My greater theory about Kent Hughes & 'CULTURE'

[Mackiaveli]

This might be a stretch - and it could be the biggest cope I have ever typed in my entire life because we just passed on a potentially generational goal scorer to reach for a defenseman - BUT - hear me out.

With Bergevin, it was all about the CHaracter. With Hughes - it's CULTURE.

Inspired by wherein which Bobrov uses a specific word quite a few times - CULTURE.

Dach, Newhook, Slafkovsky, Beck and now seemingly Reinbacher (henceforth referred to as Dr/The Doctor) - all of these guys were acquired by Hughes - and they all have something in common. They're all charismatic, well spoken, mature players. They all seem like good kids - good teammates.

When you consider some of the other guys from Hughes past on our team - Farrell and Harris. It's the same thing. It's what Cole oozes in every interview. Guhle, despite being soft spoken - the same. It seems to be a recurring theme. I don't think Newhook was picked up at that price just because of his on-ice capabilities.

To really highlight where this comes from - after watching interviews with Reinbacher, there is a humbleness and eagerness to join the team. I think this pick is not just about addressing a serious need (RD) but about continuing to develop around a general philosophy; an almost Ted Lasso-ian focus on team building. I think Slaf fell into this same mold; just so much character and an eagerness to improve and be a good teammate.

Wright and Michkov will both be excellent players - hyper-competitive, skilled players who will excel in their own rights - but I think that the belief here might be that one well-oiled core is much more important than a single superstar cog.

Now - who knows if this will work out in the end - it will be interesting to see. Maybe this will all work in the end, and our doomsaying will be for nothing as we excitedly watch our team lift a cup.

Or, our team will be a perpetual bottom feeder and Michkov will become a perpetual threat to win the Rocket.

For what it's worth - agree with it or not - there is a plan here. Bergevin never really seemed to have a plan, so I will take a plan I disagree with over random over-corrections.

Click to read more...

 

[ottawa]

Great, another Kent Hughes thread. As if there haven't been enough...

Character and a healthy locker room culture are both great, but you know what else is great? A potential superstar like Michkov considering how starved this franchise is for scoring.

The fact is that no one knows if Michkov's "red flags" are overblown or not. The board went the safe route and drafted for need, as simple as that. Looks like the habs got a great prospect in Reinbacher, but if Michkov turns into a ppg+ player then it's inexcusable.

 

[River Meadow]

TL;DR

Can someone please summarize?

 

[VirginiaMtlExpat]

I agree with you. Plus, HuGo exercise a lot of care to ensure harmony from a salary standpoint, with the recent Leafs tribulations serving as a cautionary tale.

 

[vokiel]

TL;DR

Can someone please summarize?

We are frustrated and we need money.

 

[Frank Drebin]

Our talentless boring habs have had more playoff success than quite a few more talented teams (jets, oilers, leafs immediately come to mind)

Not saying that our 2012-21 roster was good, or a good blueprint, but you have to admit the sum was greater than it's individual parts.

I guess it's good these gms are trying to build a team with an identity rather than just grouping the best hockey players together with no consideration for anything else.

I guess we'll see how it plays out.

 

[ottawa]

TL;DR

Can someone please summarize?

Copium

 

[Mackiaveli]

Character and a healthy locker room culture are both great, but you know what else is great? A potential superstar like Michkov considering how starved this franchise is for scoring.

I agree - I wanted Michkov - it ruined my night when they said Reinbacher. I am just trying to make some sense of it; they didn't do it for funzies. They aren't trolling - they did what they genuinely think was best for the organization. I want to understand WHY they did it - and I think it is the same reason they traded for Newhook.

I wonder if Mailloux ever makes it to the Canadiens roster.

Copium

yeah that's true - no sense crying over spilled milk, though. Michkov is not, and will not ever be a Hab - no matter how shitty that is or how much we bitch about it. Thank god we have Caufield lmfao

Can someone please summarize?

TL;DR I think every decision he has made is with the primary focus of building a cohesive locker room culture a la Ted Lasso (not actually inspired just a fun comparison) ... he is basically putting together a room of 'good' kids who also happen to be good hockey players, and hoping their passion for the game and their quality of character allow them to pull together and win it all.

also I might just be coping because we passed on a generational goal scorer potentially for an, in Hughes words, at best, 2D.

 

[River Meadow]

TL;DR I think every decision he has made is with the primary focus of building a cohesive locker room culture a la Ted Lasso (not actually inspired just a fun comparison) ... he is basically putting together a room of 'good' kids who also happen to be good hockey players, and hoping their passion for the game and their quality of character allow them to pull together and win it all.

also I might just be coping because we passed on a generational goal scorer potentially for an, in Hughes words, at best, 2D.

Oh, I think you're 100% correct, and they are very clear about this.

I think it's smart.

 

[MadMslm]

I agree - I wanted Michkov - it ruined my night when they said Reinbacher. I am just trying to make some sense of it; they didn't do it for funzies. They aren't trolling - they did what they genuinely think was best for the organization. I want to understand WHY they did it - and I think it is the same reason they traded for Newhook.

