BigTed3

Moderators/Modérateurs
  • Content count

    23,698
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About BigTed3

  • Rank
    Moderator/Modérateur

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

13,309 profile views
  1. Molson's in a tough spot, because he's not the guy making hockey personnel decisions and it looks equally bad if he's meddling in hockey affairs, so I get that it's not easy for him. On the other hand, he's got to look at Marc Bergevin's body of work... Bergevin stepped into a situation where there was nowhere to go but up. It was a great situation to walk into because the team he took over had done badly but it was also one that had really failed to meet expectations and had injury woes and a lame-duck coach the year before. So there was a lot of potential for immediate improvement. He inherited a 3rd overall pick. He had the best young goalie in the game. He had a potential superstar in Subban. He really had a lot of the pieces to build a Cup contender around. Fast forward 5 years later and that promise is almost gone. We have very little in the way of sure things in the minors, and the AHL development system has been an utter disaster. Most of our trades have made our team slower, older, or just plain worse and there continues to be the mantra that grit and character win out. This team certainly appears worse off now than when MB took over: Subban and Eller are gone, Price and Pacioretty's window is closing and their contracts are expiring, Galchenyuk and Beaulieu look to be on the outs, Tinordi and Pateryn flamed out, Kristo and Thomas and Sekac and Andrighetto were cast away, Hudon looks like he'll never get a chance... the young pieces that MB was supposed to build around just haven't materialized. Instead, we've seen him continue to add depth veterans without addressing the need for scoring or the need for a top-pairing LH defenceman. We haven't seen him address the need for not one but now two top-6 centers. All he's done in that regard is complain about how hard it is to make trades and how hard it is to draft quality players. I don't know what Bergevin thought his job was going to be like, but he really hasn't been overly successful at it. As an owner, you want to give your GM five years. That's how long it should take to revamp a roster and put your own stamp on it. Most of the players MB inherited are gone. The guys who are here are his type of guy now... Weber, Shaw, King, Ott, Mitchell, Danault, Martinsen, Flynn, Byron, Benn, Petry, Davidson, etc... these are the guys MB wanted to trade for and bring in. This roster is still competitive, but it lacks flair. It lacks actual character, because character to MB is having guys who toe the party line. It lacks homegrown talent that we have drafted and developed from day 1 and who wear the CH on their sleeve. Gallagher is one guy, but he's been injured a lot. Galchenyuk is another but he's been marginalized, as has Beaulieu. But all in all, this team lacks direction. I look at this roster and I feel less optimistic about the team going forward than I did 5 years ago. I feel like MB went all-in on Weber and Shaw and his 4th liners this year, and he lost that bet. So if I'm Molson, I don't know where he thinks MB is driving this train. MB has an average team assembled, but he had the opportunity to be well ahead of where he is now and certainly, to not have sacrificed the future to get older this season and see nothing pan out.
  2. Agreed. I still like the team per se but I just don't buy into the culture of the club and the people running it. I don't like being brushed off as a fan. I don't like the jacked-up ticket prices and concession prices. I don't like being told that as an Anglophone I'm less important as a fan than a Francophone. I don't like being told that language politics are more important than winning. I don't like that Bergevin hires his friends and won't fire them. I don't like the way MB and MT have treated a lot of the skilled players. I don't like the way they treat the media and got angry every time someone asked them to justify their decisions. There's just a lot of contempt thrown out at us from Bergevin and his groupies. Fans want to win. Fans want a fun show and personality in the players and guys who put everything on the line for the team. We don't have that now. We have a collection of guys who don't win and who don't make it very fun to follow along. There are a lot of plain personalities on the team since we got rid of Subban and others. It's one thing if you win and dominate, you can justify the approach... but right now, the Habs are rude to their fans and they're oppressive towards certain players, and they're not that good. So until that changes, I agree, not really a team that's easy to get behind.
  3. Actually it doesn't. It means you have a problem in your locker room, but that problem wasn't Subban, it was the person/people who perpetrated the idea that Subban was a poison and had to go. Those people were clearly Michel Therrien (who publicly bashed Subban repeatedly) and Marc Bergevin (who failed numerous times to stand up for PK and who low-balled him on several contract offers and refused to admit his worth). Maybe there were players too. Maybe Plekanec. Maybe Pacioretty. Maybe Price. Who knows. But I absolutely believe that Michel Therrien came into his job with the idea that Subban needed to be put in his place, and he did everything in his power to humiliate PK and make him a whipping boy. In public, Subban didn't react. He took his blows and he acted like a good team player. Was he like that behind closed doors? I don't know. But he wasn't the one who started the animosity, it was Therrien. Look at Subban now. His teammates seem to love him. His coach and GM and owner have embraced his personality, and PK has stated publicly how much of a difference it is to have those people let him be who he is and not try to change him. It's very clear to me that Therrien and Bergevin are exactly what caused the problem, not Subban. And that doesn't in the least make Weber a better player. It simply means the Habs needed to have done better at managing assets. Someone re-posted James Duthie's take on the trade from a year ago, where he stated he had never seen a divide as big as the one between public opinion of Subban and that of management. He argued that management wasn't able to adapt to the new NHL and that the problem was theirs in not being able to deal with Subban's personality. And that's the essence of it. Therrien failed. Bergevin failed. And to try and justify the trade at this point just doesn't make sense. We clearly got the inferior hockey player, and we clearly gave up a guy who by all accounts is NOT what stops your hockey team from winning. What is stopping us from winning is the culture created by Therrien and Bergevin.
  4. Some of Marc Bergevin's friends still played under him... Francis Bouillon, for example. I think our previous regime extended the careers of Patrice Brisebois and Matt Schneider as well. We're great at recycling people who are past their prime.
  5. That's the thing. Subban has always been under-valued defensively. He's great at getting on loose pucks, he's great at shielding the puck, he's very strong for his size at 1v1 battles, and he's excellent at getting the puck out of his zone. As I posted before, he had a lot of turnovers because he has so many touches of the puck, but he actually had a lower turnover rate than most elite defencemen when you adjust for how often he gets the puck. Someone posted today that Subban has been tasked with shutting down Toews, Tarasenko, and Getzlaf in Nashville's first three series and those three top-tier scorers accounted for just 3 goals in 16 games. I remember when we first called him up how he won battles against Crosby and Malkin in the playoffs and how he's taken on and bettered the likes of Ovechkin and Marchand and Lucic. He's a rare combination of a guy who has great skating ability but also possesses a low center of gravity and power to be able to shut down just about any type of player. Weber matches up well size-wise and he's good at battling in front of the net and in the corners, but he doesn't get on loose pucks as well and he's simply slower in picking up coverage. His defensive ability is overrated because of the fact he throw thundering hits and blocks shots, but that doesn't mean he does other things well that actually prevent goals from being scored against you. Again, still a very good player, but not nearly as good as Subban.
  6. I disagree. Michel Therrien would never have been employed if it wasn't for the Habs re-hiring him.
  7. The trade isn't bad because of the Preds playoff run. The trade was bad because we got the slower, older, less useful player on the worse contract. Weber is still a good player, Weber is a better powerplay quarterback, and then in my view, Subban is better at just about everything else AND he's younger, meaning we're likely to see that difference grow with time. Different story if we were acquiring Weber when he was 26. We didn't. We are getting 31 year-old Weber and 34 year-old Weber and 40 year-old Weber in this deal. There were ONLY two arguments Bergevin was able to come up with for justifying this trade: 1.Subban's attitude was a reason the Habs couldn't win. 2. The Habs could win now with Weber, so it was worth eating up the bad contract years of an aging Weber down the line. This season's playoffs have proven MB's gamble on both to be far from the truth. The Habs look to be further from contention than when Subban was here, and Subban is clearly not hurting the Preds, just as he didn't hurt the Habs on their runs to two ECF's. In fact, Subban-Ekholm has been used as the Preds #1 pairing, playing the most minutes and being given the late-game shutdown role. Subban missed time for injury this year but he actually had more PPG than all but 10 of the D men ahead of him in the scoring race, including Weber. So he had a pretty decent year. He wasn't used as a 1st-wave PP guy most of the time, but if anything that speaks even more to how he was able to compensate by producing more at ES. So no, Subban wasn't a Norris candidate this year and the Preds didn't win the President's Trophy, but if Bergevin is blasting Subban for being a guy who ruins team chemistry and if Bergevin is justifying the trade by arguing the Habs win short-term while Preds win long-term, he's been wrong on both accounts, and that leaves him with zero justification for his biggest move... something many fans have been saying all along.
