Toggle sidebar

The Roster Thread, Summer 2024

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
TehDoak said:
That is true.

However, how many of these companies use 'One Buffalo' as their marketing, have their owners come out wtih Bravado bragging about how much they are going to spend on the team, and use the working class people of buffalo as marketing props at every opportunity?

The standard has to be higher. And sending employees to unemployment during a time when no sports teams were hiring isn't being a good neighbor, it's being just another business.

But the one way that is guaranteed to fail is to not provide financial resources to the team to be competitive with teams you are trying to make the playoffs with. And, point blank, the Pegula's have not.
Click to expand...
For a business that relies on customer loyalty, they truly are God awful as business people. Then again, with the value growth/Ponzi scheme in sports franchise valuation (compared against a fairly stagnant cash flow), I guess he gets the last laugh. Thankfully the business will pass to a second generation soon, and having worked with many second generation business owners, everything will burn to the ground soon enough.
 
The total goals scored by Peterka/Thompson/Tuch/Zucker/Cozens/Quinn last season was 120.

If you expect something similar this coming season, yes, I can understand the doom and gloom.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nikolajs Sillers
KeyserSoze81 said:
For a business that relies on customer loyalty, they truly are God awful as business people. Then again, with the value growth/Ponzi scheme in sports franchise valuation (compared against a fairly stagnant cash flow), I guess he gets the last laugh. Thankfully the business will pass to a second generation soon, and having worked with many second generation business owners, everything will burn to the ground soon enough.
Click to expand...
When you have a monopoly on the sport in the region, then you don't need loyalty.

The Buffalo News and Sabres are both monopolies...you don't need to be good at business to stay afloat with a monopoly.
 
TehDoak said:
That is true.

However, how many of these companies use 'One Buffalo' as their marketing, have their owners come out wtih Bravado bragging about how much they are going to spend on the team, and use the working class people of buffalo as marketing props at every opportunity?

The Sabres have not been sold to the fans as just 'another company', they have sold themselves as an integral part of the fabric of Buffalo.

The standard has to be higher. And sending employees to unemployment during a time when no sports teams were hiring isn't being a good neighbor, it's being just another business.




The evidence is very clear. They have been bottom of the league in spending the past few years.

The proper way to build a rebuilding team is supplement the young players with veterans to provide support and help smooth the ups and downs of young players by having quality veterans to surround the youth with. But, those cost money. The Sabres have had both cap space and draft capital at a time where cap space was limited. They chose not to go out and add but instead opted with a youth heavy roster to keep the budget in line.

The idea the Sabres haven't spent isn't a tin foil conspiracy theory, it's black and white facts.



Again, there are plenty of ways to rebuild a team. We've seen them all.

But the one way that is guaranteed to fail is to not provide financial resources to the team to be competitive with teams you are trying to make the playoffs with. And, point blank, the Pegula's have not.
Click to expand...
I get that. And there have been opportunities for the team to spend more money.

But they are spending money now. The internal cap narrative is pretty much out the window at this point. Do you sign guys to long term, big money contracts with a predisposition to not spend? No. It's the opposite. That part is black and white.

To point to a rebuilding team that isn't spending to the cap is such a disingenuous position if you know anything about hockey business and I know you are very familiar. But your arguments seem to be very reminiscent and not contemporary.

Now that they've signed veterans, signed players in house to big contracts, pushed close to the cap and seemingly improved the on ice product, what hoops need to be jumped through in order to sustain the internal cap narrative?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rowley Birkin
OkimLom said:
The "internal budget" doesn't necessarily mean that there is a hard number that Kevyn and Co. must stay at year after year. The fact we haven't been close to the cap, for years under Kevyn kind of shows that there must be an internal budget of some sort. Whether that's Kevyn's own doing or something handed down from ownership remains to be seen which one is correct, but Kevyn's actions of not using the cap to it's fullest points towards pretty clear there's a limit that they are operating at, and Kevyn's comments about planning for extensions and other financial decisions which would account in future years, (I believe at the most recent presser with Kevyn, please correct me if I'm wrong) shows there's some sort of budget being used.



It doesn't take believing at a tinfoil conspiracy theory level, to think the Buffalo Sabres have an internal budget. There's plenty of plausible data points that could point towards them having an internal budget, and quite honestly, it's not that such a bad thing to have, especially if you're operating with any thoughts that you may need to invest later in the year to improve your team.
Click to expand...
I mean, fire away. What are the contemporary data points that show an internal budget that has clearly increased over time as the young team has coincidentally aged?

Keeping space to sign and retain your up and coming players as FAs are difficult to attract is exactly what an eye on the future would logically dictate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SECRET SQUIRREL and BUCKSHOT
Matt Ress said:
I mean, fire away. What are the contemporary data points that show an internal budget that has clearly increased over time as the young team has coincidentally aged?

Keeping space to sign and retain your up and coming players as FAs are difficult to attract is exactly what an eye on the future would logically dictate.
Click to expand...
And a key point, and major confirmation of having an internal budget. Read what I said.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Matt Ress
ValJamesDuex said:
Would you give up Sam in a Farabee deal ? Seems like the replacements in the system are still a year or 3 away unless they think Gilbert could play more now. Don't see it.

Click to expand...
I don't get how Johnson isn't seen as NHL ready.

