Serge Savard on TSN690

[Mike]

Not having too many nice things to say about current management. On PK
Subban "they really mis-managed this kid".

Yo Geoff, just curious here and I'm going out on a limb - is this The
GMs fault or does this fall into your mysterious list of excuses?

[Chuck]

Like he mishandled John LeClair. :)

[Mike]

On 2018-03-20 03:23 PM, Chuck wrote:
> Like he mishandled John LeClair. :)
>

There's no room for obvious points here. This is a "shit on Begevin"
group. You miss the memo Chuck? :-)

[Gerry]

So I guess he's not in line to fill the "senior management advisor" opening, then... :)

l8r,
Gerry

[Chuck]

Lets do both! Savard recommended Bergiven. So how useful has advice been from Savard :)

[Mike]

bwhahaha. OK, you win. :-)

[Habscout]

Geoff Molson missed the boat on that decision nearly 6 years ago.

He should hired Savard to be the President of Hockey Operations, since he could have mentored Bergevin into the GM role. After perhaps the first 6 months on the job, it should not have taken much time for big Serge to spend helping MB out; afterwards, a daily phone call of 30 minutes or less should be all that's needed. It would have at least given Bergevin a sounding post or overseer for making big decisions. Sure one could argue that's what Rick Dudley was hired to do, but Dudley is beneath Bergevin in the hierarchy.

Instead Molson decided to let MB, an assistant GM with one year's experience in that job, take over his franchise. Hmmmm, I wonder if he runs his beer division the same way.

Norm

[Mike]

On 2018-03-28 09:53 PM, Habscout wrote:
> Geoff Molson missed the boat on that decision nearly 6 years ago.
>
> He should hired Savard to be the President of Hockey Operations, since he could have mentored Bergevin into the GM role. After perhaps the first 6 months on the job, it should not have taken much time for big Serge to spend helping MB out; afterwards, a daily phone call of 30 minutes or less should be all that's needed. It would have at least given Bergevin a sounding post or overseer for making big decisions. Sure one could argue that's what Rick Dudley was hired to do, but Dudley is beneath Bergevin in the hierarchy.
>
> Instead Molson decided to let MB, an assistant GM with one year's experience in that job, take over his franchise. Hmmmm, I wonder if he runs his beer division the same way.
>

He'd pick the best man/woman for the job regardless of linguistic
abilities. For the Habs, the guy has to be able to parlez vous first and
foremost. Bergevin looked good, sounded good and was French. All the
boxes were ticked. Ability to lead a hockey team is optional.

The problem with the Habs is they refuse to learn from past mistakes.
Until the day arrives that they start picking hockey people first,
French people second, they will continue to flounder.

[Gerry]

Hm, I don't know that you always need to have a senior advisor in to hold a new GM's hand. When you pick a new GM who hasn't been GM before, they still have a background, and the promotion should come with the belief that indeed, they are READY for that promotion. Lots of candidates start out in other roles in the business and gradually work their way up, and Bergevin was probably considered relatively widely as a candidate who had successfully served his apprenticeship and was ready for the promotion.

I don't feel like I would have the information at my disposal to second-guess the pick. In hindsight, sure, but at the time he did indeed seem to check all the boxes... including the ones of qualification and readiness for promotion. Maybe a year isn't a lot as an assistant GM, but 7 years overall in the hockey ops dept isn't bad, and I think he was seen as a "rising star" in the ranks. Or maybe that's just how they portrayed him to us. I don't remember what my initial impressions were, but I am going to guess they were probably generally positive ones, along with most Habs fans at the time.

And I think the next GM can indeed check all boxes without needing a fossilized hand-holder onboard. Also without needing to change the language requirements. Julien Brisebois and Joel Bouchard are a tandem that are having success at their levels, and I think you could bring them in to replace Bergevin and Dudley (and Mellanby and Timmins) without upsetting the applecart on the language issue.

Anyway, I'll still be shocked if they make a change this year. Maybe next if/when another disastrous season is in the books.