  8. You need to be getting back an equal-caliber player (i.e. don't be trading him for several lesser parts) and you need to be trading him for a player as young as he is (i.e. no sense in getting older if you're not lined up for a Cup right away). End of story. Why can we not find 18 minutes a night for Galchenyuk? He has a positive Corsi, positive scoring chance ratio, and positive expected goals for ratio. All that to say that no matter how bad you might think he is defensively, the team is still producing more shot attempts, scoring chances, and goals for at ES with him on the ice than the opposition. Last season, his record with Radulov was not very good. His record with Gallagher was fantastic. So pair him with Gallagher and let the two players play. Who care if you need to shelter him a bit for him to get to 30 goals. We can't seem to find too many guys who can net 20, never mind 30, and we simply don't have other alternatives at this time. I get your point about the Rangers having a bad team Corsi, but Miller is essentially a bad possession player on a bad possession team, which makes him look even worse, since he can't even keep up with his teammates. I'm not 100% against trading Chucky. I just think that 1. The Habs have devalued him because of how much they've juggled him around the line-up and ruined his confidence. 2. There is too much focus on his defensive woes and not enough on the fact that his offence has produced more success than his defence has produced problems. Given how weak we are at center, grabbing more 2nd-to-3rd line guys is not the solution. You want to trade Chucky as part of a package for a bona fide 1st line center like Tavares, by all means. You want to trade him for a young guy who has the potential to be a #1 center like Draisaitl, by all means. You want to trade him for a guy who can be a top-pairing D man like OEL or Ekblad or Hedman and then use Weber as trade bait to get a #1 center in return, by all means. But let's not trade our only potential 1st line center (and even if you don't believe he currently is one, he's still the only guy in the entire organization with the skill to be a 1C right now) for guys who's max ceiling is 2nd line.
  9. J.T. Miller is overrated. He had an abysmal 45% Corsi this past season at 5v5 with only 48% scoring chances. He posted a high PDO and that was pretty much what floated his numbers up above where they should have been. He was virtually invisible in the series against us in the playoffs. Stepan spent most of the playoff series against us on his butt from being hammered repeatedly. He was easily displaced from the puck. While his possession numbers were better than Miller's, he also benefited from a higher PDO than average. Despite the fact that he's been given regular top 6 minutes in NY, he's only posted two 20-goal seasons in his career. He had fewer points per game this year than Galchenyuk, despite the fact Chucky played on the 3rd/4th lines for part of the year. And FWIW, both Miller and Stepan have poor records in the faceoff circle too, one of the reasons people feel the need to move Chucky. We frankly don't need playmakers, we need goal-scorers. Chucky can be a 30+ goal scorer if he's given the chance to play top 6 an entire season. Stepan has proven he's not that guy. Miller likely won't do better than he's done the past two years, given his puck luck. We're better off sticking with Chucky in this exchange.
  10. I think it makes more sense to find one center now than it is to try a full re-build and hope it works. Again, there have been lots of rumors about various centers being available, including RNH and Tavares and Duchene and Tyler Johnson and Couturier and so on. Thornton is a free agent and not the guy you build around but a player who could be a stop gap for a year or two. There are other teams who might be as willing as us to make changes. Ideally, I'd like to get a guy who can be with us for 5+ years, not an aging veteran who's already hitting his 30's, but that's where MB needs to get creative. Can he go out and get Duchene without giving up Galchenyuk or Sergachev? Would Colorado look at some package of 2-3 guys for example (Gallagher and/or Juulsen and/or Beaulieu and/or Emelin and/or McCarron). I really think you need to work that angle first, and if you really fail at getting a 1C, then you look at your other options. But I'd find it hard to believe RNH isn't available or that the price on Duchene won't come down with every single team passing at the deadline. If you can get a guy like Duchene or RNH or so on to plug onto your first line with Pacman and Radulov, then I have absolutely no issue with a line of Lehkonen-Galchenyuk-Gallagher being line 2 and getting loaded with O zone starts. Plenty of top centers are not great on draws. Plenty of them are not great defensively. Chucky is an elite player in terms of offensive skill and he's still a positive possession player despite his defensive woes. He's 100 times better than DD, and the Habs seemed to have no issue letting Desharnais be our number one center for years. As I've noted, Chucky was also 2nd on the team in points per game and 1st on the team in points per ice time at 5v5, so despite his injuries, he was more productive than anyone else. He needs to be let loose to play, not bottled up the way we treated Subban. Another alternative to get a top center (like a Tavares or a Draisaitl or so on) would be to trade Price or Weber. A little bit crazy in some respect, but if Price isn't willing to commit to a long-term contract then maybe you can grab value for him now. Maybe you grab value for Weber before he declines. Carey could certainly fetch a 1C, so what about a trade of something like Price + Plekanec for Tavares plus Halak. We know Halak can handle the pressure of Montreal. Could he be a guy who can quarterback us for a year or two the way we used Andy Moog or Jeff Hackett in the past, while we wait to see if Lindgren is the real deal. If Lindgren's not, then maybe solid prospect Michael McNiven is or maybe you just go out and find another goalie the way the Pens turned to Matt Murray or so on. I could live with Halak/Lindgren in goal if it meant a top 9 of Pacman-Tavares-Radulov, Lehkonen-Galchenyuk-Gallagher, Hudon-Danault-Shaw. In any case, I think there are options that don't include a full rebuild. If we are planning a rebuild that involves trading Galchenyuk, then as said, you may as well be dealing all your vets. There's no point in hanging on to Weber or Pacioretty or Price or Petry or Plekanec if your plan is to win in 3-5 years. You may as well grab as many top prospects and draft choices as you can instead. But to me, this should absolutely be a Plan B only.
  11. Coaching staff in Mtl or St. John's? Either way, it's a bad move. Our AHL staff has had no positive impact. If you think the goal of the minors is to develop young players, well they simply aren't graduating anyone important to our NHL roster. And if you think it's to build a winning culture, they aren't doing that either.
  12. Stepan and Miller are mid-level players. Chucky is the best player in the deal and has more potential for the future. Bad trade by a mile. Draft is weak this year, so not worth giving up Chucky for a prospect who needs work. It won't help our current core in the least. If you make that deal, you may as well trade Pacioretty, Price, Weber, Petry, etc. as well.
  13. Well Subban has already stated that it was a welcome change for him to go to a team where the GM and coach welcomed him and told him he could relax and play his style without having to try to fit in. He also stated that Nashville invited his parents and his PR director and agent to come in and asked him how they could work with him on his social media projects and so on. It sounds like Nashville really accepted Subban for who he is and let him be himself outside the rink... and thus far, it doesn't look like it's had any negative impact on the team's performance. Just goes to show that it was completely possible to keep Subban and make things work and that it's been MT and MB who really wanted to create a problem and drive Subban out. We know Therrien didn't like Subban before he even took over, and it's clear to me that Therrien (and maybe Bergevin) sabotaged Subban's success here. Our organization made it a personal vendetta against Subban and it cost us.
  14. To recap: - According to Larry Robinson, MB never called him back when he expressed interest in our vacant coaching job 5 years ago. - According to Elliotte Friedman, Mike Babcock was more interested in coming here than Toronto and MB refused to even consider firing Therrien to replace him with Babcock. - According to reports in the French media a couple of years ago, MB also refused to interview Guy Boucher and claimed he wasn't the right coach for Montreal either. Now Boucher is poised to lead his team to a lead in the ECF. I'm happy we got Julien in the end. He's a huge upgrade on MT, but the fact MB recycled Therrien in the first place, the fact he hung onto him for so long and extended his contract when he didn't have to, the fact he's clinging on to the miserable job Sylvain Lefebvre has done in the AHL, and the fact MB has shown such terrible judgment in who he's refused to consider for his coaching vacancies is yet another black mark on this Bergevin regime.
  15. 1. I wouldn't give up Carter if I were LA. They may need to free up cash, but why trade a guy who's still extremely productive? And if you are trading him, why wouldn't they deal him for high draft choices and/or top-tier prospects? Why would they trade for a 3rd line winger? Makes no sense for LA. I'd love to dump salary as well, but I wouldn't trade Weber for a 3rd-pairing D man just to clear up salary. I'd look at dealing Plekanec or Emelin or Shaw first, and I'd be open to dealing Weber to get his contract off our books before he becomes untradeable, but I wouldn't give away a top-pairing D man for nothing, just like LA won't trade a top-line forward for a 3rd line veteran. 2. Galchenyuk for Leddy is something I think you've suggested many times. It's a no from me from our end. Galchenyuk is one of our few elite skilled forwards and despite his misuse here, he was a top 10 producer over the end of the 15-16 season and was a top 5 producer to start this year before his injury. This guy can be elite if injury-free and given the chance. If we're dealing him, it's for an elite young player in return. You want to deal him for Draisaitl or Huberdeau or Ekman-Larson or Ekblad or so on, that's one thing. Not for Leddy. Leddy in my view falls into the same class as a guy like Petry or Seabrook or Muzzin: he's good, he's serviceable, but he's not elite the way Galchenyuk can be. The ceiling there is much lower, and we can't afford to deal one of our few scoring assets for a mid-level defenceman.