I'm on the fence with trading Samuelsson as I do worry about the style of play leading to injuries. Maybe dumb luck, but another banged up year, he loses value to the team and on the market.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ValJamesDuex
ValJamesDuex said:
Would you give up Sam in a Farabee deal ? Seems like the replacements in the system are still a year or 3 away unless they think Gilbert could play more now. Don't see it.

Click to expand...
Most probably wouldn't but I think I would. Sammy's injury history concerns me given the length of deal we gave him. Additionally, I am not sure his salary would fit if Byram becomes what this management seems to think he can become.

I like Sammy and absolutely would not consider it if he could stay healthy, but he can't seem to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SECRET SQUIRREL
Doug Prishpreed said:
"Are you cheating on your wife?"

"Sir, my wife sleeps with me whenever I ask."

This dude is cheating on his wife.
Click to expand...
Ever seen the Before series of movies? Specifically Before Sunset?

There is a moment in the movie where the wife (Julie Delpy) tries to get the husband (Ethan Hawk) to admit he cheated, but when she asks him if he cheated his answer is "If you are asking me if I am committed to this marriage, my answer is a resounding yes"

it's implied he is dodging the question because he did cheat. I agree, Adams did not answer if he was allowed to spent to the cap. If he believes he can win without spending to the cap then he has still been given all the resources he needs to win.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SECRET SQUIRREL and Doug Prishpreed
old kummelweck said:
I don't get how Johnson isn't seen as NHL ready.

I'm on the fence with trading Samuelsson as I do worry about the style of play leading to injuries. Maybe dumb luck, but another banged up year, he loses value to the team and on the market.
Click to expand...

I agree that he needs to find a way to avoid the major freak injuries such as the knee and shoulder. But the broken bone from blocking a shot and the bumps and bruises are unavoidable. Everyone that pays that style misses games, Adam Larsson played 5 seasons before he reached 82 games:

1721149951569.png


Cernak still hasn't played a full season:

1721149989083.png


Regardless, this is a skillset and style that this group sorely lacks. If we ship out Sammy because we're trying to find a dependable 82-game defensive defenseman, we'll never find one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Samsonite23, WeDislikeEich, itwasaforwardpass and 9 others
Fezzy126 said:
I agree that he needs to find a way to avoid the major freak injuries such as the knee and shoulder. But the broken bone from blocking a shot and the bumps and bruises are unavoidable. Everyone that pays that style misses games, Adam Larsson played 5 seasons before he reached 82 games:

View attachment 895292

Cernak still hasn't played a full season:

View attachment 895293

Regardless, this is a skillset and style that this group sorely lacks. If we ship out Sammy because we're trying to find a dependable 82-game defensive defenseman, we'll never find one.
Click to expand...
Let's not forget Chris Tanev, who has been the apple of many posters' eyes:

2013/14: 64 GP
14/15: 70 GP
15/16: 69 GP (nice)
16/17: 53 GP
17/18: 42 GP
18/19: 55 GP
19/20: 69 GP (nice x2....1 game short of a full season)
20/21: 56 GP (hey look, a full season)
21/22: 82 GP (an actual full season!!!!)
22/23: 65 GP
23/24: 75 GP


Defensemen who play the style that these guys play get injured. It's a fact. Larsson was an injury-prone bust until he wasn't. Tanev was injury-prone and spent.....until he wasn't.

Cobra's contract is perfectly fine, it's a non-issue......and becoming less of an issue the more the cap goes up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: itwasaforwardpass, SECRET SQUIRREL, Dirty Dog and 3 others
OkimLom said:
And a key point, and major confirmation of having an internal budget. Read what I said.
Click to expand...

Frankly I think the contention isn't if there's an internal budget versus that of why there is. A rebuilding team will naturally spend differently than a team near the top of the league.

The better question is are they budgeting for hockey reasons or for Pegula?

Not spending 7mil in cap space when you already have a "full" roster and the majority are on ELCs and bridges makes logical sense. If you have 10 guys making under 2.5mil each, you are naturally going to have a lower cap hit overall. Having so many rookies and youngsters is a choice with both good and bad reasonings but doesn't automatically require Pegula demanding cheapness. It can be as simple as how they desired to grow the team as a group. Spending money for the sake of it, is a meaningless gesture that 9 times out of 10 will back fire.

Not wanting to handicap yourself next year when you have multiple "presently important" young pieces needing new contracts isn't illogical by any measure. Merely sitting on money for "savings" sake however isn't acceptable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SECRET SQUIRREL, Matt Ress, BUCKSHOT and 1 other person
I think when you have a choice to re-sign RFAs at fair deals or even slightly above, at positions of need, and choose not to even when you have the cap space for now and the foreseeable future, that is a strong indicator of operating on the cheap. Whether someone characterizes it as an internal budget or not doesn't matter, when the bottom line is that the organization chooses to spend less at the expense of the on-ice product.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ceky
Sabresfansince1980 said:
I think when you have a choice to re-sign RFAs at fair deals or even slightly above, at positions of need, and choose not to even when you have the cap space for now and the foreseeable future, that is a strong indicator of operating on the cheap. Whether someone characterizes it as an internal budget or not doesn't matter, when the bottom line is that the organization chooses to spend less at the expense of the on-ice product.
Click to expand...

So, you're wildly speculating because of Mitts and... :huh:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom