The state of the Habs Rebuild - The Next step

  • HFBoards is well aware that today is election day in the US. We ask respectfully to focus on hockey and not politics.

What note you give to Kent Hughes' Rebuild? ?

  • A

    Votes: 205 51.9%
  • B

    Votes: 143 36.2%
  • C

    Votes: 39 9.9%
  • D

    Votes: 3 0.8%
  • E

    Votes: 1 0.3%
  • F

    Votes: 8 2.0%

  • Total voters
    395

HabsCode

Registered User
Feb 10, 2019
3,072
3,598
Can't forget Bergevin numerous rebuilding moves when considering the timeline of the current HuGo era such as the Simon Bourque for Armia and picks trade, the signing of Kovalchuk. Or acquiring Gustafsson for a 7nd pre covid run. Or is it the trading of Nathan Beaulieu in 2017 for a 3rd round pick?

Wait how can I forget the trade of Andrew Shaw and a 7th round pick for a 2nd, 3rd and a 7th? That moves should have set us for years to come.

And please don't bring up Pacioretty trade, the player asked for a trade and wasn't agreeing for an extension.

The 5 draft before Hughes came in, Montreal picked top 14 once. All other picks were 15 and up. We were definitely not in a rebuilding phase in any sort of form, Bergevin was still going for it with his UFA patching signing and trades.
 

ReHabs

Registered User
Sponsor
Jan 18, 2022
8,019
12,364
I agree, and this point gets misunderstood. Many key players of the rebuild are already on the team. Suzuki, Caufield, Slafkovsky, Dach, Newhook, Guhle, Struble, and Xhekaj. These aren't rookies. Some improvement is expected. If so, the team should improve incrementally. Nobody's expecting us to win this season. Forget playoffs and 'in the mix'. I'm just talking about moving up slowly, not languishing at the bottom once again.

Sure, a lot depends on future players like Demidov, Reinbacher and Hage, and on rookies like Hutson. But even more depends on the current players.

At some point, tanking stops being a strategy and starts becoming a symptom of stagnation.
I was mostly just making a joke at the expense of the perverted tankophiles -- however, you hit the nail on the head.

We're not in crisis. Nobody needs to be fired. Nothing is "wrong". But we should be expecting improvements if not actually enjoying/seeing improvements.

A bad start to a season is not the end of the world but dirty, dirty tankophiles insisting that it's actually what we should expect just doesn't sit right with me... we look like crap. Not a serious hockey team. We look like a loser team of losers. The suckiest bunch of sucks who ever sucked (-- Homer Simpson). It's not good to see these not-so "young players" (some on mega contracts) be on a team that plays like loose shit and be patted on the head for it.
 

Mrb1p

PRICERSTOPDAPUCK
Dec 10, 2011
91,323
58,407
Citizen of the world
How about the last few years of Bergevin where he spent picks and then let Price, Weber, Danault, and Tatar walk, extended Gallagher instead of trading him, didn't trade Petry, and lost Kotkaniemi before trading the OS picks for Dvorak and signing Savard/Hoffman/Armia? You make this point a lot and I just don't understand the connection. Even if we for some reason accept that we've been "rebuilding" since 2015-2016 it doesn't change anything for today because we are still missing the ACTUAL PLAYERS. Drafting Kotkaniemi, Ylonen, Romanov, and Harris in 2018 did not put us in a position to be competitive today. Drafting Sergachev in 2016 does not help us today at all.

I'm not trying to get into the weeds on what we should have done back then because I can't honestly say with hindsight we "should" have blown that team up instead of having the 2021 playoff run. I also don't care to debate if we were rebuilding or not back then because it doesn't really matter. A few spare 2nds doesn't mean anything today compared to losing your entire veteran core and having the last remaining value from the 2005 and 2007 drafts evaporate after largely whiffing in the draft from 2008-2017. For example, Toronto had JVR/Bozak/Gardiner/Kadri as supporting vets when they took their big step, we have Matheson who compares to Gardiner and that's about it.

Suzuki, Caufield, and Guhle are great pieces and of course Bergevin was good at collecting extra picks around the margins and we were able to turn some of those pieces into Dach/Laine which helps. That's still not nearly enough to make up for losing two hall of famers plus our other core vets from 2021 with no trade return and then immediately filling up the cap sheet with Hoffman, Savard, Armia, and Dvorak on top of Gallagher and Drouin leaving us no cap space to take advantage of the flat cap era deals AND unable to retain our own veterans even if we wanted to.

Yeah like I said above I don't think I can get to the point where I can say with hindsight that I'd have sacrificed 2021 to sell those guys, but it's the most direct reason we're still in this rebuilding phase right now.
Did he spend picks? Aside.from Dvo.
 

ReHabs

Registered User
Sponsor
Jan 18, 2022
8,019
12,364
The 5 draft before Hughes came in, Montreal picked top 14 once. All other picks were 15 and up. We were definitely not in a rebuilding phase in any sort of form, Bergevin was still going for it with his UFA patching signing and trades.
Kotkaniemi Sergachev Caufield is three top 14 picks in the five seasons before Hughes was hired.
 

Kobe Armstrong

Registered User
Jul 26, 2011
15,581
6,527
The rebuild officially started the moment we traded Toffoli away - that was the first domino and led to a busy trade deadline where we dumped Lehkonen, Chiarot, and Kulak.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Theodore450

ReHabs

Registered User
Sponsor
Jan 18, 2022
8,019
12,364
The rebuild officially started the moment we traded Toffoli away - that was the first domino and led to a busy trade deadline where we dumped Lehkonen, Chiarot, and Kulak.
I think this is the same as saying the rebuild started with Bergevin's firing -- which is the most accurate way to approach it.

A fun exercise:

[ChatGPT's definition of rebuild] In professional sports, the term "rebuild" refers to a strategic phase where a team deliberately shifts its focus from short-term success to long-term improvement. This usually involves trading away established, often high-paid players in exchange for younger talent, draft picks, or prospects. The goal is to reset the roster, often with a focus on developing young players, creating financial flexibility, and building a sustainable foundation for future success.

A rebuild typically occurs when a team has been underperforming, when a roster has become too old or expensive, or when a championship window has closed. Rebuilding periods can vary in length and are often challenging for both players and fans, as they may mean sacrificing immediate competitiveness for the promise of a stronger future team.

[ChatGPT definition of tanking] In professional sports, "tanking" refers to the practice of intentionally losing games or underperforming in a season to achieve a more favorable position in future drafts. Since many sports leagues use draft systems where the worst-performing teams receive higher picks (or better odds in a draft lottery), a struggling team may opt to "tank" to secure top prospects or talent who could contribute to the team's long-term success.

Tanking can be controversial because it compromises the competitive integrity of the sport. While the intention is usually to rebuild the team more quickly, it can frustrate fans, players, and officials, as it may feel like the team isn't giving its best effort. Some leagues have implemented draft lotteries or other mechanisms to discourage tanking, making it less certain that a losing season will automatically translate into the best draft position.
 

HabsCode

Registered User
Feb 10, 2019
3,072
3,598
Kotkaniemi Sergachev Caufield is three top 14 picks in the five seasons before Hughes was hired.
Nope.

5 draft before Hughes:

2021: Mailloux(31)
2020: Ghule(16)
2019: Caufield(15)
2018: Kotkaniemi(3)
2017: Poelhing(25)

We were a middle of the pack team, and Bergevin was not doing moves that were indicating a rebuild was taking place.

It is pretty obvious that the start of the rebuild started after HuGo hiring, not before.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ReHabs

Lafleurs Guy

Guuuuuuuy!
Jul 20, 2007
78,299
49,611
I'm cool with that. My expectations aren't high, but they're not zero, either. Some struggling is normal, but some progress is equally normal. Like New Jersey – they can call last season an off-year because they showed great potential the season before. I'm not expecting a huge surge like NJ, but we should see a hint of potential from at least some of our guys we consider to be our future core. Between now and April I'd like the D to settle down somewhat. I'd like Dach to look closer to where he was pre-injury. I'd like to see less panic. I want my increment.
I agree that we want to see progress. And maybe we still will. The good news is that the core players are playing reasonably well.

But if we don’t, it’s not the end of the world. And it certainly doesn’t mean we’re in a perpetual tank scenario.
 

ReHabs

Registered User
Sponsor
Jan 18, 2022
8,019
12,364
Nope.

5 draft before Hughes:

2021: Mailloux(31)
2020: Ghule(16)
2019: Caufield(15)
2018: Kotkaniemi(3)
2017: Poelhing(25)

We were a middle of the pack team, and Bergevin was not doing moves that were indicating a rebuild was taking place.

It is pretty obvious that the start of the rebuild started after HuGo hiring, not before.
I got it wrong (thought Sergy was 2017 and Caufield 14th OA, but you were cunning in your delinations!) but I don't think you even need to argue that the rebuild started with HuGo's hiring -- that much is plainly obvious. It shouldn't even be up for debate.

A more interesting debate is if Caufield, Suzuki, and Guhle (+) counts as a good, normal, or bad initial position of a rebuild's asset bank.
 

417

Cole "Cold" Palmer
Feb 20, 2003
52,434
30,270
Ottawa
The rebuild officially started the moment we traded Toffoli away - that was the first domino and led to a busy trade deadline where we dumped Lehkonen, Chiarot, and Kulak.
No it didn't...at least not IMO.

Before you rebuild anything, it implies something already existed that you have to tear down.

That was the tear down (which frankly, continues to this day and this trade deadline when he gets rid of Armia, Dvorak and perhaps Savard).

Their rebuild started that summer when they drafted Slafkovsky.

Dumping is not rebuilding since you're stripping away. You rebuild by adding, not stripping.
 

HabsCode

Registered User
Feb 10, 2019
3,072
3,598
I got it wrong (thought Sergy was 2017 and Caufield 14th OA, but you were cunning in your delinations!) but I don't think you even need to argue that the rebuild started with HuGo's hiring -- that much is plainly obvious. It shouldn't even be up for debate.
I’ve read some comments on the Habs board (don’t know if its this thread or another one) saying that rebuild has been going in for longer tha HuGo hiring because we were accumulating picks before. Was just replied to that, but I agree that it should be obvious.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ReHabs

HabsCode

Registered User
Feb 10, 2019
3,072
3,598
No it didn't...at least not IMO.

Before you rebuild anything, it implies something already existed that you have to tear down.

That was the tear down (which frankly, continues to this day and this trade deadline when he gets rid of Armia, Dvorak and perhaps Savard).

Their rebuild started that summer when they drafted Slafkovsky.

Dumping is not rebuilding since you're stripping away. You rebuild by adding, not stripping.
I see your point but I think on HF majority of people consider the selling of vets the start of the rebuild. They don’t separate the teardown from the rebuilding. Hence why sometimes you will read term like « scorched earth rebuild » when talking about selling everything.

IMO rebuilding is tear down phase + building phase (which are more often then not simultaneous). And I think most people see it that way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ReHabs

417

Cole "Cold" Palmer
Feb 20, 2003
52,434
30,270
Ottawa
I see your point but I think on HF majority of people consider the selling of vets the start of the rebuild. They don’t separate the teardown from the rebuilding. Hence why sometimes you will read term like « scorched earth rebuild » when talking about selling everything.
HF is not reality, it exists outside of what happens in the real world of the GM.

If i'm going to evaluate the job the GM is doing in the rebuild, i'm not going to attribute moves he did to get rid of deadwood and contracts as part of his rebuild.

It just doesn't make sense.

Matheson, Dach, Newhook, Heineman, Laine + the 30 players he drafted, of which 3 have played any NHL games.

That's the rebuild.

Like I totally get what you're saying but what is said here on HF doesn't really mean anything. The same people you see complaining today about the state of the current team while their losing, will be the same people you see complaining come February/March when the team is winning "meaningless" games.

Being "right" or "first" will always be more important than taking a step back and actually taking a birds eye view of the situation.
IMO rebuilding is tear down phase + building phase (which are more often then not simultaneous). And I think most people see it that way.
Yeah I don't think the majority of people see it that way because I see that part of it absent in a lot of the posts in this very thread, you got people attributing the work of MB as part of HuGo's portfolio which is utterly ridiculous.

We are still years away from knowing if this "rebuild" will work and it's fine to have tent poles to measure the progress, but 12 games into the START of year 3, is way too soon of a timeline to start a revolution.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leto and HabsCode

HabsCode

Registered User
Feb 10, 2019
3,072
3,598
HF is not reality, it exists outside of what happens in the real world of the GM.

If i'm going to evaluate the job the GM is doing in the rebuild, i'm not going to attribute moves he did to get rid of deadwood and contracts as part of his rebuild.

It just doesn't make sense.

Matheson, Dach, Newhook, Heineman, Laine + the 30 players he drafted, of which 3 have played any NHL games.

That's the rebuild.

Like I totally get what you're saying but what is said here on HF doesn't really mean anything. The same people you see complaining today about the state of the current team while their losing, will be the same people you see complaining come February/March when the team is winning "meaningless" games.

Being "right" or "first" will always be more important than taking a step back and actually taking a birds eye view of the situation.

Yeah I don't think the majority of people see it that way because I see that part of it absent in a lot of the posts in this very thread, you got people attributing the work of MB as part of HuGo's portfolio which is utterly ridiculous.

We are still years away from knowing if this "rebuild" will work and it's fine to have tent poles to measure the progress, but 12 games into the START of year 3, is way too soon of a timeline to start a revolution.
Maybe you are right, opinion are more split. I went through some reading of rebuild thread in the past from the main board and this was the message I was mostly getting, rebuild is mostly seen as when with new Management coming in and choosing to go through the long-term vision instead of short term aka selling vets and planning for the subsequent drafts.

