Marc Bergevin: At the End o'da Day

[417]

God you're being so ridiculous and biased you don't even think your arguments through.

That 12 dive is not the same as this year. And it's not because of Gomez that dive happened. Gomez produced 41 points in 45 games when he played with Markov in 09-10.

What great center did we get to replace Gomez in the summer of 12? None.

The rise that came after 12 was due to Markov putting the team back to a level that it HISTORICALLY has with him in the lineup. And the Impact players who were reaching their developemental peak like Pac, PK and Price.

Bryson said they were trending upwards, and upward trends are not always a constant rise, their can be valleys, the peak rose up again after 12 and that's because they were indeed trending upwards.

And we won't be seeing the same this year. The historical peak (in post Roy era) of 2015 was due to Timmins and Gainey's work. No matter if they didn't accomplish the ultimate goal, it was still far better than what we lived in the late 90's and what we are living now.

Your reaction to Bryson's comment that they were trending upward was very juvenile, and your inability to actually think it through once you get overwhelming proof that it was the case (that peak in 13 is not due to Bergevin).

There is a huge difference between the Houle years and the years that follow, we can see Houle and Savard's impact on the draft with the small rise between 01 and 03, and impacts in the years following 03, but afterwards and up to 2015, that was all Gainey, and there wasn't much missing and was the closet we've been in 25 years and that's mainly because of Gainey and Timmins.


You're being really childish if you can't see the different impact each of them had.

Anybody who just equates those 5 GMs is being biased and/or dishonest and just plain intellectually lazy.

Now I haven't read your response to my other post yet, but I'm sure it's the same futile and lazy discourse of equating everything. Here's something original, admit you were wrong back then, and how Bergevin is much worse.

There's no similar rise to 2013 coming next season. That sorta rise won't be happening anytime soom. The canyon at the end of the graph will stay close and probably under the 50%win mark for the foreseeable future. This will show a constant rise all throughout the impact of Gainey's years, and the impact of those drafts on the early part of Bergevin's term, and then a steep decline at the end of Bergevin's term.

One goes up constantly, the other went down drastically.

Yes, I'm extrapolating, but based on a certain overwhelming certitude, which most here share, that the Habs won't be rising much over ,500 hockey in the next few seasons. In summer 2012, I said the team would surely make the playoffs unless Markov is not back to form, I even went as far as saying they'd finish in the top 5 of the conference, and that prediction wasn't hard to make. I knew that all that needed to happen was for Subban and Markov to not get injured for any amount of the time and the Habs would have a winning record and more. I was right. And next season, I'm predicting a slight rise in points, but nothing drastic and nothing that'll bring us over ,500. Let's see if I'm right.

I love how you hurl insults at me, after a perfectly civil response to your post.

And then you proceed to call me "childish" "lazy" and question my intelligence.

All this because I asked if not trading McDonagh could of mitigated the injury to Markov and Hamrlik's decline.

I'm not quite sure why you're bent out of shape here, I don't think my post warranted this type of response from you.

Gainey built, Bergevin destroyed. If you can't realize that, there's not point in discussing this further.

I would actually agree with this completely and have said so many times

Gainey did build, or at least, attempt to build...he just couldn't finish the job, but he tried. Things started to go wrong for Gainey following the death of his daughter, he was never the same, and I don't blame him for that. But I loved the front half of Gainey as GM of this team, he brought back credibility, respectability...but the post-trajedy, things went down south quickly and bringing on Gauthier made things even worse.

Bergevin hasn't built anything and like you said, has destroyed more than anything else. So i'm not quite sure where you get the impression that I think he's better.

But you're also right, there's no point in discussing this further given you seem aggressive for no good reason.

 

[Belial]

Danault is not going to suddenly become something he is not. At 25 he is what he is: bottom six on a good team. Neither Mete nor Juulsen will ever be top pairing guys.

Drouin and Scherbak are the only players listed who have any chance to become something special because they have the God-given talent to do so. Everybody else is what their talent level says they are: average.

Completly irrelevant to what I'm trying to say here.

Even if Danault doesn't progress anymore, if he gets 7 more seasons at ~40 points in a Habs jersey it would be a solid career.

 

[Habs]

I don't think it's a stretch. I heard a pundit say that it would cost in the neighborhood of $45 million for the Habs to clean house on their management. That's no drop in the bucket.

.

That number is high. Numbnuts has a few million coming to him and his wardrobe collection, Timmins isn't a high value, long term contract.. I don't see anything north of 10 on the books on immediate management. What am I missing?

 

[Habs]

Gainey did build, or at least, attempt to build...he just couldn't finish the job, but he tried. Things started to go wrong for Gainey following the death of his daughter, he was never the same, and I don't blame him for that. But I loved the front half of Gainey as GM of this team, he brought back credibility, respectability...but the post-trajedy, things went down south quickly and bringing on Gauthier made things even worse.

Bergevin hasn't built anything and like you said, has destroyed more than anything else. So i'm not quite sure where you get the impression that I think he's better.

But you're also right, there's no point in discussing this further given you seem aggressive for no good reason.

Gainey didn't know how to compete in a cap world, he unclear in the team direction as well. Its as if, after all these years, the teams changes philosphy with one big hit, or by another teams miraculous run. They have had no direction since Serge Savard, no clear plan on what team they want to build.

That 93 team formula would still work today. Speed, size and mobility all over the ice. Oh, and actual Centers.

 

[417]

Gainey didn't know how to compete in a cap world, he unclear in the team direction as well. Its as if, after all these years, the teams changes philosphy with one big hit, or by another teams miraculous run. They have had no direction since Serge Savard, no clear plan on what team they want to build.

That 93 team formula would still work today. Speed, size and mobility all over the ice. Oh, and actual Centers.

Which is what I said in the previous post...

But apparently that's lazy, childish and stupid.

 

[Laurentide]

Completly irrelevant to what I'm trying to say here.

Even if Danault doesn't progress anymore, if he gets 7 more seasons at ~40 points in a Habs jersey it would be a solid career.

It's a career that won't help move the needle for this team even one bit if things remain as they are. Danault's career only has relevance if he's a complimentary piece to a team with an actual #1 center. But as long as Danault is our de facto #1 center his career is a nothing burger. The same goes for all those other guys you mentioned aside from perhaps Drouin and Scherbak. Complimentary players need elite players to compliment. They can't compliment players who are even more average than they themselves are.

Case in point is Gallagher. He would be an elite complimentary player on a line with a true #1 center. But as it is he is the best player on his line. It's no knock against him, but he can only be so successful as the top player on his own line. It limits him.

Bergevin is forever missing out on the big trade or big signing that will put the team over the top. You can't win with a roster full of Gallaghers and Danaults. They need to play with better players. They can't be the best players on their own lines. Character is fine. Attitude is fine. But where's the damned talent supposed to come from?

 

[Habs Halifax]

Precisely why it's so pointless to get into these "show me a trade" discussions with you.
Whatever name is brought forward, you will just argue against. It's a silly game as I said right from the start.
Not to mention, it is completely missing the point.

Fact is we had valuable players. Valuable players are tradeable. Could we have traded for some guys and end up improving? I don't see why not. It's also very possible we end up doing some incredibly stupid trade like Subban for Weber. That is besides the point though.
****ing trades up as nothing to do with whether or not we had valuable assets to move.
You like to lump everything together because you just don't want to admit it. Such silliness, and that's why a lot of posters here don't take you seriously.

It's pointless to bring up a point with no substance to back it up. I was talking about what we had after Price, Subban, Patch, Gallagher, Eller, Pleky and Markov and our ability to improve on that with what we had in the pipeline. You are talking about we should of been able to improve on that but you provide no examples. You think we could of acquired top 2 centers by trading those great prospects we had back in 2012

 

[Belial]

It's a career that won't help move the needle for this team even one bit if things remain as they are. Danault's career only has relevance if he's a complimentary piece to a team with an actual #1 center. But as long as Danault is our de facto #1 center his career is a nothing burger. The same goes for all those other guys you mentioned aside from perhaps Drouin and Scherbak. Complimentary players need elite players to compliment. They can't compliment players who are even more average than they themselves are.

Case in point is Gallagher. He would be an elite complimentary player on a line with a true #1 center. But as it is he is the best player on his line. It's no knock against him, but he can only be so successful as the top player on his own line. It limits him.

Bergevin is forever missing out on the big trade or big signing that will put the team over the top. You can't win with a roster full of Gallaghers and Danaults. They need to play with better players. They can't be the best players on their own lines. Character is fine. Attitude is fine. But where's the damned talent supposed to come from?

Did you completely miss the part where I was talking about Poehling and Kotka?

If Kotka can become a first line center and Poehling a solid 2way second line center, having a guy like Danault on the third line would be solid af.

We have wingers galore.

We're set in net.

With Weber/Petry/Juulsen on the right side, we're more than good.

The only thing that will be left to fix is the left side of the D, but we'll have to wait and see with Mete and Reilly, I see some potential in those two.

 

[417]

Remember the good ol' days Habs fans?

Gauthier fired

Until I was reminded, I forgot how good things were back then

 

[Bryson]

That post talks about drafted players and acquired talent over the course of a particular GM reign.

Drouin is 23, Domi is 23, Scherbak is 22, Lehkonen is 23, Hudon is 24, Danault is 25, DLR is 23, Mete is 20 and Juulsen is 21!

And I'm not even talking about guys like Poehling and Kotka.

You can crap on Bergevin all day long and think he's a complete moron but I can assure you that those guys I listed will put up points in the NHL in the next 5-10 years and that list will change.

So yeah, that list is useless right now.

In 5-10 years Price and Weber will be finished if they aren't already. We wasted the prime years of three 30 goal scorers, a Norris Trophy Defenseman and a Vezina/Hart Goalie to build a team of plugs built in Bergevin's own image. If we are lucky maybe Poehling will be more than a 3rd line C and maybe Kotka will be more that a 2C. Yippee!! Take my money!!

Completly irrelevant to what I'm trying to say here.

Even if Danault doesn't progress anymore, if he gets 7 more seasons at ~40 points in a Habs jersey it would be a solid career.

Danault will never score 40 points playing strictly a 3rd line role. Not going to happen.. and if Danault plays as anything more than a 3C this team isn't going anywhere.

 

[Laurentide]

Did you completely miss the part where I was talking about Poehling and Kotka?

If Kotka can become a first line center and Poehling a solid 2way second line center, having a guy like Danault on the third line would be solid af.

We have wingers galore.

We're set in net.

With Weber/Petry/Juulsen on the right side, we're more than good.

The only thing that will be left to fix is the left side of the D, but we'll have to wait and see with Mete and Reilly, I see some potential in those two.

IF Kotka can become a first line center.
IF Poehling can become a solid second line center.

If if's and but's were candy and nuts, we'd all have a merry Christmas.

The fact of the matter is that neither of those two guys is going to become anything in time for Danault to be relevant. By the time they're in a position to lead, Danault will be a washed-up, never-was-been. Weber will be retired. Petry will be long gone and even Price will be past his prime, if he isn't already. So all you're going to have then are a couple of centers with no one talented to pass the puck to because at the rate at which Bergevin strips this team bare in his endless string of one-for-one trades in which we get the older or slower or less-productive guy in exchange for the younger or faster or more-productive guy, Kotka and Poehling will themselves become irrelevant to the equation.

And like I said, that's IF those two actually become what we all hope they will become. If these guys turn out to be Doug Wickenheiser and Terry Ryan by other names then we're never going to see the bottom of the hole we're in.

There's an old saying which goes "when you're digging yourself into a hole, you should stop digging." In terms of the Habs, keeping Bergevin is the equivalent of continuing to dig that hole. But what else would we expect from this bunch? They're so out to lunch that they don't even realize that they're in a hole to begin with. If I were in Molson's shoes I'd just drop Bergy into the hole and fill it with dirt.

 

[Belial]

In 5-10 years Price and Weber will be finished if they aren't already. We wasted the prime years of three 30 goal scorers, a Norris Trophy Defenseman and a Vezina/Hart Goalie to build a team of plugs built in Bergevin's own image. If we are lucky maybe Poehling will be more than a 3rd line C and maybe Kotka will be more that a 2C. Yippee!! Take my money!!

Yeah, dude... We suck... Nothing new...

Danault will never score 40 points playing strictly a 3rd line role. Not going to happen.. and if Danault plays as anything more than a 3C this team isn't going anywhere.

I already brought up stats a ton of times where I showed that Danault was able to produce even as a 4th line winger!

IF Kotka can become a first line center.
IF Poehling can become a solid second line center.

If if's and but's were candy and nuts, we'd all have a merry Christmas.

The fact of the matter is that neither of those two guys is going to become anything in time for Danault to be relevant. By the time they're in a position to lead, Danault will be a washed-up, never-was-been. Weber will be retired. Petry will be long gone and even Price will be past his prime, if he isn't already. So all you're going to have then are a couple of centers with no one talented to pass the puck to because at the rate at which Bergevin strips this team bare in his endless string of one-for-one trades in which we get the older or slower or less-productive guy in exchange for the younger or faster or more-productive guy, Kotka and Poehling will themselves become irrelevant to the equation.

And like I said, that's IF those two actually become what we all hope they will become. If these guys turn out to be Doug Wickenheiser and Terry Ryan by other names then we're never going to see the bottom of the hole we're in.

There's an old saying which goes "when you're digging yourself into a hole, you should stop digging." In terms of the Habs, keeping Bergevin is the equivalent of continuing to dig that hole. But what else would we expect from this bunch? They're so out to lunch that they don't even realize that they're in a hole to begin with. If I were in Molson's shoes I'd just drop Bergy into the hole and fill it with dirt.

Come on man...

I mean, there's extremely pessimistic and then there's this section of HFBoards...

Danault is freaking 25 years old!

Even if it will take 3 years for Kotka and Poehling to be relevant, the guy will be 28 years old!

Not going to decorticate the rest of your post because it's just the same ultra negative stuff.

Poehling and Kotka will make this team next year(19/20)! Book it! It will not take 5 years!

 

[DAChampion]

Leafs were not trading Kessel to the Habs

Baseless assumption.

They had just traded Phaneuf to the Senators, and they traded Kessel to a conference rival.

 

[Bryson]

I thought you were on the bandwagon where Bergevin inherited a great core?

Bergevin inherited one of the best goalies and defenseman in the WORLD and drafted a center with the 3rd overall pick. Any GM would be so lucky to inherit these players as these are the hardest positions to fill on team and it was handed to Bergevin on a golden platter.

Where was the centers?

Playing on the wing where the GM banished him to.

The point about the 2007 draft vs the 4 after is one draft year don't give you an excuse or pass for the next 4 years. The results from those 4 years are huge holes in our line-up today and in the past 5 or 6 seasons

You fail to understand how this works. You need to look at the end result. It's like the stock market. Most stocks are evaluated by an anual basis. If you double your money at the end of the year than that is very good. What you are doing is nitpicking the 4 months of the year where the stock dipped without looking at the end result. It pointless and stupid and it's not done in any professional capacity.

Pretty sure we agree that there are missing holes in our lineup right?

Oh we had holes back in 2012. Now? There is only a huge freakin crater of destruction. Our defense is garbage. Putrid even. Our forwards are trash. Our goalie is injury prone all the while being rewarded with a historical contract. This is quite possibly the worst assembled team in franchise history. I've never seen a team so devoid of talent.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Baseless assumption.

They had just traded Phaneuf to the Senators, and they traded Kessel to a conference rival.

It's my opinion. Habs would of had to outbid the Pens if the Leafs were trading Kessel to the Habs. Same with Petry... Habs will not trade him to the Leafs unless the return is very good.

Also, The discussion was going after the pieces we needed with the assets we had (based on who was moved since 2012). I ask again, does Kessel turn the Habs into a deep playoff team?

 

[Laurentide]

Yeah, dude... We suck... Nothing new...



I already brought up stats a ton of times where I showed that Danault was able to produce even as a 4th line winger!



Come on man...

I mean, there's extremely pessimistic and then there's this section of HFBoards...

Danault is freaking 25 years old!

Even if it will take 3 years for Kotka and Poehling to be relevant, the guy will be 28 years old!

Not going to decorticate the rest of your post because it's just the same ultra negative stuff.

Poehling and Kotka will make this team next year(19/20)! Book it! It will not take 5 years!

They may make the team but that doesn't mean they should make the team nor that they are ready to be full-time NHL players. So when you say "Book it!" what you're really saying is "Management will find a way to ruin these prospects by rushing them into an impossible situation and destroying their confidence. Book it!"

And stop it with the "decorticate" stuff. Nobody uses that word but you.

 

[417]

Oh we had holes back in 2012. Now? There is only a huge freakin crater of destruction. Our defense is garbage. Putrid even. Our forwards are trash. Our goalie is injury prone all the while being rewarded with a historical contract. This is quite possibly the worst assembled team in franchise history. I've never seen a team so devoid of talent.

Our lineup game 1 of 2012-2013 season

Pacioretty-Desharnais-Cole
Bourque-Plekanec-Gionta
Galchenyuk-Prust-Gallagher
Moen-White-Armstrong

Extras: Eller, Blunden

Markov-Emelin(*)
Gorges-Diaz
Bouillon-Kaberle

Extra: Weber
*Subban in contract holdout

Compare this cast to whatever lineup you want to come up with that will start game 1 of this season.

Seems like they have a lot of the same strengths (few) and weaknesses (many).

But sure, let's act like things were so much better then lol

 

[Habs Halifax]

Bergevin inherited one of the best goalies and defenseman in the WORLD and drafted a center with the 3rd overall pick. Any GM would be so lucky to inherit these players as these are the hardest positions to fill on team and it was handed to Bergevin on a golden platter.

Playing on the wing where the GM banished him to.

You fail to understand how this works. You need to look at the end result. It's like the stock market. Most stocks are evaluated by an anual basis. If you double your money at the end of the year than that is very good. What you are doing is nitpicking the 4 months of the year where the stock dipped without looking at the end result. It pointless and stupid and it's not done in any professional capacity.



Oh we had holes back in 2012. Now? There is only a huge freakin crater of destruction. Our defense is garbage. Putrid even. Our forwards are trash. Our goalie is injury prone all the while being rewarded with a historical contract. This is quite possibly the worst assembled team in franchise history. I've never seen a team so devoid of talent.

1. I agree. Bergevin inherited a solid core with Price, Subban, Patch, Gallagher, Eller. Vets like Pleky and Markov. And the 3rd OA pick. The disscusion is what did we have after that and what prospects filled holes in our line-up starting in 2012. We inserted Gallagher and Galchenyuk and then Beaulieu (eventually). Tinordi looked good and bad and eventually disappointed. Leblanc was a disappointment. Kristo was a disappointment. We inserted only Gallagher and Beaulieu and it took years to start inserting others like Lehkonen, Mete, Juulsen, Hudon, DLR, Scherbak. There is a major gap here and it's part of the reason why we have holes in our line-up.

2. The stock market and how you do is tied to how much $ you invest. The more $ you have, the more stocks you can take a gamble on. 8 top 100 picks in 4 years of drafting is not much money to work with . I think you don't understand your own point

3. You are grossly undervaluing our current team. Price, Subban/Weber, and Patch are still with our team and they were major assets back in 2012. We can expect modest decline years but they are not melting away anytime soon. Patch might be traded for futures. The Gallagher and under core is starting to take shape. I think the LD depth needs to be addressed now. We are missing a stud grade A prospect on D.

 

[Milhouse40]

It's pointless to bring up a point with no substance to back it up. I was talking about what we had after Price, Subban, Patch, Gallagher, Eller, Pleky and Markov and our ability to improve on that with what we had in the pipeline. You are talking about we should of been able to improve on that but you provide no examples. You think we could of acquired top 2 centers by trading those great prospects we had back in 2012

How about trading for Brayden Schenn?

 

[Habs Halifax]

Our lineup game 1 of 2012-2013 season

Pacioretty-Desharnais-Cole
Bourque-Plekanec-Gionta
Galchenyuk-Prust-Gallagher
Moen-White-Armstrong

Extras: Eller, Blunden

Markov-Emelin
Gorges-Diaz
Bouillon-Kaberle

Extra: Weber

Compare this cast to whatever lineup you want to come up with that will start game 1 of this season.

Seems like they have a lot of the same strengths (few) and weaknesses (many).

But sure, let's act like things were so much better then lol

It has to be better in 2012 in Byrson's world. He hates Bergevin so much and it has to be this way. In his world, Gallagher, Beaulieu, Tinordi, Leblanc, Kristo = our current prospect group. Weber is younger than Markov was in 2012 but Weber is done and Markov was still in his prime.

 

[Habs Halifax]

How about trading for Brayden Schenn?

Very fair. That would of cost us Poehling and a conditional 2018 1st. We had the 3rd pick so that would of moved to a 2019 unprotected pick. Is this example one that you would of preferred our GM to make?

The other thing to note is I think most would agree our team was built to win from 2012-2016 ish range. And Bergevin failed to add the pieces we needed. So it really comes down to Carter, Richards, RyJo, ROR, and Spezza but he had the Habs on his no trade list. Someone else also mentioned Kessel and that is also fair. But who were we trading? This is the discussion. Lets talk about who we were acquiring and what assets we subtracted. We can't just name names and not consider what assets are subtracted. The prospect pool was Beaulieu, Tinordi, Leblanc, Kristo, Gallagher, Galchenyuk. These were the assets we had to use. Or we ended up trading roster players like Eller, Markov, Pleky, Cole/Ryder, Gionta, etc.

 

[Milhouse40]

Our lineup game 1 of 2012-2013 season

Pacioretty-Desharnais-Cole
Bourque-Plekanec-Gionta
Galchenyuk-Prust-Gallagher
Moen-White-Armstrong

Extras: Eller, Blunden

Markov-Emelin
Gorges-Diaz
Bouillon-Kaberle

Extra: Weber

Compare this cast to whatever lineup you want to come up with that will start game 1 of this season.

Seems like they have a lot of the same strengths (few) and weaknesses (many).

But sure, let's act like things were so much better then lol

But sure, let Subban off the line-up because of contract problems......and Galchenyuk was at center.

 

[Belial]

They may make the team but that doesn't mean they should make the team nor that they are ready to be full-time NHL players. So when you say "Book it!" what you're really saying is "Management will find a way to ruin these prospects by rushing them into an impossible situation and destroying their confidence. Book it!"

And stop it with the "decorticate" stuff. Nobody uses that word but you.

Some more negative stuff... Geez, are you guys depressing or what...

But not only depressing but so annoyingly inconsistent in opinions and points made...

Hudon was left in the AHL so that he can develop, there was someone literally daily around here calling this management morons for not bringing him up!

Some guys got promoted earlier and the management got blasted for bringing those guys up too fast!

I mean... Clearly, there's no damn win situation! The twisting and misinterpreting actual facts festival are present 24/7 around here.

 

[Mario Lemieux fan 66]

It's my opinion. Habs would of had to outbid the Pens if the Leafs were trading Kessel to the Habs. Same with Petry... Habs will not trade him to the Leafs unless the return is very good.

Also, The discussion was going after the pieces we needed with the assets we had (based on who was moved since 2012). I ask again, does Kessel turn the Habs into a deep playoff team?

When you are rebuilding, you take the best return available period. If the best offer for Petry, Weber, Price or Pacioretty came from the Leafs so be it trade them to the Leafs. When you are rebuilding, you are not contending for 3 or 4 years minumum who cares what the Leafs might achieve or not with our player.

Kessel would have been our offense general and our top playoff performer just like Radulov was for us. Everytime you can get a player like that on the cheap you should go for it if you are a contender like the Habs were.

 

[Milhouse40]

Very fair. That would of cost us Poehling and a conditional 2018 1st. We had the 3rd pick so that would of moved to a 2019 unprotected pick. Is this example one that you would of preferred our GM to make?

100% yes.
Poehling is a ''maybe at best'' in 2 years from now and our time was right now back then.
And with a top center like Schenn, we would probably never go down as we did so we wouldn't have get a top 3 pick. So, Yes without a doubt