Why you shouldn't be so harsh on GMs (Or, PA was right all along!)

[dudacek]

Intriguing column from former Canuck and Devil employee Rachel Doerrie on how things really work inside NHL organizations.

https://thehockeynews.com/news/when-an-nhl-gm-becomes-a-dartboard

Edited March 14, 2023 by dudacek

[Marvin]

25 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Intriguing column from former Canuck and Devil Rachel Doerrie employee on how things really work inside NHL organizations.

https://thehockeynews.com/news/when-an-nhl-gm-becomes-a-dartboard

Which brings up a question from other boards: are the Sabres the Arizona Coyotes of the east?  The argument runs as follows:

Cap floor team.  Rookie GM.  Rookie Coach.  No big FA signings.  No trading futures for immediate help.  Still problems in goal, on defence, and with overall depth.  "Players who want to be here" is an excuse to cut payroll to the bone.  Two years running looks like a long-term trend.

[Stoner]

See also Tim Murray relaying what his Uncle Terry told him upon getting the job in Buffalo: everyone has a boss. Well almost everyone.

Just now, Marvin said:

Which brings up a question from other boards: are the Sabres the Arizona Coyotes of the east?  The argument runs as follows:

Cap floor team.  Rookie GM.  Rookie Coach.  No big FA signings.  No trading futures for immediate help.  Still problems in goal, on defence, and with overall depth.  "Players who want to be here" is an excuse to cut payroll to the bone.  Two years running looks like a long-term trend.

Damn, bruh!

[SDS]

 

when everyone is super, no one will be.

If this article is to be believed, then any interference experienced here is the same as anywhere else.

[Thorner]

3 minutes ago, Marvin said:

Which brings up a question from other boards: are the Sabres the Arizona Coyotes of the east?  The argument runs as follows:

Cap floor team.  Rookie GM.  Rookie Coach.  No big FA signings.  No trading futures for immediate help.  Still problems in goal, on defence, and with overall depth.  "Players who want to be here" is an excuse to cut payroll to the bone.  Two years running looks like a long-term trend.

Ouch 

i think we eventually spend more than them, though, just through extensions 

Edited March 14, 2023 by Thorny

[LGR4GM]

Just now, Marvin said:

Which brings up a question from other boards: are the Sabres the Arizona Coyotes of the east?  The argument runs as follows:

Cap floor team.  Rookie GM.  Rookie Coach.  No big FA signings.  No trading futures for immediate help.  Still problems in goal, on defence, and with overall depth.  "Players who want to be here" is an excuse to cut payroll to the bone.  Two years running looks like a long-term trend.

This is so frustrating to deal with over and over again. They did cut payroll to the bone in 2020 during the pandemic and every year since then they have added to the org. The Sabres scouting staff and analytics staff is one of the biggest in the league again. The reason they don't have to spend to the cap is because most of their talent is young and hasn't started their second deals or just broke out in the last 2 years and hasn't started their post breakout deals. Comparing Buffalo, an org that is already given out long term high dollar deals and will do so again this summer to Arizona who plays in a NCAA arean is just a lazy surface level comparison IMPO. 

It is almost as though ppl forget going into the 2021 season (aka last season) the Sabres were in the process of trading Eichel and starting a rebuild which clearly has done pretty decent considering only a year later we are hovering near the playoffs, have a 40+ goal scorer, and a Norris candidate. 

[SDS]

1 minute ago, Thorny said:

Ouch 

It’s an awful comparison that frames everything as a negative, while conveniently leaving out positive differentiators. 

[Thorner]

Just now, SDS said:

It’s an awful comparison that frames everything as a negative, while conveniently leaving out positive differentiators. 

As always the truth lies somewhere in the middle, yes 

[Marvin]

FYI: I am not of this school.  But if you lurk where I do, the majority of posts are like this.  Dahlin will want out.  Tuch will not be resigned.  And so on.  Here is the complete state of the deadline had these people had their way...

In: Chychrun, Jeannot, Meier.

Out: 2023 1st, 3 x 2023 2nd, 2024 1st, 2024 2nd, Rosen, Savoie, Kulich, Östlund (basically, the initial ask x 3).

[Stoner]

What if Terry's meddling (defined to me as the owner on a macro level telling the GM how to achieve the organizational goal of winning the Cup... First no restraint on spending/let's go for it, then a dig up the foundation teardown tank, then accelerate the rebuild then Economic Effective Efficient) brought the Sabres back to what worked so well for decades: the lean mean overachieve small market little engine that could? Which is where Terry started off and which might have carried right on if Darcy had been able to sensibly tap into fewer financial constraints? I'll hope for that and that the meddling is gone or limited and when the time is ripe the financial support will be there. I always said Terry COULD be the perfect owner. It's the slow jamming Jimmy Fallon rebuild that's making me nervous and suspicious.

[LGR4GM]

4 minutes ago, Thorny said:

As always the truth lies somewhere in the middle, yes 

Not really. 

Arizona has 1 player above 46 points an that is Clayton Keller at 69pts. Buffalo has 5 players over 46 points and all 5 of those players are signed to long term deals. 

Arizona's best U23 defender is Victor Sodestrom. At 22 he has 5pts in 15 NHL games. Buffalo's best U23 defender is Dahlin and their 2nd best is Power. Power has 26pts in 63 games as a 20yr old. 

Arizona forfeited a pick in 2022 draft because of cheating... Buffalo didn't. 

The Sabres 2022 draft is better IMPO. Arizona took Cooley, Geekie, and Lamoureux in the first round and I could argue that only Cooley is better or on par with Savoie and that Östlund and Kulich easily slot above the other two. 

Arizona is about 2 years behind where Buffalo is to be honest so no, I don't think it is somewhere in the middle. I think it more likely is 20% as opposed to 50% similar. 

[Stoner]

Let's forget Arizona. Is this how some of you plan to weasel out of a good discussion? Straw Man in the Desert.

[Thorner]

1 minute ago, PASabreFan said:

What if Terry's meddling (defined to me as the owner on a macro level telling the GM how to achieve the organizational goal of winning the Cup... First no restraint on spending/let's go for it, then a dig up the foundation teardown tank, then accelerate the rebuild then Economic Effective Efficient) brought the Sabres back to what worked so well for decades: the lean mean overachieve small market little engine that could? Which is where Terry started off and which might have carried right on if Darcy had been able to sensibly tap into fewer financial constraints? I'll hope for that and that the meddling is gone or limited and when the time is ripe the financial support will be there. I always said Terry COULD be the perfect owner. It's the slow jamming Jimmy Fallon rebuild that's making me nervous and suspicious.

Speaking of jimmy and terry 

 

[Marvin]

1 minute ago, PASabreFan said:

Let's forget Arizona. Is this how some of you plan to weasel out of a good discussion? Straw Man in the Desert.

I always thought Terry and Kim had at least some input.  The question was over how much.

[dudacek]

12 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

. I always said Terry COULD be the perfect owner. It's the slow jamming Jimmy Fallon rebuild that's making me nervous and suspicious.

This is what I shake my head at: 

Since when is 54 points to 75 points to 88ish points over two years slow?

It’s significant, real, measurable improvement.

Edited March 14, 2023 by dudacek

[SDS]

1 minute ago, dudacek said:

This is what I shake my head at: 

Since when is 54 points to 75 points to 88ish points over two years slow?

It’s significant, real, measurable improvement.

What I don’t understand is how a 20 or 21 year old becomes a 27 year old seasoned NHL veteran in 52 games?

[Thorner]

12 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Not really. 

Arizona has 1 player above 46 points an that is Clayton Keller at 69pts. Buffalo has 5 players over 46 points and all 5 of those players are signed to long term deals. 

Arizona's best U23 defender is Victor Sodestrom. At 22 he has 5pts in 15 NHL games. Buffalo's best U23 defender is Dahlin and their 2nd best is Power. Power has 26pts in 63 games as a 20yr old. 

Arizona forfeited a pick in 2022 draft because of cheating... Buffalo didn't. 

The Sabres 2022 draft is better IMPO. Arizona took Cooley, Geekie, and Lamoureux in the first round and I could argue that only Cooley is better or on par with Savoie and that Östlund and Kulich easily slot above the other two. 

Arizona is about 2 years behind where Buffalo is to be honest so no, I don't think it is somewhere in the middle. I think it more likely is 20% as opposed to 50% similar. 

You are just detailing the differences between the teams, I already know all those things

I was engaging in the argument being laid out by another poster. Technically the things he mentioned are currently true: thus the “truth in the middle” thing. As mentioned in my post, the extensions alone will bump up our payroll and the extensions are evidence, obviously, of internal growth 

[GASabresIUFAN]

In light of this article, I guess we need to revisit the JBot ROR trade again.  JBot successfully traded ROR for Thompson, a 1st (Johnson) and a 2nd, and saved Terry $8 mill as required.  Thompson is a star and Johnson is our top D prospect.  I guess he did ok after all.

[Thorner]

9 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

In light of this article, I guess we need to revisit the JBot ROR trade again.  JBot successfully traded ROR for Thompson, a 1st (Johnson) and a 2nd, and saved Terry $8 mill as required.  Thompson is a star and Johnson is our top D prospect.  I guess he did ok after all.

But trades are a means to an end. Botterill can only have done “ok” in that deal if no attention is paid to what he was trying to accomplish. After trading ROR, Eichel came of age and had a big development jump, coming into his own as an mvp candidate. Exactly the WRONG time to deal your second best player for assets that didn’t look good until..about now 

I’ll say it again, not enough attention is paid to the Time asset - the assets dealt for in Botterill’s case amounting to good players in a time frame where he would already be out of a job doesn’t make the trade a good one 

it shows he did have an eye for talent, sometimes. It doesn’t mean the *trade* was good. It doesn’t mean he *managed the team* well 

Edited March 14, 2023 by Thorny

[Randall Flagg]

5 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

In light of this article, I guess we need to revisit the JBot ROR trade again.  JBot successfully traded ROR for Thompson, a 1st (Johnson) and a 2nd, and saved Terry $8 mill as required.  Thompson is a star and Johnson is our top D prospect.  I guess he did ok after all.

The trade worked out well (despite whispers that botterill later shopped Thompson for a late round pick)

But it was still poor value at the time for what he sent out and set the table for the bottomless pit of despair the next 2.5 years would be

 

[JohnC]

2 hours ago, Marvin said:

Which brings up a question from other boards: are the Sabres the Arizona Coyotes of the east?  The argument runs as follows:

Cap floor team.  Rookie GM.  Rookie Coach.  No big FA signings.  No trading futures for immediate help.  Still problems in goal, on defence, and with overall depth.  "Players who want to be here" is an excuse to cut payroll to the bone.  Two years running looks like a long-term trend.

There are up and down cycles for franchises. Smart managers know exactly where their team is on the spectrum and the direction it wants to go. It has to establish a course of action to get where one wants it to go. It is not surprising that our organization decided to tear down and thus spend less money after jettisoning of the original core. What's foolish is spending more money than one needs to when cleaning out the cupboard thus handcuffing yourself when you are about to get to the stabilizing and upward trajectory point. One doesn't haven't to agree with everything our GM has done. But taking a broader perspective you have to be impressed by how he has cleaned out what he needed to clean out, and then worked to augment the talent that was already on board. And included within this issue is the judicious and wise manner in which he has spent on contracts. 

[nucci]

The turnaround and offensive improvement has been impressive. Back to being a real hockey team. I just want a goalie.

[GASabresIUFAN]

20 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

The trade worked out well (despite whispers that botterill later shopped Thompson for a late round pick)

But it was still poor value at the time for what he sent out and set the table for the bottomless pit of despair the next 2.5 years would be

 

 

22 minutes ago, Thorny said:

But trades are a means to an end. Botterill can only have done “ok” in that deal if no attention is paid to what he was trying to accomplish. After trading ROR, Eichel came of age and had a big development jump, coming into his own as an mvp candidate. Exactly the WRONG time to deal your second best player for assets that didn’t look good until..about now 

I’ll say it again, not enough attention is paid to the Time asset - the assets dealt for in Botterill’s case amounting to good players in a time frame where he would already be out of a job doesn’t make the trade a good one 

it shows he did have an eye for talent, sometimes. It doesn’t mean the *trade* was good. It doesn’t mean he *managed the team* well 

Based on the article, I look at the trade very differently.  It seems now that Terry likely told Jbot to get rid of ROR and get it done before the bonus was to paid.  Under those circumstances he did very well in the end.

[Thorner]

20 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

 

Based on the article, I look at the trade very differently.  It seems now that Terry likely told Jbot to get rid of ROR and get it done before the bonus was to paid.  Under those circumstances he did very well in the end.

Ok. Pegula made a bad trade then. In terms of what I’m trying to argue, this is semantics. I’m not here to torpedo or defend Botterill

i view him as a poor GM because his results were poor. It’s that simple. I don’t use that as a retroactive blank slate to say EVERYTHING he did was bad and if he drafted someone good it was by accident.

Nor do I pretend that some of our best players, now, that Botterill is responsible for bringing in (simply: cause and effect, don’t even need to get into “credit” or lack thereof) performed “poorly” under Botterill, simply because they were youthful assets still developing, sometimes not even playing in the NHL yet (Cozens), and sometimes playing really well (Dahlin). That’s super revisionist 

Edited March 14, 2023 by Thorny

[Taro T]

10 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

 

Based on the article, I look at the trade very differently.  It seems now that Terry likely told Jbot to get rid of ROR and get it done before the bonus was to paid.  Under those circumstances he did very well in the end.

The Pegulas definitely did not want to pay the bonus.  There's no 2 ways around that.  BUT what is unclear is whether that was their preference before Botterill started shopping O'Reilly or if that was what they made a condition of allowing Botterill to get rid of him.  Recall, Botterill was on record as saying if he won the draft lottery it would mean he could do a reset on the roster.

Expect he knew the Pegulas would be ok with shopping ROR if they knew they had another high end piece to build around via the draft.

But to say 2 months before the draft while not knowing whether he'd win the lottery that a lottery win would be key to remaking the team seems foolish if he knew he had to punt ROR and only had a 20% chance of meeting the criteria he'd spoken of being a necessary condition to make that happen.