Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Brawndo

Report Sabres Considering Internal Salary Cap

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, sabremike said:

Unless you are just waking up from a coma you have been in since 2011 you are probably aware of the fact they are just about the least successful NHL owners of the modern era and that this is just the latest strike against them.

"Nine Years, ***** All!!!"

#PegulasOut

Who isn't criticizing the ownership and organization for their lack of success and bumbling operation? That's fair to do. But what I am not going to do is criticize the Pegulas for trying to take actions to weather the fiscal storm due to circumstances they had no control over. They are adapting as are (or will) most franchises to the situation. 

One of the most successful developers in Western NY is Roco Termini. He is converting some rooms in the hotels he owns into apartments because the pandemic has affected his hotel business. The point is a lot of people and businesses are adjusting how they do business in this extraordinary environment. 

https://www.bizjournals.com/buffalo/news/2020/08/19/hotel-rooms-check-out-of-two-buffalo-buildings.html

 

  • Like (+1) 3

Share this post


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

You are not very educated and obviously don’t understand the financial ramifications the NHL teams face without fan attendance. The Pegulas made a huge mistake hiring Botteril but we are fortunate to have them as our owners. 

How does that explain them failing harder than any owners in modern NHL history the past 9 seasons? They literally did a powerpoint presentation telling their own freaking employees that a pillar of their organization was maintaining their lifestyles. Talk to anyone who has ever had the misfortune to work for them, there's a reason PSE has a higher turnover than a McDonalds.

Share this post


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

You are not very educated and obviously don’t understand the financial ramifications the NHL teams face without fan attendance. The Pegulas made a huge mistake hiring Botteril but we are fortunate to have them as our owners. 

You make a good point about the dependence on attendance for revenue in hockey. As a contrast the rich national TV contract for the NFL allows for every team, well run or not, to be profitable. That's not the situation in hockey when the arenas are empty. Different sports and different calculations.  

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


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

You are being unfairly harsh. The judicious fiscal approach that the Pegulas will be taking will be the same approach that a lot of owners will be taking. The stress that this organization is subjected to is the same stress that other organizations are subjected to. Few organizations will be untouched by the Covid era. 

Let's start with what should be a universally understood fact about personal finances: the Buffalo Sabres will not bankrupt the Pegulas 

Hot take: This is a team owned by a Billionaire that has lied to our face when he says there are no fiscal constraints when making sure we have the best product on the ice.  He forced a trade that set this franchise back 1-2 years because O'Reilly was due a $7.5MM bonus in few hours, but was fine spending $9MM for 8 years on a 27 year old winger. They mass fired people so recklessly they had to hire one of them back the next day.  They had 3 GMs on the payroll at once.  There is nothing fiscally judicious when it comes the Pegulas anywhere else, why is ok with some people the Sabres can be an exception?   This is a great opportunity for them to capitalize on other teams financial woes to make up for their past mistakes and gain some trust back from the fanbase (aka their stakeholders).  

Chill take: They have done a lot of good for this team and for the area, but they had some HUGE blunders we shouldn't gloss over as well.  If anything its time for them to put their money were their mouth is.  They've had more than enough years to figure out how to run a hockey operation and should know where they need to invest.  Now is a time for them to GAIN on other franchises, not pinch pennies.   

I'm confident the Pegulas can still turn this team into a contender, but they still make amateur mistakes that should give us all cause for concern.  Cutting costs now is an amateur mistake I hope they don't make...

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


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

Who isn't criticizing the ownership and organization for their lack of success and bumbling operation? That's fair to do. But what I am not going to do is criticize the Pegulas for trying to take actions to weather the fiscal storm due to circumstances they had no control over. They are adapting as are (or will) most franchises to the situation. 

One of the most successful developers in Western NY is Roco Termini. He is converting some rooms in the hotels he owns into apartments because the pandemic has affected his hotel business. The point is a lot of people and businesses are adjusting how they do business in this extraordinary environment. 

https://www.bizjournals.com/buffalo/news/2020/08/19/hotel-rooms-check-out-of-two-buffalo-buildings.html

 

You think when we reach the historic Ten In A Row after another season of being a league punching bad it's going to help that bottom line? And the Pegulas aren't like freaking Karmanos or something, they are like the 5th wealthiest owners in the league. I'm sick of the neverending failure.

