huzer

Let's see, former player, speaks french, has executive experience. Seems to check all of the GM resume screening criteria boxes!

The hyperbole of "worst GM ever", I don't think that belief was widely held here. However, if you take his more recent body of work (last 5 years) the "above average" starts to fade a bit, even just going by something as simple as points in the standings. Habs drop to 20th over the past 5 years. I think the fade would've been more acceptable had the team started to field bonafide prospects, but the lack of drafted players cracking the roster (whether picks were traded, prospects traded, etc is irrelevant) while the team was also getting progressively worse meant a change was needed. The root cause of the lack of drafting and development also falls at the feet of the GM, as ultimately, he's responsible for that. One would like the think the goal of a sports franchise is to draft and develop all of their own players. While a team of 100% draftees is certainly a pipe dream, the Habs should have more top 9, top 4 "homegrown" players than they do. In a nutshell (and much like @The Chicoutimi Cucumber said, this points to Bergevin inheriting a decent team, being unable to draft and develop the replacement players as the inherited team "aged out", and now no homegrown youth to lead the charge.

Debbie downer chiming in again, so for the Habs to finish between 11-20, you expect them to post an above 500 record the remainder of the year? Going back to the last full season, teams that finished in the 11-20 spot were above 500 (including the OT loser point). To get to about 83 points, which would be the 11th spot in 2018-2019, the Habs will have to go something along the lines of 35-25-3 over their last 63 games. Picking 20th means they're in the playoffs and finish the year at a 42-18-3 rate (97pts).

Wideman and Niku were the healthy scratches. So if vets were supposedly "irked" (which is completely just a guess on your part), what, did they want Niku and Wideman in and roll the team with 10 forwards and 8 d? Or maybe they're mad Caufield was in and Belzile was returned to Laval?

Right, the team was poor prior to losing our 4th liners, and it's still poor. My point basically being a reporter waving a banner of "look at the prospects!", when ultimately, they aren't any better than the low level fruit they are replacing. Whoop-d-doo, we had warm bodies we can call up as injury fill ins. Plan the parade! As far as throwing in the towel, consider the towel thrown in. Nothing left to do but ride this dumpster fire of a team to a (hopeful) good draft pick. I've been a Habs fan since the late 70s and suffered through the Houle years like many others. But really, this period of ineptitude can't even be considered the Houle years anymore. it's been 28 years of nothing but glimmers of hope every few years, and long periods of darkness. This current crop of players is a rudderless ship.

That's a humorous take from Grant, given the only reason they are in the lineup is because Edmundson, Hoffman, Perreault, Byron, Weber, Price, Allen, Paquette are injured. They are not in the lineup because they have wowed and deserved a "merit" call up. So the Habs had 5 "drafted and developed between 2017-2019" players in the lineup, and they lost 6-0. At this point, I'd prefer waiver fodder in the lineup, and the drafted kids get developed in the AHL, where they should be.

If we, random internet people, could pluck a GM out of the air, we may be more than just random internet people. I don't think anyone here is plugged in to the hockey executive world, and probably much less the french hockey executive world. As far as trading/drafting lower, you wouldn't have to trade as much if you could internally develop. Generally on a contending roster, you're filling in the complementary pieces at the trade deadline more than doing roster shakeups. At some point, 10 years of swings and misses at draft picks, and be unable to land one impact player out of 77 draft picks points to either poor scouting or poor development. I'll even dial it back and say one top 6 forward (Caufield may eventually be that, so 1 top 6 forward in 77 picks, 1 top 4 dman in Romanov). This isn't a case of overlooking players and revisionist history. This is a case of where's the beef?

It's ok if you think that Bergevin is the top choice for Montreal's GM. The mere existence of this thread indicates that many others will disagree. One thing that can be agreed upon is that the Habs internal drafting and development under the past few GMs has not been good. The Habs are now up against the cap because they have not been able to develop their youth, which would have allowed several years of cost control for above average talent. Instead, they have to pay middle tier money to a lot of average players that they have been forced to acquire due to poor internal development. Bergevin inexplicably keeping Lefebvre for so long while he produced absolutely nothing is a fatal flaw.

I may be the only one that was a bit nervous with Primeau's play. While he made some big saves, there were a lot of out of position moments that the Rangers were unable to take advantage of.

Well, if his stats say top 20 D, do Drouin’s stats say top 20 C, since that’s what position he was sold as after the trade? Or heck, let’s ignore that and see if he’s top 20 at LW. The Habs still have glaring holes at D, and at C. In the long run, this trade has accomplished nothing for the Habs. Really though, this is somewhat of an odd post, as this is routinely a trade that is panned, and Timmins given high marks for drafting Sergachev. I think most people simply believe the Habs would be better off today with Sergachev vs Drouin.

GMs and coaches are also guaranteed contracts. When they get fired, they still get paid. Like Julien is still getting his $5M for not coaching this year. If you want the ability to cut a player with no repercussion, then the salary cap will need to be significantly higher, as players will still want significantly higher compensation for the sake of having no guarantee. All of a sudden, your David Savards are getting $8M year, and fans will STILL be crying foul!, even though it isn't their money...

Well, if there’s a positive, this forum exists because of folks that bonded on ESPN boards during those dark years. So there’s that, I guess.

I think the only way to clean house in Montreal is some (non-victim) related scandal. I can't pretend to know any french speaking executive with experience other than the folks I've heard of here, Madden, Darche, Roy. I think Madden is waiting in the wings behind Murray in Anaheim. I'm just not educated enough in this area to even fathom a guess.

Meh, I don't blame Savard for being forced to play above where he should be slotted.

Ooof.