Jump to content

Fire Bergevin


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

Hey, I can say this: "Potaeto, Potahto" 😁

 

Agreed, the Sens D were bad, even if people are willing to trade for Gudbranson and Cobourn, they are still bad defencemen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Commandant said:

Agreed, the Sens D were bad, even if people are willing to trade for Gudbranson and Cobourn, they are still bad defencemen. 

Are those two worse than Gustafsson and Merrill?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

Are those two worse than Gustafsson and Merrill?

 

Merrill is terrible as a RD.  He is not bad on the left side.   He's the best of the 4 defencemen.

 

Gudbranson and Cobourn are at the same level as say Jack Johnson.  They are supposed to be good defensive defencemen with no offence, but they are actually bad defensively too.  We saw the Habs exploit Johnson last year in the bubble against Pittsburgh. 

 

Gustafsson is a PP specialist who is useless defensively.  I'd still put him ahead of Gudbranson and Cobourn though cause at least he does one thing well.  They don't. 

 

But overall, one of these D is passable as third pairing guy on the left side.  The other three are terrible and we are just arguing degrees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

Merrill is terrible as a RD.  He is not bad on the left side.   He's the best of the 4 defencemen.

 

Gudbranson and Cobourn are at the same level as say Jack Johnson.  They are supposed to be good defensive defencemen with no offence, but they are actually bad defensively too.  We saw the Habs exploit Johnson last year in the bubble against Pittsburgh. 

 

Gustafsson is a PP specialist who is useless defensively.  I'd still put him ahead of Gudbranson and Cobourn though cause at least he does one thing well.  They don't. 

 

But overall, one of these D is passable as third pairing guy on the left side.  The other three are terrible and we are just arguing degrees.


i had seen that ! Merril better at LD !

Glad I am not the only one 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something tells me the playoffs the last 2 years may of just saved his job. Other wise it would of be what 6 straight years not making the playoffs?  Unless Bergevin doesn't want to be GM in Montreal anymore I don't see him leaving.  I can see Molson giving him another 3-5 year deal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Habsfan89 said:

Something tells me the playoffs the last 2 years may of just saved his job. Other wise it would of be what 6 straight years not making the playoffs? 

 

Yes, if we ignore years that playoffs were made.... the number of straight years missing the playoffs goes up. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Commandant said:

Yes, if we ignore years that playoffs were made.... the number of straight years missing the playoffs goes up. 

 

They've made three of the last six playoffs. Once in a year where they finished 12th in the conference and once where they got in solely because of the divisional format. That is terrible. I had high hopes many times since the bubble last summer, but in the end, this team is still not good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Fanpuck33 said:

 

They've made three of the last six playoffs. Once in a year where they finished 12th in the conference and once where they got in solely because of the divisional format. That is terrible. I had high hopes many times since the bubble last summer, but in the end, this team is still not good.

 

All of that is debateable. 

 

saying, if they didn't make the playoffs they would have missed 6 in a row... is just not a good argument.  Yes, its technically correct, but at the same time, if we ignore the 4 years the leafs made the playoffs they would have missed 10 in a row is also true, but again a bad argument cause if you have to ignore some years to make your point, its not that effective. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

All of that is debateable. 

 

saying, if they didn't make the playoffs they would have missed 6 in a row... is just not a good argument.  Yes, its technically correct, but at the same time, if we ignore the 4 years the leafs made the playoffs they would have missed 10 in a row is also true, but again a bad argument cause if you have to ignore some years to make your point, its not that effective. 

The leafs did a full rebuild. Bergevin took over a team that was a true number one center and depth scoring away from making a cup final and maybe wining a cup, and he turned it into a retool and wasting the prime of price and the few years left of usefulness we could of got out of weber in a playoff run.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Habsfan89 said:

The leafs did a full rebuild. Bergevin took over a team that was a true number one center and depth scoring away from making a cup final and maybe wining a cup, and he turned it into a retool and wasting the prime of price and the few years left of usefulness we could of got out of weber in a playoff run.  

 

Again, none of that changes my point... you can't just say, if these years didn't happen, the streak would be 6. 

 

Its the same thing as that Leafs website tweeting last week that if Matthews didn't struggle for like 2.5 weeks in the middle of the season, he'd challenge McDavid for the Hart..... well yeah, that might be true (I still doubt it), but even if it is true, that's just the way things are.  You can't remove those weeks from the season, they happened.  Just like making the playoffs in 3 of the last 6 seasons happened and we can't just ignore them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do think it's valid to say that the Bubble last year was a bit of a freak stroke of luck. Had a once-in-a-century pandemic event not struck, the team would not have been artificially leveraged into the playoffs. So to gloat that the team "made the playoffs" last year occludes more than it reveals, one could argue.

 

In any case, two first-round exits and three missed playoffs is hardly an inspiring record.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

I do think it's valid to say that the Bubble last year was a bit of a freak stroke of luck. Had a once-in-a-century pandemic event not struck, the team would not have been artificially leveraged into the playoffs. So to gloat that the team "made the playoffs" last year occludes more than it reveals, one could argue.

 

In any case, two first-round exits and three missed playoffs is hardly an inspiring record.

 

Sure, but saying six straight both ignores this year, and 2017.  Two years where they legit made the playoffs. 

 

Even if you consider last year a miss... its 3 straight, not 6.

 

If you want to consider when the exits were, and they were first round, then fine... do that. 

Just don't be disingenous and say, it'd be six straight if we ignored the years they made it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Commandant said:

All of that is debateable. 

 

saying, if they didn't make the playoffs they would have missed 6 in a row... is just not a good argument.  Yes, its technically correct, but at the same time, if we ignore the 4 years the leafs made the playoffs they would have missed 10 in a row is also true, but again a bad argument cause if you have to ignore some years to make your point, its not that effective. 

 

I wasn't agreeing with the original suggestion that they've essentially missed 6 playoffs in a row. There is a true playoff appearance in that span. But you have to admit that last season and this season come with a serious asterisk. Find me one person who would debate that the Habs would have surged into a wild card position if last season not been interupted. I'll give you that this season is somewhat debatable given the unbalanced scheduling making it difficult to compare teams.  Either way, is sneaking into the playoffs as the final seed really significant progress?  Is this Columbus where they're just happy to get in?

 

We'll see what happens against the Leafs, but the chances are pretty good that in those six years they will not have won a single playoff series. The closest they've come was the 5 game pre-playoff play-in series. Most teams would be on their 3rd GM with those kind of results. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Commandant said:

 

Again, none of that changes my point... you can't just say, if these years didn't happen, the streak would be 6. 

 

Its the same thing as that Leafs website tweeting last week that if Matthews didn't struggle for like 2.5 weeks in the middle of the season, he'd challenge McDavid for the Hart..... well yeah, that might be true (I still doubt it), but even if it is true, that's just the way things are.  You can't remove those weeks from the season, they happened.  Just like making the playoffs in 3 of the last 6 seasons happened and we can't just ignore them. 

What are you talking about, last year we would of missed the playoffs that's a fact. And this year we would of missed the playoffs too.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Habsfan89 said:

What are you talking about, last year we would of missed the playoffs that's a fact. And this year we would of missed the playoffs too.  

Lat time I checked NHL.com, the habs made the playoffs last year and this year. Habs are 100% two for two to make the playoffs, two years in a row.

 

That is reason to celebrate, isn't it?

 

:wavetowel::wavetowel::wavetowel::wavetowel::wavetowel::wavetowel:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Fanpuck33 said:

 

I wasn't agreeing with the original suggestion that they've essentially missed 6 playoffs in a row. There is a true playoff appearance in that span. But you have to admit that last season and this season come with a serious asterisk. Find me one person who would debate that the Habs would have surged into a wild card position if last season not been interupted. I'll give you that this season is somewhat debatable given the unbalanced scheduling making it difficult to compare teams.  Either way, is sneaking into the playoffs as the final seed really significant progress?  Is this Columbus where they're just happy to get in?

 

We'll see what happens against the Leafs, but the chances are pretty good that in those six years they will not have won a single playoff series. The closest they've come was the 5 game pre-playoff play-in series. Most teams would be on their 3rd GM with those kind of results. 

 

I agree they werent' going to make the playoffs last year.

 

Being happy with being a playoff team this year doesn't mean I'm happy and consider this year to be the end result.  Teams typically progress in steps.  I didn't expect to go from last year's team to cup winner right away, and no one should have. That said the extension I'd give would be short term and we'd need to see the team take another step next year (and that step would likely need to be as a result of further development of Suzuki, KK, Romanov, Caufield's)

You want to see the team make the playoffs cause that is progression. 

 

It isn't the end goal, but this isn't the year to be a contender yet either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't get me wrong at the start of the year I said Bergevin did a great job and it was up to the coaches and players now.  But at the end of the day it's the GM the brings in the coaches and players so it will always fall on him.  If we didn't make the playoffs this year it would of been his job, so I don't think Molson will let him go unless Bergevin wants to go. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn’t they miss the playoffs two years ago by a point and had more wins that the las team to qualify in the west?

 

that has to count for something like “if they were in the Wes they would have made the playoffs three years straight” 

 

right ?! Right?! :tigi: my brain is going to explode from thinking so hard !!! 
 

baked potato

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

Didn’t they miss the playoffs two years ago by a point and had more wins that the las team to qualify in the west?

 

that has to count for something like “if they were in the Wes they would have made the playoffs three years straight” 

 

right ?! Right?! :tigi: my brain is going to explode from thinking so hard !!! 
 

baked potato

There is a big difference in saying that if we were in the west we would have made it, and being MOVED temporarily because of the pandemic into a Canadian division fir ONE year. Are we better than TBL,TOR, FLO, BOS this year?? Will we be better than them next year??? I know that we are better than BUF and OTT and will probably be better than them next year.  With BOS another year older and with potentially some lineup moves it’s possible we are better, depending on how our lineup changes. 
 

As far as gradual improvements and taking the next steps go, some our players may take the next step, but that is probably going to countered by further regression by some of our older players. Calgary at the start of the 2019-20 season felt they had a great D and good D prospects coming in, well, Giordano fell off a cliff, and the young players didn’t progress as expected.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

Didn’t they miss the playoffs two years ago by a point and had more wins that the las team to qualify in the west?

 

that has to count for something like “if they were in the Wes they would have made the playoffs three years straight” 

 

right ?! Right?! :tigi: my brain is going to explode from thinking so hard !!! 
 

baked potato

 

To be fair one would then have to look at all the years they made the playoffs and see if the reverse were true (i.e., wouldn't have made the playoffs if they were in the west) ... but in the world of the unbalanced schedule neither makes any sense as it is an apples and oranges comparison

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think what does matter though is that the 2019 team had the most points ever for a team that didn't make the playoffs.  That certainly indicates that team was good enough to be a playoff team, as it would have been in every other year. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Commandant said:

I think what does matter though is that the 2019 team had the most points ever for a team that didn't make the playoffs.  That certainly indicates that team was good enough to be a playoff team, as it would have been in every other year. 


being the first loser doesn’t make you a winner.

I assume you’re being sarcastic because otherwise that post is junk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, hockeyrealist said:


being the first loser doesn’t make you a winner.

I assume you’re being sarcastic because otherwise that post is junk.

He’s not being sarcastic. Since it seems you didn’t understand, he’s saying that the team was a playoff capable team, whether or not they made the playoffs. This has happened before, and it will happen again. He wasn’t handing out a consolation trophy for effort, despite them having missed the playoffs.

 

How many times do we see people saying negative things about the Habs when they do make the playoffs? But we’re not allowed to say positive things about the Habs when they miss the playoffs with the highest point total to miss of all

time? 

 

Quite frankly, your post is more junk thank his.

 

I think all this recent discussion is better fit for after actually losing our playoff series. Yes, we are definitely the underdogs. In any series before looking at names on a paper, any team has a 50% chance of losing a series, so of course no one can guarantee that we will beat the Leafs. With that being said, it happens all the time where players and teams play well above expectation. Let’s give the Habs a chance to perform in a week’s time, rather than have this useless conversation. Any decision about Bergevin should hinge on the team’s performance these playoffs, which we have still yet to see. If we lose in 4 or 5, I am completely fine with Bergevin being shown the door.
 

At this point in time? One week before playoffs? It’s not even a topic on my mind. 

 

 

  • Upvote 2
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...