info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
So seriously, what can be done
47 views
Skip to first unread message
Marty
Jan 30, 2016, 8:22:31 PM1/30/16
to
OK. I give Bergevin more credit than others here and thus I believe I
understood what he tried to do, but in the short term he clearly
overplayed his hand. He tried to put the pressure on himself, cheerlead,
send the message that the coaches and players needed to find their groove
and not start waiting for a trade or firing or Price. However, back-to-
back loses to the WORST team in the league makes him look like he gambled
almost all his chips on a poker hand that's almost drawing dead.
He wanted the pressure, and now he's got it. Hockey's talking heads would
be hailing him as a genius if that won three games. Instead, he's looking
pretty stupid, which does happen when you gamble.
So, what can be done?
Bergevin technically CAN go back on his word, but can he after a mere 3
games? I can't imagine.
Molson can fire the whole lot of them, but wouldn't that be a terrible
over-raction to a season train-wrecked, mostly, by a key injury? Aside
from Bergevin's love of Therrien, most of his moves have been beneficial
or sideways, and the Hab's have been the best they have been in two
decades under his rule. If Molson establishes the Habs as a team that will
fire a GM for one bad, injury plagued season, you tell future GMs "think
short term. That's all that matters".
So, this begs the question I am building too. Molson is a true "hockey"
owner, a fan of the game, and knowledgeable of the Montreal fans and the
franchise. Can HE step in and say to Bergevin "You made a mistake. You
stand by Therrien too much. He is NOT irreplaceable, and you can't refuse
to fire him because you like him. You have to react to the fact he's a
lightning rod now, and he has to go so fans and players stop looking at
the coaching, and look back to the guys on the ice." If you are Molson,
would you demand he fire Therrien, but keep the demand private? Or do you
go public and make it clear you went over his head? This would save
Bergevin from having to go back on his word, but could make him look weak
in the public eye as a GM readily overruled by an owner. Of course, you
could also just fire Begevin. Final option, you can let the season play
out before giving an order to fire Therrien if the play-offs are missed.
Then Bergevin could carry secretly follow ownership demands without having
to break his "promise".
Here's the thing. To me, the answer lies in the answer to another
question. What, the fuck, is going on with Price? You see, if he's not
coming back, then to hell with this season anyway, right? We're not
winning a Cup or even coming close even with Jesus as coach. For all we
know, that might be the most likely scenario and Bergevin KNOWS that, and
that's why he made the Hail Mary speech. Anyway, we can't know that
though, especially because the team won't let us know what is going on
with Price, as if keeping that information secret helps them in the next
game, which I've often been assure by athelete's is the only game they
worry about! Ahem. I digress.
Anyway, we can only speculate. So me, if I'm Molson, and Price IS coming
back very soon, I'm firing Therrien, and asking Bergevin is he wants to do
it, or I'll do it and make a statement that I did it while assuring
everyone I had full confidence in Bergevin but needed to send a message to
the fans or some bullshit. If Price isn't coming back, then I let it all
play out, but I tell Bergevin is the team continues to totally collapse
like they are, he better be prepared to fire Therrien at the end of the
year and give the team a fresh start next season, because heads are going
to roll. It then become Bergevin's choice if his head rolls too.
Marty
understood what he tried to do, but in the short term he clearly
overplayed his hand. He tried to put the pressure on himself, cheerlead,
send the message that the coaches and players needed to find their groove
and not start waiting for a trade or firing or Price. However, back-to-
back loses to the WORST team in the league makes him look like he gambled
almost all his chips on a poker hand that's almost drawing dead.
He wanted the pressure, and now he's got it. Hockey's talking heads would
be hailing him as a genius if that won three games. Instead, he's looking
pretty stupid, which does happen when you gamble.
So, what can be done?
Bergevin technically CAN go back on his word, but can he after a mere 3
games? I can't imagine.
Molson can fire the whole lot of them, but wouldn't that be a terrible
over-raction to a season train-wrecked, mostly, by a key injury? Aside
from Bergevin's love of Therrien, most of his moves have been beneficial
or sideways, and the Hab's have been the best they have been in two
decades under his rule. If Molson establishes the Habs as a team that will
fire a GM for one bad, injury plagued season, you tell future GMs "think
short term. That's all that matters".
