HF Habs: Trade Proposal Thread #80
- Thread starter Boyon90
- Start date
- Status
Vachon23
Registered User
He was traded as cap dump with a pick for Eric Cole 1 month before. His value wasn’t that high
Vachon23
Registered User
I’m telling you that it wasn’t time to start a rebuild with Price/Pacioretty/Subban entering there prime. It was time to surround them with talent and not bargain gambleAre you telling me Bergevin had nothing to sell to start a rebuild?
- Jan 18, 2022
- 8,108
- 12,442
Went for it by doing what? Trading a fifth round pick for Davis Drewiskie?
Gorges, Gionta, Emelin, Plekanec, Markov, Ryder/Cole, Moen, Desharnais, etc.
And how was Bergevin supposed to get assets or anything really?
How was he supposed to surround them?
Vachon23
Registered User
Trading prospect/1st pick and not only try to get some asset at a cheap price
Mon ami he took on a team that finished in the bottom of the league and you expected him to swing for the fences the first year?
That was so f***ing sad that the team overachieved right off the gate...
Your all bickering when the answer is much simpler, Bergevin tried to suck and blow at the same time, he tried to compete but also develop, tried to get draft picks but also had one of the leagues best players in his prime and wouldn't trade assests to improve the team.
I've worked in marketing and advertising for the last decade, we have a saying around here "if you try to be everything to everybody, you'll end up be nothing to no one"
I've worked in marketing and advertising for the last decade, we have a saying around here "if you try to be everything to everybody, you'll end up be nothing to no one"
Vachon23
Registered User
A lot happen the year they finish bottom, they where way better then that.
I’m not saying he should have done the 1st summer he arrived, but the year after yes.
They almost did the SC final the 2nd year if Price wasn’t hurt and they where the 2nd best team in the league the year after. Imagine if he acquired a top 6 C to surround them
With what assets though?
It's hilarious to hear how Bergevin never acquired a first-round pick in his tenure while Hughes did it by trading Toffoli(signed by Bergevin), Chiarot(signed by Bergevin), Romanov(drafted by Bergevin) and so on...
There was f*** all to trade when Bergevin took over! And nothing of real value in terms of projects to be able to make a big splash.
Vachon23
Registered User
Yeah, cuz he probably never got the rebuild go from management.
But, but..what about all those great draft picks that TT made before MB ruined his reputation? Surely those guys could have been traded for quality players.
(now THAT'S sarcasm )
Hope Of Glory
Registered User
We had GREAT assets. You said said it yourself at the time. Can't trade McCarron or Scherbak or Juulsen, they're the future of the team.
I wish I was joking but that's how they were viewed at the time. So at that time they had value. Or were to bust to everybody but ourselves right from the start?
Vachon is right. We had to go all in around 2015-2016. It wasn't hard to see that our key players were in their prime on good contracts (unironically thanks to Bergevin for that, save for Subban). Sure, we could have traded prospect that ended being good but that's the price to pay to receive. It wasn't the time for bargain shopping.
Can't believe I've got to argue with Bergevin fanboys still
If he's so good why isn't he a GM already?It feels like we finally have a good enough prospect pool to make some moves - I just hope Hugo have a firm grasp on who to keep and who to trade
I am really interested to see who Gorton/Hughes might target from NYR.
Both Lundvist and Kratsov are interesting to me, Lundvist fills a bigger need obviously - but the prospect of getting two buy-low players is enticing.
Imagine a line of: Slafkovsky - Fantilli - Kravstov
Both Lundvist and Kratsov are interesting to me, Lundvist fills a bigger need obviously - but the prospect of getting two buy-low players is enticing.
Imagine a line of: Slafkovsky - Fantilli - Kravstov
salbutera
Registered User
- Sep 10, 2019
- 15,151
- 16,926
The 2011-2012 season was a mirage, that team wasn’t as bad as the standings indicated, injuries to key players was
Also, I’m not sure how times this need to be stated McGuire has stated numerous times, during the GM interview process in 2012, Andlauer & Molson made is implicitly clear rebuilding would not be an acceptable plan for the ownership consortium.
Last edited:
salbutera
Registered User
- Sep 10, 2019
- 15,151
- 16,926
MB should’ve sacrificed his 1st round picks during the 2012-2014 period to pry an asset or two for the “now”, there no doubt about it. Those 3-seasons the team was drafting late in the 1st.
I do know for a fact, MB had deals in place w SJS at 2013 & 2014 trade deadlines for Marleau and Jumbo Joe respectively and both refused to waive for Mtl. In fact, Dudley was camped out in SJ for months trying to convince the players both times. I do not have any clue as to what Habs would’ve been giving up in return though
Last edited:
The team was in limbo, and he said he wouldn't sacrifice the future for now...
Honestly, that team was not a contender when you look at it on paper, I don't blame him for not going all in.
- Jan 18, 2022
- 8,108
- 12,442
Trading 1st round picks isn't rare and ordinary non-rebuilding teams do it all the time. This is not correct.
Last edited:
- Jan 18, 2022
- 8,108
- 12,442
1) It's a given that every player Hughes inherited was a Bergevin-asset, Bergevin was GM for 10 years
2) Bergevin had Gorges, Gionta, Cole, Bourque, Desharnais, Diaz, Eller, Markov, Moen, Plekanec and Emelin to trade + White, Y Weber, Tinordi, Beaulieu, Leblanc, etc.
You can't argue that the Habs overachieved (which is somewhat true) and then say Bergevin couldn't have sold off - those two ideas don't work together. If they had overachieved that means their assets overperformed (inflated value) and Bergevin should've sold. If they had encouraged Bergevin to not sell, then he should've signed and acquire scoring help that the team sorely needed.
The 2011-2012 roster was only surpassed by the 2021-2022 roster in terms of mangames lost. Bergevin didn't inherit a last placed team, he inherited much better players than he left for Kent Hughes and a much easier cap situation. Hughes has to navigate out of a minefield that Bergevin planted for him.
Acquiring scoring help is not, and will never be, "going all in" and selling assets for returns is not, and will never be, "rebuilding".
Even bad teams manage to buy and sell as they need. Bergevin never could manage to acquire scoring talent. It goes to show how important Price was in this era.
In the first "overachieving" season Bergevin didn't help his team. In the second season he didn't acquire a centre, but did pick up Vanek. In the third he got Petry, still didn't acquire a centre. After that he lost the plot completely - never sold never bought.
Vachon23
Registered User
They had:
- The best goalie in the world and a top 3 player in the league during that time.
- Norris Trophy winner
- One of the best PP QB and a top 2 Dmen in the league
- One of the best goal scorer in the league during those years
- a good 2 way C that could shutdown other team best player
During 2013-2016, Habs where a top 5 teams in the league, imagine if we added a #1C
Spring in Fialta
A malign star kept him
How did they overachieve in 2012-2013? If anything, they ended up proving they didn't. ECF and 2nd in the conference the next two seasons after that. Bergevin should have started making major moves starting in 2013-2014. He got Vanek and Petry but running Desharnais at the no.1 was inexcusable.
The 2015 TDL was criminal. Petry was good but I can't believe he got zero scoring help. Of course, we get through Ottawa despite a lack of goals and then lose to Tampa despite playing a pretty good series. Just had no finish.
- Status
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
-
Ken Holland named consultant to NHL Hockey Operations.- Latest: jigglysquishy
-
