Marc Bergevin " So your telling me there's a chance" edition

[Habs Halifax]

He was considered great despite doing nothing and it was based solely on the Habs record+Vanek, that is it, and as you now know, it meant absolutely jack crap.

Sorry, it had to do with a lot more than what you remember.

- Patch contract
- Price contract
- Gallagher contract
- Vanek trade was brilliant and Collberg turned into a bust
- Impact Prust made
- Petry
- Weise

 

[Whitesnake]

Bergevin was considered one of the best young GM's in the game in his first few years with the Habs. People forget this very quick. The guy had a negotiation war with Subban on the bridge contract and then got burned in the next contract. Then he trades Subban before his NMC kicked in. I like Weber but trading Subban has lead to a downward spiral for our GM. Not much he can do to turn people around and support him anymore.

Doing what? He was considered one of the best young GM doing what. This is a misconception solely based on this great GM award that in the end was only given because a team that finished low 1 season, finished high the season after....as if that season was a total imprint of the GM that just came in. Insane. What did he do to transform this team so much?

So the contracts? And the trades that got us where? For how long?

 

[Whitesnake]

Sorry, it had to do with a lot more than what you remember.

- Patch contract
- Price contract
- Gallagher contract
- Vanek trade was brilliant and Collberg turned into a bust
- Impact Prust made
- Petry
- Weise

Thank god the Isles chose McLeod with that 2nd pick.....'cause they could have chosen Dvorak or Brayden Point.

 

[OldCraig71]

He isn’t learning or adapting at all though. He lowballs skill and overplays for character. This is his mantra. Obsessed with grit to the point where I wonder if he was a cement mixer in a alternatile universe.

He’s made the team worse. Not just one mistake but several.

The comedy here should be paid for. And just to save you some agony, your point of view will never be accepted by some posters here, they think we are a contender.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Doing what? He was considered one of the best young GM doing what. This is a misconception solely based on this great GM award that in the end was only given because a team that finished low 1 season, finished high the season after....as if that season was a total imprint of the GM that just came in. Insane. What did he do to transform this team so much?

So the contracts? And the trades that got us where? For how long?

There is nothing anybody can tell you that you will acknowledged. You don't have to like it but Bergevin started well in his first few years but has faded towards the end (Same as Gainey).

 

[Whitesnake]

Sorry, it had to do with a lot more than what you remember.

- Patch contract
- Price contract
- Gallagher contract
- Vanek trade was brilliant and Collberg turned into a bust
- Impact Prust made
- Petry
- Weise

Do you know when being great at signing contracts is useful for? When you are able to add pieces so that you benefit from the money you still have because you are so great at negotiating.....Tell me where the Habs are because of his contract wisdom? Then Prust and Weise...don't worry. Bottom feeders specialist even if he misses more than he hits. Vanek for 1/2 season. And now it leaves us, hockey wise, with Petry. GM of the year right there.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Thank god the Isles chose McLeod with that 2nd pick.....'cause they could have chosen Dvorak or Brayden Point.

And if the Habs would of kept that pick and taken Dvorak or Point, we would of developed them into McCarron right

 

[Doublechin]

He's the first GM to have made me lose such interest, I barely watch anything, I watched more WJC than Habs hockey this year within a week! And I only watched a handful of games semi distracted.

 

[NotProkofievian]

Sorry, it had to do with a lot more than what you remember.

- Patch contract
- Price contract
- Gallagher contract
- Vanek trade was brilliant and Collberg turned into a bust
- Impact Prust made
- Petry
- Weise

So he re-signed a bunch of players he already had, traded for 2 months of Vanek (who turned out to be a bum), and then the moves start to fall of a cliff.

Great.

We celebrated Bergevin for housekeeping, instead of building.

 

[justafan22]

It's time for him to go. The last 3 seasons have been embarrassing for him.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Do you know when being great at signing contracts is useful for? When you are able to add pieces so that you benefit from the money you still have because you are so great at negotiating.....Tell me where the Habs are because of his contract wisdom? Then Prust and Weise...don't worry. Bottom feeders specialist even if he misses more than he hits. Vanek for 1/2 season. And now it leaves us, hockey wise, with Petry. GM of the year right there.

Keep digging a hole. I am only showing you the reasons why Bergevin was considered one of the best young GM's in the game in the first few years on the job. This was a very popular believe back when and the reasons were not picked out of thin air. There were reasons.

 

[Kriss E]

First mistake and to me, this has bled into what we're seeing today...

Is he made the mistake of thinking the team he took over, was really better than their record indicated it was. I guess that theory was reinforced in his opinion after they won the division his first year as GM, but they got destroyed by the Sens in the playoffs that year...

He needed to purge the team when he took over and all he really did was get rid of Gomez, which was an obvious, but there were other veterans he should of done the same with.

Curious to see if he's going to take the same approach this year...

