Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
IN THE HEARTS OF MEN

Stuff moved from the Rumour thread that isn't rumours

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

I do it for the lulz.

Definitely lulz to be had

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

ok, here is the spreadsheet analysis:

   https://drive.google.com/file/d/102S-AKuH81-COsCjTgT6Tg-Q5imkCvcH/view?usp=sharing

 

[fixed spreadsheet. Thanks Commandant!]

 

Based on total points for Marc Bergevin teams (2012-2019) the CH is above average 669.62 points, over the 625.96 average or the 648.13 median

Based on the total point multiplied by (1+ playoff-winning-percentage) the CH is above average 839.25 over the 781.13 average or the 779.73 median

 

The last two seasons have moved them lower on the rankings, but it seems to have retooled them to move up for another push for the cup. Overall, a decent (above average) job by the GM

 

Edited by alfredoh2009
included 2011-2012 season by mistake
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

ok, here is the spreadsheet analysis:

   https://drive.google.com/file/d/102S-AKuH81-COsCjTgT6Tg-Q5imkCvcH/view?usp=sharing

 

Based on total points for Marc Bergevin teams (2011-2019) the CH is above average 747.63 points, over the 714.99 average or the 728.71 median

Based on the total point multiplied by (1+ playoff-winning-percentage) the CH is above average 917.25 over the 892.51 average or the 865.98 median

 

The last two seasons have moved them lower on the rankins, but it seems to have retooled them to move up for another push for the cup. Overall, a decent (above average) job by the GM

 

 

Marc Bergevin didnt become GM til the 2012-13 season... not 2011

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
43 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

Marc Bergevin didnt become GM til the 2012-13 season... not 2011

he was the GM for the 2011 draft where he selected Galchenyuk, wasn't he?

(edit) oh! sh!!t, yeah. Galchenyuk = 2012

 

Let me double check my spreadsheet

Edited by alfredoh2009
mistake on years

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Commandant said:

 

Marc Bergevin didnt become GM til the 2012-13 season... not 2011

I had 2011 because in the spreadsheet I started from the draft is included with the preceding season. MB drafted Chucky after the 2011-2012 season. By mistake, I included that last PG season.

The numbers, seem to show that the CH has performed well during the season but underperformed during the playoffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

The numbers, seem to show that the CH has performed well during the season but underperformed during the playoffs.

Could have saved a lot of time by just asking me about this conclusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Commandant said:

 

I do it for the lulz.

ur lulz reminded me of :  MARIO? As-tu mange ta soupe Chunky? :D:D

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JoeLassister said:

Could have saved a lot of time by just asking me about this conclusion.

Yes, I also knew that without the spreadsheet. The spreadsheet shows without a doubt that the CH is clearly above average in the regular season but not as good in the playoffs 

 

A pet peace of mine is when someone claims something is true based on their opinion where data shows otherwise (e.g. climate change)

 

  • Upvote 4
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

Yes, I also knew that without the spreadsheet. The spreadsheet shows without a doubt that the CH is clearly above average in the regular season but not as good in the playoffs 

 

A pet peace of mine is when someone claims something is true based on their opinion where data shows otherwise (e.g. climate change)

 

Fair enough, opinion + evidence is better than opinion alone

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, alfredoh2009 said:

Yes, I also knew that without the spreadsheet. The spreadsheet shows without a doubt that the CH is clearly above average in the regular season but not as good in the playoffs 

 

A pet peace of mine is when someone claims something is true based on their opinion where data shows otherwise (e.g. climate change)

 

I think a big reason for that is match ups in a 7 game series rather than just a 1 and by type of game. 

 

In the regular season teams don't care as much with match ups or shutting down a player, as much as they do in the playoffs in a 7 game series.

 

That's why our teams always get exposed for their weaknesses in the playoffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The last GM to miss three playoffs during his tenure was Houle. Heck, Bergevin and Houle are the only 2 GMs in the last, I dunno, 30-40-50-60 years in Habs history to miss more the playoffs more than twice during their tenure. 

 

I'm neither a Bergevin apologist or basher, but to say he's above average just based on season points...blah. If the Habs miss a third year in a row, Bergevin should be out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

Yes, I also knew that without the spreadsheet. The spreadsheet shows without a doubt that the CH is clearly above average in the regular season but not as good in the playoffs 

 

A pet peace of mine is when someone claims something is true based on their opinion where data shows otherwise (e.g. climate change)

 

Right.  Does your data show what the average point totals were earlier in MB’s reign as GM, when he still had the core he inherited vs the performance after he put more of his stamp on the team?  Does it show the difference in the playoff performance in the first half of his reign vs when he changed the core.  Raw data without context is crap.  To come to the conclusion that his an above average GM bases on a overly simplistic analysis is crap as well.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 6

Share this post


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

The last GM to miss three playoffs during his tenure was Houle. Heck, Bergevin and Houle are the only 2 GMs in the last, I dunno, 30-40-50-60 years in Habs history to miss more the playoffs more than twice during their tenure. 

 

I'm neither a Bergevin apologist or basher, but to say he's above average just based on season points...blah. If the Habs miss a third year in a row, Bergevin should be out. 

No GM in the 60s or earlier missed the playoffs because were only 6 teams, a # which has been increasing since then and every GM now misses playoffs. Bergevin has exact same amount of cups as vast majority of todays GMs. Bowman, Holland, Tallon, Armstrong is it isn't it?

Also, who is best to replace Bergevin? Mcguire, or Roy...any other options?

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many playoff misses will it take before MB defenders think he should be fired, I wonder? If we miss this season, does that do the trick?

 

I don't see why Habs29's post has three downvotes. He is quite right that data requires context, and also quite right that - in the main - the longer MB has been GM, the worse the results have gotten. The overall uptick last year doesn't change the fact that the team still missed the playoffs, after all. If that's a fine season, then the bar is just too damned low around here.

 

The argument that the talent pool is good and the organization is now trending the right direction makes some sense. But saying that is quite different from redeeming MB's body of work to this point, which would indeed have been completely unacceptable for any Habs' GM prior to Bergevin. We may like the look of the future, but it hasn't happened yet. Taken as a whole - looking at what actually has happened, in terms of results - MB's career has been mediocre at best.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


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

No GM in the 60s or earlier missed the playoffs because were only 6 teams, a # which has been increasing since then and every GM now misses playoffs. Bergevin has exact same amount of cups as vast majority of todays GMs. Bowman, Holland, Tallon, Armstrong is it isn't it?

Also, who is best to replace Bergevin? Mcguire, or Roy...any other options?

 

I think you get my point. Fine, I’ll change it since 1967. It’s hard to win Cups if you don’t make the playoffs, which the Habs haven’t done in 3 of the past 4 seasons. I management person, I am not. I don’t know who a good candidate would be, but if the Habs go 3 straight years out of the playoffs, and 4 of 5 seasons, the GM isn’t getting the results.

 

Anyway, that’s cart before the horse stuff. I’m content seeing how the remainder of this offseason, and how the season plays out. But this entire conversation goes back to stating Bergevin is an above average GM. I don’t agree with that statement and the lack of playoff hockey, let alone playoff success, should be enough to prove that. 

Share this post


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

How many playoff misses will it take before MB defenders think he should be fired, I wonder? If we miss this season, does that do the trick?

 

I don't see why Habs29's post has three downvotes. He is quite right that data requires context, and also quite right that - in the main - the longer MB has been GM, the worse the results have gotten. The overall uptick last year doesn't change the fact that the team still missed the playoffs, after all. If that's a fine season, then the bar is just too damned low around here.

 

The argument that the talent pool is good and the organization is now trending the right direction makes some sense. But saying that is quite different from redeeming MB's body of work to this point, which would indeed have been completely unacceptable for any Habs' GM prior to Bergevin. We may like the look of the future, but it hasn't happened yet. Taken as a whole - looking at what actually has happened, in terms of results - MB's career has been mediocre at best.

 

 

With respect, the context being missed here is this team has gone into a full blown retool and building through youth for over a year now, expecting to make the playoffs during such a transition is setting the bar at an unrealistically high level to promote the rhetoric that he is continually failing. MB has not been very good during his tenure as a whole, he has also not been nearly as terrible as some make him out to be, the truth, as usual, is somewhere between both biased parties of the argument.

 

He mismanaged some assets and even an entire offseason, he has also surprisingly shown great poise and solid asset management and strategy since embarking on this retool, it has thus far been the beginning of a redemption story for him. If you are going to give the guy a chance to redeem himself from past mistakes, then you have to, at some point, put those mistakes in the past and judge him based on what he is doing while trying to redeem himself. I have little complaints since the retool started about him, with the exception of the current passive offseason, but I do understand the offseason is far from over and things can happen by training camp.

 

All in all, what I am seeing is a team with a top 5 prospect pool in the league, and miles away from any kind of cap hell, those are his dues to collect, there is no other regime to give credit to, there is no one else responsible for this current situation. So while it is easy for some people to continually pile on the dog poop about his past blunders, those same people are seemingly nowhere to be found when it comes to giving an honest unbiased assessment of his retool management. While I think it is easy enough to see why they steer clear of any positive assessment and only jump in the fray when there is mud to fling around and dead horses to beat on, it doesn't make it right by any stretch.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 5
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


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

How many playoff misses will it take before MB defenders think he should be fired, I wonder? If we miss this season, does that do the trick?

 

I don't see why Habs29's post has three downvotes. He is quite right that data requires context, and also quite right that - in the main - the longer MB has been GM, the worse the results have gotten. The overall uptick last year doesn't change the fact that the team still missed the playoffs, after all. If that's a fine season, then the bar is just too damned low around here.

 

The argument that the talent pool is good and the organization is now trending the right direction makes some sense. But saying that is quite different from redeeming MB's body of work to this point, which would indeed have been completely unacceptable for any Habs' GM prior to Bergevin. We may like the look of the future, but it hasn't happened yet. Taken as a whole - looking at what actually has happened, in terms of results - MB's career has been mediocre at best.

 

I’m a big MB defender because I think the job he’s done recently has been pretty good. The future looks bright and he has pieces to play with. 

 

Having said that, I’d be shocked if he’s around next year if they miss the playoffs. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like people might be eatin a lot of crow over the next few years! Habs are on the upswing and MB is at the helm of it. I’ve said it before and i’ll Say it again; There was a point I hated MB. But I’m frankly confused by the inability to see the positives that have come in the last year. 

 

That or I’ll be eatin crow ??‍♂️

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


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

How many playoff misses will it take before MB defenders think he should be fired, I wonder? If we miss this season, does that do the trick?

 

I don't see why Habs29's post has three downvotes. He is quite right that data requires context, and also quite right that - in the main - the longer MB has been GM, the worse the results have gotten.

 

 Raw data without context is crap.  To come to the conclusion that his an above average GM bases on a overly simplistic analysis is crap as well.

 

this wording is probably why. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My big issue with Bergevin is that he fails to address weaknesses on the team. He doesn't address them through trades or through free agency. 

 This is why this team does a tail spin the last 2 months of the season and when we get injuries to key players. And if we do get into the playoffs you can really see our teams weaknesses when we play physical teams with speed.

 I gave him credit on the Domi trade, and I also give him credit on drafting the last 3 years since he started drafting skill and speed over size and grit.

 But as long as he doesn't address our teams weaknesses we will always be a team that needs to fight down to the last game of the season to see if we get into the playoffs.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the salary cap era there is no perfect team.  Everyone has weaknesses, even your cup winners.  Expecting every weakness to be addressed is an impossible ask of any gm.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Commandant said:

In the salary cap era there is no perfect team.  Everyone has weaknesses, even your cup winners.  Expecting every weakness to be addressed is an impossible ask of any gm.

Lol that's a joke.  Are you a family member of Bergevin or something ? 

  • Downvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Link67 said:

 

 

With respect, the context being missed here is this team has gone into a full blown retool and building through youth for over a year now, expecting to make the playoffs during such a transition is setting the bar at an unrealistically high level to promote the rhetoric that he is continually failing. MB has not been very good during his tenure as a whole, he has also not been nearly as terrible as some make him out to be, the truth, as usual, is somewhere between both biased parties of the argument.

 

He mismanaged some assets and even an entire offseason, he has also surprisingly shown great poise and solid asset management and strategy since embarking on this retool, it has thus far been the beginning of a redemption story for him. If you are going to give the guy a chance to redeem himself from past mistakes, then you have to, at some point, put those mistakes in the past and judge him based on what he is doing while trying to redeem himself. I have little complaints since the retool started about him, with the exception of the current passive offseason, but I do understand the offseason is far from over and things can happen by training camp.

 

All in all, what I am seeing is a team with a top 5 prospect pool in the league, and miles away from any kind of cap hell, those are his dues to collect, there is no other regime to give credit to, there is no one else responsible for this current situation. So while it is easy for some people to continually pile on the dog poop about his past blunders, those same people are seemingly nowhere to be found when it comes to giving an honest unbiased assessment of his retool management. While I think it is easy enough to see why they steer clear of any positive assessment and only jump in the fray when there is mud to fling around and dead horses to beat on, it doesn't make it right by any stretch.

 

As I've said before, I have no real problem with people arguing that we are now at MB 2.0 - that as of the summer of 2018 or so, he switched gears and entered his second act as GM - and having faith that this time around it will all work out. Sure, I continue to believe it's unduly optimistic, but it's a defensible attitude.

 

My problem is when people try to argue that he's done a bang-up job for his tenure overall. Au contraire. He basically sucked balls (or if you prefer a more genteel phrasing, he was mediocre - "not very good for his tenure as a whole," as you put it). I never rule out the possibility of a guy learning and improving. I just wish we were putting our faith in someone who had a track record of success instead of failure.

 

I'll admit that I also resent the fact that he was never held accountable for the garbage he inflicted upon us for 6-7 years, as he protected his bum-buddies Therrien and Lefebvre instead of insisting on excellence - because this lack of accountability does not speak to a sound organizational culture, and it emanates from the very top, i.e., Kegmeister Molson. The track record is part of what dilutes my optimism about MB 2.0.

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Metallica said:

Lol that's a joke.  Are you a family member of Bergevin or something ? 

You have to be kidding me, there's a perfect team? 

STOP THE MADNESS

 

It's becoming the theme of the 2019 offseason

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Metallica said:

Lol that's a joke.  Are you a family member of Bergevin or something ? 

 

Its true.

 

Tell me what team is perfect and has no weaknesses. 

Tampa is the closest I've seen and they had Dan Girardi on their first pair defence last year, and lost in 4 straight in the first round. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...