HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The Marc Bergevin Experience

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-19-2013, 02:17 PM
  #51
Agnostic
11 Stanley Cups
 
Agnostic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,325
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post
You could say that the re-signing of Plekanec, Gorges and Markov are also his moves. We blame GMs when they let players walk, but never say anything about the guys they keep and in this case, they are three players retained from the previous era. Gauthier could have let either of the three walk or even could have traded them, but they were re-signed are all significant contributers to the team.

For as bad as Gainey-Gauthier was...a good chunk of the roster is composed of their acquisitions:
-Desharnais (signed)
-Pacioretty (drafted from a pick acquired in a trade)
-Emelin (signed)
-Diaz (signed)
-Gorges (acquired in a trade)
-Bourque (acquired in a trade)
-Gionta (signed)
-Moen (signed)...Though he was retained by Bergevin, could have let him walk, so I think Bergy gets credit.
-Eller (acquired in a trade)

Bergevin has done a good job in not tweaking too much. Most of the team's success this year has come from health (gionta and Markov back) and guys just developing into good players: Eller, Diaz, Emelin (the latter two have impressed me with their adjustments). Gallagher and Galchenyuk bring some much needed depth in the lineup making the team harder to play against. Most of the adjustments to this team has come from internal improvements rather than external.
Dead cat bounce . Bergevin will make a sustainable winning team GaineyGoats era was about zigging when they should have been zagging .

Agnostic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 02:22 PM
  #52
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agnostic View Post
Dead cat bounce . Bergevin will make a sustainable winning team GaineyGoats era was about zigging when they should have been zagging .
Sure, but doesn't change the fact that 3 of the habs top5 d-men and 5 players of the top 9 were acquired under Gauthier and Gainey. The team is mostly composed of players they brought it in, whether or not you agreed with what they did during tenure does nothing to change that fact.

Andy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 02:23 PM
  #53
HiggsBozon
Vintage Emy
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,535
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post
You could say that the re-signing of Plekanec, Gorges and Markov are also his moves. We blame GMs when they let players walk, but never say anything about the guys they keep and in this case, they are three players retained from the previous era. Gauthier could have let either of the three walk or even could have traded them, but they were re-signed are all significant contributers to the team.

For as bad as Gainey-Gauthier was...a good chunk of the roster is composed of their acquisitions:
-Desharnais (signed)
-Pacioretty (drafted from a pick acquired in a trade)
-Emelin (signed)
-Diaz (signed)
-Gorges (acquired in a trade)
-Bourque (acquired in a trade)
-Gionta (signed)
-Moen (signed)...Though he was retained by Bergevin, could have let him walk, so I think Bergy gets credit.
-Eller (acquired in a trade)
Eller, Bourque, Kaberle, Diaz and Emelin are the roster players added by Gauthier that are on this roster right now.

Cammalleri, Halak, Lapierre, S. Kostitsyn, Gill are the ones he traded out and who are still in the NHL.

To me, Diaz and Emelin do nothing more than replacing the insane amount of draft picks he gave up and that we could have used to get some pieces/young prospects by keeping them. You've then got Eller and Bourque. Solid players, but far from being HUGE difference makers at that point. There's interesting upside in Eller, but it is what it is; upside. He keeps improving, but knowing what a guy like Varlamov fetched barely one year after, it's reasonable to think we might have been able to get more out of him. As for Bourque, well it was a move done to add some size, but you still have to hate how he dealt him in the middle of a crisis, when the market at last year's deadline was definitely a seller's market.

Then you've got Kaberle, a move that was a catastrophy from day one. He's being paid 4.25M to sit in the pressbox.

He clearly didn't maximize the return on his trades.

Cammalleri vs Bourque
Halak vs Eller
S. Kostitsyn vs Diaz
Lapierre vs Emelin
Gill vs Kaberle

Ultimately, THIS is the real difference, the real before and after of what Gauthier gave this team going forward. And I'm not even including guys like Wisniewski and Hamrlik.

The Markov signature was, and still is a very risky one. Him also not taking any backup and counting on two rookies as insurance was a suicidal move on his part. The Gorges signature, as well as Gorges' contract was, and still is a huge question mark. It's almost 4M that are given to a player that ultimately blocks shots as his main contribution to his team. Don't get me wrong, the guy is useful, but I'm not a fan of giving 6 years, 4M/per contracts to guys who aren't a definite part of your core.

All in all, I respected Gainey's era way more than Gauthier's. At least, Gainey made some significant moves to improve this franchise. He got Pacioretty and Gorges (even though he's got too big of a contract IMO) for pretty much nothing, he was a huge part in drafting Carey Price, he got this team Kovalev, who was a very good player for us ultimately... All in all, one could say he was never the same after his daughter died. I think that's where Gauthier's term actually started. From then on, you could see the conservative, patient man Gainey was started to show signs of impatience and urgency. Tried to offer ridiculous contracts to BOTH Briere and Gomez in 2007... Traded plenty of assets for Lang and Tanguay who ultimately, yes, added offense, but didn't fill any particular need on this team... Went bat**** insane on the UFA market in 2009... We were not used to such a behavior from Gainey, and the day his daughter died, you could see there was a huge difference in his way of operating. To me, it marks the real start of the Gauthier era.

HiggsBozon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 02:24 PM
  #54
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GFORCE View Post
Eller, Bourque, Kaberle, Diaz and Emelin are the roster players added by Gauthier that are on this roster right now.

Cammalleri, Halak, Lapierre, S. Kostitsyn, Gill are the ones he traded out and who are still in the NHL.

To me, Diaz and Emelin do nothing more than replacing the insane amount of draft picks he gave up and that we could have used to get some pieces/young prospects by keeping them. You've then got Eller and Bourque. Solid players, but far from being HUGE difference makers at that point. There's interesting upside in Eller, but it is what it is; upside. He keeps improving, but knowing what a guy like Varlamov fetched barely one year after, it's reasonable to think we might have been able to get more out of him. As for Bourque, well it was a move done to add some size, but you still have to hate how he dealt him in the middle of a crisis, when the market at last year's deadline was definitely a seller's market.

Then you've got Kaberle, a move that was a catastrophy from day one. He's being paid 4.25M to sit in the pressbox.

He clearly didn't maximize the return on his trades.

Cammalleri vs Bourque
Halak vs Eller
S. Kostitsyn vs Diaz
Lapierre vs Emelin
Gill vs Kaberle

The Markov signature was, and still is a very risky one. Him also not taking any backup and counting on two rookies as insurance was a suicidal move on his part. The Gorges signature, as well as Gorges' contract was, and still is a huge question mark. It's almost 4M that are given to a player that ultimately blocks shots as his main contribution to his team. Don't get me wrong, the guy is useful, but I'm not a fan of giving 6 years, 4M/per contracts to guys who aren't a definite part of your core.

All in all, I respected Gainey's era way more than Gauthier's. At least, Gainey made some significant moves to improve this franchise. He got Pacioretty and Gorges (even though he's got too big of a contract IMO) for pretty much nothing, he was a huge part in drafting Carey Price, he got this team Kovalev, who was a very good player for us ultimately... All in all, one could say he was never the same after his daughter died. I think that's where Gauthier's term actually started. From then on, you could see the conservative, patient man Gainey was started to show signs of impatience and urgency. Tried to offer ridiculous contracts to BOTH Briere and Gomez in 2007... Traded plenty of assets for Lang and Tanguay who ultimately, yes, added offense, but didn't fill any particular need on this team... Went bat**** insane on the UFA market in 2009... We were not used to such a behavior from Gainey, and the day his daughter died, you could see there was a huge difference in his way of operating. To me, it marks the real start of the Gauthier era.
All true (though I disagree with the whole Gauthier took over when Gainey's daughter died, especially when Gainey took on even more responsibily in 08-09 when he went back behind the bench. Also he remained advisor of the team, which resulted in people claiming that he was still running the show despite Gauthier being GM which actually contradicts the narrative that Gauthier took over when Gainey's daughter died), but getting full return on trades or not doesn't change the fact that team is composed mostly of players they acquired and brought in.

Andy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 02:44 PM
  #55
HiggsBozon
Vintage Emy
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,535
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post
All true, but getting full return on trades or not doesn't change the fact that team is composed mostly of players they acquired and brought in.
Players Gainey brought in? Sure. Players Gauthier brought in? I don't know...

