Kevyn Adams - New GM
- Thread starter Buffaloed
- Start date
- Status
UnleashRasmus
Rasmus has gone Super Saiyan VI!
I still want Dean Lombardi and or Mike Gillis and Babcock. I don't care about their past "sensitivity issues" or warts on their records. Give me someone with hockey knowledge that will actually stand up for the fans. Our pathetic owners are only concerned about their pockets.
MarkusKetterer
Shoulda got one game in
The assistant GM helps with those things. Ideally a team has a bunch of amateur and professional scouts and development coaches and the assistant GM talks to those people. Because the GM is the one making calls to other teams, the owners, league offices and whomever else. A sports team is a corporation. You can’t just call in Microsoft and talk to Bill Gates. You get middle management instead.
- Aug 19, 2005
- 16,986
- 5,948
Adams' hiring has a lot more in common with Botterill's than Murray's.
Murray was the product of Lafontaine, whom Pegula brought in to lead the GM search after Regier got canned. The thing about Murray is he had a definite conception of what team he wanted to build and gave zero f***s what the Pegulas thought he should or should not do as far as roster and coaching decisions went, and he had the full authority to do both. He rightly perceived ownership's opinions as useless for the purposes of building a hockey team. Their expertise in building wealth in one domain (energy) simply had no bearing, or rather did not carry over into the domain of sports franchises. I think Murray ignored Terry as much as possible, especially in the context of Terry sharing his opinions about players. After a slight set back in Murray's second year and his failure to give satisfying answers as to why Buffalo had experienced a minor regression, he was shown the door.
The Pegulas repeatedly stated over an over how they were not involved with the Murray hire and -- after feeling frozen out by Lafontaine and then Murray -- made sure the whole world understood they were intimately involved in the process that brought Botterill to Buffalo. They stressed it was their hire, and emphasized the need for better "communication" with their new management team, i.e., Terry wanting a seat at the GM table alongside Botterill and feeling the need to receive daily updates about the team from his newest employee. For example, whereas Pegula had zero role in the trade that brought ROR to Buffalo, it stands to reason he was the driving force behind his exit to St. Louis, as a hapless and acquiescent Botterill executed his boss' command.
In this context I think we will see Adams is much closer to Botterill than Murray, as Adams appears to be just another pliable lackey who will gladly suffer through numerous phone calls from Pegula pushing his inexpert opinions because he doesn't quite have the spine or courage to put his boss in his rightful place.
joshjull
Registered User
Ah yes Patty LaFontaine.... The guy Pegula hires on a whim after fanboying over him during a dinner they had together. Then Patty helps get Murray hired and they (Pat L./Murray) immediately start butting heads over the path forward. With Murray going over Patty’s head directly to the owners to sell his vision for the future (tanking). Which effectively broke the chain of command in hockey ops that was promised to Patty by the Pegulas. Where everyone in hockey ops answered to him.
Patty losing the fight with Murray over the path forward, along with the owners actions around it, led to him heading out the door via resignation. Symbolically it was the day after Miller got traded. That front office was such a clusterf***. The seeds of the problems we’ve had started with that front office and got worse over time.
I’m not trying to be snarky but your take on Murray is pure fantasy. He had full control of the hockey team because the owners gave it to him. No owner would be ignored or frozen out by their GM for very long without things coming to a head and that GM heading out the door. He certainly wouldn’t be able to stay in his job for over 3yrs like Murray did. I have no idea why posters ever think the owner of a team can be ignored or told to stay out of things.
Murray had only one person who disagreed with his vision and was an impediment to him realizing it (Patty L.). Once he was out of the way, Murray had total control of hockey ops and no one interfering with his plans.
I don’t get your desire to lionize Murray. He was a terrible GM. He had no idea how to run a hockey department. He had no idea how to set up any structure, rules, discipline or accountability within the team and organization. Thats without getting into the hockey specific stuff.
