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.