nfreeman

So you think TP forced the tank on DR? And this is because he said the owner gets to decide the scope of the rebuild? Doesn't the owner get to decide everything, by either approving it or declining approval? And don't all major decisions generally get run by the owner? Did TP force the tank on TM also? Do you not think most owners speak with their GMs regularly? So someone who owns something worth, say, $200MM to $500MM doesn't speak regularly with the guy who runs it for him? A "donut shop under a practice rink?" Do you not think TP has invested substantial amounts into downtown Buffalo? As for whether someone else would buy the team, keep it here, etc. -- there's no need to speculate. The team has been sold twice in the past 15 years. The first time around, no one wanted to buy it until it was deeply discounted -- and that buyer refused to spend money on it and thus dismantled possibly the best team they've ever had. The second time, there was one bidder, and it was the one we ended up with.

We have no idea whether or not TP can move the team. None of us has ever seen the contract. We also have no idea whether TG "insisted" on a no-movement clause (assuming it exists, and doesn't expire or have other loopholes) or whether TP agreed to it when it was brought up because he wants to keep the team there anyway. Regarding the tank -- do you think it was TP's idea, or was he following his GM's recommendation? I suspect it's the latter, which, if correct, would argue against the "meddling" theory. Of course he was happy they scored. It was a thrilling moment. He'd have had to have been dead not to react. That doesn't mean he didn't care much more about the Benjamins than about the wins. Every single action he took as owner was consistent with his public statements that it was critical that the team not lose money on a current basis -- i.e. he was openly, and repeatedly, not interested in funding operating losses. So your willingness to fire him isn't based on results? It's based on your perceptions of "meddling" -- including the unforgivable sin of speaking regularly with his GM (like at least 90% of other NHL owners)? Do you not believe that hiring Howie and firing Howie were JB's decisions? Well, we don't know what was in his heart, but we do know that he didn't step in and buy the team until the price dropped to a ridiculously low number, which included the city forgiving something like $25MM in loans. We also know that he sold the team a few years later for 3x what he paid for it.

Well, by assuming that you can replace him with another wealthy and committed owner (which were not assumed in the OP, by the way) you’ve effectively assumed away the issue. For me, it’s not just that he’s kept the teams in Buffalo. It’s that he’s thrown money at them in a way that no Buffalo owner ever has and no one else is likely to do ever again as it is an economically irrational move. Not to mention pouring money into developing downtown Buffalo (they weren’t exactly lining up to do that either), not extorting a bunch of money out of the city and generally being a fundamentally decent guy. I understand the dissatisfaction with with the results. I do think though that evaluation of owners requires a much longer horizon than evaluation of coaches or players. I think all of his hiring decisions have made sense on paper, and all arose out of a desire to improve the team. The biggest reason the Sabres are where they are was the idiotic decision to tank for Eichel, which at least half, and probably more, of the fan base and commentariat supported. My point is that it’s not like he’s been hiring his cousin who got laid off at the gas station to be the GM or his favorite waitress at the diner to be the coach (although I guess he did marry her and then make her team president, so...) Your 2nd paragraph is fair. I don’t agree with the first paragraph at all. TG did not give a crap about winning — the Sabres were purely an investment opportunity for him, which he cashed out of as soon as he had a good bid. Rigas didn’t spend any money on the team — the Peca holdout, which was over a few hundred thousand, effectively torpedoed the Hasek era. And TP IMHO absolutely cares about winning — that’s why he fired DR/RR and TM/DDB — because those groups let things fall apart.

I don’t agree at all. As I mentioned, this is fairly likely to be his last contract. He has hopefully another 30-40 years to live, plus kids and grandchildren to think about. Another $7MM on the contract, plus another, say, $1.5MM in taxes/cost of living, is a major factor. (And since we should be referring to after-tax dollars, it’s an even bigger factor.)

Are the new owners from fantasy land contractually obligated not only to keep the team in Buffalo but also to throw money at the team the way TP has? It continues to amaze me that the OP does not understand how freaking miraculous it was that the heavens opened up and gave us a stinking rich owner for BOTH of our teams who wants to win, doesn’t care what it costs and has no interest in moving the teams. This free stuff isn’t enough! Give me more! Do more for me!

Excellent thread but I think Huberdeau is a core piece in Florida.

Interesting. So if the Sabres are offering $25MM and LA is offering, say, $18MM — that’s a pretty big spread, and enlarged by the higher CA taxes and cost of living. He has to know that there’s a pretty good chance that this is the last big contract of his life. The economically prudent move is to take the Sabres’ offer. (Unless of course it results in divorce.)

This seems fine, as long as I or anyone else chooses, as you did, the wrong thing to criticize him for and the wrong time to do so.

I agree on the West coast factor. As for the Eichel and Dahlin factor -- I agree that this is a factor, but it has limitations IMHO. Plenty of crappy teams have 2 good players -- e.g. Edmonton has McD and Draisaitl. If given an alternative where there are compelling other factors (e.g. preferable city, more stability, more recent winning, etc.), I'm not sure how far Eichel/Dahlin gets us.

Are you seriously asking this? You don't see a difference between criticizing a coach for his performance and criticizing a fired ex-coach for...whatever it was you were criticizing him for?

Jeez. The guy failed at his dream job and has been publicly humiliated. He says something nice and appreciative on his way out -- is it necessary to take shots at him like this?

Bummer. He may or may not have been the right guy, but if the Sabres tried to get him and failed, it's a bit discouraging. I'm curious to see whether other strong candidates pass on the Sabres. Hopefully not, but there are certainly plenty of reasons to steer clear in favor of other options -- chronic losing, lousy goalies, frequent turnover at coach and in management, the possibility that JB is on thin ice, questions about JB's ability to put together a good team, mediocre prospect pipeline, quiet and aging arena, long winter, etc.

LA and Colorado got hosed much more than the Sabres did. But the question regarding the last 2 wins is a good one.

My wife wants to watch a show and I am stalling! Time for the NHL to quit jerking around here!

If anyone learns when the actual lottery is scheduled to start — pls let us know.

So, after observing Risto on cleanout day, I'm going to officially predict that he gets traded. He sounded and looked like he expects, and perhaps wants, it to happen. From the Sabres' perspective, I can see them wanting to make some material changes in the D group after the poopshow in the 2nd half this year. As I've said previously, I'm fine with trading him, but a good player needs to be coming back. This can't be for picks/prospects. He's a pretty good, albeit flawed, player. They shouldn't unload him just for the sake of moving on.

Future Of The 716‏ @FutureOfThe716 Sabres Draft Lottery Odds: 1st: 8.5% 2nd: 8.7% 3rd: 8.9% 4th: 0.0% 5th: 8.4% 6th: 34.5% 7th: 26.7% 8th: 4.3% So -- about a 17% chance of a huge win (i.e. Hughes or Kakko), but about a 65% chance of dropping 1-3 spots.

But Howie had all of last year to evaluate Scandella.

What’s the basis for this?

Again — if you don’t want to get called out for trolling, don’t engage in trolling.

Both of these are fair points. From our perspective, though, we really have no idea how applicable they are (if at all) to any particular coach. You could certainly be right that McL is just paying lip service to the use of analytics -- but we'd need a lot more data (heh) to know whether it's actually the case. Put another way, how many coaches have come out and said that they emphasize analytics in their approach to coaching? (For that matter, how many have come out and expressly disavowed analytics? Nolan is the only one I know of.)

Further to the "is McL a stupid dinosaur who rejects analytics?" question, here is an interview with him from just a couple of weeks ago: https://epellefsen.podbean.com/e/leadership-from-behind-the-bench-todd-mclellan/ They get into his approach to analytics at about the 9:30 mark. Essentially, he says that analytics are a tool to be considered, but they have limitations. He repeats the "the best analytics are my 2 eyeballs" line that has given heartburn to some posters here.

I'll also point out that if it ends up being McL -- once again, Buffalo sports reporters are out to lunch while the national guys get the scoop.

From this article: Yes please.

OK -- other thread now unlocked. And I'll probably be disappointed if the Sabres don't get McL.