Botts had the same level of autonomy as Murray had and for the same reason. The owners gave it to him. He was also a terrible GM, worse than Murray. Specific to the ROR trade. Its fairly safe to assume the owners were the ones that wanted him gone before his bonus was due. But it’s probably Botts who chose to move on from him as part of the overall lockeroom “cleanup” (Kane, Lehner, etc). But I won;t dismiss the owners playin a role as well.
As for Adams.... He just secured for himself a level of autonomy that likely near or on par with what Murray/Botts had. He will sink or swim based on his own decisions. If he fails it will be his own fault and he will be another example of the owners hiring a bad GM. Not someone who failed because hey we’re controlling him like a puppet.
Going back to the stupidity of impulsively hiring Patty LaFontaine. How things played out after that is what soured the Pegulas on having a President of Hockey Ops.
I think a step in the right direction would be a Karmanos hire right off the bat. Friedman mentioned it, and there's an obvious connection. Let's see what Adams can do before we completely implode and mosy over to the Kraken forum. I'm sick to my stomach about the current state of the franchise, but I just can't quit this team. Every one of you know you'll hold on until the bitter end. Strap in.
The main thing I like from Adams is the “we need an identity” talk. Now it is only talk, he has to actually execute it. For too long I have looked at this team and had no idea who they were supposed to be as a team. Just a mishmash of mediocre players playing systems that made no sense.
I think Adams gets it. He grew up a Sabres fan and knows that the city wants a team that is gritty and competes all the time. That is why I see picking Beniers as making sense. I would like to see him starting to trade and signing more guys who bring it. This doesn’t mean you avoid skill but more look for guys with a balance of both.
Being able to identify these types of players and acquire them is the big question. Let’s see how he handles the trade deadline and the assets he brings into the fold.
I think Adams gets it. He grew up a Sabres fan and knows that the city wants a team that is gritty and competes all the time. That is why I see picking Beniers as making sense. I would like to see him starting to trade and signing more guys who bring it. This doesn’t mean you avoid skill but more look for guys with a balance of both.
Being able to identify these types of players and acquire them is the big question. Let’s see how he handles the trade deadline and the assets he brings into the fold.
The Norris Division
Registered User
Complete the Carolina connection, Karmanos as AGM, Rutherford as president and then Brind’amour as coach. Incredible and instant stability in the organization
explore
I was wrong about Don Granato and TNT
- Jun 28, 2011
- 3,752
- 3,434
Who says no? NHL executives evaluate your trade proposals for Eichel, Mantha, Dumba and others – The Athletic
TL;DR Adams shouldn't be saying yes to 99.99% of the HFBoards Eichel trade proposals, and should autoblock all phone calls from the Rangers
TL;DR Adams shouldn't be saying yes to 99.99% of the HFBoards Eichel trade proposals, and should autoblock all phone calls from the Rangers
Fjordsen
Soul Dancing in the Dark
- Jun 20, 2018
- 20,505
- 11,411
I think Newhook + Byram is not bad, depending on how you rate Newhook.
Jim Bob
RIP RJ
LA is far and away the best option for an Eichel trade.
The question is whether LA is willing to give up enough of their future to make it worth it.
Jim Bob
RIP RJ
Colorado would need to dump salary in a deal, too. Colorado has some nice pieces to offer. But, Newhook isn’t good enough for a deal to make sense to me.
Good to see NHL execs are much smarter then hfboards posters
The L.A. Deal would be a home run if they blow it all up. That is a lot for L.A. To give up though. It is exactly what I would hope for if they moved Eichel. Then move Reinhart and Risto and you are on the road to a proper rebuild with a chance to build an identity like Adams has stated.
Fjordsen
Soul Dancing in the Dark
- Jun 20, 2018
- 20,505
- 11,411
I think this is not the worst offer, but we could probably get a better package. It would be like Zegras + Drysdale, but Zegras seems to be a better prospect than Newhook.
explore
I was wrong about Don Granato and TNT
- Jun 28, 2011
- 3,752
- 3,434
Good to see NHL execs are much smarter then hfboards posters
The L.A. Deal would be a home run if they blow it all up. That is a lot for L.A. To give up though. It is exactly what I would hope for if they moved Eichel. Then move Reinhart and Risto and you are on the road to a proper rebuild with a chance to build an identity like Adams has stated.
