Jump to content

Are the Canadiens above average under MB?


alfredoh2009

Recommended Posts

I took on this challenge to show that the Canadiens are an above average team. My motivation is to eat away at the dull time before the new season starts. It seems to touch a nerve with some forum members, and I hope it provides some civil chatter.
 

In essence:

1) based on total points over the Marc Bergevin era, the Canadiens (652) are an above average (641.87) team

2) based on total points over the Marc Bergevin era, the Canadiens have been better than the average more times (4) than league (3.87)

 

Those numbers don't show much. They can be dismissed and argued very easily. So, I took my analysis a bit further and multiplied the total of points for each season by the playoff winning percentage. This is a number that may show teams that could elevate their play in the playoffs. To me this would separate elite teams from average...

3) based on factored playoff-performance, the Canadiens (821) are an above average (801.00) team

4) based on factored playoff-performance, the Canadiens (4) have been better than the average more times (4) than league (3.50). 

5) Here is a snapshot of the numbers with the "playoff-performace multiplier"

 

image.png

I have compiled my analysis here 2012-2018_Teams-performance.xlxs (its very basic)

 

That's the point I was trying to make.

 

Edited by alfredoh2009
typos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They may be an above average team stat wise, but MB also inherited a core of Pacioretty, Subban, Gallagher, Price, and started with an easy pick of Galchenyuk. Much of our success has been due to these players.

 

I’d argue that even if the team has been above average, it isn’t because of solid GMing from Bergevin. In fact it’s pretty easy to argue that Bergevin has objectively made the team worse. 

 

Thankfully, recently our prospect pool’s talent has seen a massive leap.

 

The future hinges on Poehling and Kotkaniemi working out, alongside some of our solid D prospects like Brook or Fluery, and a couple forwards like Ylonen and Olofsson or Hillis/Fonstad etc.

 

Pair that with progression from Mete, Juulsen, Lehkonen and Hudon, and although Bergevin may have seen a decline in one core, he’s setting up another core which has potential to compete. Especially if we have another top 10 pick this year. The first overall pick would be Hughes. I mean huge*

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at the numbers over the last three seasons. Huge decline relative to the 2014 numbers.

 

The longer he has been in charge, the worse the team has gotten - as a direct result of his incompetence.

 

He is an absolute POS General Manager. Stop clinging to the team he inherited (the core of which defined the 2014/15 teams) and focus on the team he built - the human garbage we now see before us.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You miss the point. The numbers show a lot of teams faring worse during the same time span

 

I am not delusional, I know the team is trending to average. But the sky is not falling

Edited by alfredoh2009
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

You miss the point. The numbers show a lot of teams faring worse during the same time span

 

I am not delusional, I know the team is trending to average. But the sky is not falling

 

The sky has already fallen, my friend. The team is a piece of crap. And with a good GM, it would not be so.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Meller93 said:

MB also inherited a core of Pacioretty, Subban, Gallagher, Price

That had just finished the 2011-12 season 28th in the NHL.

 

And again, has had only 2 bad years, both when Price was out hurt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The team was an above average club. It had a strong group and needed just one more piece in a top line centre. 

 

Its no longer above average though, the window on this roster has closed and it needs to be re-opened.  The fact that this happened without the missing piece being added in six years absolutely falls at the feet of the GM

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I can find a way to show team trend (up/down) I'll post it, but without data it is hard to argue.

 

I would say the team has been "an above average club"; and I agree with everything else you wrote. The point I am trying to make is that the team has been above average, up to this day.

 

Until they start playing, I do not know how much worse they will be this season. Most, me included, think that the team will tank, loose more than last year and yield a very good 1st round draft.

I think that we will hit rock-bottom this year, but that the turnaround has started though the draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Commandant said:

The team was an above average club. It had a strong group and needed just one more piece in a top line centre. 

 

Its no longer above average though, the window on this roster has closed and it needs to be re-opened.  The fact that this happened without the missing piece being added in six years absolutely falls at the feet of the GM

28th is above average?

And the 25+ other GMs who also have had no championships in last 6 years? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I consider January of 2016 when the wheels finally fell off and the window started shutting.

 

207 games, 93 wins, 89 regulation losses, 25 overtime/shootout losses, 211 points: 23rd of 30 (not counting Vegas) in front of only New Jersey, Ottawa, Detroit, Buffalo, Colorado, Vancouver, and Arizona. Three teams in their division worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, alfredoh2009 said:

I think that we will hit rock-bottom this year

Is possible without Weber, but most likely will be mid-pack if Price plays well and doesn't have to stop 40shots/game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, alfredoh2009 said:

I think that we will hit rock-bottom this year, but that the turnaround has started though the draft.

