Shopping Jack Eichel: Minnesota

[JohnC]

Just now, LGR4GM said:

Your post was not accurate and that was my point. Adams is 100% concerned with cap ramifications. 

Also, if Pegula is such a penny pincher why are the Sabres hiring 2 front office ppl and why was KA allowed to fire another coach that will still get paid? 

Again, comparing retaining 2.5 million, the cost we were talking about before you changed the number,  for 5 years (12.5 million dollars) to a one time signing bonus isn't the same. You have to carry 2.5 mil less against the cap and we might not care this year, or next year but years 3-5 you might need that extra space. 

If you're giving someone Eichel for 7.5 million bucks instead of 10 for the next 5 years, they need to significantly sweeten the deal. 

For more than a year Pegula was without question a penny-pincher. Why do you think that he fired Botterill after he refused to carry out the owners' dramatic staffing cuts? Pegula ordered the gutting of the scouting staff with the belief that a reliance on video was just as good as reliance on scouts? How did that turn out?

As far as firing Krueger who was leading a team that quit on him and was the HC whose team hadn't won in nearly 20 games what did you want to the owner to do? He hired Krueger who was out of his depth and and an abject failure. What else was the owner going to do? Give him an extension for his team's consistency? The reason that he is paying Krueger not to coach is because the owner made a stupendous blunder in hiring him. As the owner has painfully learned when you make bad hires it can be costly.

Yes Pegula is rebuilding a staff that he deliberately eviscerated. What he is doing is going back to having a normally staffed operation after he ordained that the Sabres be abnormally run with its austerity model. Where did it get this bedraggled franchise? We were the worst team in the league by far last year? 

What you are perversely doing is akin to giving credit to the person who stabs his victim because he administered first-aid to the person that he cut. That makes no freaking sense. 

 

[Curt]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

For more than a year Pegula was without question a penny-pincher. Why do you think that he fired Botterill after he refused to carry out the owners' dramatic staffing cuts? Pegula ordered the gutting of the scouting staff with the belief that a reliance on video was just as good as reliance on scouts? How did that turn out?

As far as firing Krueger who was leading a team that quit on him and was the HC whose team hadn't won in nearly 20 games what did you want to the owner to do? He hired Krueger who was out of his depth and and an abject failure. What else was the owner going to do? Give him an extension for his team's consistency? The reason that he is paying Krueger not to coach is because the owner made a stupendous blunder in hiring him. As the owner has painfully learned when you make bad hires it can be costly.

Yes Pegula is rebuilding a staff that he deliberately eviscerated. What he is doing is going back to having a normally staffed operation after he ordained that the Sabres be abnormally run with its austerity model. Where did it get this bedraggled franchise? We were the worst team in the league by far last year? 

What you are perversely doing is akin to giving credit to the person who stabs his victim because he administered first-aid to the person that he cut. That makes no freaking sense. 

 

Bolded #1 - we don’t know yet

Bolded #2 - it was 12 games

Overall response - Did Buffalo actually save any money by firing all those people?  I’m not so sure.  Some of them were under contracts that still needed to be paid out.

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

For more than a year Pegula was without question a penny-pincher. Why do you think that he fired Botterill after he refused to carry out the owners' dramatic staffing cuts? Pegula ordered the gutting of the scouting staff with the belief that a reliance on video was just as good as reliance on scouts? How did that turn out?

As far as firing Krueger who was leading a team that quit on him and was the HC whose team hadn't won in nearly 20 games what did you want to the owner to do? He hired Krueger who was out of his depth and and an abject failure. What else was the owner going to do? Give him an extension for his team's consistency? The reason that he is paying Krueger not to coach is because the owner made a stupendous blunder in hiring him. As the owner has painfully learned when you make bad hires it can be costly.

Yes Pegula is rebuilding a staff that he deliberately eviscerated. What he is doing is going back to having a normally staffed operation after he ordained that the Sabres be abnormally run with its austerity model. Where did it get this bedraggled franchise? We were the worst team in the league by far last year? 

What you are perversely doing is akin to giving credit to the person who stabs his victim because he administered first-aid to the person that he cut. That makes no freaking sense. 

 

Better then you trying to change the conversation. Also "perversely"? Pegula clearly is willing to spend some money and what I said wasn't perverse unless you have a different definition. 

The original conversation was the Sabres retaining 2.5million on Eichel for the next 5 years to facilitate a trade. I states why I was against it. You compared it to the ROR deal and I explained why you were wrong. If you can't keep the bullcrap you are slinging at the wall straight maybe sling less crap. 

