Pegula tours hurricane damage

[SwampD]

I think a lot of this has gone far beyond complaining about the hockey team.

 

…[Too much to respond to]…

 

But you are right, if things continue I won't respond. I'll simply stop showing up.

You have to separate the wheat from the chaff. If you have been on the board for more than ten minutes, you know where PA, and Ghost stand. The only thing more tired than them complaining about the FO, is people complaining about them complaining about the FO. Take it with a grain of salt, pick out the kernels of hockey goodness (and they're in there), and move on.

 

 

Don't forget, it's still the off-season. We'll get back to hockey talk soon enough.

[nfreeman]

 

You have to separate the wheat from the chaff. If you have been on the board for more than ten minutes, you know where PA, and Ghost stand. The only thing more tired than them complaining about the FO, is people complaining about them complaining about the FO. Take it with a grain of salt, pick out the kernels of hockey goodness (and they're in there), and move on.

 

 

Don't forget, it's still the off-season. We'll get back to hockey talk soon enough.

 

Right on.

[PASabreFan]

We can certainly find lots to criticize about the Sabres. Heaven knows the team has given us plenty to find fault with. But speculating on, and then expressing vitriol for, the motives we *think* Pegula has for owning the team seems rather absurd.

 

My $0.02 anyway.

 

Was OSP given the same courtesy? Was Rigas?

[drnkirishone]

 

 

Was OSP given the same courtesy? Was Rigas?

they did with me.

[LTS]

You have to separate the wheat from the chaff. If you have been on the board for more than ten minutes, you know where PA, and Ghost stand. The only thing more tired than them complaining about the FO, is people complaining about them complaining about the FO. Take it with a grain of salt, pick out the kernels of hockey goodness (and they're in there), and move on.

 

 

Don't forget, it's still the off-season. We'll get back to hockey talk soon enough.

 

I didn't absolve the other side from my criticism. The you are a hater / you are blind was meant to include both side who chime in. This has been going on for awhile as you well know. I just feel that it's growing into something of ridiculous proportions. Truth is the people involved in this have shown to be some of the better posters to this board many times. Lately it just seems like the response level isn't quite what it had been.

 

Bring on the hockey talk.

[Weave]

Was OSP given the same courtesy? Was Rigas?

 

I have no idea if they were given it here. I wasn't here then. I know it took a couple seasons after "we're going to give them the tools to finish the job" before I soured on Rigas.

[Darryl Shannon's +/-]

Count me in to the camp still giving Terry the benefit of the doubt. For starters, (and I could be wrong), but his real estate project is the first substantial investment in that area since the Marine Midland atrium was built? Reading recent news, the Ellicott development company started work on the eyesore on the 190. Are they related? Was him straying from his original plan a domino that made this happen?

 

As for the actual hockey operations, when he had the ability to do so, he structured contracts in a way that made them attractive options as the years progressed. By frontloading the deals in real cash (Leino, Ehrhoff, Myers, Sekera), the opportunity exists to deal with an owner only interested in profit to obtain more assets. I viewed the Sekera deal in this way, and Kotalik fits this pattern as well. Given the up front money paid to Leino, he makes sense as a trade deadline acquisition to a team who is struggling to reach the cap floor that may be performing above expectations. (Obviously....provided he stays in one piece).

 

I've been a long time lurker and have really enjoyed the board, my whole point for posting is that I still think we have a dream owner who really does care about a winning product. And as a side bonus, he's become civic minded. Looking forward to the real thing starting in a few days.....

[darksabre]

Dude. Your username. Awesome.

[nfreeman]

Count me in to the camp still giving Terry the benefit of the doubt. For starters, (and I could be wrong), but his real estate project is the first substantial investment in that area since the Marine Midland atrium was built? Reading recent news, the Ellicott development company started work on the eyesore on the 190. Are they related? Was him straying from his original plan a domino that made this happen?

 

As for the actual hockey operations, when he had the ability to do so, he structured contracts in a way that made them attractive options as the years progressed. By frontloading the deals in real cash (Leino, Ehrhoff, Myers, Sekera), the opportunity exists to deal with an owner only interested in profit to obtain more assets. I viewed the Sekera deal in this way, and Kotalik fits this pattern as well. Given the up front money paid to Leino, he makes sense as a trade deadline acquisition to a team who is struggling to reach the cap floor that may be performing above expectations. (Obviously....provided he stays in one piece).

 

I've been a long time lurker and have really enjoyed the board, my whole point for posting is that I still think we have a dream owner who really does care about a winning product. And as a side bonus, he's become civic minded. Looking forward to the real thing starting in a few days.....

 

Good post. Keep 'em coming!

