Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Brawndo

Sabres Announce GM Jason Botterill has been Fired. Kevyn Adams Named GM

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Thorny said:

What players has he brought in so far? 

Its too early to judge. The pairing analytics with traditional methods stuff is really, really basic promotional speak. Everyone should be doing that - baseline competence. 

- - - 

As for the first bit, true, but I and many others had hoped that maybe it was more of a "straw that broke the camel's back" type deal. 

Only 2 or 3 teams  in the entire league have made player moves since Botterill was fired because the season is still occurring. We have seen what? 2 trades total with Kapanen and Allen being the main things moved. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

It's Kim's team. Isn't that obvious?

Exactly. 

As far as the analytics approach goes, I still don't think the Pegulas know anything about hockey so now they don't trust hockey people (even though they never hired experienced hockey people to run it) but they are business people so numbers and computers and charts and stuff seem to make sense to them so ya they say let's try that shiny newer thing. 

Yep, never experienced hockey people.

Well, except Stanley Cup winning GM Craig Patrick, 25-year scout and assistant GM Tim Murray, former NHL coach of the year Ted Nolan, Stanley Cup winning coach Dan Byslma, Stanley Cup winning 10-year AGM and MBA Jason Botterill, and two-time former NHL GM Randy Sexton, and hall-of-famers Phil Housley and Pat Lafontaine.

I mean, where do they find these guys?

Edited by dudacek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I don't think that was what he was saying at all. In fact your are mixing 2 conversations together, why Botterill was fired and why Adams has appeared to be different. 

I disagree with you. It's clear that Botterill was fired because he was not willing to go along with the austerity program. It's easy for us to agree on that point because the reason was stated by the Pegulas. As far as the analytical issue being a significant factor for the firing that is a diversion and a manufactured rationale because analytics were already part of the evaluation system not only for the Sabres under Botts but for all teams. 

As far as Adams approach appearing to be different I don't know how you can say that because he hasn't made many hockey decisions yet other than staffing decisions. What we do know for sure is that he will be working with a thinned out  staff because because he has no other choice. The Pegulas made the determination as to the more austere way of doing business. 

As I have said on numerous posts the Pegulas have a right to structure the organization any way they want. Ultimately, what is going to matter is the quality of hockey decisions made by the hockey people. It's not unreasonable to believe that a more austere operation can be more nimble and creative and make better hockey decisions than a bulkier run operation.  That's what I'm hoping for. 

Edited by JohnC
  • Awesome! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John C I agree with you to a large degree. I agreed with the Sabres overhaul of a bloated and inefficient organization. My only misgivings are it's been replaced by a lot of inexperience. That doesn't necessarily mean they will fail but it's still , in my mind , a misgiving. I believe Adams is a pretty sharp guy but I question ownership and it's hiring rationale at this point. Hopefully between Krueger and Adams they can assemble a team rather than just a bunch of individual pieces. I think bolstering our goaltending and upgrading our forwards is an obvious need.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Radar said:

John C I agree with you to a large degree. I agreed with the Sabres overhaul of a bloated and inefficient organization. My only misgivings are it's been replaced by a lot of inexperience. That doesn't necessarily mean they will fail but it's still , in my mind , a misgiving. I believe Adams is a pretty sharp guy but I question ownership and it's hiring rationale at this point. Hopefully between Krueger and Adams they can assemble a team rather than just a bunch of individual pieces. I think bolstering our goaltending and upgrading our forwards is an obvious need.

I agree with most of what you stated. As you noted bigger is not always better. That is not to say that it is always not better. But by culling the staff you hopefully will make it more nimble and creative. With smaller staffs the hockey departments are more likely to be better at interacting/communicating with one another. With respect to the issue of inexperience although Adams has made a lot of new hires that doesn't mean that they are less accomplished than the people they replaced. The bottom line determining success revolves around the hockey decisions that will be made this offseason. Only time will tell. Entering this offseason I'm more encouraged than discouraged. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JohnC said:

I disagree with you. It's clear that Botterill was fired because he was not willing to go along with the austerity program. It's easy for us to agree on that point because the reason was stated by the Pegulas. As far as the analytical issue being a significant factor for the firing that is a diversion and a manufactured rationale because analytics were already part of the evaluation system not only for the Sabres under Botts but for all teams. 