[LGR4GM]

9 minutes ago, Curt said:

Bolded #1 - we don’t know yet

Bolded #2 - it was 12 games

Overall response - Did Buffalo actually save any money by firing all those people?  I’m not so sure.  Some of them were under contracts that still needed to be paid out.

Not really for the ones under contract. My impression was that hockey ops had gotten too big and Tpegs wasn't seeing the results so he wanted cuts. Adams did that and has now convinced Pegula that the cuts were too much and we need to build back in a smart way. Hence the investment in analytics and I bet they add a couple of scouts. 

This entire Pegula is going to run the team as some type of sad orphan who gets the scraps left behind by the Bills is devoid of the reality. 

[JohnC]

Just now, Curt said:

Bolded #1 - we don’t know yet

Bolded #2 - it was 12 games

Overall response - Did Buffalo actually save any money by firing all those people?  I’m not so sure.  Some of them were under contracts that still needed to be paid out.

With respect to your first point what we do know is that after gutting the scouting department the organization went back and started rebuilding/staffing it. The constant churning of staff was a primary reason why this Pegula franchise was not only unstable but also highlighted by its record a dismal failure

With respect to your second point I got the consecutive number wrong but the primary point was that this team quit on its coach and was spiraling down the path to epic failure with the Pegula hiring of the coach.

With respect to your third point you make an excellent point. It is just as likely that no money was saved because of the obligation to pay off contracts for fired employees. In hindsight the organization was slimmed down, the outcome on the ice was disastrous and in the end there is a good chance that money was not saved. That's not a very smart way to run an operation/business. 

[JohnC]

8 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Better then you trying to change the conversation. Also "perversely"? Pegula clearly is willing to spend some money and what I said wasn't perverse unless you have a different definition. 

The original conversation was the Sabres retaining 2.5million on Eichel for the next 5 years to facilitate a trade. I states why I was against it. You compared it to the ROR deal and I explained why you were wrong. If you can't keep the bullcrap you are slinging at the wall straight maybe sling less crap. 

The original ROR deal didn't go through because it was about the bonus money. And the ROR St. Louis deal was rushed because the owner didn't want to pay the bonus. So the bullshiit that you are slinging originates from your own rear-side aperture. That's the point that you refuse to acknowledge. 

[LGR4GM]

11 minutes ago, JohnC said:

The original ROR deal didn't go through because it was about the bonus money. And the ROR St. Louis deal was rushed because the owner didn't want to pay the bonus. So the bullshiit that you are slinging originates from your own rear-side aperture. That's the point that you refuse to acknowledge. 

No kidding and that is what I tried to impart on you yesterday and here you are today acting like the 7.5 million roster bonus with no cap implications as the same is retaining 2.5mil against the cap every year for the next half decade. 

I'm not slinging anything. I explained why the comparison was bad from a hockey standpoint but you are so focused on Pegula that all else is irrelevant to the argument you want to make. 

Edited August 30, 2021 by LGR4GM

[LGR4GM]

13 hours ago, JohnC said:

There were reports that Carolina was willing to offer a lot more for a ROR trade than what St. Louis gave us.  The condition was that there needed to be some salary retention. In hindsight the Carolina offer would have benefited the team much more. If Rossi and Boldy were part of a deal that included a first round pick a reasonable salary retention would make sense especially when considering that the Sabres are dealing a prime player who not only is not fully healthy but alos who may never be the player he once was. 

Let me also add that this team has been mired in the muck of mediocrity during Terry Pegula's decade long tenure. As an owner he has made a lot of blundering decisions that has kept this sunken franchise submerged. 

No there was not salary retention. That is not salary retention, that isn't the same thing. It is paying a bonus and again I keep trying to explain this to you but you are now changing the conversation to be about Pegula spending money which is not about salary retention. That is a completely different conversation and argument. 

You then follow it up with the Rossi Boldy stuff and again IT IS NOT THE SAME. 

Edited August 30, 2021 by LGR4GM

[Curt]

18 minutes ago, JohnC said:

With respect to your first point what we do know is that after gutting the scouting department the organization went back and started rebuilding/staffing it. The constant churning of staff was a primary reason why this Pegula franchise was not only unstable but also highlighted by its record a dismal failure

With respect to your second point I got the consecutive number wrong but the primary point was that this team quit on its coach and was spiraling down the path to epic failure with the Pegula hiring of the coach.

