now that i have your attention, how many times have we seen the sabres in a similar position that tampa found themselves in tonight?...especially, it seems, when buffalo was up against the flyers...
on many occasions over the past 3+ seasons we've seen the sabres play competitive hockey only to have a late second period goal against change the momentum heading into the third period...how many times have we seen the sabres implode into a fetal position when the going got tough and pressure began to mount?...
tampa bay fell apart after the controversial, game-tying goal from jordan leopold early in the third period and proceeded to give up four more unanswered goals thereafter...how many times have we seen the sabres wilt like that after a questionable call that went against them?...
that was not typical sabres hockey tonight vs. the lightning, at least post-driere...
regardless of the past, regardless of what some may think of the absence of derek roy, regardless of the status of tim connolly, craig rivet, rob niedermayer or anyone else, the fact of the matter remains that the sabres are climbing towards the top-eight in the eastern conference...
next up is florida...can they finally win three in a row for the first time this season? (shrugs)
stick to the mantra: two points, by any means necessary
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Sunday, February 6, 2011
"at least break even," dan dipofi and darcy regier
sooooo....the "golisano-era" is over, or will be officially over very soon...actually, for me, it will not be over until tim connolly is moved...
i had this big, long blog set up to go over various things point-for-point, etc...but it ain't worth it...it's done, and if people want to harp on what happened over the last 3+ seasons, they can...that represents less than 10% of the sabres existence...i'm actually more disappointed about the scotty bowman-era than i am with this...such high expectations...
other than the dude near the end who pressed big tom about "driere," the $70m above selling price offer (and "non-reference" to jim balsillie) and revisiting "blue-ice," nothing really stood out...except for maybe the part where big tom said his only directive to the management team was to break even...
larry quinn, dan dipofi and darcy regier did do a masterful job in that area considering the sabres, post-lockout, had operating income in the black only one season--2005/06, $5m...after, according to forbes, it went like this:
the buckster had an article in today's buffalo news about dan dipofi...the third partner who no one really knew nothing about looks to be staying on with the pegula team and may be getting a contract extension...
i've always known that revenue sharing was a big part of the sabres attaining "viable franchise"-status...it was a big part of the gary bettman plan for a "new-nhl"...curious, though, as to why golisano never mentioned it in the presser as he did with the cost-certainty of the salary cap...maybe he wanted to keep the fact the the sabres were on the nhl's version of public assistance, hidden...wouldn't look right for a maverick independent to be considered a welfare recipient...
a collective bargaining agreement will drive any layman crazy trying to figure it out...while researching the nhl cba for information on revenue sharing the legal-speak was mind-boggling, and after about two paragraphs it was back to google to find the info i was looking for...but a funny thing happened on the way to finding out just how much the sabres got in revenue sharing (and anyone who has a link or information is more than welcome to share it) i came across an abstract written by an underclassman at vanderbilt university which delves into the potential impact of player-signings in relation to overall revenue estimates...
you're more than welcome to explore the nhl/nhlpa contract yourself...but here's a breakdown of the aforementione relationship (paragraph titles added by myself)...
From Sharing the Wealth in the "New NHL": The Implications of Revenue Sharing For Competitive Balance, Payroll Spending, and Profits.
Taylor F. Brinkman Peabody College of Vanderbilt University, 2006
the pdf abstract can be accessed here: http://ejournals.library.vanderbilt.edu/vurj/viewarticle.php?id=48
Consider the following example: The Carolina Hurricanes project a gross $45 million in regular season revenues. Per the salary cap, which reserves 54 percent of all revenues for the players, the 'Canes must spend a minimum of $24.3 million on player salaries. Assuming a payroll midpoint of $28 million for the league, Carolina can expect to receive a transfer in the amount of $3.7 million, the difference between its available team compensation and the midpoint (CBA, Article 49.4).
Now, assume that the Hurricanes have the opportunity to hire free agent winger Erik Cole, a player whose contribution they estimate will create an additional $2 million in revenues. If the Hurricanes hire Cole, their revenues will rise to $47million, which will simultaneously increase their available team compensation--54 percent of revenues- to $25.4m. Since the Hurricanes now have a higher ability-to-pay in the eyes of the league, their revenue transfer will decrease to $2.6m ($28m-$25.4m=$2.6m).
