PASabreFan Posted June 19, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 19, 2013 (edited) Would your honor deny having had drinks with Kim Pegula on the night of March 16th? Wait, prima facie is bad, right? Edited June 19, 2013 by PASabreFan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted June 19, 2013 Report Share Posted June 19, 2013 You're saying he's committed Meddling in the Third or possibly Fourth Degree. 3rd degree would be my guess Darcy has said Myers' contract was a problem because it assumes a player that young will behave responsibly after getting it. So, why did Myers end up with said contract? Does Darcy time-travel, arguing with himself, or is there a more logical explanation? Or Darcy signed him to that deal because Darcy is still suffering from PTSD over the loss of players like Drury, Briere, Campbell because he didn't sign them early and long term. He thought Myers was going to be good and could handle it. Since this is a "court" do you have proof that Terry Pegula effectively told Darcy he had to sign Tyler Myers to a long term high money deal? If not you are spitting conjecture with no supporting evidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted June 19, 2013 Report Share Posted June 19, 2013 I'd like to submit to this... court that Terry Pegula says that he talks to darcy but he did make it sound as though he was talking about player types more than actual guys. The hard work thing is something that I have heard Black, Pegula and Regier all mention. I don't think Terry is making decisions and that he is instead pushing for a direction, he is plotting a course but Regier is the captain. They have had multiple conversations it would seem about hard work. They even said that Myers needs to work harder (which of course he does) but the fact they are saying these things is a good sign. Bottom Line: Pegula is not saying "Darcy I want player X, go." It appears as if he is saying "we need talented hard workers, go" which is completely different. I agree that Pegula is in the room and has a core set of "standards" shall we say that he wants players held accountable for. He does however seem to allow Darcy the final decision. I'd like to argue we do not know if Pegula can or does force Darcy to make hockey decisions. It sounds as though Darcy has the right to and does say things like "player X is nice but he doesn't fit our team" OR "Player X is going to cost us this and as GM I think that is to much to pay (in terms of prospects, picks, or players" Your honour. If it pleases the court I would like to address the proceedings. While I am not a member of the prosecution *dream team* I am a forensic accountant. If I may, I would like to present two exhibits for your honour's consideration: Exibit A: Regehr, Robyn. Exibit B: Ehrhoff, Christian. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted June 19, 2013 Report Share Posted June 19, 2013 Terry is the money. Therefore he's in on every personnel decision. The prosecution has failed to demonstrate how this is different than any NHL owner. Move to dismiss. My t-shirts biz is slowing down. I need to move over to the Glen Sather trial over on BlueRagTimeoftheMonth.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted June 19, 2013 Report Share Posted June 19, 2013 Would your honor deny having had drinks with Kim Pegula on the night of March 16th? Wait, prima facie is bad, right? Ha. Oh, how I would wish to have had drinks with Mrs. Pegula. Seriously. And while I'm at it, why hasn't Google Images generated more pictures of this woman? The imagination can only do so much. As for prima facie, it just means that the evidence proffered is sufficient to sustain the claim or charge. It doesn't establish the claim or charge dispositively, but there's enough there to support a finding on it. 3rd degree would be my guess I think that's right. Since this is a "court" do you have proof that Terry Pegula effectively told Darcy he had to sign Tyler Myers to a long term high money deal? If not you are spitting conjecture with no supporting evidence. It's inference, not conjecture, to say that Pegula's role in the Myers extension can be seen in Regier's having articulated a long-held belief/fear about player development (i.e., you can't pay guys too much too soon -- a belief he held evidently when Myers was given all that money) and having also expressed misgivings or regrets over having given so much money to such a young player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted June 19, 2013 Report Share Posted June 19, 2013 Your honour. If it pleases the court I would like to address the proceedings. While I am not a member of the prosecution *dream team* I am a forensic accountant. If I may, I would like to present two exhibits for your honour's consideration: Exibit A: Regehr, Robyn. Exibit B: Ehrhoff, Christian. Your honor I would like to point out that both of those signings coincided with Pegula's first summer of ownership. Exhibit A was most definitely influenced by Pegula. Exhibit B may have been. However since that time can the prosecution demonstrate a continuing trend of interference as opposed to a new owner being excited and trying to do to much. It would appear to me that Terry Pegula has calmed his enthusiasm to assume a more backseat role since the summer of 2011. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted June 19, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 19, 2013 Terry is the money. Therefore he's in on every personnel decision. The prosecution has failed to demonstrate how this is different than any NHL owner. Move to dismiss. My t-shirts biz is slowing down. I need to move over to the Glen Sather trial over on BlueRagTimeoftheMonth.com Define "in on." I'm really curious about how any of us would handle things if we were in Terry's shoes. I am going to guess that the majority of the frequent posters here would choose a different course. Ask yourself that question, X. Would you really dictate to Darcy that non-hockey people contribute to his decisions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted June 19, 2013 Report Share Posted June 19, 2013 Define "in on." I'm really curious about how any of us would handle things if we were in Terry's shoes. I am going to guess that the majority of the frequent posters here would choose a different course. Ask yourself that question, X. Would you really dictate to Darcy that non-hockey people contribute to his decisions? Honestly I would inquire about guys or say I wanted types of players but leave personnel decisions up to my Gm who I would assume knows more. I think I need to bow out of this. I think Terry has meddled but like I said to 3rd degree. I think he allows darcy a lot of free room. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted June 19, 2013 Report Share Posted June 19, 2013 Your honor I would like to point out that both of those signings coincided with Pegula's first summer of ownership. Exhibit A was most definitely influenced by Pegula. Exhibit B may have been. However since that time can the prosecution demonstrate a continuing trend of interference as opposed to a new owner being excited and trying to do to much. It would appear to me that Terry Pegula has calmed his enthusiasm to assume a more backseat role since the summer of 2011. So a tiger can change its stripes, eh? Talk about conjecture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted June 19, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 19, 2013 Honestly I would inquire about guys or say I wanted types of players but leave personnel decisions up to my Gm who I would assume knows more. I think I need to bow out of this. I think Terry has meddled but like I said to 3rd degree. I think he allows darcy a lot of free room. I would confess my ignorance, get the best hockey guys in the world (would need a lot of help doing that, too) to figure out what types of players to get, set the mission, sign the checks and sit back and be a fan. Don't take this the wrong way, but I think the bigger the fan you are, the more you want that Cup, the less you'd be involved. It's common sense to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted June 19, 2013 Report Share Posted June 19, 2013 Don't take this the wrong way, but I think the bigger the fan you are, the more you want that Cup, the less you'd be involved. It's common sense to me. Yes, PA(ngloss), that would be the case in the best of all possible worlds. But Uncle Terry didn't get to where he is in life by taking a modest view of his own instincts, acumen, aptitude, and such. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted June 19, 2013 Report Share Posted June 19, 2013 Yes, PA(ngloss), that would be the case in the best of all possible worlds. But Uncle Terry didn't get to where he is in life by taking a modest view of his own instincts, acumen, aptitude, and such. Or....if there was a flat decision making process....maybe almost every good idea came from someone else and his bank account exploded on the talent of others???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted June 19, 2013 Report Share Posted June 19, 2013 Define "in on." I'm really curious about how any of us would handle things if we were in Terry's shoes. I am going to guess that the majority of the frequent posters here would choose a different course. Ask yourself that question, X. Would you really dictate to Darcy that non-hockey people contribute to his decisions? Define "in on." I'm really curious about how any of us would handle things if we were in Terry's shoes. I am going to guess that the majority of the frequent posters here would choose a different course. Ask yourself that question, X. Would you really dictate to Darcy that non-hockey people contribute to his decisions? Absolutely. A GM is in charge of the whole shebang - he needs to listen to everybody from Accounting to the Zamboni driver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted June 19, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 19, 2013 Absolutely. A GM is in charge of the whole shebang - he needs to listen to everybody from Accounting to the Zamboni driver. I think you know I was referring to hockey decisions. Anyway, the Sabres have made it quite clear that the business side is Ted's bailiwick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted June 19, 2013 Report Share Posted June 19, 2013 I think you know I was referring to hockey decisions. Anyway, the Sabres have made it quite clear that the business side is Ted's bailiwick. There is no getting around that the league is a business. Hockey decisions are accounting decisions are money decisions are marketing decisions. There is no pretending that any hockey decision happens in its own silo. I don't think Pegula is the type to second guess as much as he is to ask for regular updates, ask for progress reports, and ask if decisions are in keeping with the institutional focus. Pegula certainly isnt looking at the internet and proposing trades that he's dreaming up and giving directives like a fantasy GM behind the scenes. He's just not that guy. What Pegula is more comfortable doing is hanging out with the guys who are already on the team and doing his best to see what gives them the best chance to win and making sure they are provided for off the ice. That's his comfort zone. I really think he believes if he gives people the space, resources and environment to do their jobs well, they will. He wants everybody talking to each other. He (gasp) believes it's healthy. People are sincere when they say they love working for him. That's not to say Terry's human network is going to bring Buffalo a cup, but I think that's his style. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted June 19, 2013 Report Share Posted June 19, 2013 In all honesty....at this point I don't care who is making what decisions....it's like letting your wife and kids pick a horse to bet at the track based on name or color or because it just pooped. We can't get any worse than we have been under Darcy. And staying on the horse theme....there was a hall of fame trainer that wouldn't train for people if they told him what to do. Leave him the horse and leave him alone. A lot of people will "put up" with novice owners if they want to be involved in decisions on the track, but aren't happy about it. Usually the ones who put on the shine-show and welcome it are just out to get as much cash out of the guy before he moves on. This at least has been my experience in what I have seen. Some really good people and they just wish they could be left alone to do their thing. It is a distraction...... I bet Lindy hated having to put on the smile all the time.....that's one thing I'm sure he doesn't miss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted June 19, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 19, 2013 There is no getting around that the league is a business. Hockey decisions are accounting decisions are money decisions are marketing decisions. There is no pretending that any hockey decision happens in its own silo. I don't think Pegula is the type to second guess as much as he is to ask for regular updates, ask for progress reports, and ask if decisions are in keeping with the institutional focus. Pegula certainly isnt looking at the internet and proposing trades that he's dreaming up and giving directives like a fantasy GM behind the scenes. He's just not that guy. What Pegula is more comfortable doing is hanging out with the guys who are already on the team and doing his best to see what gives them the best chance to win and making sure they are provided for off the ice. That's his comfort zone. I really think he believes if he gives people the space, resources and environment to do their jobs well, they will. He wants everybody talking to each other. He (gasp) believes it's healthy. People are sincere when they say they love working for him. That's not to say Terry's human network is going to bring Buffalo a cup, but I think that's his style. I don't think you're paying attention to Terry's own words. Give Darcy space? Seriously? He's said a couple of times he talks to Darcy more than he talks to his wife. Not a little weird? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted June 19, 2013 Report Share Posted June 19, 2013 So a tiger can change its stripes, eh? Talk about conjecture. Ligers are coveted for their magical powers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted June 19, 2013 Report Share Posted June 19, 2013 I'm not going to be a Pegula apologist, but I'll just say that were I in his shoes, I'd be just as involved as he is. However much that is has not been determined, but I appreciate him wanting to be hands on with the company he owns and the product he makes. Is he a "meddler"? That's a rather negative perspective. But we know he's involved. I support that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted June 20, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 20, 2013 I'm not going to be a Pegula apologist, but I'll just say that were I in his shoes, I'd be just as involved as he is. However much that is has not been determined, but I appreciate him wanting to be hands on with the company he owns and the product he makes. Is he a "meddler"? That's a rather negative perspective. But we know he's involved. I support that. How involved? Darcy has said Terry will determine the extent to which the franchise rebuilds. I believe you're smarter and know more about hockey than Terry; even at that, would you feel comfortable making that kind of decision? Would it not feel odd for you as owner to make that decision that should belong to the general manager? If you felt the need to make that decision, wouldn't you fire your GM immediately? It's almost like Terry knows he can be as involved as he is or have a strong, top-notch GM, but not both, and he's being quite selfish about it. Seriously, name a GM whom you would want to be in charge in Buffalo who would abdicate that decision to the owner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bunomatic Posted June 20, 2013 Report Share Posted June 20, 2013 How involved? Darcy has said Terry will determine the extent to which the franchise rebuilds. I believe you're smarter and know more about hockey than Terry; even at that, would you feel comfortable making that kind of decision? Would it not feel odd for you as owner to make that decision that should belong to the general manager? If you felt the need to make that decision, wouldn't you fire your GM immediately? It's almost like Terry knows he can be as involved as he is or have a strong, top-notch GM, but not both, and he's being quite selfish about it. Seriously, name a GM whom you would want to be in charge in Buffalo who would abdicate that decision to the owner. Garth Snow. Ahem cough :blink: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted June 20, 2013 Report Share Posted June 20, 2013 I don't think you're paying attention to Terry's own words. Give Darcy space? Seriously? He's said a couple of times he talks to Darcy more than he talks to his wife. Not a little weird? I'm paying attention, I just make much less of it. He's joking He's been a boss for a while....every boss thinks he's funny because people laugh at your jokes. On radio and TV it is just awkward. I just don't think you can learn too much by trying to parse his language. Pegula will want to be fully informed of what's happening. That doesn't mean he is micromanaging. That's all I got. I'm back to selling T-shirts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted June 20, 2013 Report Share Posted June 20, 2013 How involved? Darcy has said Terry will determine the extent to which the franchise rebuilds. I believe you're smarter and know more about hockey than Terry; even at that, would you feel comfortable making that kind of decision? Would it not feel odd for you as owner to make that decision that should belong to the general manager? If you felt the need to make that decision, wouldn't you fire your GM immediately? It's almost like Terry knows he can be as involved as he is or have a strong, top-notch GM, but not both, and he's being quite selfish about it. Seriously, name a GM whom you would want to be in charge in Buffalo who would abdicate that decision to the owner. I think there is a different angle in play here. Let's talk about Darcy. We know Darcy is capable of acquiring good players and generally drafts well. But he lacks a certain flair for identifying personality types and how they fit together as a team. If I'm Pegula perhaps I recognize that as long as I support Darcy in a way that will allow him to be a better GM, perhaps we could form a better club. I think Pegula has the vision that Darcy lacks, but that Terry thinks he can work with that better than anyone else. Maybe Terry guiding the ship really IS better than leaving Darcy to his own devices? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted June 20, 2013 Report Share Posted June 20, 2013 Maybe Terry guiding the ship really IS better than leaving Darcy to his own devices? Hope is the new heroin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted June 20, 2013 Report Share Posted June 20, 2013 Hope is the new heroin. Hey man, someone around here has to give Terry a little support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.