So, this begs the question I am building too. Molson is a true "hockey"
owner, a fan of the game, and knowledgeable of the Montreal fans and the
franchise. Can HE step in and say to Bergevin "You made a mistake. You
stand by Therrien too much. He is NOT irreplaceable, and you can't refuse
to fire him because you like him. You have to react to the fact he's a
lightning rod now, and he has to go so fans and players stop looking at
the coaching, and look back to the guys on the ice." If you are Molson,
would you demand he fire Therrien, but keep the demand private? Or do you
go public and make it clear you went over his head? This would save
Bergevin from having to go back on his word, but could make him look weak
in the public eye as a GM readily overruled by an owner. Of course, you
could also just fire Begevin. Final option, you can let the season play
out before giving an order to fire Therrien if the play-offs are missed.
Then Bergevin could carry secretly follow ownership demands without having
to break his "promise".
Here's the thing. To me, the answer lies in the answer to another
question. What, the fuck, is going on with Price? You see, if he's not
coming back, then to hell with this season anyway, right? We're not
winning a Cup or even coming close even with Jesus as coach. For all we
know, that might be the most likely scenario and Bergevin KNOWS that, and
that's why he made the Hail Mary speech. Anyway, we can't know that
though, especially because the team won't let us know what is going on
with Price, as if keeping that information secret helps them in the next
game, which I've often been assure by athelete's is the only game they
worry about! Ahem. I digress.
Anyway, we can only speculate. So me, if I'm Molson, and Price IS coming
back very soon, I'm firing Therrien, and asking Bergevin is he wants to do
it, or I'll do it and make a statement that I did it while assuring
everyone I had full confidence in Bergevin but needed to send a message to
the fans or some bullshit. If Price isn't coming back, then I let it all
play out, but I tell Bergevin is the team continues to totally collapse
like they are, he better be prepared to fire Therrien at the end of the
year and give the team a fresh start next season, because heads are going
to roll. It then become Bergevin's choice if his head rolls too.
Marty
Mike
Jan 30, 2016, 10:32:28 PM1/30/16
to
that really matters though. If you are Molson then you need to sit back
at this point and ask if you believe the team will make the playoffs. I
can't believe he'll come to the conclusion other than the obvious - they
aren't. Once you accept that premise then the rest become moot really.
Therrien, Bergevin, Price - none of it matters until next September. So
if I was Molson I would do nothing right now. No, I'm wrong. I would do
something. I'd tell Bergevin that trades to bring in temporary help are
off the table. We dance with the coach that brought us to the dance. We
then sit down and determine, who do we want to keep and who do we want
to let go. We part ways with the pieces that we can and we turn the
young guys loose. Therrien is ordered to play Galchenyuk at centre with
wingers who can help and not with a couple book ends. McCarron,
Sherback, Pateryn - they all play down the stretch and get some valuable
experience. DD is traded or sent to the AHL. Then the day after the last
game of the year, Therrien is fired. Bergevin then gets another chance
to pick a coach, his last.
Jim Bauch
Jan 30, 2016, 11:18:41 PM1/30/16
to
If I were Geoff Molson, I suppose my approach would be largely similar to Marty's and Mike's.
I'd sit Bergevin down and tell him this:
"What you did at your press conference, taking the blame onto yourself, was noble. But I don't pay you to be noble. Showing loyalty to your coach and accepting the blame might have earned you the respect of the players, but it certainly hasn't shown up on the ice in the last three games."
"I hired you to manage a team that ALREADY had a world-class goaltender, a young Norris-caliber defenseman, and a 30-goal winger. You got good results for a couple of seasons; I believed that the coaching staff and style of play was holding them back, but I couldn't quarrel with the results or the direction of the team. But now this team is absolutely awful. You insist that coaching isn't the problem. But then what is? Injuries? The only significant injury is to Price, which revealed that apparently you've built a team that, without a world-class goaltender, is the worst in the NHL. By far. Personnel? As you said, that's your fault. If the best you've been able to do with a generational goaltender is surround him with a squad that a supposedly good coach can't wring better than an AHL-quality performance from, then that tells me something about you."