The exec rightfully says that LA wouldn't do it though. Really there's no realistic scenario where you trade Eichel and come away better off, it's a worse position to start from than when Botterill thought trading ROR was the way to better the franchise
"Rebuilding" a team with a franchise 1c and a franchise 1d in their early 20's is a fundamentally foolish proposition
- Aug 19, 2005
- 16,986
- 5,948
What's my take on Murray? That he had complete autonomy to trade/sign players and pick his own coach? How is that is take? It's what actually happened! Nor am I trying to lionize the guy. He had plenty of faults, and hardly a tear was shed when he was shown the door.
But that aside, my fundamental point -- which you seem to agree with while disagreeing -- is that Murray had far more autonomy to build the team his way, which is much different than the Botterill era. Here is Pegula's exact words after firing Murray:
Q: Can you be more specific on maybe some of the decisions that you've made that ended up going in the wrong direction to get you to this point?
Pegula: Well, I can tell you that I was not involved in the last GM/coach search to a large extent and I regret that move. And that's all I'm going to say about that.
Q: Terry, I know you want to restrict this to Sabres questions and I understand that, but one of the questions I've been asked, in making the decision to fire Tim Murray, why Murray and not when you made the decision with Sean McDermott and the Bills did you not fire Doug Whaley?
Pegula: Well, we're not talking about football here, but again, our organization needs more discipline, structure and communication. This is how you win. We need to get better at that in the future.
So where as Murray was free to trade for ROR and hire Bylsma, Jason Botterill was compelled to trade ROR by a particular date, and the move to hire Housley and then Kreuger was certainly a group decision which involved the Pegulas every step of the way. Above and beyond that, it was well known that Botterill spoke to Pegula on a daily basis, which is what Pegula meant by "an organization needing more communication." He wanted to be kept in the loop regarding everything, which is utterly stupid when you have zero expertise to bring to a situation. It's precisely why Warren Buffett communicates with the managers of his businesses once a year, and other than that he stays out of their way so they can conduct their business as they see fit since it's their area of expertise, not Buffett's.
And thus as it was with Botterill it will be with Adams. He was hand-picked by the Pegula's because of his communication skills, i.e., he'll take Pegulas calls all day every day and waste his time discussing things with a meddlesome non-expert. He will have to pass everything through them, especially the next coach. And the Sabres will most likely continue to struggle because ownership can't get out of their own f***ing way.
brian_griffin
"Eric Cartman?"
I think there are truths to both @slip 's and @joshjull 's interpretations, and a lot of overlap. So much so that to me I can't pinpoint the nuanced differences (or maybe I'm not trying hard or caring enough to find them).
That said, I posit the following:
1. The Buffet / Berkshire Hathaway comparison is perhaps flawed, because Buffet and Charlie Munger have literally decades of business and personal trust together, and AFAIK, those two do talk daily / often, regardless of Buffet's engagement with "lower" level leaders. Also, Buffet / Munger / BRK_A are exceptionally successful financially, so not sure that communication model is one the Sabres need now. Sabres need to act / communicate as though they've struck the iceberg, the compartments are filling, and there is no Carpathia coming to their aid.
2. I don't particularly care if/when/how often Pegula(s) talk with Adams. I care immensely how they delineate decision rights. If Adams feels he spends too much time or effort conversing with Pegula(s), then he should speak up and say there are two ways to handle this (A) I keep talking to you the way we have, and we get someone else to help me with my duties,; or (B) I keep talking to you the way we have and I will likely do a worse job than I am capable of, and/or you should expect me to do. Your choice Terry / Kim.
3. I assume Krueger had some frequency of communication with Pegula(s) (as well as Adams). One might infer that Adams further needs an AGM if he's going to additionally fill some fraction of the time Pegula(s) formerly spent communicating with Krueger.
