Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
DON

Bergevin back for 18-19 season

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Dalhabs said:

If he just didnt do that horrible Subban trade....    

Thats is the really annoying thing. Makes me think this is how the Oilers fans felt after they traded Gretzky.

Oilers won a Cup without Gretzky.

 

It's very, very similar to the Savard/Chelios trade but we won a Cup after that too. Could have had #25 with Cheli though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

Oilers won a Cup without Gretzky.

 

It's very, very similar to the Savard/Chelios trade but we won a Cup after that too. Could have had #25 with Cheli though. 

Could have won more with Chelios - just like the oilers would have won a lot more with Gretzky.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Could have won more with Chelios - just like the oilers would have won a lot more with Gretzky.

 

90-91 could have been Gretzky versus Lemieux in the final. That would have been fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just want everyone removed who thought a dcore without any puck movers... was something you can do.

 

If that was Berg, Julien, assistants w/e want anyone who thought that out. They blatently showed they are out of touch with the modern game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, bbp said:

I just want everyone removed who thought a dcore without any puck movers... was something you can do.

 

If that was Berg, Julien, assistants w/e want anyone who thought that out. They blatently showed they are out of touch with the modern game.

 

Bergevin was quoted in the summer in saying that this defence in 17-18 would move the puck better than the defence in 16-17.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, bbp said:

I just want everyone removed who thought a dcore without any puck movers... was something you can do.

 

If that was Berg, Julien, assistants w/e want anyone who thought that out. They blatently showed they are out of touch with the modern game.

 

Amen, brother.

 

The analogy between Subban and Gretzky is obviously ridiculous - much as I respect PK, he's no Gretzky. But that trade transformed my understanding of Marc Bergevin in a split second. Whereas prior to that, it was possible, for me at least, to think (despite the Therrien hiring) that we had a forward-looking young GM who understood the contemporary game, the trade exposed him for what he really is: a GM who prioritizes his own ego and loyalty to his managerial team of mediocrities over winning, who reaches for lazy scapegoats (Subban, 'character') rather than intelligently analyzing problems, and who is heavily old-school rather than forward-looking in his approach to the game. In an organization that had glaring needs, especially at C, his big signature move was to make a thoroughly pointless trade that, best-case scenario, can be described as a lateral move that traded a player entering his prime for a player beginning the downslide. Indeed, as good as Weber is, pretty much the ONLY thing that trade has really accomplished is to create a brand-new glaring organizational need, i.e., an elite puck-moving defenceman. The definition of dumb.

 

Most of his subsequent moves have reinforced what the Subban trade taught us about him. He is retrograde, ego-driven, and quite possibly rather stupid for a man in charge of a half-billion dollar organization.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m not by any means a fan of Bergevin. I also disliked getting rid of Sergachev and considering how nice Mete looked this year, I think Sergachev would have looked nice on our back end contrary to the argument that he’s on Tampa Bay and being made to look good only by all world players.

 

With that being said, I think it’s too simple to state that Bergevin would not be able to adapt to the modern view that NHL teams need puck movers on the back end. As fans, those statements are seen all over these boards and so do we really think that if Bergevin hasn’t already considered this himself, he wouldn’t have anyone around him telling him the same things being said here? 

 

His main mistake was letting Markov go, who many would argue was getting older in age anyway, and then following that up/preceding that by signing Karl Alzner and Mark Streit.

 

That’s actually one of Bergevin’s biggest indictments. Many of his reclamation projects (Semin,Kassian,Streit) didn’t last more than a few weeks/months.

 

Back on topic, the fact that he signed stay at home defenseman Karl Alzner over Markov isn’t the hugest issue in of itself simply because he’s not a puck mover. It’s the fact that Karl Alzner is just bad. There are other similar players who would have been more efficient on our team. Similarly, Mark Streit is a puck mover who was acquired, he was just the wrong choice because it only took a few weeks for the organization and fans to decide that he was simply over the hill.

 

In short, we can agree to disagree but while

not a fan in particular of Bergevin, I wouldn’t personally be overly concerned that he wouldn’t be able to acquire some puck movers on the back end in the future, as has already been seen with depth player Reilly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

I’m not by any means a fan of Bergevin. I also disliked getting rid of Sergachev and considering how nice Mete looked this year, I think Sergachev would have looked nice on our back end contrary to the argument that he’s on Tampa Bay and being made to look good only by all world players.

