Official Tank Thread

[teamfirst]

Except that he’d just signed Price for ten million dollars…

Curious to know what you would've done.........let him test free agency, trade him ( alltho i think trading him would have been a good choice if rebuild was possible at the time).......... he didn't had any other choice imo

 

[McGuires Corndog]

Curious to know what you would've done.........let him test free agency, trade him ( alltho i think trading him would have been a good choice if rebuild was possible at the time).......... he didn't had any other choice imo

Bergevin continually backed himself into corners by not picking a direction. He didn’t want to sacrifice picks or prospects but didn’t want to rebuild either.

That’s his legacy. Was there some good work? Yes, but it was by far and large mostly bad to terrible work.

 

[Archijerej]

I would just like to point out that Bergevin wanted Cody Glass, not Nick Suzuki.

By proxy, he fell ass backwards into a net positive trade. Without Suzuki, this team would be worse than Chicago.

The whole league preferred Cody Glass at that time. There's no point in making the man's faults bigger than they really were.

 

[teamfirst]

Bergevin continually backed himself into corners by not picking a direction. He didn’t want to sacrifice picks or prospects but didn’t want to rebuild either.

That’s his legacy. Was there some good work? Yes, but it was by far and large mostly bad to terrible work.

Cool but, in what way does this is addressing my post.

 

[salbutera]

Bergevin continually backed himself into corners by not picking a direction. He didn’t want to sacrifice picks or prospects but didn’t want to rebuild either.

That’s his legacy. Was there some good work? Yes, but it was by far and large mostly bad to terrible work.

It’s wasn’t MBs direction to choose - McGuire said at interview for GM job it was made clear any rebuild suggestions were not acceptable options

 

[Sorinth]

For all of Bergevin 's failings, at least Gorton and Hughes walked into a decent situation.

Was it actually all that decent relative to league average. Like sure there were a couple good to great young players/prospects, but that feels like it's the average situation for GMs to inherit.

We'd really have to look around the league to know for sure, and that seems like a lot of work I don't want to do, but as a quick Habs only view. Gauthier left a much better situation on exit. And I think there's a pretty strong case that Savard left Gainey a better situation as well.

When all it takes to leave a "decent situation" to your successor is to leave some good young players/prospects then even Houle would qualify as leaving a decent situation.

 

[DAChampion]

Was it actually all that decent relative to league average. Like sure there were a couple good to great young players/prospects, but that feels like it's the average situation for GMs to inherit.

We'd really have to look around the league to know for sure, and that seems like a lot of work I don't want to do, but as a quick Habs only view. Gauthier left a much better situation on exit. And I think there's a pretty strong case that Savard left Gainey a better situation as well.

When all it takes to leave a "decent situation" to your successor is to leave some good young players/prospects then even Houle would qualify as leaving a decent situation.

Gauthier left a better situation due to the league giving two compliance buyouts. So is it fair to say that Gauthier left a better situation?

What did Houle and Savard leave? And isn't it the case that Savard didn't deserve to be fired?

 

[McGuires Corndog]

It’s wasn’t MBs direction to choose - McGuire said at interview for GM job it was made clear any rebuild suggestions were not acceptable options

That was in 2012?

Am I supposed to believe that option was completely off the table until Jeff Gorton was hired?

Let’s play devils advocate, so his mandate was to win then right? He did not trade a single prospect or first round pick his entire tenure. He just sat on his hands the whole time: wasting prime Subban/Weber and Pacioretty.

 

[Anardil]

Next year? We just beat 3 Stanley cup champions in their barns.

And just lost to Chicago. The poster you were quoting makes a valid point. This team still lacks upper level talent/depth to consistently be part of playoff contention.

Demidov will help greatly, as long as he is able to adjust quickly to the NHL.

 

[Sorinth]

Gauthier left a better situation due to the league giving two compliance buyouts. So is it fair to say that Gauthier left a better situation?

What did Houle and Savard leave? And isn't it the case that Savard didn't deserve to be fired?

