Well then I REALLY don't get it. I can branch and merge all day in my scm if there aren't any conflicts. Is all the hype over git just because maybe the branch and merge commands are slightly simpler?
Also, we were spending a very large amount of time waiting for merges to complete. Minutes. Lots of them. Git is lightning fast, and we spend a lot less cycles waiting (or context switching).
http://whygitisbetterthanx.com/
I would say the primary "hype" factor of git is because of local commits and all the infrastructure/features around them. Better server-side merges is just a nice bonus.
* For finding what commit introduced a bug, by binary search. Flag a revision as the last known good commit, then bisect will switch to a one in-between, wait for you to test and mark it as good or bad, then repeat. Better yet, just provide a test suite and it will classify the revision automatically.
It's somewhat comparable to incremental programming with a REPL, rather than a compile-link-test cycle. Sure, you only get feedback on your code "slightly faster", but that makes a tremendous difference.
Git is hyped pretty hard (software hipsters seem to be gaga over it, probably in part because of gasp Linus), but if you ignore all that, it is a pretty good version control system.