6/12/14 - WGR Staff Interviews Tim Murray

[PASabreFan]

Please name another owner in the NHL whom you think would NOT be consulted by his GM on a buyout costing this much.

 

I can't. Just like you can't say that there aren't owners who want no such consultation. Anyway, consultation, at most, should go like this: "Terry, we're buying out Leino. OK?"

 

Again, I ask — what can Terry contribute to the making of this decision? He's on record as saying he doesn't really care about the bottom line. Unless, that's changed, this is a hockey-only decision. And Terry's just a fan, and not a very good one.

Edited June 15, 2014 by PASabreFan

[JJFIVEOH]

Did Pegula come out and say he wants Leino to stay and I missed it? Or are we just speculating?

[drnkirishone]

I can't. Just like you can't say that there aren't owners who want no such consultation. Anyway, consultation, at most, should go like this: "Terry, we're buying out Leino. OK?"

 

Again, I ask — what can Terry contribute to the making of this decision? He's on record as saying he doesn't really care about the bottom line. Unless, that's changed, this is a hockey-only decision. And Terry's just a fan, and not a very good one.

so this is a you can't prove my point is right or wrong so that means I am right arguement.........

[PASabreFan]

so this is a you can't prove my point is right or wrong so that means I am right arguement.........

 

No. The argument isn't about how owners typically run their teams — to me, it's about the smartest way to run a team. Yes, I imagine every owner is more involved than I want an owner to be. The way I look at it, my way would give the Sabres a distinct advantage over all the others. The best hockey people running things their way, without interference from non-hockey people.

 

Let's say I'm a Johnny Depp fan. I come into enough money to buy a Hollywood studio, with the reason for existence of that studio to finally get Depp an Academy Award. Do I sit in on meetings? Other than being a film lover, what can I add? Do I stop the director and suggest that maybe the lighting is better this way, or the camera angle is better from over here? No way.

[drnkirishone]

No. The argument isn't about how owners typically run their teams — to me, it's about the smartest way to run a team. Yes, I imagine every owner is more involved than I want an owner to be. The way I look at it, my way would give the Sabres a distinct advantage over all the others. The best hockey people running things their way, without interference from non-hockey people.

 

Let's say I'm a Johnny Depp fan. I come into enough money to buy a Hollywood studio, with the reason for existence of that studio to finally get Depp an Academy Award. Do I sit in on meetings? Other than being a film lover, what can I add? Do I stop the director and suggest that maybe the lighting is better this way, or the camera angle is better from over here? No way.

and when the director sends you a bill that is something like 40% of the budget of the movie and tells you oo by the way that's not counting against my movie budget? it is his money he has the right to be consulted on something like this. it's not like we are talking about springing for free soda in the dressing room Edited June 15, 2014 by drnkirishone

[PASabreFan]

and when the director sends you a bill that is something like 40% of the budget of the movie and tells you oo by the way that's not counting against my movie budget? it is his money he has the right to be consulted on something like this. it's not like we are talking about springing for free soda in the dressing room

 

It's a hockey decision. If the end result of a bunch of hockey decisions is that Terry feels like he's losing too much/not making enough money, then he can fire the hockey people and start all over. Anything else is micromanaging, er, meddling.

[nfreeman]

I can't. Just like you can't say that there aren't owners who want no such consultation. Anyway, consultation, at most, should go like this: "Terry, we're buying out Leino. OK?"

 

Again, I ask — what can Terry contribute to the making of this decision? He's on record as saying he doesn't really care about the bottom line. Unless, that's changed, this is a hockey-only decision. And Terry's just a fan, and not a very good one.

It's a hockey decision. If the end result of a bunch of hockey decisions is that Terry feels like he's losing too much/not making enough money, then he can fire the hockey people and start all over. Anything else is micromanaging, er, meddling.

 

I can say that, and it's not a hockey decision.

[PASabreFan]

I can say that, and it's not a hockey decision.

 

Who's on the roster in the fall isn't a hockey decision? Managing the cap isn't a hockey decision? I'm afraid this time there's no bridging our differences.

 

Maybe I'm punishing Terry for not being the fantasy owner that existed only in my head in the days leading up to "Pegula Day." But he, not I, actually said things like, "If I want to make more money, I'll drill…" "I don't want to come into town and raise ticket prices" and "there's no salary cap on scouting and player development" etc.