Let's see;

Pacioretty - Desharnais - Gallagher
Ryder - Plekanec - Gionta
Galchenyuk - Eller - Bourque
Prust - Dumont - Moen
White - Armstrong

Markov - Emelin
Gorges - Subban
Bouillon - Diaz
Kaberle
Weber

Price
Budaj

Therrien
Daigneault
Gallant
Groulx
Jodoin


Gainey players
Bergevin players
Gauthier players
Timmins/Grown players


Keep in mind; I attributed players to GMs and put them in categories from who I think had the biggest word on why they're on this lineup today. For example, Galchenyuk was drafted AND put in the lineup under Bergevin, without any minor seasoning. That to me explains why he's a Bergevin's guy. Gallagher was drafted under Gauthier and won a spot under Bergevin, so he's a grown player. Similar to Subban, who was drafted under Gainey but won a spot under Gauthier. Grown players have to be associated with Timmins, or the guy in charge of scouting at the time of his draft, above everyone else. Markov was drafted before any GMs in there, but still was re-signed by Gauthier as part of the core days before joining the UFA market.

All in all you look throughout the lineup, you have;
7 Gauthier players
7 Timmins/Grown players
6 Bergevin players
4 Gainey players

3 Bergevin coaches
1 Gainey coach
1 Gauthier coach

Plus the whole second floor made of Bergevin's hirings.

Hardly a team completely built by Gainey and Gauthier. Sure there are some remaining players, but all in all, the changes brought by Bergevin and the players drafted by Timmins are what explains such a competitive lineup this season. You could even put Markov and Emelin to the Timmins/Grown players list, which would then limit Gauthier's contribution to this team down to;

Eller, Bourque, Diaz. Hardly earth-shattering move and core builders, considering the insane amount of picks and assets he let go in the process.


Last edited by HiggsBozon: 03-19-2013 at 02:49 PM.
HiggsBozon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 02:48 PM
  #56
Sorinth
Registered User
 
Sorinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,884
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GFORCE View Post
The Markov signature was, and still is a very risky one. Him also not taking any backup and counting on two rookies as insurance was a suicidal move on his part. The Gorges signature, as well as Gorges' contract was, and still is a huge question mark. It's almost 4M that are given to a player that ultimately blocks shots as his main contribution to his team. Don't get me wrong, the guy is useful, but I'm not a fan of giving 6 years, 4M/per contracts to guys who aren't a definite part of your core.
Right now we are one of the better defensive teams in the league, Bergevin is benefitting from the Markov and Gorges risks that cost Gauthier his job.

Sorinth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 02:50 PM
  #57
Sorinth
Registered User
 
Sorinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,884
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GFORCE View Post
Players Gainey brought in? Sure. Players Gauthier brought in? I don't know...

Let's see;

...
How do you put Galchenyuk as a Bergevin brought in player but guys like Subban go under Timmins. That's extremely dishonest.

Sorinth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 02:52 PM
  #58
HiggsBozon
Vintage Emy
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,535
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
Right now we are one of the better defensive teams in the league, Bergevin is benefitting from the Markov and Gorges risks that cost Gauthier his job.
Wut... I don't even...

Gorges was acquired by Gainey. This guy would not even be on this team without him. Gauthier only signed him to an insane contract afterwards.

As for Markov, hopefully he's done and over with his injuries, but still, Gauthier not taking any precaution was a huge part of why we had that much of a terrible season last season.

HiggsBozon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 02:54 PM
  #59
HiggsBozon
Vintage Emy
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,535
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
How do you put Galchenyuk as a Bergevin brought in player but guys like Subban go under Timmins. That's extremely dishonest.
Read. The. Explanation.

Galchenyuk was picked and put in this lineup by Bergevin, who had a HUGE say in this pick AND him starting in the lineup. Just like Price, who got picked by Gainey (Timmins gave him the option between Staal and Price, Gainey picked the goalie), and then put in the lineup because Gainey ordered it. Subban was picked by Timmins, developed in Gainey's era, and integrated in Gauthier's reign. None of these guys deserve the credit Timmins got. If I was dishonest, I'd have attributed him to Bergevin, because he signed his contract under Bergevin.

HiggsBozon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 03:04 PM
  #60
Sorinth
Registered User
 
Sorinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,884
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GFORCE View Post
Read. The. Explanation.

Galchenyuk was picked and put in this lineup by Bergevin, who had a HUGE say in this pick AND him starting in the lineup. Just like Price, who got picked by Gainey (Timmins gave him the option between Staal and Price, Gainey picked the goalie), and then put in the lineup because Gainey ordered it. Subban was picked by Timmins, developed in Gainey's era, and integrated in Gauthier's reign. None of these guys deserve the credit Timmins got. If I was dishonest, I'd have attributed him to Bergevin, because he signed his contract under Bergevin.
Do you have any proof that Bergevin decided on Galchenyuk or did he just let Timmins make the choice? As for signing an 18 year old top pick, every team did this this year. Thanks to the lockout everyone wanted to sign their young players to entry level deals rather than wait and see (I think in part this was because otherwise they wouldn't be eligble for camp). Do we have any indication that Bergevin decided that Galchenyuk was making the team, did he overule Therrien, like Gainey was rumored to have done with Price.

