Jump to content

Building from the net out. Is that "old" thinking?


huzer

Recommended Posts

On this Poile versus Bergevin thing...

 

Drafting and development: Poile by some distance

Addressing glaring team weaknesses: Poile wins again, e.g., actually going out and acquiring a stud C

Trades: Poile wins again (e.g., Forsberg, Subban)

 

Maybe if MB is GM for 20 years, he will learn to do a similarly good job. I doubt that he will achieve this, because from what I can see the team has relatively little quality talent in the pipeline and the core is aging. This doesn't bode well for MB's longevity, assuming that Molson has some actual interest in winning someday. But who knows? The future is a 'known unknown.'

 

Regarding Subban, what Nashville's run does show is that his 'character' or other traits were in no way, shape, or form a problem or obstacle to team success. (That his actual skills are a huge on-ice asset is self-evident). The whole 'not a team player/leader' thing was a total canard. If Weber is sooooooooooo vastly superior to Subban as a 'leader,' then why isn't Nashville suffering in any discernable way from Weber's departure? Maybe other guys have stepped up and compensated for the loss of Weber to such an extent that the team has been able to overcome PK's non-leadership dragging them down. More likely, you don't lose much actual (as opposed to bullsh*t mythological) 'leadership' when you substitute PK for Weber. It sure doesn't hurt you on the ice, that's for sure.

 

This is the reason why some of us are pointing to Nashville's success as further proof that the trade was - at best - a totally unnecessary lateral move that accomplished little more than making us considerably older at the #1 D position. (We probably wouldn't win the Cup with Subban either, since his 2015 team had exactly the same weaknesses and only went one round further than Weber's 2017 team).

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stogey24
16 minutes ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

 

You have it backwards. I don't give a damn about Subban, win or lose, but we're on a Habs website and people take joy in seeing another team succeed all the while actually criticizing our player and boasting about our team's misfortunes. I don't hate Subban but I dislike Nashville. I also do not like Ottawa, Pittsburgh or Anaheim and I live right on the border of Orange County and Long Beach in California. I've said nothing about Subban and I don't see why I would. He's been a piece of the puzzle. On the other hand people have been literally mocking Weber's leadership or trying to diminish its importance when that has nothing to do with Nashville's success this year.

 

Those are are the trolls, not me.

 

By the way, I wasn't the one who gave you a down vote the other day when you responded to something I said. I actually agreed with you for the most part. 

Subban pushed Nashville over the edge to legit contention, Weber didn't do the same for Montreal. 

 

I didn't down vote you there... Never do 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Poile has had three eras with Nashville.

 

Expansion era: Tried to sell the game to a new market. Brought in Forsberg and Kariya to limited success.

 

Smashville Era: Brought in Arnott and built around Weber. Trotz coaching meant a tough gritty club. Skill was downplayed for toughness. Limited success. 11-12 where they acquired Gill, Kostitsyn, and Gaustad was a flop.

 

Speedville Era: Started with hiring Lavi, kicked into gear with trading Weber for Subban. Team drafts three NHLers in almost every draft, built around four defencemen that can play 20+ minutes, acquired Forsberg who can do everything, got Johansen, now in the Cup final.

 

Expansion Era: D+

Smashville Era: B-

Speedville Era: A

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

On this Poile versus Bergevin thing...

 

Drafting and development: Poile by some distance

Addressing glaring team weaknesses: Poile wins again, e.g., actually going out and acquiring a stud C

Trades: Poile wins again (e.g., Forsberg, Subban)

 

Maybe if MB is GM for 20 years, he will learn to do a similarly good job. I doubt that he will achieve this, because from what I can see the team has relatively little quality talent in the pipeline and the core is aging. This doesn't bode well for MB's longevity, assuming that Molson has some actual interest in winning someday. But who knows? The future is a 'known unknown.'

 

Regarding Subban, what Nashville's run does show is that his 'character' or other traits were in no way, shape, or form a problem or obstacle to team success. (That his actual skills are a huge on-ice asset is self-evident). The whole 'not a team player/leader' thing was a total canard. If Weber is sooooooooooo vastly superior to Subban as a 'leader,' then why isn't Nashville suffering in any discernable way from Weber's departure? Maybe other guys have stepped up and compensated for the loss of Weber to such an extent that the team has been able to overcome PK's non-leadership dragging them down. More likely, you don't lose much actual (as opposed to bullsh*t mythological) 'leadership' when you substitute PK for Weber. It sure doesn't hurt you on the ice, that's for sure.

 

This is the reason why some of us are pointing to Nashville's success as further proof that the trade was - at best - a totally unnecessary lateral move that accomplished little more than making us considerably older at the #1 D position. (We probably wouldn't win the Cup with Subban either, since his 2015 team had exactly the same weaknesses and only went one round further than Weber's 2017 team).

 

 

If MB manages to be a GM for another 30 years (which I doubt - he only got this job because of the French requirement), I can't see him having success.   When Poile first became a GM he fleeced grundman, despite being new to the job (so it's not the first time he's screwed the habs).  At the time the caps were fighting for their survival and were a laughing stock.  In his first few months on the job he brought them legitimacy by trading Walter and green (both good players), for Langway (go on to be an all-star and Norris winner), Brian Englom (become an all-star dman), Jarvis (shut-down centre) and Laughlin (solid defensive player).  He was handcuffed by a cheap owner and always ended up losing his key drafted and developed players like Kevin Stevens and Kevin HAller.

 

His next job was building an expansion franchise from scratch.  

 

MB in his first few months decided to play hardball with Subban and other then the avalanche was the only GM not the to sign his key RFA to an extension before the lockout.  Instead he blew the money he saved on a washed out bum Briere and garbage like Douglas friggin Murrey.  He's made one solid trade - vanak. But he was wasted by the idiot he hired as coach.  So I have zero confidence that MB will meet the wizard of oz and get a brain.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...