian view is being dismissed. I asked myself if that were true but couldn't actually figure out what your view was. You did say 1 false and 1 misleading thing in your article and appear to be upset that we said the 1 was false (revenue/income) and the other was misleading (harbor center being built is not an arena upgrade, harbor center is actually a separate thing and something very nice and awesome the Pegulas did). You took no time to defend them, yelled at us for questioning you while using the most dismissing tone you could muster, and then told us to "enjoy your circle-jerk exercise" before fleeing back to the anonymity of the internet. I couldn't disparage you because I have no actual idea what your view is because you haven't made that clear. Is it that we should give the Pegulas more chances? Is it that they have done good and are good? Idk, I read your article again before posting and within its meandering defense of the Pegulas, I suppose my takeaway is that we should give them a chance or respect what they have done. 

Interestingly you are guilty of the very tone that you claim we have. You aren't here for enlightenment or to even discuss the team because if you were you would take part in the very in depth conversations that occur here. For example we talked at length about the ROR trade, the Frolic trade, and why this team is not good (they don't generate enough offensive opportunities, the PK was passive and terrible, and the goaltending was below average). Yet you show up when we criticize your article (one poster did this) and tell someone they didn't ask you nice enough about the CBA. You aren't a valuable member to this forum because you drop in like you are god's gift to us and then leave just the same when the random people on the internet don't bow to your greatness. Your entire tone is "how dare you question me". The sad part is you could be a valuable member of this community but you aren't here to be a member, you are here to get your ego stroked. So I guess all I have left to say is... 

[Eleven]

10 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

What I fine interesting is that your tone is always this ^ level of arrogance mixed with condescension. You don't engage you just swoop in, yell at us, tell us we "provide little value" and that this place is not for "discussion or enlightenment" and then leave again for months on end. In this very message I am quoting you claim that your contrarian view is being dismissed. I asked myself if that were true but couldn't actually figure out what your view was. You did say 1 false and 1 misleading thing in your article and appear to be upset that we said the 1 was false (revenue/income) and the other was misleading (harbor center being built is not an arena upgrade, harbor center is actually a separate thing and something very nice and awesome the Pegulas did). You took no time to defend them, yelled at us for questioning you while using the most dismissing tone you could muster, and then told us to "enjoy your circle-jerk exercise" before fleeing back to the anonymity of the internet. I couldn't disparage you because I have no actual idea what your view is because you haven't made that clear. Is it that we should give the Pegulas more chances? Is it that they have done good and are good? Idk, I read your article again before posting and within its meandering defense of the Pegulas, I suppose my takeaway is that we should give them a chance or respect what they have done. 

Interestingly you are guilty of the very tone that you claim we have. You aren't here for enlightenment or to even discuss the team because if you were you would take part in the very in depth conversations that occur here. For example we talked at length about the ROR trade, the Frolic trade, and why this team is not good (they don't generate enough offensive opportunities, the PK was passive and terrible, and the goaltending was below average). Yet you show up when we criticize your article (one poster did this) and tell someone they didn't ask you nice enough about the CBA. You aren't a valuable member to this forum because you drop in like you are god's gift to us and then leave just the same when the random people on the internet don't bow to your greatness. Your entire tone is "how dare you question me". The sad part is you could be a valuable member of this community but you aren't here to be a member, you are here to get your ego stroked. So I guess all I have left to say is... 

 

I am a big defender of John Wawrow and always will be, but this is a very accurate critique of what happened here.

John, if you're reading this:  We know that you have access to facts that we don't.  We also value your presence here.  But if you're here, you're JAG like the rest of us--albeit a more informed JAG.  Still, we have conversations here.  Mostly polite conversations; sometimes not so much.  Conversations require give and take.