In essence, for every dollar of additional revenue that Cole creates, 54 cents is deducted from the Hurricanes' revenue transfer. Thus, the net revenue effect of hiring Cole, i.e. his marginal revenue product, is no longer $2m. Rather, due to the $1.1m loss in transfer money that accompanies his signing; his net value is reduced to only $900k, not including the cost of paying his salary.
When the monetary value of Cole's contribution decreases, the team's willingness to pay him decreases as well; therefore, instead of offering Cole a salary up to his expected incremental contribution of $2m, the Hurricanes' front office will only hire him if he agrees to play for less than $900k. If they pay him any more, hiring his services will actually cost them money, meaning that they will be financially better off by holding on to their cash and not hiring him. Mathematically speaking, if the decrease in revenue sharing transfer plus the additional payroll cost exceed the increase in total revenue that comes as a result of hiring talent, then not spending would be the profit-maximizing strategy.
For that reason, if owners behave rationally, in many cases they should pocket their transfers instead of acquiring more or better playing talent, as the league would hope (Zimbalist 2003, 103).
Adding to this disincentive to spend transfer money on talent is the potential for these teams to receive a share of any leftover escrow funds. If adequate funds are present in the escrow account at the end of the season, teams with payrolls below the midpoint will receive a second transfer amount of the difference between the payroll midpoint and their available team compensation (CBA, Article 49.7). Continuing with the preceding example, the the Hurricanes decide not to hire Cole, they are eligible for two revenue transfers of $3.7m, the first coming from the shared revenue pool, and the second coming from the excess escrow funds."
using the criteria in the abstract above, is it any wonder why regier went after the likes of steve bernier, steve moore, raffi torres, steve montador, craig rivet, etc..while they enjoyed the luxury of having various millions in cap-space available?...second-tier players like these would not have a significant impact upon estimates for top-line revenue therefore keeping the team within the guidelines for revenue-sharing...
it's not a be-all/end-all scenario, but for the admitted cost-conscious/break-evan directive handed down by big tom golisano for a team for a team estimated to have negative operating income, you can bet that it was first and foremost in the minds of number-cruncher dipofi and talent analyst/contract-negotiator regier...
i had this big, long blog set up to go over various things point-for-point, etc...but it ain't worth it...it's done, and if people want to harp on what happened over the last 3+ seasons, they can...that represents less than 10% of the sabres existence...i'm actually more disappointed about the scotty bowman-era than i am with this...such high expectations...
other than the dude near the end who pressed big tom about "driere," the $70m above selling price offer (and "non-reference" to jim balsillie) and revisiting "blue-ice," nothing really stood out...except for maybe the part where big tom said his only directive to the management team was to break even...
larry quinn, dan dipofi and darcy regier did do a masterful job in that area considering the sabres, post-lockout, had operating income in the black only one season--2005/06, $5m...after, according to forbes, it went like this:
- 2006/07--($5m)
- 2007/08--($9m)
- 2008/09--($5m)
- 2009/10--($8m)
the buckster had an article in today's buffalo news about dan dipofi...the third partner who no one really knew nothing about looks to be staying on with the pegula team and may be getting a contract extension...
i've always known that revenue sharing was a big part of the sabres attaining "viable franchise"-status...it was a big part of the gary bettman plan for a "new-nhl"...curious, though, as to why golisano never mentioned it in the presser as he did with the cost-certainty of the salary cap...maybe he wanted to keep the fact the the sabres were on the nhl's version of public assistance, hidden...wouldn't look right for a maverick independent to be considered a welfare recipient...
a collective bargaining agreement will drive any layman crazy trying to figure it out...while researching the nhl cba for information on revenue sharing the legal-speak was mind-boggling, and after about two paragraphs it was back to google to find the info i was looking for...but a funny thing happened on the way to finding out just how much the sabres got in revenue sharing (and anyone who has a link or information is more than welcome to share it) i came across an abstract written by an underclassman at vanderbilt university which delves into the potential impact of player-signings in relation to overall revenue estimates...
you're more than welcome to explore the nhl/nhlpa contract yourself...but here's a breakdown of the aforementione relationship (paragraph titles added by myself)...
