HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Notices

The case for a 1-year surgical tank for the Habs

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-31-2012, 10:26 PM
  #426
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernHab View Post
But do we use our first round draft pick on a triggerman or on MacKinnon?

This tanking business is complicated. You still have to make decisions and manage assets even though you get the top draft picks.

Columbus, Edmonton regards......
I expect the Habs to rise a few notches. I'd like them to make the playoffs and upset a frontrunner or two. How about ousting the Southeast leader in the first round? Why not?


Last edited by Teufelsdreck: 08-01-2012 at 04:09 PM.
Teufelsdreck is offline  
Old
07-31-2012, 10:48 PM
  #427
SouthernHab
Registered User
 
SouthernHab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 9,590
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Columbus signed James Wisniewski last summer. He did well for them, but he missed 34 games. Happens sometimes. However, he's a good player for them going forward.

Edmonton had the 3rd best power play in the league this summer. They've solved that aspect of the game. There are other problems holding them back.
Are you saying that a "tank" is therefore not a guarantee lock for a Cup? Because of "other" things that might happen to a team during a season?

Is that what you just said?

SouthernHab is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 12:53 AM
  #428
haburger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,132
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
PP Triggermen can be acquired by UFA signings and trades. In the past few years we acquired Schneider, Bergeron, and Wisniewski. We can do it again. Bergevin has opted not to do so at this time.
Bergeron an wiz are weak bud. An schneids was done when we last picked him up. Pp studs like pk an markov are rare. You are getting killed on here and u still show up. Go leafs go eh ?

haburger is online now  
Old
08-01-2012, 01:10 AM
  #429
Lars The GOAT Eller
WildGranlund
 
Lars The GOAT Eller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,279
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to Lars The GOAT Eller
Quote:
Originally Posted by haburger View Post
Bergeron an wiz are weak bud. An schneids was done when we last picked him up. Pp studs like pk an markov are rare. You are getting killed on here and u still show up. Go leafs go eh ?
Wiz was treated like a god around here when he was with us mate

Lars The GOAT Eller is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 07:17 AM
  #430
Davebo
beep beep
 
Davebo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,818
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernHab View Post
Are you saying that a "tank" is therefore not a guarantee lock for a Cup? Because of "other" things that might happen to a team during a season?

Is that what you just said?
We've come full circle. maybe he's gained a clue in the process, although signs are not promising.

Time to click the little thread ignore X, and put this one to bed.

Davebo is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 08:44 AM
  #431
guest1467
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkersMark View Post
If by pretty good you mean misses the net by a tractors length multiple times a game then yeah, we have one.

guest1467 is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 08:47 AM
  #432
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 22,739
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haburger View Post
Bergeron an wiz are weak bud. An schneids was done when we last picked him up. Pp studs like pk an markov are rare. You are getting killed on here and u still show up. Go leafs go eh ?
They weren't weak on the PP, which is the whole point of the discussion.

Kriss E is online now  
Old
08-01-2012, 08:53 AM
  #433
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,367
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernHab View Post
Are you saying that a "tank" is therefore not a guarantee lock for a Cup? Because of "other" things that might happen to a team during a season?

Is that what you just said?
There is no strategy that comes with 100% guarantee.

The point is to pick the strategy with the highest probability: proper rebuilding.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 08:56 AM
  #434
MarkersMark*
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 195
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post


Child please, we can play this all day.

MarkersMark* is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 08:57 AM
  #435
MarkersMark*
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 195
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haburger View Post
Bergeron an wiz are weak bud. An schneids was done when we last picked him up. Pp studs like pk an markov are rare. You are getting killed on here and u still show up. Go leafs go eh ?
How about I dig up all your Gomez predictions from last year? Hahaha, yeah didn't think so.

MarkersMark* is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 09:04 AM
  #436
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,367
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
They weren't weak on the PP, which is the whole point of the discussion.
In order to compete, the Habs are missing a:

1) PP Triggerman. Someone to replace the lineage of Sourray/Streit/Schneider/Bergeron/Wisniewski. Buddha smoke has argued Subban will succeed in this role, but others pointed out Subban has low accuracy, low precision, and telegraphs his intentions. Formerly good prospect Yannick Weber could have fulfilled this role but his development ... failed.

2) An additional top-6 forward. We can't be a one-line team like last year. This could have been Semin, but Bergevin chose not to. Any of Eller, Leblanc, or Gallagher has the potential to step into the role. IMO Bourque is not good enough for top-6 duties, I think he's deadwood, but other people have hope.

3) A defensive dman with size. Our defense might be the shortest in the league. Emelin, the tallest, is 6'2", Kaberle is 6'1", then Markov, Subban, and Gorges are 6'0". All the other dmen are below 6'0". There's no one big. No Hal Gill, no Paul Mara, no Sheldon Sourray, no Mike Komisarek. Further, out of the current defense corps, there is only going to be one shutdown unit: whatever unit Gorges is on. Could be Subban-Gorges or Markov-Gorges, i.e. we will physically exhaust either Markov or Subban putting them on shutdown duties when their energies should ideally be conserved for offese. The other two units will end up giving up a lot of goals.

4) An enforcer. I realize this is controversial, but I think it'd good for the team. I'm not sure why we let go of Brad Staubitz, he was the only bright spot of the last 10 games of the season. Brandon Prust is 5'11", 195 lbs. He has other qualities, but he won't cut it in the enforcement department. Bergevin chose not to keep Staubitz. Bergevin chose not to sign John Scott.

Habs are finishing 11th-15th this season.


Last edited by DAChampion: 08-01-2012 at 09:24 AM.
DAChampion is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 10:07 AM
  #437
bsl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jakomyte View Post
There are two major holes in your argument:

1) This '1-year tank' you are talking about gives absolutely no guarantee of short-, mid-, or long-term improvement. Just ask teams like Edmonton, Columbus, NYI, etc. that have been at or near the bottom of the league forever. I'm sure their fanbases would kill for their team to have a successful season, even if they don't win the cup. There are just as many examples of cup contenders that did not require a series of high draft picks (Detroit, Boston, Philly, NYR, Vancouver) as their are those that succeeded because of their high-pick talent (Pittsburgh, Chicago).

2) The Montreal Canadiens are a business, period. You can talk all you want about your strategy will help us win the cup (no proof of that at all), but every single home game, 21,273 fans come to the Bell Centre and want their team to win. Believe it or not, the majority of fans probably don't think about hockey in terms of managerial moves that can help in 5 years (i.e. the HFboards fan), but in terms of "GO HABS, WIN THE GAME!!" The management of the team has the responsibility of providing the best entertainment product available, game in, game out, regardless of whether their team is a 'contender' this year, in order to satisfy fans, and justify the price of their product. I certainly paid less attention to the Habs during the latter half of last season, because the games they played didn't matter. Also, there's no way an NHL coach will play his backup goalie ahead of his starting goalie just to reduce the chance of winning, that is ridiculous! You can call me a bad fan, or say "but you missed watching player X develop!", but ultimately I got siginificantly more entertainment value out of the 2009-2010 team that made the conference finals, even if some look back and say they were a fluke/outmatched.
Your post was grossly insulting to Habs fans.

So you're saying fans are stupid now, and we have to entertain them. I don't believe it. This club has existed for 100 years, and I do not underestimate and insult Habs fans, as you do.

I can tell you straight that every Habs fan with some knowledge of Hockey knew exactly what Sam Pollock was doing with the team throughout the seventies. We knew our team, and what they were doing.

Part of being a true fan is understanding when the team is bad, and what managements is doing about it.

I don't give a **** about casual fans who show up at the Bell once a year and expect us to trounce the Bruins.

At one time, the Habs never cared about those fans either. They cared about winning cups. You cross that line, you move away from excellence.