 

We are hitting 'rock bottom' at the time when the team should be in the midst of its Cup window, with MaxPac, Subban, and Price all still in their primes, Gallagher maturing, Galy as a legit top-6 C, replacements for Pleks and Markov doing their thing, Radulov signed on the wing, etc., etc.. What you keep missing, IMHO, is that this team should never have been in this position in the first place.

 

Now, the future may be good. It's possible that after 6 years of mistakes, MB has learned from his errors. But that's just a pious hope at this point. What we actually know is that he has behaved like a clown for six years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I commend the positive outlook, really I do, and you are going to need every ounce of it to get through the coming storm.

 

What is posted is, statistically solid, to prove the very point you are trying to make, the team under Bergevin's tenure has overall, been above average. the problem with averages is they don't show you where things are trending. In this case, we have been trending down with a few lucky spikes for the better part of those years. I am not just talking about points in a season, position in the standings, and all that, I am talking about the product on the ice, in its entirety and in its make up, it has been trending down. From blatantly obvious holes not being filled putting us in a worse and worse situation because of it, to letting go of the wrong players at the wrong time. The grand make up of this team has been trending downward, it is really as simple as that, we were trying to trend upward, with core pieces in every position, except Center, being damn good, and instead squandered it through a snowball like effect of improvised Management, creating holes where there once weren't any not long ago, and not filling holes that have been around for far too long.

 

I'm all for looking at things through glass is half full spectrum, but sometimes you just gotta call a turd, a turd. You can tell me you you think the cat litter doesn't stink that bad, but don't tell me there isn't that many turds in the box when there is. It is important to ensure the line between positive thinking and ignorance doesn't get fuzzy

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not oblivous to the fact this team should be a contender now. I thought we were close a couple of years ago.

But the team has remained above average, despite the mistakes.

 

if there were two consecutive years to stockpile prospects it was 2018 and 2019. I don't mind if MB gets fired as long the current rebuild continues.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Link67 said:

I commend the positive outlook, really I do, and you are going to need every ounce of it to get through the coming storm.

 

What is posted is, statistically solid, to prove the very point you are trying to make, the team under Bergevin's tenure has overall, been above average. the problem with averages is they don't show you where things are trending. In this case, we have been trending down with a few lucky spikes for the better part of those years. I am not just talking about points in a season, position in the standings, and all that, I am talking about the product on the ice, in its entirety and in its make up, it has been trending down. From blatantly obvious holes not being filled putting us in a worse and worse situation because of it, to letting go of the wrong players at the wrong time. The grand make up of this team has been trending downward, it is really as simple as that, we were trying to trend upward, with core pieces in every position, except Center, being damn good, and instead squandered it through a snowball like effect of improvised Management, creating holes where there once weren't any not long ago, and not filling holes that have been around for far too long.

Thanks Link67. I agree the statistics only show the past. But they clearly show that more than half the teams in the league have done worst and the bottom-feeders are not trending up anytime soon. 

 

The Canadiens are a disaster right now, a pileup of mistakes and misevaluations; but also of bad luck and player-underperformance that cannot be pinned on MB:

As a GM he has done better than Buffalo. Vancouver, Carolina, Edmonton, Arizona, Calgary, Colorado, Florida, New York Islanders, 

I wish he was doing as well as the Devils, Winnipeg and Philadelphia. But I would be more discouraged right now if my team would have suck for so long during these past 7 years 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, DON said:

That had just finished the 2011-12 season 28th in the NHL.

 

And again, has had only 2 bad years, both when Price was out hurt.

Sure, Gauthier’s tenture resulted in a decline and poorly performing team as well. But Gauthier was still responsible for the core of MB’s “above average” teams.

