[Vague Title] Crazy theory?

[Radar]

The Sabres have pretty much gutted the team. When they rid Eichel from the asset column they will have. Could this be positioning for the sale of the team? One would hope so, at least I would.  Doubt that's the case but here's hoping. I think we may have the most inept owners in hockey. They probably mean well but that's not the sole criteria needed unfortunately. Just random thoughts.

[Stoner]

You'll have to connect the dots. Why would gutting the team make it more attractive to new owners?

[Sabres Fan in NS]

Interesting thought.  I really don't think the Pegulas are planning on selling the team.

They are inempt in one regard only, IMO, which is the fact that they have had no success in hiring people for the most important positions on the team ... GM and coach.  I am not sure if they are ignoring advice or are listening to the advice of idiots.  Maybe this time they have it right or maybe this time they will get lucky like with the Bills.

I actually believe that there are worse owners out there.  That guy in Ottawa, for example, although he seems to be staying out of everybodies way now.

[inkman]

1 minute ago, PASabreFan said:

You'll have to connect the dots. Why would gutting the team make it more attractive to new owners?

Less fixed costs

Edited October 3, 2021 by inkman

[Stoner]

2 minutes ago, inkman said:

Less fixed costs

So OSP and LQ and DD are coming back? Wouldn't be the worst thing. Spending freely has gotten Terry nowhere.

[JohnC]

4 minutes ago, inkman said:

Less fixed costs

And fewer paying customers. An empty building is not a selling point. Tarnishing your asset is not a great selling point. 

[Radar]

3 minutes ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

Interesting thought.  I really don't think the Pegulas are planning on selling the team.

They are inempt in one regard only, IMO, which is the fact that they have had no success in hiring people for the most important positions on the team ... GM and coach.  I am not sure if they are ignoring advice or are listening to the advice of idiots.  Maybe this time they have it right or maybe this time they will get lucky like with the Bills.

I actually believe that there are worse owners out there.  That guy in Ottawa, for example, although he seems to be staying out of everybodies way now.

I said they may be the most inept. Football and hockey in my perspective are different animals but even so I'm not sure in the Bills case it wasn't pure luck. 

[inkman]

Just now, JohnC said:

And fewer paying customers. An empty building is not a selling point. Tarnishing your asset is not a great selling point. 

I didn’t say I subscribed to the theory.  It’s just what people think.  

[JohnC]

1 minute ago, inkman said:

I didn’t say I subscribed to the theory.  It’s just what people think.  

There are always a variety of opinions. Some people think thoughtfully; and others think unthoughtfully. It's like trying to sell your house after you viciously vandalize it order to make in more marketable. This so called "crazy theory" makes absolutely no sense. 

[PromoTheRobot]

2 hours ago, Radar said:

The Sabres have pretty much gutted the team. When they rid Eichel from the asset column they will have. Could this be positioning for the sale of the team? One would hope so, at least I would.  Doubt that's the case but here's hoping. I think we may have the most inept owners in hockey. They probably mean well but that's not the sole criteria needed unfortunately. Just random thoughts.

Only if a sale involves relocation. That was John Y Brown did to the NBA Buffalo Braves. Made the team so unpalatable no one went to games anymore. Then claimed he had no choice but move them to San Diego (then eventually LA.)

21 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

You'll have to connect the dots. Why would gutting the team make it more attractive to new owners?

 

[Sabres Fan in NS]

19 minutes ago, JohnC said:

There are always a variety of opinions. Some people think thoughtfully; and others think unthoughtfully. It's like trying to sell your house after you viciously vandalize it order to make in more marketable. This so called "crazy theory" makes absolutely no sense. 

Easy there big guy.  Don't ruin my pleasant Sunday afternoon, eh.

I'll be ...

 

[Flashsabre]

As I have said before the only way Pegulas would sell the Sabres to move them would be if they did the same to the Bills. They couldn’t allow the Sabres to leave town and still show their faces in Buffalo.

[inkman]

3 minutes ago, Flashsabre said:

As I have said before the only way Pegulas would sell the Sabres to move them would be if they did the same to the Bills. They couldn’t allow the Sabres to leave town and still show their faces in Buffalo.

Who said anything about moving the team

[Brawndo]

1 minute ago, Flashsabre said:

As I have said before the only way Pegulas would sell the Sabres to move them would be if they did the same to the Bills. They couldn’t allow the Sabres to leave town and still show their faces in Buffalo.

They cannot move the Sabres there is a non relocation clause in the purchase agreement. 

[Sabres Fan in NS]

2 minutes ago, Brawndo said:

They cannot move the Sabres there is a non relocation clause in the purchase agreement. 

I think that some are questioning if that was carried forward in their purchase agreement, or if the Pegulas had to agree not to move the team when they bought it from TG.  Maybe they have to put a similar clause in any agreement they draw up when they sell.  Maybe they don't.  I am not a lawyer and I don't even want to play one on SabreSpace, but I don't don't know if that kind of clause automatically carries forward in future agreements.  I would doubt it, but the law makes little sense to me.

[SabresFanInRochester]

2 hours ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

Interesting thought.  I really don't think the Pegulas are planning on selling the team.