Share this post


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

Let's start with what should be a universally understood fact about personal finances: the Buffalo Sabres will not bankrupt the Pegulas 

Hot take: This is a team owned by a Billionaire that has lied to our face when he says there are no fiscal constraints when making sure we have the best product on the ice.  He forced a trade that set this franchise back 1-2 years because O'Reilly was due a $7.5MM bonus in few hours, but was fine spending $9MM for 8 years on a 27 year old winger. They mass fired people so recklessly they had to hire one of them back the next day.  They had 3 GMs on the payroll at once.  There is nothing fiscally judicious when it comes the Pegulas anywhere else, why is ok with some people the Sabres can be an exception?   This is a great opportunity for them to capitalize on other teams financial woes to make up for their past mistakes and gain some trust back from the fanbase (aka their stakeholders).  

Chill take: They have done a lot of good for this team and for the area, but they had some HUGE blunders we shouldn't gloss over as well.  If anything its time for them to put their money were their mouth is.  They've had more than enough years to figure out how to run a hockey operation and should know where they need to invest.  Now is a time for them to GAIN on other franchises, not pinch pennies.   

I'm confident the Pegulas can still turn this team into a contender, but they still make amateur mistakes that should give us all cause for concern.  Cutting costs now is an amateur mistake I hope they don't make...

Why?

  • Like (+1) 5

Share this post


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

Let's start with what should be a universally understood fact about personal finances: the Buffalo Sabres will not bankrupt the Pegulas 

Hot take: This is a team owned by a Billionaire that has lied to our face when he says there are no fiscal constraints when making sure we have the best product on the ice.  He forced a trade that set this franchise back 1-2 years because O'Reilly was due a $7.5MM bonus in few hours, but was fine spending $9MM for 8 years on a 27 year old winger. They mass fired people so recklessly they had to hire one of them back the next day.  They had 3 GMs on the payroll at once.  There is nothing fiscally judicious when it comes the Pegulas anywhere else, why is ok with some people the Sabres can be an exception?   This is a great opportunity for them to capitalize on other teams financial woes to make up for their past mistakes and gain some trust back from the fanbase (aka their stakeholders).  

Chill take: They have done a lot of good for this team and for the area, but they had some HUGE blunders we shouldn't gloss over as well.  If anything its time for them to put their money were their mouth is.  They've had more than enough years to figure out how to run a hockey operation and should know where they need to invest.  Now is a time for them to GAIN on other franchises, not pinch pennies.   

I'm confident the Pegulas can still turn this team into a contender, but they still make amateur mistakes that should give us all cause for concern.  Cutting costs now is an amateur mistake I hope they don't make...

As I said in a prior post criticizing the Pegulas for their hockey decisions is fair game. Without question they made bad hires and bad hockey decisions. And there is no question that when they first took over they foolishly and recklessly spent money without getting back much return. Those days are over with. 

The Pegulas are still billionaires. However, they don't have the cash flow to wastefully throw away money. So they are tightening how they run not only the hockey operation but their other businesses as well until the environment becomes more favorable. Whether you like it or not for the foreseeable future the free flowing money spigot has been tighten. You may not be aware of it but there is a real world out where a lot of people have to adjust to. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


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

As I said in a prior post criticizing the Pegulas for their hockey decisions is fair game. Without question they made bad hires and bad hockey decisions. And there is no question that when they first took over they foolishly and recklessly spent money without getting back much return. Those days are over with. 

The Pegulas are still billionaires. However, they don't have the cash flow to wastefully throw away money. So they are tightening how they run not only the hockey operation but their other businesses as well until the environment becomes more favorable. Whether you like it or not for the foreseeable future the free flowing money spigot has been tighten. You may not be aware of it but there is a real world out where a lot of people have to adjust to. 

The problem was the poor decisions made...not as much as wasting money. I don't have confidence in them to make the right decisions whether they spend money or don't

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, nucci said:

The problem was the poor decisions made...not as much as wasting money. I don't have confidence in them to make the right decisions whether they spend money or don't

I'm not saying you are wrong in not having confidence to successfully run a hockey organization. There is certainly merit and history for your position. Your opinion is very understandable. What's obvious is obvious. The record is the record. However, my central point on this topic is that I understand why from a business sense that they will be running their hockey business with more financial restraint as will a lot of other owners. 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


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

I'm not saying you are wrong in not having confidence to successfully run a hockey organization. There is certainly merit and history for your position. Your opinion is very understandable. What's obvious is obvious. The record is the record. However, my central point on this topic is that I understand why from a business sense that they will be running their hockey business with more financial restraint as will a lot of other owners. 