From Sharing the Wealth in the "New NHL": The Implications of Revenue Sharing For Competitive Balance, Payroll Spending, and Profits.
Taylor F. Brinkman Peabody College of Vanderbilt University, 2006
the pdf abstract can be accessed here: http://ejournals.library.vanderbilt.edu/vurj/viewarticle.php?id=48
~~~the ideal vs. the reality~~~
"Despite the NHL's best efforts to avoid baseball's fate and to construct a revenue sharing system that incentivizes performance and encourages teams to spend revenue transfers on payroll, the marginal tax rates created by hockey's revenue sharing system give teams receiving a transfer a strong incentive to refrain from spending additional money on playing talent. ~~the share amount~~~
Consider the following example: The Carolina Hurricanes project a gross $45 million in regular season revenues. Per the salary cap, which reserves 54 percent of all revenues for the players, the 'Canes must spend a minimum of $24.3 million on player salaries. Assuming a payroll midpoint of $28 million for the league, Carolina can expect to receive a transfer in the amount of $3.7 million, the difference between its available team compensation and the midpoint (CBA, Article 49.4).
~~~the additional cost of quality talent~~~
Now, assume that the Hurricanes have the opportunity to hire free agent winger Erik Cole, a player whose contribution they estimate will create an additional $2 million in revenues. If the Hurricanes hire Cole, their revenues will rise to $47million, which will simultaneously increase their available team compensation--54 percent of revenues- to $25.4m. Since the Hurricanes now have a higher ability-to-pay in the eyes of the league, their revenue transfer will decrease to $2.6m ($28m-$25.4m=$2.6m).
In essence, for every dollar of additional revenue that Cole creates, 54 cents is deducted from the Hurricanes' revenue transfer. Thus, the net revenue effect of hiring Cole, i.e. his marginal revenue product, is no longer $2m. Rather, due to the $1.1m loss in transfer money that accompanies his signing; his net value is reduced to only $900k, not including the cost of paying his salary.
~~~why top-talent is not a fiscally responsible for small market teams~~~
When the monetary value of Cole's contribution decreases, the team's willingness to pay him decreases as well; therefore, instead of offering Cole a salary up to his expected incremental contribution of $2m, the Hurricanes' front office will only hire him if he agrees to play for less than $900k. If they pay him any more, hiring his services will actually cost them money, meaning that they will be financially better off by holding on to their cash and not hiring him. Mathematically speaking, if the decrease in revenue sharing transfer plus the additional payroll cost exceed the increase in total revenue that comes as a result of hiring talent, then not spending would be the profit-maximizing strategy.
~~~the rationality of the golisano management team~~~
For that reason, if owners behave rationally, in many cases they should pocket their transfers instead of acquiring more or better playing talent, as the league would hope (Zimbalist 2003, 103).
~~~more "small-market" compensation~~~
Adding to this disincentive to spend transfer money on talent is the potential for these teams to receive a share of any leftover escrow funds. If adequate funds are present in the escrow account at the end of the season, teams with payrolls below the midpoint will receive a second transfer amount of the difference between the payroll midpoint and their available team compensation (CBA, Article 49.7). Continuing with the preceding example, the the Hurricanes decide not to hire Cole, they are eligible for two revenue transfers of $3.7m, the first coming from the shared revenue pool, and the second coming from the excess escrow funds."
using the criteria in the abstract above, is it any wonder why regier went after the likes of steve bernier, steve moore, raffi torres, steve montador, craig rivet, etc..while they enjoyed the luxury of having various millions in cap-space available?...second-tier players like these would not have a significant impact upon estimates for top-line revenue therefore keeping the team within the guidelines for revenue-sharing...
it's not a be-all/end-all scenario, but for the admitted cost-conscious/break-evan directive handed down by big tom golisano for a team for a team estimated to have negative operating income, you can bet that it was first and foremost in the minds of number-cruncher dipofi and talent analyst/contract-negotiator regier...
