Marc Bergevin: Real Madrid ne font pas les séries ou va pas au Mondial Edition

What do you want to do with Bergevin?

  • Should be to be fired

  • Be patient

  • Keep him is doing a good job


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Rosso Scuderia

Registered User
Jun 30, 2012
9,932
4,115
I know this is a meme right now but there're indeed people really pissed when they lose and people that don't care... I mean this is quite obvious, I have no idea why this Bergevin's comment made so much noise...

I know exactly in what category a guy like Gallagher or Byron are , don't know for the rest...

I get the idea of player that hates to lose.. but the thing is, not every players shows their emotions the same way.

Thing is.. this team is entirely his now. He brought in or kept the players he thought would make this a winning team and then all of a sudden, we are losing because HIS players don't care anymore?

Maybe, just maybe.. there are not indifferent to losing, they're just tired of it because unlike the GM, they know this team just plain suck so the motivation is not there anymore. I respect guys like Gallagher and Byron that will always give 100% every games, every shifts.. but let's not pretend that there's 20 guys like that in any team.

Purely speculative.. I think there's a lot of veterans in this team that gave up on MB and/or just doesn't like how this team is being managed and/or players are treated.

I guess the players and mostly vets did not appreciated it all that much when they saw Markov and Radulov leave the team, replaced with two players that gave us nothing.. and with tons of money left.. When MB said the players weren't ready to start the season.. We'll maybe that's why.

All this just to say that this is his team, his players that he analyzed over the years and chose to keep, sign, or trade for.. The sudden attitude problem is just BS. The problem goes way further than that.
 

Belial

Registered User
Oct 22, 2014
26,142
14,323
Montreal
There's also players like Crosby or Malkin who prefer to win than lose.

Being pissed when losing is overrated. I've met my fair share or losers who were always pissed after a loss. And believe me they lost a lot.

Winner don't lose their temper when things are not working. They keep their calm because they are confident they'll win anyway. From my own experience people who hate to lose do because they are actually losing instead of winning.

I don't think you get the point honestly..

What Bergevin was trying to say is that there were too many players on this team that were fine with losing (complacent) and not enough crazy heads that wanted nothing but victory.
 

Belial

Registered User
Oct 22, 2014
26,142
14,323
Montreal
I get the idea of player that hates to lose.. but the thing is, not every players shows their emotions the same way.

Thing is.. this team is entirely his now. He brought in or kept the players he thought would make this a winning team and then all of a sudden, we are losing because HIS players don't care anymore?

Maybe, just maybe.. there are not indifferent to losing, they're just tired of it because unlike the GM, they know this team just plain suck so the motivation is not there anymore. I respect guys like Gallagher and Byron that will always give 100% every games, every shifts.. but let's not pretend that there's 20 guys like that in any team.

Purely speculative.. I think there's a lot of veterans in this team that gave up on MB and/or just doesn't like how this team is being managed and/or players are treated.

I guess the players and mostly vets did not appreciated it all that much when they saw Markov and Radulov leave the team, replaced with two players that gave us nothing.. and with tons of money left.. When MB said the players weren't ready to start the season.. We'll maybe that's why.

All this just to say that this is his team, his players that he analyzed over the years and chose to keep, sign, or trade for.. The sudden attitude problem is just BS. The problem goes way further than that.

The problem I have with this is that the guys he brought in for that leadership thing were all injured this season... Weber, Shaw, even Danault...

For me, it's clearly Price who failed, he's supposed to be this team's star but he just failed this season.
 

417

BBQ Chicken Alert!
Feb 20, 2003
51,374
27,817
Ottawa
I don't think you get the point honestly..

What Bergevin was trying to say is that there were too many players on this team that were fine with losing (complacent) and not enough crazy heads that wanted nothing but victory.
Personally...I understood what Bergrvin meant.

But players caring more about losing this year wouldn't of changed anything.

If 19 players toss the dressing room after every game because they're upset they lost...it still doesn't change anything.

There may be too many players who don't care enough about losing.

But there are too many in management who don't care enough about winning either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lo striver

Belial

Registered User
Oct 22, 2014
26,142
14,323
Montreal
Personally...I understood what Bergrvin meant.

But players caring more about losing this year wouldn't of changed anything.

If 19 players toss the dressing room after every game because they're upset they lost...it still doesn't change anything.

There may be too many players who don't care enough about losing.

But there are too many in management who don't care enough about winning either.

I have one answer: Vegas! That team on paper is quite shitty but there you go : character, attitude, perseverance blabla...
 

417

BBQ Chicken Alert!
Feb 20, 2003
51,374
27,817
Ottawa
I have one answer: Vegas! That team on paper is quite ****ty but there you go : character, attitude, perseverance blabla...
I don't agree that Vegas is ****ty first of all, but even if we're to take what you're saying at face value.

These are all immeasurable intangibles that make it easy to lay on when the truth is just that he put together a ****ty to begin with.

If the talent on this team suggested it should be better than it ended up being this year...

I'd agree 100% with you...

But this team finished where it's talent and roster composition dictated it should finish.
 

Whitesnake

If you rebuild, they will come.
Jan 5, 2003
89,423
36,745
I have one answer: Vegas! That team on paper is quite ****ty but there you go : character, attitude, perseverance blabla...

Shitty? You have Schmidt and Theodore that could be in our top 4. You have Marchessault, Karlsson and Neal that could clearly be on our top 6. You have Tuch you would be the most interesting kid we'd have on our pool. I would take Smith and Eakin in our top 9 more than what we have. I'd Carrier and Bellemare ahead of quite a few 4th liners. I'd take the head coach ahead of ours.

If they are shitty...what does it make us? And I have no idea how you can use an exception to prove what the norm is....
 

CristianoRonaldo

Registered User
Apr 7, 2014
19,765
16,177
In your head
****ty? You have Schmidt and Theodore that could be in our top 4. You have Marchessault, Karlsson and Neal that could clearly be on our top 6. You have Tuch you would be the most interesting kid we'd have on our pool. I would take Smith and Eakin in our top 9 more than what we have. I'd Carrier and Bellemare ahead of quite a few 4th liners. I'd take the head coach ahead of ours.

If they are ****ty...what does it make us? And I have no idea how you can use an exception to prove what the norm is....

Karlsson scored 40+ goals because of karakter, liderchip and attytud.
 

Price is Wright

Registered User
Feb 5, 2010
12,494
5,571
essex
I don't agree that Vegas is ****ty first of all, but even if we're to take what you're saying at face value.

These are all immeasurable intangibles that make it easy to lay on when the truth is just that he put together a ****ty to begin with.

If the talent on this team suggested it should be better than it ended up being this year...

I'd agree 100% with you...

But this team finished where it's talent and roster composition dictated it should finish.

The big issue people had with Vegas was it didn't seem set up for the future. It was a pretty good team for two years then there wouldn't be much there. People didn't think it would be dominating the Pacific division, but to me it looked like a team that would do well out the gate, maybe be a lottery club, but come 2019-2010 unless they make some interesting signings they'll crater. Maybe that's the plan all along.
 

Belial

Registered User
Oct 22, 2014
26,142
14,323
Montreal
****ty? You have Schmidt and Theodore that could be in our top 4. You have Marchessault, Karlsson and Neal that could clearly be on our top 6. You have Tuch you would be the most interesting kid we'd have on our pool. I would take Smith and Eakin in our top 9 more than what we have. I'd Carrier and Bellemare ahead of quite a few 4th liners. I'd take the head coach ahead of ours.

If they are ****ty...what does it make us? And I have no idea how you can use an exception to prove what the norm is....

Oh please... Should we revisit the "How dumb is GMGM" threads?

No one predicted this type of season !!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peanut

Whitesnake

If you rebuild, they will come.
Jan 5, 2003
89,423
36,745
Oh please... Should we revisit the "How dumb is GMGM" threads?

No one predicted this type of season !!!

Where did I say that I predicted it. Is me liking players on that team means that AS A TEAM, I knew they would have that kind of season? Thing is...individually, they have quite a few interesting players that doesn't put them in the shitty category. And if so, where does it put us. And since when are our predictions a proof that teams aren,t good? Where did we have Boston too? Yet individually, even if we didn't Karlsson would have a 42 goal season, even as a 3rd liner...you would not have taken him? You would not have taken Neal and Marchessault? You didn't like Tuch before? Everybody in here, before the expansion, was talking about Theodore....you didn't? I kept talking about Nate Schmidt WAY before the expansion and at the expansion too.....Want some proofs?

