Marc Bergevin - Would I lie to you Edition

[pepperMonkey]

1) Shaw was traded for 2-2nd because we were in position to make this trade.

2) Shaw was signed from age 25-30. We got a very solid versatile player in his prime years.

3) We have acquired more picks than you are willing to admit but you fail to see this because it don't go with your narrative.

2008 - 2011:
- 8 top 100 picks (average of 2 per draft year)
- Missing one 1st round pick

2012-2018:
- 28 top 100 picks (average of 4 per year)
- No 1st round picks traded

Open your eyes! Patience is the key but you fail to see this and you try to say we don't have it? Come on man!

Are you spewing this again? We went over this already... but since you may have forgotten...
Draft picks since MB was on board...
MB traded away
6 x 2nd picks
2 x 4th picks
5 x 5th picks
2 x 6th picks
2 x 7th picks
Total = 17 picks

MB acquired
3 x 2nd picks
2 x 3rd picks
4 x 5th picks
1 x 6th picks
Total = 10 picks

Please explain how that is building via draft? How do you build by trading away way more picks (which includes way more higher valued picks) than acquiring?? Take a look, traded SIX 2nd rnd picks and acquired three...yeah, okay buddy, MB is building via draft...
I'm patient, but at this rate there are less and less draft picks to build with. The only good thing so far is that he hasn't gotten rid of any 1st round picks. That's about it.

 

[1909]

Are you spewing this again? We went over this already... but since you may have forgotten...
Draft picks since MB was on board...
MB traded away
6 x 2nd picks
2 x 4th picks
5 x 5th picks
2 x 6th picks
2 x 7th picks
Total = 17 picks

MB acquired
3 x 2nd picks
2 x 3rd picks
4 x 5th picks
1 x 6th picks
Total = 10 picks

Please explain how that is building via draft? How do you build by trading away way more picks (which includes way more higher valued picks) than acquiring?? Take a look, traded SIX 2nd rnd picks and acquired three...yeah, okay buddy, MB is building via draft...
I'm patient, but at this rate there are less and less draft picks to build with. The only good thing so far is that he hasn't gotten rid of any 1st round picks. That's about it.

The second rounders are the killer trades.... 6 given vs 3 acquired.

But he kept all his 1st rounders.

 

[417]

You sign Radu, which makes Galch-Patches way more expendable, because you have Radu-Drouin to fall back on.
You also talked about that ''oomph''..Radulov has that. Even if he's a winger, having that edge of competitiveness no matter the position is great. PK also had it.
This should have been done, as well as retaining Markov. Letting go of this long time Habs for no reason whatsoever is truly bizarre.

I dont think that makes us better...

4 quarters for 1 dollar.

We're weak down the middle, we have NO pushback...

Was watching the game vs the Leafs and seeing them trot out Matthews/Nylander, Kadri, Bozak

And we're throwing out Drouin (who is an apprentice center) Danault, Plekanec and De la Rose.

I'm sorry man, you'll never convince me that we should be focusing on adding a playmaking winger when we could literally stand to upgrade all 4 of our centers.

 

[417]

I don't get how a player who has Radulov's skill would not be able to help any team that is offensively challenged. We don't have a Benn or Seguin, but that doesn't make Radulov a lesser asset and he's precisely the type of player the Habs are not able to draft or buy. This was a unique opportunity.

And since Radulov is a winger, it would have opened the door to trade any other winger on the top 6 to try and land a center. You have much less of an opportunity to do that without him on the roster, goes without saying. Funny how the GM had no trouble throwing money at Shaw and Alzner but not for the PPG player that Radulov has been this year. And Radulov would have cost no asset in order to sign -- that has a lot of value on a team that is severely lacking in tradeable assets. Instead of that, there is no one to replace Radulov and the GM is left with a large amount of unused cap room and no one to spend it on.

I mean, I don't know how many other ways I can explain it lol...I've tried every single approach, I'm not trying to change your mind, just see/understand my point of view.

Others have, so perhaps we're just meant to be at a stalemate over this issue (well not really cause despite disagreeing with your take, I understand it).