Thursday, February 3, 2011
what she said
"My late husband would be so excited to know there is an individual who is going to appreciate having the Buffalo Sabres and do something wonderful for the city of Buffalo at the same time," says Jean Knox, widow of the late seymour knox III...(via wben website)
yeah...what she said...much appreciation to big tom golisano for grabbin' his wallet and plunkin' down all those millions to buy the sabres...he kept the team out of the hands of mark hammister and his smoke and mirror/government-welfare finances...he got the team on pretty solid financial footing....and, although he reportedly had the team for sale since 2006, he waited for a buyer who would appreciate having the buffalo sabres...
thx big tom...there are alot of beefs, but in the grand scheme of things, the sabres, because of your due diligence, may have themselves an owner who, in the words of jean knox, "has the roots Seymour himself had and that's important."
thx also to larry quinn who lobbied big tom to step in and pony up the cash...alas...good-bye, larry quinn, with your lobbying expertise, snake-oil salesmanship, underhandedness, secrecy and hubristic detachment from everyday buffalonians, you'd be a perfect fit in washington d.c...
full-circle...
pretty good 40th anniversary present for sabres fans
 |
| the late seymour knox III drops the ceremonial first puck oct 15, 1970 |
yeah...what she said...much appreciation to big tom golisano for grabbin' his wallet and plunkin' down all those millions to buy the sabres...he kept the team out of the hands of mark hammister and his smoke and mirror/government-welfare finances...he got the team on pretty solid financial footing....and, although he reportedly had the team for sale since 2006, he waited for a buyer who would appreciate having the buffalo sabres...
thx big tom...there are alot of beefs, but in the grand scheme of things, the sabres, because of your due diligence, may have themselves an owner who, in the words of jean knox, "has the roots Seymour himself had and that's important."
thx also to larry quinn who lobbied big tom to step in and pony up the cash...alas...good-bye, larry quinn, with your lobbying expertise, snake-oil salesmanship, underhandedness, secrecy and hubristic detachment from everyday buffalonians, you'd be a perfect fit in washington d.c...
full-circle...
pretty good 40th anniversary present for sabres fans
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
regier re-signs, ruff declines
as the sabres turn...
thanx to mike harrington of the buffalo news, we've come to find out today that darcy regier was offered a two year extension for somewhere between $2.5m and $3m total last fall and did, in fact, sign the contract...this rather insignificant (sarcasm here) re-signing was kept internal by managing partner larry quinn for some reason...maybe because the fans may have burned down hsbc when they heard the news?...
in most fans eyes, including this one, it may be looked upon as a "golden-parachute" to the gm who apparently was thought very highly of within the upper-echelon of the organization...
somehow i'm not surprised that larry quinn clandestinely pulled this move off...
not to show favor, the buffalo sabres offered lindy ruff an extension as well as reported by paul hamilton of wgr today...
thanx to mike harrington of the buffalo news, we've come to find out today that darcy regier was offered a two year extension for somewhere between $2.5m and $3m total last fall and did, in fact, sign the contract...this rather insignificant (sarcasm here) re-signing was kept internal by managing partner larry quinn for some reason...maybe because the fans may have burned down hsbc when they heard the news?...
in most fans eyes, including this one, it may be looked upon as a "golden-parachute" to the gm who apparently was thought very highly of within the upper-echelon of the organization...
somehow i'm not surprised that larry quinn clandestinely pulled this move off...
not to show favor, the buffalo sabres offered lindy ruff an extension as well as reported by paul hamilton of wgr today...
congratulations, lindy...for turning down the offer...hamilton, in his brief article, speculates that ruff may have turned down the "rather gracious" offer due to unhappiness with the lack of change in the roster and/or to keep his options open...seems as if he finally tired of his "superiors"...
much respect for ruff, who i've always considered a stand-up guy...and i hope that examples of integrity like this are welcome by the new owner...
if regier's two year extension is a golden parachute, good-riddance...