A lot of the problem is just the slow reaction. Therrien was a bad choice at a time when maybe the candidates list wasn't so hot, but they just double- tripled-down on him waaaay past the time it was obvious he wasn't suited to the job. Maybe they're in the same spot with Bergevin now. But I still think most of the time they should indeed be able find a top, fully-qualified candidate while still keeping the language consideration in place. Maybe not always, but at least most of the time. Julien and Vigneault are top NHL coaches, and Brisebois is now seen as a top young GM candidate. So maybe it isn't a big issue right at the moment.

l8r,
Gerry

[Jim Bauch]

On Thursday, March 29, 2018 at 7:25:49 AM UTC-7, Gerry wrote:

> I don't feel like I would have the information at my disposal to second-guess the pick. In hindsight, sure, but at the time he did indeed seem to check all the boxes... including the ones of qualification and readiness for promotion. Maybe a year isn't a lot as an assistant GM, but 7 years overall in the hockey ops dept isn't bad, and I think he was seen as a "rising star" in the ranks. Or maybe that's just how they portrayed him to us. I don't remember what my initial impressions were, but I am going to guess they were probably generally positive ones, along with most Habs fans at the time.
>

Yeah, that's my recollection as well. Bergevin was talked about as a plausible GM candidate in general, not just for Montreal.

And while this may be damning with faint praise, he was an improvement over Gauthier. For a while, Bergevin looked pretty good -- he was even touted as a GM of the Year candidate in his first or second season -- and I think reaction here was generally positive.

Of course, Bergevin walked into a reasonably good situation. The team had just finished near the league bottom, but it wasn't really a true rebuild job. They had a great young goaltender, a budding star on defense, and a couple solid young forwards, all cheap and easy on the salary cap. Add to that some defense prospects who were considered fairly decent, and the #3 overall pick in a not-bad draft, and Bergevin could be a "smart" GM by just not doing anything crazy, restoring some normalcy to the front office, installing a new head coach, and tinkering around the edges of the roster. He even pulled off what looked like a nice deadline deal at the time, nabbing Vanek for less than what everyone expected he would fetch.

So yeah, I wouldn't be too hard on Molson for hiring MB, or on Savard or anyone else who recommended him.

I'm still not sure I could have handled -- or could now handle -- Pierre McGuire as GM. Nor do I have much confidence in Patrick Roy's temperament. Which perhaps means that I'm talking myself into disagreeing with Gerry that the Habs have a good enough talent pool to draw from with the language restriction.

Jim

[Mike]

Bergevin would have been fine as GM if it were not for one fatal mistake
- hiring Michel Therrien as coach. Even if he had cut the cord after the
2015 playoffs he might have been able to recover but choosing a
replaceable coach over an all star defenceman was Tremblay 2.0 and he
was too fucking stupid to realize it. And fwiw, Molson is making the
same mistake with Bergevin. He'll realize that, oh, along about December
of next year.

[Gerry]

On Thursday, March 29, 2018 at 3:58:24 PM UTC-4, Mike wrote:
> Bergevin would have been fine as GM if it were not for one fatal mistake
> - hiring Michel Therrien as coach. Even if he had cut the cord after the
> 2015 playoffs he might have been able to recover but choosing a
> replaceable coach over an all star defenceman was Tremblay 2.0 and he
> was too fucking stupid to realize it. And fwiw, Molson is making the
> same mistake with Bergevin. He'll realize that, oh, along about December
> of next year.

I don't think I'd go that far. He might have been "less disastrous"... or maybe even "mediocre" without the Therrien debacle and falling into the Subban hatred. But not "fine". Even without that chapter, the farm system has floundered, the nepotism factor with Lefebvre and Daigneault has not been good for the team. It's still a bloated front office, they still haven't built the top end of the roster the way they need to.

Bergevin has been good with the small moves, very busy with the small moves too, but really struggled with the bigger ones, which are the ones that really matter. And it goes way beyond the Therrien file.

l8r,
Gerry

[Gerry]

On Thursday, March 29, 2018 at 2:08:36 PM UTC-4, Jim Bauch wrote:
> I'm still not sure I could have handled -- or could now handle
> -- Pierre McGuire as GM. Nor do I have much confidence in Patrick Roy's
> temperament. Which perhaps means that I'm talking myself into
> disagreeing with Gerry that the Habs have a good enough talent pool
> to draw from with the language restriction.

Oh yeah we hadn't touched on the Patrick Roy rumour mill item here either had we. Supposedly he was in for a chat recently? Well, I just can't see that working out. At least, I would not fear too much front office bloatage with him. But indeed, I can't see his emotion as a good thing for that job. Too risky. Maybe he'd got all fiery and behind the right guys, or maybe he'd pick the wrong fights or turn against the wrong players instead, etc.

