In the last two years, we've gone from 3rd seed (division title), to 7th seed, to 9th seed.
I understand Pegula and Black only wanting to look at recent history and not the past 15 years, but how can they possibly look at the last two years and conclude that this team is on a good trajectory?
They aren't going back that far.
When Terry took over last season, they were on the outside of the playoffs looking in.
The team then went on a tear and made the playoffs before getting bounced by the Flyers.
This year was this year. But, it's obvious that they are blaming the injuries for a large portion of the drop from 7th to 9th.
Regier absolutely gets credit for acquiring the top-rated Dman, who was available on the open market, for an incredibly efficient cap hit. Seriously, how much is the maximum amount of credit one can award? Thats how much credit Regier gets for that one. It was a coup.
Hypothetically, if Ehrhoff had sucked, would Regier deserve blame? After all, Ehrhoff was the top rated Dman. If he doesn't get credit for signing Ehrhoff, does he not get blame for signing Leino? After all, he was the 2nd highest rated forward available.
Well I doubt you will believe me, but to respond to your second paragraph: NO, had Ehrhoff had a bad season, I would not have blamed Regier for the reason you cite.
We are not evaluating players in a vacuum here. We are evaluating Darcy's effectiveness as a GM. If the top rated D Man in free agency that everyone would like on their roster (hypothetically and given a need at the position) lays an unexpected egg, you can't put that on the GM. You can put that on the player and/or coach.
How Darcy completely failed to analyze properly the dynamics of the Briere/Drury affair is classic bad managing.
And regarding your "coup"--if Ehrhoff was a different sort of person (single, into bright lights big city) he would likely not have come here, period. I would put forth Darcy's deal to get that exclusive right to deal with him first was likely meaningless. Let's not forget Ehrhoff pocketed what? $10 million in that first year? He got an obscenely long contract and it is massively front loaded, which every player wants and in theory every GM wants to avoid. The trick (for the GM) is BACKLOADING a contract if you can, and keeping term lower so you have options rolling forward if a player doesn't pan out.
The Leino deal is a classic example how a bad deal can put the GM/team in a bind as a result of term and salary positioning (frontload vs. backload).
Darcy gave Ehrhoff a sweetheart deal other teams may not have matched, and Ehrhoff was the type of guy to not care about living in a little town like Buffalo. So it all worked out.
I don't put any of that down to good management. It's not necessarily "bad management" either. For me, it's a wash. Not relevant in determining how well Darcy does, or does not do, his job.
I may be over simplifying this but let me get this straight......Everything good that happened with this team was in spite of ruff and regier.....but everything bad is because of them?
Also stop judging regier now based on before the sale of the team....the situation is so night and day that's like saying don't hire a coach because a different team fired him....
Evaluating Darcy's body of work over his entire career in Buffalo, pre Terry and post Terry, is absolutely relevant. The orders he is receiving from ownership and his primary function may have changed, but that doesn't mean it is irrelevant to analyze his effectiveness at executing a given directive in the past or now.
Whether Darcy is told to maintain a low team salary and at least break even as a business, or spend to the limit and win a Cup, the fundamental underlying skills he needs as a GM are precisely the same. He still needs to negotiate shrewd contracts that favor the organization and be an accurate evaluator of talent.
Having said that, I listened to Ted Black yesterday and I 100% acknowledge that Pegula and Black are NOT looking to the past with Darcy. They are clearly only concerned about his performance under current ownership.
I believe that is short sighted, but there is nothing we can do about that! It's Terry's team now and he can run it as he sees fit. That doesn't mean his evaluation of Darcy or Lindy is correct though. It just means he's the guy paying the bills.
Lastly, for the record, let me say I think Darcy had a strong trade deadline. I also think an immediate change of coach is more necessary and would have a greater immediate impact on the team than changing the GM.
The trick (for the GM) is BACKLOADING a contract if you can, and keeping term lower so you have options rolling forward if a player doesn't pan out.
It depends on the situation. Ehrhoff is in his prime right now. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me to backload a contract for a 29 year old defenseman, particularly when you consider the length of the contract. Yes, ideally you'd want a shorter contract, but like you said, I doubt Ehrhoff signs if the deal is 3-4 years long. Regier can't act like the GM of the Rangers. The team is where it is, and the city and the surrounding area has the appeal or the lack thereof that it has.
e: When you look at his salary, both in terms of cap hit and actual salary, it's a great contract. Yes, 10m this year, 8m next year, but then 4m for the next four years, followed by a 3m season, and then three seasons where he's payed 1m. He'll be 36 at the point where he'll start being payed 1m a year, which is logical. Honestly though, as fans, the actual salary is fairly inconsequential. The cap hit will remain 4m, but the counter to that is it's 4m right now as well at quite the bargain.
Ehrhoff's contract, barring unforeseen occurrences like severe injuries, is fantastic. And not just for the team. He's being paid very well. It works for both parties.