~~~~~~~~~~
a quick addendum on ruff declining a contract extension from the present regime...from wgr's paul hamilton today:
"Ruff was also given the chance to expand on his failure to accept a contract extension from the team. All Ruff would say was, 'The only light I'd like to shed is I want to win a Stanley Cup here in Buffalo and that should conquer all other comments.'"
beware of bucky and his influence
soooo...i'm listening to wgr yesterday, pretty excited about the thursday news conference...what sabres fan wouldn't be, right?...annnnndddd...mike schopp is talking with paul hamilton, the reporter who broke the story...annnnddddd...it's a good conversation...and all involved are trying not to get overly excited or overly speculative...
fine...
a little over half-way into the segment, they're talking about terry pegula's passion for hockey and schopp quantifies it with this, "this guys in the paper being mad about letting tallinder go"...ok, where did this come from?...
well, a caller had mentioned it...in fact over the course of yesterday, i'd heard callers mention that a few times, stating as historical fact that pegula was, indeed, ticked about the off-season tallinder situation...
and where did the callers get this stuck in their heads, pray-tell?...none other than the buckster himself, bucky gleason...
it all stems from a, generally, pretty good background article he wrote on december 2, 2010, sabres' owner-in-waiting comes across as a buffalo kind of guy...according to the buckster, it was culled from conversations from "anonymous sources" close to pegula...keep in mind that nothing has come directly from pegula or his camp...nothing...
soooo...the buckster gives us some background, then some speculation as to a possible pegula interest in the buying the bills (apparently gleason's dream?)...then, inevitably, gleason re-opens old wounds and fortifies it with a new, more recent quinn/regier-era catastrophe', "[pegula] was upset when Chris Drury and Daniel Briere left the organization. He couldn't comprehend how the team let Henrik Tallinder get away because he wanted a four-year contract rather than the three-year deal it offered"...
really?..."couldn't comprehend"?...like you and pegula had talked about it and this is a direct quote?...
once again, no one has interviewed pegula or any of his inner-circle...all the buckster has to go on is conversations with people who do not speak for pegula...all he has are anonymous sources...and we all know what can be done with anonymous sources...
the thing that ticks me off (and i addressed it on this blog as well as in one of his chats) was how pegula was depicted as angry and/or frustrated through an incredulous reaction to the mention of drury, briere and now hank tallinder...all of this gathered through second, third or even distant parties who will remain anonymous...
the press conference on thursday is big news...the sale of the sabres to terry pegula is looked at as a welcome change for "long-suffering" sabres fans who've gone through 40 years of ups and downs, near misses and prolonged failures...although i really don't want to put pegula into "the savior" category--because i don't believe in saviors--it's a huge step forward for an organization that , lately, hasn't been able to combine a desire to win with the financial resources (among other things) to get the job done...
fine...
a little over half-way into the segment, they're talking about terry pegula's passion for hockey and schopp quantifies it with this, "this guys in the paper being mad about letting tallinder go"...ok, where did this come from?...
well, a caller had mentioned it...in fact over the course of yesterday, i'd heard callers mention that a few times, stating as historical fact that pegula was, indeed, ticked about the off-season tallinder situation...
and where did the callers get this stuck in their heads, pray-tell?...none other than the buckster himself, bucky gleason...
it all stems from a, generally, pretty good background article he wrote on december 2, 2010, sabres' owner-in-waiting comes across as a buffalo kind of guy...according to the buckster, it was culled from conversations from "anonymous sources" close to pegula...keep in mind that nothing has come directly from pegula or his camp...nothing...
soooo...the buckster gives us some background, then some speculation as to a possible pegula interest in the buying the bills (apparently gleason's dream?)...then, inevitably, gleason re-opens old wounds and fortifies it with a new, more recent quinn/regier-era catastrophe', "[pegula] was upset when Chris Drury and Daniel Briere left the organization. He couldn't comprehend how the team let Henrik Tallinder get away because he wanted a four-year contract rather than the three-year deal it offered"...
really?..."couldn't comprehend"?...like you and pegula had talked about it and this is a direct quote?...
 |
| the "anonymous blogger" has many "sources" feeding him "credible" information as well |
the thing that ticks me off (and i addressed it on this blog as well as in one of his chats) was how pegula was depicted as angry and/or frustrated through an incredulous reaction to the mention of drury, briere and now hank tallinder...all of this gathered through second, third or even distant parties who will remain anonymous...
if you read bucky enough, you'll be able to sift through his articles and separate fact from opinion...on many occasions (which will be documented from here-on-in) you may notice that between the lines lies a hidden agenda, and/or animosity lurking just below the surface and/or speculation written to be taken as gospel...
bucky isn't stupid...he can string together thoughts and put them on paper rather well...he is sports reporter for a one-newspaper town...nothing more, nothing less...if someone wants to follow him off a cliff...go right ahead...
(shrugs)...caveat emptor...
~~~~~~~~~~
i like the fact that paul hamilton broke the buffalo sabres thursday press conference concerning the sale of the buffalo sabres...
as the beat reporter for the sabres on wgr, hamilton is about as close to the team as you can get...he's there at practice, there for the games, there in the locker room doing interviews with players...and there's a lot to be said for that...
i don't agree with everything he says, but for the amount of content he produces he manages to maintain a solid level of objectivity...sure, his opinion does make it's way into his material, but i've never really got the impression that he's being underhanded, vindictive or malicious with his opinions...
~~~~~~~~~~
Monday, January 31, 2011
the chase is on for the playoffs
yeah...i mean, YEAAAAHHHH!!!!...thursday, a sabres press conference in regards to the upcoming sale...
welcome terry pegula and your passion for hockey--not to mention your deep wallet ; )...
but...there are still games to be played in the month of february...with boston in control of the northeast division right now, somewhat out of reach for the sabres, time to look towards a climb into the playoffs...
buffalo's in that "bubble-mix" right now, six points out of a playoff spot sitting in 10th place...
the 7th thru 11th place teams in the eastern conference:
here's a look at the upcoming schedules for all five of those teams broken down into opponents as division leaders, playoff teams and non-playoff teams (as of january 31):
montreal, 13 games:
taking a look at this, montreal could solidify their place in the standings with their schedule...atlanta has a rather weak schedule, but they play four crucial games vs. non-playoff teams around them in the standings...
carolina's got a real tough month...only four non-playoff teams out of 13...not only that, nj, who they play three times went into the all-star break on a tear going 6-1-1 in their last eight...
florida has a middle-of-the-road schedule, but will need to make up ground vicariously as they play only one game vs. teams they're trying to catch...
and, as for the sabres?...it behooves them match last month's record if they want to gain ground and possibly climb into the playoff mix...
two points by any means necessary, should be the rallying cry...
welcome terry pegula and your passion for hockey--not to mention your deep wallet ; )...but...there are still games to be played in the month of february...with boston in control of the northeast division right now, somewhat out of reach for the sabres, time to look towards a climb into the playoffs...
buffalo's in that "bubble-mix" right now, six points out of a playoff spot sitting in 10th place...
the 7th thru 11th place teams in the eastern conference:
- montreal--59 points
- atlanta--57
- carolina--56
- buffalo--51
- florida--49
here's a look at the upcoming schedules for all five of those teams broken down into opponents as division leaders, playoff teams and non-playoff teams (as of january 31):
montreal, 13 games:
- division leaders (2)--boston, vancouver
- playoff teams (2)--washington, nyr
- non-playoff teams (9)--florida, nj, toronto (2,) nyi, buffalo, edmonton, calgary, carolina
- division leaders--none
- playoff teams (2)--nyr, phoenix
- non-playoff teams (9)--nyi, calgary, carolina (2,) toronto (2,) edmonton, buffalo, florida
- division leaders (4)--boston, philadelphia (2,) tampa bay
- playoff teams (5)--atlanta (2,) nyr, pittsburgh, montreal
- non-playoff teams (4)--toronto, nj (3)
- division leaders (2)--tampa bay, detroit
- playoff teams (4)--pittsburgh, montreal, washington, atlanta
- non-playoff teams (6)--toronto (2,) florida, nyi, st. louis, ottawa
- division leaders (3)--philladelphia, detroit, tampa bay
- playoff teams (3)--montreal, san jose, atlanta
- non-playoff teams (7)--toronto, nj (2,) st louis, buffalo, nyi, ottawa
taking a look at this, montreal could solidify their place in the standings with their schedule...atlanta has a rather weak schedule, but they play four crucial games vs. non-playoff teams around them in the standings...