Sorinth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 03:07 PM
  #61
Sorinth
Registered User
 
Sorinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,884
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GFORCE View Post
Wut... I don't even...

Gorges was acquired by Gainey. This guy would not even be on this team without him. Gauthier only signed him to an insane contract afterwards.

As for Markov, hopefully he's done and over with his injuries, but still, Gauthier not taking any precaution was a huge part of why we had that much of a terrible season last season.
That's my point, Gauthier gets bashed for not taking any precaution. Bergevin didn't get anyone as a precuation either but gets credit for the habs turnaround that's in large part to Markov being healthy. It's hypocritical.

Sorinth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 03:11 PM
  #62
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GFORCE View Post

Hardly a team completely built by Gainey and Gauthier. Sure there are some remaining players, but all in all, the changes brought by Bergevin and the players drafted by Timmins are what explains such a competitive lineup this season. You could even put Markov and Emelin to the Timmins/Grown players list, which would then limit Gauthier's contribution to this team down to;

Eller, Bourque, Diaz. Hardly earth-shattering move and core builders, considering the insane amount of picks and assets he let go in the process.
Why would Markov be Timmins grown? He was drafted under a different scouting era. Also, the team spent years trying to get Emelin over, Gauthier was finally successful in bringing him over.

The whole defense this year (which I admittedly thought would be bad) is entirely Gauthier composed. He didn't let Markov walk despite not playing for 2 years. He re-signed Gorges and brought in Diaz and Emelin.

Much of the success this year has to do with internal players either getting healthy or taking the next step in their development. Kudos to Bergy for not tweaking too much when it could have been the easy thing to do and to instead see how everything plays out.

Andy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 03:24 PM
  #63
HiggsBozon
Vintage Emy
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,535
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post
Why would Markov be Timmins grown? He was drafted under a different scouting era. Also, the team spent years trying to get Emelin over, Gauthier was finally successful in bringing him over.

The whole defense this year (which I admittedly thought would be bad) is entirely Gauthier composed. He didn't let Markov walk despite not playing for 2 years. He re-signed Gorges and brought in Diaz and Emelin.

Much of the success this year has to do with internal players either getting healthy or taking the next step in their development. Kudos to Bergy for not tweaking too much when it could have been the easy thing to do and to instead see how everything plays out.
First, Gauthier was not the one to be credited for being brought over. Believe it or not, it's Mulder, in a casual conversation with the Russian team's doctor, who discovered that Emelin was being told by his Russian agent that Montreal was not truly interested in bringing him over. Then, it triggered everything.

Then, Gorges was aquired by trade by Gainey. Gauthier re-signed him, that being said, Gainey re-signed him multiple times as well before even coming down to that. Plus, signing him to a 6 years contract worth roughly 24M is hardly what I'd consider a very, very clever move.

And I'd say Bergevin tweaked a whole lot of damn things. He brought in Armstrong, Bouillon and Prust. He completely rebuilt the coaching staff and the 2nd floor from top to bottom. He traded Cole for Ryder. And as if it was not enough, he actually was the one who decided to let Galchenyuk and Gallagher a chance to prove their worth by not signing guys like Jagr who would have been a stop-gap solution. Sure he inquired on Doan, but got out of the race fairly quickly too.

Ryder, Galchenyuk, Gallagher, Prust, Armstrong and Bouillon, whether we like them all or not, are still 6 roster players. This is almost a third of the current roster that's been brought in following Bergevin's plan.

Gallagher is on pace for a 50 points + season over 82 games
Ryder has 23 points in 27 games this season, 9 in 8 since joining the Canadiens
Galchenyuk has 14 points in 28 games, good for 40 points + over 82 games

Then you've got a guy like Prust who's been used everywhere, a good depth d-man in Bouillon who's been doing better than Gorges for most of the year, and a guy like Armstrong who, even if I don't like him all that much, has been more than decent on the PK.

These are huge moves over what happened last season.

HiggsBozon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 03:30 PM
  #64
HiggsBozon
Vintage Emy
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,535
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
Do you have any proof that Bergevin decided on Galchenyuk or did he just let Timmins make the choice? As for signing an 18 year old top pick, every team did this this year. Thanks to the lockout everyone wanted to sign their young players to entry level deals rather than wait and see (I think in part this was because otherwise they wouldn't be eligble for camp). Do we have any indication that Bergevin decided that Galchenyuk was making the team, did he overule Therrien, like Gainey was rumored to have done with Price.
The only 2013 drafted players still on an NHL roster at this point in time are Galchenyuk and Yakupov. Bergevin had a huge say in Galchenyuk being part of the team. Just read interviews, article, and watch 24CH to have your proof. It's painfully obvious. Galchenyuk was picked by Timmins, but then it's Bergevin and Therrien who decided that this guy was going to be NHL-bound this year. The first 18 years old player to play for the Habs since Petr Svoboda. Do you actually think it would have been the same with Gauthier? No. He probably would have given 5M to Jiri Hudler to fill the void.

HiggsBozon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 03:32 PM
  #65
Sorinth
Registered User
 
Sorinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,884
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GFORCE View Post
First, Gauthier was not the one to be credited for being brought over. Believe it or not, it's Mulder, in a casual conversation with the Russian team's doctor, who discovered that Emelin was being told by his Russian agent that Montreal was not truly interested in bringing him over. Then, it triggered everything.
Never heard this one before. Could you provide a link?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GFORCE View Post
Then, Gorges was aquired by trade by Gainey. Gauthier re-signed him, that being said, Gainey re-signed him multiple times as well before even coming down to that. Plus, signing him to a 6 years contract worth roughly 24M is hardly what I'd consider a very, very clever move.
Gorges was going to become UFA, if we didn't sign him long term we risked losing him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GFORCE View Post
And I'd say Bergevin tweaked a whole lot of damn things. He brought in Armstrong, Bouillon and Prust. He completely rebuilt the coaching staff and the 2nd floor from top to bottom. He traded Cole for Ryder. And as if it was not enough, he actually was the one who decided to let Galchenyuk and Gallagher a chance to prove their worth by not signing guys like Jagr who would have been a stop-gap solution. Sure he inquired on Doan, but got out of the race fairly quickly too.
What a load BS. He changed the coaching staff and brought in some bottom 6 guys. Does he get Ryder if Gauthier doesn't sign cole as a UFA first? He was in on Doan for the whole time and now he's getting credit for inviting a top-3 pick and a guy who was one of the last cuts the year before to camp. Please.

Sorinth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 03:35 PM
  #66
Sorinth
Registered User
 
Sorinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,884
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GFORCE View Post
The only 2013 drafted players still on an NHL roster at this point in time are Galchenyuk and Yakupov. Bergevin had a huge say in Galchenyuk being part of the team. Just read interviews, article, and watch 24CH to have your proof. It's painfully obvious. Galchenyuk was picked by Timmins, but then it's Bergevin and Therrien who decided that this guy was going to be NHL-bound this year. The first 18 years old player to play for the Habs since Petr Svoboda. Do you actually think it would have been the same with Gauthier? No. He probably would have given 5M to Jiri Hudler to fill the void.
Yes I think if Gauthier was still in charge Galchenyuk would be on the Habs because he EARNED his spot.

Sorinth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 04:08 PM
  #67
HiggsBozon
Vintage Emy
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,535
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
Never heard this one before. Could you provide a link?



Gorges was going to become UFA, if we didn't sign him long term we risked losing him.



What a load BS. He changed the coaching staff and brought in some bottom 6 guys. Does he get Ryder if Gauthier doesn't sign cole as a UFA first? He was in on Doan for the whole time and now he's getting credit for inviting a top-3 pick and a guy who was one of the last cuts the year before to camp. Please.
Keep believing whatever you want. Really. I couldn't care less. You quite obviously have a favorable opinion of the old management. Good for you. And good for me, they're gone and rotting elsewhere now.

Going by the same logic, Subban had no contract and Bergevin re-signed him. Might as well say Subban being a Hab is on Bergevin, right? Hell, I'll play that game. Emelin and Diaz did not have a contract. I guess Bergevin is responsible for them being on the team as well?

As for giving Gauthier credit for Ryder... yeah. I won't bother answering your posts anymore. This is just ridiculous. Bergevin actually inquired on Doan without ever making any offer if you followed this case closely this summer, by the way. Pretty much everyone went out really early after Buffalo got crazy and offered him an insane contract. But don't let the facts block your judgment.

