Has Bergevin made us a better team so far this summer? Part 3

Will Bergevin fill a need with a major acquisition before the start of the 2019-2020 season?


  • Total voters
    125
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

The Real Timo

Registered User
Jun 18, 2019
13,819
17,012
That's been the beef with Bergevin for years now. No commitment to any direction. No vision. No structure.
His inconsistency was visible early on, the hope was that he would learn, but here we are in year 8 and hes still lost.
That is so true... never any plan or vision. The only plan is buying more purple suites and growing those biceps. That is it. Neither is useful to the team.
 

The Real Timo

Registered User
Jun 18, 2019
13,819
17,012
Once again... the only way to force any change is to stop going to the games and buying Habs crap... Molson and his shareholders will only understand $$$. As long as people are still lining up to buy tickets (figuratively, as everything is online now) and TV packages nothing will ever change.
 
Last edited:

Whitesnake

If you rebuild, they will come.
Jan 5, 2003
89,205
36,197
He can be replaced from within...Andrew Shaw was/is a good player.

But not exactly irreplaceable.

His departure allows more opportunity for a younger player to get more icetime.

This is the exact type of move Bergevin hasn't done enough of during this tenunre.

Thing is....3 years ago we get him for 2 high 2nd rounders. 2nd rounders that could potentially have changed the face of this franchise. If Timmins is so great and all he needed, as proven in 2018 and 2019 were high picks, can't imagine what DeBrincat and Girard could be doing to this team. So we get Shaw. And finally last year.....he is his best year with us. So what was the point in acquiring him in the first place? And then when he succeeds, he is traded for less than what we have given him just 3 years down the road. The entire Shaw story proves a lack of direction. People talk as if Bergevin finally seems to understand as if his stupid moves happened 6 years ago. Not true.

The Shaw story is exactly the same thing as Bergevin's bringing vets in....but then, giving back the team to young guns instead....to then realize he needed vets....to then realize he had to trade the young guns he thought his team should have been lead with to then...etc.

Bergevin's GM strategies in once picture....

1267168-Clipart-Of-A-Caucasian-Businessman-Working-At-His-Desk-And-Holding-His-Finger-Up-To-The-Wind-Royalty-Free-Vector-Illustration.jpg
 

417

BBQ Chicken Alert!
Feb 20, 2003
51,255
27,464
Ottawa
Thing is....3 years ago we get him for 2 high 2nd rounders. 2nd rounders that could potentially have changed the face of this franchise. If Timmins is so great and all he needed, as proven in 2018 and 2019 were high picks, can't imagine what DeBrincat and Girard could be doing to this team. So we get Shaw. And finally last year.....he is his best year with us. So what was the point in acquiring him in the first place?
I'm not sure this question is relevant since that was 3 years ago...the team is totally different today then what it was, their objectives are also different.

And then when he succeeds, he is traded for less than what we have given him just 3 years down the road. The entire Shaw story proves a lack of direction. People talk as if Bergevin finally seems to understand as if his stupid moves happened 6 years ago. Not true.
Given he's never had a full season with the Habs since they acquired him and he JUST finished this past season with a career high in points.

I think Bergevin was clearly looking to "sell high". Something he's very rarely done throughout his tenure.

Once again...

Bergevin said he wanted to make the team younger, faster and to build through the draft.

When seen through that lens, the goal of this trade should be clear to see.

It allows more opportunity for a Lehkonen or even a Suzuki to perhaps earn a spot in the top 6 and the acquired picks, obviously help towards the draft.

I don't have to like Bergevin or agree with him...but he's doing exactly what he said he would be doing if we track back to the 2018 trade deadline.
 

Runner77

**********************************************
Sponsor
Jun 24, 2012
83,296
148,990
Well…..i must find a reason for that move cause it doesn't make any sense at all.

It was reported that a few weeks before the trade, the Hawks inquired about Shaw and Bergevin told them he was not available.

Then, the night before the opening of Free Agent Frenzy, MB decided to make him available.

Did MB get less than he might have had by apparently only dealing with the Hawks or did he feel a sudden need to create more cap room and considered that Shaw was the easiest and quickest piece to move given the Hawks’s interest, and settled on a lesser return on account of it?
 