I don't think that was the problem. The issue, imo, was that he could never commit to any direction.
Had he actually followed through with an "all in" attitude after 13-14, maybe things would have been different. He did not do that though. He just swaped Briere with PAP who was another failure, let Vanek go, let Gionta go, kept rolling DD down the middle.
He could not commit to a strong push.
Either go for it, or do the opposite and commit to full rebuild. Just don't stick with the status quo, that was the worst thing to do.

 

[Habs Halifax]

So he re-signed a bunch of players he already had, traded for 2 months of Vanek (who turned out to be a bum), and then the moves start to fall of a cliff.

Great.

Well celebrated Bergevin for housekeeping, instead of building.

Signing core players to solid low AAV contract for a long term is considered a good move by a GM. Yes . Until he ran into Subban and his agent. They made him burn on that "Prove it" bridge contract. In hindsight, that lead to this downward spiral

 

[NotProkofievian]

Signing core players to solid low AAV contract for a long term is considered a good move by a GM. Yes

It ought to be considered basic things that he's just supposed to do. But sure, give him a trophy for it.

 

[Whitesnake]

There is nothing anybody can tell you that you will acknowledged. You don't have to like it but Bergevin started well in his first few years but has faded towards the end (Same as Gainey).

Not true. He did some good things. I did name it when it happened. BUt doing some good things....every GM does that. What you need to do as a GM is build a team, have a real plan, and see the team improves to become a real cup contending team. Not a ''let's go in the playoffs and maybe luck will be on our side'' type of plan. That's the problem. He went and got Byron too. For nothing. Very good move. Still where are we now? Réjean Houle got Sheldon Souray too. Réjean Houle. The beer seller. Houle got us Hackett and Weinrich. The guy who should never have been close to a management....not even Pee-Wee. He did some good things. Mike Milbury did some GREAT things. The guy who is perceived as the worst GM in hockey did some VERY good moves. So we are past that. By a mile. Acknowledging the good moves....been there done that. You decided you and a few others to INCREDIBLY enough never see the positives posts I made, not my problem anymore. Now...we are elsewhere.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Not true. He did some good things. I did name it when it happened. BUt doing some good things....every GM does that. What you need to do as a GM is build a team, have a real plan, and see the team improves to become a real cup contending team. Not a ''let's go in the playoffs and maybe luck will be on our side'' type of plan. That's the problem. He went and got Byron too. For nothing. Very good move. Still where are we now? Réjean Houle got Sheldon Souray too. Réjean Houle. The beer seller. Houle got us Hackett and Weinrich. The guy who should never have been close to a management....not even Pee-Wee. He did some good things. Mike Milbury did some GREAT things. The guy who is perceived as the worst GM in hockey did some VERY good moves. So we are past that. By a mile. Acknowledging the good moves....been there done that. You decided you and a few others to INCREDIBLY enough never see the positives posts I made, not my problem anymore. Now...we are elsewhere.

It's very clear to me that our GM started well in the 1st few years but has not done well in the last few years. The ability to add a core piece with a bad prospect pool is difficult. I have said this before and will say it again. That prospect pool in 2012 (before the draft) was not good at all due to lack of top 100 picks in the 4 years prior. Add that Leblanc and Tinordi were bust and it was storm cloud to follow us around for several years.

I am fine with the Habs making a change but if they do, I want a new President first. I am also fine with giving Bergevin one more season but under careful watch. The problem is Molson would be doing the watching and he needs an advisor other than Bergevin

 

[Kriss E]

Keep digging a hole. I am only showing you the reasons why Bergevin was considered one of the best young GM's in the game in the first few years on the job. This was a very popular believe back when and the reasons were not picked out of thin air. There were reasons.

And many people were saying back then that those are superficial reasons. Not saying they all were. He definitely had some good moves in there, but if the team finishes 6th, he doesn't get this "great young GM" label.
But we have the luxury of hindsight, you know those moves were without vision and not indicative of anything. So you and anybody else can say he was one of the great young GMs all you want, clearly that did not translate well for him as time went on.

 

[theghost1]

I don't think that was the problem. The issue, imo, was that he could never commit to any direction.
Had he actually followed through with an "all in" attitude after 13-14, maybe things would have been different. He did not do that though. He just swaped Briere with PAP who was another failure, let Vanek go, let Gionta go, kept rolling DD down the middle.
He could not commit to a strong push.
Either go for it, or do the opposite and commit to full rebuild. Just don't stick with the status quo, that was the worst thing to do.

100% Bergevin will not pick a direction and commit to it.....you either go all in that means trading 1st round draft picks like every single other contending team or you tear it down and sink to the bottom and rebuild.....but Bergevin the coward will not choose he will not go left or right he stays right in the middle straddling the fence.

 

[Captain Mountain]

He isn’t learning or adapting at all though. He lowballs skill and overplays for character. This is his mantra. Obsessed with grit to the point where I wonder if he was a cement mixer in a alternatile universe.

He’s made the team worse. Not just one mistake but several.

At least not demonstrably. Which is the big thing. The distribution of the scouting staff hasn't really changed. The team is still significantly under-invested in data acquisition and analysis relative to the league. There has been no discernible shift in trading or drafting philosophy. The organizational management and coaching group has an incredibly low turnover rate.

 

[MaxDummy]

I just saw that Weber won the mark messier leadership award the year we traded PK for him... No wonder why anymore

 

[Roke]

I just saw that Weber won the mark messier leadership award the year we traded PK for him... No wonder why anymore

We're getting the 1997-2004 Mark Messier level of leadership from Weber.

(It's ridiculous that award is named after Messier and not Beliveau).

 

[417]

I don't think that was the problem. The issue, imo, was that he could never commit to any direction.
Had he actually followed through with an "all in" attitude after 13-14, maybe things would have been different. He did not do that though. He just swaped Briere with PAP who was another failure, let Vanek go, let Gionta go, kept rolling DD down the middle.
He could not commit to a strong push.
Either go for it, or do the opposite and commit to full rebuild. Just don't stick with the status quo, that was the worst thing to do.

Well you're right in the sense that it wasn't 'the' problem...but, at least for me, it was the harbinger to everything we're seeing today.

First thing he talked about when he took over was 'building through the draft'...well he should of noticed how little draft picks the Habs had the years before he took over (2008 to 2011). If building through the draft was his mandate, he should of been trying to sell off as many of his veterans as possible to acquire additional draft picks.

That means, Plekanec, Gionta, Gorges should of all been moved before or at some point his 1st season.

See he did do some of that when he took over, moving Erik Cole, buying out Gomez, he just didn't finish that work. The draft picks he could of potentially acquired for those players would form the base of our team today.

I'm not trying to be revisionist either, I was strongly advocating that approach at the time. But as usual with the Montreal Canadiens, after coming off a terrible year, the most important thing was to qualify for the playoffs the following year, short sighted approach.

The goal wasn't to build something sustainable...just get into the playoffs as soon as possible.

 

[mitchmagic]

Hate Bergevin even more after every game. This idiot has completely destroyed our team and continues to do so. What a complete failure of a GM and a failure of a team.

He completely destroyed this team by getting rid of our top players in two years. I should have stopped watching after the Subban trade.

Screw this dude - not watching until he's gone.

 

[Kriss E]

Well you're right in the sense that it wasn't 'the' problem...but, at least for me, it was the harbinger to everything we're seeing today.

First thing he talked about when he took over was 'building through the draft'...well he should of noticed how little draft picks the Habs had the years before he took over (2008 to 2011). If building through the draft was his mandate, he should of been trying to sell off as many of his veterans as possible to acquire additional draft picks.

That means, Plekanec, Gionta, Gorges should of all been moved before or at some point his 1st season.

See he did do some of that when he took over, moving Erik Cole, buying out Gomez, he just didn't finish that work. The draft picks he could of potentially acquired for those players would form the base of our team today.

I'm not trying to be revisionist either, I was strongly advocating that approach at the time. But as usual with the Montreal Canadiens, after coming off a terrible year, the most important thing was to qualify for the playoffs the following year, short sighted approach.

The goal wasn't to build something sustainable...just get into the playoffs as soon as possible.

Well that is my point. He could not fully commit to that rebuild idea. [MOD] myself have constantly criticized him on how he keeps preaching building through the draft yet doing close to nothing in order to actually follow through on it.
Similarly, once he realized the team was better than he initially thought, he could not commit to going all in either.

So as I said, I think the problem was his inability to pick a path and stick to it. Whether you think we should have taken the opportunity to do a full rebuild, or be more aggressive for contention once realizing we actually had some good pieces in place, I think one can make the argument for either direction...so long as you actually fully commit to it, which he failed to do.

 

[417]

Well that is my point. He could not fully commit to that rebuild idea. [MOD] myself have constantly criticized him on how he keeps preaching building through the draft yet doing close to nothing in order to actually follow through on it.
Similarly, once he realized the team was better than he initially thought, he could not commit to going all in either.

So as I said, I think the problem was his inability to pick a path and stick to it. Whether you think we should have taken the opportunity to do a full rebuild, or be more aggressive for contention once realizing we actually had some good pieces in place, I think one can make the argument for either direction...so long as you actually fully commit to it, which he failed to do.

The team he took over completely imploded the year before...with veterans like Markov, Plekanec, Gionta, Gomez, Gorges amongst others, on the team.

How he could of thought a team comprised of that core of veterans would be good enough to contend with a few minor tweaks, is something I have often criticized him for and something I will never be able to understand. A few years later, this team imploded again and Markov/Plekanec were still important figures, just as they were a few years prior.

But agreed with his non-committal approach though.