[Zamboni]

In fairness, I view some discussions as actual conversations. A little back-and-forth to express our views and discuss the views and maybe even change someone’s opinion once in a great while. But forums overall, and not just this one, (I’m a Mod on a non-sports forum), Have mostly become a place to tell people your view, and they tell you their view… And there’s nothing you can do to change their mind no matter what you say. And there’s nothing they could do to change your mind no matter what they say. So it’s not really a discussion at all. It’s just a place to tell everybody who’s reading it what your unwavering view is on any particular topic. And when that happens, I find it’s not even worth getting into a discussion in the first place. Because it’s not really a conversation at that point. It’s just another version of a bull horn to tell everybody what you view as truth. And no other opinion matters. I Personally get way more value out of Factual articles that are posted here. Non-opinion articles. With an occasional logical, levelheaded  opinion here or there. And the posters who stay mostly levelheaded and logical are the ones I enjoy reading the most. And I mostly block out the silly posters who aren’t that way. Just my O ?‍♂️ 
 

[DeleteThisAccount]

5 hours ago, Eleven said:

I am a big defender of John Wawrow and always will be, but this is a very accurate critique of what happened here.

John, if you're reading this:  We know that you have access to facts that we don't.  We also value your presence here.  But if you're here, you're JAG like the rest of us--albeit a more informed JAG.  Still, we have conversations here.  Mostly polite conversations; sometimes not so much.  Conversations require give and take.

I left here 2 or so years ago because of all the negativity.

There was no welcomeness then, and neither is there any now.

This board has constantly, constantly -- stress constantly -- disparaged my work, questioned my sources, questioned whether I had sources, believed my only source was Larry Quinn, and now stoops to the level of calling out  my latest story as being filled with "whoppers."

That's a big word, and really the last straw on my part to engaging in any semblance of an open discussion or give and take.

It was like this when I first joined, only to quickly find out there was little desire on anyone's part to engage in anything of merit.

And, upon revisiting this place last week, I see very little has changed.

If my tone, as some put it, is condescending or arrogant, well, it's only because that's a lot of what's been directed at me over the years.

So if I put off a bunch of people here, big whup. It's not like those same people provided me an ounce of respect to begin with.

jw

[Sabres Fan in NS]

I don't think that anyone is forcing anyone to stay active here.  Stay, don't stay, what does it really matter?  Contribute to the discussion, or don't.

[Curt]

18 minutes ago, john wawrow said:

I left here 2 or so years ago because of all the negativity.

There was no welcomeness then, and neither is there any now.

This board has constantly, constantly -- stress constantly -- disparaged my work, questioned my sources, questioned whether I had sources, believed my only source was Larry Quinn, and now stoops to the level of calling out  my latest story as being filled with "whoppers."

That's a big word, and really the last straw on my part to engaging in any semblance of an open discussion or give and take.

It was like this when I first joined, only to quickly find out there was little desire on anyone's part to engage in anything of merit.

And, upon revisiting this place last week, I see very little has changed.

If my tone, as some put it, is condescending or arrogant, well, it's only because that's a lot of what's been directed at me over the years.

So if I put off a bunch of people here, big whup. It's not like those same people provided me an ounce of respect to begin with.

jw

It was one person who said the “whoppers” stuff.  One person, not “the board”.  It wasn’t a fair way to approach any questions about what you wrote.  It was not respectful.  But it’s not “the board” vs you.

[Eleven]

30 minutes ago, john wawrow said:

This board has constantly, constantly -- stress constantly -- disparaged my work, questioned my sources, questioned whether I had sources, believed my only source was Larry Quinn, and now stoops to the level of calling out  my latest story as being filled with "whoppers."

Well, here's one problem.  The disparagement has not been constant, nor has it been consistent.  I know that others, and I, have offered positive opinions on your work.  I also know that if someone believed that your only source was Larry Quinn, that person is a little kooky.  An awful lot of us read your work and trust it over other sources.  In my own personal opinion, you, Hoppe, and Yerdon, and maybe Vogl (when reporting and not acting as a columnist; he has a dual role, unfortunately), are in an echelon above the rest.

Quote

 

 It's not like those same people provided me an ounce of respect to begin with.

You may be right, but this is not how I remember it.  And I do not believe that the poster with who you had trouble in this thread, @PASabreFan , is someone with whom you've had trouble before.  I think you may have mixed up a couple of people.  I think that PA generally likes your stuff.

7 minutes ago, Curt said:

It was one person who said the “whoppers” stuff.  One person, not “the board”.  It wasn’t a fair way to approach any questions about what you wrote.  It was not respectful.  But it’s not “the board” vs you.

Also well said.

Edited June 15, 2020 by Eleven

[Eleven]

I guess one more thing, John:  If you want to engage with posters here, I think it's great.  It's a wonderful opportunity for us to talk with a reporter, and it's a wonderful opportunity for the AP to get exposure.  Again, I like your work and I like the dialogue.  But if it's always going to be "I'm taking my ball and going home" when someone disagrees, well, there's Twitter for that.

Edited June 15, 2020 by Eleven

[Taro T]

7 minutes ago, john wawrow said:

I left here 2 or so years ago because of all the negativity.

There was no welcomeness then, and neither is there any now.

This board has constantly, constantly -- stress constantly -- disparaged my work, questioned my sources, questioned whether I had sources, believed my only source was Larry Quinn, and now stoops to the level of calling out  my latest story as being filled with "whoppers."

That's a big word, and really the last straw on my part to engaging in any semblance of an open discussion or give and take.

It was like this when I first joined, only to quickly find out there was little desire on anyone's part to engage in anything of merit.

And, upon revisiting this place last week, I see very little has changed.

If my tone, as some put it, is condescending or arrogant, well, it's only because that's a lot of what's been directed at me over the years.

So if I put off a bunch of people here, big whup. It's not like those same people provided me an ounce of respect to begin with.

jw

John, glad to see you were back briefly; saddened that it looks like you're going away again.

Not sure what it is that creates the dynamic where reporters and columnists that come here (& to TSW as well) tend to seem to be attacked but that perception & then seemingly inevitable result definitely arises.

And went with "seem to be attacked" rather than "are attacked" because IMHO when the conflicts originate (and this dustup w/ PA isn't the origination, again IMHO) the imperfection of a written media where nuance & tone gets lost starts a lot of it.  People know you have better contacts within the Sabres & NHL than most everybody here (and have earned those through your hard work & professionalism through the years), and they tend to, again IMHO, hope to get more "inside baseball" info than we should realistically expect to get and end up asking for more than anyone in your position should ever be expected to offer.

I, for one and know I'm not the only one, really do appreciate when you share your opinion on matters here.  If this were a Zoom meeting, rather than a message board, your experience would likely be much better as you'd be able to pick up the nuance & people on this end likely wouldn't be as blunt (or at least the bluntness would come across better as if we were all sitting at a bar rather than just being random anonymous typers) & there probably (hopefully) wouldn't be the impression that you're being ganged up upon.  

It seems to a certain degree, the way this format is set up, that ganging up almost happens automatically regardless of intent (and again IMHO there is very little if any intent to gang up on you or others that come down here on occassion) as multiple people try to throw their 2 cents in clarifying what somebody else said (in their own attempt to speak for another) or asking a question to get some additional nuance cleared up but on a subject that you've already said as much as you're comfortable in providing.

Sorry 'bout the long winded psychobabble.  Do believe/ know this place is better when you participate and hope you do still stop by on occassion.

Knowing that you like dropping into the PPP board from time to time but have a much different political bent than the primarily libertarian vibe that exists there, that you'd probably enjoy stopping into the political club subgroup on this forum.  The general vibe seems much more in line with your political tastes.

Anyway.  Take care.

?

[Indabuff]

FWIW (which is not much since I'm just riding coach on this site) my agreeance with PA's post was in regards to management's mismanagement of this team and had nothing to do with you.  This team is an embarrassment and I don't know anyone personally that thinks otherwise.

