HF Habs: Montreal Canadiens Hockey Ops - Part 3

[BLONG7]

Bergevin was tough to judge in the moment. Most of his moves looked bad, but a few of them worked out surprisingly well. The problems were mostly fundamental and less visible, not valuing good players, trading away too many picks, absolutely trashing player development.

It’s obvious he was bad in retrospect, but at the time some of them things I blasted him for worked out. Therrien had a good season or two, Domi scored, PK crapped out a season or two after the trade.

No question he was bad, but he had enough unexpected successes that he could fake competence.

Price was the reason the majority of the time we had good seasons..............dragging the team into the playoffs, and then Price was the reason we finished low in the standings when he got hurt.
Bergevin and Therrien, we beyond awful at their jobs for the most part....
Flawed philosophy from the get go......................Mol$on was a sucker for 10 years.

 

[Vachon23]

It was discussed in the Game thread, but Martin Lapointe is doing a heck of a job as Head Scout.

 

[Rapala]

I loved Marty's post gamer this evening.
He made no bones about how he felt our drills in practice are helping our players react to the game in front of them.
The Grillo effect is starting to take root.

 

[Tyson]

I rarely go out of my way to give Bergevin and Timmins much credit but the 2021 draft could turn out to be one of the best draft years in recent Habs history.

 

[Adam Michaels]

I rarely go out of my way to give Bergevin and Timmins much credit but the 2021 draft could turn out to be one of the best draft years in recent Habs history.

Which is why I always said that the development was the bigger issue and the draft wasn't as big a problem as it was made out to be. It had its flaws, as well. But the prospects didn't have as many things at their disposal as they do now. Most of it depended on the players only whereas now it depends on the players, but the organization offers them tools to work with (hockey development with Nicholas, more player development coaches and consultants, and a mental performance coach).

Caufield, Guhle, Roy, Mailloux, Struble, RHP, Primeau, Farrell, Dobes, Tuch, Kapanen, Kidney, Trudeau, Simoneau. Some will top out at the AHL level, but these are a big part of why there is depth.

I'll even include guys like Romanov, Harris, Sergachev, and KK, who are no longer with the organisation, but are full time NHL'ers. In hindsight, KK at 3 was the wrong pick, but he is still a full time NHL'er. All Timmins picks.

So Timmins and Churla deserve credit.

Although I also feel like under Bobrov/Lapointe, the same group of amateur scouts do a better job. Because under this regime, the same scouts got: Slaf, Demidov, Reinbacher, Beck, Hutson, Mesar, Engstrom, Fowler, Florian, Hage, Konyushkov, Volokhin, Eriksson, Davidson, Thorpe among others.

 

[Tyson]

Which is why I always said that the development was the bigger issue and the draft wasn't as big a problem as it was made out to be. It had its flaws, as well. But the prospects didn't have as many things at their disposal as they do now. Most of it depended on the players only whereas now it depends on the players, but the organization offers them tools to work with (hockey development with Nicholas, more player development coaches and consultants, and a mental performance coach).

Caufield, Guhle, Roy, Mailloux, Struble, RHP, Primeau, Farrell, Dobes, Tuch, Kapanen, Kidney, Trudeau, Simoneau. Some will top out at the AHL level, but these are a big part of why there is depth.

I'll even include guys like Romanov, Harris, Sergachev, and KK, who are no longer with the organisation, but are full time NHL'ers. In hindsight, KK at 3 was the wrong pick, but he is still a full time NHL'er. All Timmins picks.

So Timmins and Churla deserve credit.

Although I also feel like under Bobrov/Lapointe, the same group of amateur scouts do a better job. Because under this regime, the same scouts got: Slaf, Demidov, Reinbacher, Beck, Hutson, Mesar, Engstrom, Fowler, Florian, Hage, Konyushkov, Volokhin, Eriksson, Davidson, Thorpe among others.

Well said

 

[Andy]

I rarely go out of my way to give Bergevin and Timmins much credit but the 2021 draft could turn out to be one of the best draft years in recent Habs history.

2021 and 2022 drafts might set up this club for a while:

Mailloux, Kapanen, Roy, Slafkovsky, Beck, Hutson....outside chance of Engstrom making an impact.

Getting 6 nhlers, two possible stars in back-to-back drafts might set up this team for a few years.

 

[Tyson]

2021 and 2022 drafts might set up this club for a while:

Mailloux, Kapanen, Roy, Slafkovsky, Beck, Hutson....outside chance of Engstrom making an impact.

Getting 6 nhlers, two possible stars in back-to-back drafts might set up this team for a few years.

 

[Rapala]

Which is why I always said that the development was the bigger issue and the draft wasn't as big a problem as it was made out to be. It had its flaws, as well. But the prospects didn't have as many things at their disposal as they do now. Most of it depended on the players only whereas now it depends on the players, but the organization offers them tools to work with (hockey development with Nicholas, more player development coaches and consultants, and a mental performance coach).

Caufield, Guhle, Roy, Mailloux, Struble, RHP, Primeau, Farrell, Dobes, Tuch, Kapanen, Kidney, Trudeau, Simoneau. Some will top out at the AHL level, but these are a big part of why there is depth.

I'll even include guys like Romanov, Harris, Sergachev, and KK, who are no longer with the organisation, but are full time NHL'ers. In hindsight, KK at 3 was the wrong pick, but he is still a full time NHL'er. All Timmins picks.

So Timmins and Churla deserve credit.

Although I also feel like under Bobrov/Lapointe, the same group of amateur scouts do a better job. Because under this regime, the same scouts got: Slaf, Demidov, Reinbacher, Beck, Hutson, Mesar, Engstrom, Fowler, Florian, Hage, Konyushkov, Volokhin, Eriksson, Davidson, Thorpe among others.

The greatest difference for me is quite simply the thought put into the process in terms of who we are and who is a fit.
Development aside I'm thinking we would have avoided a few disasters in the past had we taken this approach.

 

[Treb]

I rarely go out of my way to give Bergevin and Timmins much credit but the 2021 draft could turn out to be one of the best draft years in recent Habs history.

Better than 2014-2019, but I think 2020 will be pretty similar (Guhle, Tuch, Farrell and Dobes vs Mailloux, Kapanen and Roy) and 2022 (even without Slaf) should beat it pretty easily.

Funnily enough, Timmins last two drafts are probably in his top5.

 

[Tyson]

Better than 2014-2019, but I think 2020 will be pretty similar (Guhle, Tuch, Farrell and Dobes vs Mailloux, Kapanen and Roy) and 2022 (even without Slaf) should beat it pretty easily.

Funnily enough, Timmins last two drafts are probably in his top5.

You are right that 2020 looks promising when you see how well Tuch and Dobes are progressing.

 

[WeThreeKings]

Better than 2014-2019, but I think 2020 will be pretty similar (Guhle, Tuch, Farrell and Dobes vs Mailloux, Kapanen and Roy) and 2022 (even without Slaf) should beat it pretty easily.

Funnily enough, Timmins last two drafts are probably in his top5.

Timmins best drafts fall outside of his time with Bergevin - with the most recent ones where Bergevin couldn't be responisble for developing the players he picked.

Bergevin's approach to development and the coaches he put in place were to the absolute detriment of the franchise and unfortunately cost a lot of great kids their careers and upside.

 

[badfish]

I originally started writing this in the Mesar thread in response to criticisms about the Mesar pick as a management decision, but then realized it would probably be better suited here.

Criticizing the Mesar pick as a poor management decision echoes the same narrow framing/myopic decision making that characterized Bergevin's obsession with winning every trade. In contrast, HuGo is operating with a much more strategic, long-term vision for building a contending team that will ensure the Habs do not fail if they miss on a first round pick.

When they took over, I imagine they did an exercise to create a future vision of what a contender would look like. They probably started with setting aspects of team identity - being big, skilled, fast, effective in counter attack, etc. They likely also spent some time defining player archetype roles that would have to be filled to achieve this vision of the team. I bet they would be pretty detailed on this and do it for all 4 lines/6 defense/2 goalies, not just the top line.