Keep talking about trading Pacioretty...


Last edited by HiggsBozon: 03-19-2013 at 04:13 PM.
HiggsBozon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 05:04 PM
  #68
Quagmier
Registered User
 
Quagmier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,868
vCash: 500
This thread got weird quickly...why are we arguing which players were brought in by which GMs? Bergevin has been at this job for what? 9 months now? Was he expected to inheret a team void of players and prospects? This line of argument makes little sense. Further, it really isn't a Gauthier vs. Bergevin debate anyways, or at least its way too early to turn it into one.

Bergevin has been absolutely stellar as GM so far for the Habs in my opinion. In fact, even without making any roster moves, the positive impact he's had on the Habs franchise, its culture, the player development system, the coaching staff, and the overall climate within the media and around the league has probably worked wonders on turning this wayward ship around. Though without empirical evidence to support such a statement that will just have to remain speculation.

If I'm looking for flaws to his tenure so far, its that he is currently managing this team in the BEST possible situation a GM of the Habs could ask for. Entire organizational revamp, absurdely low expectations coming into the season, solid and young nucleus of players to build on, an absolute gift regarding amnesty buyouts (kaberle and gomez free up roughly 12 mil in salary this summer, with no long term consequences...just crazy), a young stud goalie, 3rd overall pick, lockout shortened season (giving him more time to acclimate to the role), etc. etc. In all honesty life will never really be easier for MB as GM of the Habs, especially with the early success this team has achieved.

The thing is though, the guy essentially picked up a winning lottery ticket, and had the sense and foresight to realize what he had. I remember when he came in and the questions were about how full scale the organizational dismantle would be, and you could tell he was a little bemused by it all. He recognized (i assume he did anyways) that the Habs weren't too far off from being a perennially competitive team, but that the results wouldn't come overnight. He seemed to have a plan for this team almost from his first day here, and entirely to his credit he has stuck with it so far.

His biggest achievement so far though (again, entirely my opinion): all of his moves have appeared eminently defensible from day 1:

- Hires just about everyone he's ever worked with in hockey to the coaching and management staff (presumably knows their strengths/weaknesses, plus he has the budget to max out his support team so why not do it? Gauthier didn't seem to grasp that)
- brings in prust (habs need toughness but are built on team speed...hire a sandpaper guy who can skate on most lines without too much of a dropoff)
- let your scouting team (your team's greatest strength) run the draft for you, end up with 4-5 good to great prospects (again no proof this is what he did, but given how early into his tenure he was, it seems that Timmins shouldered the load for this one and hit a homerun. Either way the Habs look to have had a great draft, and it was under MB's tenure)
-sign aging, role-playing veterans (armstrong, bouillon) to fill out the roster and provide leadership on 1-year deals (absolutely 0 downside if they don't pan out, give the spot to a rookie and wish them the best in the offseason)
- sign Pacioretty and Price to long term extensions (both within their market value, patches incredibly so)
- gives young guys chance to play in NHL after they've earned it
- sent gomez home so as not to risk injury (the right move, and one that prompted the rule change that got gomez out of town early)
- minimized the potential cap issues with cole long term by dealing him for equally productive winger in UFA season and a draft pick (say what you will about both players...this was an INCREDIBLY defensible move and one you make 10 times out of 10 if you ask me)
- Sign your burgeoning star to a crazy reasonable bridge contract (people think it was dumb because you would have to overpay in two years...but ask anaheim fans if they are upset about the 17 mil Getzlaf and Perry are getting? you pay a premium for star players, and MB went the safe route on this one...i think it was a gutsy move and the right one no matter what Subban gets on his next deal)

All those moves points to a rational GM with a vision of what this team should look like and who his core players are and will be. Each move he has made has been consistent with each other, and each move has displayed an objective rationale that you hope to find with your team's GM. Even if Prust hadn't worked out as well as he has so far, even if Bouillon hadn't been great for us, even if Cole starts lighting the lamp for Dallas again, and even if the Habs weren't (what appears to be) a burgeoning young powerhouse of a team, i can't find much fault with any of the moves MB has made so far because they all came from what looks to have been a well thought out position. Even the Therrien hiring (probably the only move i struggled with on its face) seems to have been made after extensive interviewing and the initial impressions that Therrien left.