With respect to your third point you make an excellent point. It is just as likely that no money was saved because of the obligation to pay off contracts for fired employees. In hindsight the organization was slimmed down, the outcome on the ice was disastrous and in the end there is a good chance that money was not saved. That's not a very smart way to run an operation/business. 

I think that the Sabres scouting department was relatively stable for quite some time.  Of course the couple times that GMs changed, the department heads changed, but it’s not as if they were constantly churning through scouts.  This big restructuring of the hockey ops was a one time thing, not something that they have repeatedly been doing.

To say that the on ice results of scouting and player development changes were disastrous after one year doesn’t carry any water for me.  These changes would not have much effect on the players on the ice and already under contract.  They results of these changes will take quite some time to manifest themselves.

Im not convinced that the main point of the changes was to save money short term.  I think it was meant to be an actual restructuring, not just a cost cutting exercise.

The Pegulas performance has been absolutely terrible, but I save my criticism for valid areas.  I won’t fault them for making changes to things that haven’t been working by restructuring and trying to do things a different way.

Edited August 30, 2021 by Curt

[Hoss]

19 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Not really for the ones under contract. My impression was that hockey ops had gotten too big and Tpegs wasn't seeing the results so he wanted cuts. Adams did that and has now convinced Pegula that the cuts were too much and we need to build back in a smart way. Hence the investment in analytics and I bet they add a couple of scouts. 

This entire Pegula is going to run the team as some type of sad orphan who gets the scraps left behind by the Bills is devoid of the reality. 

I don’t know what more Pegula needs to do to this team to convince people he’s cutting costs.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

I think a few in here need to get #### ... the pressure is intense.  Somethings got to give.

We have two highly respected posters slinging poop at each other and the rest of us are caught in the middle.

Maybe we should set up a gofundme to raise funds so that the owners can retain some of Jackie Boy's salary and we can all be put out of our miseries on this whole saga.

[LGR4GM]

12 minutes ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

I think a few in here need to get #### ... the pressure is intense.  Somethings got to give.

We have two highly respected posters slinging poop at each other and the rest of us are caught in the middle.

Maybe we should set up a gofundme to raise funds so that the owners can retain some of Jackie Boy's salary and we can all be put out of our miseries on this whole saga.

I didn't sling anything and resent that. 

I stated a fact and then had a forced topic change shoved on top of me and when I tried to comment why that was not the point, we ended up here. John C was wrong and instead of acknowledging that and moving on, he flung crap at the walls until he found some wiggle room and I don't appreciate it. 

The ROR saga was not about salary retention of any kind into the future (5 years in the case of Eichel). I would rather pay a 7.5mil signing bonus as a team and then not worry about the cap for another 5 years then retain 2.5mil of Eichel's contract to facilitate a trade. It is Jack Eichel, you don't get him for 7.5 million without providing me a massive sweetner. 

[Sabres Fan in NS]

3 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I didn't sling anything and resent that. 

I stated a fact and then had a forced topic change shoved on top of me and when I tried to comment why that was not the point, we ended up here. John C was wrong and instead of acknowledging that and moving on, he flung crap at the walls until he found some wiggle room and I don't appreciate it. 

The ROR saga was not about salary retention of any kind into the future (5 years in the case of Eichel). I would rather pay a 7.5mil signing bonus as a team and then not worry about the cap for another 5 years then retain 2.5mil of Eichel's contract to facilitate a trade. It is Jack Eichel, you don't get him for 7.5 million without providing me a massive sweetner. 

When you accuse someone of slinging crap you are slinging crap.

 

[Digger]

Looks like the Minnesota trade rumors thread has lost focus.  

[JohnC]

4 hours ago, Curt said:

I think that the Sabres scouting department was relatively stable for quite some time.  Of course the couple times that GMs changed, the department heads changed, but it’s not as if they were constantly churning through scouts.  This big restructuring of the hockey ops was a one time thing, not something that they have repeatedly been doing.

To say that the on ice results of scouting and player development changes were disastrous after one year doesn’t carry any water for me.  These changes would not have much effect on the players on the ice and already under contract.  They results of these changes will take quite some time to manifest themselves.

Im not convinced that the main point of the changes was to save money short term.  I think it was meant to be an actual restructuring, not just a cost cutting exercise.

The Pegulas performance has been absolutely terrible, but I save my criticism for valid areas.  I won’t fault them for making changes to things that haven’t been working by restructuring and trying to do things a different way.