And if we go by semantics, you are actually the one with the correct definion. Rebuild = build (something) again after it has been damaged or destroyed.

But I got the impression when evaluating rebuild, people often use this term to evaluate the general work of a GM starting from a point in a timeline where the team was at its lowest (often when he is hired after the firing of the previous GM) to the elevation of his team to a playoff contender.

I might be arguing about this for nothing, but in the context of this thread, rebuild length is often discussed to evaluate HuGo works. And the way I see it, they are starting year 4 (technically 3.5) of their plan, which I still have patience for since most rebuild take much longer than that to be completed (aka team is competitive again).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 417

Kobe Armstrong

Registered User
Jul 26, 2011
15,581
6,527
No it didn't...at least not IMO.

Before you rebuild anything, it implies something already existed that you have to tear down.

That was the tear down (which frankly, continues to this day and this trade deadline when he gets rid of Armia, Dvorak and perhaps Savard).

Their rebuild started that summer when they drafted Slafkovsky.

Dumping is not rebuilding since you're stripping away. You rebuild by adding, not stripping.
This is just semantics though

Did we not add anything by selling vets? Trading vets for prospects and picks is the hallmark of a rebuild. Mesar + Heineman came from the Toffoli trade - are they not part of the rebuild?
 
  • Like
Reactions: HabsCode and ReHabs

ReHabs

Registered User
Sponsor
Jan 18, 2022
8,019
12,364
I definitely think rebuild implies teardown+building. It's in the name. The new management is building with a new design and it (by definition) requires abandoning and un-doing the existing design and salvaging what you can salvage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HabsCode

HabsCode

Registered User
Feb 10, 2019
3,072
3,598
This is just semantics though

Did we not add anything by selling vets? Trading vets for prospects and picks is the hallmark of a rebuild. Mesar + Heineman came from the Toffoli trade - are they not part of the rebuild?
This is exactly the logic problem I see with this definition of rebuild.

If we trade Savard at TDL for a 2nd, and pack this pick with one of our early 2nd for a 1st and draft a good player that will help us in the future with it, does it mean the begin of the rebuild is postponed to 2025 TDL? Since teardown is still happening.

You could even argue that teardown is not completely done until Anderson, Dvorak, Gallagher and Armia are off the team.
 

417

Cole "Cold" Palmer
Feb 20, 2003
52,434
30,270
Ottawa
Maybe you are right, opinion are more split. I went through some reading of rebuild thread in the past from the main board and this was the message I was mostly getting, rebuild is mostly seen as when with new Management coming in and choosing to go through the long-term vision instead of short term aka selling vets and planning for the subsequent drafts.
Well all this to say it doesn't really matter how we define when the rebuild stared or how it started, etc. It's all about the organization's vision.

And I can't see a move like trading Tyler Toffoli as part of a rebuilding vision (which was his 2nd trade) anymore than I can see him acquiring Andrew Hammon (his first trade) as part of his vision.

Those are just tear down or plug holes type of moves.

Hell, when he took over this team in January of 2022, they were in last place and his stated goal was to make sure that continued.

That in itself isn't building, that's like pouring acid through the vents in your ceiling lol.
And if we go by semantics, you are actually the one with the correct definion. Rebuild = build (something) again after it has been damaged or destroyed.

But I got the impression when evaluating rebuild, people often use this term to evaluate the general work of a GM starting from a point in a timeline where the team was at its lowest (often when he is hired after the firing of the previous GM) to the elevation of his team to a playoff contender.
Like I said, we can all define rebuilds however we want.

Personally, I see a "rebuild" as the point where the identity you want to build as a team is implemented and that almost exclusively related to the players you've traded and acquired via trade who you've signed for a medium-to-long term.

I referenced those players in an earlier post but I see it as: Matheson, Dach, Newhook, Laine + the 30 players they drafted.
I might be arguing about this for nothing, but in the context of this thread, rebuild length is often discussed to evaluate HuGo works. And the way I see it, they are starting year 4 (technically 3.5) of their plan, which I still have patience for since most rebuild take much longer than that to be completed (aka team is competitive again).
Jeff Gorton has been on the job since November 28, 2021...it will be 3 years later this month and Kent Hughes since January 18, 2022, so 3 years in the New Year.

If you take away the initial assessment period that anyone taking of a job has, then it's even less.

Let's face it, we're just a very impatient bunch and timelines start to get intertwined and stuff. But in reality, it really hasn't been that long.

Go talk to a Sens fan or Sabres fan.