As far as Adams approach appearing to be different I don't know how you can say that because he hasn't made many hockey decisions yet other than staffing decisions. What we do know for sure is that he will be working with a thinned out  staff because because he has no other choice. The Pegulas made the determination as to the more austere way of doing business. 

As I have said on numerous posts the Pegulas have a right to structure the organization any way they want. Ultimately, what is going to matter is the quality of hockey decisions made by the hockey people. It's not unreasonable to believe that a more austere operation can be more nimble and creative and make better hockey decisions than a bulkier run operation.  That's what I'm hoping for. 

You are agreeing with me actually.

Botterill was fired because he wouldn't can a bunch of ppl. No one is saying analytics was a significant factor, or at least I haven't seen that because we literally know he was fired because he wouldn't fire ppl. Not sure why you keep trying to make them some other argument that really no one is making. 

Adams is different then Botterill because he wants to integrate analytics into the decision making process more. Staffing results in hockey decisions so those 2 things go together. You don't make your analytics guy expressly part of the scouting department for shits and giggles. 

Edited by LGR4GM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

You are agreeing with me actually.

Botterill was fired because he wouldn't can a bunch of ppl.

Adams is different then Botterill because he wants to integrate analytics into the decision making process more. Staffing results in hockey decisions so those 2 things go together. You don't make your analytics guy expressly part of the scouting department for shits and giggles. 

With respect to the highlighted segment about why Botterill was fired the reason you gave why he was fired is exactly what I have been saying in the dozens of my posts on this subject. So there is no disagreement on that issue. 

You didn't respond to what I stated. You distorted it. That's fine. There is no need to continue with this wasteful and foolish duet. Your need to always be right is tiresome. And forcing your self-declared brilliance on to others doesn't work with people who are not receptive to it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, JohnC said:

With respect to the highlighted segment about why Botterill was fired the reason you gave why he was fired is exactly what I have been saying in the dozens of my posts on this subject. So there is no disagreement on that issue. 

You didn't respond to what I stated. You distorted it. That's fine. There is no need to continue with this wasteful and foolish duet. Your need to always be right is tiresome. And forcing your self-declared brilliance on to others doesn't work with people who are not receptive to it. 

I am not even sure what you stated that I am "deliberately" ignoring...so here, tell me what your point is because I don't get it. "You didn't respond to what I stated." Okay well restate it so I know exactly what I didn't respond too. 

I wrote several things to this bolded. I deleted most of them. Why are you making this personal and this is out of line. 

Edited by LGR4GM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JohnC said:

I disagree with you. It's clear that Botterill was fired because he was not willing to go along with the austerity program. It's easy for us to agree on that point because the reason was stated by the Pegulas. As far as the analytical issue being a significant factor for the firing that is a diversion and a manufactured rationale because analytics were already part of the evaluation system not only for the Sabres under Botts but for all teams. 

As far as Adams approach appearing to be different I don't know how you can say that because he hasn't made many hockey decisions yet other than staffing decisions. What we do know for sure is that he will be working with a thinned out  staff because because he has no other choice. The Pegulas made the determination as to the more austere way of doing business. 

As I have said on numerous posts the Pegulas have a right to structure the organization any way they want. Ultimately, what is going to matter is the quality of hockey decisions made by the hockey people. It's not unreasonable to believe that a more austere operation can be more nimble and creative and make better hockey decisions than a bulkier run operation.  That's what I'm hoping for. 

I don't think analytics had anything to do with Botterill being fired. If that was what you are arguing about then we can end that now. Botterill was fired for the singular reason he refused to go along with the Pegula's plans to downsize the hockey department. Analytics might have played a role in the new order if Botterill had agreed but he was fired for refusing or fighting the downsize. 

Analytics were a peripheral under Botterill as evidence by the fact decisions were made and then stats were asked to be provided to backed already decided upon things. In a sense then Analytics was part of the process but again, Adams has at least in appearance elevated it to be a primary part of the process. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, JohnC said:

With respect to the highlighted segment about why Botterill was fired the reason you gave why he was fired is exactly what I have been saying in the dozens of my posts on this subject. So there is no disagreement on that issue. 

You didn't respond to what I stated. You distorted it. That's fine. There is no need to continue with this wasteful and foolish duet. Your need to always be right is tiresome. And forcing your self-declared brilliance on to others doesn't work with people who are not receptive to it. 

