Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens
Canadiens de Montreal

End of Season Conference


Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Frustrating. Disturbing. Revolting. Expected. That's how I would describe the press conference. It's what we all feared they would do, but it shows a real lack of understanding and insight into this club's lack of success, both from Bergevin and Molson. For Bergevin to come out and blame the season's failures on the players' lack of effort and compete and claim it was an issue with attitude only... he's basically absolving himself of any wrongdoing and saying he gave Julien a decent roster but that this was on the coach and players for not performing.

He went on to say he wasn't making injuries an excuse but that Weber missed over 50 games and no one stepped into fill his shoes... except that Petry absolutely did step up and come up with a great offensive year. There were plenty of games where Petry played better than what we usually got from Weber, and although Petry had his share of defensive miscues, the main problem was that there was no one else behind him. If Bergevin wants to figure out why no one steppe up to help Petry, it's because Bergevin himself laid out his roster that way. Who did he expect to take over? Alzner, whom he seemed to think would be a top 3 guy going into the year? Or Benn, whom he protected in the expansion draft over Beaulieu and Emelin? Or Schlemko, whom he said he envisioned as being a partner for Weber on the top pairing? Or Streit, whom he thought could replace what we got from Markov for cheaper? Or Morrow? Lernout? This wasn't "Weber went down and we really thought the young guy Sergachev was ready for a bigger role", it was "Weber went down and we had a collection of AH-caliber defencemen to fill out 2/3 of our defence." The fact that they couldn't fill the void is 100% on Bergevin.

If Bergevin wants to complain about compete and attitude, what about his own? He admitted he is a glass-half-full guy today and that he likes to put a positive spin on things, but he's completely out of touch with reality. He legitimately thought he had a good roster put together. He legitimately thought he had improved his defence substantially. But his attitude has been condescending and arrogant towards fans and media and even his own players and coaches now. This is on you, he says. He claims he's willing to accept his share of the blame, but he also said it was on him a couple of years ago, and then he went out and fired his foxhole buddy and didn't learn from his past mistakes and he's still here.

How can anyone come out of today as a Habs' fan and not be fed up with the utter arrogance that comes out of Bergevin's mouth? How can anyone not be frustrated by the complete lack of action from Geoff Molson? It's excuse after excuse. When are the Habs going to come out and say, Bergevin tore down a roster that should have been competitive and made bad decisions because he over-valued grit and size and traded away skill? Bergevin has spent the past couple of years gloating about how he dealt away players like Subban and let guys like Radulov walk, when those were players with true compete levels and personality and will to win. And now, our roster is built around the likes of Shea Weber and Andrew Shaw and Nic Deslauriers and Gallagher and Byron and Alzner and Pacioretty and Benn and Schlemko and Danault, and these are the guys that Bergevin told us hated to lose and were character players. So if there's a lack of compete and character and positive attitude and work ethic now, well whose fault is that? Isn't it Bergevin's? It's completely his roster now. It's built in his image and yet we're seeing it's got even worse performance and "compete level" than the guys Bergevin tossed to the curb. So perhaps this isn't on the players or the coach but on the fact that Bergevin just plain sucks at his job and can't build a winner for his life. As a long-time diehard Habs fan, I'm utterly sick of this franchise's management and the way they're running the team into the ground. I haven't spent money on them in years and I will continue to not do so until there's a turnaround in the way they treat their fans, treat their players, and make their decisions.

Thanks, Good post. - and agreeing with the rest, same old, same old, .. it`s all in the room, anyone can bring you a Stanley Cup, as long as their attitude is right.

heck, with the right attitude you don`t even need hockey players, .. it`s all in the mind, or at least, in his.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ChiLla said:

Even better! MB went after character guys and somehow managed to end up with a team that has a bad attitude.

What a clever statement to make, I'm sure UFAs will keep that in mind come July 1st  :blink:

 

Exactly! Who wants to play for a team where the attitude from management is to pass the buck or the blame. Hardly inspiring and totally unprofessional.

Perhaps that's the reason why trades are 'so hard' for MB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I'm going to come clean here and say that I don't exactly have my finger on the pulse of the Montreal Canadiens community these days.  I live out of province, I don't follow any other hockey sites, I've barely watched the team this year - pretty much the only Canadiens talk I get is with a few friends who watch hockey and with you folks here on this forum.

But for those of you who do follow things more closely, I have a question.  Is there anybody out there still defending Marc Bergevin?  Like... anybody at all?  Is there a group of fans/writers who are still happy that Subban was traded for Weber, or that we dropped Eller/Markov/Radulov, or that we signed Alzner and Co?  Are there people looking back on this season and lamenting the fact that our "room" just couldn't bring enough grit/character/will-to-win/attitude/thoughts-and-prayers to challenge for the cup?  

Because if there are, I haven't seen it.  And I honestly can't remember any other issue that has seen this forum so united in a single common opinion.  Young or old, advanced stats/old-school-hockey, anglophone/francophone, whatever - we've all got different points of view on so many things, but right now I don't see a single person offering up even a shred of defence for our embattled GM.

 

And Molson's decision to keep Bergevin on, no matter what kind of hockey mind he thinks he personally has or doesn't have, just seems so completely bonkers to me.  Even if you had never seen ice before in your life, in isolation the fact that he inherited a team that had been competing for top spot in the conference and ran it this far into the ground should be proof enough.  The fact that the guy did that and then has the guts to hold a press conference where he offers no proposed solutions except to change our "attitude" and try again next year... does that make sense in any sport, in any universe?  I can't tell cricket from croquet, but if I was suddenly handed the reigns of a cricket team and given only those two pieces of information I would immediately think "fire the guy who's in charge of that".

 

So what's the deal?  Is this forum just an echo chamber, and somewhere out there there are real live people who think that Bergevin should still be employed?  Or is this really as nutso as it seems?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Manatee-X said:

So I'm going to come clean here and say that I don't exactly have my finger on the pulse of the Montreal Canadiens community.  I live out of province, I don't follow any other hockey sites, I've barely watched the team this year - pretty much the only Canadiens talk I get is with a few friends who watch hockey and with you folks here on this forum.

But for those of you who do follow things more closely, I have a question.  Is there anybody out there still defending Marc Bergevin?  Like... anybody at all?  Is there a group of fans/writers who are still happy that Subban was traded for Weber, or that we dropped Eller/Markov/Radulov, or that we signed Alzner and Co?  Are there people looking back on this season and lamenting the fact that our "room" just couldn't bring enough grit/character/will-to-win/attitude/thoughts-and-prayers/whatever to challenge for the cup?  

Because if there are, I haven't seen it.  And I honestly can't remember any other issue that has seen this forum so united in a single common opinion.  Young or old, advanced stats/old-school-hockey, anglophone/francophone, whatever - we've all got different points of view on so many things, but right now I don't see a single person offering up even a shred of defence for our embattled GM.

 

And Molson's decision to keep Bergevin on, no matter what kind of hockey mind he thinks he personally has or doesn't have, just seems so completely bonkers to me.  Even if you had never seen ice before in your life, in isolation the fact that he inherited a team that had been competing for top spot in the conference and ran it this far into the ground should be proof enough.  The fact that the guy did that and then has the guts to hold a press conference where he offers no proposed solutions except to change our "attitude" and try again next year... does that make sense in any sport, in any universe?  I can't tell cricket from croquet, but if I was suddenly handed the reigns of a cricket team and given only those two pieces of information I would immediately think "fire the guy who's in charge of that".

 

So what's the deal?  Is this forum just an echo chamber, and somewhere out there there are real live people who think that Bergevin should still be employed?  Or is this really as nutso as it seems?

Like you Im out of province so a lot of what i read is online.    I have seen a few - VERY few - people still defending him on sites like EOTP.  So few in fact i think people think it may be MB or MT posting. lol.

I do think there are still some supporters of individual moves like Weber for PK or Shaw (indirectly) for Eller because they didnt like the players we traded. But even those who support one move overwhelmingly dont support MB.  


Like you, its mind-boggling that Molson is standing by him.  The one conspiracy theory that I know is too far fetched to believe but at least would explain things if true, is that Brisson has assured MB that John Tavares will sign with us.  And the day after MB signs him, Molson will fire MB.  lol. 

 

I did like how in the press-conference MB kept going on and on about attitude and then Molson cut in "its not just attitude, we do need some better players" 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, maas_art said:

I did like how in the press-conference MB kept going on and on about attitude and then Molson cut in "its not just attitude, we do need some better players" 

I thought he had better players until he traded them , released them , or didn't sign them for inferior players

I guess they lacked character and grit

So he replaced they with players with bad attitude

Id like to know who  the bad apples were / are . I recall reading a certain group of players were not happy with the practice effort of CP, JP and Weber

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a trend here.... in his 6 years as GM, Bergevin has talked about the need for grit, character, leadership, hatred of losing, effort, experience, and now attitude. All of these things are immeasurable. They're personality traits, and no one can truly confirm or dispel his assessment of a player in any of these areas. Bergevin says Weber hates to lose. I say Subban hates to lose. Who's right? But what has Bergevin never talked up? Skating. Puck control skill. Shot accuracy. Breakout passing. Loose puck recovery. Passing. He never plays up any of the actual skills that it takes to win hockey games nor anything that one can actually measure with statistics or outcomes. It's all very vague and what he deems to be important is mainly based on gestalt/opinion.

The one difference now is that the roster is almost all his own. So regardless of how he measures things, the players he's brought in are his definition of grit and character and will-power... Shaw, Weber, Deslauriers, Byron, Drouin, Alzner, Benn, Schlemko, Froese, Morrow, etc. These are players he thought fit those needs. So to see us lose worse than we lost with the guys he disliked is simply proof that those things have no significant value. If hating to lose or grit was enough to overcome a drop in skill, then we'd be at least as good or better than when we had players like Subban or Eller or Radulov or Markov or Beaulieu. Clearly, they're not.

I don't know of anyone who supports Bergevin any more. The closest I've seen is Brian Wilde, who's a realistic reporter and who argued that Bergevin deserves a chance to fix his mistakes and that he's as likely to build a winner as a new GM. But even Wilde has seemed to sour a bit on Bergevin in recent weeks. He's now constantly re-tweeting posts people make pointing out Bergevin's mistakes and lies. So I'm not sure there's much support for MB outside of Molson and the people MB has hired to be his yes-men.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Manatee-X said:

So I'm going to come clean here and say that I don't exactly have my finger on the pulse of the Montreal Canadiens community these days.  I live out of province, I don't follow any other hockey sites, I've barely watched the team this year - pretty much the only Canadiens talk I get is with a few friends who watch hockey and with you folks here on this forum.

But for those of you who do follow things more closely, I have a question.  Is there anybody out there still defending Marc Bergevin?  Like... anybody at all?  Is there a group of fans/writers who are still happy that Subban was traded for Weber, or that we dropped Eller/Markov/Radulov, or that we signed Alzner and Co?  Are there people looking back on this season and lamenting the fact that our "room" just couldn't bring enough grit/character/will-to-win/attitude/thoughts-and-prayers to challenge for the cup?  

Because if there are, I haven't seen it.  And I honestly can't remember any other issue that has seen this forum so united in a single common opinion.  Young or old, advanced stats/old-school-hockey, anglophone/francophone, whatever - we've all got different points of view on so many things, but right now I don't see a single person offering up even a shred of defence for our embattled GM.

 

And Molson's decision to keep Bergevin on, no matter what kind of hockey mind he thinks he personally has or doesn't have, just seems so completely bonkers to me.  Even if you had never seen ice before in your life, in isolation the fact that he inherited a team that had been competing for top spot in the conference and ran it this far into the ground should be proof enough.  The fact that the guy did that and then has the guts to hold a press conference where he offers no proposed solutions except to change our "attitude" and try again next year... does that make sense in any sport, in any universe?  I can't tell cricket from croquet, but if I was suddenly handed the reigns of a cricket team and given only those two pieces of information I would immediately think "fire the guy who's in charge of that".

 

So what's the deal?  Is this forum just an echo chamber, and somewhere out there there are real live people who think that Bergevin should still be employed?  Or is this really as nutso as it seems?

Fantastic post.

Think about how truly significant that is. 

Like even in cases where we all hated carbo or therrien, they had winning records. You had to be fair and say well yeah I can see where he isnt going to get fired just because he keeps throwing DD out there on the PP as long as somehow we keep winning.

This is a joke, your cricket owner analogy is perfect.  This team looked like garbage on paper, and then they went out there and played like garbage.  And its entirely Bergevins team. Like, you can make a graph of the inverse relation in result to his moves.  I can tell you I run a small business and if I had results like this I would be bankrupt.

Im in toronto, so its not total habs coverage, but as far as we are covered we are a laughingstock.  I have not heard one bergy apologist, it sounds like us talking, just that they are happy about it.  I also listened to a lot of post-game show call in on tsn and thats been unanimous as well.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

There's a trend here.... in his 6 years as GM, Bergevin has talked about the need for grit, character, leadership, hatred of losing, effort, experience, and now attitude. All of these things are immeasurable. They're personality traits, and no one can truly confirm or dispel his assessment of a player in any of these areas. Bergevin says Weber hates to lose. I say Subban hates to lose. Who's right? But what has Bergevin never talked up? Skating. Puck control skill. Shot accuracy. Breakout passing. Loose puck recovery. Passing. He never plays up any of the actual skills that it takes to win hockey games nor anything that one can actually measure with statistics or outcomes. It's all very vague and what he deems to be important is mainly based on gestalt/opinion.

 

He doesn't talk about it, because he fired that stats guy for not kissing his butt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

There's a trend here.... in his 6 years as GM, Bergevin has talked about the need for grit, character, leadership, hatred of losing, effort, experience, and now attitude. All of these things are immeasurable. They're personality traits, and no one can truly confirm or dispel his assessment of a player in any of these areas. Bergevin says Weber hates to lose. I say Subban hates to lose. Who's right? But what has Bergevin never talked up? Skating. Puck control skill. Shot accuracy. Breakout passing. Loose puck recovery. Passing. He never plays up any of the actual skills that it takes to win hockey games nor anything that one can actually measure with statistics or outcomes. It's all very vague and what he deems to be important is mainly based on gestalt/opinion.

The one difference now is that the roster is almost all his own. So regardless of how he measures things, the players he's brought in are his definition of grit and character and will-power... Shaw, Weber, Deslauriers, Byron, Drouin, Alzner, Benn, Schlemko, Froese, Morrow, etc. These are players he thought fit those needs. So to see us lose worse than we lost with the guys he disliked is simply proof that those things have no significant value. If hating to lose or grit was enough to overcome a drop in skill, then we'd be at least as good or better than when we had players like Subban or Eller or Radulov or Markov or Beaulieu. Clearly, they're not.

I don't know of anyone who supports Bergevin any more. The closest I've seen is Brian Wilde, who's a realistic reporter and who argued that Bergevin deserves a chance to fix his mistakes and that he's as likely to build a winner as a new GM. But even Wilde has seemed to sour a bit on Bergevin in recent weeks. He's now constantly re-tweeting posts people make pointing out Bergevin's mistakes and lies. So I'm not sure there's much support for MB outside of Molson and the people MB has hired to be his yes-men.

Bang on.   Early in the season (or preseason) MB said (Paraphrasing, I cant find the exact quote) that this was the first team that was "truly his." He felt like this year's team was exactly what he was looking for... but now it isnt?

The time Molson should have fired him (well sooner, but the absolute last straw) should have been when we first signed Hemsky the day after losing out on Radulov, then signed Streit right after losing Markov.   Molson admitted today that the extra cap money was supposed to go to Markov & Radulov.  So knowing that for fact - we signed Streit and Hemsky as plan B.  Markov and Radulov vs. Streit and Hemsky.  Let that sink in.   We all speculated it was Bergevin's "fall back" but he said they had nothing to do with each other. Now Molson has confirmed that they did.   Nice transparency guys.

The good news is that the food is supposedly going to be better at the Bell centre this year.   Lets hope no one is there to eat it. Maybe then they will finally listen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, maas_art said:

 

 
I cant tell if this is MB being facetious or he genuinely believes it!!