I promise you none of their fanbase was losing their shit 2.5 years into their rebuild.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HabsCode

Kobe Armstrong

Registered User
Jul 26, 2011
15,581
6,527
This is exactly the logic problem I see with this definition of rebuild.

If we trade Savard at TDL for a 2nd, and pack this pick with one of our early 2nd for a 1st and draft a good player that will help us in the future with it, does it mean the begin of the rebuild is postponed to 2025 TDL? Since teardown is still happening.

You could even argue that teardown is not completely done until Anderson, Dvorak, Gallagher and Armia are off the team.
Most people are just trying to buy some time for their "3-5 years to contention" predictions that came with Hughes and Gorton taking over
 
  • Like
Reactions: ReHabs

ReHabs

Registered User
Sponsor
Jan 18, 2022
8,019
12,364
I referenced those players in an earlier post but I see it as: Matheson, Dach, Newhook, Laine + the 30 players they drafted.
What's the difference between trading Romanov at the draft to get the pick to get Dach and trading Toffoli or Chiarot to get picks? How is one a rebuilding more and the others not? Your definition is as specious as Mrb1p's but you're welcome to hold it, of course.
 

417

Cole "Cold" Palmer
Feb 20, 2003
52,434
30,270
Ottawa
This is just semantics though
Is it? I don't think it is.


Did we not add anything by selling vets? Trading vets for prospects and picks is the hallmark of a rebuild. Mesar + Heineman came from the Toffoli trade - are they not part of the rebuild?
Yes and only Heineman has played any NHL games..

The most significant player of this "rebuild" acquired or drafted by Kent Hughes and Jeff Gorton is Juraj Slafkovsky and he's the best player from that draft, at least so far.

Everyone is still cooking in the pipeline.

Nick Suzuki, Cole Caufield are solid young players, but they inherited them. They were not part of their mandate, they identified them as two players they wanted to keep in the transition but they were drafted by another administration.

We will START to see the fruits of the draft labour in the next few years, then we can properly assess the job they're doing with the "rebuild".

Until then, it's mostly trying to steer a boat full of holes made by a captain who got walked off the plank.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WeThreeKings

HabsCode

Registered User
Feb 10, 2019
3,072
3,598
What's the difference between trading Romanov at the draft to get the pick to get Dach and trading Toffoli or Chiarot to get picks? How is one a rebuilding more and the others not? Your definition is as specious as Mrb1p's but you're welcome to hold it, of course.
I think I understand @417 point. He means the rebuild starts when there is actual building taking place (aka drafting Slaf).
 
  • Like
Reactions: WeThreeKings

Kobe Armstrong

Registered User
Jul 26, 2011
15,581
6,527
Is it? I don't think it is.



Yes and only Heineman has played any NHL games..

The most significant player of this "rebuild" acquired or drafted by Kent Hughes and Jeff Gorton is Juraj Slafkovsky and he's the best player from that draft, at least so far.

Everyone is still cooking in the pipeline.

Nick Suzuki, Cole Caufield are solid young players, but they inherited them. They were not part of their mandate, they identified them as two players they wanted to keep in the transition but they were drafted by another administration.

We will START to see the fruits of the draft labour in the next few years, then we can properly assess the job they're doing with the "rebuild".

Until then, it's mostly trying to steer a boat full of holes made by a captain who got walked off the plank.
We clearly disagree on the classification of what a rebuild is - so yes, purely semantics and not worth discussing further

I agree with a lot of your points just not with your definition of rebuild
 
  • Like
Reactions: ReHabs

417

Cole "Cold" Palmer
Feb 20, 2003
52,434
30,270
Ottawa
What's the difference between trading Romanov at the draft to get the pick to get Dach and trading Toffoli or Chiarot to get picks? How is one a rebuilding more and the others not? Your definition is as specious as Mrb1p's but you're welcome to hold it, of course.
There is none, hence why I added Dach.

Heineman was acquired in the Toffoli deal, mentioned him also.

The Chiarot trade brought up a 1st round pick that brought in Alex Newhook (mentioned him also) and a 4th round pick (Cedric Guindon) who I also mentioned as one of the 30 players drafted by Hughes.

Nothing specious about it other than perhaps you misunderstanding of it.

We clearly disagree on the classification of what a rebuild is - so yes, purely semantics and not worth discussing further

I agree with a lot of your points just not with your definition of rebuild
That's normal...it can't be strictly defined. You're entitled to look at it your way, just as I am mine.

If you want to attribute Christian Dvorak to Kent Hughes rebuild plan, you're again entitled.

All good, this is a message board, the whole purpose to is have discussions, not necessarily agree with everything we all say.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HabsCode

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad