Sabres Head Coaching Search

[PromoTheRobot]

On 5/23/2021 at 4:43 AM, sabremike said:

If Boudreau wants the job and the team passes on him it's a staggering act of malfeasance. A guy with a long track record of success in multiple places who would bring instant credibility to an organization sorely in need of it. You hire him and I'll throw down a marker that both Jack and Sam see this means that the Sabres have decided to become an actual NHL outfit instead of the joke they are now and decide to stay.

He does have a long track record of getting to a certain point and failing miserably. Hence why he's got a long resume and not coaching now. Hiring Boudreau is analogous to the Bills hiring Rex Ryan. You should also pay attention to Bruce's comments on hockey media regarding the Sabres.

Edited May 24, 2021 by PromoTheRobot

[Stoner]

3 minutes ago, Thorny said:

What I'm taking a "stand" on is the Cup being the goal. For me, it's not. Being entertained is the goal, and for me that involves being a winning hockey team. A winning hockey team in the NHL generally makes the playoffs. 

I've experienced runs in the playoffs where we only got half way (won 2 series) that I can confidently say have given me some of my best memories, and for me provide the joy necessary to justify the amount of time I put into the team. Any team making it can fluke off a series win or two, it's just about making it and being in the conversation. 

It's simple math - win more than you lose and you enjoy more than you don't. Winning more than you lose in a league where half the teams make the playoffs means being a winning team generally gets you in - playoffs are just a symptom of being a winning hockey team.

That's all I want, to be entertained - a winning hockey team. 50/50 odds going into any season? To me that's logical. 

Thanks. I misinterpreted your response to NS.

It's good to think about this kind of stuff. There are fans, huge fans, who probably give the Sabres very little thought except when they're playing, go to every game, cheer like hell, are happy when they win, don't get too angry if they lose (though are disappointed), and think of the playoffs as a treat, not a necessity — bonus hockey. They are out there. I cannot say my approach is better or they are lesser fans than I am. In a way, I envy them. (They might even be the majority of fans.) When you think about it, it's kind of how you start out as a fan (if you start as a kid, anyway).

[Thorner]

13 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

Thanks. I misinterpreted your response to NS.

It's good to think about this kind of stuff. There are fans, huge fans, who probably give the Sabres very little thought except when they're playing, go to every game, cheer like hell, are happy when they win, don't get too angry if they lose (though are disappointed), and think of the playoffs as a treat, not a necessity — bonus hockey. They are out there. I cannot say my approach is better or they are lesser fans than I am. In a way, I envy them. (They might even be the majority of fans.) When you think about it, it's kind of how you start out as a fan (if you start as a kid, anyway).

This is the crux of it. Any regular fan/viewer is going to inherently know if this product is worth their time. These are the people who actually do tune out and stop paying for tickets when the team struggles for a long time: if at least half the time the game you are watching, for fun, with your friends and family results in "celebration" for that fan, notably together with the people they consume the product with, the product said fan is devoting their time to will be adjudged to be a worthy pursuit. Like any form of entertainment. Why consume a TV show if more of the episodes are bad than good? Why consume a product for years on years if the net output isn't enjoyment?

Sickos like me and you who have an arguably unhealthy obsession with the team (consuming a product that results in disappointment, to the level it has, for a decade...what?) say what we need to keep ourselves glued to it all, and will continue to do so. If I weighed the worth of all of this based on winning a cup, I'd be an abject fool, if not already - so that's where I draw the line. 

Winning a bit more games than you lose? Attainable, reasonable, fun. Worth my time. 

Edited May 24, 2021 by Thorny

[Thorner]

People may bitch and moan around here at season's end every year if we become a team that perennially makes the 8th seed and loses in round 1 or 2 - but I'm not fool enough to take people's temperature on their worst day and and consider them understood. I'll be happy to take part in gameday threads every year where more than half of them have the good people of Sabrespace in a good mood. 

[Weave]

1 hour ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

I get that, but as I said, the Sabres have done that many times over the past 50+ years.

I don't want to run away with the regular season, I don't want the playoff ... I want a damn cup!!  Just 1!!

Never let perfect be the enemy of good.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

2 minutes ago, Weave said:

Never let perfect be the enemy of good.

Thanks and also thanks to @Thorny.

A good team that entertains most nights is very good.

[Hoss]

I don’t believe there is such a thing as a coach who has large amounts of regular season success and fails in the postseason. It happens but only as a result of the fact that only one team can win the cup and there are very few coaches who get the pleasure of hoisting said cup.

[Pimlach]

9 hours ago, Thorny said:

What I'm taking a "stand" on is the Cup being the goal. For me, it's not. Being entertained is the goal, and for me that involves being a winning hockey team. A winning hockey team in the NHL generally makes the playoffs. 

I've experienced runs in the playoffs where we only got half way (won 2 series) that I can confidently say have given me some of my best memories, and for me provide the joy necessary to justify the amount of time I put into the team. Any team making it can fluke off a series win or two, it's just about making it and being in the conversation. 

It's simple math - win more than you lose and you enjoy more than you don't. Winning more than you lose in a league where half the teams make the playoffs means being a winning team generally gets you in - playoffs are just a symptom of being a winning hockey team.

That's all I want, to be entertained - a winning hockey team. 50/50 odds going into any season? To me that's logical. 

See 1970’s, 80, 90’s, 00’s.   

[SwampD]

JFC. Right now, I’ll settle for A guy who gets us to not being the first to be ***** 32nd.

[Kristian]

On 5/19/2021 at 7:34 PM, Brawndo said:

 

Oh good. The Pegulas are involved.... Thank god......

[Zamboni]

7 hours ago, Kristian said:

Oh good. The Pegulas are involved.... Thank god......

As an owner …. IF I took a “hands off let the hockey guys handle it” approach,  you are damn right I’d want to know what’s going on with my investment. Thru phone calls, video calls AND in person meetings. And I’d have them come to me for those meetings unless I was in the area already. And again IF I was hands off, I would just want to listen and jib jab with the men and women I entrust with my investment. If nothing sounded massively outrageous and wrong, I’d be cool with it all. 

[Stoner]

1 hour ago, Zamboni said:

As an owner …. IF I took a “hands off let the hockey guys handle it” approach,  you are damn right I’d want to know what’s going on with my investment. Thru phone calls, video calls AND in person meetings. And I’d have them come to me for those meetings unless I was in the area already. And again IF I was hands off, I would just want to listen and jib jab with the men and women I entrust with my investment. If nothing sounded massively outrageous and wrong, I’d be cool with it all. 

So you wouldn't trust the people you hire? And you wouldn't be smart enough to know that as the person with the hammer over the heads of your managers, that your jib-jab (I like gritty players! He's a fine young man! That kid can really skate!) wouldn't be a thumb on the scale?

Also — you really haven't paid much attention to Pegula as owner, have you? He's not a "keep me in the loop, that sounds fine, go ahead" kind of guy. He coached his son in Olean, not sure if you heard.

Edited May 25, 2021 by PASabreFan

[Zamboni]

4 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

So you wouldn't trust the people you hire? And you wouldn't be smart enough to know that as the person with the hammer over the heads of your managers, that your jib-jab (I like gritty players! He's a fine young man! That kid can really skate!) wouldn't be a thumb on the scale?

Also — you really haven't paid much attention to Pegula as owner, have you? He's not a "keep me in the loop, that sounds fine, go ahead" kind of guy. He coached his son in Olean, not sure if you heard.

You completely misinterpreted what I said. Soooo not surprised.

[PromoTheRobot]

9 hours ago, Kristian said:

Oh good. The Pegulas are involved.... Thank god......

Don't tell anyone but the Pegula's own the team.

[Radar]

1 hour ago, PASabreFan said:

So you wouldn't trust the people you hire? And you wouldn't be smart enough to know that as the person with the hammer over the heads of your managers, that your jib-jab (I like gritty players! He's a fine young man! That kid can really skate!) wouldn't be a thumb on the scale?

Also — you really haven't paid much attention to Pegula as owner, have you? He's not a "keep me in the loop, that sounds fine, go ahead" kind of guy. He coached his son in Olean, not sure if you heard.

PA as I've previously said I'm not happy with the Pegula ownership. They've been poor at hiring and maintaining good management under them. I don't see evidence of the meddling day to day in hockey ops. You and others seem to believe a conspiracy that I see no evidence of myself.

[dudacek]

2 minutes ago, Radar said:

PA as I've previously said I'm not happy with the Pegula ownership. They've been poor at hiring and maintaining good management under them. I don't see evidence of the meddling day to day in hockey ops. You and others seem to believe a conspiracy that I see no evidence of myself.

Things that may or may not be true:

• Pushed to sign Ville Leino and Christian Ehrhoff
• Instigated the tank
• OKed the Ryan Miller trade behind Pat Lafontaine’s back
• Overruled Botterill on the Eichel contract
• Vetoed any attempt to re-sign Kane
• Insisted O’Reilly be traded prior to the bonus
• Steered the signing of Phil Housley
• Resisted acquiring Russians, feeding the Nylander over Sergachev decision
• Overruled Botterill on the Skinner deal
• Instigated the signings of Brett Murray and Brandon Biro because of their Penn State connections.
• Ordered Botterill to gut the hockey department and fired him when he refused
• Ordered Adams to give Girgensons what it took to get him re-signed.
• Pushed for Quinn because “52 goals”

A couple of these things are pretty much accepted as true, the rest are just whispers. I’m sure there are others, but that’s off the top of my head.

A lot of it is circumstantial, but I think there is evidence.

[nfreeman]

10 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Things that may or may not be true:

 [snipped and copied/annotated below]

 

A couple of these things are pretty much accepted as true, the rest are just whispers. I’m sure there are others, but that’s off the top of my head.

A lot of it is circumstantial, but I think there is evidence.

 

More plausible (IMHO) descriptions of the facts:

• Pushed to sign Ville Leino and Christian Ehrhoff
  • OR:  Told Darcy he could sign whoever he wanted, without concern as to cost

• Instigated the tank
  • OR:  Approved Darcy's recommendation to implement the tank

• OKed the Ryan Miller trade behind Pat Lafontaine’s back
  • OR:  Told PLF that GMTM, as GM, had final say on roster decisions, including that one.

• Overruled Botterill on the Eichel contract
  • OR:  Joined the negotiations when JB and JE had reached a stalemate and got a deal done.

• Vetoed any attempt to re-sign Kane
  • OR:  Agreed with JB's decision not to re-sign Kane, based on JB's determination that Kane was part of the problem in the room

• Insisted O’Reilly be traded prior to the bonus
  • OR:  Agreed with JB's decision to trade ROR, , based on JB's determination that ROR was part of the problem in the room, and required that ROR be traded before the bonus was triggered

• Steered the signing of Phil Housley
  • OR:  Approved JB's choice of Housley

• Resisted acquiring Russians, feeding the Nylander over Sergachev decision
  • OR:  Sat in the war room on draft day but did not push for any particular player

• Overruled Botterill on the Skinner deal
  • OR:  Approved the contract once JB negotiated it

• Instigated the signings of Brett Murray and Brandon Biro because of their Penn State connections.
  • OR:  Forwarded an email to JB from the PSU coach about these 2 guys, asking JB whether he knew anything about them but leaving any decision on them entirely up to JB

• Ordered Botterill to gut the hockey department and fired him when he refused
  • Guilty as charged

• Ordered Adams to give Girgensons what it took to get him re-signed.
  • OR:  Approved the contract once KA negotiated it

• Pushed for Quinn because “52 goals”
  • OR:  Sat in the war room on draft day but did not push for any particular player

 

[PromoTheRobot]

30 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

 

More plausible (IMHO) descriptions of the facts:

• Pushed to sign Ville Leino and Christian Ehrhoff
  • OR:  Told Darcy he could sign whoever he wanted, without concern as to cost

• Instigated the tank
  • OR:  Approved Darcy's recommendation to implement the tank

• OKed the Ryan Miller trade behind Pat Lafontaine’s back
  • OR:  Told PLF that GMTM, as GM, had final say on roster decisions, including that one.

• Overruled Botterill on the Eichel contract
  • OR:  Joined the negotiations when JB and JE had reached a stalemate and got a deal done.

• Vetoed any attempt to re-sign Kane
  • OR:  Agreed with JB's decision not to re-sign Kane, based on JB's determination that Kane was part of the problem in the room

• Insisted O’Reilly be traded prior to the bonus
  • OR:  Agreed with JB's decision to trade ROR, , based on JB's determination that ROR was part of the problem in the room, and required that ROR be traded before the bonus was triggered

• Steered the signing of Phil Housley
  • OR:  Approved JB's choice of Housley

• Resisted acquiring Russians, feeding the Nylander over Sergachev decision
  • OR:  Sat in the war room on draft day but did not push for any particular player

• Overruled Botterill on the Skinner deal
  • OR:  Approved the contract once JB negotiated it

• Instigated the signings of Brett Murray and Brandon Biro because of their Penn State connections.
  • OR:  Forwarded an email to JB from the PSU coach about these 2 guys, asking JB whether he knew anything about them but leaving any decision on them entirely up to JB

• Ordered Botterill to gut the hockey department and fired him when he refused
  • Guilty as charged

• Ordered Adams to give Girgensons what it took to get him re-signed.
  • OR:  Approved the contract once KA negotiated it

• Pushed for Quinn because “52 goals”
  • OR:  Sat in the war room on draft day but did not push for any particular player

 

How many of these offenses are verified to be true and how many are rumors that sprouted legs?

[dudacek]

19 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

How many of these offenses are verified to be true and how many are rumors that sprouted legs?

How I remember them:

Pushed to sign Ville Leino and Christian Ehrhoff. It was reported by multiple sources at the time that Terry was enamoured by Ehrhoff's play in the playoffs and wanted the team to pursue him. Whether that amounts to a random comment, an order, or a thumb on the scale is a matter of interpretation. Leino was more conjecture, and a fallback after Richards wasn't interested. It's pretty undisputable that Terry handed Darcy a whack of cash and ordered him to spend it.

Instigated the tank. Darcy was pretty frank that the idea came from Terry questioning him on how Stanley Cup winners like Pittsburgh came together and that the form of the tank would come at the direction of ownership. Again, thumb on the scale?

OKed the Ryan Miller trade behind Pat Lafontaine’s back. Pure conjecture based on the timing. No one has ever definitively reported why Lafontaine left

Overruled Botterill on the Eichel contract. This came from one of the Insiders, can't remember which.

Vetoed any attempt to re-sign Kane. Again, conjecture. It was widely reported that the Pegulas were thoroughly embarrassed by the bad publicity surrounding Kane and the situation that occurred at the draft.

Insisted O’Reilly be traded prior to the bonus: I don't see how this can be interpreted any other way given what Lebrun reported both before and after the deal and what Armstrong said in its wake.

Steered the signing of Phil Housley: message board whispers

Resisted acquiring Russians, feeding the Nylander over Sergachev decision: message board whispers

Overruled Botterill on the Skinner deal: From the same insider reporter as the Eichel contract info

Instigated the signings of Brett Murray and Brandon Biro because of their Penn State connections; message board whispers

Ordered Botterill to gut the hockey department and fired him when he refused: pretty much straight out of Terry's mouth

Ordered Adams to give Girgensons what it took to get him re-signed: message board whispers

Pushed for Quinn because “52 goals”: message board whispers

Edited May 25, 2021 by dudacek

[Stoner]

Coming this summer on SabreSpace, a classic re-airing of The Trial of Terry Pegula*.

(Spoiler alert: he's found guilty of meddling this time, too.)

*Due to unfortunate circumstances*, the role of Terry Pegula this time will be played by PromoTheRobot.

*Woody cannot be located.

Watch for it following Ken Burns' 11-part series, Tank.

[Stoner]

4 hours ago, Zamboni said:

You completely misinterpreted what I said. Soooo not surprised.

I'm not sure I did. You'd also make your managers travel to Florida at a time when clearly they have better ways to spend their time at home.

[Radar]

3 hours ago, dudacek said:

Things that may or may not be true:

• Pushed to sign Ville Leino and Christian Ehrhoff
• Instigated the tank
• OKed the Ryan Miller trade behind Pat Lafontaine’s back
• Overruled Botterill on the Eichel contract
• Vetoed any attempt to re-sign Kane
• Insisted O’Reilly be traded prior to the bonus
• Steered the signing of Phil Housley
• Resisted acquiring Russians, feeding the Nylander over Sergachev decision
• Overruled Botterill on the Skinner deal
• Instigated the signings of Brett Murray and Brandon Biro because of their Penn State connections.
• Ordered Botterill to gut the hockey department and fired him when he refused
• Ordered Adams to give Girgensons what it took to get him re-signed.
• Pushed for Quinn because “52 goals”

A couple of these things are pretty much accepted as true, the rest are just whispers. I’m sure there are others, but that’s off the top of my head.

A lot of it is circumstantial, but I think there is evidence.