4. Personally, I think the Sabres are in a situation (COVID, fan frustration, NHL standings, perception of "hockey VIPs" in the league office & boards of governors etc.,) where low-communication right now (up, down, across, outward) is far more detrimental than beneficial. I think the Sabres should set a series of interim, achievable goals in all areas, communicate what they can, achieve them, then remind those affected they achieved them. Some examples (in no particular order):
(a) Hire an AGM by X date.
(b) Assess Jack's injury and determine best course of action by Y date.
(c) Define a trade deadline strategy and execute it.
(d) Define the identity of the team they wish to build.
(e) Identify any/all internal frictions & conflicts, and state them internally. So a "SWOT" analysis or similar. These processes are the standard "gap analysis" done in any organization. Assess current state and articulate desired future state, which gives you the gaps. Then prioritize what gaps you're going to work on firstly in parallel, and then secondarily / serially. Define who/how they'll work to close those gaps, and estimate how long it will take to close them, and get going. If they haven't done this, now is a great time to start. If they have done it, reinforce to all involved the plans they are working toward, and openly critique what is/isn't going well. Kreuger's firing / leadership changes are a great opportunity for open conversations without fear of retribution.
f) On the ice, pick a goal with player buy-in, and achieve it. e.g., Two consecutive games of consistent 60-minute effort, regardless of scoreboard. Don't let each other off the hook until it's met.
g) Apologize to the fans.
That said, I posit the following:
1. The Buffet / Berkshire Hathaway comparison is perhaps flawed, because Buffet and Charlie Munger have literally decades of business and personal trust together, and AFAIK, those two do talk daily / often, regardless of Buffet's engagement with "lower" level leaders. Also, Buffet / Munger / BRK_A are exceptionally successful financially, so not sure that communication model is one the Sabres need now. Sabres need to act / communicate as though they've struck the iceberg, the compartments are filling, and there is no Carpathia coming to their aid.
2. I don't particularly care if/when/how often Pegula(s) talk with Adams. I care immensely how they delineate decision rights. If Adams feels he spends too much time or effort conversing with Pegula(s), then he should speak up and say there are two ways to handle this (A) I keep talking to you the way we have, and we get someone else to help me with my duties,; or (B) I keep talking to you the way we have and I will likely do a worse job than I am capable of, and/or you should expect me to do. Your choice Terry / Kim.
3. I assume Krueger had some frequency of communication with Pegula(s) (as well as Adams). One might infer that Adams further needs an AGM if he's going to additionally fill some fraction of the time Pegula(s) formerly spent communicating with Krueger.
4. Personally, I think the Sabres are in a situation (COVID, fan frustration, NHL standings, perception of "hockey VIPs" in the league office & boards of governors etc.,) where low-communication right now (up, down, across, outward) is far more detrimental than beneficial. I think the Sabres should set a series of interim, achievable goals in all areas, communicate what they can, achieve them, then remind those affected they achieved them. Some examples (in no particular order):
(a) Hire an AGM by X date.
(b) Assess Jack's injury and determine best course of action by Y date.
(c) Define a trade deadline strategy and execute it.
(d) Define the identity of the team they wish to build.
(e) Identify any/all internal frictions & conflicts, and state them internally. So a "SWOT" analysis or similar. These processes are the standard "gap analysis" done in any organization. Assess current state and articulate desired future state, which gives you the gaps. Then prioritize what gaps you're going to work on firstly in parallel, and then secondarily / serially. Define who/how they'll work to close those gaps, and estimate how long it will take to close them, and get going. If they haven't done this, now is a great time to start. If they have done it, reinforce to all involved the plans they are working toward, and openly critique what is/isn't going well. Kreuger's firing / leadership changes are a great opportunity for open conversations without fear of retribution.
f) On the ice, pick a goal with player buy-in, and achieve it. e.g., Two consecutive games of consistent 60-minute effort, regardless of scoreboard. Don't let each other off the hook until it's met.
g) Apologize to the fans.
MarkusKetterer
Shoulda got one game in
I will never mosey over to the Kraken forum. f*** that team and their stupid ass name.