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/posts/62729321/

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/posts/133663175/

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/posts/134889929/

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/posts/133761673/
 

Price is Wright

Registered User
Feb 5, 2010
12,494
5,571
essex
To respond to the deleted thread, "Why are we here?"

1. Management is filled to the brim with first timers and failed in other teams, instead of the best in the world. The general manager protects them, always taking blame because he has the most secure position.

2. A failure in all departments except goaltender coaching and powerplay. Amateur scouting, pro scouting, development, NHL coaching, AHL coaching, drafting, signing, and trading.

3. A general manager who focuses on unverifiable attributes like character and attitude instead of something tangible.

4. An organization that prefers to hire Quebecois management but not the best Quebecois management in the league.

5. A defence first mindset based on 2008 defence.

6. A media too afraid to challenge the decisions of the club until a few weeks ago.

7. Organizational weaknesses that existed in 2013 were never properly addressed to this day at centre, left defence, and right wing. Only short term bandaid solutions.

8. Being aggressive in contract negotiation with the players that can't be replaced while being charitable with the players that can be replaced, or might not be needed at all.

9. Banking on hot streaks to be the actual identity of the team (2013, first two months of 2016-17) while dismissing cold streaks as nothing but temporary. After two division wins and two missed playoffs, nobody knows the real identity of the club.

10. The young core of 2013 now either older, more banged up, expensive, less reliable, developmentally stunted, traded, and in some cases busted. To replace them are players with less pedigree.
 
Last edited:

The Great Weal

Phil's Pizza
Jan 15, 2015
52,814
66,022
To respond to the deleted thread, "Why are we here?"

1. Management is filled to the brim with first timers and failed in other teams, instead of the best in the world. The general manager protects them, always taking blame because he has the most secure position.

2. A failure in all departments except goaltender coaching and powerplay. Amateur scouting, pro scouting, development, NHL coaching, AHL coaching, drafting, signing, and trading.

3. A general manager who focuses on unverifiable attributes like character and attitude instead of something tangible.

4. An organization that prefers to hire Quebecois management but not the best Quebecois management in the league.

5. A defence first mindset based on 2008 defence.

6. A media too afraid to challenge the decisions of the club until a few weeks ago.

7. Organizational weaknesses that existed in 2013 were never properly addressed to this day at centre, left defence, and right wing. Only short term bandaid solutions.

8. Being aggressive in contract negotiation with the players that can't be replaced while being charitable with the players that can be replaced, or might not be needed at all.

9. Banking on hot streaks to be the actual identity of the team (2013, first two months of 2016-17) while dismissing cold streaks as anything but temporary. After two division wins and two missed playoffs, nobody knows the real identity of the club.

10. The young core of 2013 now either older, more banged up, expensive, less reliable, developmentally stunted, traded, and in some cases busted. To replace them are players with less pedigree.
This, and to emphasize even more:
It all starts with Molson. There is absolutely no reason to keep Bergevin. The team is filled with holes, and the future isn't bright. A team like the LA Kings who won 2 cups in the last bit fired their GM for being mediocre, while we have kept Bergevin who hasn't done shit. Why is Bergevin bad? Glad you asked, I'll give you 7 big reasons.
1) Terrible drafting and development. I really don't care who you blame for this. People have gotten mad at Timmins, but he is still in charge. That literally means that we don't see any issues with this. Bergevin should have made some changes a long time ago. Also, I don't care if Timmins has drafted a bunch of ECHLers, the fact that the AHL record is so abysmal has nothing to do with him, it had to do with Sly.
2) We never focused on playing our young players more. Prime example is playing David Desharnais over Galchenyuk for an absurd amount of time. This served absolutely no purpose for a player that Bergevin planned on playing at center.
3) "Build through the draft". This goes back to my first point, if we actually cared about this, we would have made some changes. In addition, we have traded our drafted/younger players and replaced them with older ones. 2 2nds for Andrew Shaw, Sergachev for Drouin, Subban for Weber...etc
4) Letting go players without any replacements. I'm not even going to get into the Markov/Radulov contract situation. We had absolutely no replacements and literally tried numerous bargain options to try to fill out key roles which have all failed.
5) Failure to acknowledge the value of his own players. This includes the Price, Alzner, Shaw contracts that he handed out.
6) He makes terrible excuses due to his terrible job. This includes the "centers aren't available" notion which is just flat out wrong. O'Reilly, Duchene, Turris, Staal, Schenn are just some of the many centers that have been traded/signed who are all better than anyone on this team. Also, the "can't draft key players when you are picking late" is also a terrible excuse. Look at other teams. Tampa, Anaheim and Philly are some of the many successful drafting teams that have done their best work picking late.
7) Failure to fill in key roles. This "anything can happen in the playoffs" mentality is absurd. Anything can happen in the playoffs, but you aren't bettering your odds when you keep rotating bottom 6 players and bottom pairing dmen, it doesn't work like that.

