Marc Bergevin - Take It Or Leave It Edition

[ECWHSWI]

Or do we go with Option 2:

• move out guys in their twenties for more draft picks.

come on now...

 

[BaseballCoach]

come on now...

There are some posters saying we should trade Tatar, Byron and Shaw for the greatest haul in picks possible

 

[ECWHSWI]

There are some posters saying we should trade Tatar, Byron and Shaw for the greatest haul in picks possible

so ?

wanted to make it look like people picking option #2 (that you disagree with) are irrational or something...

that's cool, except everybody can see the "trap".


Besides, you lack imagination, only 2 options... lol

 

[BaseballCoach]

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

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.

I have no problem making Pacioretty-type trades, with a roster player coming back who outperforms the guy we traded, PLUS we save cap, PLUS we get a great first round prospect and a second round pick. Sign me up. I'll even accept 85% of that. Just don't tell me that we should accept long shots because "nothing else has worked".

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.

Yes, the schedule. Seventeen times so far the schedule makers put a team on our path that was destined to lose that night. Crappy teams like Washington, Pittsburgh and Boston.

As for the recent better record, perhaps it has something to do with Shea Weber being back on the blueline, moving other guys into better chairs?

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.

No one on a monster start is over 30. It's not unusual for younger players to improve through their twenties. That being said, I agreed that the team is not good enough right now. The club needs to make several moves to think it can compete for a Cup.

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).

Cap space is not automatically put to use. It takes good moves. But without cap space, options are way, way, way more limited.

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

Nothing guarantees success, but tearing the team down too much to hope to rebuild it is not a good percentage play. However, I will sign up for moving Price, Weber or Petry for a Pacioretty-type result where we get help for the roster, cap responsibility and great futures too. So long as you don't go radical on us and suggest we dump everyone over Gallagher's age, and maybe even including him, for pure picks and non-NHL prospects. Not sure you ever said that, but some have, and it is not something I can see working.

 

[BaseballCoach]

so ?

wanted to make it look like people picking option #2 (that you disagree with) are irrational or something...

that's cool, except everybody can see the "trap".


Besides, you lack imagination, only 2 options... lol

Several posters have suggested we trade Tatar, Byron, Shaw and Petry for only picks or non-NHL prospects. I don't recall you EVER criticizing them, and do recall you often quoting their posts approvingly. I admit that does not mean you agreed with every word they wrote, but to not even once say "WHOA" made me think you kind of agree with them. Was I wrong?

 

[Habs Icing]

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.

You realize this is the second youngest team in the league, right?

 

[Kriss E]

You realize this is the second youngest team in the league, right?

So?

 

[Habs Icing]

So?

Means a lot of the players I mentioned are on the upswing side of their maturing curve. Also, coming up we have a blue chip prospect in Suzuki, Brook who may be another blue chipper and Poehling who may turn out to be a stud 3rd line center. In the near future With the promotion of those three players we can trade three players from the team for assets that we are missing. And I haven't even mentioned the other prospects in the organization.

I see this team trending in the right direction. Now I'm just hoping MB's work the past few months hasn't been due to dumb luck.

 

[DAChampion]

So?

A lot of people assume that most players keep getting better, and that they peak between the ages of 30 and 35. If you go by that model, the Habs should get a lot better in the coming years.

In truth, many, MANY, players peak before 30. Afterwards they slowly decline, and often get more expensive.

 

[Kriss E]

I have no problem making Pacioretty-type trades, with a roster player coming back who outperforms the guy we traded, PLUS we save cap, PLUS we get a great first round prospect and a second round pick. Sign me up. I'll even accept 85% of that. Just don't tell me that we should accept long shots because "nothing else has worked".

I've been consistent. We should focus on getting younger high end talent, I don't care how, but that should be the priority at this point in time.

Yes, the schedule. Seventeen times so far the schedule makers put a team on our path that was destined to lose that night. Crappy teams like Washington, Pittsburgh and Boston.

As for the recent better record, perhaps it has something to do with Shea Weber being back on the blueline, moving other guys into better chairs?

I mean, look at the match ups in December. Rangers-Ottawa-Ottawa-Chicago-Ottawa-Caroline...You really want to argue with me these were not favorible match ups for us?
Are you actually going to argue that schedule and match ups do no play a part in how a team can look during a stretch? Wtf mate?
Perhaps it does have to do with Weber, I said in another thread how we'll be able to notice how strong his impact is now going late december and facing tougher teams.

No one on a monster start is over 30. It's not unusual for younger players to improve through their twenties. That being said, I agreed that the team is not good enough right now. The club needs to make several moves to think it can compete for a Cup.

Sure, youngsters improve, it's also not uncommon for players to have career years and then drop back down towards their mean more.

Cap space is not automatically put to use. It takes good moves. But without cap space, options are way, way, way more limited.

Yes, and having space does not guarantee a thing. Just like you to point out how getting a high pick doesn't mean you'll draft a McDavid.

Nothing guarantees success, but tearing the team down too much to hope to rebuild it is not a good percentage play. However, I will sign up for moving Price, Weber or Petry for a Pacioretty-type result where we get help for the roster, cap responsibility and great futures too. So long as you don't go radical on us and suggest we dump everyone over Gallagher's age, and maybe even including him, for pure picks and non-NHL prospects. Not sure you ever said that, but some have, and it is not something I can see working.

Nobody is suggesting tearing the team down. People name vets we *could* move that would yield us a strong return helping us in the future. Nobody is saying we have to move all the vets, right away, Weber-Price-Petry-Tatar-Byron...all gone by deadline. Not a soul here has suggested that as far as I know. Same with trading Gallagher, I haven't heard anybody mention moving him.

Not gonna happen though. Bergevin is gonna stick with status quo.

 

[Kriss E]

Means a lot of the players I mentioned are on the upswing side of their maturing curve. Also, coming up we have a blue chip prospect in Suzuki, Brook who may be another blue chipper and Poehling who may turn out to be a stud 3rd line center. In the near future With the promotion of those three players we can trade three players from the team for assets that we are missing. And I haven't even mentioned the other prospects in the organization.

I see this team trending in the right direction. Now I'm just hoping MB's work the past few months hasn't been due to dumb luck.

That's right, they're on the swing up and we should get more guys like them to tag along around the same time instead of keeping vets who'll be going in the other direction when it's time to compete.

 

[Kriss E]

A lot of people assume that most players keep getting better, and that they peak between the ages of 30 and 35. If you go by that model, the Habs should get a lot better in the coming years.

In truth, many, MANY, players peak before 30. Afterwards they slowly decline, and often get more expensive.

Ya..and progress isn't linear.

 

[Habs Icing]

That's right, they're on the swing up and we should get more guys like them to tag along around the same time instead of keeping vets who'll be going in the other direction when it's time to compete.

If MB doesn't screw up, I can see this team contending as early as next year. Besides, you need vets to help the younger players mature properly. And the vets on this team right now are great role models. Maybe next year we can move some of the good vets. This year I would keep them.

 

[Habs Icing]

Nobody is suggesting tearing the team down. People name vets we *could* move that would yield us a strong return helping us in the future. Nobody is saying we have to move all the vets, right away, Weber-Price-Petry-Tatar-Byron...all gone by deadline. Not a soul here has suggested that as far as I know. Same with trading Gallagher, I haven't heard anybody mention moving him.

You either don't read many posts in this forum or youchoose not to remember. Every one of those players have been mentioned as trade bait and many in the same trade proposals. This past summer the name mentioned the most in trade proposals was Gallagher.

 

[DAChampion]

You either don't read many posts in this forum or you have the memory of a guppy. Every one of those players have been mentioned as trade bait and many in the same trade proposals. This past summer the name mentioned the most in trade proposals was Gallagher.

All of those guys get mentioned, but few if any suggest trading all of those guys. Rather, it is suggested that some of them should be traded.

I suspect that you understand that well, and that you're merely feigning ignorance.

 

[Lshap]

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 above is a really key point. Those who believe the Habs simply need to supplement their weak spots need to read the above and consider how freakin' hard it is to add top players. We might be 'just' missing a top D and another top C, but try finding them. They're not coming to the Habs as UFAs. How many of our top players do you propose to trade away to get one back? It ain't happening, cap space or no cap space.

There's a reason the league went ape**** when Tavares became a UFA -- those type of players almost never hit the open market. And when they do, they go elsewhere. Habs have tried. Over and over and over. We've added some pretty good vets, but because they're 30-ish by the time they get here they've either declined after a season or two (Cole, Cammalleri, Gionta, Gomez) or declined to re-sign (Radulov). Bottom line with that approach: Both the window and the cap crunch are too tight.

So back to what we 'just' need. Since the odds of getting a top C and D via negotiations are very slim, the best odds are to draft them. Not surprisingly, that's exactly what every winning team has done. Yeah, you need to be lucky enough to get the top picks in the right years (Toronto) or find hidden stars in later rounds (Tampa) or develop a core that's committed to staying together (Pittsburgh, Washington). But a core of top entry-level kids is the only way for a team to stay together long enough to gel. Once you've got that core of upcoming stars, then you can supplement with one of those 30-ish vets (Nashville, Winnipeg). Habs came close to that model a few years back with Price, Subban, Pacioretty, Markov, Plekanec as their homegrown core. Unfortunately, we didn't supplement the holes we had.

Am I suggesting trading all our vets? No, it's not necessary and unlikely. Weber and Price are close to unmovable and both have value here. But if we want that 1st pair D and that top C, we'll have to give up today's 'very good' for the chance of drafting tomorrow's 'great'.

 

[Kriss E]

You either don't read many posts in this forum or youchoose not to remember. Every one of those players have been mentioned as trade bait and many in the same trade proposals. This past summer the name mentioned the most in trade proposals was Gallagher.

Sure man, but that would be like me saying fans hate every player on this team...because you always have some that are gonna hate even the good ones. I'm sure every player on the Habs have been named in some trade proposal, it hardly means people actually want them all out. I'd trade Gallagher sure, why not? If it's part of a great return..again, why not? I don't want him traded though.

Just like I told you many times I'd move Price, Weber, Petry....I don't mean move all three at within the deadline and if the return for Weber is insane, we still have to move the other two. You got to read between the lines sometimes mate. We could keep two of those guys if the return we got for one was already good enough.

 

[Andrei79]

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.

Same here. I've been wanting a well done armored mechanical vehicle for years. We need more high end talent.

 

[Kriss E]

If MB doesn't screw up, I can see this team contending as early as next year. Besides, you need vets to help the younger players mature properly. And the vets on this team right now are great role models. Maybe next year we can move some of the good vets. This year I would keep them.

Hate to break it to you but we're not gonna contend next year...and MB will screw up.

 

[Kriss E]

Same here. I've been wanting a well done armored mechanical vehicle for years. We need more high end talent.

Agreed. Alas, doesn't appear we're headed in that direction.

 

[ECWHSWI]

Several posters have suggested we trade Tatar, Byron, Shaw and Petry for only picks or non-NHL prospects. I don't recall you EVER criticizing them, and do recall you often quoting their posts approvingly. I admit that does not mean you agreed with every word they wrote, but to not even once say "WHOA" made me think you kind of agree with them. Was I wrong?

First, Habs could trade every single player they have, I won't mind, names on the back doesnt matter much, they're just instrument of an entertainment piece. Second, I dont see very often suggesting to trade ALL of thee names you wrote. Third. Trading some of the names absolutely makes sense, especially the onlder names like Byron (30 before season ends) and Petry, Shaw even before he goes on LTIR until retirement.

I know, I know, Habs have $ under the cap, they'll sign great players, guaranteed, next summer so team will keep improving,

 

[Lshap]

If MB doesn't screw up, I can see this team contending as early as next year. Besides, you need vets to help the younger players mature properly. And the vets on this team right now are great role models. Maybe next year we can move some of the good vets. This year I would keep them.

Even if we're witnessing Bergevin.2, The Awakening, our new & improved GM still won't be able to turn us into a contender next year. We should know by now that our decent/good prospects almost never become stars, despite our hopes and dreams. We need high-end. Suzuki projects to be the best prospect we have, and that's because Bergevin did exactly what some of us are suggesting: He traded a very good player today for the chance at a great player tomorrow. That's the kind of team-building we need if we ever want to jump to the next level.

 

[Kriss E]

The above is a really key point. Those who believe the Habs simply need to supplement their weak spots need to read the above and consider how freakin' hard it is to add top players. We might be 'just' missing a top D and another top C, but try finding them. They're not coming to the Habs as UFAs. How many of our top players do you propose to trade away to get one back? It ain't happening, cap space or no cap space.

How long have we heard ''we just need another top 6...and maybe another depth D..and we are golden'' for?? It's not even just about finding one..Samsonov was one..Alzner was one..Lang was one..Tanguay was one...In some cases, it was terrible like for Sammy or Alzner, the other two guys, actually they were pretty productive for us but they suffered injuries, so they didn't help a whole lot in the end.
Finding the right ones is the trickiest part.

There's a reason the league went ape**** when Tavares became a UFA -- those type of players almost never hit the open market. And when they do, they go elsewhere. Habs have tried. Over and over and over. We've added some pretty good vets, but because they're 30-ish by the time they get here they've either declined after a season or two (Cole, Cammalleri, Gionta, Gomez) or declined to re-sign (Radulov). Bottom line with that approach: Both the window and the cap crunch are too tight.

Signing elite level free agents a la Hossa or Tavares is borderline impossible. When did that ever happen? Radu might be the closest thing, but he came for a year and there were a lot of question marks seeing how he'd been out for so long. Soon as he could hit that market though..he was a goner.

So back to what we 'just' need. Since the odds of getting a top C and D via negotiations are very slim, the best odds are to draft them. Not surprisingly, that's exactly what every winning team has done. Yeah, you need to be lucky enough to get the top picks in the right years (Toronto) or find hidden stars in later rounds (Tampa) or develop a core that's committed to staying together (Pittsburgh, Washington). But a core of top entry-level kids is the only way for a team to stay together long enough to gel. Once you've got that core of upcoming stars, then you can supplement with one of those 30-ish vets (Nashville, Winnipeg). Habs came close to that model a few years back with Price, Subban, Pacioretty, Markov, Plekanec as their homegrown core. Unfortunately, we didn't supplement the holes we had.

Yes, I mentioned this in another thread I believe. It's crazy to me that Gallagher is the only Habs drafted player we have playing in the top 6 or top 4 on D.

Am I suggesting trading all our vets? No, it's not necessary and unlikely. Weber and Price are close to unmovable and both have value here. But if we want that 1st pair D and that top C, we'll have to give up today's 'very good' for the chance of drafting tomorrow's 'great'.

I think the first step is to set a time as to when you're expected to contend. From there you plan.
If you expect to start becoming solid in 3 years, which is what I'd look at, then keeping all of Petry, Weber and Price is pointless. We should still be in the load up on prospects mode imo.

 

[ECWHSWI]

If MB doesn't screw up, I can see this team contending as early as next year. Besides, you need vets to help the younger players mature properly. And the vets on this team right now are great role models. Maybe next year we can move some of the good vets. This year I would keep them.

like a shitload of other vets in the league.

 

[DAChampion]

Imo, the hardest upcoming decision for MB involves positioning the Habs for the expansion draft.

If he does nothing, the Habs will almost certainly lose one of Petry, Juulsen, or Mete. He then gets to keep all three for the 2019 and 2020 playoff runs.

If Bergevin trades one of them, he gets an influx of young players and / or prospects and / or picks, the Habs will do less well in the next two playoffs, and will end up losing one of their third line forwards, perhaps Danault, Lehkonen, or Armia.

Not an obvious choice at all in my opinion.