Props when props is due

[BLONG7]

Every GM in the league has made good moves, and bad moves, and MB is in the thick of all that...but recently the players have been bringing it, and when that happens the GM and the coach get some props ( even though I am not a fan of MT )
That being said, MB is looking for something from players that he saw in Chicago, heart and character...I know we all have fun from time to time about character, but these guys seem to be gelling together...

Weaver, Weise, and Vanek, all trades that seemed to address needs, so let's just roll with it, and see where the playoffs take us!

He's not perfect as we know, but as mentioned, props to our GQGM!!

 

[DAChampion]

Two things about the Vanek trade:

1) Vanek is not a "character player";
2) It doesn't count as building through the draft, it is the opposite;

 

[PricePkPatch*]

Two things about the Vanek trade:

1) Vanek is not a "character player";
2) It doesn't count as building through the draft, it is the opposite;

1- Agreed. But then, he seems like a clutch player to have in the playoffs.
2- Agreed again. But then, what we have sacrificed is not something we would be lacking. We haven't endangered our drafting positions, we have not endangered significantly our prospect pool.

Compare other Vanek-grade acquisitions that were done in the past; and you'll realize that Bergevin has been firm in not betting the future on any single player. Not sure what the proverb in english is, but (translated literally) he hasn't undressed Peter to dress up Paul.

 

[BLONG7]

Two things about the Vanek trade:

1) Vanek is not a "character player";
2) It doesn't count as building through the draft, it is the opposite;

In both accounts, true, but Vanek addresses a need...

Building through the draft is what Chicago did, and then added a Hossa type of player...worked for them...building your team through the draft is the most important part of the equation these days...but not the only part of the equation...true?

 

[Hope Of Glory]

Two things about the Vanek trade:

1) Vanek is not a "character player";
2) It doesn't count as building through the draft, it is the opposite;

To be fair, Bergevin probably figured it would be pretty hard to build through the draft by drafting 16-20+. When he took over, the team got the 3rd pick overall, he probably thought we would have a few top ten picks in the next years, giving him time to build through the draft.

He adjusted his strategy, which is exactly what he needed to do. We weren't going anywhere by doing nothing and having a mid-late 1st round pick.

 

[Smokey Thompson]

In both accounts, true, but Vanek addresses a need...

Building through the draft is what Chicago did, and then added a Hossa type of player...worked for them...building your team through the draft is the most important part of the equation these days...but not the only part of the equation...true?

True, that's why the Hawks were able to perform that drastic turn around from bottom dwellers to perennial contenders. Hossa and Sharp have been top5 in scoring on that team for years now, none of them drafted by the Hawks.

Their core can be identified as Toews Kane Sharp Hossa Keith, 3/5 drafted. The thing is, they have done a tremendous job of drafting since 2009, which means they constantly have a young guy who can step up and fill a vital role on a cheap contract. Guys like Saad, Shaw, Kruger, Leddy (trade), etc.

It's all about building a winning organization from top to bottom. And there's no better examples of that than Detroit and Chicago. Luckily, our GM comes from one of those teams.

 

[yianik]

MB has not changed his strategy of building through the Draft. Any GM who thinks he can build a Cup winner only through drafting would be the most delusional and stupid GM ever. Most GMs overtrade because they enjoy fiddling and think they are smarter than they are, the smartest GMs are the ones who can be patient and pick their spots.

Building through the Draft is about keeping picks and developing your players as opposed to coughing up picks at deadlines every year for pure rentals, or trading picks and prospects too often for non core pieces. If you trade picks or prospects of any value only when you are going for key pieces, you are still building through the Draft. The fact you can move picks and prospects at those times is because you have built up a deep asset pool to allow you to make such moves.

Chances are Vanek doesn't sign with us, but the price for this lotto ticket was low and worth it. MB would never had done this deal last year when the price would have been a 1st, young roster guy and prospect .That would be changing strategy. MB is still building through the draft, no hypocrisy here.

 

[JLP]

If Vanek stays in Montreal he will be able to get better haircuts.

 

[hersky77]

Two things about the Vanek trade:

1) Vanek is not a "character player";
2) It doesn't count as building through the draft, it is the opposite;

1) Vanek is exactly what we needed, if he stays then great, if not we go after moulson this summer.

2) It's not like we gave up a lot for him, Colberg is good but we have guys who are better then him specifically de la rose who Snow asked for first and Bergy said no.

 

[Kriss E]

So bad he's always on our PK, who's one of the best rated in the NHL.

Didn't we go allow a big 0 goals on the PP in the recent games he was scratched with even Gorges out (or close to that)??
The PK doesn't have much to do with one individual, and we've been great at it for years, even without Murray on it. It's about how the 4 man unit position itself.
But nobody ever said he wasn't a good PKer. Just like nobody ever said MA Bergeron wasn't good on the PP. That doesn't make them good Dman.

At ES, Murray is very bad. He has his strengths, like everybody else, but he's not good.
Markov is a pretty good Dman, and yet, he has none of Murray's strength.
If blocking shots and pushing people is what you attribute to good defending, then I understand why you think he's good. But I don't value those two aspects very much. I pay more attention to positioning, puck moving, and vision-IQ.

 

[Born in 1909]

Ahm nope. Even it he doesn't resign here the trade was a steal. He opted to help our top4 wingers and goalscoring and PP and it costed nearly nothing. Vanek is something we have lacked, a goalscorer willing to take the hits infront of the net for goals.

If we do wanna be contenders in 3-4 years I say throw money at Vanek.

Think about it.
Vanek
Subban
Price
Gally
Plecs
Markov

There is something you wanna invest on.

Pacioretty

 

[Born in 1909]

I'm sorry did Murray learn how to play hockey since then?

Murray is scary to mess with.

A scary Dman is a good thing.

The guy even engaged in slugfest with an overly-agressive John Scott this season.

That's crazy territory.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Just so you are informed: Briere has been centering our 3rd line for a few games now, and has been doing a very good job at it so far.

Not the best signing EVAR, but it's not a trainwreck by any measure of the term. If anything, it's subpar, but it's still a move that makes us currently a better team.

You need to be a lot smarter about picking your battles. It was a stupid signing... period. I don't give a **** if he's been centering our third line for the last half hour (while Eller got injured) we've barely used him this year and he has three points this month. He's over the hill, small, soft, a natural center who we signed to play wing... it made no ****ing sense whatsoever. As for Murray, he sucks too. Don't give me this crap about the PK because you can thank our goalies for that. Murray makes every player he plays with worse. He's terrible.

Again though, you completely sidestepped the crux of my point - too early to say how good a GM MB will be. The Vanek move was brilliant and - as I said - wipes out what was a bad offseason for him. But don't sit there and try to pretend like it wasn't bad because it was dreadful. Vanek redeems him and if he signs him, he'll deserve even more props.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

yeah that's exactly what PricePKPatch was saying. Come on. You make it sound like he's saying that Weise is Gretzky and Weaver's Coffey.

Murray HAS had moments where he's definitely helped but there are times where he's made some awful decisions with the puck in our end. I truly believe he's been a deterrent a lot of the time for other teams trying to push us around. When was the last time we've seen a team bully us?

Murray has been terrible. You should be able to see this. If you can't, go look at the pie charts, stats, drawings, graphs... or whatever other objective measurement you want to use. He's awful.

Briere isn't what he once was and is overpaid but that doesn't mean he hasn't been a solid player for us. He's scored some key goals and now seems to be anchoring a 3rd line that has some of our favourite whipping boys on it and is actually making it work. It's a nice luxury to have a player of his caliber on a 3rd line. If that 3rd line can keep it up for the playoffs, you can't measure how huge that is for us.

4 million dollars and a no movement clause.

Think about that for a second. He's done absolutely nothing and we've barely played this guy. He's in the lineup because Eller got hurt? Goodie for him. He's had next to no impact for us and that money could've been much better spent elsewhere.

Parros has been more bad than good but even he had his moments but he was definitely an adventure in his own zone. We freed up a prospect roster spot to get him so really who cares.

He's been brutal too. It was a strikeout in the offseason... don't pretend it wasn't and move on.

As I said... the Vanek move mitigates this because they were (wisely) short term deals.

I think a lot of people were too 'I told you so' when DD was floundering and Briere was being benched every other game. Now it would just be too much an about face to admit maybe we overreacted. I think it's just stubbornness on a lot of people's parts.

Bergevin's done a very astute job in patching up the holes in our line up.

As far as inheriting a good situation, well he kind of did. That 3rd overall pick and the plethora of 2nd round picks looks to be a huge boon for our prospect pool. Plus we got Vanek because of it. But that doesn't mean he hasn't done a good job with what he inherited.

We weren't as bad as our bottom 3 finish in 11-12 but I still think MB has made some great strides in making us better. Don't see why it can't be both that MB came into a better than it looked situation AND he also made good decisions with what he had. Everybody wants to just support their own narrative of what they've acted out on here instead of really seeing what's going on.

MB's done a damn fine job so far.

Mixed bag. But I agree the Vanek move was "damn fine" work.

The Vanek move is huge and tips the scales towards saying he's been more good than bad in my book. Let's face it, there's not much to go on yet. But the Vanek move is huge and he deserves huge props esp if he can re-sign him.

 

[Teufelsdreck]

The Vanek deal ONLY becomes a good move IF he stays in Montreal. Otherwise, it is nothing more than giving up assets for a rental, on a team built for failure. Nothing more than a smokescreen to disguise how crappy this team is.

A crappy team that's making the playoffs, taking 3 out of 4 from the Bruins, sending the winning goaltender to Sochi, having a 35-goal scorer with games remaining, icing the most recent Norris trophy winner. It doesn't sound like a crappy team to me. Too bad it doesn't meet your rarefied standards.

 

[Canadiens Ghost]

A crappy team that's making the playoffs, taking 3 out of 4 from the Bruins, sending the winning goaltender to Sochi, having a 35-goal scorer with games remaining, icing the most recent Norris trophy winner. It doesn't sound like a crappy team to me. Too bad it doesn't meet your rarefied standards.

It's a good deal even if Vanek leaves because Bergevin is sending a message to the players and the fans that he wants to win and that he is willing to take some educated guesses. And right now, Vanek seems to be enjoying himself so you never know, could be one hell of a steal.

 

[Sorinth]

His good moves DO make up for his bad ones if he's learned from his mistakes and has since improved. It's all about the learning curve with Bergevin. I look at him the same way I look at any rookie -- good potential, early screw-ups and learning his position. Yeah, he's made some dumb signings, but I'll bet he won't repeat them. His bad moves were done early and his good moves recently -- even without Vanek, which was a major coup. That's all we can hope for -- a guy who knows when to be cautious, when to be bold, and who improves the team regardless of outside distractions. Bergevin is showing signs he can do that. We'll see...

Early on it was all about character, it's why we chose Briere instead of Jagr, it's why we didn't give Subban a long term deal right away, etc... That's why I like the Vanek deal, we didn't care that he wasn't a character player, he's just an extremely talented player who filled a void we needed. Was it just an offer to good to pass up or was it learning from past mistakes? There's a good chance it's the latter which is great news.

 

[SB164]

True, that's why the Hawks were able to perform that drastic turn around from bottom dwellers to perennial contenders. Hossa and Sharp have been top5 in scoring on that team for years now, none of them drafted by the Hawks.

Their core can be identified as Toews Kane Sharp Hossa Keith, 3/5 drafted. The thing is, they have done a tremendous job of drafting since 2009, which means they constantly have a young guy who can step up and fill a vital role on a cheap contract. Guys like Saad, Shaw, Kruger, Leddy (trade), etc.

It's all about building a winning organization from top to bottom. And there's no better examples of that than Detroit and Chicago. Luckily, our GM comes from one of those teams.

You forgot Seabrook.

 

[Habs]

So this cute little winning streak has made you love MB? What about after another first round exit? Looks like Vanek is a nice little patch, nothing more. Not sure if we are really a good team, or just how bad the rest of the East is right now.

 

[PricePkPatch*]

So this cute little winning streak has made you love MB? What about after another first round exit? Looks like Vanek is a nice little patch, nothing more. Not sure if we are really a good team, or just how bad the rest of the East is right now.

Since we are not locked in a loser mentality like you, we are actually WAITING to see the results of Round 1 before starting throw eggs or pre-emptively sell the farm.

 

[WhiskeySeven*]

Since we are not locked in a loser mentality like you, we are actually WAITING to see the results of Round 1 before starting throw eggs or pre-emptively sell the farm.

I don't trust Therrien after the trainwreck of last year's playoffs.

 

[BaseballCoach]

I don't trust Therrien after the trainwreck of last year's playoffs.

OK, but given the title of this thread, can we have some mea culpas from the hockey "experts" here who lamented how STUPID Michel Therrien was being playing Vanek on the RIGHT wing (oh my God), some even going so far as saying that this one incompetent move would cost us any chance at re-signing the guy because he hates playing RW so much.

I don't know if he will re-sign, but honestly don't see from his body language how he hates the right wing.

Anyone ready to man up on this one?

 

[groovejuice]

Two things about the Vanek trade:

1) Vanek is not a "character player";
2) It doesn't count as building through the draft, it is the opposite;

Are you also a Southern Baptist who takes every spoken or written word absolutely literally?

Building through the draft does not imply never trading a player or draft pick, or signing a UFA.

It simply means that the team will rely mostly on shrewd drafting. Part of this process would also mean trading player or prospect to move up in the draft. It's complicated to manage professionally, but easy to view from a stadium seat, or TV couch.

 

[Ralbert09]

The Vanek deal ONLY becomes a good move IF he stays in Montreal. Otherwise, it is nothing more than giving up assets for a rental, on a team built for failure. Nothing more than a smokescreen to disguise how crappy this team is.

Why you heff to be med?

 

[CaptainBenn]

I like the Vanek move but it doesnt mean Bergevin becomes a saint