Marc Bergevin - More Excuses Needed... Edition Pt 2

Status
Not open for further replies.

abo9

Registered User
Jun 25, 2017
9,082
7,176
Go look again (see below for link). We had lots of picks in the 1st 3 rounds of the 2012 and 2013 draft years. It didn't turn out well at all. Some bad picks combined with two bad draft years in terms of talent. Fast forward to today and there is some comparisons to be made (in terms of position of picks and quantity of picks) to the 2017 and 2018 drafts. What we have going for us in the last two drafts is players who are developing well in their draft +1 and +2 years. There is lots to like but we have to wait and see how it turns out. We will know a lot in 12 months... especially when some turning pro this year. Poehling, Brook, Suzuki, Primeau, Teasdale. Romanov will play at least another year in the KHL.

I'm not saying Bergevin is a top 5 NHL GM. I just think he is not as bad as some think he is. I am not in favor of firing him with no pre-determined GM cause who's hiring and doing interviews for the next GM? Molson? Lets find a new President first.

Montreal Canadiens Draft History at hockeydb.com


Thanks for the link! I mixed them with 2008-2011 (2014-2016 we did not have lots of drafts picks either).

I though for a bit that Bergevin did very bad because he inherited a good team and it became bad under is tenure (and the Radulov/Markov handling stung so bad personally). But looking at those 2008-2011 drafts, I realize that he did not have anything to work with in terms of future/depth/backup.

And tbh there are 3 things I can remember that I really disliked since he came in: Handling of Radu/Markov, Trading for Drouin while proning his "attitude" culture. trading 2 2nd picks for Shaw, but that might be hindsight talking
 

OldCraig71

Registered User
Feb 2, 2009
34,819
53,818
No one cares
The year is 2034, life on earth has been decimated by climate change and Marc Bergevin is still GM of the Montreal Canadiens.
giphy.gif
 

Milhouse40

Registered User
Aug 19, 2010
22,058
24,580
We do have a plan after our 2018 off season re-set. It's youth movement and a team that looks promising in terms of the future potential. I know, you hate this turnaround cause you wanted him fired. Sorry, we are stuck with him for another season.

There is a thread somewhere on our main board that shows what our actual picks are. It's comical how you are deflating the picks we have in this next draft. Not surprised. You ignore anything positive cause you want him fired so bad it burns.

Youth movement......Is our defense part of this youth movement with Weber, Petry, Benn?
Not that Folin is old but he isn't a youngster either. Is Price part of the youth movement?

So that crap about the youth movement only applied to the forward group, not the rest of the team.
But let's say i don't care about it, the team will get younger, but will it get better?


If Suzuki doesn't become a 70-80 points players, he'll be just another one of what we already have.
If Poehling doesn't become a 60-70pts players, he'll be just another one of what we already have.

And i can do that for a lot of our prospect cause in the end, those prospect will replace someone on our current rosters and the way i see it, i don't see many that have the potential to be a lot better than what we already have.

As for Bergevin, It's about building and when you build a team, you surrounds your best pieces as much as possible. In our case it's Price and Weber, Bergevin didn't surrounded them. We don't have prospect to surrounds them coming up either. That's why Bergevin isn't good.

We knew Markov was going to leave eventually this team....Bergevin had 6 years to prepare for it.
Didn't do thing before and after either.
 

Miller Time

Registered User
Sep 16, 2004
22,837
15,037
Dissagree. Bergevin vs Gainey is a valid debate. Bergevin is not in the Houle and Gauthier category. What Bergevin did in the last 12 months to shake the "bad trending GM" status is impressive. This is very rare and hard to do.

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough.

I didn't state that you can't compare the GM's, the various posts i've made on the debate should clearly suggest that i do indeed think a comparison is an interesting and worthwhile conversation.

What I specified is that it is silly/foolish to compare them solely using "best" or "worst" transaction as the measuring stick for their tenure. That's completely pointless and says nothing of their overall effectiveness as a GM.

If you compare the body of work of those GM's (Houle, Gainey, Gauthier, Bergevin), i'd argue it is very clear that Gainey was head and shoulders ahead of the rest (and the best you can say about Gainey is that he was a bit better than average as a GM), and I don't think any case could be made that MB was any better than Houle (who had nowhere near the spending freedom MB has had) or Gauthier (who had a very brief tenure and got turfed for 1 bad season, whereas MB has had several and yet keeps his job).

