Marc Bergevin - Take It Or Leave It Edition

[Cobra Commander]

Keith
2020 1st

For

Poehling
2019 2nd
Alzner
Shlemko
Benn

 

[OldCraig71]

No we can't. However, GM still believes in that anything can happen crap, so that's not going away anytime soon. He's going to show his true colors again the minute he's within striking distance from the playoffs at the TDL.

That is the fear but hopefully he has less power to make those kinds of moves, I do not want us to add another veteran defender near the end of his career, we are not the Washington Capitals here needing a missing depth piece. We are a middle of the road team that needs some more top 6 talent before we get to the status where we are adding at the tdl.

 

[CrAzYNiNe]

Of course you have no issue with the objectionable posts. Go Habs Go and all that feel-good stuff right back at ya.

Hey, why not take it a small step further while we're at it and support the GM. The franchise is not in "disarray". Go Marc go, I say. I have no issue with supporting the GM. I wish they were trying to get rid themselves of all posts attacking him.

I can forgive, but I can never forget. I can forgive his egomaniac attitude. His total lack of experience for the position. His inability to make non emotional judgements time and time again. But I can't forget how he turned what I thought was contending roster into a team of spare parts...

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

This is a myth of your making. 2 superstars on the verge of breaking out?

Yes, both have a good shot to end up in the HOF by the end of their respective careers. We don't have anyone coming up who will be close to either one of those guys. If you think we've got somebody better, please let me know who they are so I can have a good laugh.

 

[Andrei79]

News to me that any player who is on the wrong side of 35, with a 5 year contract is a viable target, especially for the expansion draft.

Who are we protecting at the expansion draft? You want that expansion draft slot flexibility regardless of who. You're also protecting whoever the GM will be acquiring in the time frame leading to it -- why tie your hands up with such an old player? Having an expansion draft slot can be the difference maker in the team landing a player that a talent -rich team is not willing to lose over nothing.

Keith is not an option unless the Hawks pay through the nose and I don't think they will.

You said he was on the verge of a precipice. He's not. He's still very much a top player and would instantly be our top LH D by a mile. He'd be our no.2 after Weber. He has 4 years remaining after this one, he doesn't have a significant injury history... scratch that he's basically never been injured. He's as sound an acquisition as resigning Markov was at 35.

I'm of the mind this team should rebuild. But, if the team is truly looking at a LH Ds and wants to compete in the next few years while Weber and Price are still good players, then he'd a sounder acquisition than anything else most GMs can come up with.

And expansion flexibility is all fine and dandy, but it's also synonymous to your team not having enough good players to protect to start with, not exactly the problem I'm hoping we have by that point, not if management still wishes to compete over a rebuild. So, we protect Petry, Weber and Keith (assuming none of the three are traded/waive their NTC/NMCs) and take the chance at losing one of Juulsen/Mete. Or, we trade one of/both of these two for a team with "flexibility" (a bad team)... or even to Seattle in a deal that sees them take some other contract during the expansion draft.

I mean, we're assuming here that there's 1. We're going to have that flexibility at that point without such a trade 2. No other players would be moved 3. A more talented player or equal talented player at a younger age than Keith is atm will be available and we'll have the right price (*cough*Sergachev*cough*) to acquire him.

In any case, I don't see the Hawks pay through the nose to trade Keith. It makes no sense to me personnally. They'll ask for a high price because he's a great player on manageable cap hit. Maybe if we can rob them without touching any of our top prospects(Suzuki,Brook,Poehling) or 1st rounders [and also assuming the team will make moves to compete], but I don't see that happening.

 

[Habs Icing]

Look at the rosters of winning teams. Chicago, Pittsburgh, LA, Tampa, Washington, Boston, etc. Their rosters had/have well built cores that stayed together for awhile. The Habs roster shifted a lot in three years because it was filled with short-term bandaids.

And you want to perpetuate that by trading vets who are contributing to the team? Aren't you proving my point?

Domi, Drouin, Shaw, Danault, Tatar, Gallagher, Lehkonen, Armia, Byron, Koko Puffs, Price, Weber, Petry and Juulsen are not short term bandaids yet some of the names on that list are the ones bandied about in trade wishes. Anyone not on that list and on the team you can trade. Anyone on that list I wouldn't be against trading but it would have to improve the team now and not in 3, 4, 5 years. Otherwise you're doing what you said we have done in the past.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

And you want to perpetuate that by trading vets who are contributing to the team? Aren't you proving my point?

