Saint Patrick
2 rings in my hears
- Feb 14, 2007
- 4,806
- 685
Houle for sure, but Bergevin is a close second. Its not comparable to the Roy trade, and this is coming from a Roy superfan, but Subban is pretty high up there for horrible trades.
Savard thought that. But even with Roy, they were declining. Remember, months prior they traded Desjardins for Recchi. Granted, Recchi was great for the Habs. The issue was what Desjardins was/became. With Roy, that wasn't a cup contender. Not imo.
He didn't have a run with the team he has built and good picks is not what I would say we have, plus that is generally the scout. What has Bergie traded for that is a vast improvement on houle or what he even inherited from Goat who was reviled by most.Houle traded Patty Roy for a young unproven goalie and 2 young guys. He had offers with proven players that were stars. Nolan, Yzerman, Irbe, Belfour...etc. That was a really bad move...Every team made an offer.
Turgeon was a top C in his prime...For Shayne Corson! Also that move was against the rest of the office's advice.
There are so many bad stories of Houle.
I don't think it's comparible, as they never went on a run with Houle. At least Bergevin has made the playoffs and made good picks
I still say Houle is the worst but Bergevin is getting close.
Houle's greatest hits
Rejean Houle's 15 Worst Moves As Montreal Canadiens GM
Houle by a country mile. First move Houle did was trade Roy in franchise worst trade. Bergevin did have some success here. Won division last year, final 4 in 2014. He did make some good moves, ie. Byron, Waite for Price, etc... Bergevin just can't judge top talent.Who is the ultimate worse GM this team ever had?
In addition to being told to cut salary...[TBODY] [/TBODY]
2017-18 Tampa Bay Lightning NHL 79 9 31 40 [TBODY] [/TBODY]
2017-18 Montreal Canadiens NHL 77 13 33 46
Bergie tries and fails. Houle did what he was told and cut salary.
Context is everything & why bergevin is by far the worse GM.
At least Houle accomplished part of what he was tasked to do (maybe all he was hired to do?)...
In addition to being told to cut salary...
he was apparently held at gunpoint to make awful trades at the same time.
Don't only cut salary Reggie...make sure you don't get any quality back when trading Hall of Fame caliber players
You can't justify ANY trade Bergevin has made being worse than the Roy or Turgeon or Damphousse trades.And yet, Bergevin managed to be worse than him...
Speaks volumes.
Without the Recchi and Roy trades they would be running Damphousse/Turgeon/Leclair/Koivu/Bure so they needed another top six forward. Desjardins/Malakhov/Brisebois was probably good enough but another D wouldn't hurt and a lot were getting moved then for affordable prices.
With the Recchi/Roy trades, they needed a veteran/better goaltender as a platoon which they finally got in Hackett, but they could have went with Ranford in 96. They needed at least one more Top 4, maybe two, but they were pretty set offensively in 95-96. That's likely why Savard thought they were one move away. He saw that move being Roy for Nolan/Fiset, but that's a little too much confidence in Fiset. They didn't need a power forward (not that it would hurt) but someone to replace Desjardins.
Are you kidding? They needed a power forward. Getting Nolan would have completely changed that team and make it a contender. Those type of players were pretty rare at a time when PF were needed cause of the clutch and grab.
Thanks for reminding me that Pierre Lacroix gave up more for ozolinsh than he did for Roy.With Fiset in net? They weren't going anywhere. Do you remember him being the starter for the Kings in the mid-late 90s? Don't front.
If you're trading Roy, yes you try to get a powerforward for him, but you also try to get a competent goaltender. Houle attempted that actually. He tried to get a top six forward (Rucinsky), power forward (Kovalenko), and new goalie of the present/future (Thibault). It was 2/3 poorly scouted, but the mindset was there. Quebec/Colorado wasn't giving up a D as they needed one and gave up Nolan for Ozolinsh.
After trading away Desjardins, Houle should have been trying to get a top 4 D, power forward, and goalie.
You can't justify ANY trade Bergevin has made being worse than the Roy or Turgeon or Damphousse trades.
Not even close.
Bergevin has been bad, he owns that.
But Houle, regardless of how you want to paint a prettier picture for him, goes down as one of the worst GM's in professional sports history.
With Fiset in net? They weren't going anywhere. Do you remember him being the starter for the Kings in the mid-late 90s? Don't front.
If you're trading Roy, yes you try to get a powerforward for him, but you also try to get a competent goaltender. Houle attempted that actually. He tried to get a top six forward (Rucinsky), power forward (Kovalenko), and new goalie of the present/future (Thibault). It was 2/3 poorly scouted, but the mindset was there. Quebec/Colorado wasn't giving up a D as they needed one and gave up Nolan for Ozolinsh.
After trading away Desjardins, Houle should have been trying to get a top 4 D, power forward, and goalie.
No...not even close.You wouldn't view the Subban trade being worse than Turgeon or Damphousse deals?
QFT.No...not even close.
I don't think either the Turgeon or Damphousse trade brought back a player Weber's caliber (even though, I prefer Subban).
No...not even close.
I don't think either the Turgeon or Damphousse trade brought back a player Weber's caliber (even though, I prefer Subban).
Not even close. 1 year of Markov is not worth Damphousse or Turgeon.Letting Markov and radulov go for f all, is for me as similar as Damphousse/Turgeon. Same type of caliber player.
Difference between MB and Houle is that MB did it on purpose. He sucks. Houle was stuck in a really bad situation with a cheap ass owner. MB has all the leverage and money possible.
Neither trade surrendered a player of Subban's caliber though. Damphousse was also a pending UFA. Hard to argue that was a bad trade at all.No...not even close.
I don't think either the Turgeon or Damphousse trade brought back a player Weber's caliber (even though, I prefer Subban).
I'm just measuring the trade by what went out and what came back.Maybe we're measuring trades differently?
Damphousse was an impending UFA, no? And toward the end of his career.
Pure hockey trade in a vacuum, sure. Impact on franchise, I can't see the argument for the Subban deal not being far more egregious
Pierre Turgeon was still a very productive #1C when he was traded.Neither trade surrendered a player of Subban's caliber though. Damphousse was also a pending UFA. Hard to argue that was a bad trade at all.