Some of those archetype roles would be fairly obvious - things like a number one center or number one defenseman, but some might be less obvious - roles like a faceoff specialist or a secondary scorer who plays both wing and center. The design would be interconnected and ensuring that every role supports other aspects of the team and the overall vision for what the contending team would be.

The toughest part of this process is player acquisition, as the players that fill certain roles in a contending team are unique, rare, and not available every year. To fill these key roles, I suspected they've adopted a "bet and hedge" approach. For example, when HuGo first took over, they likely believed in Nick Suzuki's potential to be a number-1 center, but he still hadn't proven it. They bet on him to become one, but hedged that bet by acquiring Kirby Dach early in the rebuild, who also had the potential to become a first-line center. This way, the most likely outcome is that at least one of them develops into a first line center, with less likely outcomes being that both develop into a first line center or neither develops into a first line center. It's a different approach than say Bergevin, who put all his eggs in one basket with Drouin becoming a first line center. Another time I think they've done this is betting on Caufield to becoming a 40 goal scorer, and hedging against it by acquiring Laine.

Now imagine that one of the archetypes is a versatile secondary scorer. Such players are valuable to contenders not only for their scoring but also for providing the coach with flexibility when injuries occur. Over the last three years, they've addressed this need in three ways: drafting Mesar, acquiring Newhook and drafting Hage. At the time of making these decisions, it wasn't clear which of the three would pan out but that's okay - they've covered their bases and positioned themselves to have that role filled when they are ready to contend.

Bergevin by contrast would have picked Mesar and simply hoped he became the secondary scorer, with no other moves to hedge against him busting. This lack of supporting moves is part of why every bust in the 2010s hurt the Habs so much and why the team never seemed to be built with a vision in mind. Looking ahead, if Mesar doesn't pan out, it wont derail the Habs in their contending years. There are other players in the organization who could fill that role.

This approach might also inform what their next moves might be focused. I think they made the bet last year that Reinbacher would be a top pairing RHD. Right now the only hedge against this is Guhle playing on his offside and that's not ideal, especially if Matheson leaves the team or declines in a few seasons. In this years draft I bet the Habs are keeping an eye on players like Logan Hensler, Radim Mrtka and Charlie Tretheway as potential hedges to Reinbacher. They might also look to acquire a RHD, but that is notoriously difficult to do so - which is also probably why they drafted Reinbacher.

 

[red devil]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1839050899286540573

 

[The Last Red]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1839050899286540573

Gorton got "excited" when discussing Demidov, and is well aware that there are lot of Habs fans watching his KHL games live online.

 

[dauv]

I originally started writing this in the Mesar thread in response to criticisms about the Mesar pick as a management decision, but then realized it would probably be better suited here.

Criticizing the Mesar pick as a poor management decision echoes the same narrow framing/myopic decision making that characterized Bergevin's obsession with winning every trade. In contrast, HuGo is operating with a much more strategic, long-term vision for building a contending team that will ensure the Habs do not fail if they miss on a first round pick.

When they took over, I imagine they did an exercise to create a future vision of what a contender would look like. They probably started with setting aspects of team identity - being big, skilled, fast, effective in counter attack, etc. They likely also spent some time defining player archetype roles that would have to be filled to achieve this vision of the team. I bet they would be pretty detailed on this and do it for all 4 lines/6 defense/2 goalies, not just the top line.

Some of those archetype roles would be fairly obvious - things like a number one center or number one defenseman, but some might be less obvious - roles like a faceoff specialist or a secondary scorer who plays both wing and center. The design would be interconnected and ensuring that every role supports other aspects of the team and the overall vision for what the contending team would be.