So agree to disagree then? I legit don't know what else to say, I've even scaled back on some of my earlier rhetoric on Radulov...but at this point it just seems like you want me to abandon what I think k is a reasonable argument.

 

[Forum93]

Can't blame Radulov for trying to get the best deal available but will be interesting to see the reception he will get when he returns to the BC. It will be a boo-fest.

 

[Kriss E]

I dont think that makes us better...

4 quarters for 1 dollar.

We're weak down the middle, we have NO pushback...

Was watching the game vs the Leafs and seeing them trot out Matthews/Nylander, Kadri, Bozak

And we're throwing out Drouin (who is an apprentice center) Danault, Plekanec and De la Rose.

I'm sorry man, you'll never convince me that we should be focusing on adding a playmaking winger when we could literally stand to upgrade all 4 of our centers.

There are a few things you aren't understanding.

First, the roster would undoubtedly improve with Radu. In no way shape or form does that mean our issues at center and defense would disappear, or that we would be higher in standings. But the roster, in and of itself, would definitely be better.

Second, which is a point you did not address, is Radu adds depth making a guy like Patches way more expendable, using him as a tradebait to go after a center.

Third, this isn't Radu vs a center because we did not bring in anyone. Yes, we might bring in someone next summer, but that is a different year with another opportunity to free up some space. Signing Radu would not have meant no centers signed in future. So that is a moot point.

If you're looking at Matthews and Nylander, hey, I'm all for a rebuild, which is what I argued we should be looking at if we move on from Radu. You laughed at that because you couldn't see the bigger picture. To be fair, I never expected us to suck this bad. I knew we would take a hit..but not that bad. Then again, had you told me we wouldn't have Price playing great, not sure I would view them as a PO team.

 

[Belial]

Are you spewing this again? We went over this already... but since you may have forgotten...
Draft picks since MB was on board...
MB traded away
6 x 2nd picks
2 x 4th picks
5 x 5th picks
2 x 6th picks
2 x 7th picks
Total = 17 picks

MB acquired
3 x 2nd picks
2 x 3rd picks
4 x 5th picks
1 x 6th picks
Total = 10 picks

Please explain how that is building via draft? How do you build by trading away way more picks (which includes way more higher valued picks) than acquiring?? Take a look, traded SIX 2nd rnd picks and acquired three...yeah, okay buddy, MB is building via draft...
I'm patient, but at this rate there are less and less draft picks to build with. The only good thing so far is that he hasn't gotten rid of any 1st round picks. That's about it.

Again this false count?

What are the 6 second round picks Bergevin traded away?

 

[the]

Can't blame Radulov for trying to get the best deal available but will be interesting to see the reception he will get when he returns to the BC. It will be a boo-fest.

And after he will bury us just like he did during his homecoming in Nashville.

 

[OldCraig71]

I don’t see the point in going back on the Drouin trade.

I can live with that trade.

Now, play Drouin on the wing and he is/will be a great player.

Habs NEED talent like Drouin. I’m not saying Habs don’t need talent like Sergachev but I just feel that players like Drouin are garder to get.

I don’t see the trade as a mistake.

I do understand that it was probably a reaction to a mistake (Radulov), but still.

To his defense I can say that:
Drouin has been put at C, playing with much less talent then in TB, has much more pressure then many for a 22 year old, is only in his 3rd full season and he is still going to hit 50+ pts as he did last year with TB dispite the fact the the team is all over the place.

Give him another year, a little better conditions and he will be incredible.

The trade is a mistake if Drouin eventually goes back to being a winger, they gave up our best prospect for a guy that might be able to play center. Why not trade him to Edmonton for RNH? A guy that has already played the position at the NHL level. We were not in the position where we could afford to gamble on a potential center, we have traded away 3 top defencemen from this org and we could dearly use all of them. On top of that, to get Drouin while losing a competitor like Radulov is makes us weaker, the same way losing Subban for Weber does the same thing. Move after move made by Bergevin have ultimately led the franchise down the hole it currently sits in. The new GM will not have an enviable task in trying to fix all of Bergevins mistakes.