[Two or less]

Count me in to the camp still giving Terry the benefit of the doubt. For starters, (and I could be wrong), but his real estate project is the first substantial investment in that area since the Marine Midland atrium was built? Reading recent news, the Ellicott development company started work on the eyesore on the 190. Are they related? Was him straying from his original plan a domino that made this happen?

 

As for the actual hockey operations, when he had the ability to do so, he structured contracts in a way that made them attractive options as the years progressed. By frontloading the deals in real cash (Leino, Ehrhoff, Myers, Sekera), the opportunity exists to deal with an owner only interested in profit to obtain more assets. I viewed the Sekera deal in this way, and Kotalik fits this pattern as well. Given the up front money paid to Leino, he makes sense as a trade deadline acquisition to a team who is struggling to reach the cap floor that may be performing above expectations. (Obviously....provided he stays in one piece).

 

I've been a long time lurker and have really enjoyed the board, my whole point for posting is that I still think we have a dream owner who really does care about a winning product. And as a side bonus, he's become civic minded. Looking forward to the real thing starting in a few days.....

 

Thanks for joining and posting, and i agree with your points. While i have been (and still am) a lil skeptical, there is just too much to be positives then negatives. For example, he said there is no salary cap when it comes to the hockey department and he's build the leagues biggest scouting department in the league. And they keep adding to it as they did this past week. Pretty significant for a club that is rebuilding.

 

Also, while won't effect the team on the ice, he has build a very impressive social media/web site department. They hired Sam Korotkin who was working in Nashville and he will travel with the team. Pretty solid twitter follow, and also they hired a guy for twitter so interns won't be running out twitter. Not to mention that they brought in many to write for Sabres.com and Duff and Dunleavy who do a lot of video work for Sabres.com. One could argue the Sabres have the lead on internet/social media. There is no money to gain there, thats purely for fan entertainment.

 

 

ps. Love your user name.

[PASabreFan]

I've been a long time lurker and have really enjoyed the board, my whole point for posting is that I still think we have a dream owner who really does care about a winning product. And as a side bonus, he's become civic minded. Looking forward to the real thing starting in a few days.....

 

I think he cares about a winning product as well. I don't think he paints blue and gold onto the wings of flies and then tears them off. My beef is that he appears to have no clue about how to create that winning product (defined as a Cup winner, let's remember). Hire the best hockey people in the world (no salary cap for that, right) and get out of the way. Where am I wrong?

 

We can certainly find lots to criticize about the Sabres. Heaven knows the team has given us plenty to find fault with. But speculating on, and then expressing vitriol for, the motives we *think* Pegula has for owning the team seems rather absurd.

 

What about speculating that Pegula bought the team because he's a "huge fan" who wants to bring a Cup to Buffalo, then patting him on the back for it? Is that absurd?

 

Because he thinks he has the ability to influence others.

 

Well, don't you think you can discourage me from expressing my opinions? Just relax. I'm in control, here at SabreSpace. Me and the Ghost of Al Haig.

[Weave]

I think he cares about a winning product as well. I don't think he paints blue and gold onto the wings of flies and then tears them off. My beef is that he appears to have no clue about how to create that winning product (defined as a Cup winner, let's remember). Hire the best hockey people in the world (no salary cap for that, right) and get out of the way. Where am I wrong?

 

 

 

What about speculating that Pegula bought the team because he's a "huge fan" who wants to bring a Cup to Buffalo, then patting him on the back for it? Is that absurd?

 

 

 

Well, don't you think you can discourage me from expressing my opinions? Just relax. I'm in control, here at SabreSpace. Me and the Ghost of Al Haig.

 

Well, those were actual words out of his mouth so it really isn't speculation, no? On the other hand, you and Dwight seem intent on putting things out there that have no basis in anything other than connect the Roschach blots.

[PASabreFan]

Well, those were actual words out of his mouth so it really isn't speculation, no? On the other hand, you and Dwight seem intent on putting things out there that have no basis in anything other than connect the Roschach blots.

 

Just about every criticism I have of Pegula can be illustrated by words out of his mouth, starting with this huge fan not knowing his beloved team was for sale and in danger of folding.

 

I could say it all depends on your bias, where you stood on Pegula to start with. For me, that doesn't work. I loved the idea of Pegula leading up the first presser. Everything sounded great. My eyes got moist at the beginning of that presser (yes, he had me at Perreault). But then he talked some more. He put his faith in Lindy, the first indication he'd be a meddling owner. He put his faith in Darcy. He want to the editorial board of the News and behaved like an ass and said some truly bizarre things, the first of several on record. He even cleaned the crud from under his nails onto the conference room table! He's a strange dude. I know, because I see him at the meetings.

 

Whatever. It's hockey season. I'll let it rest. I'm actually not nearly as pessimistic as a lot of folks here about this team. I'm pretty bullish about this season being a surprising one — the goaltending will be superb, I suspect; Vanek can have a contract year season; I like the job Ron did; Myers will be better; and son on. But Pegula and Regier leading this franchise to the promised land? Not so much.

[Ghost of Dwight Drane]

Well, those were actual words out of his mouth so it really isn't speculation, no? On the other hand, you and Dwight seem intent on putting things out there that have no basis in anything other than connect the Roschach blots.

You are correct in my case. It's probably stupid of me to even be on this forum. It's the closest thing I can find to a group that is passionate about sports and is able and willing to think.

[Weave]

You are correct in my case. It's probably stupid of me to even be on this forum. It's the closest thing I can find to a group that is passionate about sports and is able and willing to think.

 

Dwight, you sound to me like a guy that has too much time to himself and not enough productive things to let your mind loose on. :P

 

It's not the connecting of the blots, it's the insistence that your interpretation of the Roschach is the only one that makes sense. Personally, I like what you bring generally. But, like salt on a steak, all things and all points of view in moderation are much more palatable.

[PASabreFan]

Dwight, you sound to me like a guy that has too much time to himself and not enough productive things to let your mind loose on. :P

 

It's not the connecting of the blots, it's the insistence that your interpretation of the Roschach is the only one that makes sense. Personally, I like what you bring generally. But, like salt on a steak, all things and all points of view in moderation are much more palatable.

 

Again, weave, the obvious retort for those of us who cast an analytical/skeptical eye on Pegula is that the other side has shown almost no moderation in their praise of Pegula, praise that has been so over the top from day one it is necessarily unearned. We're just providing some balance, balance that in the past has been useful (Golisano, Ruff, Regier, Quinn, the arena atmosphere, Ryan Miller is elite and so on).

[darksabre]

 

 

Again, weave, the obvious retort for those of us who cast an analytical/skeptical eye on Pegula is that the other side has shown almost no moderation in their praise of Pegula, praise that has been so over the top from day one it is necessarily unearned. We're just providing some balance, balance that in the past has been useful (Golisano, Ruff, Regier, Quinn, the arena atmosphere, Ryan Miller is elite and so on).

 

This is where you're completely off base. Praise for Pegula has not been over the top. You're not providing any balance.

[TrueBlueGED]

Again, weave, the obvious retort for those of us who cast an analytical/skeptical eye on Pegula is that the other side has shown almost no moderation in their praise of Pegula, praise that has been so over the top from day one it is necessarily unearned. We're just providing some balance, balance that in the past has been useful (Golisano, Ruff, Regier, Quinn, the arena atmosphere, Ryan Miller is elite and so on).

 

But that isn't true. Ticket prices, for example...None of us are praising him for it. We've simply accepted that it's the way things are done regardless of who the owner is. I believe the majority on this board has little to no faith in Regier to build a winner, we're simply able to see where Pegula is coming from--but that doesn't mean we agree, and certainly doesn't mean we're worshiping at his altar. I could go on, but I think you get the idea. The problem in the discourse isn't others' blind faith, but rather your own complete rejection of and inability or unwillingness to see the other side. Reasonable people can reasonably disagree, but you and some others don't seem to believe this--for you, disagreement isn't just disagreement, it's something else entirely.

[Weave]

Again, weave, the obvious retort for those of us who cast an analytical/skeptical eye on Pegula is that the other side has shown almost no moderation in their praise of Pegula, praise that has been so over the top from day one it is necessarily unearned. We're just providing some balance, balance that in the past has been useful (Golisano, Ruff, Regier, Quinn, the arena atmosphere, Ryan Miller is elite and so on).

 

I don't buy that at all. Yes, in year 1 there was adoration. That adoration quickly tempered when Darcy was re-affirmed as GM for the forseeable future. What you are calling no moderation in praise has simply been an acknowledgement of changes made, ie. scouting staff and coaching staff. Even Pegula's supporters here admit that he may be too much of a meddler. The difference in POV is, others haven't defaulted to "it must be bad" mode.

 

And dammitall PA. I am one of the biggest supporters of the existence of yours and Dwight's POV.

[dudacek]

I think you've made a very good case that Pegula is a meddler and that buying the team and pledging to turn it into a cup-winner is about his ego.

What I don't think — in either case — is that it has been proven that either quality will doom the Sabres.

 

It could easily been said that Wayne Gretzky and Mario Lemieux and Patrick Roy meddled with management, and that their Stanley Cup rings were about their egos.

 

As I said upthread, most of the moves have made sense under his leadership, with the glaring exception of Darcy.

We'll learn more about Rolston, Vanek, Miller, Myers and Hodgson this year.