bsl is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 10:32 AM
  #438
bsl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by optimus2861 View Post
I think the reason the "parity" illusion persists is that there are enough upsets & Cinderella stories that happen in the league that give false hope to fanbases like ours. For example:
  • An 8th seeded Oilers team gets all the way to the finals in 2006.
  • The Thrashers won their division & made the playoffs in 2007.
  • We rode some kind of freak wave to a first-place conference finish in 2008.
  • The 117-point Sharks got knocked out in the first round in 2009, and the Jackets made the playoffs for the first time with a rookie goalie.
  • Our own Halak-driven ride to the conference finals in 2010.
  • This year's Senators came out of almost nowhere and nearly upset the Rangers.
  • Finally, the 8th-place Kings won the Cup this year.
What people tend to forget is what happens after the clock strikes 12:
  • The Oilers haven't made the playoffs since.
  • Nor have the Thrashers/Jets.
  • We crashed down to 8th in 2009 and got swept in the first round.
  • The Sharks got taken out by what was still a pretty good Ducks team. Said Sharks have also been perennial playoff underachievers with their core and their window is closing/closed.
  • The Jackets have ruined themselves and possibly said goalie too.
  • The Flyers curb-stomped us in the ECF and we didn't do much better standings-wise in 2011.
  • The Rangers were playoff underachievers in 2012 and have significantly reloaded this offseason. They won't squander themselves in 7-game series against inferior opponents next spring.
  • The Kings underachieved all year and had to change coaches to get themselves righted, then they showed just how good they were with an absolute steamroll through the playoffs.
The teams that actually win Cups are the teams that actually should be winning Cups, a great mix of talent at all positions on the ice. Our squads on paper over the past 6 years simply don't match up to the squads that won the Cups.

"But we almost beat Carolina/Boston" really doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things. Only in 2006 was a path to a Cup actually conceivable because of what happened elsewhere around the league (Oilers Cinderella run in the west, Sabres ravaged by injuries, Hasek hurting/quitting on the Senators, numerous upsets of 100+ point teams), but years like 2006 only come around maybe once every 10-15 years.

I don't want this organization to have to catch a freak year to win a Cup. I want this organization to be considered a favorite. We're not there yet.
Great post. Well done.

bsl is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 10:37 AM
  #439
Sined
The AndroidBugler!
 
Sined's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 6,372
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsl View Post
Your post was grossly insulting to Habs fans.

So you're saying fans are stupid now, and we have to entertain them. I don't believe it. This club has existed for 100 years, and I do not underestimate and insult Habs fans, as you do.

I can tell you straight that every Habs fan with some knowledge of Hockey knew exactly what Sam Pollock was doing with the team throughout the seventies. We knew our team, and what they were doing.

Part of being a true fan is understanding when the team is bad, and what managements is doing about it.

I don't give a **** about casual fans who show up at the Bell once a year and expect us to trounce the Bruins.

At one time, the Habs never cared about those fans either. They cared about winning cups. You cross that line, you move away from excellence.
Regardless of history. Hockey has turned into a business. The primary goal of a business in a capitalist market is to make money. Losing goes against that.

Sined is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 10:37 AM
  #440
bsl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernHab View Post
Holy ****. This thread is like watching the old movie Sybil.

"I am for tanking.........but I am not for intentionally losing" was a classic line.

Thanks for the chuckles.

DA, you should turn the TV off this season and not watch hockey......at all. No need to. It seems that you already know how this season will progress and end. (Can you tell me who wins the Cup so I can make a bet?)

I am willing to bet that if you went to any of the other team boards, I am certain that you will see threads where teams are unwilling to win the 1st round of the playoffs because they might lose in subsequent rounds. Especially the Kings and Bruins board.

Holy ****, this one goes off the boards of reality. I am sure that you have surpassed your wildest dreams in creating this thread and seeing the number of posts. If you were a fisherman, you would officially be way above the legal limit.

Poor management in Columbus with all of their high draft picks is not relevant............that one still has me laughing.
What useless insulting post. You spend the entire thing insulting the OP instead of discussing. Why? What's your problem with this thread? Do you have anything constructive to say?

bsl is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 10:47 AM
  #441
bsl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
A rebuild from what exactly? 1993? The Kings were in the crapper for like 17 years. They made the playoffs a whopping 4 times out of 15 seasons.

Some short memories people have around here geez. I mean christ, LA was so bad that they freaking filed for bankruptcy in one of the most lucrative markets in the league.
Buddha, I respect you and your intelligence, but you are off the mark here I think.