I wonder if Mailloux ever makes it to the Canadiens roster.

yeah that's true - no sense crying over spilled milk, though. Michkov is not, and will not ever be a Hab - no matter how shitty that is or how much we bitch about it. Thank god we have Caufield lmfao



TL;DR I think every decision he has made is with the primary focus of building a cohesive locker room culture a la Ted Lasso (not actually inspired just a fun comparison) ... he is basically putting together a room of 'good' kids who also happen to be good hockey players, and hoping their passion for the game and their quality of character allow them to pull together and win it all.

also I might just be coping because we passed on a generational goal scorer potentially for an, in Hughes words, at best, 2D.

Character and personality do play a role in the selection process, and I’m sure every team tries to get that part right.

If you want to make sense out of the pick, I think it’s quite simple.

They just liked Reinbacher a lot. In the end, it came down to which player they liked the most and that was him.

 

[ReHabs]

Culture seems to be exactly like Character and Attitude.

A strong culture would’ve been able to absorb Michkov and magnify his strengths and minimize his weaknesses. Seems to me they’re afraid Michkov wouldn’t fit even after three more years of this culture seeding.

Are they not confident in themselves or is this just another excuse and false reason to justify themselves like it was Character and Attitude

 

[BenchBrawl]

Personally, if I build a hockey team culture, I'd rather aggressive working class types. They will the eat the well-spoken alive, but in reality those aggressive working class types are often well-spoken and extremely intelligent behind the facade.

But these guys don't play hockey anymore.

 

[ottawa]

I agree - I wanted Michkov - it ruined my night when they said Reinbacher. I am just trying to make some sense of it; they didn't do it for funzies. They aren't trolling - they did what they genuinely think was best for the organization. I want to understand WHY they did it - and I think it is the same reason they traded for Newhook.

I wonder if Mailloux ever makes it to the Canadiens roster.

yeah that's true - no sense crying over spilled milk, though. Michkov is not, and will not ever be a Hab - no matter how shitty that is or how much we bitch about it. Thank god we have Caufield lmfao



TL;DR I think every decision he has made is with the primary focus of building a cohesive locker room culture a la Ted Lasso (not actually inspired just a fun comparison) ... he is basically putting together a room of 'good' kids who also happen to be good hockey players, and hoping their passion for the game and their quality of character allow them to pull together and win it all.

also I might just be coping because we passed on a generational goal scorer potentially for an, in Hughes words, at best, 2D.

I mean I agree with you, Reinbacher is still a great defenseman but until Michkov busts or Reinbacher isn't considered a more core player, a part of me just can't be happy lol. Call me bitter or petty idc.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Two drafts now with Gorton/Hughes and after several trades. Lets take a look at what was left from Bergevin vs what we have added.

Young pieces that is part of our future (From Bergevin): Suzuki, Caufield, Guhle, Xhekaj, Harris, Roy, Mailloux, Kidney, Dobes, RHP, Farrell. Others like Mysak, Struble, Tuch, Kapanen.
* Most of these guys come from the 19-21 draft years.

Young pieces that is part of our future (From Gorton/Hughes): Slafkovsky, Reinbacher, Newhook, Beck, Hutson, Engstrom, Mesar. Others like Rohrer, Fowler.
* Most of these guys come from the 22-23 draft years.

Hughes gets credit for brining in Dach, Matheson, Barron, Heineman, but he used Bergevin parts to get them. Romanov, Petry, Toffoli, Lehkonen.

Hughes also gets credit for the Monahan & Flames 1st trade.

Bergevin gets credit for Anderson & Monty, but gets a negative grade for contracts like Gallagher, Hoffman, Dvorak, Armia.

 

[Kiss Under the Guy]

That theory is far from far-fetched, but I have my doubts on it being successful. We're kind of on a cloud atm with MSL being a refreshing coach and all, but I've seen so many kids come in the league and lose their smiles after a year or two....

Talent can't disappear as easily. The confidence in MSL and the fun to play the game can (and will) fade as the L keep on piling up

 

[Hoochi Papa]

Culture seems to be exactly like Character and Attitude.

A strong culture would’ve been able to absorb Michkov and magnify his strengths and minimize his weaknesses. Seems to me they’re afraid Michkov wouldn’t fit even after three more years of this culture seeding.

Are they not confident in themselves or is this just another excuse and false reason to justify themselves like it was Character and Attitude

Exactly. Weak organisations like Canadiens need players to lift them. That's why they waste money on plugs with intangibles and shit the bed in draft because they'd rather have locker room rah-rah guys like Josh Gorges, who they can handle than Ilya Kovalchuk with strong will and pride.

 

[David Suzuki]

if you have confidence in your culture than you should be able to take risks on players who you think won’t fit into it inherently, otherwise what’s the point of culture?

 

[Shred]

if you have confidence in your culture than you should be able to take risks on players who you think won’t fit into it inherently, otherwise what’s the point of culture?

My thoughts exactly. Bruins are a good example of that.

 

[NORiculous]

Bergevin = Character + attitude
Hughes = Culture

Hughes says he looks at players that have the character to play in a pressurized environment like Montreal. Lapointe is still feeding the same stuff.

What’s the difference in this culture?

At first, Hughes said they would focus on speed and offence. They decided to build the D first. So… Next thing we know they will be looking for a star goaltender?

What has changed?

I like Dach and expect Newhook to be a good pickup. Is that the speed and offence?

 

[HuGo Burner Acc]

if you have confidence in your culture than you should be able to take risks on players who you think won’t fit into it inherently, otherwise what’s the point of culture?

Strongly agree and disagree at the same time. You need a strong veterans presence that can command the locker room for that to happen. That veteran core is suzuki, Caufield, Guhle, etc. Unfortunately, they're a bunch of kids in their early 20s right now. So young players are less likely to follow lock and step compared to an aged vet who's been around the world. The "culture" that HuGo and the rest of management is spreading of is something their trying to create not something that materializes in 1.5 years of them being there.

 

[ReimanSum1908]

TL;DR

Can someone please summarize?

Reinbacher projects as a number two defenseman at best according to the team; he was drafted for position and "character" and not talent, and this is the direction in which the team is going in their drafting and player acquisition.

 

[NotProkofievian]

This culture stuff is nauseating, honestly. Two years in a row we hear Lapointe and Bobrov talk about playoff hockey and being ''remind of what works and what doesn't'' and ''stuff that just. wins. cups.'' that I am honestly curious whether they have noticed that what wins games is scoring more goals than your opponents.

That's not a statistical observation, that's like...in the rulebook. You win if and only if you have more goals than your opponent when it's all said and done.

I honestly don't know how people can watch the Vegas Golden Knights score 26 more goals than anyone else in the playoffs, with 4 forwards accounting for more than half their goals, and conclude that, actually, we don't need high scoring forwards to win the cup.

 

[HuGo Burner Acc]

Bergevin = Character + attitude
Hughes = Culture

Hughes says he looks at players that have the character to play in a pressurized environment like Montreal. Lapointe is still feeding the same stuff.

What’s the difference in this culture?

At first, Hughes said they would focus on speed and offence. They decided to build the D first. So… Next thing we know they will be looking for a star goaltender?

What has changed?

I like Dach and expect Newhook to be a good pickup. Is that the speed and offence?

I'm gonna say something and it's going to be very controversial on this board. Forwards are the least important part of a Stanley Cup. Not saying they aren't important but if a team has a strong defence and an elite goalie, they can make 2nd rounds all day at least. It's they're just offence, you get the leafs. Toronto is the perfect example of why you don't build from the forwards in.

Also I think people are really misrepresenting HuGo when they say they want to play with speed. The Blackhawks dynasty was the fastest team I've ever seen. But it's not speed in the sense of offensive talent, it was speed in moving the puck, knowing where the be, etc. The Blackhawks no. 1 C was a dude who didn't even crack 70 pts on a normal basis. They had Patrick Kane. That's about it. They just perfected the game of hockey and knew how to play fast and with a bunch of hockey IQ.

 

[HuGo Burner Acc]

This culture stuff is honestly nauseating, honestly. Two years in a row we hear Lapointe and Bobrov talk about playoff hockey and being ''remind of what works and what doesn't'' and ''stuff that just. wins. cups.'' that I am honestly curious whether they have noticed that what wins games is scoring more goals than your opponents.

That's not a statistical observation, that's like...in the rulebook. You win if and only if you have more goals than your opponent when it's all said and done.

I honestly don't know how people can watch the Vegas Golden Knights score 26 more goals than anyone else in the playoffs, with 4 forwards accounting for more than half their goals, and conclude that, actually, we don't need high scoring forwards to win the cup.

All you need to win a cup is a hot goalie, a team with almost or no holes whatsoever and forward who are competent enough to capitalize on the mistakes made by the other team. You don't win in the playoffs by creating a bunch of scoring chances out of thin air. Toronto is a perfect example of this. Forward talent only gets you so far, out in the first round normally. The teams that win tend to be hard checking, defensively talented, and have a hot goalie. I do agree that you need a few skilled forwards but the Conn Smythe winner has never cleared 75 pts in his career and is usually around a 60-65 pts player. Which goes back to my point in a previous post that forwards are the least important element of winning a cup

 

[NotProkofievian]

All you need to win a cup is a hot goalie, a team with almost or no holes whatsoever and forward who are competent enough to capitalize on the mistakes made by the other team. You don't win in the playoffs by creating a bunch of scoring chances out of thin air. Toronto is a perfect example of this. Forward talent only gets you so far, out in the first round normally. The teams that win tend to be hard checking, defensively talented, and have a hot goalie. I do agree that you need a few skilled forwards but the Conn Smythe winner has never cleared 75 pts in his career and is usually around a 60-65 pts player. Which goes back to my point in a previous post that forwards are the least important element of winning a cup

What part of the following is unclear to you: vegas had 4 forwards who scored 10 or more goals, who accounted for more than 50% of their goals scored. Three of them were over PPG in the playoffs, and the team scored way more goals than any other team in the playoffs.

The lesson from this is that we shouldn't have high scoring forwards, somehow?