They are inempt in one regard only, IMO, which is the fact that they have had no success in hiring people for the most important positions on the team ... GM and coach.  I am not sure if they are ignoring advice or are listening to the advice of idiots.  Maybe this time they have it right or maybe this time they will get lucky like with the Bills.

I actually believe that there are worse owners out there.  That guy in Ottawa, for example, although he seems to be staying out of everybodies way now.

 

2 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

You'll have to connect the dots. Why would gutting the team make it more attractive to new owners?

Because that's what they did in the movie Major League.

2 hours ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

Interesting thought.  I really don't think the Pegulas are planning on selling the team.

They are inempt in one regard only, IMO, which is the fact that they have had no success in hiring people for the most important positions on the team ... GM and coach.  I am not sure if they are ignoring advice or are listening to the advice of idiots.  Maybe this time they have it right or maybe this time they will get lucky like with the Bills.

I actually believe that there are worse owners out there.  That guy in Ottawa, for example, although he seems to be staying out of everybodies way now.

The meddling owners talk is fatiguing. Do people think Pegulas are football experts but morons when it comes to hockey? Reality check... they don't know ***** about either sport. To the best of my knowledge, for both sports, they listen to advice and consultants, then they try to bring in someone to run the operations. They are not meddling in hockey more than football -- it's just that they haven't found the right hire in hockey. Football fans love the Pegulas because the team is winning. It wasn't overnight that this happened. They went through many GMs and coaches for the Bills until they found the right fit. They have a GM, a coach with a great culture mindset, and a key player -- Josh Allen -- to represent that message with a great skillset.

Compared to hockey, they haven't found the right mix. Moving on from Eichel is their realization that he's not the person to build around,  like they did with Allen. Problem is, you don't find many players with Eichel-like talent and so you better be damn sure. We saw that with a mix of GMs and coaches while Eichel was here perhaps hoping they could salvage Eichel's character deficiencies. And when I say deficiencies, I simply mean having the intangibles found with Josh Allen. I'm not saying Eichel is a dick, or a train wreck, or a masochist -- I'm saying he is not an ingredient in the formula that worked when building the Bills. 

I don't understand the mindset of "the owners are screwing everything up." They're making moves to build the right culture. Once it they have the winning formula, the team will have success.

Relate their process to your own life. You've been on a job interview, right? Unless you're the best in your field, you had to "sell" the hiring manager and your new company on why you're the right person. The fact that you put in two years, while complaining that the company doesn't know what they're doing and leaving for greener pastures hits close to home, doesn't it? The Sabres are going through the same process. Someone seems like the right fit -- Krueger seemed like the hockey whisperer... didn't pan out, but damn did he sell them a bill of goods. And Jack was the right pick at 2nd overall. Can you imagine if GMTM decided to pass on Jack Eichel because they had an epiphany that that Jack's character was something they didn't want to build around. No, in fact, Jack made a comment -- Buffalo, I'm coming for you, and everyone creamed their pants. And his intention had nothing to do with playing for the franchise, but we made it something that we wanted. Holy *****! It's a process. It's not that the owners are incompetent. They may make bad decisions, but as with the Bills, I am hopeful that they will find the right mix. I think parting ways with Jack is a big step in the right direction.

Changing owners is not going to bring in owners who possess a crystal ball.

   

[Radar]

1 hour ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

I think that some are questioning if that was carried forward in their purchase agreement, or if the Pegulas had to agree not to move the team when they bought it from TG.  Maybe they have to put a similar clause in any agreement they draw up when they sell.  Maybe they don't.  I am not a lawyer and I don't even want to play one on SabreSpace, but I don't don't know if that kind of clause automatically carries forward in future agreements.  I would doubt it, but the law makes little sense to me

 Sale tothe Pegulas was conditioned that they wouldn't move the team. I'm doubtful that they would be required to have that condition on a future sale by them. Not sure only doubtful.

[Radar]

15 minutes ago, SabresFanInRochester said:

 

Because that's what they did in the movie Major League.

The meddling owners talk is fatiguing. Do people think Pegulas are football experts but morons when it comes to hockey? Reality check... they don't know ***** about either sport. To the best of my knowledge, for both sports, they listen to advice and consultants, then they try to bring in someone to run the operations. They are not meddling in hockey more than football -- it's just that they haven't found the right hire in hockey. Football fans love the Pegulas because the team is winning. It wasn't overnight that this happened. They went through many GMs and coaches for the Bills until they found the right fit. They have a GM, a coach with a great culture mindset, and a key player -- Josh Allen -- to represent that message with a great skillset.

Compared to hockey, they haven't found the right mix. Moving on from Eichel is their realization that he's not the person to build around,  like they did with Allen. Problem is, you don't find many players with Eichel-like talent and so you better be damn sure. We saw that with a mix of GMs and coaches while Eichel was here perhaps hoping they could salvage Eichel's character deficiencies. And when I say deficiencies, I simply mean having the intangibles found with Josh Allen. I'm not saying Eichel is a dick, or a train wreck, or a masochist -- I'm saying he is not an ingredient in the formula that worked when building the Bills. 