 

Just as MB is responsible for the possible solid core in these next 3-5 years, but he’s also the decline of the once solid core he inherited. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't just look at teams that performed worse statistically over the  past few seasons and declare that MB "did a better job" than those GMs. These things unfold in context. For example (just to pick my favourite example, the team in the city in which I reside) Jim Benning became Canucks GM in 2014. He inherited a veteran team on the decline with hardly anything in the pipeline, with key cogs like the Sedins locked in on untradeable contracts. That organization was destined to struggle for a while, no matter who the GM was. Over his four years, the team has mostly stunk and he's done some dumb things, but he's also assembled some pretty strong prospects include some genuinely elite young talent in Boeser, Demko, and Petterson. The point being, whatever we think of Benning, he inherited a dismal hand, and his performance needs to be assessed within that context. Whether the Canuckleheads have done better or worse than the Habs over that span, we can't infer from that that he has done a better or worse job than Bergevin. MB inherited an excellent hand and turned it into complete dogsh*t. Not too many of his peers can claim the same.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just figured out how to add a trend line to my spreadsheet, and according to the data (removed the top and bottom teams):

1) The CH is doing far better than Buffalo. Carolina, Edmonton, Arizona, Calgary, Colorado,

2) The CH is trending down, but at a lesser rate than: Florida, Vancouver, Dallas, New York Islanders, Detroit, Ottawa

3) To my surprise, the data indicated that New York Rangers and St-Louis are trending worse than the Canadiens.

 

That's based on this un-scientific analysis. We all know that some of these teams have done significant moves to improve.

 

I think I am done with this exercise. It was interesting to look at the numbers. It was like doing the horoscope :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DON said:

28th is above average?

And the 25+ other GMs who also have had no championships in last 6 years? 

 

The core he was given finished 1st in their division in 2013... with the additions of Colby Armstrong and Brandon Prust. 

 

They had a good group, that was young and ready to start moving up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Meller93 said:

Sure, Gauthier’s tenture resulted in a decline and poorly performing team as well. But Gauthier was still responsible for the core of MB’s “above average” teams.

 

Just as MB is responsible for the possible solid core in these next 3-5 years, but he’s also the decline of the once solid core he inherited. 

I think you are overrating the team, they lost in playoffs because they couldn't score in 2013 and underdogs Sens took em in 1st round. Outscored them 20-9

Then in 2015 at least made 2nd round but only put up 4goals in 3 losses to Tampa to seal fate, so still same issue.

IN 2016 all picked Habs to beat Rangers in 1ts round ...so didn't look like a team being run into ground.

In 2017 basically no Weber, No Price and loss of two Russians for a pretty expected result, team tanked pretty well as actually many hoped it would, once Habs had a terrible fall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

You can't just look at teams that performed worse statistically over the  past few seasons and declare that MB "did a better job" than those GMs. These things unfold in context. For example (just to pick my favourite example, the team in the city in which I reside) Jim Benning became Canucks GM in 2014. He inherited a veteran team on the decline with hardly anything in the pipeline, with key cogs like the Sedins locked in on untradeable contracts. That organization was destined to struggle for a while, no matter who the GM was. Over his four years, the team has mostly stunk and he's done some dumb things, but he's also assembled some pretty strong prospects include some genuinely elite young talent in Boeser, Demko, and Petterson. The point being, whatever we think of Benning, he inherited a dismal hand, and his performance needs to be assessed within that context. Whether the Canuckleheads have done better or worse than the Habs over that span, we can't infer from that that he has done a better or worse job than Bergevin. MB inherited an excellent hand and turned it into complete dogsh*t. Not too many of his peers can claim the same.

 

 

i was following you until you swept everything under the rug of " Bergevin inherited an excellent hand..." . Context matters, for the Canadiens the context has been: the CH will go as far as Price will take them... and fall as deep as he drags the team down.

 

Vancouver may be like Winnipeg in the future, or like Edmonton. Who knows. 

 

But there is no denying that MB is not the worst GM in the league.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hindsight is 20/20 but this is what he inherited

 

 

He inherited

 

- a future Vezina/Hart winner (and 3 time Vezina nominee)

- a future Norris winner (and 3 time Norris nominee)
- a LW who would score 30 goals 5 times in 6 seasons.
- a RW who would be a net front presence and become a 30 goal scorer.

- a Centre who was small, and shouldn't have been a number 1, but was coming off 60 points. 
- a centre who would go on to be a #3 centre on a Stanley Cup champion.

- the #3 overall pick. 
- an extra second round pick in his first draft, an extra second round pick in his second draft
- all of the players above this post were under the age of 25... and just coming into their prime when he took over. 



He also inherited the following pieces. 

 

-  2 compliance buyouts that allowed him to clear two bad contracts from the team and clean up any lingering cap space issues.
- a LHD who was a top 20 defenceman in the NHL and a true number 1. He had barely played due to knee injuries under the previous regime, but he was now healthy, and wouldn't miss much time in the next 5 years. 
- a #2 C who could play against other team's top lines. 

- an older winger coming off a 30 goal season. 

- a second line RW and Captain who was still good for approximately 40 points

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

i was following you until you swept everything under the rug of " Bergevin inherited an excellent hand..." . Context matters, for the Canadiens the context has been: the CH will go as far as Price will take them... and fall as deep as he drags the team down.

 

Vancouver may be like Winnipeg in the future, or like Edmonton. Who knows. 

 

But there is no denying that MB is not the worst GM in the league.

 

 

Yeah, out of 30 other guys, two or three may be worse :rolleyes: That's setting the bar high! Anyway, the issue was never whether he is the worst GM. It's whether he's a POS GM. Which he has been.

 

The 'context' in question - what Bergy inherited, etc. - has been elaborated upon repeatedly by posters like Machine, Commandant, and myself. If the sad tale of how MB squandered existing assets, failed to develop succession plans for obviously time-sensitive assets, failed FOR YEARS to fill almost comically glaring roster holes, lurched from team-building model to team-building model on a biannual basis while trailing most of his colleagues by three or four years in understanding the direction the league was taking, left obvious inept bum buddies in key positions for way too long, and did dick all to develop players for six years - if this sorry tale has not sunk in by now, it never will.

 

Rather than try to defend this inept track-record, you are better off pointing to the prospects now in the system, and the modified coaching staffs, to try to sell us on the idea that Bergevin has learned from his endless stream of blunders and is now finally prepared to be a competent GM. Most of us won't buy it, but at least you won't be defending the indefensible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at what i posted, he needed 2 pieces.... Literally 2 pieces to build a contender. 

 

A #3 defenceman.  He went out and got that in Petry.  Good on him. 

 

A #1 C.  He never got that. 

 

Then he went and mismanged and lost some of the pieces he had either by not replacing aging pieces or by making some bad deals. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Commandant said:

Hindsight is 20/20 but this is what he inherited

 

 

He inherited

 

- a future Vezina/Hart winner (and 3 time Vezina nominee)

- a future Norris winner (and 3 time Norris nominee)
- a LW who would score 30 goals 5 times in 6 seasons.
- a RW who would be a net front presence and become a 30 goal scorer.

- a Centre who was small, and shouldn't have been a number 1, but was coming off 60 points. 
- a centre who would go on to be a #3 centre on a Stanley Cup champion.

- the #3 overall pick. 
- an extra second round pick in his first draft, an extra second round pick in his second draft
- all of the players above this post were under the age of 25... and just coming into their prime when he took over. 



He also inherited the following pieces. 

 

-  2 compliance buyouts that allowed him to clear two bad contracts from the team and clean up any lingering cap space issues.
- a LHD who was a top 20 defenceman in the NHL and a true number 1. He had barely played due to knee injuries under the previous regime, but he was now healthy, and wouldn't miss much time in the next 5 years. 
- a #2 C who could play against other team's top lines. 

- an older winger coming off a 30 goal season. 

- a second line RW and Captain who was still good for approximately 40 points

 

hindsight 20/20, this is what I remember he inherited - what he had to work with:

* a second line of Bourque-Plekanec-Leblanc

* The franchise upcoming scorer, Pacioretty, getting injured by Chara on the first year (I think?!) of MB's tenure

* An undrafted 5'7"center on the top line

* Blunden, Staubitz, Nokelainen, Palusha on their bottom 6

* Campoli and St-Denis on D, and an unproven Subban

* Question marks about Price and Markov

* Top D prospects: Beaulieu, Tinordi

* a depleted farm system, with two years of worthless draft picks (from PG)

 

And that's an improvement over the PG/RC lineup (March 2011) of:

A.Kostitsin-Gomez-Gionta

Cammalleri-Plekanec-Moen

Pouliot-Desharnais-White

Darche-Halpern-Eller

 

Hamrlink-Wisniewski

Gill-Subban

Mara-Sopel

 

No stanley cup contender lineups there...

=========================

MB put together decent teams over the next few years.

He failed to get the #1 center; but managed to have a competitive team and perform above the league average
 

He has created a mess over the last two years, for which he hold the responsibility. Amd I agree worj all on this forum, that the mistakes from recent seasons are hos own doing.

 

But that does not disproves the fact that his teams have performed above league average.

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...