[PASabreFan]

But that isn't true. Ticket prices, for example...None of us are praising him for it. We've simply accepted that it's the way things are done regardless of who the owner is. I believe the majority on this board has little to no faith in Regier to build a winner, we're simply able to see where Pegula is coming from--but that doesn't mean we agree, and certainly doesn't mean we're worshiping at his altar. I could go on, but I think you get the idea. The problem in the discourse isn't others' blind faith, but rather your own complete rejection of and inability or unwillingness to see the other side. Reasonable people can reasonably disagree, but you and some others don't seem to believe this--for you, disagreement isn't just disagreement, it's something else entirely.

 

I see the other side, and I think I see where Pegula is coming from. We probably disagree on that, too. I think Terry is all about having faith in good people, and believing that that faith and his own input/support/resources will be the ingredients that push a midlding manager over the top. A lesser part of my thinking is that Terry wants to be involved and he knows Darcy is a yes-man who will go along ("I can work with the guy"). Think of it this way. If Terry buys the Sabres after the 1996-97 season, does he retain John Muckler?

[PASabreFan]

This is where you're completely off base. Praise for Pegula has not been over the top. You're not providing any balance.

 

I'd start a poll to measure Terry's job approval, like they do for presidents. But I know I'm grating on people's nerves already. It would be piling on and I already said I would give it a rest with the season at hand. Maybe someone else is willing to do it. You could even pull the exact language from the Gallup site.

[IKnowPhysics]

I'd start a poll to measure Terry's job approval, like they do for presidents. But I know I'm grating on people's nerves already. It would be piling on and I already said I would give it a rest with the season at hand. Maybe someone else is willing to do it. You could even pull the exact language from the Gallup site.

 

This isn't unfair. I'll do it.

 

I've been kicking around the idea of making at least one poll like this, but including all relevant front office folks as separate questions, and encouraging folks to change their votes as many times/often as they like to reflect the current approval rate (not just once). I'd also encourage in-depth discussion to go to their separate threads so the poll thread doesn't turn into an enormous shitshow. However, we're limited to three questions per thread.

 

My hope was it would dampen the "everyone hates" or "most fans love" type of citations (unless they're true) and maybe accurately indicate what posters around here are feeling. Let's hash out the details here in a fair way, and then I'll go ahead and execute.

 

My suggestions:

-Definitely a public poll.

-Really kind of limited by three questions, but relevant front office folks: Pegula, Black, Regier for one poll thread, I think. Maybe Rolston, coaches, for another thread?

-Phrasing, we should keep it simple and neutral. "Do you approve of the job currently being done by (name) as (job title) of the Buffalo Sabres? Yes No Undecided"

-I could put everyone into one thread, but it'd end up really ###### hokey. It'd have to be something like "Check the following box if you DO approve of the job that person is currently doing: []Pegula []Black []Regier... Check the following box if you DO NOT approve of the job that person is currently doing: []Pegula []Black []Regier... etc." I think that sucks, is more complicated, and the results could end up with some weird systematic problem with them.

[qwksndmonster]

I see the other side, and I think I see where Pegula is coming from. We probably disagree on that, too. I think Terry is all about having faith in good people, and believing that that faith and his own input/support/resources will be the ingredients that push a midlding manager over the top. A lesser part of my thinking is that Terry wants to be involved and he knows Darcy is a yes-man who will go along ("I can work with the guy"). Think of it this way. If Terry buys the Sabres after the 1996-97 season, does he retain John Muckler?

If terry really wanted a yes-man, don't you think he would have hired his own? I believe he honestly believes Darcy can build a winner.

[nfreeman]

 

 

This isn't unfair. I'll do it.

 

I've been kicking around the idea of making at least one poll like this, but including all relevant front office folks as separate questions, and encouraging folks to change their votes as many times/often as they like to reflect the current approval rate (not just once). I'd also encourage in-depth discussion to go to their separate threads so the poll thread doesn't turn into an enormous shitshow. However, we're limited to three questions per thread.

 

My hope was it would dampen the "everyone hates" or "most fans love" type of citations (unless they're true) and maybe accurately indicate what posters around here are feeling. Let's hash out the details here in a fair way, and then I'll go ahead and execute.

 

My suggestions:

-Definitely a public poll.

-Really kind of limited by three questions, but relevant front office folks: Pegula, Black, Regier for one poll thread, I think. Maybe Rolston, coaches, for another thread?

-Phrasing, we should keep it simple and neutral. "Do you approve of the job currently being done by (name) as (job title) of the Buffalo Sabres? Yes No Undecided"

-I could put everyone into one thread, but it'd end up really ###### hokey. It'd have to be something like "Check the following box if you DO approve of the job that person is currently doing: []Pegula []Black []Regier... Check the following box if you DO NOT approve of the job that person is currently doing: []Pegula []Black []Regier... etc." I think that sucks, is more complicated, and the results could end up with some weird systematic problem with them.

 

You could also have the question phrased as "on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being excellent and 1 being atrocious, how would you rate Pegula?" That would be a bit more specific and quantifiable. Just a suggestion.