"Loyalty is a fine thing. But it's a tough league, and you're going to be judged on results. You didn't allow scruples about loyalty to stop you from trading a heart-and-soul leader like Brandon Prust -- and by the way, we're going to have another chat about your due diligence on Kassian later -- so let's not pretend that hockey isn't, as you said then, a tough game that requires hard decisions. Right now you need to decide whether you really want to tie your fate to Michel Therrein's."
"If you want to fire him now, you'll have to swallow some pride, but I'll overlook the money lost on his contract extension as just part of the price of doing business in this league, and you'll get a chance to get it right with another coach next season, no matter what happens the rest of this year."
"Or, if you really believe that's what is best for the organization, then I have enough trust in you that I'll let you both finish out the season. And perhaps you'll be able to say 'I told you so,' and all will be well. Just know that if this season continues like it has, then in the summer, I will be reassessing everyone in the organization. If you change your mind then and want to fire Therrein, then I'm going to be asking myself if I also want to continue employing a GM who is slower than me, the amateur, to see the obvious deficiencies in this coach."
Jim
I'd sit Bergevin down and tell him this:
"What you did at your press conference, taking the blame onto yourself, was noble. But I don't pay you to be noble. Showing loyalty to your coach and accepting the blame might have earned you the respect of the players, but it certainly hasn't shown up on the ice in the last three games."
"I hired you to manage a team that ALREADY had a world-class goaltender, a young Norris-caliber defenseman, and a 30-goal winger. You got good results for a couple of seasons; I believed that the coaching staff and style of play was holding them back, but I couldn't quarrel with the results or the direction of the team. But now this team is absolutely awful. You insist that coaching isn't the problem. But then what is? Injuries? The only significant injury is to Price, which revealed that apparently you've built a team that, without a world-class goaltender, is the worst in the NHL. By far. Personnel? As you said, that's your fault. If the best you've been able to do with a generational goaltender is surround him with a squad that a supposedly good coach can't wring better than an AHL-quality performance from, then that tells me something about you."
"Loyalty is a fine thing. But it's a tough league, and you're going to be judged on results. You didn't allow scruples about loyalty to stop you from trading a heart-and-soul leader like Brandon Prust -- and by the way, we're going to have another chat about your due diligence on Kassian later -- so let's not pretend that hockey isn't, as you said then, a tough game that requires hard decisions. Right now you need to decide whether you really want to tie your fate to Michel Therrein's."
"If you want to fire him now, you'll have to swallow some pride, but I'll overlook the money lost on his contract extension as just part of the price of doing business in this league, and you'll get a chance to get it right with another coach next season, no matter what happens the rest of this year."
"Or, if you really believe that's what is best for the organization, then I have enough trust in you that I'll let you both finish out the season. And perhaps you'll be able to say 'I told you so,' and all will be well. Just know that if this season continues like it has, then in the summer, I will be reassessing everyone in the organization. If you change your mind then and want to fire Therrein, then I'm going to be asking myself if I also want to continue employing a GM who is slower than me, the amateur, to see the obvious deficiencies in this coach."
Jim
Nyssa
Jan 31, 2016, 12:13:48 PM1/31/16
to
Beautifully written. I can only hope that the same thoughts
are winding their way through Molson's brain right now.
The season is toast, but at least the remainder should be
used to give the kids some NHL level game experience to
build on for next season and those to come. Lay it on
the line to MT that these kids PLAY, not sit or eat popcorn.
Even if they make a mistake occasionally. It's the only
way they will learn.
Ditto with Chucky at center with decent wingers who can do
more than chase the play or stand around watching.
I agree wholeheartedly about Prust. The lack of strong
leadership in the room is painfully obvious, especially
with the absence of the other leader, Price on a daily
and game time basis. What we got in return...the less
said the better.