Kriss E

Registered User
May 3, 2007
55,329
20,272
Jeddah
Selling on on an asset whose value peaked this past year.
That's not a reason. We have a bunch of guys who's value peaked, none of them were moved outside of Shaw.
Also, didn't we trade two 2nds for him? We got a 2nd + 3rd? Doesn't sound like peak value to me.
He can be replaced from within...Andrew Shaw was/is a good player.

But not exactly irreplaceable.

His departure allows more opportunity for a younger player to get more icetime.

This is the exact type of move Bergevin hasn't done enough of during this tenunre.

He ''can'' be replaced from within? You don't know that. As it stands, nobody can come in and score around 20g 50pts on the RW while adding his gritty style of play. So no, he can't. Maybe a kid will surprise us all and score 2oG 50pts as a rookie, but we have to go as far back as Ryder for that so I ain't holding my breath. It's anything but a certainty.

Again, you need a plan. This move doesn't make much sense when your GM is trying to build a PO team, has millions free on the cap, and no plan to actually improve.
 

Tabarouette

ben kin
Jan 28, 2013
14,776
4,338
mtl
That's not a reason. We have a bunch of guys who's value peaked, none of them were moved outside of Shaw.
Also, didn't we trade two 2nds for him? We got a 2nd + 3rd? Doesn't sound like peak value to me.


He ''can'' be replaced from within? You don't know that. As it stands, nobody can come in and score around 20g 50pts on the RW while adding his gritty style of play. So no, he can't. Maybe a kid will surprise us all and score 2oG 50pts as a rookie, but we have to go as far back as Ryder for that so I ain't holding my breath. It's anything but a certainty.

Again, you need a plan. This move doesn't make much sense when your GM is trying to build a PO team, has millions free on the cap, and no plan to actually improve.

I get that it's a big assumption to say he can be replaced, but it's also a little disingenuous to also assume Shaw was going to go 20G 50pts again when he only did it once and his average is much much lower than that

and that is not even mentioning that he is one pichnotte su'a tête away from being a vegetable for the rest of his life
 

417

BBQ Chicken Alert!
Feb 20, 2003
51,255
27,464
Ottawa
That's not a reason. We have a bunch of guys who's value peaked, none of them were moved outside of Shaw.
That doesn't mean you use this approach with EVERY player on the roster.

In this case, it made sense with Shaw given that he's not irreplaceable..same with Paul Byron who IMO, will get moved at some point in the next 12 months.

Also, didn't we trade two 2nds for him? We got a 2nd + 3rd? Doesn't sound like peak value to me.
This is market fluctuation...a player's value isn't static.

I don't see what's particularly noteworthy in this.

He ''can'' be replaced from within? You don't know that. As it stands, nobody can come in and score around 20g 50pts on the RW while adding his gritty style of play. So no, he can't. Maybe a kid will surprise us all and score 2oG 50pts as a rookie, but we have to go as far back as Ryder for that so I ain't holding my breath. It's anything but a certainty.
And neither do you...

Did you think Max Domi would score 28 goals and have 72 points last year?

So i'm sorry, you don't know that nobody can come in and score 20 goals and 50 points.

Again, you need a plan. This move doesn't make much sense when your GM is trying to build a PO team, has millions free on the cap, and no plan to actually improve.
The plan once again is to get younger, faster and to build through the draft.

You can argue the return on the trade or the trade itself...but it falls in line with what he set as a goal 2yrs ago.

I mean, where was this love for Andrew Shaw when he was a Hab? How did he become indispensable the moment he was traded???
 

417

BBQ Chicken Alert!
Feb 20, 2003
51,255
27,464
Ottawa
I get that it's a big assumption to say he can be replaced, but it's also a little disingenuous to also assume Shaw was going to go 20G 50pts again when he only did it once and his average is much much lower than that

and that is not even mentioning that he is one pichnotte su'a tête away from being a vegetable for the rest of his life
I don't think it's a big assumption at all...perhaps "gamble" would be a more appropriate term.

I don't think it's a big gamble at all personally because I think there are a few players on this team who are indispensable.

Carey Price? Shea Weber? Philippe Danault? Max Domi?

Sure...

Andrew Shaw?

Nah...
 

Kriss E

Registered User
May 3, 2007
55,329
20,272
Jeddah
I get that it's a big assumption to say he can be replaced, but it's also a little disingenuous to also assume Shaw was going to go 20G 50pts again when he only did it once and his average is much much lower than that

and that is not even mentioning that he is one pichnotte su'a tête away from being a vegetable for the rest of his life
I'm not assuming Shaw can do it again, but he did contribute that last year so him being gone means production from last year is.
 

Kriss E

Registered User
May 3, 2007
55,329
20,272
Jeddah
That doesn't mean you use this approach with EVERY player on the roster.

In this case, it made sense with Shaw given that he's not irreplaceable..same with Paul Byron who IMO, will get moved at some point in the next 12 months.
Again. No clear direction...
A bit of this a bit of that. No commitment.

This is market fluctuation...a player's value isn't static.

I don't see what's particularly noteworthy in this.
Bottom line, we sold him for less than we bought him, that's not a peaked value. Stop trying to spin it.

And neither do you...

Did you think Max Domi would score 28 goals and have 72 points last year?

So i'm sorry, you don't know that nobody can come in and score 20 goals and 50 points.
Oh..great...what an argument. You're really going into the ''let me claim something and then tell people they can't prove me wrong!''?? I expect that from HF trolls..it's like their favorite line of arguing.

Burden of proof is on you, not me. You claimed his contributions could be replaced internally, not me.
We have no prospect as of today who would be expected to come in at perform/contribute as much as Shaw did last year.

Might as well just say Domi will score 100pts. I can't prove you wrong on that either. I also can't prove every time I blink, Donald Trump farts. So how about sticking to what we actually know?
As I said, right now, nobody is set to produce as Shaw did.

The plan once again is to get younger, faster and to build through the draft.

You can argue the return on the trade or the trade itself...but it falls in line with what he set as a goal 2yrs ago.

I mean, where was this love for Andrew Shaw when he was a Hab? How did he become indispensable the moment he was traded???

I don't care about Shaw. If his objective was to get younger and draft better talent, then I want a lot more than just Shaw traded. I'd also be pretty disappointed that we moved Subban, Patches, Galch and we couldn't even grab an extra 1st round pick.

Also, Bergevin's objective is also to make the Playoffs, moving Shaw doesn't help us reach that objective. Conflicting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Doc McKenna

Runner77

**********************************************
Sponsor
Jun 24, 2012
83,296
148,990
I'm not assuming Shaw can do it again, but he did contribute that last year so him being gone means production from last year is.

They should have sold Shaw for a price where the other team might have believed that Shaw's production from last year could be replicated.

That team was not the Hawks, evidently. That said, who knows what Shaw's value was on the market. I don't imagine it's a stretch to have gotten more than the Hawks were prepared to pay but I don't think we have an indication of that from other sources.
 

417

BBQ Chicken Alert!
Feb 20, 2003
51,255
27,464
Ottawa
Again. No clear direction...
A bit of this a bit of that. No commitment.
So because he traded Shaw...it means he has to trade Byron, Petry, Weber and Price immediately?

Bottom line, we sold him for less than we bought him, that's not a peaked value. Stop trying to spin it.
There's no spin...just common sense.

A player doesn't retain his value indefinitely. I'm not sure why i'm having to explain this to you, because I know you well enough to know that you know this.

And at the end of the day, what they paid for Shaw vs what they traded him for is pretty close. We're talking a difference of 30 or so draft slots.

Oh..great...what an argument. You're really going into the ''let me claim something and then tell people they can't prove me wrong!''?? I expect that from HF trolls..it's like their favorite line of arguing.

Burden of proof is on you, not me. You claimed his contributions could be replaced internally, not me.
We have no prospect as of today who would be expected to come in at perform/contribute as much as Shaw did last year.
But how do you know this? lol

Burden of proof is on me? I didn't realize I was on trial here lol

Might as well just say Domi will score 100pts. I can't prove you wrong on that either. I also can't prove every time I blink, Donald Trump farts. So how about sticking to what we actually know?
As I said, right now, nobody is set to produce as Shaw did.
Once more...you don't know either.

You say "stick to what we know"...then you claim that nobody can produce like Shaw did.

In other words

I can't claim that he can be replaced internally

But you can claim that he can't.

What makes your assumption any more valid then mine?

I don't care about Shaw. If his objective was to get younger and draft better talent, then I want a lot more than just Shaw traded. I'd also be pretty disappointed that we moved Subban, Patches, Galch and we couldn't even grab an extra 1st round pick.
And this has to happen in a time frame that you deem appropriate I assume?

Also, Bergevin's objective is also to make the Playoffs, moving Shaw doesn't help us reach that objective. Conflicting.
The Habs weren't a playoff team WITH Andrew Shaw, having a career season no less.

Shaw is not what's going to determine whether or not the Habs make the playoffs...again, he's not Price or Weber or even Domi.
 

The Real Timo

Registered User
Jun 18, 2019
13,819
17,012
The Habs weren't a playoff team WITH Andrew Shaw, having a career season no less.

Shaw is not what's going to determine whether or not the Habs make the playoffs...again, he's not Price or Weber or even Domi.

That is a good point. However, Habs also weren't a playoff team with aforementioned Price and Weber and Domi.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Doc McKenna and 417

Runner77

**********************************************
Sponsor
Jun 24, 2012
83,296
148,990
Shaw was moved because he was critical of Xavier LaFlamme.

Interesting take. Who will be there now to call out Xavier when he goes on disappearance cruise control again?
 

angusyoung

The life of..The Party
Aug 17, 2014
11,673
11,920
Heirendaar
Are the Habs worse than the start of last season? I say no, so therefore they are improved,glass full. lol. Healthy Weber form the get go, Price...right, with hope. PP was one of the best last 10-15 games. A stable 4th line now with a plethora of options to boot. Cap space available to make a deal or so when evaluation process is done of roster players.
 

admiralcadillac

Registered User
Oct 22, 2017
7,461
6,656
Once again... the only way to force any change is to stop going to the games and buying Habs crap... Molson and his shareholders will only understand $$$. As long as people are still lining up to buy tickets (figuratively, as everything is online now) and TV packages nothing will ever change.

Yeah because last year wasn’t exciting at all

:rolleyes:
 

Sorinth

Registered User
Jan 18, 2013
10,938
5,393
He ''can'' be replaced from within? You don't know that. As it stands, nobody can come in and score around 20g 50pts on the RW while adding his gritty style of play. So no, he can't. Maybe a kid will surprise us all and score 2oG 50pts as a rookie, but we have to go as far back as Ryder for that so I ain't holding my breath. It's anything but a certainty.

Again, you need a plan. This move doesn't make much sense when your GM is trying to build a PO team, has millions free on the cap, and no plan to actually improve.

It's far from guaranteed that Shaw would've put up 20g 50pts either.

I don't think Bergevin has learned anything from the Shaw experience, but I don't think it's wrong to move on from him.
 

Runner77

**********************************************
Sponsor
Jun 24, 2012
83,296
148,990
I don't have access to the article but googling the piece titled "The 2019 NHL front office confidence rankings: Fans weigh in on how each team is doing" in The Athletic, this quote surfaced from the Google search excerpt:

“Bergevin keeps zigging and zagging. No one knows what the plan really is.”

If anyone is a subscriber to The Athletic, can you please confirm who made the comment?

The 2019 NHL front office confidence rankings: Fans weigh in...
 
Last edited:

Tabarouette

ben kin
Jan 28, 2013
14,776
4,338
mtl
I don't have access to the article but googling the piece titled "The 2019 NHL front office confidence rankings: Fans weigh in on how each team is doing" in The Athletic, this quote surfaced from the Google search excerpt:

“Bergevin keeps zigging and zagging. No one knows what the plan really is.”

If anyone is a subscriber to The Athletic, can you please confirm who made the comment?

there's no name attached to the comment
 

Runner77

**********************************************
Sponsor
Jun 24, 2012
83,296
148,990
there's no name attached to the comment

Is it an unqualified anonymous source? Or a fellow GM speaking anonymously? Or is it just the writer of the piece giving his opinion?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->