As usual, I have my pick lined up, with all the scant information that's ever at our disposal (so of course generally worthless)... and that's Brisebois. Tampa Bay has succeeded on all fronts, and he has been in all kinds of positions to gain the necessary experience. A guy who is all on the management/office side of things instead of another hockey player appeals to me in this day and age.

But I still don't think it's going to happen yet. :)

And I still don't think any team would take Carey Price for free right now either. :)

l8r,
Gerry

[Mike]

I'm of the mind that sometimes in life you have a choice, a fork in the
road if you like. Everything you do in life past that moment of choice
is a result of and based on that decision to take road A or road B.
Bergevin chose the Therrien road. Everything that resulted afterwards is
as a result of that choice.

Hiring Therrien put PK Subban on the clock, immediately. Everyone knew
it. The whole contract bridge BS and the bad taste left in people's
mouths never would have happened had Therrien not been coach. He bred
the hatred in for Subban.

Molson intervenes on PKs ensuing long term contract going against
Bergevin's wishes - wishes pushed on him by Therrien no doubt. This only
stoked the burning embers of hatred for Subban in Therrien's eyes.

Therrien's style of play, e.g. let Price stop everything, bench young
players at the first hint of a mistake, yield ice time to veterans even
when its unearned, fire the puck off the boards, dont take risks. All
the moves he made were to appease Therrien's theory of player management
and use. And when Bergevin did add an interesting piece like Vanek, a
guy who scores goals, Therrien was quick to sabotage that move. Vanek
has alluded to this since he left Montreal. Other players have made
similarly disparaging comments since getting out from under Therrien's
abusive thumb.

Trading Subban was to appease Therrien and, hindsight being 20-20, it
turns out it was completely against where the game was going. The game
was a year away from becoming a game that relied on slick puck moving
defencemen. Therrien was stuck in the old game along side his foxhole
buddy. Bergevin is supposed to have the foresight to see where the game
is going and to be able to evaluate the talent he has or needs but he
can't do that if his coach ties his hands.

He should have fired Therrien the year that Subban was traded but that
doubling, tripling down on Therrien doomed this version of the team. Had
he had a coach with vision, tolerance and acceptance, the core would
still be in place. Instead they've become arguably the worst team in the
league and all because of one reason - Therrien and the ensuing
appeasement of him. That young promising core that they both inherited
is now a shambles - completely lacking in leadership, save for Gallagher.

And now we're witnessing Molson make the same mistakes. Its triple down
time on Bergevin now. Sound familiar? By God, Molson is going to show
the hockey world he was right - results be damned. And this is what gets
me most. That refusal to learn from past mistakes. Tremblay/Roy,
Therrien/Subban. Two times where the team picks an entirely replaceable
coach over an all star hockey player. All that was needed was a sit down
with the coach with the GM - "PK/Patrick is here to stay, I suggest you
get used to it and I suggest you 2 figure a way to get along because,
when push comes to shove, I can always find another coach but Patrick
Roy/PK Subban are generational talents. They ain't going anywhere". But
of course that conversation would never be had in Habdom these days.
Nepotism rules the Foxhole. Appearance and looks are what matter most.
Results? Well, if they come, great. If not, well, we'll trot out the
torch, some old players from years gone by, Madame Belliveau. Whatever
it takes to keep the dying embers of what used to be a professionally
run franchise still burning.

Time to admit the obvious. They've turned this team into the pre-Auston
Matthews Leafs and if Molson really thinks that this team is a tweak or
two away from Cup contenders, then he's fooling a lot of people - or at
least trying to. In the end, he's only trying to fool himself.

Is that another fork in the road I see? Surely they'll choose the right
path this time right?

[Chuck]

I hate when they bring back previous failures to run things. Sure he won a cup but little if any sign he could rebuild this team, especially when he laid the groundwork for Montreal’s decades of gloom.

As I lounge around a cruise ship in the South Pacific ;)

[Mike]

On 2018-03-31 07:55 PM, Chuck wrote:
> I hate when they bring back previous failures to run things. Sure he won a cup but little if any sign he could rebuild this team, especially when he laid the groundwork for Montreal’s decades of gloom.
>
> As I lounge around a cruise ship in the South Pacific ;)
>

Oh you lucky bugger - what ship?

[Chuck]

Maasdam Holland America

[Mike]

Ha - we were on the Oosterdam last fall. Found the ship a little too
quiet for our liking. Food was good though and the price was good -
Sometimes being a travel agent has its perks. :-)