The LA Kings won the cup last year. We did not. There is nothing else to say.

bsl is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 10:53 AM
  #442
bsl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
I wonder. Does it mean trade away key players until the team's red blood cell count is in the anemic range? Or does it mean neglectingto file qualifying offers? Or does it mean telling Carey Price to let in easy shots? Or does it mean taking low percentage shots? Or does it mean taking bench penalties? Or does it mean unscrewing vials or popping corks? Or does it mean a combination of the foregoing?
Your lack of understanding of this entire topic is astonishing.

bsl is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 11:47 AM
  #443
Jakomyte
Registered User
 
Jakomyte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,086
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsl View Post
Your post was grossly insulting to Habs fans.

So you're saying fans are stupid now, and we have to entertain them. I don't believe it. This club has existed for 100 years, and I do not underestimate and insult Habs fans, as you do.

I can tell you straight that every Habs fan with some knowledge of Hockey knew exactly what Sam Pollock was doing with the team throughout the seventies. We knew our team, and what they were doing.

Part of being a true fan is understanding when the team is bad, and what managements is doing about it.

I don't give a **** about casual fans who show up at the Bell once a year and expect us to trounce the Bruins.

At one time, the Habs never cared about those fans either. They cared about winning cups. You cross that line, you move away from excellence.
LOL! I'm not insulting anyone, I'm just stating facts. If you think the team management will purposely try to lose games then you are wrong, as it could lead to decrease interest/revenue for the team.

I recognize that Bergevin isn't making any major shuffles to his roster since he wants some time to size it up for himself first, but if you think that he is 'tanking' this season before it even begins, then you simply don't have a clue.

Jakomyte is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 12:46 PM
  #444
SouthernHab
Registered User
 
SouthernHab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 9,590
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsl View Post
What useless insulting post. You spend the entire thing insulting the OP instead of discussing. Why? What's your problem with this thread? Do you have anything constructive to say?
I could quote your "useless insulting posts" on this thread but what's the point. I have posted examples of the folly of tanking and DA dismissed them as irrelevant So if this thread is an exercise in who knows what the agenda, then I will continue to call out the lunacy getting posted...........like tanking is not really intentionally losing for example.

SouthernHab is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 01:57 PM
  #445
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,367
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernHab View Post
like tanking is not really intentionally losing for example.
Bergevin isn't purposefully trying to lose any specific games, but the evidence suggests he's thrown in the towel on the season as a whole.

If you can't tell the difference between the two, then there's probably a whole lot you don't understand about the world.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernHab View Post
I have posted examples of the folly of tanking
No, you've made the irrelevant argument that no strategy comes with a 100% guarantee of success.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 03:42 PM
  #446
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,346
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
Actually, the crapshoot comment was a reference in regards to fans if you didn't notice.

You build the best possible team and hope for the best. You know, like, how professional sports always go.

If it doesn't work out, there is always next year. It is just a game after all.
Building the best possible team year by year? Again, that's shortsighted and will lead us nowhere. A game by game, season by season mentality is for the coaches and players. Mangement should be looking at the next 5 years out. They are supposed to be trying to win the war not a bunch of small battles. The way you go about making 8th place is differnent than how you go about trying to build a contender. How can you still not understand this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernHab View Post
But do we use our first round draft pick on a triggerman or on MacKinnon?

This tanking business is complicated. You still have to make decisions and manage assets even though you get the top draft picks.
Not sure what's so complicated about high picks being better than lower ones. Not sure why you still can't grasp the facts here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernHab View Post
Columbus, Edmonton regards......
Tanking won't happen. Rebuilding should. In the long run we'll probably be better off having the season we just had and if Galchenyuk becomes the star we've needed forever, guys like you will forget all about the crap you're spewing now.

I'm pretty sure you're one of the guys who used to laugh at Pittsburgh and Chicago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutabaga View Post
Thats a very underrated aspect of the rebuilding process.
In order to be in a position to rebuild, not only you need to be a bad team, but you need to reach a point of no-return, point you reached because of bad management.
Not true.

It was clear we weren't a good team last year so... what do we do? We tie ourselves to Kaberle. That's just flat out stupid.

We should've dealt away vets. That would've made sense then and it makes sense now. Forget about 'trying to lose' because it won't happen. But dealing vets definitely makes sense at this stage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutabaga View Post
If you are doing a decent, not even good, but decent job, you wont end up in such a situation because the league is engineered to allow as many teams as possible to be as competitive as possible at the same time. Well, during the last 2 seasons, thats not as true as it was, but its still an important factor.
Sure. If you make short term moves designed for 8th place you have a decent shot at making it. Good luck winning the cup though.