It reminds me of when Darcy decided to lay all his eggs in Drury's basket, when quite obviously they should have been laid in Briere's. Darcy had the ability under that ownership to retain Briere (but not Drury too) and he did not. It went the other way around. He made the play for Drury, Drury thumbed his nose, and the guy to keep rolling forward (we now clearly know) was Briere, not Drury.
That single oversight should have cost him his job back then.
Given reports that LQ told Regier to get Drury from Calgary, it wouldn't surprise me at all if the decision to focus on retaining Drury over Briere wasn't 100% Regier's call.
I can completely understand why Pegula & Black would focus on evaluating Regier & Ruff under their stewardship of the franchise.
Just like how Ruff likely evaluates players based on how they do for him and not based on what he heard about the player on other teams and playing for different coaches.
In the last two years, we've gone from 3rd seed (division title), to 7th seed, to 9th seed.
I understand Pegula and Black only wanting to look at recent history and not the past 15 years, but how can they possibly look at the last two years and conclude that this team is on a good trajectory?
They may not care about the team at this point -- they feel the "franchise" is in a better place.
They threw money at players who otherwise wouldn't give Buffalo a sniff, and because of that, they think they can call this "hockey heaven" for players now. It's hockey heaven for mercenaries.
You want players who want to come to your team to win a Cup. And right now, that has to be a laughable idea for players who see Ruff and Regier constantly being passed along to the next grade.
They may not care about the team at this point -- they feel the "franchise" is in a better place.
They threw money at players who otherwise wouldn't give Buffalo a sniff, and because of that, they think they can call this "hockey heaven" for players now. It's hockey heaven for mercenaries.
You want players who want to come to your team to win a Cup. And right now, that has to be a laughable idea for players who see Ruff and Regier constantly being passed along to the next grade.
The problem with that is they are NOT just passing them along! They came in and are giving the two of them a clean slate. Ted Black said that nobody is giving ruff credit for the end of the season run. But darcy is getting credit for everything he HAS done. Did you even listen to the Thursday radio apperence? He got SLAMMED by the callers but answered every question asked and explained every answer! What else can he be expected to do as the PR guy!? He even appologised for his not doing enough to keep the fans happy and renewing season tickets if it came down to that and said he will do his best to make the fans happy! Ruff and Regehr aren't his call! All he can do is try and put a good face on the situation, WHICH IS HIS JOB. No more, no less.
The problem with that is they are NOT just passing them along! They came in and are giving the two of them a clean slate. Ted Black said that nobody is giving ruff credit for the end of the season run. But darcy is getting credit for everything he HAS done. Did you even listen to the Thursday radio apperence? He got SLAMMED by the callers but answered every question asked and explained every answer! What else can he be expected to do as the PR guy!? He even appologised for his not doing enough to keep the fans happy and renewing season tickets if it came down to that and said he will do his best to make the fans happy! Ruff and Regehr aren't his call! All he can do is try and put a good face on the situation, WHICH IS HIS JOB. No more, no less.
Ted seems less and less able to take the heat, when any heat comes his way. Did he really threaten to not do the radio show next season because one schmuck said he did it to feed his ego? Maybe he's in over his head just a bit?
I don't buy this "clean slate" business. Lindy and Darcy were both fully evaluated. At least if we take Terry at his word, they were. Remember all those league people Terry said he talked to, who didn't have a bad word to say about them?
But we'll never get clarity from snake-oil peddlers like Ted Black. You want some doubletalk that would make Larry Quinn bust with pride?
"Terry and I came in here, we evaluated everyone... uh, uh going forward based on their performance with us."
The pause is where guys like that do their best work.
Terry doubled down on Lindy and Darcy and now that the team is in the *******, this "clean slate" business has cropped up.
They may not care about the team at this point -- they feel the "franchise" is in a better place.
They threw money at players who otherwise wouldn't give Buffalo a sniff, and because of that, they think they can call this "hockey heaven" for players now. It's hockey heaven for mercenaries.
You want players who want to come to your team to win a Cup. And right now, that has to be a laughable idea for players who see Ruff and Regier constantly being passed along to the next grade.
Do you really believe this melodramatic nonsense? Or do you just post it for effect?
What fantasy world do you inhabit where Cup winners or contenders never sign players to big money contracts?
I was under the impression that the Sabres spent close to the cap almost every year under Golisano.
They spent to the cap early, but as it rose they didn't max out salaries because of the 'don't lose money' directive. If you recall, trade deadline moves were always dollar for dollar because they weren't allowed to take on additional salary.
I was under the impression that the Sabres spent close to the cap almost every year under Golisano.
In cap hits that would be correct. The exception being the very first year post lockout when they were way below.
But having cap hits near the upper limit doesn't put a team near the top of the spending heap. What does is front loaded contracts like Ehrhoff's. A tactic that wasn't available under Golisano.
In terms of actual salaries, the Sabres were usually near the middle of the pack and lower in the last year of Golisano's ownership.