- Aug 19, 2005
- 16,986
- 5,948
Again, the crux of my argument is that whereas Tim Murray had complete autonomy to build the team as he saw fit, Botterill and now Adams operate under the thumb of the Pegulas which will feed into the ongoing mediocrity we see on the ice. I disagree that Adams sold the Pegulas on a "new" structure, but I think the Pegulas realized a bit too late they were hoodwinked by Kreuger and are now scrambling to offload these mistakes on their errand boy Adams.
In regards to (1):
According to the survey, Buffett lives up to his “delegation just short of abdication” style. The CEOs provide monthly financial statements to headquarters, but they have infrequent contact with Buffett. Most report having phone calls with him on a monthly or quarterly basis. None have a pre-established schedule, and all said they initiate the communication themselves.
Buffett is also unlikely to get involved in the affairs of their companies, the CEOs noted. They would handle independently issues like labor disruptions, supply-chain issues, legal action against the company, or modest declines in sales. What would bring Buffett to the phone: anything that impacts Berkshire’s reputation or a severe restatement of previously reported financial results, respondents said. One CEO noted, “No one gives a company this kind of freedom.”
What Is It Like to Be Owned by Warren Buffett?
The Pegulas need to follow the lead of the most successful investor on the planet and get out of the way of day to day hockey operations.
(2)I think a GM spending his time on the phone daily talking to ownership is completely wasting his time and energy. Every couple of weeks might make sense. Every couple of months makes more sense. The Pegulas need to be removed from the chains of communications that any business must establish to be successful. If the the past decade of futility has taught us anything, it's that.
(3) Kreuger did indeed spend much time talking to Pegula, and even mentioned how it was his role to assuage their concerns and to trust his leadership course, even after it was clear to "not so informed" fans the ship had struck an iceberg and was rapidly taking on water. If an assistant GM can makes those calls and play sports psychologist to ownership, then more power to him. But let's be honest, it's a sideshow and a distraction in the context of building a hockey team.
(4) Agree with everything on this list. Let's get at.
OkimLom
Registered User
- May 3, 2010
- 15,932
- 7,385
Id be willing to bet Krueger, not Adams, sold the Pegulas on the flat management structure, which probably wasn’t too hard because a flat management was what they were looking to have even if they didn’t know it. They wanted influence from all voices at all levels. Krueger saw an opportunity to have his claws further in the organization, because it’s a lot harder to fire the coach if he’s having a voice in the construction of the team, and easier to sell the players down the river. And he had an inexperienced management person to work with, which would’ve been easier to get your way vs someone that’s been there and done that.
- Aug 19, 2005
- 16,986
- 5,948
I think there is general agreement that Krueger was the driving force behind the flat management structure. My only quibble with joshjull's point is he seems to think Adams sold the Pegulas on a new path (i.e., a normal hockey operation) that will undue the damage incurred under Kreuger's batshit flat structure approach, whereas I think the structure just self destructed which left the Pegulas scrambling for a new path forward.
As we move away from this structure, I don't trust Adams to hire the right coach and build the type of roster we need to climb out of the gutter for two reasons: (1) he's an amateur GM who's primary qualification appears to be he is "trusted" by our insecure ownership; and (2) his ability to shape the management/coach and roster will once again -- as it was under Botterill -- require the Pegula's seal of approval, which is not only superfluous in the grand scheme of things, but outright detrimental.
A veteran GM would tell the Pegulas to f*** off and let him do his job. A veteran coach would tell the Pegulas to f*** off and let him do his job. In short, the Pegulas need to f*** off and let real professionals run things. Going all in on Adams seems like a very low probability bet. It feels like history is repeating itself.
joshjull
Registered User
First things first, I was agreeing with you in my previous post that Patty L. hired Murray not the Pegulas. It probably wasn’t clear and thats my fault since I jumped right into ripping Pegula for how he hired LaFontaine. Then attacked the dysfunction that followed Patty hiring Murray.