Also, I'd say the idea that MB has had a good "12 months" is ludicrous and unfounded. His in-season moves, or lack thereof, were symptomatic of the same lack of planning/vision/direction that has been the hallmark of his failed tenure.

He had a good/decent summer...

- the Domi traded worked out great, so far, but cost the team it's best young offensive talent (and created a hole on our PP that proved to be extremmely costly).

- the pacioretty trade also worked out well, so far... but in trading away the teams most valuable asset, getting a quality prospect, a 2nd and a salary dump is not exactly a coup. Tatar bouncing back and having a career year definitely made the trade look much better in the short term, remains to be seen how sustainable that is. Not getting a first round pick in the deal remains a significant and valid knock when comparing similar value assets traded in recent years.

- the armia move was good. Why we didn't move more aggressively to make other moves of that nature to take advantage of his spending & cap capacity is a negative, and again shows that he doesn't have the consistency in thinking or planning of a good or great GM... that unused cap space from the past two years has no value now, it should have been used to add assets like Armia or additional picks (at least, that's what would constitute great management).

- the personnel moves were also good moves... albeit both painfully obvious and LONG overdue. Credit to making them can't ignore how long he waited to turf Lefebvre.

- the much maligned (for no valid reason imo) draft department did well in selecting JKO... he's the boss, so he gets credit there... but getting a good player with a top-3 pick isn't exactly a coup either (the romanov pick has much more merit, imo, but in either case, time will tell how good this lottery picking draft year will be for the franchise... last one didn't exactly amount to much under his organizational guidance).

and then, from September on, he did nothing to improve our situation either in the short or long term.
- he lost young assets (JDR, Scherbak) to waivers while keeping useless vets on the roster.
- Dropped down a few draft spots to acquire a 4th liner who played fewer than 12min/game down the stretch
- added no additional picks, despite a wealth of cap space and a very predictable non-playoff season
- did nothing to take advantage of our cap space to either add future assets or shore up key areas of need early in the season (like back-up goalie) that might have actually got us into the playoffs


so no, he hasn't done anything to shake the "bad trending" GM label. The team overachieved because several players had career years, we avoided any significant/major injuries, and Price/Weber both had bounce back seasons. All those positives led us to no playoffs and a 15th overall pick... about the worst possible outcome we could have had.

His lack of vision and planning remains evident. The next few months will be quite telling, but, by all indications, there is no reason to expect him to do anything different than he has previously.
 

BLONG7

Registered User
Oct 30, 2002
35,619
21,953
Nova Scotia
Visit site
i still don't quite get this obsession with comparing "worst moves" as the evaluation tool... makes no sense. A GM's job is a complex interplay of trades, UFA signings, drafting, extensions, coaching & hockey personnel decisions, public/media relations, budget management et.

Pointing to any one or two moves and using that as the measuring stick is both silly and useless. On the whole, it's a matter of how they manage the organizations hockey assets.

Gainey, for all his mistakes, did a decent job, arguably better than the average. Houle and Gauthier were both mediocre or worse, Bergevin most certainly falls in that category. His terrible coaching decisions, extension decisions, bargainbin emphasis and misses in major asset decisions (PK, Sergachev, Radulov, Alzner, Markov) all added up to guiding a strong core that was a few moves away from being a legit contender, to missing the playoffs in 3/4 years and 1 playoff series win in 5 years... this despite full cap spending ability and among the league best in hockey ops spending capacity.

Bergevin has been a complete failure heading into his 8th!!! offseason. That's all there really is to it.
MB is like a used car salesman, he can just sell it!!! Geoff Mol$on is the real issue folks. This is the biggest spin job in sports over the last few seasons that MB has pulled off. Tragic for habs fans, and entertainment for the rest of the league. This clown of a GM had better results with the Gainey/Gautier team he inherited, than he has his own team, he has created.