And I'm still pissed off that we lost the potential that
Sekac showed and got DSP who is showing zero potential.
Now to try to shrug off what awaits us for the rest of
the season and think of better, Therrein-free days to come.
Oh, and if we do end up with Matthews or another high pick,
MT HAS to be gone or the kid will be wasted just like the
others until MT has "made a better person of him." <gag>
Nyssa, who hopes there will be a brighter future on the
horizon come this fall
Gerry
Jan 31, 2016, 1:09:29 PM1/31/16
to
Great posts by Marty, Mike, and Jim, for sure. Well grounded in practical reality. But I think if we really take some of those practical approaches, it does still hurt us. This team is maybe a week or two away from really having mathematical certainty that there is not even a miracle that can salvage this seaosn. In which case, I think (as Nyssa points out) that a really high priority has to be the The Future. And The Future has several components.
Most immediately, there is the trade deadline. They have to take a Future-oriented approach to the trade deadline. They have to move veteran/UFA elements and bring in more Futures, whether draft picks, prospects or young players. It's a modern reality when you are a team outside the playoff picture, it's the one chance you really get to transform lead into gold (albeit "possible" gold). Parity means fewer Sellers. Teams which do Sell, are never going to find a better market than the trade deadline. The team absolutely MUST approach it in the proper frame of mind.
Then there is the "finish out the season" component. I argue that there should be no scenario which allows Therrien to continue coaching as a "lame duck". The team has to evaluate the potential of young players. If possible, it would be advantageous to give any prospective new coach a headstart on next season by getting some time this season. I would not allow any latitude for not making the coaching change. Possibly retaining Therrien gives us a higher draft pick. Maybe. But everything else about his continued presence screams futility, and as Habs' boss, I simply would not stand for that. There is no face-saving or alternative scenario which I would alllow which includes Therrien in the "finish out the season" component. There are various ways to address it, per some of the other posters, but to me, I could not allow any situation which leaves Therrien in place. Playing youth and evaluating young talent in the right environment is simply too important.
And then for the early-summer... the Free Agency period is of paramount importance to roster building in the modern NHL. Depending on how our trade deadline went, we could be very well-positioned to be significant players on the UFA market. There can be absolutely no allowance for leaving any uncertainty or negative energy swirling around the franchise during this period. We have to be an attractive location for potential UFAs.
The Future has to be paramount, and I don't think the franchise can afford to yield to "saving face" or any other compromises. There should REALLY be No Excuses allowed.
l8r,
Gerry
Most immediately, there is the trade deadline. They have to take a Future-oriented approach to the trade deadline. They have to move veteran/UFA elements and bring in more Futures, whether draft picks, prospects or young players. It's a modern reality when you are a team outside the playoff picture, it's the one chance you really get to transform lead into gold (albeit "possible" gold). Parity means fewer Sellers. Teams which do Sell, are never going to find a better market than the trade deadline. The team absolutely MUST approach it in the proper frame of mind.
Then there is the "finish out the season" component. I argue that there should be no scenario which allows Therrien to continue coaching as a "lame duck". The team has to evaluate the potential of young players. If possible, it would be advantageous to give any prospective new coach a headstart on next season by getting some time this season. I would not allow any latitude for not making the coaching change. Possibly retaining Therrien gives us a higher draft pick. Maybe. But everything else about his continued presence screams futility, and as Habs' boss, I simply would not stand for that. There is no face-saving or alternative scenario which I would alllow which includes Therrien in the "finish out the season" component. There are various ways to address it, per some of the other posters, but to me, I could not allow any situation which leaves Therrien in place. Playing youth and evaluating young talent in the right environment is simply too important.
And then for the early-summer... the Free Agency period is of paramount importance to roster building in the modern NHL. Depending on how our trade deadline went, we could be very well-positioned to be significant players on the UFA market. There can be absolutely no allowance for leaving any uncertainty or negative energy swirling around the franchise during this period. We have to be an attractive location for potential UFAs.