Making the right decisions is about maximizing your chances for success and minimizing your potential for failure. In my view the merits of a decision should be examined without the benefit of hindsight, as the way a move pans out is not always indicative of its strength. People always credit the Red Wings organization for drafting guys like Zetterberg and Datsyuk in late rounds, but if they really had known how good those two guys were gonna pan out, chances are they would have gone way higher. Credit SHOULD go to the Red Wings for beefing up their european scouting and establishing a successful system in Europe years before it was the norm to do so (in the late 80s and early 90s). They maximized their chance of success and it paid off years down the road.

MB seems to be on the right track in that regard. He's addressed the organization's areas of weakness (player development and coaching), kept in place its areas of strength (scouting), and made personnel moves that maximized his chances of success and minimized his chances of failure. Will every move pan out as expected? probably not, but each one seems to have been executed with the short AND long term good of the team in mind.

As General Manager of the Montreal Canadiens so far I have to give him an A.

Quagmier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 05:09 PM
  #69
PricePkPatch
Registered User
 
PricePkPatch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,145
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agnostic View Post
Dead cat bounce . Bergevin will make a sustainable winning team GaineyGoats era was about zigging when they should have been zagging .
I'm pretty sure they don't. They squich.

PricePkPatch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 05:12 PM
  #70
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quagmier View Post
This thread got weird quickly...why are we arguing which players were brought in by which GMs? Bergevin has been at this job for what? 9 months now? Was he expected to inheret a team void of players and prospects? This line of argument makes little sense. Further, it really isn't a Gauthier vs. Bergevin debate anyways, or at least its way too early to turn it into one.

Bergevin has been absolutely stellar as GM so far for the Habs in my opinion. In fact, even without making any roster moves, the positive impact he's had on the Habs franchise, its culture, the player development system, the coaching staff, and the overall climate within the media and around the league has probably worked wonders on turning this wayward ship around. Though without empirical evidence to support such a statement that will just have to remain speculation.

If I'm looking for flaws to his tenure so far, its that he is currently managing this team in the BEST possible situation a GM of the Habs could ask for. Entire organizational revamp, absurdely low expectations coming into the season, solid and young nucleus of players to build on, an absolute gift regarding amnesty buyouts (kaberle and gomez free up roughly 12 mil in salary this summer, with no long term consequences...just crazy), a young stud goalie, 3rd overall pick, lockout shortened season (giving him more time to acclimate to the role), etc. etc. In all honesty life will never really be easier for MB as GM of the Habs, especially with the early success this team has achieved.

The thing is though, the guy essentially picked up a winning lottery ticket, and had the sense and foresight to realize what he had. I remember when he came in and the questions were about how full scale the organizational dismantle would be, and you could tell he was a little bemused by it all. He recognized (i assume he did anyways) that the Habs weren't too far off from being a perennially competitive team, but that the results wouldn't come overnight. He seemed to have a plan for this team almost from his first day here, and entirely to his credit he has stuck with it so far.

His biggest achievement so far though (again, entirely my opinion): all of his moves have appeared eminently defensible from day 1:

- Hires just about everyone he's ever worked with in hockey to the coaching and management staff (presumably knows their strengths/weaknesses, plus he has the budget to max out his support team so why not do it? Gauthier didn't seem to grasp that)
- brings in prust (habs need toughness but are built on team speed...hire a sandpaper guy who can skate on most lines without too much of a dropoff)
- let your scouting team (your team's greatest strength) run the draft for you, end up with 4-5 good to great prospects (again no proof this is what he did, but given how early into his tenure he was, it seems that Timmins shouldered the load for this one and hit a homerun. Either way the Habs look to have had a great draft, and it was under MB's tenure)
-sign aging, role-playing veterans (armstrong, bouillon) to fill out the roster and provide leadership on 1-year deals (absolutely 0 downside if they don't pan out, give the spot to a rookie and wish them the best in the offseason)
- sign Pacioretty and Price to long term extensions (both within their market value, patches incredibly so)
- gives young guys chance to play in NHL after they've earned it
- sent gomez home so as not to risk injury (the right move, and one that prompted the rule change that got gomez out of town early)
- minimized the potential cap issues with cole long term by dealing him for equally productive winger in UFA season and a draft pick (say what you will about both players...this was an INCREDIBLY defensible move and one you make 10 times out of 10 if you ask me)
- Sign your burgeoning star to a crazy reasonable bridge contract (people think it was dumb because you would have to overpay in two years...but ask anaheim fans if they are upset about the 17 mil Getzlaf and Perry are getting? you pay a premium for star players, and MB went the safe route on this one...i think it was a gutsy move and the right one no matter what Subban gets on his next deal)

All those moves points to a rational GM with a vision of what this team should look like and who his core players are and will be. Each move he has made has been consistent with each other, and each move has displayed an objective rationale that you hope to find with your team's GM. Even if Prust hadn't worked out as well as he has so far, even if Bouillon hadn't been great for us, even if Cole starts lighting the lamp for Dallas again, and even if the Habs weren't (what appears to be) a burgeoning young powerhouse of a team, i can't find much fault with any of the moves MB has made so far because they all came from what looks to have been a well thought out position. Even the Therrien hiring (probably the only move i struggled with on its face) seems to have been made after extensive interviewing and the initial impressions that Therrien left.

Making the right decisions is about maximizing your chances for success and minimizing your potential for failure. In my view the merits of a decision should be examined without the benefit of hindsight, as the way a move pans out is not always indicative of its strength. People always credit the Red Wings organization for drafting guys like Zetterberg and Datsyuk in late rounds, but if they really had known how good those two guys were gonna pan out, chances are they would have gone way higher. Credit SHOULD go to the Red Wings for beefing up their european scouting and establishing a successful system in Europe years before it was the norm to do so (in the late 80s and early 90s). They maximized their chance of success and it paid off years down the road.

MB seems to be on the right track in that regard. He's addressed the organization's areas of weakness (player development and coaching), kept in place its areas of strength (scouting), and made personnel moves that maximized his chances of success and minimized his chances of failure. Will every move pan out as expected? probably not, but each one seems to have been executed with the short AND long term good of the team in mind.

As General Manager of the Montreal Canadiens so far I have to give him an A.
Good analysis and I agree. The only thing I really didn't like was the whole PK Subban contract handling. Really the only thing I can hold against Bergevin right now, but that issue is now settled.

Andy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 05:21 PM
  #71
HiggsBozon
Vintage Emy
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,535
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post
Good analysis and I agree. The only thing I really didn't like was the whole PK Subban contract handling. Really the only thing I can hold against Bergevin right now, but that issue is now settled.
We'll thank him sooner than later for that with the cap going down next season.

HiggsBozon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 05:23 PM
  #72
Sorinth
Registered User
 
Sorinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,884
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quagmier View Post
The thing is though, the guy essentially picked up a winning lottery ticket, and had the sense and foresight to realize what he had. I remember when he came in and the questions were about how full scale the organizational dismantle would be, and you could tell he was a little bemused by it all. He recognized (i assume he did anyways) that the Habs weren't too far off from being a perennially competitive team, but that the results wouldn't come overnight. He seemed to have a plan for this team almost from his first day here, and entirely to his credit he has stuck with it so far.

...

As General Manager of the Montreal Canadiens so far I have to give him an A.
I agree with most of your post but I can't give a guy an A for essentially not screwing up his winning lottery ticket.

Sorinth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 05:27 PM
  #73
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GFORCE View Post
We'll thank him sooner than later for that with the cap going down next season.
We'll see. Subban is playing at a really high level right now. We could have gotten a discount signing him long-term now. I still think the whole Subban thing was really short-sighted...still do. Again, it's the only thing I really disagree with.

Andy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 05:55 PM
  #74
HiggsBozon
Vintage Emy
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,535
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post
We'll see. Subban is playing at a really high level right now. We could have gotten a discount signing him long-term now. I still think the whole Subban thing was really short-sighted...still do. Again, it's the only thing I really disagree with.
I understand where people are coming from with this, but my point is; more likely than not, the salary cap will once again go up dramatically after the 2013-2014 season. We'll then have Subban signed under 3M for next season, where the cap is projected to go down, allowing us to use the money to improve the team in other areas. Then, in 2013-2014, as the cap is projected to increase, you can get PK signed to his long-term deal.

Could it cost us a little more in the end? Yeah. But it might be worth it if it's the price to pay to keep improving this team year after year.

HiggsBozon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 06:15 PM
  #75
cphabs
It complels you!
 
cphabs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: WNY
Country: United States
Posts: 759
vCash: 500
You know, I don't know too much about French Candiens or their politics/culture/demographics, but I can tell you this. Their passion and drive, especially the passion, hooked me as a fan of the Habs over 30 years ago. Hard to explain. Even felt good during the rough times. Glad to be a part of it. Just my .02

cphabs is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 09:09 AM.

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.