 

With that being said, I think it’s too simple to state that Bergevin would not be able to adapt to the modern view that NHL teams need puck movers on the back end. As fans, those statements are seen all over these boards and so do we really think that if Bergevin hasn’t already considered this himself, he wouldn’t have anyone around him telling him the same things being said here? 

 

His main mistake was letting Markov go, who many would argue was getting older in age anyway, and then following that up/preceding that by signing Karl Alzner and Mark Streit.

 

That’s actually one of Bergevin’s biggest indictments. Many of his reclamation projects (Semin,Kassian,Streit) didn’t last more than a few weeks/months.

 

Back on topic, the fact that he signed stay at home defenseman Karl Alzner over Markov isn’t the hugest issue in of itself simply because he’s not a puck mover. It’s the fact that Karl Alzner is just bad. There are other similar players who would have been more efficient on our team. Similarly, Mark Streit is a puck mover who was acquired, he was just the wrong choice because it only took a few weeks for the organization and fans to decide that he was simply over the hill.

 

In short, we can agree to disagree but while

not a fan in particular of Bergevin, I wouldn’t personally be overly concerned that he wouldn’t be able to acquire some puck movers on the back end in the future, as has already been seen with depth player Reilly. 

2

 

"I’m not by any means a fan of Bergevin. I also disliked getting rid of Sergachev and considering how nice Mete looked this year, I think Sergachev would have looked nice on our back end contrary to the argument that he’s on Tampa Bay and being made to look good only by all world players."

 

Who said this?

If you are pointing to my arguments, you've totally misconstrued them. 

I've always said that Sergachev is a great prospect.  I've also said that his numbers have to be taken with a grain of salt.  Would he play on Montreal's back end? yes, and he'd probably look better than Mete has.  But his numbers and his production are boosted in tampa by playing with better players.  No one said he is good "ONLY" because of those players.  It is said that his numbers are boosted by them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, bbp said:

I just want everyone removed who thought a dcore without any puck movers... was something you can do.

 

If that was Berg, Julien, assistants w/e want anyone who thought that out. They blatently showed they are out of touch with the modern game.

I hear that criticism a lot and I suspect its true. Not knowing the game we're playing would count as a negative for any GM I'd consider. But I'm mostly pissed at trading our black hearted soul and the report of indifference experienced by the great Hab Markov and Rad. I don't see any great grounds for confidence in the owner either. We just disappeared. We became a collection of players.. mostly unidentifiable.. and not a team. I used to like us. Now I just have you guys. And you just have me. How bad is THAT!

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Amen, brother.

 

The analogy between Subban and Gretzky is obviously ridiculous - much as I respect PK, he's no Gretzky. But that trade transformed my understanding of Marc Bergevin in a split second. Whereas prior to that, it was possible, for me at least, to think (despite the Therrien hiring) that we had a forward-looking young GM who understood the contemporary game, the trade exposed him for what he really is: a GM who prioritizes his own ego and loyalty to his managerial team of mediocrities over winning, who reaches for lazy scapegoats (Subban, 'character') rather than intelligently analyzing problems, and who is heavily old-school rather than forward-looking in his approach to the game. In an organization that had glaring needs, especially at C, his big signature move was to make a thoroughly pointless trade that, best-case scenario, can be described as a lateral move that traded a player entering his prime for a player beginning the downslide. Indeed, as good as Weber is, pretty much the ONLY thing that trade has really accomplished is to create a brand-new glaring organizational need, i.e., an elite puck-moving defenceman. The definition of dumb.

 

Most of his subsequent moves have reinforced what the Subban trade taught us about him. He is retrograde, ego-driven, and quite possibly rather stupid for a man in charge of a half-billion dollar organization.

I've always really liked the word "stupid" .. its a fave... but I'll withhold it here while agreeing with you. I honestly didn't know we absolutely needed a rushing defenseman.. but always assumed any team would automatically have one. But we traded our soul and as Aquinas and Aristotle said.. the soul is the act and ordering principle of the body. The mind over matter. We are lifeless things without our souls, abject objects not agents pursuing destiny. And because our intellective soul presupposes free will.. MB is responsible. He's set up for life so he wouldn't have endured a hardship in parting. We have endured a wound to our souls in his not parting perchance. What say ye soul brothers.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Toronthab said:

I've always really liked the word "stupid" .. its a fave... but I'll withhold it here while agreeing with you. I honestly didn't know we absolutely needed a rushing defenseman.. but always assumed any team would automatically have one. But we traded our soul and as Aquinas and Aristotle said.. the soul is the act and ordering principle of the body. The mind over matter. We are lifeless things without our souls, abject objects not agents pursuing destiny. And because our intellective soul presupposes free will.. MB is responsible. He's set up for life so he wouldn't have endured a hardship in parting. We have endured a wound to our souls in his not parting perchance. What say ye soul brothers.

 

Those are some heavy metaphysics for a hockey board, my friend! There is a rich irony in the thought that moves supposedly made to bolster our 'character' have in fact left us a soulless shell. Watching Price this season, he seems to have been mentally preoccupied or half-checked out all year. Who knows why, but it may be partly informed by MB's foolish chemistry experiments. Amazing to think that in 2015 the chemistry was so good everyone raved about it, Petry was blown away when he arrived, etc.. Now they're a listless, lifeless bunch except for the wonderful Brendan Gallagher.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/9/2018 at 9:35 AM, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Those are some heavy metaphysics for a hockey board, my friend! There is a rich irony in the thought that moves supposedly made to bolster our 'character' have in fact left us a soulless shell. Watching Price this season, he seems to have been mentally preoccupied or half-checked out all year. Who knows why, but it may be partly informed by MB's foolish chemistry experiments. Amazing to think that in 2015 the chemistry was so good everyone raved about it, Petry was blown away when he arrived, etc.. Now they're a listless, lifeless bunch except for the wonderful Brendan Gallagher.

Memories of a soul for sure CC. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that if Molson thinks  that Bergevin a “ great evaluator of talent”,  has a plan and is the right man to lead the renaissance of the Canadiens he:

a. Is Imbibing too much of the family product

b. Has Bergevin confused with George McPhee, David Poile or any other reasonable GM.

c. Has suffered a significant, yet undisclosed head injury

d. Is not watching the Canadiens this season

e. All of the above

My theory is “E”

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, PMAC said:

I think that if Molson thinks  that Bergevin a “ great evaluator of talent”,  has a plan and is the right man to lead the renaissance of the Canadiens he:

a. Is Imbibing too much of the family product

b. Has Bergevin confused with George McPhee

c. Has suffered a significant, yet undisclosed head injury

d. Is not watching the Canadiens this season

e. All of the above

My theory is “E”

I’m no MB fan, in case that hasn’t been clear ;), but the success that Vegas has aside, Macphee made a lot of bonehead moves - like trading Forsberg for Enstrom, picking up a washed up penner and moving Varhmalov when they caps were constantly searching for a goalie. He’a A guy who benefited from tanking and getting franchise defining #1 picks.

 

He’s much better than MB and I’d take him over a lot of other GM’s, but I don’t think he’s anywhere near the best GM’s in life he league, or one to use as an example of a great GM.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Poile's run over the past few seasons is without peer. Yzerman is pretty good too. 

 

Mcphee's done an outstanding job, but Vegas may be a case of everything going right (including the Vegas flu) and also being a beneficiary of ridiculously generous expansion rules. We'll have a better sense of that when we see how Seattle does with a similar format; if the Sockeyes or whatever similarly rip it up, we'll have definitive proof the rules are loopy.

 

And TO doesn't seem to be making many mistakes, I must say.

 

One thing you have to give Macphee is the William Karlsson pick. I have to laugh...even as MB has flailed around for six years and has two fewer top-6 C than when he started, Poile has added not one, but TWO C who would be far and away the best C on our team, and Vegas added a #1 C for free through cagey pro scouting :lol: Yeah, MB, tell us again how 'tough' it is to get a C. Tough for inept boobs like you, no doubt.

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Karlssons season is screwy.  25% shooting percentage.

 

Hes a number 3 c with a fluke season.

 

Marchessault on the other hand.  Hes a legit centre 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×