Ok, I agree with that part. 

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Thorny said:

Chad's point doesn't really make sense to me, because the sources are saying we are thinking of cutting CAP to the low 70s. So ya, maybe that means they figure out they can spend that in real cash, and have a higher actual cap number...but maybe they just already know that, and the cash IS going to be lower than our low 70s cap hit..

I don't have time to read through the whole thread to see if this is covered, but Chad wrote a subsequent article explaining that he expects the Sabres to come in at $75M or higher. 

Edited by Eleven
  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thanks (+1) 1

Share this post


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

I'm not saying you are wrong in not having confidence to successfully run a hockey organization. There is certainly merit and history for your position. Your opinion is very understandable. What's obvious is obvious. The record is the record. However, my central point on this topic is that I understand why from a business sense that they will be running their hockey business with more financial restraint as will a lot of other owners. 

The only problem with your argument is that they moved O’Reilly for financial reasons long before the pandemic happened.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SwampD said:

The only problem with your argument is that they moved O’Reilly for financial reasons long before the pandemic happened.

It was a disastrous hockey decision that to this day has affected the team. I agree with you that a financial consideration was a factor in that decision to move him out. 

Share this post


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

It was a disastrous hockey decision that to this day has affected the team. I agree with you that a financial consideration was a factor in that decision to move him out. 

The one thing is ....success on the ice will make the wallet much thicker. It creates more excitement and sales in all areas and not just locally. 

I would agree that this is the time where they should take advantage of the situation. Sure, streamline to an extent but you don't cut back the quality of your product (of course that's hard to do in our product) or chances are you'll lose even more/all of what you have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, SwampD said:

The only problem with your argument is that they moved O’Reilly for financial reasons long before the pandemic happened.

My version of the O'Reilly trade is this:

"I just gave that punk $52 million and he celebrates by driving his truck into a Tim Horton's? How can he embarrass me like that?"

"What the hell? I give your brother an NHL salary to play in the minors as a favour to you and he treats our top prospect like dogshit?"

"Terry, this team has deeper problems than I thought. Our best veterans are kinda dik-heads I think we should move them and turn the room over to Jack and the other young guys. Let me check the market."

"My God that O'Reilly guy is getting annoying with his drinking and his holier-than-thou attitude. He's not playing hard any more. Got any good offers for him yet?"

"Did you see that performance at clean out? I've had enough of that guy. It's time to pull the trigger. We're close, right?"

"Jason, you said that douche would be gone by the draft. Why is he still here? I told you, I'm not letting him steal another $10 million from me on July 1. Get it done."

It was personal, as opposed to coldly financial. The money was more a matter of principle on this player, than not wanting to spend.

Edited by dudacek
  • Like (+1) 2
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
  • Thanks (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dudacek said:

My version of the O'Reilly trade is this:

"I just gave that punk $52 million and he celebrates by driving his truck into a Tim Horton's? How can he embarrass me like that?"

"What the hell? I give your brother an NHL salary to play in the minors as a favour to you and he treats our top prospect like dogshit?"

"Terry, this team has deeper problems than I thought. Our best veterans are kinda *****. I think we should move them and turn the room over to Jack and the other young guys. Let me check the market."

"My God that O'Reilly guy is getting annoying with his drinking and his holier-than-thou attitude. He's not playing hard any more. Got any good offers for him yet?"

"Did you see that performance at clean out? I've had enough of that guy. It's time to pull the trigger. We're close, right?"

"Jason, you said that douche would be gone by the draft. Why is he still here? I told you, I'm not letting him steal another $10 million from me on July 1. Get it done."

The money was more a matter of principle on this player, than not wanting to spend.

While that’s most likely the case, only one of those things has to do with his play on the ice, and it’s wrong. He did play hard.

Hopefully, someday we’ll live in a word where decisions are made for hockey reasons and we keep our good players and get rid of the bad ones.