That being said, yes last summer was huge for the team, but leaving this clown around, is scary at best.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Miller Time

Rafafouille

Registered User
May 12, 2015
1,421
1,478
QC
'Cause Bergevin does not benefit from having Carey Price huh? You don't talk about lucky that makes Bergie? And you don't think that getting a whole lot of points Bergie style in the regular seaosn to be dumped in in the playoffs so rapidly doesn't exactly tell a different story? That a bad conference makes having more points in the regular season easier, while when it's time to face a playoff team on a 4 out of 7, you then show your true colors and you are rapidly eliminated?

True colors? They've only been upset once. In Bergevin first year against Ottawa during the lockout year.

2014: lost conference finals against rangers. Probably would've made the finals if price wasn't injured.

2015: Lost against tampa in 2nd round who went on to the cup finals. Lightning was the much better team. 108 points instead of the Habs 110 but they had a +51 goal differencial instead of our +32.

2016: no playoffs

2017: 103 points, lost to 102 points rangers(in a much better division) in a very tight series.


They've never been upset or "rapidly" eliminated in the playoffs other than that one first year against Ottawa. All our matchups were against teams that were just as good or better than us.
 

Runner77

**********************************************
Sponsor
Jun 24, 2012
83,292
148,954
Bergevin should have been fired after 4-5 seasons.......we all know it.........the joke is on us as the clown is still here. Who gives a rats a$$ about the GM's of other teams...

Get MB away from the Habs, sooner than later...

Amazing the gymnastics some feel compelled to engage in to perpetuate the mediocrity of this GM.
 

Kriss E

Registered User
May 3, 2007
55,329
20,272
Jeddah
Yeah everyone who doesn't share your point of view is an infidel what else is new here
Can't blame him...all of the people who tell me to keep Bergey on are my Leafs/Sens buddies that poke fun. Outside of this board, I don't know any Habs fan who argues for Bergey. At the most, I know some guys who say they don't care but they completely understand why some want him out. I never actually argued with someone who suggested we should keep this bozo on board.

Miss the POs 3 years out of 4....what are you waiting for? For us to go 4 out of 5 and tie our worst 5 year stretch in history?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wats

admiralcadillac

Registered User
Oct 22, 2017
7,460
6,655
Can't blame him...all of the people who tell me to keep Bergey on are my Leafs/Sens buddies that poke fun. Outside of this board, I don't know any Habs fan who argues for Bergey. At the most, I know some guys who say they don't care but they completely understand why some want him out. I never actually argued with someone who suggested we should keep this bozo on board.

Miss the POs 3 years out of 4....what are you waiting for? For us to go 4 out of 5 and tie our worst 5 year stretch in history?

I'm struggling to see people arguing for Bergevin, I personally don't really care whether he stays or goes at this point - but I don't always agree with the criticisms this year. There's a difference between trying to make people understand why their thought process doesn't make sense, or defending specific aspects of someone's tenure, and arguing for that person as a positive contributor.

Missing the playoffs is part of any hfboards plan involving the team restructuring. Again, for me, this year was supposed to be a bottom gutter year, I think it surprised everyone that it wasn't. It was therefore not a shocker to me, nor should it have been to anyone, that the team didn't make it. However, people are just angry the team didn't get a high draft pick since they didn't make the playoffs, and angry that Bergevin didn't do more for the team to make the playoffs. There are just inconsistencies with positions people hold and whenever that is pointed out you get classics like everyone who supports or defends Bergevin in any way is not even a habs fan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 417

teamfirst

Registered User
Oct 28, 2016
3,432
2,038
Can't blame him...all of the people who tell me to keep Bergey on are my Leafs/Sens buddies that poke fun. Outside of this board, I don't know any Habs fan who argues for Bergey. At the most, I know some guys who say they don't care but they completely understand why some want him out. I never actually argued with someone who suggested we should keep this bozo on board.

Miss the POs 3 years out of 4....what are you waiting for? For us to go 4 out of 5 and tie our worst 5 year stretch in history?


Well, in all fairness you're pretty hard to argue with in the first place, i can see alot of your buddy saying ''ya you're right Kriss''

Let's face it, you scare people :laugh::laugh:
 

Kriss E

Registered User
May 3, 2007
55,329
20,272
Jeddah
I'm struggling to see people arguing for Bergevin, I personally don't really care whether he stays or goes at this point - but I don't always agree with the criticisms this year. There's a difference between trying to make people understand why their thought process doesn't make sense, or defending specific aspects of someone's tenure, and arguing for that person as a positive contributor.