I mean from the GM that literally admitted that he wants to keep getting projects and hope they pan out into key roles for longterm, he shouldn't even be here right now.
 

Tighthead

Registered User
Nov 9, 2016
3,612
3,832
As usual you have no freaking point...

And you have repeatedly defended a post of yours tonight that was sum total “BS”.

Your main objection to Brisebois was that he doesn’t come with a guarantee, which you acknowledged was pointless because it literally applies to every single candidate, as you acknowledged.

Those posts were equally pointless, so why do you object to this?
 

Runner77

**********************************************
Sponsor
Jun 24, 2012
83,873
151,070
To respond to the deleted thread, "Why are we here?"

1. Management is filled to the brim with first timers and failed in other teams, instead of the best in the world. The general manager protects them, always taking blame because he has the most secure position.

2. A failure in all departments except goaltender coaching and powerplay. Amateur scouting, pro scouting, development, NHL coaching, AHL coaching, drafting, signing, and trading.

3. A general manager who focuses on unverifiable attributes like character and attitude instead of something tangible.

4. An organization that prefers to hire Quebecois management but not the best Quebecois management in the league.

5. A defence first mindset based on 2008 defence.

6. A media too afraid to challenge the decisions of the club until a few weeks ago.

7. Organizational weaknesses that existed in 2013 were never properly addressed to this day at centre, left defence, and right wing. Only short term bandaid solutions.

8. Being aggressive in contract negotiation with the players that can't be replaced while being charitable with the players that can be replaced, or might not be needed at all.

9. Banking on hot streaks to be the actual identity of the team (2013, first two months of 2016-17) while dismissing cold streaks as nothing but temporary. After two division wins and two missed playoffs, nobody knows the real identity of the club.

10. The young core of 2013 now either older, more banged up, expensive, less reliable, developmentally stunted, traded, and in some cases busted. To replace them are players with less pedigree.

This, and to emphasize even more:
It all starts with Molson. There is absolutely no reason to keep Bergevin. The team is filled with holes, and the future isn't bright. A team like the LA Kings who won 2 cups in the last bit fired their GM for being mediocre, while we have kept Bergevin who hasn't done ****. Why is Bergevin bad? Glad you asked, I'll give you 7 big reasons.
1) Terrible drafting and development. I really don't care who you blame for this. People have gotten mad at Timmins, but he is still in charge. That literally means that we don't see any issues with this. Bergevin should have made some changes a long time ago. Also, I don't care if Timmins has drafted a bunch of ECHLers, the fact that the AHL record is so abysmal has nothing to do with him, it had to do with Sly.
2) We never focused on playing our young players more. Prime example is playing David Desharnais over Galchenyuk for an absurd amount of time. This served absolutely no purpose for a player that Bergevin planned on playing at center.
3) "Build through the draft". This goes back to my first point, if we actually cared about this, we would have made some changes. In addition, we have traded our drafted/younger players and replaced them with older ones. 2 2nds for Andrew Shaw, Sergachev for Drouin, Subban for Weber...etc
4) Letting go players without any replacements. I'm not even going to get into the Markov/Radulov contract situation. We had absolutely no replacements and literally tried numerous bargain options to try to fill out key roles which have all failed.
5) Failure to acknowledge the value of his own players. This includes the Price, Alzner, Shaw contracts that he handed out.
6) He makes terrible excuses due to his terrible job. This includes the "centers aren't available" notion which is just flat out wrong. O'Reilly, Duchene, Turris, Staal, Schenn are just some of the many centers that have been traded/signed who are all better than anyone on this team. Also, the "can't draft key players when you are picking late" is also a terrible excuse. Look at other teams. Tampa, Anaheim and Philly are some of the many successful drafting teams that have done their best work picking late.
7) Failure to fill in key roles. This "anything can happen in the playoffs" mentality is absurd. Anything can happen in the playoffs, but you aren't bettering your odds when you keep rotating bottom 6 players and bottom pairing dmen, it doesn't work like that.

I mean from the GM that literally admitted that he wants to keep getting projects and hope they pan out into key roles for longterm, he shouldn't even be here right now.

Just wanted to underscore two well thought-out posts, containing several lingering issues, some haunting the team since the beginning of Bergevin's tenure. Apparently, ownership has a high tolerance for damage and wants to see what else MB can come up with while being put on a shorter leash.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: groovejuice

nhlfan9191

Registered User
Aug 4, 2010
19,682
17,528
I don't think you get the point honestly..

What Bergevin was trying to say is that there were too many players on this team that were fine with losing (complacent) and not enough crazy heads that wanted nothing but victory.

If I get a group of players and they’re playing against teams that are way out of their league, is the desire to win enough? It’s one thing to hate losing, but a lot of the complacency and attitude that Bergevin would’ve been talking about was created from players who knew they weren’t good enough to win. You’ve been on the board long enough to know what the mass majority of posters thought about the roster before the season even began and experts and many journalists called it as well. This wasn’t a good team, and Bergevin continues to hold expectations way to high on a team that atleast at the moment only his management could’ve thought was good. Look at the defence we came into the season with. Did you really think we were going to make the playoffs with that on top of our offence which didn’t improve at all either?
 

Fish on The Sand

Untouchable
Feb 28, 2002
60,241
1,942
Canada
If I get a group of players and they’re playing against teams that are way out of their league, is the desire to win enough? It’s one thing to hate losing, but a lot of the complacency and attitude that Bergevin would’ve been talking about was created from players who knew they weren’t good enough to win. You’ve been on the board long enough to know what the mass majority of posters thought about the roster before the season even began and experts and many journalists called it as well. This wasn’t a good team, and Bergevin continues to hold expectations way to high on a team that atleast at the moment only his management could’ve thought was good. Look at the defence we came into the season with. Did you really think we were going to make the playoffs with that on top of our offence which didn’t improve at all either?
You're being too hard on Bergevin. He added Hemsky and Streit, what else was he supposed to do?
 

Kriss E

Registered User
May 3, 2007
55,329
20,272
Jeddah
Personally...I understood what Bergrvin meant.

But players caring more about losing this year wouldn't of changed anything.

If 19 players toss the dressing room after every game because they're upset they lost...it still doesn't change anything.

There may be too many players who don't care enough about losing.

But there are too many in management who don't care enough about winning either.
It really doesn't mean anything. It is BS you spew out to fool the average fan. I guess Belial fell for it.

Not a single athlete is fine with losing. But there is no thing these individual athletes can do other than compete and listen to directives. That is all they can control. And it never appeared like this was the case. We didn't hear about any locker room issues, players not getting along, not listening to the coach, missing out curfews, being disruptive. We had none of that.
After a while, you can't pout forever. The team is not good, they are trying, it's not working, these athletes also aren't f***ing stupid. They are able to measure the potential of their team. I doubt Gallagher looks at this team after two months of struggles and thinks...I really believe in this group with Petry-Alzer as first pair and Danault as our best center. I mean, come on.
So ya, I'm sure they were frustrated, but at some point, staying angry and frustrated takes a lot of energy and it's not a good attitude to have, especially when there is pretty much nothing you can do about improving your situation.

It's pointless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 417

Genesis76

True Leader
May 3, 2013
3,878
1,301
quote-your-attitude-not-your-aptitude-will-determine-your-altitude-zig-ziglar-32-50-31.jpg


quote-clothing-is-the-first-step-to-building-a-character-sylvester-stallone-28-7-0782.jpg



Weakness-of-attitude-becomes-weakness-of-character.-Albert-Einstein.jpeg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad