Jump to content

How many times do you fire GM and/or coach before you realize it's the team??


Habsfan1989
 Share

Recommended Posts

I don't really understand the title to this thread. It indicates that the team players are at fault. Hmmmm are they trading drafting etc for each other? If it is the team do we fire 22 guys? I think if the team has a lack of talent that would be the GM's fault or the coach's fault for mishandling them. The current GM has been here for 5 years, the previous coach (le genius) was here for almost 5 years. How long do you give them before you realise they don't have the answers? This is a results based business, we have seen poor results. Now let's be honest Mark down ain't going anywhere, still has a long and I mean long contract, so he is ok for at least another 2 to 3 years. We are dealing with a Molson here not a Pegula.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I honestly think our center depth was fine when we had all of Plekanec, Eller, Desharnais and Galchenyuk touted as our next #1. Since then, we traded Eller, which many were and still are fine with. Then we traded Desharnais, which should have happened years ago, Plekanec regressed, Galchenyuk was injured and mishandled and Danault became our best center. 

 

I'm not so convinced that there's not a blurry line being drawn between Habs fans having wanted a top line center for the past two decades and organizational needs. I mean, at that time we didn't need a true #1 because we were legitimately able to roll four lines. This has since changed.  In addition, we weren't trading Desharnais (Defense: Davidson) or Eller (Draft Picks) for an upgrade at center anyway and we were trying to get rid of them.  I believe Therrien was going to eventually have Galchenyuk playing center full time but only now do we have a different coach who is hopefully not going in a different direction with him. 

 

I dont mind Galchenyuk playing wing. But when it is also such an obvious organizational need to need a skilled center, you have to play the cards you're dealt.

 

I still think this season is a complete aberration of the perception that should be given to Galchenyuk. He had a rough year to an extent but I believe he could be a first line center as soon as next year. My opinion matters not if the Habs organization don't tread water carefully though. We should have other teams concerned about covering Galchenyuk; we shouldn't worry as much about Gakchenyuk defending the pluggers who will be matched up to defend our top line. 

 

What we really need to acquire this off season is a top 6 center. The list Commandant showed was nice, and I would have been after every one of them, outside of the no clauses, but in this off season, we definitely need to acquire a top 6 center. While it would be nice, it doesn't have to be a first liner as long as the coach plays his cards right. If we acquire a top 6 center and Danault is still not off the first line? I'll have issue that we didn't get a top 3 center, leaving no doubt in the coaches mind who should be our first line center, only then.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. I found myself missing Eller this year. For years I had been vocal about DD needing to go. Im not sure how Eller and DD both go with no suitable player being brought in. Ott was admitting that DD is not a viable bottom 6 player.

 

I find Bergevin is constantly a step behind. Doing things at trade deadline that are obvious flaws from pre-season. But is never a step ahead of the curb in using trade deadline to make that move to give the team its edge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm perfectly fine with Danault replacing Eller. 

 

I'm not so fine with Danault replacing Desharnais. Someone on a different board made the point that he sees Danault as a guy getting prime minutes and not deserving it (there's advanced stats showing Pacioretty plays better when not with Danault and actually allows less goals with Chuck at centre but hey that's advanced stats feel free to act like it's hocus pocus) and that'll lead to his next contract getting him paid $4 million and being a guy taking a spot better suited for someone better.

 

It's all fear and stuff not happening but if Montreal looks at 40 points from Danault despite poor play on the first line and an absent playoffs, and decides that's good enough for the top six next season, it's fear realized.

 

Danault is a great choice for the third line. He needs to stay 50 feet away from the top six.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

I'm perfectly fine with Danault replacing Eller. 

 

I'm not so fine with Danault replacing Desharnais. Someone on a different board made the point that he sees Danault as a guy getting prime minutes and not deserving it (there's advanced stats showing Pacioretty plays better when not with Danault and actually allows less goals with Chuck at centre but hey that's advanced stats feel free to act like it's hocus pocus) and that'll lead to his next contract getting him paid $4 million and being a guy taking a spot better suited for someone better.

 

It's all fear and stuff not happening but if Montreal looks at 40 points from Danault despite poor play on the first line and an absent playoffs, and decides that's good enough for the top six next season, it's fear realized.

 

Danault is a great choice for the third line. He needs to stay 50 feet away from the top six.

 

Danault is Desharnais 2.0

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

I'm perfectly fine with Danault replacing Eller. 

 

I'm not so fine with Danault replacing Desharnais. Someone on a different board made the point that he sees Danault as a guy getting prime minutes and not deserving it (there's advanced stats showing Pacioretty plays better when not with Danault and actually allows less goals with Chuck at centre but hey that's advanced stats feel free to act like it's hocus pocus) and that'll lead to his next contract getting him paid $4 million and being a guy taking a spot better suited for someone better.

 

It's all fear and stuff not happening but if Montreal looks at 40 points from Danault despite poor play on the first line and an absent playoffs, and decides that's good enough for the top six next season, it's fear realized.

 

Danault is a great choice for the third line. He needs to stay 50 feet away from the top six.

 

Absolutely. Eller was a bottom-6er. So is Danault - an upgrade on Eller IMHO. He is not David Desharnais 2.0, because unlike DD he is a complete player.

 

A few years ago, DD was actually a decent 2nd-line C. He produced offence. Then he stopped producing it. That - believe it or not - has left a void. So has Pleks's regression. It's one thing not to have the Stud #1 C everyone covets. Not even having a decent 2nd-line C is a joke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Absolutely. Eller was a bottom-6er. So is Danault - an upgrade on Eller IMHO. He is not David Desharnais 2.0, because unlike DD he is a complete player.

 

A few years ago, DD was actually a decent 2nd-line C. He produced offence. Then he stopped producing it. That - believe it or not - has left a void. So has Pleks's regression. It's one thing not to have the Stud #1 C everyone covets. Not even having a decent 2nd-line C is a joke.

 

I think only Arizona has a worse top six if Galchenyuk is at the wing. Maybe I'm wrong but I can't think of another team with a weaker top six than Danault/Plekanec except Dvorak/Martinook. 

 

By my estimation, the bottom five top six centre duos in the league would be:

 

26. Carolina Staal/Rask

27. New Jersey Zajac/Henrique

28. Detroit Zetterberg/Nielsen

29. Montreal Danault/Plekanec

30. Arizona Dvorak/Martinook

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

 

I think only Arizona has a worse top six if Galchenyuk is at the wing. Maybe I'm wrong but I can't think of another team with a weaker top six than Danault/Plekanec except Dvorak/Martinook. 

 

By my estimation, the bottom five top six centre duos in the league would be:

 

26. Carolina Staal/Rask

27. New Jersey Zajac/Henrique

28. Detroit Zetterberg/Nielsen

29. Montreal Danault/Plekanec

30. Arizona Dvorak/Martinook

Galchenyuk/Plekanec will fall to 30th...no difference

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, THE Bobby Orr said:

Galchenyuk/Plekanec will fall to 30th...no difference

 

 

Are you seriously calling Galchenyuk a worse centre than Dvorak or Martinook? You do want your opinion to be taken seriously here right? Or just admit you were talking out of your ass. That's fine too.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i am saying that galchenyuk is not a center...and you don;t have to take my opinion seriously

 

Ps..i don't take your opinion too seriously either M...Chuck is 6th C on the Habs depth chart behind Ott and Michell...behind Shaw...he is sixth in the minds of MT, Muller, Julien and MB.  But soemhow i'm supposed to take you seriously??? Really ?  yeaah right...have a good summer bro. and keep drinking plently of that kool-aid 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stogey24
2 hours ago, THE Bobby Orr said:

i am saying that galchenyuk is not a center...and you don;t have to take my opinion seriously

 

Ps..i don't take your opinion too seriously either M...Chuck is 6th C on the Habs depth chart behind Ott and Michell...behind Shaw...he is sixth in the minds of MT, Muller, Julien and MB.  But soemhow i'm supposed to take you seriously??? Really ?  yeaah right...have a good summer bro. and keep drinking plently of that kool-aid 

Ok bud. Bit of a stretch there

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Stogey24 said:

Ok bud. Bit of a stretch there

how is this a stretch when the GM says in very clear words that he is a winger??? He cannot crack a line-up that has 5 other centers ahead of him.  He simply is not a center ...by the logic of some ppl here if Galchenyuk is a #1-2 center then i could just as easily say Pax or Radu or Arturi should be a C.  But i wouldn't be taken seriously but (LOL) i.m supposed to take someone who is delusional about this player seriously.  sorry take a cold shower.  last time i looked,  MB CJ, Muller are still running the show and Chucky's playing center well... that ship has sailed.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, THE Bobby Orr said:

how is this a stretch when the GM says in very clear words that he is a winger??? He cannot crack a line-up that has 5 other centers ahead of him.  He simply is not a center ...by the logic of some ppl here if Galchenyuk is a #1-2 center then i could just as easily say Pax or Radu or Arturi should be a C.  

 

He would surely be a top-6 C - probably a PPG C, or thereabouts - on a team that was willing to tolerate one-dimensional centremen. Therein lies the frustration. I think you're right that he looks increasingly unlikely to be that C in this organization, however.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, THE Bobby Orr said:

i am saying that galchenyuk is not a center...and you don;t have to take my opinion seriously

 

Ps..i don't take your opinion too seriously either M...Chuck is 6th C on the Habs depth chart behind Ott and Michell...behind Shaw...he is sixth in the minds of MT, Muller, Julien and MB.  But soemhow i'm supposed to take you seriously??? Really ?  yeaah right...have a good summer bro. and keep drinking plently of that kool-aid 

 

I'm not convinced this isn't a troll account.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, THE Bobby Orr said:

Chuck is 6th C on the Habs depth chart behind Ott and Michell...behind Shaw...he is sixth in the minds of MT, Muller, Julien and MB. 

Just because you say this constantly doesn't mean it's true. Game six. Last two faceoffs? Galchenyuk. Most important faceoffs of the entire year and he gives it to the guy that's sixth on the depth chart?

 

It's pretty obvious to me that Bergevin doesn't like Galchenyuk while Julien was trying to teach him a lesson. The mistake is when he tried to teach him a lesson late in the year. Should have just let him play and work with him game by game but Julien wanted to work tough love. That's why Bergevin and Julien contradicted each other at the press conference. Julien said he was ideally a centre.

 

But next time just admit you haven't watched the Coyotes play instead of talking out of your ass. Would save you a lot of face and not have you accused of being a troll account.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Lovett's Magnatones said:

Hey, how about this scenario? Very likely in my mind. What if they don't upgrade the center and Danault pulls a 2013-2014 Lars Eller? There's no guarantee Danault can get 40 points again. Then what's the center depth look like? Yikes.

 

I don't think Danault gets 40 points if he's not playing with Max/Radulov. 

 

Remember DD was a 50-60 point guy at times when playing with Max at LW and some combo of Gallagher/Vanek/Cole on RW those years. 

 

His production is obviously going to do down, further down the lineup. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Commandant said:

 

I don't think Danault gets 40 points if he's not playing with Max/Radulov. 

 

Remember DD was a 50-60 point guy at times when playing with Max at LW and some combo of Gallagher/Vanek/Cole on RW those years. 

 

His production is obviously going to do down, further down the lineup. 

 

They need to get somebody if they want to play the Galchenyuk is Not a Center game. They could have 60 points between their top 2 centers.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Lovett's Magnatones said:

 

They need to get somebody if they want to play the Galchenyuk is Not a Center game. They could have 60 points between their top 2 centers.

 

 

 

Look, it's obvious that the uncertainty around Galchenyuk's suitability for C means that the Habs absolutely have to acquire at least one top-6 C. At least. Where I maybe differ from many fans is that I don't think the team has to fixate on a stud #1C. That would be ideal, but one or two 55-60-point C would mark a huge upgrade relative to the pathetic place where the team is now. Even acquiring one  such C will probably be too 'tough' for our idiot GM, of course; but I really think this is the approach a realistic team would adopt.

 

Get 1-2 guys like that, and you can stick Galy at W all you like. Problem solved, except for people who make a fetish out of the Ryan Getzlaf-type dominant #1C.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On April 27, 2017 at 5:35 PM, habs rule said:

I don't really understand the title to this thread. It indicates that the team players are at fault. Hmmmm are they trading drafting etc for each other? If it is the team do we fire 22 guys? I think if the team has a lack of talent that would be the GM's fault or the coach's fault for mishandling them. The current GM has been here for 5 years, the previous coach (le genius) was here for almost 5 years. How long do you give them before you realise they don't have the answers? This is a results based business, we have seen poor results. Now let's be honest Mark down ain't going anywhere, still has a long and I mean long contract, so he is ok for at least another 2 to 3 years. We are dealing with a Molson here not a Pegula.

The point to this topic is we have fired coachs and gm's, but we get the same result every time on the ice. So what I am asking is it time to blow up the core of this team? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Habsfan1989 said:

The point to this topic is we have fired coachs and gm's, but we get the same result every time on the ice. So what I am asking is it time to blow up the core of this team? 

So who is going to blow the core up? The Gm who put it together? Isn't that the definition of insanity? When the core needs to go, 1st guy fired is the GM. No? This guy has had 5 years to and accomplished basically nothing. You would like him to start over? I don't get it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stogey24
46 minutes ago, habs rule said:

So who is going to blow the core up? The Gm who put it together? Isn't that the definition of insanity? When the core needs to go, 1st guy fired is the GM. No? This guy has had 5 years to and accomplished basically nothing. You would like him to start over? I don't get it.

Ya, Beregvin had his chance. He's not leading a rebuild 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Stogey24 said:

Ya, Beregvin had his chance. He's not leading a rebuild 

Correct, as there wont be one, nor is one needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't blow up the core. Fire the GM and replace him with one who understands how to draft and develop talent, and one who is actually competent to identify and address real problems (scoring) rather than make-believe ones ('leadership'). 

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...