The Future has to be paramount, and I don't think the franchise can afford to yield to "saving face" or any other compromises. There should REALLY be No Excuses allowed.
l8r,
Gerry
TheMadApe
Jan 31, 2016, 1:41:19 PM1/31/16
to
One thing to consider in any players movements will be the cap for next
year. Because of the shit Canadian $ I would assume that it might have
the potential to bring it down. If that is the case there could be a lot
of teams trying to do the impossible big salary dump.
I do think anyone foresaw the Canadian $ shitting the bed when the
NHL-NHLPA agreement was signed.
I will admit that I have not looked at this in any great detail but I
would have to think it is a very negative effect on teams.
On a bit of a side note... how does the absence of Canadian Teams in the
post-season play into league revenue?
TMA
gorgo...@gmail.com
Jan 31, 2016, 3:51:25 PM1/31/16
to
The cap is all in US$ is it not? Therefore the value of the Canadian dollar is immaterial other than the fact Canadian teams assume a bigger salary bill when the roster total is converted from US to Canadian dollars. Probably not a big factor for rich teams like Mtl and TO but a bastard for gge small market teams. This isn't even mentioning the higher taxes paid in socialist Canada.
Marty
Jan 31, 2016, 7:10:18 PM1/31/16
to
Canadian teams are going to show a BIG drop in revenue, which lowers the
total league revenue a lot. When the dollar was soaring, it allowed the
cap to jump by leaps and bounds. Now, the opposite will happen.
Gerry
Jan 31, 2016, 10:39:18 PM1/31/16
to
Well, the HRR I think uses daily exchange rates, at least, so in real-time, the decline of the CDN$ is at least slightly mitigated as it plunges by having been a bit higher earlier on in the season, and last summer. Still, there are some estimates that peg the CDN portion of HRR as high as 40% of the NHL. i.e. 7 teams out of 30 (plus our various broadcast contracts, etc) really do play a pretty significant role in determining the final HRR. Estimates I've read of what the effect is going to be, including pro-rating the loonie dropping to $0.60, still don't drop us _below_ the current cap. But we could very well have a flat/flat-ish cap for next season. (The 5% escalator is almost always automatically included nowadays).
Depending on how market-savvy individual teams were, they may have "hedged" some of their contract expenditures. Apparently that's something they can do by locking in deals at essentially an insured exachange rate, and so converting payrolls to US$ under a declining exchange rate may not impact teams on their own bottom line as drastically as one might fear.
Nevertheless, it is certain that the declining loonie is going to have an impact. Maybe not dire, or at least, not immediately dire. But to me, that just means it's all the more important to play this trade deadline as intelligently as possible. Create cap space where possible, move low efficiency contracts if you can. In the summer, you still offer the same $US to prospective UFAs as other teams do. Granted, higher taxation is always an issue for us.
Buyers may not wish to take on our low efficiency contracts... but not every team is capped out, even allowing for zero growth on the cap. There are teams in the hunt that have projected space, teams which have their own low efficiency expiring deals, etc.
Anyway, I am not guaranteeing that we can pan for gold successfully at this trade deadline, who knows, the market may conspire against us, but regardless, it should be the objective.
l8r,
Gerry
Depending on how market-savvy individual teams were, they may have "hedged" some of their contract expenditures. Apparently that's something they can do by locking in deals at essentially an insured exachange rate, and so converting payrolls to US$ under a declining exchange rate may not impact teams on their own bottom line as drastically as one might fear.
Nevertheless, it is certain that the declining loonie is going to have an impact. Maybe not dire, or at least, not immediately dire. But to me, that just means it's all the more important to play this trade deadline as intelligently as possible. Create cap space where possible, move low efficiency contracts if you can. In the summer, you still offer the same $US to prospective UFAs as other teams do. Granted, higher taxation is always an issue for us.
Buyers may not wish to take on our low efficiency contracts... but not every team is capped out, even allowing for zero growth on the cap. There are teams in the hunt that have projected space, teams which have their own low efficiency expiring deals, etc.
Anyway, I am not guaranteeing that we can pan for gold successfully at this trade deadline, who knows, the market may conspire against us, but regardless, it should be the objective.
l8r,
Gerry
0 new messages