I don’t get this.  I think Liger had it right.  You didn’t fully understand what I was saying.  I clarified, it’s all good.  When Liger clarified, saying the same thing, you respond like this???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the Pegula's who knows, they could have this glorified puppet in for the next 5 years and we're suffering.  I know that the Pegula's do not want to lose like we have been.  Just see with the Beane/McDermott group, they hardly get involved.  Can you please STAY OUT OF OUR HOCKEY OPS DEPARTMENT.  

Edited by TheCerebral1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

I don't think analytics had anything to do with Botterill being fired. If that was what you are arguing about then we can end that now. Botterill was fired for the singular reason he refused to go along with the Pegula's plans to downsize the hockey department. Analytics might have played a role in the new order if Botterill had agreed but he was fired for refusing or fighting the downsize. 

Analytics were a peripheral under Botterill as evidence by the fact decisions were made and then stats were asked to be provided to backed already decided upon things. In a sense then Analytics was part of the process but again, Adams has at least in appearance elevated it to be a primary part of the process. 

I have said all along that Botterill was fired for not going along with the downsizing. What more can I say. And I have repeatedly stated that the peripheral analytical issue as it pertained to Botterill was not a consequential factor. You keep portraying my position as if it was otherwise. It is not!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Curt said:

I don’t get this.  I think Liger had it right.  You didn’t fully understand what I was saying.  I clarified, it’s all good.  When Liger clarified, saying the same thing, you respond like this???

My problem is not with you. As I stated before with our exchanges you and I are basically in accord. My issue is with another poster who keeps twisting my position when it is clear that it is not what I am saying. This repeated distortion by him irritated me to the point that I responded with needless vigor. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, JohnC said:

My problem is not with you. As I stated before with our exchanges you and I are basically in accord. My issue is with another poster who keeps twisting my position when it is clear that it is not what I am saying. This repeated distortion by him irritated me to the point that I responded with needless vigor. 

He isn’t twisting anything though.  You think he is saying that you said Botterill was fired because of analytics?

I’m almost certain that he isn’t saying that.  I don’t know where you are getting that from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, dudacek said:

Yep, never experienced hockey people.

Well, except Stanley Cup winning GM Craig Patrick, 25-year scout and assistant GM Tim Murray, former NHL coach of the year Ted Nolan, Stanley Cup winning coach Dan Byslma, Stanley Cup winning 10-year AGM and MBA Jason Botterill, and two-time former NHL GM Randy Sexton, and hall-of-famers Phil Housley and Pat Lafontaine.

I mean, where do they find these guys?

Funny. Except no. None of their GMs, the men at the top had experience at that level. Murray was a scout true, but he was unqualified for a GM role, just an inexperienced product of nepotism in the Murray clan. Nolan? Nolan was a patsy. Filled the void for the tank, totally screwed over even though he had somewhat of a legacy here and fan favour (with some). Wonder why the culture sucks? Maybe it's for things like that. Botterill? No GM experience, I think everyone (probably even you) has said at some point he was in over his head and didn't have a clue. Housley? No pevious head coaching experience. and LaFontaine, he ran for the door (or was pushed out of it) practically day one.

Actually experienced people who have been available at various points that they could have hired..........Tortorella, Lamorello, Trotts, Quennville, Dudley, ..............how long do you want that list to be, it's long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We just won't have a clear idea about the extent to which Adams differs from the previous GM, and his aptitude as a whole, until later this offseason.

From what is being mentioned here it doesn't seem like the current management structure (and power structure) was the plan (the Krueger "vacuum" bit from J.W.,), so we're all hoping Krueger is up to it, and that Adams was the right guy, sitting there, all along. 

It's possible. 

The verbal respect being paid to incorporating analytics I don't think means anything in and of itself, but @LGR4GM and others are correct in pointing out that at least one of the promotions Adams has already made bodes well for that. Even if we differ slightly on the significance. 

Edited by Thorny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, JohnC said:

I have said all along that Botterill was fired for not going along with the downsizing. What more can I say. And I have repeatedly stated that the peripheral analytical issue as it pertained to Botterill was not a consequential factor. You keep portraying my position as if it was otherwise. It is not!

 

5 hours ago, JohnC said:

My problem is not with you. As I stated before with our exchanges you and I are basically in accord. My issue is with another poster who keeps twisting my position when it is clear that it is not what I am saying. This repeated distortion by him irritated me to the point that I responded with needless vigor. 

You need to improve your reading comprehension. 

For the last time, you have said that other posters (that means not you, but literally anyone else) think analytics played a role in botterill being fired. I simply responded because that's not what curt was saying and I haven't seen anyone making that argument. I did not say, you made that argument. Did I spell it enough or do you still not understand? 

I didn't distort or twist anything and now that's precisely what you're doing. You started an argument over nothing, congrats. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/7/2020 at 10:41 AM, LGR4GM said:

We pretty much knew that Botterill was fired because he wouldn't do the downsizing plan. That was the only logical way to read what happened.

Except Adams has already changed things from how Botts did them. You don't start bringing in guys that want to pair analytics with traditional methods or elevate them into higher roles because you are Botts 2.0

 

On 9/7/2020 at 5:38 PM, Curt said:

It was fairly obvious.  Especially since Pegulas stated that Botterill was fired because he wasn’t listening to them and wasn’t on the same page regarding the organization restructuring.  They told us exactly why they fired him.

No person is really someone else 2.0.  Adams has already made significant changes and has expressed a philosophy that quite different from that of Botterill.

The Pegulas are the power behind the throne, always.  Adams is GM, Krueger is coach.  I don’t know why Adams would be taking his orders from Krueger.

Agree on all counts.  Pegulas actually told everyone exactly why Botterill was fired.  Adams is very different from Botterill.

 

23 hours ago, Curt said:

Well, the apparent fact that Adams wants to run a slimmed down, more analytics focused organization, and Botterill apparently really really didn’t, is a difference in itself.  

Additionally, Adams speaks about integrating analytics into the decision making processes in a way that Botterill never did.  Furthermore, that restructuring has resulted in the Director of Analytics be named an Assistant Director of Scouting, so there actual follow through on that integration.

In the end I guess it’s possible that Adams is just going to do whatever the Pegulas tell him every day, but I’m going to assume that he was hired because his vision aligned with the PegIslas’ vision, and that he actually believes in the things he is doing and saying, not that he is a mindless Pegula puppet.

Everything up to here is on the same page. Here Curt mentions Adams being more analytic in terms of how a slimmed down org would run and again reiterates Botts wasn't interested in slimming things down.

22 hours ago, JohnC said:

I agree with almost all your responses with a slight difference about Botterill. The issue is as I see it is not that Botterill was adverse to an analytical approach because it is already a factor with all hockey operations. I'm sure that he was willing to cut staff but not to the extent that the Pegulas' were demanding. It certainly was going to be uncomfortable for the former GM to be forced to cut so many people that he hired. 

Because of the financial hemorrhaging the organization was already faced and with the gloomy future economic climate that their hockey business would have to contend with this austerity program was going to be installed no matter who was going to be the GM. It should be noted that no one outside the organization was considered for the job so it is clear that the owners had the person in hand who was going to implement what they wanted to do. 

I am not criticizing the owners. From a business standpoint what they did made sense. And they had a good argument that even when they were copiously spending money the results didn't come close to matching the invested resources. So altering their course of action in such a maelstrom made sense. 

Where I slightly deviate from your take is that I don't believe the issue of analytics was much of a factor for the GM departure. And I'm not getting caught up on how the slimmed down operation will change how things are done. The bottom line is: are Adams and his smaller staff able to make better hockey decisions that can turn the fortunes of this sputtering team? This offseason we should get a better sense of what the answer will be. As I, and others have stated, the organization is in a good situation this offseason to make some important hockey decisions. Will they sufficiently seize the opportunity? I am hopeful that they will.    

(I want to emphasize that for the most part our views coincide except for a difference on the emphasis on the analytical factor.) 

 

Here you agree and mention analytics was not a factor. You maybe could imply Curt was hinting at that but honestly at this point everything is fine. 

22 hours ago, Curt said:

I don’t know if the Pegulas are specifically interested in analytics.  I do think they were interested in ways to slim things down.  They were pushing to be economical and efficient as they said many times recently.

Im with you.  I’m under the impression that the analytics ideas are Adams’, not him just parroting the Pegulas.

Again Curt reiterates that the slimming down was the main factor and analytics could be a result of that slim down but nothing about Botterill being fired for analytics. 

10 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

I don't think that was what he was saying at all. In fact your are mixing 2 conversations together, why Botterill was fired and why Adams has appeared to be different. 

I chime in saying I think you, JohnC, are mixing up conversations because Curt isn't using analytics as a reason Botts was fired. There were 2 separate points being made.

10 hours ago, JohnC said:

I disagree with you. It's clear that Botterill was fired because he was not willing to go along with the austerity program. It's easy for us to agree on that point because the reason was stated by the Pegulas. As far as the analytical issue being a significant factor for the firing that is a diversion and a manufactured rationale because analytics were already part of the evaluation system not only for the Sabres under Botts but for all teams. 

As far as Adams approach appearing to be different I don't know how you can say that because he hasn't made many hockey decisions yet other than staffing decisions. What we do know for sure is that he will be working with a thinned out  staff because because he has no other choice. The Pegulas made the determination as to the more austere way of doing business. 

As I have said on numerous posts the Pegulas have a right to structure the organization any way they want. Ultimately, what is going to matter is the quality of hockey decisions made by the hockey people. It's not unreasonable to believe that a more austere operation can be more nimble and creative and make better hockey decisions than a bulkier run operation.  That's what I'm hoping for. 

 

8 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

You are agreeing with me actually.

Botterill was fired because he wouldn't can a bunch of ppl. No one is saying analytics was a significant factor, or at least I haven't seen that because we literally know he was fired because he wouldn't fire ppl. Not sure why you keep trying to make them some other argument that really no one is making. 

Adams is different then Botterill because he wants to integrate analytics into the decision making process more. Staffing results in hockey decisions so those 2 things go together. You don't make your analytics guy expressly part of the scouting department for shits and giggles. 

Again, no one up to this point said that analytics or failure to use them or anything was a reason for the firing. We were all in agreement and no one accused you of thinking otherwise. We simply were saying that Curt also was in agreement with you. 

8 hours ago, JohnC said:

With respect to the highlighted segment about why Botterill was fired the reason you gave why he was fired is exactly what I have been saying in the dozens of my posts on this subject. So there is no disagreement on that issue. 

You didn't respond to what I stated. You distorted it. That's fine. There is no need to continue with this wasteful and foolish duet. Your need to always be right is tiresome. And forcing your self-declared brilliance on to others doesn't work with people who are not receptive to it. 

Here we go. Run through it all again. We reach the end where you accuse me of who knows what because I pointed out 4 messages ago that you misunderstood the point Curt was making in regards to why Botts was fired and that you and Curt and myself were all on the same page. 

Stop trying to attack me for *****, I am one of the few posters on this board who openly admits when they are wrong so back off. 

Edited by LGR4GM
  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

 

 

 

Stop trying to attack me for *****, I am one of the few posters on this board who openly admits when they are wrong [/b]so back off. [/b]

You are being ridiculous. Go spend your research time on someone else. 

  • Meh 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, JohnC said:

You are being ridiculous. Go spend your research time on someone else. 

Lol, I defended myself from your bs. We were all in agreement. There was not and is not an outside poster arguing botterill was fired for any other reason. You misunderstood Curt, no big deal.

Research? That's just straight reading comprehension, no research needed. 

If I'm being ridiculous, what are you being? 

Edited by LGR4GM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

 

Stop trying to attack me for *****, I am one of the few posters on this board who openly admits when they are wrong so back off. 

Links?

 

 

Lol...just kidding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

 

You need to improve your reading comprehension. 

For the last time, you have said that other posters (that means not you, but literally anyone else) think analytics played a role in botterill being fired. I simply responded because that's not what curt was saying and I haven't seen anyone making that argument. I did not say, you made that argument. Did I spell it enough or do you still not understand? 

I didn't distort or twist anything and now that's precisely what you're doing. You started an argument over nothing, congrats. 

To be fair, I was among those saying I was hoping the financial cuts thing was more of a tipping point, and that there were plenty of other aspects of Botterill's performance that ownership was dissatisfied with (analytics among them?). That would make it likely Adams would represent a significant departure.

But the further we go without that being mentioned very much at all, make it seem his refusal to make those cuts was the one and only factor in his dismissal, and that he really was going to be retained if not for that. 

Edited by Thorny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am closing this to stop this from being the one topic “all about the GM”. Adams has been hired. Different subjects about his decisions/non-decisions, etc... should have their own topics. 
 

thanks 

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...