The buyouts no doubt helped, but I was more referring to Price, Subban, Pacioretty, Gallagher, Eller, even Markov and Plekanec had many good years left. And really you just have to look at what happened, Bergevin did almost nothing to improve the roster adding only Prust, Armstrong, Bouillon and the team ended up top-5 in the league. Bergevin's plan was actually the same as Hughes', do very little to make the team better and just sit at the bottom of the standings for a few years collecting top picks. The team Bergevin inherited was simply too good to do that, the team Hughes' inherented was bad enough to do exactly that.

Houle left guys like Koivu, Ribeiro, Markov, Beauchemin, Ryder, Souray, and a host of guys who played close to or exceed 1000 games in mid-tier roles like Hainsey, Rivet, Zubrus, etc...

 

[Anardil]

How do you flip that switch between finishing bottom 4 one year and playoffs the year after?

It's just as easy as going to the Stanley Cup Final one year, then finishing last the next year.

 

[Sorinth]

And just lost to Chicago. The poster you were quoting makes a valid point. This team still lacks upper level talent/depth to consistently be part of a playoff worthy team.

Demidov will help greatly, as long as he is able to adjust quickly to the NHL.

Chicago has wins this year against Edmonton, Colorado, LA, Minnesota, Florida, Dallas, Washington to name a few. I don't think you can draw any conclusions one way or the other based on who you win/lose too.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Bergevin left a decent starting position for Hughes and Gorton, we can acknowledge that reality without relitigating all of his decisions.

We can.

By but I think it’s also important not to romanticize his tenure here. One of his biggest issues was a failure to develop players. I think Caufield’s a good example of how they were holding talent back.

 

[Anardil]

Chicago has wins this year against Edmonton, Colorado, LA, Minnesota, Florida, Dallas, Washington to name a few. I don't think you can draw any conclusions one way or the other based on who you win/lose too.

It goes both ways. You can't then say that the rebuild should be ending because of a 3 game winning streak against top teams.

This team still relies too much on great goaltending to win games. This team also does not have the depth to be able to overcome missing one key player.

Remember whenever Price went down? Laine missing? The team is a lottery level team.

Let's look at Tampa for an example. Everyone here loves to crap on them because they supposedly circumvented Cap rules by LTIRing Kucherov for the season, then bringing him in for the playoffs. We should all be applauding them for building a team that could withstand the loss of one of, if not their best player for the regular season, and still make the playoffs rather easily. They should be the model to follow, as much as I dislike them.

I've accepted long ago that the Habs will never be a dynasty ever again. I just want to see a team that resembles the Tampa/Chicago 'pseudo dynasties' of the past decade. I'm tired of wondering every season if the team can make the playoffs. I want to wonder instead, if they can contend for the Cup.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Curious to know what you would've done.........let him test free agency, trade him ( alltho i think trading him would have been a good choice if rebuild was possible at the time).......... he didn't had any other choice imo

I would have signed him and I would’ve tried to win. Our problem was that we never picked a direction.

Price was a true superstar. He was the caliber of player that you can build cup winners around. The kind who elevates his games in the postseason and can steal you a series rather than just a game. To me, that’s someone you go all in on. So yeah, I’d have signed him and traded away picks/prospects to try to win now. We didn’t do that.

And we could’ve traded him and gone the other way but that really would’ve shown what a failure MB was. For him to walk into a string situation like that and then blow it up? That’s the height of incompetence. He knew he couldn’t do that so he signed Price and half assed it.

Price almost led us to a finals in 2014 and actually did it five years later. If we’d had go teams over that time we would’ve won a cup. Instead we trashed the team and his numbers went with it. It was f***ing sad to watch.

 

[Kennerback]

It goes both ways. You can't then say that the rebuild should be ending because of a 3 game winning streak against top teams.

This team still relies too much on great goaltending to win games. This team also does not have the depth to be able to overcome missing one key player.

Remember whenever Price went down? Laine missing? The team is a lottery level team.

Let's look at Tampa for an example. Everyone here loves to crap on them because they supposedly circumvented Cap rules by LTIRing Kucherov for the season, then bringing him in for the playoffs. We should all be applauding them for building a team that could withstand the loss of one of, if not their best player for the regular season, and still make the playoffs rather easily. They should be the model to follow, as much as I dislike them.

I've accepted long ago that the Habs will never be a dynasty ever again. I just want to see a team that resembles the Tampa/Chicago 'pseudo dynasties' of the past decade. I'm tired of wondering every season if the team can make the playoffs. I want to wonder instead, if they can contend for the Cup.

I appreciate the feeling. And I see issues with the team holding us back… However I also look at the standings and see Ottawa on the Wild Card spot and they’re not a good team at all. So it’s very confusing.

 

[themilosh]

It goes both ways. You can't then say that the rebuild should be ending because of a 3 game winning streak against top teams.

This team still relies too much on great goaltending to win games. This team also does not have the depth to be able to overcome missing one key player.

Remember whenever Price went down? Laine missing? The team is a lottery level team.

Let's look at Tampa for an example. Everyone here loves to crap on them because they supposedly circumvented Cap rules by LTIRing Kucherov for the season, then bringing him in for the playoffs. We should all be applauding them for building a team that could withstand the loss of one of, if not their best player for the regular season, and still make the playoffs rather easily. They should be the model to follow, as much as I dislike them.

I've accepted long ago that the Habs will never be a dynasty ever again. I just want to see a team that resembles the Tampa/Chicago 'pseudo dynasties' of the past decade. I'm tired of wondering every season if the team can make the playoffs. I want to wonder instead, if they can contend for the Cup.

And this is what Hugo is doing.. we no longer are going to pretend that just making the playoffs, chip and chair, is a zero sum game - a la bergevin.
When we make playoffs we will actually contend.

Any fan who watched the Halak/Price era will know - goalies can win games, even series' with a lot of luck.. but when the going gets tough - the CH roster has been brutal for 30 years..

Give it time.. so much to undo, so much to rebuild.

 

[Jurivan Demidovsky]

I would have signed him and I would’ve tried to win. Our problem was that we never picked a direction.

Price was a true superstar. He was the caliber of player that you can build cup winners around. The kind who elevates his games in the postseason and can steal you a series rather than just a game. To me, that’s someone you go all in on. So yeah, I’d have signed him and traded away picks/prospects to try to win now. We didn’t do that.

And we could’ve traded him and gone the other way but that really would’ve shown what a failure MB was. For him to walk into a string situation like that and then blow it up? That’s the height of incompetence. He knew he couldn’t do that so he signed Price and half assed it.

Price almost led us to a finals in 2014 and actually did it five years later. If we’d had go teams over that time we would’ve won a cup. Instead we trashed the team and his numbers went with it. It was f***ing sad to watch.

The whole Bergevin era was insanity. Like living in the twilight zone.

 

[teamfirst]

I would have signed him and I would’ve tried to win. Our problem was that we never picked a direction.

Price was a true superstar. He was the caliber of player that you can build cup winners around. The kind who elevates his games in the postseason and can steal you a series rather than just a game. To me, that’s someone you go all in on. So yeah, I’d have signed him and traded away picks/prospects to try to win now. We didn’t do that.

And we could’ve traded him and gone the other way but that really would’ve shown what a failure MB was. For him to walk into a string situation like that and then blow it up? That’s the height of incompetence. He knew he couldn’t do that so he signed Price and half assed it.

Price almost led us to a finals in 2014 and actually did it five years later. If we’d had go teams over that time we would’ve won a cup. Instead we trashed the team and his numbers went with it. It was f***ing sad to watch.

So to put it shortly, you agree with me that he had no other choice

 

[rahad]

Curious to know what you would've done.........let him test free agency, trade him ( alltho i think trading him would have been a good choice if rebuild was possible at the time).......... he didn't had any other choice imo

I don't believe we would have gotten much trading Price. Goalie don't bring a lot in trade vs forward/Defensemen.

 

[Gaylord Q Tinkledink]

Saw a post asking about the top 10 prospects in Montreal and this team needs to suck AND keep both 1sts and 2nds this draft and get that prospect pool up..

So, lose again tonight.

 

[Sorinth]

It goes both ways. You can't then say that the rebuild should be ending because of a 3 game winning streak against top teams.

Agreed, but people aren't really saying the rebuild is over because of those 3 games, they are saying it's over because after 38 games we are very much a team in mix and not one that is at the bottom of the standings looking at another high pick.