Missing the playoffs is part of any hfboards plan involving the team restructuring. Again, for me, this year was supposed to be a bottom gutter year, I think it surprised everyone that it wasn't. It was therefore not a shocker to me, nor should it have been to anyone, that the team didn't make it. However, people are just angry the team didn't get a high draft pick since they didn't make the playoffs, and angry that Bergevin didn't do more for the team to make the playoffs. There are just inconsistencies with positions people hold and whenever that is pointed out you get classics like everyone who supports or defends Bergevin in any way is not even a habs fan.

Yes, except Bergevin only claimed to be doing a reset last summer, meaning he missed the POs twice in three years prior. You want others to be more objective? Why aren't you mentioning that?

There are no inconsistencies man. What has been the biggest criticism towards Bergevin since he joined the Habs? There is no direction/plan. Are we going for prospects? Are we rebuilding? Are we trying to make the POs and compete? Bergevin says he isn't rebuilding, he's resetting, and the objective is still to make the POs.
People don't know what to think. Some, such as myself, wanted Tatar and Petry traded early, add more picks/prospects, drop down the standings. You don't want to do that? Fine. Then make moves that will improve the team. No need to sell the whole farm here, but get a bit of help to push you into the POs. It will be a good learning experience for the youngsters and we aren't going to pick high anyways, the last thing we need is a 9th place finish to pick around 15th.

Go back to the beginning of the season, people were saying the only thing they don't want is a 9th place finish and pick 15th. Either get us into the POs, or keep selling to stock up the prospect pool further.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bsl

Runner77

**********************************************
Sponsor
Jun 24, 2012
83,292
148,954
Are those ... Birken-flops? Bergen-flops?

Style icon.

Beer can (Molson), flops.

That's what happens when someone misses leg day at the gym, over an 8-year span.
 
Last edited:

admiralcadillac

Registered User
Oct 22, 2017
7,460
6,655
Yes, except Bergevin only claimed to be doing a reset last summer, meaning he missed the POs twice in three years prior. You want others to be more objective? Why aren't you mentioning that?

There are no inconsistencies man. What has been the biggest criticism towards Bergevin since he joined the Habs? There is no direction/plan. Are we going for prospects? Are we rebuilding? Are we trying to make the POs and compete? Bergevin says he isn't rebuilding, he's resetting, and the objective is still to make the POs.
People don't know what to think. Some, such as myself, wanted Tatar and Petry traded early, add more picks/prospects, drop down the standings. You don't want to do that? Fine. Then make moves that will improve the team. No need to sell the whole farm here, but get a bit of help to push you into the POs. It will be a good learning experience for the youngsters and we aren't going to pick high anyways, the last thing we need is a 9th place finish to pick around 15th.

Go back to the beginning of the season, people were saying the only thing they don't want is a 9th place finish and pick 15th. Either get us into the POs, or keep selling to stock up the prospect pool further.

What if neither of those things was the thing to do this year? You mention this dichotomy as if they were the only options available but if you can't afford the players available and aren't in a position to give up your prospects for help, but you're also not in a position where giving up your players is really all that beneficial (Tatar's value was based on his play this season, you mentioning his name is completely incomprehensible unless you'Re referring to trading him during the trade deadline. As for trading Petry, that leaves a massive, gaping hole in the D that was unfortunately not replaceable by anyone on our D line, nevermind Juulsen being injured.

Your comment makes sense and you've rehearsed it countless times, but it's the inability to see any nuance that perhaps gives you licence to defend someone who thinks you're "not a habs fan" if you don't see either of those options as making sense in the context of this year.
 

Miller Time

Registered User
Sep 16, 2004
22,837
15,037
What if neither of those things was the thing to do this year? You mention this dichotomy as if they were the only options available but if you can't afford the players available and aren't in a position to give up your prospects for help, but you're also not in a position where giving up your players is really all that beneficial (Tatar's value was based on his play this season, you mentioning his name is completely incomprehensible unless you'Re referring to trading him during the trade deadline. As for trading Petry, that leaves a massive, gaping hole in the D that was unfortunately not replaceable by anyone on our D line, nevermind Juulsen being injured.