 

[417]

There are a few things you aren't understanding.

First, the roster would undoubtedly improve would Radu. In no way shape or form does that mean our issues at center and defense would disappear, or that we would be higher in standings. But the roster, in and of itself, would definitely be better.

There's nothing difficult to understand about this point you're making, in fact, I have SEVERAL times expressed the sentiment that I DO understand that the roster would be better today if it had Radulov on it as opposed to not having him or anyone else.

I understand this very simple logic and have said so several times.

Check page 8 through 10 of the OT thread if you want, check my exchange with Gobias...

second, which is a point you did not address, is Radu adds depth making a guy like Patches way more expendable.

Wrong again, I've also acknowledged that several times, in fact last week, someone argued just that and extrapolated the thought even further and I gave him credit for providing a perspective that I hadn't thought of.

Sign Radulov...trade Pacioretty...ok

I can get down with that depending on what that trade is.

Fair argument.

Only issue I have with this argument is that trading a Pacioretty on a team starved for goals doesn't really solve anything. If we trade him and add a center, who scores goals now?

Radulov? Galchenyuk?

Are we really better?

Difficult to say, you'd have to provide an example of a trade, otherwise is just crap against the wall.

third, this isn't Radu vs a center because we did not bring in anyone. Yes, we might bring in someone next summer, but that is a different with another opportunity to free up some space. Signing would not have meant no centers signed in future. So that is a moot point.

Not sure what you mean by this but it appears you've decided the point is moot so I guess there's nothing for me to say lol

you're looking at Matthews and Nylander, hey, I'm all for a rebuild, which is what I argued we should be looking at if we move on from Radu. You laughed at that because you couldn't see the bigger picture.

Kriss E...you don't want to go down the reminiscing lane with me. You keep re-positioning your arguments with me as it relates to Plekanec, but before he signed his extension and I was championing the cause to trade him as his VALUE was declining, you also laughed at me.

So let's put aside the ego contest for a second and just stick to the conversation...I'm not trying to be called 'boy' again tonight.

 

[DAChampion]

@417 was right about Plekanec.

 

[Runner77]

I mean, I don't know how many other ways I can explain it lol...I've tried every single approach, I'm not trying to change your mind, just see/understand my point of view.

Others have, so perhaps we're just meant to be at a stalemate over this issue (well not really cause despite disagreeing with your take, I understand it).

So agree to disagree then? I legit don't know what else to say, I've even scaled back on some of my earlier rhetoric on Radulov...but at this point it just seems like you want me to abandon what I think k is a reasonable argument.

I guess we have a stalemate. I don't mean to convince you of anything. It's all good.

 

[NORiculous]

The trade is a mistake if Drouin eventually goes back to being a winger, they gave up our best prospect for a guy that might be able to play center. Why not trade him to Edmonton for RNH? A guy that has already played the position at the NHL level. We were not in the position where we could afford to gamble on a potential center, we have traded away 3 top defencemen from this org and we could dearly use all of them. On top of that, to get Drouin while losing a competitor like Radulov is makes us weaker, the same way losing Subban for Weber does the same thing. Move after move made by Bergevin have ultimately led the franchise down the hole it currently sits in. The new GM will not have an enviable task in trying to fix all of Bergevins mistakes.

RNH does not have Drouin’s talent and ceiling and trading Sergachev for RNH would have been a major mistake, IMO.

Losing Radulov makes the Habs weaker, yes, but that has nothing to fo with Drouin.

Trading Subban for Weber was a mistake, yes, but that has nothing to do with Drouin.

This team still has good assets and Drouin is one, if not the most important one, of them.

 

[isthatso]

Again this false count?

What are the 6 second round picks Bergevin traded away?

This is driving me crazy enough to finally post for the first time.

4 x 2nd round picks IN (MB era):

2x2nd for Eller
1x2nd for Weise-Fleish
1x2nd for Gorges

5 x 2nd round picks OUT (MB era):

1x2nd for Drouin** (conditional to Sergachev NOT playing 40 games)
2x2nd for Shaw
1x2nd for Petry
1x2nd for Vanek

The net result would be 4 vs 4, with one more possible OUT, but it's fair to assume that it won't go anywhere. Still, my total count says 10 totals picks coming IN vs 15 picks going out since he took over.

Either way, I believe that it is fair to say that without absolutely emptying the pick reserve in exchange for vets, MB is still not bringing in more picks than shipping out, which ultimately shows that he isn't banking a lot on his so-called ''building through the draft'' alleged approach. Especially coming from a guy that acknowledged live that drafting anything after mid-1st (or was it from 2nd round) is mostly a crap shot.

Then, shouldn't you be trying to get your odds higher by acquiring more picks than you are shipping out to truly respect your ''approach''?

Anyways, move along. Nothing to see here.

 

[Runner77]

Either way, I believe that it is fair to say that without absolutely emptying the pick reserve in exchange for vets, MB is still not bringing in more picks than shipping out, which ultimately shows that he isn't banking a lot on his so-called ''building through the draft'' alleged approach. Especially coming from a guy that acknowledged live that drafting anything after mid-1st (or was it from 2nd round) is mostly a crap shot.

Then, shouldn't you be trying to get your odds higher by acquiring more picks than you are shipping out to truly respect your ''approach''?

Thanks for setting the record straight. And congrats on your first post. Hopefully we get to see many more.

 

[OldCraig71]

RNH does not have Drouin’s talent and ceiling and trading Sergachev for RNH would have been a major mistake, IMO.

Losing Radulov makes the Habs weaker, yes, but that has nothing to fo with Drouin.

Trading Subban for Weber was a mistake, yes, but that has nothing to do with Drouin.

This team still has good assets and Drouin is one, if not the most important one, of them.

The trade of Sergachev to Edmonton could have involved more than just two players and I don't know if you are aware but there have been reports that Yzerman was going to potentially lose Drouin to Vegas and if that was indeed true it should have put Bergevin in a stronger position but it didn't. Drouin is a good not great player but he is young and is not in the right situation here(yet). His best days will come when the center experiment ends and he goes back to wing.

 

[pepperMonkey]

Again this false count?

What are the 6 second round picks Bergevin traded away?

Drouin - 2018 2nd round pick
Shaw - 2016 2nd round pick, 2016 2nd round pick
Petry - 2015 2nd round pick
Vanek - 2014 2nd round pick
Whoops, you are correct. I miss counted. MB acquired 4 2nd round picks and traded away 5. Mind you, unless I'm mistaken, the two 2nd's we used to get Shaw were of higher value than the two 2nds we acquired for trading Eller...

 

[1909]

If Yzerman was so brilliant, he would had let his small center Tyler Johnson available for the Draft and keep Drouin.. He had already Point to play on that 2nd line.

He gave a 7 y contract - 35M $ to Johnson.

 

[Habs100]

Can't blame Radulov for trying to get the best deal available but will be interesting to see the reception he will get when he returns to the BC. It will be a boo-fest.

Ludwig: Radulov makes the Stars better

Listen to this interview with Craig Ludwig who handles the Stars and knuckles, both saying Radulov works his butt off every shift and its contagious.

And then tell me he's not worth 8 million per year. Bullocks! Such a stupid move by Bergevin to not offer this guy the moon and make sure he didn't get to free agency or thoroughly outbid the other teams even if he did...It's ridiculous, now we have to watch a crappy offensively impotent team all year...

 

[isthatso]

Wrong again, I've also acknowledged that several times, in fact last week, someone argued just that and extrapolated the thought even further and I gave him credit for providing a perspective that I hadn't thought of.

Sign Radulov...trade Pacioretty...ok

I can get down with that depending on what that trade is.

Fair argument.

Only issue I have with this argument is that trading a Pacioretty on a team starved for goals doesn't really solve anything. If we trade him and add a center, who scores goals now?

Radulov? Galchenyuk?

Are we really better?

Difficult to say, you'd have to provide an example of a trade, otherwise is just crap against the wall.

This one has been bugging me as well, so now that I have lost my anonymity cover, might as well chime in this debate that I have seen popping up so often between you twos.

More good assets = more trade possibilities. You have acknowledged that much, 417.

Of course, everybody knows we need centers. So much so that we try just about anything as a center, not unlike your ''crap against the wall'' quote. But you know, teams usually trade from their area of strengths VS their area of needs...

I don't believe anybody can put a name on that future possible trade, as it would be pointless anyways, but might at least have an area of strengths to make this conversation even possible, right? And I am not even trying to be condescending here; it is just so painful to see an argument like this derail into a personal level when there is actually not a lot of argument to have to begin with.

Although, I have been around here long enough to know that this is business as usual, in some cases.

 

[Belial]

This is driving me crazy enough to finally post for the first time.

Yes, false narrative and exaggeration drives me crazy too...

Welcome aboard.

Drouin - 2018 2nd round pick
Shaw - 2016 2nd round pick, 2016 2nd round pick
Petry - 2015 2nd round pick
Vanek - 2014 2nd round pick
Whoops, you are correct. I miss counted. MB acquired 4 2nd round picks and traded away 5. Mind you, unless I'm mistaken, the two 2nd's we used to get Shaw were of higher value than the two 2nds we acquired for trading Eller...

That Sergachev pick ain't going anywhere, so we suddenly went from 6 OUT and 3 IN to 4 OUT and 4 IN...

Quite the difference don't you think?

 

[isthatso]

Thanks for setting the record straight. And congrats on your first post. Hopefully we get to see many more.

Thanks. Well, now I feel like I opened a Pandora's Box for myself.

Yay, I guess.

 

[OldCraig71]

If Yzerman was so brilliant, he would had let his small center Tyler Johnson available for the Draft and keep Drouin.. He had already Point to play on that 2nd line.

He gave a 7 y contract - 35M $ to Johnson.

He might have valued Johnson and Sergachev more.

 

[isthatso]

Yes, false narrative and exaggeration drives me crazy too...

Welcome aboard.

Thanks. Unfortunately, false narrative, exaggeration, hyperbole and whatnots are basically 90% of these forums nowadays. And frankly, even the best of you guys do it from time to time.

Then again, might have been an honest mistake.

Although, my opinion on the subject is as I presented it in my previous post. If you prone ''building through the draft'', you should at least bring in more picks than you ship out, so even without exaggeration, the point is still valid.

Especially when you acknowledge LIVE that drafting is a lot like a crap shot. Here goes my first snarky comment: ''Hey, who's that analytic guy Bergevin fired? He should have at least keep him around to explain simple odds calculation to him, right?''

 

[417]

This one has been bugging me as well, so now that I have lost my anonymity cover, might as well chime in this debate that I have seen popping up so often between you twos.

More good assets = more trade possibilities. You have acknowledged that much, 417.

Of course, everybody knows we need centers. So much so that we try just about anything as a center, not unlike your ''crap against the wall'' quote. But you know, teams usually trade from their area of strengths VS their area of needs...

I don't believe anybody can put a name on that future possible trade, as it would be pointless anyways, but might at least have an area of strengths to make this conversation even possible, right? And I am not even trying to be condescending here; it is just so painful to see an argument like this derail into a personal level when there is actually not a lot of argument to have to begin with.

Although, I have been around here long enough to know that this is business as usual, in some cases.

I don't think I made it personal at all, I could see him going that route though.

As for the rest of your post...all good points, don't disagree at all.

I also get what you mean by it would be pointless to put a name on a possible trade, that type of conversation tends degenerate into nonsense.

But it's also essential to the argument he's trying to make.

If your take is that re-signing Radulov makes trading Pacioretty easier.

Ok, fair...

But for what? If not names, then what's the template?

Is it a trade built around futures/prospects? Is it for established players?

I'm surely willing to consider another perspective, as I've done several times before.

On another note...welcome to the board.