Edited June 15, 2020 by Indabuff
I also follow your content (and I enjoy PA's posts)

[Eleven]

2 minutes ago, Indabuff said:

FWIW (which is not much since I'm just riding coach on this site) my agreeance with PA's post was in regards to management's mismanagement of this team and had nothing to do with you.  This team is an embarrassment and I don't know anyone personally that thinks otherwise.

Yes.  Getting back to the topic (here?  on Sabrespace?!), the team is a disaster.

The question is whether Kim Pegula is the reason.

She isn't.  She's the president of another sports team that is mildly successful and seems to be rising.  She didn't play that sport, either.  She isn't the issue, and adding another layer between her and the GM is useless (as we learned from the aforementioned Mr. Black.).

The problem, mainly, is Botterill.  

And, just to raise a few feathers, the remaining part of the problem is that they fired a coach who shouldn't have been fired in the first place, and have been wandering at sea ever since.  Just like I wrote it ten years ago.

[SABRES 0311]

4 hours ago, Eleven said:

Yes.  Getting back to the topic (here?  on Sabrespace?!), the team is a disaster.

The question is whether Kim Pegula is the reason.

She isn't.  She's the president of another sports team that is mildly successful and seems to be rising.  She didn't play that sport, either.  She isn't the issue, and adding another layer between her and the GM is useless (as we learned from the aforementioned Mr. Black.).

The problem, mainly, is Botterill.  

And, just to raise a few feathers, the remaining part of the problem is that they fired a coach who shouldn't have been fired in the first place, and have been wandering at sea ever since.  Just like I wrote it ten years ago.

I don’t think she is the problem either. I’d like to see her hire someone from the hockey world as her assistant. The Pegulas own two pro teams not to mention their business dealings. A hockey assistant could be groomed to eventually take her place as the years roll on and serve as an advisor. JBott would still go directly to her and not through the assistant.

[Eleven]

2 minutes ago, SABRES 0311 said:

I’d like to see her hire someone from the hockey world as her assistant.

Again, that's a GM who knows what's up.  Botterill isn't him/her.

[That Aud Smell]

BP is taking an historic write down of assets based on the free fall in energy prices. It’s also trying to reposition itself to be more responsive to the changing norms of the energy markets (i.e., away from petrol and shale gas).

Just thought I’d toss that in there in the context of what the core problem with the Sabres is. Or will soon be.

Also, I think it’s a false paradigm to debate who’s the bigger problem: Ownership or the GM. Both have been miserably failing the franchise.

Finally, my eyes damn near rolled out of my head when I saw @john wawrow stop back to double down on his scorched earth condemnation of the board. His posture calls to mind a helpful piece of advice I once heard: Take what you do seriously; don’t take yourself seriously.

[nucci]

1 hour ago, That Aud Smell said:

BP is taking an historic write down of assets based on the free fall in energy prices. It’s also trying to reposition itself to be more responsive to the changing norms of the energy markets (i.e., away from petrol and shale gas).

Just thought I’d toss that in there in the context of what the core problem with the Sabres is. Or will soon be.

Also, I think it’s a false paradigm to debate who’s the bigger problem: Ownership or the GM. Both have been miserably failing the franchise.

Finally, my eyes damn near rolled out of my head when I saw @john wawrow stop back to double down on his scorched earth condemnation of the board. His posture calls to mind a helpful piece of advice I once heard: Take what you do seriously; don’t take yourself seriously.

A good GM can make up for bad ownership. 

[SwampD]

It really bothers me when someone says “how come” instead of “why.”

[That Aud Smell]

53 minutes ago, nucci said:

A good GM can make up for bad ownership. 

A blind squirrel is apt to find a nut now and then.

[SwampD]

9 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

A blind squirrel is apt to find a nut now and then.

Usually they just die, though.

Has anyone actually ever seen a blind squirrel?