Your comment makes sense and you've rehearsed it countless times, but it's the inability to see any nuance that perhaps gives you licence to defend someone who thinks you're "not a habs fan" if you don't see either of those options as making sense in the context of this year.

it's not that there are only 2 options available, it's that there are only two paths that give a sports team (in a cap/draft environment) the highest probability to build a contending roster.

nuance is all fine and good, but in reality, clarity of focus trumps waffling consistently. Waiting to get lucky, or for the stars to align, can and does work, its just not particularly effective.

What we did this past season is the worst (as in lowest probability) approach to achieving post-season success... now or in the future. Tinkering around the edges, hoping to get "in and see what happens", ensures that you don't maximize available assets either for immediate reinforcements or for future gain.

There's a wealth of research and documentation on both sport and military leadership that reinforces this idea... "Going for it" doesn't guarantee success (be it in a short term or long term focus), but playing the middle ground far more frequently leads to defeat.

The cap space we did not use (either to get roster improvements, or to allow other teams to make room for roster improvements at the expense of future assets given to us for the cap relief), the 15th overall pick we ended up with, and the roster full of players not gaining from playoff experience are all net negatives for our franchise's objective of fielding a team that can win a cup... that's a complete failure on the part of the GM, one that was avoidable had he had the courage to pick a clear direction
 
  • Like
Reactions: bsl

Kriss E

Registered User
May 3, 2007
55,329
20,272
Jeddah
What if neither of those things was the thing to do this year? You mention this dichotomy as if they were the only options available but if you can't afford the players available and aren't in a position to give up your prospects for help, but you're also not in a position where giving up your players is really all that beneficial (Tatar's value was based on his play this season, you mentioning his name is completely incomprehensible unless you'Re referring to trading him during the trade deadline. As for trading Petry, that leaves a massive, gaping hole in the D that was unfortunately not replaceable by anyone on our D line, nevermind Juulsen being injured.

Your comment makes sense and you've rehearsed it countless times, but it's the inability to see any nuance that perhaps gives you licence to defend someone who thinks you're "not a habs fan" if you don't see either of those options as making sense in the context of this year.

Neither things to do? So don't sell. Don't buy. Don't try to improve your team in the slightest just to squeak into the POs....Just do nothing? How is this ever the right strategy?
All I'm hearing from you are excuses, no plan, no direction...let's just wait it out, see next year how everyone is going to improve or not, and what prospect is ready. Maybe we sign someone this summer...maybe we don't. Maybe something will be available to us via trade, or not.

Again, no idea, no plan, no direction, no structure, no clue. Maybe this maybe that.

Do you not realize this was the stance Bergevin took when he was named GM? He came over, got rid of obvious garbage, didn't commit to any free agents, signed cheap depth players, waited for players to be available for cheap like Vanek or Petry...never committed to a direction.
Then he attempted making bigger moves, that made him miss the POs 2 out of 3 years, which then made him say ''we gonna reset'', leading to us missing the POs for the 3rd year out of 4.

You said it's pretty standard for rebuilding teams to be missing the POs so you don't get the uproar. Ya. It's also pretty standard for them to sell players and stock up more on prospects/picks. He did a bit of that, but again, doesn't seem fully committed to it.
When are we expecting to compete exactly? In 2 years? or 3-4?? Because what you should have done this year is very dependent of when you expect to compete.
If we are waiting for the Poehling, Suzuki, KK, Fleury, Brook, Romanov to come around, well, why are we keeping the Weber-Petry-Tatar..etc..Why sign Byron, I mean, we really need Byron around if we want to compete in a few years with younger guys?? Or considering we really don't care where we finish this year because we're in reset mode, maybe moving some vets we don't really have to keep around for picks/prospects who will help in the future is a better decision..
No direction. No commitment. No plan.

That has always been the problem and remains to be the biggest one.

As for not being a fan, pretty sure it's tongue in cheek. I question it sometimes too, how can a fan be in any way okay with having Bergevin still on board here going into year 8. It's mindblowing to me.
But I also know everyone here is a Habs fan.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->