Those 3 games are used to dispute certain claims such as we are only in the mix because of an "easy schedule" and wins against bad teams. I mean the post you made about the 3 games, you quoted someone responding to the claim that we will only start winning against good teams next year. Which is plainly false, and as I pointed out the wrong way to look at things because winning games against good teams isn't a reliable measure. The reliable measure is winning over the long term, and from that we can say this team is in the mix.

Whether being in the mix means the rebuild is over or not depends on your definition of what a rebuild is.

This team still relies too much on great goaltending to win games. This team also does not have the depth to be able to overcome missing one key player.

Remember whenever Price went down? Laine missing? The team is a lottery level team.

FIrst the goaltender is part of the team, if Ottawa holds on and makes the playoffs it will because of great goaltending from Ullmark. And plenty of good teams fall flat because they don't have good goaletnding. Like many other positions it can be a strength or a weakness, like every other position if it's a strength it can coverup for other holes in the lineup. McDavid covers up for a lot of holes on defence and goaltending for example.

Let's look at Tampa for an example. Everyone here loves to crap on them because they supposedly circumvented Cap rules by LTIRing Kucherov for the season, then bringing him in for the playoffs. We should all be applauding them for building a team that could withstand the loss of one of, if not their best player for the regular season, and still make the playoffs rather easily. They should be the model to follow, as much as I dislike them.

That's a weird argument since a big reason Tampa did well even though they lost their top player was because they turned around and spent his money on replacements. So the team didn't just absorb the loss and still play well, they brought in guys to help replace and offset that loss.

Also worth noting that Tampa relied heavily on goaltending that year. Vasilevsky was 7th in Hart voting the year they lost Kucherov. They didn't have a single PPG player and relied on goaltending, stingy D, and depth scoring, sound familiar?

 

[ReHabs]

Also worth noting that Tampa relied heavily on goaltending that year. Vasilevsky was 7th in Hart voting the year they lost Kucherov. They didn't have a single PPG player and relied on goaltending, stingy D, and depth scoring, sound familiar?

Their roster was absolutely stacked. It’s not acceptable to handwave away Stamkos, Point, and Palat as “depth scoring” and Hedman, McDonagh, and Sergachev as “stingy D”.

 

[Anardil]

I appreciate the feeling. And I see issues with the team holding us back… However I also look at the standings and see Ottawa on the Wild Card spot and they’re not a good team at all. So it’s very confusing.

The team is also 3 game losing streak away from being back in the 1st over all discussion.

 

[Anardil]

Agreed, but people aren't really saying the rebuild is over because of those 3 games, they are saying it's over because after 38 games we are very much a team in mix and not one that is at the bottom of the standings looking at another high pick.

Those 3 games are used to dispute certain claims such as we are only in the mix because of an "easy schedule" and wins against bad teams. I mean the post you made about the 3 games, you quoted someone responding to the claim that we will only start winning against good teams next year. Which is plainly false, and as I pointed out the wrong way to look at things because winning games against good teams isn't a reliable measure. The reliable measure is winning over the long term, and from that we can say this team is in the mix.

Whether being in the mix means the rebuild is over or not depends on your definition of what a rebuild is.


FIrst the goaltender is part of the team, if Ottawa holds on and makes the playoffs it will because of great goaltending from Ullmark. And plenty of good teams fall flat because they don't have good goaletnding. Like many other positions it can be a strength or a weakness, like every other position if it's a strength it can coverup for other holes in the lineup. McDavid covers up for a lot of holes on defence and goaltending for example.


That's a weird argument since a big reason Tampa did well even though they lost their top player was because they turned around and spent his money on replacements. So the team didn't just absorb the loss and still play well, they brought in guys to help replace and offset that loss.

Also worth noting that Tampa relied heavily on goaltending that year. Vasilevsky was 7th in Hart voting the year they lost Kucherov. They didn't have a single PPG player and relied on goaltending, stingy D, and depth scoring, sound familiar?

Of course goalies are part of the team. But I am tired of the 40 years of the goalies being the 90% reason of any Habs success. I grew up watching a Habs team that had ppg players almost up to the 3rd line.

I don't know about you, but I would like to have a skater have an consistent impact on the success of the team instead of a goalie.