Jump to content

Oct. 26, Kings vs Canadiens, 7:30 PM


dlbalr

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

 

I don't believe tanking equals a cup. 

 

I believe tanking equals a reset on the franchise. Starting from scratch. New management, new personnel, new talent. A few years of flushing the old system out and starting fresh. 

 

That's what I want more than draft picks. I want a new perspective. And we won't get it if we just replace Bergevin with Carriere or Dudley. And we don't have a deep pool of young talent that's going to replace the 30 year olds currently on the club, thus ensuring mediocrity in 3-5 years. So if we don't tank now, we will be tanking a few years from now. Which is fine. 

 

But don't kid yourself. The Habs have never truly been in the gutter. They made the playoffs in 96, 97, and 98. No top 5 pick until Price in 05. They made the playoffs in 02 and 04. Montreal continues to either be a cup pretender or a middling 6th/7th/8th team because they don't go through a full rebuild and continue to overhype the kids they gather on high picks. Montreal has drafted exactly one elite player outside of the first round in Subban. That's it. The past 10 years have been proof that's not enough.

 

I want the best chance at a cup. The current system of shuffling decks isn't doing it. Erase and start over. 

 

Good points, but I'd argue that the team did indeed go through a genuine, full-bore rebuild under Gainey. His regime was all about a completely new managerial apparatus, an organizational "reset" (including even a new owner), and the patient stockpiling of young players. It didn't work, in terms of winning a Cup, but that's beside the point. What the Gainey case shows - accepting your point that the Habs never truly tanked - is that you don't need to "tank" per se in order to hit the organizational reset button.

 

Gainey actually spearheaded two rebuilds. He blew up the core he'd patiently assembled and reconstructed it overnight, in one of the boldest strokes of GMing ever, during the summer of 2010. But I argued at the time, and still believe, that this was meant as a cover for the refurbishing of the prospect pool, tiding us over with a competitive club until the Paciorettys and the Subbans were ready. Call this the second Gainey 'rebuild,' even though he departed before it really got underway. And it wasn't an organizational reset; it was, indeed, meant to pre-empt the need for such a reset, by keeping the team competitive as the prospect pool was replenished.

 

Bergevin's job was not to rebuild, but to oversee the continued progression of that second internally-developed core - a combination of elements left over from the first Gainey rebuild (Price, Pleks) with those from the second (Patches, PK, Gallagher). Of course, he arsed it all up.

 

I don't think we need to tank, then, to reboot the organization. Fire MB and his cronies. That'll do it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

The problem is that tanking is no guarantee at all of winning a Cup. It increases your odds of being in the draft lottery but is nothing like a guarantee. Once in a while you get a true franchise player, but quite often you don't. EDM (unintentionally) tanked for decade before finally getting one.

 

I also think that when people talk as though "tanking = Cup" they under-estimate the number of years necessary. Chicago was crap for years and years and years in order to assemble their current core. Do we really want the Habs to suck,  not just for one season, but for a series of seasons?

 

For that matter, the Habs spent four or five years in the gutter under Houle. All we really had to show for that was Carey Price. A great piece, but he hasn't come within sniffing distance of the Stanley Cup. So much for that 'tank job.'

 

There is no substitute for superior drafting and development. With them, you don't need to tank.

 

Tankyou.

 

Hockey should be a tankless task to remain hockey and not a personality disorder.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly I'm ready for being the worst team in the league for the next 10 years if it means the Habs have a real chance at the Cup after that. We've gone through the heart attack habs, come back kids, and the Cup pretenders of the past few years. I would rather be the worst in the league at this point than the middle of the pack. 

 

I'm tired of, "anything can happen" I want "stop the Habs and anything can happen"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

Honestly I'm ready for being the worst team in the league for the next 10 years if it means the Habs have a real chance at the Cup after that. We've gone through the heart attack habs, come back kids, and the Cup pretenders of the past few years. I would rather be the worst in the league at this point than the middle of the pack. 

 

I'm tired of, "anything can happen" I want "stop the Habs and anything can happen"

 

Again, I ask the question.... HOW do you tank this team in October?  Knowing how hard it would be to find a team with need, and cap space to take guys like Price and Weber. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Commandant said:

 

Again, I ask the question.... HOW do you tank this team in October?  Knowing how hard it would be to find a team with need, and cap space to take guys like Price and Weber. 

 

I already said earlier that a tank is hard since Price is re-signed.

 

I expect three years of "good but not that good" while players leave and veterans age, leading to Bergevin being fired and the veterans being traded by the new GM. 

 

This won't be quick. This will be a slow process with failure every season. That's why I'm so negative. This team isn't getting better, and they weren't great previously. 2010s Canucks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

 

I already said earlier that a tank is hard since Price is re-signed.

 

I expect three years of "good but not that good" while players leave and veterans age, leading to Bergevin being fired and the veterans being traded by the new GM. 

 

This won't be quick. This will be a slow process with failure every season. That's why I'm so negative. This team isn't getting better, and they weren't great previously. 2010s Canucks. 

 

 I agree with you there. All the pain of being a Canucks fan without the excitement of ever having had a contender: that is the likeliest outcome of the Bergevin era. I just hope you're wrong about the three year window, and that MB is gone before that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

 I agree with you there. All the pain of being a Canucks fan without the excitement of ever having had a contender: that is the likeliest outcome of the Bergevin era. I just hope you're wrong about the three year window, and that MB is gone before that.

 

Even if he's gone this season, the next GM is going to try to make the playoffs and win a Cup. I don't blame them either. If we get someone to do to the Habs what Burke did with the Ducks it can happen.

 

But it's also possible for a GM to come in and make the team worse or the same, which after three seasons will be obvious enough to fire. Usually what Nonis got following Burke. That's when the organization will have to decide to full rebuild or not. 

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...