I don't understand the mindset of "the owners are screwing everything up." They're making moves to build the right culture. Once it they have the winning formula, the team will have success.

Relate their process to your own life. You've been on a job interview, right? Unless you're the best in your field, you had to "sell" the hiring manager and your new company on why you're the right person. The fact that you put in two years, while complaining that the company doesn't know what they're doing and leaving for greener pastures hits close to home, doesn't it? The Sabres are going through the same process. Someone seems like the right fit -- Krueger seemed like the hockey whisperer... didn't pan out, but damn did he sell them a bill of goods. And Jack was the right pick at 2nd overall. Can you imagine if GMTM decided to pass on Jack Eichel because they had an epiphany that that Jack's character was something they didn't want to build around. No, in fact, Jack made a comment -- Buffalo, I'm coming for you, and everyone creamed their pants. And his intention had nothing to do with playing for the franchise, but we made it something that we wanted. Holy *****! It's a process. It's not that the owners are incompetent. They may make bad decisions, but as with the Bills, I am hopeful that they will find the right mix. I think parting ways with Jack is a big step in the right direction.

Changing owners is not going to bring in owners who possess a crystal ball.

   

Totally would agree except a decade of wrong hires? This is why I doubt their abilities as owners. The Bills comparison? Not sure that wasn't catching lightning in a bottle. In any case I can't just pass this off to bad advice by the league or supposed people of experience. Why if you know what you're doing do you need to depend on them to begin with. Frankly I have only to hope they just stumble on to another management team like it appears they have with the Bills. Also a franchise quarterback is much more important in football than any one position in hockey in my opinion. Also more important than any GM. Look at New England for proof.

Edited October 3, 2021 by Radar

[Digger]

Hockey is an entertainment sport so the players are very important to the value of the franchise.  If they wanted to sell the Sabres then in my opinion they would have done everything possible to repair the relationship with Eichel (and yes I agree that it's almost certainly too late now).  Eichel is an asset for the team and a player that can be marketed as a top line center (set aside the injury for this argument). 

I suppose it could be suggested that drafting 1st overall in 2022 and getting Shane Wright would give them the future star so dumping Eichel's salary would make sense.  That's a pretty weak argument and it's a scenario that has a low percentage of happening.  Yes there are some other great options at the 2022 draft but still no guarantees. 

I can't see the logic in selling off your top talented players to sell the team.  I can see it for a rebuild but we have been down this road a few times now.  It's an interesting Sunday discussion. 

[aristocrat]

Winning teams make more money and sell for more but you don’t sell winning teams cause they’re making so much money 

[SDS]

[This is an automated response]

As a courtesy to the other board members, please use more descriptive topic titles. A better title will help the community find information faster and make your topic more likely to be read. The topic starter can edit the topic title line to make it more appropriate.

Thank you.

[Brawndo]

2 hours ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

I think that some are questioning if that was carried forward in their purchase agreement, or if the Pegulas had to agree not to move the team when they bought it from TG.  Maybe they have to put a similar clause in any agreement they draw up when they sell.  Maybe they don't.  I am not a lawyer and I don't even want to play one on SabreSpace, but I don't don't know if that kind of clause automatically carries forward in future agreements.  I would doubt it, but the law makes little sense to me.

Well according to one the attorneys that helped to write the purchase agreement it does.

Both privately and publicly the NHL has reported the Importance that the Sabres have to the league in Buffalo.

Another matter to take under consideration is the fact that it has been 11 years since a NHL Franchise has moved 

At some point in the past decade Arizona, Carolina and Florida have all been prime candidates for relocation. Arizona is the most likely to relocate given Their Arena Situation.

While 3 NFL Franchises have relocated in the past six years. 

From a financial benefit to their respective leagues which Buffalo Franchise would be more desirable to be moved? 
 

[Indabuff]

6 hours ago, Radar said:

When they rid Eichel from the ass column they will have. 

FTFY

[Andrew Amerk]

8 hours ago, Radar said:

Totally would agree except a decade of wrong hires? This is why I doubt their abilities as owners. The Bills comparison? Not sure that wasn't catching lightning in a bottle. In any case I can't just pass this off to bad advice by the league or supposed people of experience. Why if you know what you're doing do you need to depend on them to begin with. Frankly I have only to hope they just stumble on to another management team like it appears they have with the Bills. Also a franchise quarterback is much more important in football than any one position in hockey in my opinion. Also more important than any GM. Look at New England for proof.

This is debatable. It could be argued that Brady never becomes Brady without Belicheat. Or Mahomes doesn’t become who he is without Reid. Or Allen doesn’t become as good as he is without McD.

[SabresFanInRochester]

2 minutes ago, Andrew Amerk said:

This is debatable. It could be argued that Brady never becomes Brady without Belicheat. Or Mahomes doesn’t become who he is without Reid. Or Allen doesn’t become as good as he is without McD.

Agreed - Sam Darnold was horrible in NY, but he gets shipped to Carolina and they put coaches and pieces around him and he suddenly looks more than serviceable. On a related note, I always wonder what Grigorenko or another rushed player would have developed into had the organization not mismanaged them or had they simply gone elsewhere.