Domi, Drouin, Shaw, Danault, Tatar, Gallagher, Lehkonen, Armia, Byron, Koko Puffs, Price, Weber, Petry and Juulsen are not short term bandaids yet some of the names on that list are the ones bandied about in trade wishes. Anyone not on that list and on the team you can trade. Anyone on that list I wouldn't be against trading but it would have to improve the team now and not in 3, 4, 5 years. Otherwise you're doing what you said we have done in the past.

We may have made the odd futures trade but it hasn't been something that we've done consistently. And that's a big reason why we don't have the number of superstars that cup winning teams do.

There are times to trade for vets. I'd have done this a few years back for example... but when you're not in the hunt for a cup and you aren't going to be anytime soon, then it makes sense to deal for futures. It doesn't have to be this year or at the deadline but in the summer we could do it. There's just no reason not to. I don't really care about missing out on 8th place if it means we're going to get talent to help us win in the future.

 

[Habs Icing]

We may have made the odd futures trade but it hasn't been something that we've done consistently. And that's a big reason why we don't have the number of superstars that cup winning teams do.

There are times to trade for vets. I'd have done this a few years back for example... but when you're not in the hunt for a cup and you aren't going to be anytime soon, then it makes sense to deal for futures. It doesn't have to be this year or at the deadline but in the summer we could do it. There's just no reason not to. I don't really care about missing out on 8th place if it means we're going to get talent to help us win in the future.

Name me the superstars on the last 10 Cup winning teams: Chicago, Pittsburgh, L.A. Washington, Boston. If our definitions of superstar are similar then you will find there weren't that many superstars on each of those teams.

 

[Runner77]

That is the fear but hopefully he has less power to make those kinds of moves, I do not want us to add another veteran defender near the end of his career, we are not the Washington Capitals here needing a missing depth piece. We are a middle of the road team that needs some more top 6 talent before we get to the status where we are adding at the tdl.

We kinda are the Washington Capitals or we could be. Let's be them when they cut bait with Alzner and didn't attempt to re-sign him. Let's do the same with Benn and Schlemko -- cut bait.

 

[Runner77]

You said he was on the verge of a precipice. He's not. He's still very much a top player and would instantly be our top LH D by a mile. He'd be our no.2 after Weber. He has 4 years remaining after this one, he doesn't have a significant injury history... scratch that he's basically never been injured. He's as sound an acquisition as resigning Markov was at 35.

I'm of the mind this team should rebuild. But, if the team is truly looking at a LH Ds and wants to compete in the next few years while Weber and Price are still good players, then he'd a sounder acquisition than anything else most GMs can come up with.

And expansion flexibility is all fine and dandy, but it's also synonymous to your team not having enough good players to protect to start with, not exactly the problem I'm hoping we have by that point, not if management still wishes to compete over a rebuild. So, we protect Petry, Weber and Keith (assuming none of the three are traded/waive their NTC/NMCs) and take the chance at losing one of Juulsen/Mete. Or, we trade one of/both of these two for a team with "flexibility" (a bad team)... or even to Seattle in a deal that sees them take some other contract during the expansion draft.

I mean, we're assuming here that there's 1. We're going to have that flexibility at that point without such a trade 2. No other players would be moved 3. A more talented player or equal talented player at a younger age than Keith is atm will be available and we'll have the right price (*cough*Sergachev*cough*) to acquire him.

In any case, I don't see the Hawks pay through the nose to trade Keith. It makes no sense to me personnally. They'll ask for a high price because he's a great player on manageable cap hit. Maybe if we can rob them without touching any of our top prospects(Suzuki,Brook,Poehling) or 1st rounders [and also assuming the team will make moves to compete], but I don't see that happening.

How is he not on the verge of a precipice? How many 35 year olds don't decline between the ages of 35 and 40?

No, he's nowhere as sound an acquisition as Markov. That NMC plus length of contract plus whatever it would require to add him, are a huge barrier. The GM has a job to do, let him find younger and better. We're not going to resolve it here tonight.

So you want to go with the slippery slope of asking players to waive their no-movement clause when the expansion draft comes along? Good luck with that.

Also, the expansion draft protection list is not set in stone and should not be projected on the assets we have now. Wait and see who else will be on this team by then and I suspect there will be other players worth protecting that are not currently on the roster. And if not, you can use that expansion draft slot creatively in a deal -- by acting as a safety valve for a talent-rich team that doesn't have enough protection slots for the good players they own. That team will need a trading partner to get something instead of nothing and the Habs can profit from that.

The Hawks can ask what they want. However, the player they'd be peddling is bringing with him more furniture than we can afford. Let's hope it never comes to that.

 

[Runner77]

Your deal is really this:

Keith
2020 1st
*One expansion protection draft slot added by trading Keith and adding Poehling who doesn't need protection

For

Poehling
2019 2nd
Alzner
Shlemko
Benn
*One protection draft slot forfeited because of Keith

 

[OldCraig71]

We kinda are the Washington Capitals or we could be. Let's be them when they cut bait with Alzner and didn't attempt to re-sign him. Let's do the same with Benn and Schlemko -- cut bait.

Benn, Schlemko, Alzner, DLO,Chaput, that's about 8 million a year right there, how much did Radulov want again?

 

[Runner77]

Benn, Schlemko, Alzner, DLO,Chaput, that's about 8 million a year right there, how much did Radulov want again?

I thought Radulov was a pathetic mercenary. Who needs him? We dodged a bullet!

 

[dackelljuneaubulis02]

You mean except from when he took over? I'll take that team over this one in a heartbeat. It had two superstars on the verge of breaking out plus tons of young talent and a third overall pick.

No way.

2012. Younger Price, PK, Pacioretty, Galchenyuk, Gallagher, Markov not much else from what I can remember. Best prospects were whom exactly? LL? Tinordi? NB? 2012 draft sizzled out fairly quickly. Thrower and Collberg did nothing right from the get go. Bozon and Hudon looked good. Vail was okay.

2018 Older Price, Weber, Kotkaniemi, Domi, Drouin, Petry, Gallagher. Much better supporting cast up front. D's Prospect wise: Suzuki, Brook, Poehling, Fleury, Romanov a bunch of others who's early returns are looking much better than the

The roster is better and the prospects are better. Younger Price and PK aren't that much better than older Price and Weber. Not enough to make up for all the other players. I would be willing to put large sums of money that KK will completely eclipse Galchenyuk as a player. I really think people overrated that 2012 core. People keep looking back in hindsight like MB inherited a gold mine. Who thought that at the time? Everyone wanted Gauthier gone yet somehow he gifted his successor a Cup contending core.

 

[Andrei79]

How is he not on the verge of a precipice? How many 35 year olds don't decline between the ages of 35 and 40?

No, he's nowhere as sound an acquisition as Markov. That NMC plus length of contract plus whatever it would require to add him, are a huge barrier. The GM has a job to do, let him find younger and better. We're not going to resolve it here tonight.

So you want to go with the slippery slope of asking players to waive their no-movement clause when the expansion draft comes along? Good luck with that.

Also, the expansion draft protection list is not set in stone and should not be projected on the assets we have now. Wait and see who else will be on this team by then and I suspect there will be other players worth protecting that are not currently on the roster. And if not, you can use that expansion draft slot creatively in a deal -- by acting as a safety valve for a talent-rich team that doesn't have enough protection slots for the good players they own. That team will need a trading partner to get something instead of nothing and the Habs can profit from that.

The Hawks can ask what they want. However, the player they'd be peddling is bringing with him more furniture than we can afford. Let's hope it never comes to that.

Because neither being 35 or declining means that youre on the verge of a precipice. Are your expectations for him to fall of the map next year ? So was Belial right all along that 40 yo Markov had nothing to offer anymore ? The actual expectations for a D of his caliber is to remain a top player up until his retirement.

For a team with no realistic means of getting a LH D in the medium short term, having a top player at that position for 3-4 years while your two other top players can also still play at a top level does make sense. Its actually smack in the middle of what you can realistically expect from both as far as elite play. That's, if management actually wants to make moves towards contention and keep its core.

5.5M for a D who produces 30+ points and never has to be sheltered is actually a joke of a cap hit. He signed it before winning his Norris' (december 2009) and cups which makes the notion he was paid for past production (reality: hes been one of the leagues biggest bargains and never got the 9-10M contract he deserved) inaccurate. In a league where Marleau gets that contract, a 36 yo Keith is fair value at 5.5 for 4 years. He can retire if his play drops too much, thats what players like him do and we would get 0 cap repercussions.

But really, Im dispelling the notion that he's a dump (which Chicago would have to pay to get rid of) or that he was paid for services rendered. Both are false.

As far as the merits of trading for him. It depends. Whats the teams plan ? Are we going all in for 3 years ? Then yes, hes close to the best acquisition we could make covering that span at LD. The price though would likely be heavy and I would hope the assets that would be weighed in the thought process wouldnt include an expansion slot. Withholding the creation of a contending window just to protect a Juulsen/Mete (assuming you cant make a deal with Seattle to protect them). In that scenario where the team fully commits to competing, where Id lose it is if an A level prospect that would likely help during those 3 years would be going to other way (those players have to be kept for a truly big fish, a la Carter/Richards to LA). But then, I dont think Chicago would go for lesser assets.

 

[Kriss E]

You said he was on the verge of a precipice. He's not. He's still very much a top player and would instantly be our top LH D by a mile. He'd be our no.2 after Weber. He has 4 years remaining after this one, he doesn't have a significant injury history... scratch that he's basically never been injured. He's as sound an acquisition as resigning Markov was at 35.

I'm of the mind this team should rebuild. But, if the team is truly looking at a LH Ds and wants to compete in the next few years while Weber and Price are still good players, then he'd a sounder acquisition than anything else most GMs can come up with.

And expansion flexibility is all fine and dandy, but it's also synonymous to your team not having enough good players to protect to start with, not exactly the problem I'm hoping we have by that point, not if management still wishes to compete over a rebuild. So, we protect Petry, Weber and Keith (assuming none of the three are traded/waive their NTC/NMCs) and take the chance at losing one of Juulsen/Mete. Or, we trade one of/both of these two for a team with "flexibility" (a bad team)... or even to Seattle in a deal that sees them take some other contract during the expansion draft.

I mean, we're assuming here that there's 1. We're going to have that flexibility at that point without such a trade 2. No other players would be moved 3. A more talented player or equal talented player at a younger age than Keith is atm will be available and we'll have the right price (*cough*Sergachev*cough*) to acquire him.

In any case, I don't see the Hawks pay through the nose to trade Keith. It makes no sense to me personnally. They'll ask for a high price because he's a great player on manageable cap hit. Maybe if we can rob them without touching any of our top prospects(Suzuki,Brook,Poehling) or 1st rounders [and also assuming the team will make moves to compete], but I don't see that happening.

Keith relied a lot more on speed though. That was the biggest part of his game, being able to skate the puck up like a forward and speed back fast on defense.
Markov was lot more of a Lidstrom type with incredible vision and terrific passing. He relied on positioning and reads a lot more.

 

[Kriss E]

And you want to perpetuate that by trading vets who are contributing to the team? Aren't you proving my point?

Domi, Drouin, Shaw, Danault, Tatar, Gallagher, Lehkonen, Armia, Byron, Koko Puffs, Price, Weber, Petry and Juulsen are not short term bandaids yet some of the names on that list are the ones bandied about in trade wishes. Anyone not on that list and on the team you can trade. Anyone on that list I wouldn't be against trading but it would have to improve the team now and not in 3, 4, 5 years. Otherwise you're doing what you said we have done in the past.

That won't get you far man. It's like you think we have a bunch of young superstars in the making that are going to lead us to contention next year so keeping the vets and adding depth is more important.

This team is better than thought, doesn't mean it's near contention. There's a better chance Domi becomes like Schenn and drops back down to regular production next year than remains a ppg player, and then we can fight for POs a couple more years, until older guys lose value and eventually we will finish in bottom 10 again and we can argue for the 3rd or 4th time on these boards about how we should have stuck to rebuilding plan more..Round and round we go.

 

[Andrei79]

Keith relied a lot more on speed though. That was the biggest part of his game, being able to skate the puck up like a forward and speed back fast on defense.
Markov was lot more of a Lidstrom type with incredible vision and terrific passing. He relied on positioning and reads a lot more.

Keith is a very smart player as well.

 

[Kriss E]

Keith is a very smart player as well.

Sure, but again, a major part of his game was speed, he's just not the same out there.
I wouldn't give up assets for Keith. He's not the solution for our back end. If we were contenders, he could have been a nice depth add, not our situation.

 

[SirClintonPortis]

That won't get you far man. It's like you think we have a bunch of young superstars in the making that are going to lead us to contention next year so keeping the vets and adding depth is more important.

This team is better than thought, doesn't mean it's near contention. There's a better chance Domi becomes like Schenn and drops back down to regular production next year than remains a ppg player, and then we can fight for POs a couple more years, until older guys lose value and eventually we will finish in bottom 10 again and we can argue for the 3rd or 4th time on these boards about how we should have stuck to rebuilding plan more..Round and round we go.

We might be back to the Gainey era of just being pretty good if Domi is for real and Kotka pans out. But Cup contenders? Having playoff failures like Shea Weber and Jeff Petry being your best Dmen is basically a glass ceiling on this team.

 

[Andrei79]

Sure, but again, a major part of his game was speed, he's just not the same out there.
I wouldn't give up assets for Keith. He's not the solution for our back end. If we were contenders, he could have been a nice depth add, not our situation.

My conditions for acquiring Keith would be not to give significant assets (unlikely) and to follow such a move with significant deals for a 2-3 yesr push (also unlikely considering whos at the helm). Seeing as MB's prevented himself from doing the latter with awful contracts like Alzner, there'd be very little chance a deal for Keith would help us in any direction. Thats not really what my issues were re:Keith itt however.

 

[Kriss E]

My conditions for acquiring Keith would be not to give significant assets (unlikely) and to follow such a move with significant deals for a 2-3 yesr push (also unlikely considering whos at the helm). Seeing as MB's prevented himself from doing the latter with awful contracts like Alzner, there'd be very little chance a deal for Keith would help us in any direction. Thats not really what my issues were re:Keith itt however.

I wouldn't go that route though. I'd be more interested in moving some of our guys and load up with even more prospects to be ready for a push in 3 years.

 

[Kriss E]

We might be back to the Gainey era of just being pretty good if Domi is for real and Kotka pans out. But Cup contenders? Having playoff failures like Shea Weber and Jeff Petry being your best Dmen is basically a glass ceiling on this team.

Well don't know if they're failures but I don't like us as contenders at all. We need more high end talent and I'm not convinced on Domi.

 

[BaseballCoach]

I wouldn't go that route though. I'd be more interested in moving some of our guys and load up with even more prospects to be ready for a push in 3 years.

As I write these words, the Habs are 5th in the Conference after 33 games.

We agree that with the current roster they have a negligible chance of winning the Cup this year. No matter what is done, status quo is not likely to be good enough in the next year or two either, not even if Kotkaniemi develops as expected.

So to sum up: 5th in the Conference, need to get better. The question is how.

Do we, Option 1:

• identify our specific weaknesses and keep most (but not all) of the core talent in place
• trade from strength to bolster weaker areas (LD, one more scorer)
• work in our three top prospects in the next year or two
• use our cap space to get good players
• draft a larger than average number of new players this summer to ensure prospect continuity

Or do we go with Option 2:

• declare bankruptcy of the current team
• move Price, Weber and Petry for picks
• move out guys in their twenties for more draft picks
• work in our three top prospects in the next year or two
• use our cap space to get good players
• draft an even larger than average number of new players this summer to replace the talent we lost plus bolster the weak areas

In choosing Option 1, I am guided by the knowledge that the number of holes is not enormous, and that we already have several elite talents on team. I take into account that not one of our forwards is over 30. Most of all, I start from the position that we are 5th in the Conference, and we aren't riding unworldly goaltending or wiliness from too many veterans on their last legs. I see youngsters making mistakes, but being largely allowed to continue playing and learn from them.

There is risk in Option 1 that the latest #3 overall does not pan out as expected and that Weber, Price and Petry fall off a cliff over the next 2-3 years. To this I have two replies:

• if a #3 overall is a serious enough development risk that we are being advised to tear down and start over, the chances of the picks we own or could get being able to replace all the holes we would create in addition to the ones we have is also serious, and disqualifying in my opinion
• If Weber, Price and Petry get hurt or retire, we have almost $24M in cap space to replace their contributions - that should be enough, if we had a competent GM

The last bolded comment is the real issue. I have a feeling that many pro-tankers have so little confidence in the GM, but also so little confidence that he would be replaced if he can't get us to the next level, that they are willing to settle for a very, very low percentage chance at lightning in a bottle, meaning the team getting a draft pick who will put the club on its back and carry it to the promised land despite poor work by the management. Frankly, that is so unrealistic that I can't choose to suggest that path.

A good GM could take our current roster, prospects and cap space and improve the team quite a bit. If we don't have one, get one.

 

[Kriss E]

I appreciate you taking the time BC, I really do, but it's not as black and white as you make it sound.

As I write these words, the Habs are 5th in the Conference after 33 games.

We agree that with the current roster they have a negligible chance of winning the Cup this year. No matter what is done, status quo is not likely to be good enough in the next year or two either, not even if Kotkaniemi develops as expected.

So to sum up: 5th in the Conference, need to get better. The question is how.

Do we, Option 1:

• identify our specific weaknesses and keep most (but not all) of the core talent in place
• trade from strength to bolster weaker areas (LD, one more scorer)
• work in our three top prospects in the next year or two
• use our cap space to get good players
• draft a larger than average number of new players this summer to ensure prospect continuity

Or do we go with Option 2:

• declare bankruptcy of the current team
• move Price, Weber and Petry for picks
• move out guys in their twenties for more draft picks
• work in our three top prospects in the next year or two
• use our cap space to get good players
• draft an even larger than average number of new players this summer to replace the talent we lost plus bolster the weak areas

Option 3:

• Do not declare any bankruptcy.
• Move Petry for a high end prospect.
• Entertain offers for Price and Weber. Imagine what Weber could yield if we look at the return Patches brought in + fact Nsh got a young Norris winner for him.

There. Simple. Start with that.

In choosing Option 1, I am guided by the knowledge that the number of holes is not enormous, and that we already have several elite talents on team. I take into account that not one of our forwards is over 30. Most of all, I start from the position that we are 5th in the Conference, and we aren't riding unworldly goaltending or wiliness from too many veterans on their last legs. I see youngsters making mistakes, but being largely allowed to continue playing and learn from them.

Sure, but we have enjoyed a very favorable schedule as of date. When we faced a more average-good teams like in November, well we struggle to play for .500.
Now in early December we again enjoyed easy match ups, going 6-2 during that stretch, but are now looking at harder games moving forward. Let's see how that goes and where we sit in your standings afterwards.

There is risk in Option 1 that the latest #3 overall does not pan out as expected and that Weber, Price and Petry fall off a cliff over the next 2-3 years. To this I have two replies:

• if a #3 overall is a serious enough development risk that we are being advised to tear down and start over, the chances of the picks we own or could get being able to replace all the holes we would create in addition to the ones we have is also serious, and disqualifying in my opinion
• If Weber, Price and Petry get hurt or retire, we have almost $24M in cap space to replace their contributions - that should be enough, if we had a competent GM

1- There is another risk, or reality. That the Habs simply are not good enough even with all the guys still playing well. A lot of guys are on career highs and had monstrous starts, and as I mentioned we had very favorable match ups, yet that's just good for 5th. Not very convincing.

2- Cap space, as we've seen over the past two years, is pretty freaking useless if not used. There isn't a bunch of talented guys sitting idly by waiting for our call to luckily join us. We couldn't even replace Markov..So if Weber-Petry-Price get hurt, we're screwed (although I'd happily enjoy the high pick coming from it...so long as they come back after in good health).

The last bolded comment is the real issue. I have a feeling that many pro-tankers have so little confidence in the GM, but also so little confidence that he would be replaced if he can't get us to the next level, that they are willing to settle for a very, very low percentage chance at lightning in a bottle, meaning the team getting a draft pick who will put the club on its back and carry it to the promised land despite poor work by the management. Frankly, that is so unrealistic that I can't choose to suggest that path.

A good GM could take our current roster, prospects and cap space and improve the team quite a bit. If we don't have one, get one.

A good GM would recognize that this team lacks high end talent and its window to compete should be in 3 years. Not today or next year. So keeping aging vets around for the right is a bit pointless.
Maximize value. Move one or two in order to stock up even further. The team's youngsters like Domi and Drouin are still unproven. Brayden Schenn was a revelation in Stl...Top center right?..Almost ppg guy coming from Philly. That looks more to be an anomaly now.

We are not going to rebuild on the fly and have success. Book it.