Back to Murray..... what I was calling a pure fantasy is the idea he could ignore the owners input. Now you’re going even further by saying he could do whatever he wanted and never bother getting the owners input in the first place. None of that is true. Every major decision, especially those involving a lot of money, would involve consulting the Pegulas and getting their permission. Murray may be the one deciding to go after Babcock but he has to get a sign off from ownership to do it. The same applies to all the big contracts he gave out.
Specific to the ROR trade....There is no way in hell Murray is trading for ROR and immediately giving him a huge extension without the Pegulas being heavily involved and signing off on all of it. Especially with the crazy structure of that deal with ROR getting enormous bonus checks every July 1st.
From your post ............ “our organization needs more discipline, structure and communication”.
This was Pegula talking about the dysfunctional nature of the team Murray was in charge of. It was about wanting the type of team structure, discipline and communication he saw developing with his football team. It wasn’t about how much he talked with the GM or how much control he had.
The lack of communication referenced was about how Murray hardly communicated with the coach or players. Its why he had no idea we had a dysfunctional locker room or that the bulk of the players disliked Bylsma by the end of his tenure. Its a pretty incompetent GM that has no idea these things are going on. Its also one with terrible communication skills.
I also worth remembering how bad our team’s lack of structure, discipline and accountability. One of the first things a GM does is install some sort of team structure/discipline with a system of accountability to enforce it. Something that would be badly needed for a team of young players transitioning from tanking. But Murray didn’t even think to do this until 3+ years on the job. That was ridiculous. Its small wonder the inmates were running the asylum.
The problem with your arguments for Botts being a puppet is they're based on a comment about “communication” your taking out of context ( its part of that larger statement) and misconstruing it. Or maybe you’re intentionally spinning it. You’re also acting as if a GM and owner being in frequent contact is some sort of oddity. Its not.
Specific to the ROR trade and Botts...... He decided to move him and the owners wanted him trade by before his bonus. That’s not being a puppet master. That’s adding a condition to a decision Botts already made.
joshjull
Registered User
I’ve never argued Adams can undue the damage or that he will succeed as GM. All I’ve argued is he got rid off the flat management structure and I’m grateful for it.
I can definitely buy an argument that Adams had a very receptive audience to his sales pitch and it probably wasn’t the hardest task to convince them.
But I have to say your argument that they were scrambling for a new path forward is very inconsistent with your take on how they operated with Botts as GM.
What you’re saying about this season portrays an ownership that’s self aware. One that knows something isn’t working and only took a couple months to get to that conclusion.
Whereas under Botts they had no problem being the “puppet masters” of the worst team in hockey over a full 82gm season in year one. Then kept that coach/GM combo for another year and the GM for one more beyond that. That sounds like an ownership thats incredible stubborn and refusing to admit mistakes.
It’s like you’re describing two different owners.
Agree with #1 leading to him not hiring the right coach.
#2 is more of the stuff we’re never going to agree on.
I share your frustration with this ownership. But no Gm or coach is going to tell the owner to f*** off. They know they’d lose they're job and thats just not how things are handled.
I agree but not for the same reasons you do.
Last edited:
Jim Bob
RIP RJ
There was a definition of the prototype of a "Sabres player" that Adams wanted to add that was caught in one of the Embedded videos.
Now I need to go through them until I find it again...
Thanks for that!
Update:
There is a teaser of the "What is a Sabre" definition at the beginning of the video.
Here is what I think it says:
"A Buffalo Sabre is an athlete that is intentional with his habits on and off the ice, driven to grow and improve on whatever challenges and adversity are presented. Through grit and mental toughness, a Buffalo Sabre will be unselfish, resilient and compete to get better everyday, with the goal of winning a Stanley Cup championship."
Last edited:
Jim Bob
RIP RJ
That wouldn't surprise me. But, I also doubt that the Rangers "reasonable offer" is the best that the Sabres could potentially get.
Another wildcard is Seattle. I think there could be some really interesting options if the Sabres talk to Seattle about whether they want to make a deal that makes Eichel the face of the new franchise.
- Status