 

To be sitting here three years (or four years, or four seasons, or 36 dog years) later and hearing that the GM has to have multiple meetings with the owner to decide whether to get rid of this piece of hockey scum, would have been unfathomable to all of us on the day the lord delivered us our Hockey Saviour.

[Claude_Verret]

Leino will be bought out. Can we save yet another made up reason to attack the owner until after the 1% chance that he isn't bought out happens?

[Weave]

, would have been unfathomable to all of us on the day the lord delivered us our Hockey Saviour.

 

Speak for yourself. I would always expect the GM to get the owner's buy in for $10M roster decision. this isn't a promotion form the Amerks we're talking about. This is $10M with no return.

[X. Benedict]

 

 

Who's on the roster in the fall isn't a hockey decision? Managing the cap isn't a hockey decision? I'm afraid this time there's no bridging our differences.

 

Maybe I'm punishing Terry for not being the fantasy owner that existed only in my head in the days leading up to "Pegula Day." But he, not I, actually said things like, "If I want to make more money, I'll drill…" "I don't want to come into town and raise ticket prices" and "there's no salary cap on scouting and player development" etc.

 

To be sitting here three years (or four years, or four seasons, or 36 dog years) later and hearing that the GM has to have multiple meetings with the owner to decide whether to get rid of this piece of hockey scum, would have been unfathomable to all of us on the day the lord delivered us our Hockey Saviour.

 

sThe only reason this would be an issue is if the owner says no.

Tim Murray when he took the job said the advice he got from every gm when he took the job was to communicate with the owner. It is hard for me to imagine that every GM wouldn't do the same thing. What GM would not account for 7plus million dollars?

Even if only a professional courtesy?

 

With your expectations I don't think any owner would be living up to standard.

 

 

 

 

[Weave]

sThe only reason this would be an issue is if the owner says no.

 

 

Yup.

[PASabreFan]

Got it. It's Terry's decision to make, but he can't say no. Perfect logic.

[tom webster]

Who's on the roster in the fall isn't a hockey decision? Managing the cap isn't a hockey decision? I'm afraid this time there's no bridging our differences.

 

Maybe I'm punishing Terry for not being the fantasy owner that existed only in my head in the days leading up to "Pegula Day." But he, not I, actually said things like, "If I want to make more money, I'll drill…" "I don't want to come into town and raise ticket prices" and "there's no salary cap on scouting and player development" etc.

 

To be sitting here three years (or four years, or four seasons, or 36 dog years) later and hearing that the GM has to have multiple meetings with the owner to decide whether to get rid of this piece of hockey scum, would have been unfathomable to all of us on the day the lord delivered us our Hockey Saviour.

 

First, to echo Weave's statement, speak for yourself.

However, while I obviously don't agree with most of your continued narrative, I have always felt you make some valid points. If TP was forcing TM to have continuous meetings to convince him what he wanted to do, that would be a problem. What is likely happening though, is that multiple meetings consist of two. There was probably an end of year meeting where TM laid out his vision for the off season and a second meeting upcoming where he will inform TP of his decision so that the owner of the company doesn't have to read it in the papers or hear it on the radio. I hate analogies but wouldn't any upper management person want to inform the CEO of any major budgetary decisions before said CEO heard it elsewhere?

Forty years ago when owning a sports team was mostly a passionate hobby for some old money family, your vision may have made sense. Today, however, sports is a billion dollar industry where keeping the owner informed is important for job security.

[PASabreFan]

Leino will be bought out. Can we save yet another made up reason to attack the owner until after the 1% chance that he isn't bought out happens?

 

My "attack" has nothing to do with whatever decision Terry is going to come to. It's that he's making the decision in the first place.

[tom webster]

My "attack" has nothing to do with whatever decision Terry is going to come to. It's that he's making the decision in the first place.

 

As I said above, you don't know that he is. In fact, if he is making the decision, I agree with you.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

No disrespect to anyone, but I am with PA on this.

 

I do not want the owner involved at all in hockey related decisions.

 

Now, I do not know for a fact that he is involved, but it appears from what is known that he is.

 

All I want him to do is sign cheques.

 

This has nothing to do with Mr. Pegula. I would say the same thing if Mr. Dressup (or anyone else for that matter) owned the Sabres.

Edited June 15, 2014 by Sabres Fan In NS

[Hoss]

I agree with Webster tenfold. We have no evidence that Pegula is meddling here or controlling the situation. He's going to have to sign a big check for a player he won't have anymore. Don't you think he'll want to talk about it?