You can evaluate the franchise in any way you prefer to do. You can use any metric you want. Any way you want to look at it the record during their tenure is not something to have pride in. The owners can hire whoever they want, fire whoever they want and get involved as much as they want. Ultimately, sports franchises are judged on their record. It's not impressive. That's the essential point.

 

 

Edited August 30, 2021 by JohnC

[JohnC]

3 hours ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

When you accuse someone of slinging crap you are slinging crap.

 

I don't want to get involved in repeated back and forth exchanges that are nonproductive and have a tendency to get nasty. All I can say is your observation is spot on. 

[Curt]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

You can evaluate the franchise in any way you prefer to do. You can use any metric you want. Any way you want to look at it the record during their tenure is not something to have pride in. The owners can hire whoever they want, fire whoever they want and get involved as much as they want. Ultimately, sports franchises are judged on their record. It's not impressive. That's the essential point.

 

 

Yeah, that’s what I said.  As a general statement, the Pegulas have done bad, because the results have been bad.  However, that doesn’t automatically mean that every single thing the Sabres organization has done over the past 10 years has been bad.

We were discussing one very specific thing (reorganization of the hockey ops over the past year), and when I try to engage on the topic, instead of addressing what I actually say, you shift the discussion sideways.  It’s fine if you don’t want to discuss an certain topic, but this is something that it seems you habitually do when anyone brings up counterpoints to what you are saying; Ignoring what they say and just shifting the conversation sideways without addressing any of their points.

🤷‍♂️

Edited August 30, 2021 by Curt

[LGR4GM]

2 hours ago, JohnC said:

I don't want to get involved in repeated back and forth exchanges that are nonproductive and have a tendency to get nasty. All I can say is your observation is spot on. 

I wish your original observation about salary retention versus paying a bonus had been spot on so I didn't have to have this conversation but here we are. 

53 minutes ago, Curt said:

Yeah, that’s what I said.  As a general statement, the Pegulas have done bad, because the results have been bad.  However, that doesn’t automatically mean that every single thing the Sabres organization has done over the past 10 years has been bad.

We were discussing one very specific thing (reorganization of the hockey ops over the past year), and when I try to engage on the topic, instead of addressing what I actually say, you shift the discussion sideways.  It’s fine if you don’t want to discuss an certain topic, but this is something that it seems you habitually do when anyone brings up counterpoints to what you are saying; Ignoring what they say and just shifting the conversation sideways without addressing any of their points.

🤷‍♂️

Yup. Still waiting on the ROR bonus versus 5 years of salary retention point from them. Hell they even recalculated the amount of 2.5 mil retained to 1.5 so they could "see it is the same!" even though that was not the OP's original setup. 

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, Curt said:

Yeah, that’s what I said.  As a general statement, the Pegulas have done bad, because the results have been bad.  However, that doesn’t automatically mean that every single thing the Sabres organization has done over the past 10 years has been bad.

We were discussing one very specific thing (reorganization of the hockey ops over the past year), and when I try to engage on the topic, instead of addressing what I actually say, you shift the discussion sideways.  It’s fine if you don’t want to discuss an certain topic, but this is something that it seems you habitually do when anyone brings up counterpoints to what you are saying; Ignoring what they say and just shifting the conversation sideways without addressing any of their points.

🤷‍♂️The

I have never said that everything the Pegulas have done is bad. So I don't know why you said that.  What I did say from an overview perspective is that their stewardship has been poor as evidenced by their record.

The reorganization was initiated during the Botterill tenure. The owners wanted him to dramatically cut staff. He refused to do it. He ended up being fired. He didn't get fired for his hockey performance. He got fired because he was unwilling to significantly cut the staff to the degree that the owners wanted. So he was fired. Then KA was brought on and it appears that Krueger gained a lot of influence during this period of time. 

Last year, under Krueger the wheels came off and KA seemed to become the most important person in the hockey operation. What has happened this past year since the departure of Krueger is that the organization has been re-staffed in a manner that most organizations are staffed. So what essentially happened was that the reorganization that was initiated by the owners was quickly changed to what normal franchises do. Why was another organizational change made? Its simple: The owners' austerity organization plan was an abject failure. 

I addressed the Pegula reorganization plan post Botterill. It was a failure. I'm not sure what you disagree with. 

[Curt]

15 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I have never said that everything the Pegulas have done is bad. So I don't know why you said that.  What I did say from an overview perspective is that their stewardship has been poor as evidenced by their record.

The reorganization was initiated during the Botterill tenure. The owners wanted him to dramatically cut staff. He refused to do it. He ended up being fired. He didn't get fired for his hockey performance. He got fired because he was unwilling to significantly cut the staff to the degree that the owners wanted. So he was fired. Then KA was brought on and it appears that Krueger gained a lot of influence during this period of time. 

Last year, under Krueger the wheels came off and KA seemed to become the most important person in the hockey operation. What has happened this past year since the departure of Krueger is that the organization has been re-staffed in a manner that most organizations are staffed. So what essentially happened was that the reorganization that was initiated by the owners was quickly changed to what normal franchises do. Why was another organizational change made? Its simple: The owners' austerity organization plan was an abject failure. 

I addressed the Pegula reorganization plan post Botterill. It was a failure. I'm not sure what you disagree with. 

Where I disagree is with the idea that the original plan was to run with a bare bones operation indefinitely, then quickly changed plans a few months later.

I believe that from the start they intended to fill out the hockey ops department again, but with a different structure.  Proof in point, from the day he was hired, Adams spoke of a new philosophy and looking to add people who fit that vision.

Your characterization seems to be that the Pegulas flip flopped often on how to structure their hockey ops.  I’d argue that they kept the same basic structure/philosophies for many years, and now made a large change this one time. 

[JohnC]

3 hours ago, Curt said:

Where I disagree is with the idea that the original plan was to run with a bare bones operation indefinitely, then quickly changed plans a few months later.

I believe that from the start they intended to fill out the hockey ops department again, but with a different structure.  Proof in point, from the day he was hired, Adams spoke of a new philosophy and looking to add people who fit that vision.

Your characterization seems to be that the Pegulas flip flopped often on how to structure their hockey ops.  I’d argue that they kept the same basic structure/philosophies for many years, and now made a large change this one time. 

We fundamentally disagree. By constantly churning over GMs and coaches there is going to inherently be philosophical changes in the organization. It doesn't matter what the organizational structure or flow chart is because the philosophy on how to build a roster is going to change with each different GM. Murray certainly had a different approach to roster building compared to the diffused front office he took over for. And then when Murray was replaced by Botterill he had a different mind-set on not only building a roster but also in building-up the minor league system. And when Botterill was replaced by KA there was another shift in the approach to roster building and toward running the organization. And when KA took over as the GM I believe (some agree and others don't) that Krueger wielded the most influence in the hockey operation. The point I'm emphasizing is that this constant churning of staff had a predictable effect of destabilizing the franchise because there wasn't enough continuity and follow through to build a solid foundation. 

I'm just hoping that the Pegulas learn from their mistakes and allow KA and his staff the time and space to do their jobs

 

 

[Thorner]

22 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Better then you trying to change the conversation. Also "perversely"? Pegula clearly is willing to spend some money and what I said wasn't perverse unless you have a different definition. 

The original conversation was the Sabres retaining 2.5million on Eichel for the next 5 years to facilitate a trade. I states why I was against it. You compared it to the ROR deal and I explained why you were wrong. If you can't keep the bullcrap you are slinging at the wall straight maybe sling less crap. 

I think he is too - I think the point people miss with the ROR transaction is in my estimation it wasn't about raw dollars, it was about raw dollars being paid to That Man. It was personal - Pegula isn't outwardly against spending 7.5 on whatever but he made the decision he sure as hell wasn't giving 7.5 million bones to Ryan O'Reilly. 

[thewookie1]

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

I think he is too - I think the point people miss with the ROR transaction is in my estimation it wasn't about raw dollars, it was about raw dollars being paid to That Man. It was personal - Pegula isn't outwardly against spending 7.5 on whatever but he made the decision he sure as hell wasn't giving 7.5 million bones to Ryan O'Reilly. 

Partially this, partially he refused to pay a guy 7.5mil just for him to be traded. 

 

The Pegulas have slowly become more stingy with money for sure but that may be in part due to the massive spending they did prior not accomplishing much of anything. 

[spndnchz]

On 8/31/2021 at 8:56 AM, thewookie1 said:

Partially this, partially he refused to pay a guy 7.5mil just for him to be traded. 

 

The Pegulas have slowly become more stingy with money for sure but that may be in part due to the massive spending they did prior not accomplishing much of anything. 

And possibly saw what was coming?