You began by saying may or may not be true. I used the word evidence. My opinion is that many , like myself, are not happy with the state of the franchise and ultimately that falls on the owners. But some because of their displeasure with the owners take every negative speculation as gospel truth and have an agenda to make the owners look as bad as they can. Go back to my posts and you will see that my problem with the owners is their hiring. Specifically general managers. I have no idea or evidence beyond some posters speculations about the direct meddling they speculate that has gone on. This has come to the point of evil speculations on why management would even meet with ownership. How absurd! What business structure have they been in or seen where this communication is not normal?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[LTS]

32 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

I'm not sure I did. You'd also make your managers travel to Florida at a time when clearly they have better ways to spend their time at home.

Yes.  Just like I am forced to travel to my corporate HQ to present on strategy.  Our CEO is forced to travel to the board meeting and present strategy to the board.

Just as I made my Executive Director travel to report on strategy to the board when I was the chair, and the chair before me did the same thing, and so on.

Why is this surprising ?  This is 100% common place.  This is not even a sports thing, this is a business thing.

[Stoner]

2 hours ago, nfreeman said:

 

More plausible (IMHO) descriptions of the facts:

• Pushed to sign Ville Leino and Christian Ehrhoff
  • OR:  Told Darcy he could sign whoever he wanted, without concern as to cost

• Instigated the tank
  • OR:  Approved Darcy's recommendation to implement the tank

• OKed the Ryan Miller trade behind Pat Lafontaine’s back
  • OR:  Told PLF that GMTM, as GM, had final say on roster decisions, including that one.

• Overruled Botterill on the Eichel contract
  • OR:  Joined the negotiations when JB and JE had reached a stalemate and got a deal done.

• Vetoed any attempt to re-sign Kane
  • OR:  Agreed with JB's decision not to re-sign Kane, based on JB's determination that Kane was part of the problem in the room

• Insisted O’Reilly be traded prior to the bonus
  • OR:  Agreed with JB's decision to trade ROR, , based on JB's determination that ROR was part of the problem in the room, and required that ROR be traded before the bonus was triggered

• Steered the signing of Phil Housley
  • OR:  Approved JB's choice of Housley

• Resisted acquiring Russians, feeding the Nylander over Sergachev decision
  • OR:  Sat in the war room on draft day but did not push for any particular player

• Overruled Botterill on the Skinner deal
  • OR:  Approved the contract once JB negotiated it

• Instigated the signings of Brett Murray and Brandon Biro because of their Penn State connections.
  • OR:  Forwarded an email to JB from the PSU coach about these 2 guys, asking JB whether he knew anything about them but leaving any decision on them entirely up to JB

• Ordered Botterill to gut the hockey department and fired him when he refused
  • Guilty as charged

• Ordered Adams to give Girgensons what it took to get him re-signed.
  • OR:  Approved the contract once KA negotiated it

• Pushed for Quinn because “52 goals”
  • OR:  Sat in the war room on draft day but did not push for any particular player

 

So... based on literally nothing you present a case to make Terry look innocent against charges painstakingly put together over the course of years. Some is direct evidence, some is circumstantial. The conclusion is almost unavoidable. Smoking guns? On Ehrhoff: there's a video of Terry's kids talking about how much Dad liked Ehrhoff. On Leino and Ehrhoff: there's Terry calling into WGR and defending himself against other owners, saying the signings were his decision. On the tank there's Darcy on WGR saying he liked the Wild rebuild and the extent of the rebuild would be Terry's call. On his relationship with GMJB, one of the two said they spoke three times a day. You have Terry in the war room, Terry at the draft table, Terry on a plane to woo Regehr, Terry sitting up top next to Bales, Terry going to the GM side when he and Kim got to the arena offices.

Honestly I think sometimes I'm the one being trolled.

[Stoner]

4 minutes ago, LTS said:

Yes.  Just like I am forced to travel to my corporate HQ to present on strategy.  Our CEO is forced to travel to the board meeting and present strategy to the board.

Just as I made my Executive Director travel to report on strategy to the board when I was the chair, and the chair before me did the same thing, and so on.

Why is this surprising ?  This is 100% common place.  This is not even a sports thing, this is a business thing.

It's a strained analogy. Would you like to present strategy to an owner who won the lottery and bought your business and has demonstrated for a decade he doesn't know what he is doing and has actually run the business into the ground?