[X. Benedict]

Got it. It's Terry's decision to make, but he can't say no. Perfect logic.

the logic is airtight once you accept these premises:

 

Tim Murray works as Terry Pegula's agent. All franchise decisions (hockey or otherwise) happen with the Pegula's tacit approval (whether he is paying attention or not).

 

Oversight of the GM comes from the owner (who is taking all the financial risk, BTW).

 

The GM will at times lobby the owner to get the budgetary and structural resources he needs to run a successful operation.

 

The GM is the hired expert.

 

___________________________________________________________________________________________________-

 

 

Now onto buying out Leino:

 

Though this decision is a no-brainer. It is still a $7.5 million decision that will get kicked upstairs.

 

Goes something like this:

 

Murray: "Terry, it is time to cut our losses with Leino. I'm advising that we use the buyout window tomorrow."

 

Pegula: "Expensive mistake, wasn't it? Have we looked at every alternative? How does this get paid off? What are the cap implications? Hmmm...... You don't say?"

 

Murray: "I've had Jakubowki write a report on all the implications. He's done a thorough job with it. It's on your desk."

 

Pegula: "Thanks for the call, Tim. By all means, cut the check if you think that's the best route."

 

Murray: We are having our final draft board meeting next week if you'd like to sit in on it.

 

Pegula: I'd love to, Tim. But Kim and I are going to be at a WCT event next week. We'll have to catch up after that.

 

Murray: Sounds good, Terry. I'll give you a call after we complete our draft board.

 

Pegula: Okay Tim, looking forward to that.

[Jsixspd]

Let's just hope Leino's gone by the deadline. There will be (much) more to discuss if he isn't. 'Nuff said.

[Ghost of Dwight Drane]

 

 

Now onto buying out Leino:

 

Though this decision is a no-brainer. It is still a $7.5 million decision that will get kicked upstairs.

 

Goes something like this:

 

Murray: "Terry, it is time to cut our losses with Leino. I'm advising that we use the buyout window tomorrow."

 

Pegula: "Expensive mistake, wasn't it? Have we looked at every alternative? How does this get paid off? What are the cap implications? Hmmm...... You don't say?"

 

Murray: "I've had Jakubowki write a report on all the implications. He's done a thorough job with it. It's on your desk."

 

Pegula: "Thanks for the call, Tim. By all means, cut the check if you think that's the best route."

 

Murray: We are having our final draft board meeting next week if you'd like to sit in on it.

 

Pegula: I'd love to, Tim. But Kim and I are going to be at a WCT event next week. We'll have to catch up after that.

 

Murray: Sounds good, Terry. I'll give you a call after we complete our draft board.

 

Pegula: Okay Tim, looking forward to that.

 

It's probably more along the line of:

 

Pegula: (walking into Murray's office)...."Tim, did you ever eat these birthday cake flavored Goldfish?"

 

Murray: ...........

 

Pegula: "Really. Here, have some. How do they do it? They are orange...they are crackers....but they taste like birthday cake. Here..here...have some."

 

Murray: "I'm not really hungry Terry."

 

Pegula: "You have to have some. This is amazing. What will they think of next?"

 

Murray: "That's OK Terry. By the way, we're buying out Lieno tomorrow."

 

Pegula: "You don't know what you're missing.....um....D-day for Villie, huh? He's a nice kid. Maybe he will go to Europe. I wonder if they have these Goldfish over there?"

 

Murray: (walking out of his own office)...."OK Terry....I gotta go bring this....see you later...."

 

Pegula: "Let me go see what Ted's doing. Maybe he brought in the labrodoodle today. I bet he likes Goldfish!"

[X. Benedict]

It's probably more along the line of:

 

Pegula: (walking into Murray's office)...."Tim, did you ever eat these birthday cake flavored Goldfish?"

 

Murray: ...........

 

Pegula: "Really. Here, have some. How do they do it? They are orange...they are crackers....but they taste like birthday cake. Here..here...have some."

 

Murray: "I'm not really hungry Terry."

 

Pegula: "You have to have some. This is amazing. What will they think of next?"

 

Murray: "That's OK Terry. By the way, we're buying out Lieno tomorrow."

 

Pegula: "You don't know what you're missing.....um....D-day for Villie, huh? He's a nice kid. Maybe he will go to Europe. I wonder if they have these Goldfish over there?"

 

Murray: (walking out of his own office)...."OK Terry....I gotta go bring this....see you later...."

 

Pegula: "Let me go see what Ted's doing. Maybe he brought in the labrodoodle today. I bet he likes Goldfish!"

 

So he's the boss from WKRP? :lol:

[Trettioåtta]

No disrespect to anyone, but I am with PA on this.

 

I do not want the owner involved at all in hockey related decisions.

 

Now, I do not know for a fact that he is involved, but it appears from what is known that he is.

 

All I want him to do is sign cheques.

 

This has nothing to do with Mr. Pegula. I would say the same thing if Mr. Dressup (or anyone else for that matter) owned the Sabres.

 

In my mind the owner is the owner. It is his toy. If wants to screw it up, it is his right. If I was an owner I would sure as hell want to feel I was having an input - e.g. what do you think about signing this player, would they fit in? There is no way in hell i would spend $50 million dollars a year (i.e. net loss of $50 million), just to get a slightly better seat in the arena or shake a few more players hands. Although I wouldn't like it, if the owner did order a GM to sign/trade a player I couldn't complain. He is the one paying these guys. If I don't like the team/attitude I won't pay for stuff - if enough people do it then I'm sure empty arenas and bank accounts is a quick way to get an owner to change their strategy

 

Anything involving money, be it player salaries, gym equipment repair or hot dog prices is a business decision. It may also be a hockey decision - the two aren't mutually exclusive.

[PASabreFan]

In my mind the owner is the owner. It is his toy. If wants to screw it up, it is his right. If I was an owner I would sure as hell want to feel I was having an input - e.g. what do you think about signing this player, would they fit in? There is no way in hell i would spend $50 million dollars a year (i.e. net loss of $50 million), just to get a slightly better seat in the arena or shake a few more players hands. Although I wouldn't like it, if the owner did order a GM to sign/trade a player I couldn't complain. He is the one paying these guys. If I don't like the team/attitude I won't pay for stuff - if enough people do it then I'm sure empty arenas and bank accounts is a quick way to get an owner to change their strategy

 

Anything involving money, be it player salaries, gym equipment repair or hot dog prices is a business decision. It may also be a hockey decision - the two aren't mutually exclusive.

 

I quote: The Buffalo Sabres' reason for existence will be to win the Stanley Cup. If that's the real credo of the franchise, then it's not about Terry having fun with his toy, or getting into the real estate development business, or growing hockey in the U.S.

 

There's no reason the franchise shouldn't operate on that strict premise. Yes, it would be near-revolutionary in sports to have an ego-less owner who sits in the stands and does little else.

 

Clearly, I am delusional. Starting that day, the Buffalo Sabres' reason for existence was to do lots of things, hopefully win a Stanley Cup, led by Terry Pegula.

 

It's probably more along the line of:

 

Pegula: (walking into Murray's office)...."Tim, did you ever eat these birthday cake flavored Goldfish?"

 

Murray: ...........

 

Pegula: "Really. Here, have some. How do they do it? They are orange...they are crackers....but they taste like birthday cake. Here..here...have some."

 

Murray: "I'm not really hungry Terry."

 

Pegula: "You have to have some. This is amazing. What will they think of next?"

 

Murray: "That's OK Terry. By the way, we're buying out Lieno tomorrow."

 

Pegula: "You don't know what you're missing.....um....D-day for Villie, huh? He's a nice kid. Maybe he will go to Europe. I wonder if they have these Goldfish over there?"

 

Murray: (walking out of his own office)...."OK Terry....I gotta go bring this....see you later...."

 

Pegula: "Let me go see what Ted's doing. Maybe he brought in the labrodoodle today. I bet he likes Goldfish!"

 

Now I'm hungry for a calzone.

[tom webster]

I quote: The Buffalo Sabres' reason for existence will be to win the Stanley Cup. If that's the real credo of the franchise, then it's not about Terry having fun with his toy, or getting into the real estate development business, or growing hockey in the U.S.

 

There's no reason the franchise shouldn't operate on that strict premise. Yes, it would be near-revolutionary in sports to have an ego-less owner who sits in the stands and does little else.

 

Clearly, I am delusional. Starting that day, the Buffalo Sabres' reason for existence was to do lots of things, hopefully win a Stanley Cup, led by Terry Pegula.

 

 

 

Now I'm hungry for a calzone.

 

 

Not sure why I feel the need but there is no proof that he is meddling, just being kept informed.