Maybe if you surround him with a better cast of characters then the ATTITUDE may be better. Granted, regardless of the players in front of him there were times he should have made the saves but he didn't. Is this a case of not caring anymore? I wouldn't doubt it and I wouldn't blame him. Look at Patches, at what he has done in the past without a GOOD centre. Finally, we get a guy with talent and the will to win up front and he doesn't go all out to sign him and he goes to Dallas. We get over 100 points the year before last and he removes a lot of assets that got us there, but what do I know?!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In an interview today, Bergevin said "the team's attitude was bad from day 1"... but that means that Bergevin himself put together a team full of guys with bad attitudes or else he hired a coach who can't coach or put in place a captain who isn't suited for the job. Any way you split it, if Bergevin is saying the team he assembled had faults from day 1, then it falls on Bergevin's own shoulders. It's nonsensical that he continues to try and pass the buck. The more he speaks the more he incriminates himself and the less credible he sounds. How is it Molson can just go on allowing this to happen?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

In an interview today, Bergevin said "the team's attitude was bad from day 1"... but that means that Bergevin himself put together a team full of guys with bad attitudes or else he hired a coach who can't coach or put in place a captain who isn't suited for the job. Any way you split it, if Bergevin is saying the team he assembled had faults from day 1, then it falls on Bergevin's own shoulders. It's nonsensical that he continues to try and pass the buck. The more he speaks the more he incriminates himself and the less credible he sounds. How is it Molson can just go on allowing this to happen?

Thankfully we got rid of Subban, who knows how bad the attitude would have been otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't it on management and the coaching staff to create a winning culture? Sure, they have plenty of other responsibilities too, but who's actually in charge of creating the right environment to perform? The players? I don't think so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

4 hours ago, ChiLla said:

Isn't it on management and the coaching staff to create a winning culture? Sure, they have plenty of other responsibilities too, but who's actually in charge of creating the right environment to perform? The players? I don't think so.

yes, .. another example

"I knew we had a better team than what was going on," Blue Jackets captain Nick Foligno said. "We just had to find a way to get those pieces in the right spot. Once the trade deadline hit, it's almost like it allowed us to put those pieces in the right spot and we took off.

"Credit to management for seeing that. We knew we were missing some pieces or needed some things to happen for us to get going. The way these guys have come in and found their role and done it so well, it just gives everybody confidence."

The Blue Jackets averaged 2.50 goals-per game before the trades, and 3.95 goals-per game after.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, kinot-2 said:

Does this mean grit and character doesn't come with attitude?

In NHL parlance, doesn't "grit and character" mostly just mean "white North Americans" (possibly add anglophone to that depending who's speaking)?

At least "attitude" is so vague no one has any pre-conceived notions of what it means.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, kinot-2 said:

Does this mean grit and character doesn't come with attitude?

Doh!  All this time!!

 


of course, since he is, you know, THE GENERAL FREAKING MANAGER if the real issue was attitude, then wouldnt it be UP TO HIM to fix that?     If you ran a company & you turned up to work one day & everyone was in crap moods and had bad attitudes would you just keep going, status quo for a year and then complain?  Or would you give them a warning & if nothing changed, fired some people & brought in new staff?

I know that being GM is hard Marc but come on.    I dont want to blame this in injuries but Weber and Price and Pacioretty were injured a lot. I dont want to make excuses but here are a lot of excuses. I take some responsibility for this season but now Im going to blame everyone else. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, maas_art said:

Doh!  All this time!!

 


of course, since he is, you know, THE GENERAL FREAKING MANAGER if the real issue was attitude, then wouldnt it be UP TO HIM to fix that?     If you ran a company & you turned up to work one day & everyone was in crap moods and had bad attitudes would you just keep going, status quo for a year and then complain?  Or would you give them a warning & if nothing changed, fired some people & brought in new staff?

I know that being GM is hard Marc but come on.    I dont want to blame this in injuries but Weber and Price and Pacioretty were injured a lot. I dont want to make excuses but here are a lot of excuses. I take some responsibility for this season but now Im going to blame everyone else. 

I guess I "should" have put this emoticon at the end. " :rolleyes: " It was a rhetorical question. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...