If you care about winning a cup, you're going to have to do things differently.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutabaga View Post
The point is, teams are not rebuilding because they chose to (i already said this several times anyway, but i feel its the right time to say it again)? And whats the point in a rebuild anyway ?
Washington rebuilt intentionally so have others. It's not the norm but clubs will rebuild by dealing away vets for prospects. It makes sense to do this if you want to win a cup. If all you care about is the playoffs then you can do like us and sign medicore free agents, finish somewhere around 8th every year and build with mid round picks. Decent but not great players. Decent but not great prospects. Decent but not great teams...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutabaga View Post
Collecting several top-5 picks ?
Teams with more than 2 top-5 picks are poorly managed and are not going to move up in the standings as long as the staff doesnt change. If the staff is gone, well...you have to look even higher, and thats not a good thing.
When we look at the teams with several high picks, they were all pushed there by poor management.
First, you're wrong teams do decide to consciously rebuild. Secondly, even if you were right it still doesn't matter. Just because teams don't do it intentionally (and not many do) that doesnt' mean it's not a good idea.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutabaga View Post
Chicago was badly managed. Pittsburgh was out of money. LA and Washington both used to have horribly old teams that ran out of energy.
Well, how about us? We were sitting there with Koivu and company. An over the hill team that wasn't going anywhere. So over the hill that our management decided to let them leave for no return. And what did we do? We just re-upped with the same calibre players and paid them double. Does that make sense to you?

I sat there and said we should've traded those guys. But folks screamed that we couldn't trade Koivu because the sky would fall. He's indispensible! Yeah right, so indispensible that we kicked his butt to the curb for nothing and didn't even bother answering his agent's calls about coming back to the club... Made no sense then and look at what we wound up doing. Wasting three seasons with those FA replacements. Wasting years that we coud've spent rebuilding. But folks want us to continue doing this for some reason... why?

Even if clubs unintentionally rebuilt (and that's not the case for Washington, Detroit, Quebec, NJ or LA) they still had success. They STILL in spite of themselves wound up with top pick superstars to turn them into contenders or cup winners. Rebuilding works. You have to be patient with it and you have to be willing to deal vets for prospects but in the long run it usually pays off with good players.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutabaga View Post
Posterboys of why the bad management of a team create a false opinion.
There's no question it was terrible management. And I have little doubt that Edmonton has bad management too. But it still demonstrates that even when you have terrible management you can STILL land terrific players by just drafting high. Draft position is the great equalizer. No it won't always work out that way but it definitely helps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutabaga View Post
If Milbury isnt an idiot and dont give away the first players they had in that list of mistakes, they dont end up with the latter ones, because they would have improved their situation.
The team would have made some progress, and the latest mistakes are never made. Because they never have the chance, in that scenario, of having that many great players.
You're missing the point here.

People who argue against rebuilding shout 'Look at the Islanders they had high picks and never won' - well yeah, they had high picks but they never held onto them. It's stupid to try to use them as an example against rebuiding when they are very clearly exhibity A as to why rebuilding would work. All they had to do was keep their prospects. But they didn't do this and that's why they continued to suck.

And yes, they have terrible management. That's why they never rebuilt. If they didn't have terrible management, then those prospects wouldn't have been dealt in the first place.

Lafleurs Guy is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 04:13 PM
  #447
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsl View Post
Your lack of understanding of this entire topic is astonishing.
Maybe to you but I find more than a smattering of agreement. Does my contrary opinion trouble you? I could say the same about you but I won't because in the long run it doesn't matter. What you think you know will dissolve like a f..t inthe breeze long before the season ends.

Teufelsdreck is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 04:14 PM
  #448
SouthernHab
Registered User
 
SouthernHab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 9,590
vCash: 500
Lafleur's Guy.

The problem is this thread's title. Surgical tank.

OP starts off with calling for a tank, then morphs that into rebuild, then says that since Bergevin is not signing players like Semin that he is tanking.

This thread is a cluster ****, pure and simple.

But I am trying to help him get to his desired Part 2 Thread. 552 more posts to go.

SouthernHab is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 04:20 PM
  #449
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,367
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernHab View Post
Lafleur's Guy.

The problem is this thread's title. Surgical tank.

OP starts off with calling for a tank, then morphs that into rebuild, then says that since Bergevin is not signing players like Semin that he is tanking.
Once more with feeling:

Bergevin isn't purposefully trying to lose any specific games, but the evidence suggests he's thrown in the towel on the season as a whole.

************

I started the hread on July 26th. By then it was clear Bergevin had no interest in Semin. He's not focused on winning this year.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
08-01-2012, 05:32 PM
  #450
Rutabaga
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Middle of Nowhere
Country: France
Posts: 979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post

It was clear we weren't a good team last year so... what do we do? We tie ourselves to Kaberle. That's just flat out stupid.
Well, before that terrible year, our team, even if it wasnt a favourite, was progressing on the right path, and did a convincing season in 10-11, showing some positive signs for the future. Until poor decisions were made, there was no reason to think that the team wouldnt have been able to do better than the previous year.

Anyway, i think everyone is pretty much aware of your position on the subject.

I still disagree on the fact that a team like Washington, dead last on the standings with a core group of an average of 32 years old, and among the highest-paid players in the league (what was the salary of Jagr ? 11M$ per year ?...), did chose to rebuild instead of trying to redress the situation with the same group of players.

Like others, they had no choice, whatever they might say about it.
If they honestly think that there was another option available, they were fooling themselves.

And it was basically 10 years ago.

More recently praised, a team like Chicago hardly rebuild on purpose, their team was simply bad, and their moves during the years when they end up with Toews and Kane were hardly rebuild-like. (They signed Khabibulin and Aucoin, traded for Havlat, Smolinski and Handzus). Of course, since they had basically no one to give away.

Today, in the current situation, there is not much separating a 6th place team from a 10th place team. Just like there is not much between the 2nd and the 5th team in the conference.

There is a lot of risk in going the rebuild way. Your job is on the line, the team is also in danger if the results are slow to appear...
From a business point of view, i think its obvious that the situation needs to be desperate to allow such a thing. Considering that the owners are not sure to be here in 5 or 7 years...

On the latest teams to appear early at the draft table, in the last years, how many are/were actually rebuilding ?

Boston and Philadelphia were teams that did end up on the bottom of the standings 5 or 6 years ago, they did not rebuild/tank, and after some good moves, they finally turn things around. There is no magic recipe, anyway, but in the current circumstances, there is no need to throw away 2 or 3 years, where good management can lead to goos results just as fast, but without the pain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Well, how about us? We were sitting there with Koivu and company. An over the hill team that wasn't going anywhere. So over the hill that our management decided to let them leave for no return. And what did we do? We just re-upped with the same calibre players and paid them double. Does that make sense to you?
-How can you seriously think that we should have dealt Koivu and co, whereas we finished 1st in the conference (even if it was a pure fluke) during 07-08 ?

I dont think that kind of thing can happen.


Should we have rebuild the next year ?

Well, with what ? We had no assets except Plekanec (coming from a negative season, RFA), Markov (UFA at the end of the year) and two unproven goalies, Price/Halak. It would have been a long agony, their value would have decreased in such a team, to make it worse.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
There's no question it was terrible management. And I have little doubt that Edmonton has bad management too. But it still demonstrates that even when you have terrible management you can STILL land terrific players by just drafting high. Draft position is the great equalizer. No it won't always work out that way but it definitely helps.

You're missing the point here.

People who argue against rebuilding shout 'Look at the Islanders they had high picks and never won' - well yeah, they had high picks but they never held onto them. It's stupid to try to use them as an example against rebuiding when they are very clearly exhibity A as to why rebuilding would work. All they had to do was keep their prospects. But they didn't do this and that's why they continued to suck.

And yes, they have terrible management. That's why they never rebuilt. If they didn't have terrible management, then those prospects wouldn't have been dealt in the first place.
It demonstrates that because you have terrible management you land terrific players by just drafting high.
And terrible management wont have a clue about using these terrific players, which means that he is going to be "rewarded" with even more terrific players. But as he doesnt have a clue, its unfortunately useless, unless a major change happens.

If they didnt have terrible management, then those prospects wouldnt have end up there (certainly not all of them, at the very least) in the first place.

Rutabaga is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:41 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.