The toughest part of this process is player acquisition, as the players that fill certain roles in a contending team are unique, rare, and not available every year. To fill these key roles, I suspected they've adopted a "bet and hedge" approach. For example, when HuGo first took over, they likely believed in Nick Suzuki's potential to be a number-1 center, but he still hadn't proven it. They bet on him to become one, but hedged that bet by acquiring Kirby Dach early in the rebuild, who also had the potential to become a first-line center. This way, the most likely outcome is that at least one of them develops into a first line center, with less likely outcomes being that both develop into a first line center or neither develops into a first line center. It's a different approach than say Bergevin, who put all his eggs in one basket with Drouin becoming a first line center. Another time I think they've done this is betting on Caufield to becoming a 40 goal scorer, and hedging against it by acquiring Laine.

Now imagine that one of the archetypes is a versatile secondary scorer. Such players are valuable to contenders not only for their scoring but also for providing the coach with flexibility when injuries occur. Over the last three years, they've addressed this need in three ways: drafting Mesar, acquiring Newhook and drafting Hage. At the time of making these decisions, it wasn't clear which of the three would pan out but that's okay - they've covered their bases and positioned themselves to have that role filled when they are ready to contend.

Bergevin by contrast would have picked Mesar and simply hoped he became the secondary scorer, with no other moves to hedge against him busting. This lack of supporting moves is part of why every bust in the 2010s hurt the Habs so much and why the team never seemed to be built with a vision in mind. Looking ahead, if Mesar doesn't pan out, it wont derail the Habs in their contending years. There are other players in the organization who could fill that role.

This approach might also inform what their next moves might be focused. I think they made the bet last year that Reinbacher would be a top pairing RHD. Right now the only hedge against this is Guhle playing on his offside and that's not ideal, especially if Matheson leaves the team or declines in a few seasons. In this years draft I bet the Habs are keeping an eye on players like Logan Hensler, Radim Mrtka and Charlie Tretheway as potential hedges to Reinbacher. They might also look to acquire a RHD, but that is notoriously difficult to do so - which is also probably why they drafted Reinbacher.

How dare you post sometihng that is well thought out and makes complete and logical sense. This has no place on an HFboard, go back to the library nerd says the old man yelling at the clouds

Just kidding very well put.

 

[WeThreeKings]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1844384885022261736

Arguably the worst GM in franchise history and somehow a worse person

 

[Tyson]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1844384885022261736

Arguably the worst GM in franchise history and somehow a worse person

The sad part is that he managed to snow Geoff Molson for a decade.

 

[Sorinth]

I originally started writing this in the Mesar thread in response to criticisms about the Mesar pick as a management decision, but then realized it would probably be better suited here.

Criticizing the Mesar pick as a poor management decision echoes the same narrow framing/myopic decision making that characterized Bergevin's obsession with winning every trade. In contrast, HuGo is operating with a much more strategic, long-term vision for building a contending team that will ensure the Habs do not fail if they miss on a first round pick.

When they took over, I imagine they did an exercise to create a future vision of what a contender would look like. They probably started with setting aspects of team identity - being big, skilled, fast, effective in counter attack, etc. They likely also spent some time defining player archetype roles that would have to be filled to achieve this vision of the team. I bet they would be pretty detailed on this and do it for all 4 lines/6 defense/2 goalies, not just the top line.

Some of those archetype roles would be fairly obvious - things like a number one center or number one defenseman, but some might be less obvious - roles like a faceoff specialist or a secondary scorer who plays both wing and center. The design would be interconnected and ensuring that every role supports other aspects of the team and the overall vision for what the contending team would be.

The toughest part of this process is player acquisition, as the players that fill certain roles in a contending team are unique, rare, and not available every year. To fill these key roles, I suspected they've adopted a "bet and hedge" approach. For example, when HuGo first took over, they likely believed in Nick Suzuki's potential to be a number-1 center, but he still hadn't proven it. They bet on him to become one, but hedged that bet by acquiring Kirby Dach early in the rebuild, who also had the potential to become a first-line center. This way, the most likely outcome is that at least one of them develops into a first line center, with less likely outcomes being that both develop into a first line center or neither develops into a first line center. It's a different approach than say Bergevin, who put all his eggs in one basket with Drouin becoming a first line center. Another time I think they've done this is betting on Caufield to becoming a 40 goal scorer, and hedging against it by acquiring Laine.

Now imagine that one of the archetypes is a versatile secondary scorer. Such players are valuable to contenders not only for their scoring but also for providing the coach with flexibility when injuries occur. Over the last three years, they've addressed this need in three ways: drafting Mesar, acquiring Newhook and drafting Hage. At the time of making these decisions, it wasn't clear which of the three would pan out but that's okay - they've covered their bases and positioned themselves to have that role filled when they are ready to contend.

Bergevin by contrast would have picked Mesar and simply hoped he became the secondary scorer, with no other moves to hedge against him busting. This lack of supporting moves is part of why every bust in the 2010s hurt the Habs so much and why the team never seemed to be built with a vision in mind. Looking ahead, if Mesar doesn't pan out, it wont derail the Habs in their contending years. There are other players in the organization who could fill that role.

This approach might also inform what their next moves might be focused. I think they made the bet last year that Reinbacher would be a top pairing RHD. Right now the only hedge against this is Guhle playing on his offside and that's not ideal, especially if Matheson leaves the team or declines in a few seasons. In this years draft I bet the Habs are keeping an eye on players like Logan Hensler, Radim Mrtka and Charlie Tretheway as potential hedges to Reinbacher. They might also look to acquire a RHD, but that is notoriously difficult to do so - which is also probably why they drafted Reinbacher.

For sure one of the big differences between Hughes and Bergevin is Hughes has a vision whereas Bergevin didn't but I very much doubt they had or have a highly detailed plan for what the roster should look like with predefined roles ascribed throughout. That just doesn't strike me as a realistic approach to roster building. There are so many different ways to build a contender that you can't limit yourself to some preconceived ideal of how things should be. If for example you end up with two franchise centers like Crosby and Malkin then it completly changes how you will want to build the rest of the roster compared to having Suzuki level centers, or if your franchise players are D or a goalie like Price. It's more about complementing your core players properly, so the player archetype roles are always going to be dependent on the strengths and weaknesses of whoever your core players are.

 

[badfish]

For sure one of the big differences between Hughes and Bergevin is Hughes has a vision whereas Bergevin didn't but I very much doubt they had or have a highly detailed plan for what the roster should look like with predefined roles ascribed throughout. That just doesn't strike me as a realistic approach to roster building. There are so many different ways to build a contender that you can't limit yourself to some preconceived ideal of how things should be. If for example you end up with two franchise centers like Crosby and Malkin then it completly changes how you will want to build the rest of the roster compared to having Suzuki level centers, or if your franchise players are D or a goalie like Price. It's more about complementing your core players properly, so the player archetype roles are always going to be dependent on the strengths and weaknesses of whoever your core players are.

Yes, I think in my post the word doing a lot of the heavy lifting was archetype in archetype role. It's meant to be a list of attributes of what you are looking for in this type of player, but is in no doubt meant to be a check-list of must haves. I have done similar work in my professional life and to your point, as you fill people in your team with certain attributes you may change what attributes you're looking for in other players.

 

[Habs Halifax]

I rarely go out of my way to give Bergevin and Timmins much credit but the 2021 draft could turn out to be one of the best draft years in recent Habs history.

Long term vision problems with them two yes. However, not everything they did was garbage. A lot of fans won't forgive them but some of the biggest parts of our core come from them.

Bergevin's biggest error was thinking he had enough with Price, Subban, Patch, Gallagher, 3rd OA (Galchenyuk), and vets like Markov and Pleky. Our pool was very thin with only 8 top 100 picks from 08-11 (the 4 drafts before Bergevin was hired). 2012 and 2013 drafts didn't replenish our pool enough and when you compare that to our current pool, it's knight and day difference. Our best prospects were Beaulieu, Tinordi, McCarron, DLR, Lehkonen. Come on man!

Gorton/Hughes/MSL know what they are doing (clearly!). Keep pumping up the draft power and ensure development is not overlooked.