carolina's got a real tough month...only four non-playoff teams out of 13...not only that, nj, who they play three times went into the all-star break on a tear going 6-1-1 in their last eight...
florida has a middle-of-the-road schedule, but will need to make up ground vicariously as they play only one game vs. teams they're trying to catch...
and, as for the sabres?...it behooves them match last month's record if they want to gain ground and possibly climb into the playoff mix...
two points by any means necessary, should be the rallying cry...
Sunday, January 30, 2011
pegula's impact upon darcy regier (already)
terry pegula is inching ever closer to becoming the new owner of the buffalo sabres...speculation is that the deal could be done sometime around the trade deadline, a date that is inching ever closer for gm darcy regier, who's in his usual pre-deadline, diplomatic role...for the most part...there are times when the words that come out of our mouths are not necessarily ours...the conversation is in familiar territory, we frame words in a way that stays true to the tone that we've used over the years--a tone and a structure that has remained constant over the years because the environment we're in and the people around us are constants as well...
yet sometimes words enter into our vernacular that we'd never really used before simply because it's something that's stuck in our head from a previous conversation with someone outside of our constant...this someone says things we may or may not have heard before, but the words, now delivered with an aura of power and respectability surrounding them, carry significant weight and are etched into our subconscious...
we've heard "regier-speak" for the last three-plus years all within the friendly confines of the constant that has been the sabres for those years...on many occasions, we could cut and paste an interview from one of those years and seamlessly fit them into another interview from another year...
on january 28th, espn's pierre lebrun had an article on the upcoming trade deadline and one of his interviewees was regier...this was the day before pegula, apparently, impressed the comish and the nhl board of governors executive committee at a meeting the next morning...pegula and the league seem to be ready for the sale...and it seems as if regier is starting to feel pegula's impact...
here's the first quote from regier in the lebrun article:
"Most of us have players that we would make available even right now for a trade, either because they're underperforming and/or overpaid," Buffalo Sabres GM Darcy Regier told us this week. "But it's impossible right now to get an agreement on values. We're all hoping that we're going to be able to just charge a cost without taking anything back, and that's not reality. So I think, yes, we're all sitting around to the last day or two again [before the trade deadline]."that paragraph opens up with regier lumping his players into a pool with other teams' players who are "underperforming and/or overpaid"...the rest falls into more traditional "regier-speak" centering around--"yes, we're looking into trades," "it's a tough market," "salary for salary," "player values," "getting a feel for the market," etc, but i don't think i've ever heard him explicitly lump his players into the category of "underperforming and/or overpaid" players...
the second quote goes like this:
"We're getting a lot of pop out of our young kids," Regier said. "Older players that we all believed in when we signed them aren't performing at the levels that they're capable of, or maybe we misjudged it. In some part, I think we could be selling veterans if we can sell them because we like what we see in our youth. I think it's going to be really interesting."
maaaayyyybe, at various times regier would say something to the effect that his players could be performing better, but i can't really recall a time when he implied that he (and his staff) made a mistake or "misjudged" a player they'd brought on board...maaaayyyybe in the past he'd mention the possibility of moving veterans, but i can never recall him using the word--"selling" in reference to moving them...even if he'd slipped those words by, i'm pretty sure i've never heard the complete train of thought laid out like he did in the proceeding quote...
lumping his players into the"underperforming and/or over paid" category?...admitting that they may have "misjudged" certain players?..."selling" vets?...
i do not know for a fact that darcy regier has sat down with owner-in-waiting, terry pegula, and/or any of his inner circle, but it's probably safe to assume that he has, likely more than once...and i'm pretty sure that pegula's veiw of the present and vision of the future (near-term) is firmly etched into regier's brain as well...and ya gotta believe that pegula has had a definite impact on regier, especially because it looks as if the ownership change will be completed mid-season...
the hints are there...
and if pegula is getting regier to admit to things--like he's fallible--that's a good thing...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)