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


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

My version of the O'Reilly trade is this:

"I just gave that punk $52 million and he celebrates by driving his truck into a Tim Horton's? How can he embarrass me like that?"

"What the hell? I give your brother an NHL salary to play in the minors as a favour to you and he treats our top prospect like dogshit?"

"Terry, this team has deeper problems than I thought. Our best veterans are kinda dik-heads I think we should move them and turn the room over to Jack and the other young guys. Let me check the market."

"My God that O'Reilly guy is getting annoying with his drinking and his holier-than-thou attitude. He's not playing hard any more. Got any good offers for him yet?"

"Did you see that performance at clean out? I've had enough of that guy. It's time to pull the trigger. We're close, right?"

"Jason, you said that douche would be gone by the draft. Why is he still here? I told you, I'm not letting him steal another $10 million from me on July 1. Get it done."

It was personal, as opposed to coldly financial. The money was more a matter of principle on this player, than not wanting to spend.

You paint an accurate picture of the situation. Paul Hamilton who for a long time covered the Sabres for WGR said on the radio during that departure period that ROR who used to be the hardest worker on the team in practice and a supportive teammate, especially to the younger players, noticeably changed his demeanor.  Whether he should or should not have been dealt or handled in a different way is another discussion. His attitude changed and it was apparent to all. So the decision to move on from him was made and rushed to be implemented. My major criticism of the trade was not that he was dealt but that the bonus should have been paid to allow more time to get a better deal. But as you point out the organization's jaundiced attitude to this enriched player was more than understandable. The problem is that you don't get back at someone by shooting yourself in the foot. 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Skeptical 1
  • Thanks (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

The one thing is ....success on the ice will make the wallet much thicker. It creates more excitement and sales in all areas and not just locally. 

I would agree that this is the time where they should take advantage of the situation. Sure, streamline to an extent but you don't cut back the quality of your product (of course that's hard to do in our product) or chances are you'll lose even more/all of what you have.

What I and others will be watching for is to see how much the financial situation affects the hockey decisions that could upgrade the roster. I really don't know how much the fiscal restraints will influence the personnel decisions. We will soon find out this offseason. 

Share this post


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

You paint an accurate picture of the situation. Paul Hamilton who for a long time covered the Sabres for WGR said on the radio during that departure period that ROR who used to be the hardest worker on the team in practice and a supportive teammate, especially to the younger players, noticeably changed his demeanor.  Whether he should or should not have been dealt or handled in a different way is another discussion. His attitude changed and it was apparent to all. So the decision to move on from him was made and rushed to be implemented. My major criticism of the trade was not that he was dealt but that the bonus should have been paid to allow more time to get a better deal. But as you point out the organization's jaundiced attitude to this enriched player was more than understandable. The problem is that you don't get back at someone by shooting yourself in the foot. 

 

It widely know he was being shopped by Botts in the middle of the season which probably affected him. Basically they created a self fulfilling prophecy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that picture is true, then Pegula is an idiot. He has no one to blame for the current drought / money loss situation but himself.

Pressuring your GM to speedily move an important asset is asinine business acumen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Gabrielor said:

If that picture is true, then Pegula is an idiot. He has no one to blame for the current drought / money loss situation but himself.

Pressuring your GM to speedily move an important asset is asinine business acumen. 

Very often what you do is not as big a problem as how you do it. 

https://www.shutterstock.com/search/shooting+yourself+in+the+foot

Share this post


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

Very often what you do is not as big a problem as how you do it. 

https://www.shutterstock.com/search/shooting+yourself+in+the+foot

2014 hurt.

It'll piss off Bills fans, but the Pegulas getting them was bad for the Sabres. The NFL clearly has dominated their attention since. Adding that they lucked into a good GM/Coach pair has certainly helped, but the fact that it's basically impossible to lose money as a NFL owner is the probably the bigger perk for them.

Meanwhile, every hire they made of either high-recommended GMs / coaches, or high-priced UFAs, has failed miserably. So they're probably thinking that if they cut funding to save money, what's the difference? We suck anyways!, as opposed to concentrating on fixing the problem.

 

So I guess we'll see. Maybe Jack and Dahlin save the Pegulas. Maybe both leave and the Pegulas sell. Money is no longer a factor for good, though. 

Edited by Gabrielor
  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...