Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Psycing

Is it time to trade Markov?

Recommended Posts

In the words of the Great Rick Estrin (Little Charlie and the Nightcats)

DUMP THAT CHUMP

Curious? Who is Great Rick Estrin, blues/jazz?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Curious? Who is Great Rick Estrin, blues/jazz?

pretty good blues band (I looked it up)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Curious? Who is Great Rick Estrin, blues/jazz?

Yeah, he's a great blues harmonica player with a knack for songwriting. I used to do that song years ago in a bar band. Blues, like the Canadiens, had it's golden age in the 50's and stopped being relevant in the late 80's when Stevie Ray Vaughan died.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, he's a great blues harmonica player with a knack for songwriting. I used to do that song years ago in a bar band. Blues, like the Canadiens, had it's golden age in the 50's and stopped being relevant in the late 80's when Stevie Ray Vaughan died.

Sorry to be (just a bit) off-topic.

SRV (gone way too early) & Son House-type stuff, love it. That's all.

Am on the fence with trading Markov, mixed feelings; but, I still think better to cut bait and look to revamp for 2014-15 and beyond.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to be (just a bit) off-topic.

SRV (gone way too early) & Son House-type stuff, love it. That's all.

Am on the fence with trading Markov, mixed feelings; but, I still think better to cut bait and look to revamp for 2014-15 and beyond.

Check out Paul Rishell, he learned from Son House and I studied with his wife Annie Raines (and Darrel Nulisch briefly) for years...now back to regularly scheduled programming.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, Markov. I agree with sim.on above: it all comes down to salary and term. He is in serious danger of becoming a 5th defenceman who becomes a 2nd defenceman on the PP: a classic "specialist," on a continuum with guys like Marc-Andre Bergeron. The "leadership" argument only goes so far. Lots of other players can provide leadership. Heck, you can always go and sign a guy like Hal Gill, i.e., an unambiguous bottom-pairing veteran defenceman at a reasonable rate, to provide that. And when we're talking leadership, let's remember - it's not like Markov has won Cups or anything.

When you consider the return Markov could generate at the deadline - at least a 1st rounder, probably more - I incline to the view that the organizationally responsible thing to do is move him. (Admittedly, I'm also looking for signs from MB that he has the necessary ruthlessness to make major moves - this would be one example).

That said, if we re-sign him on a short-term deal at a reasonable rate, I won't pull out my hair about it.

I guess that I am in the minority here that sees this team as needing a big scoring winger (replace Bourque) and a consistent scoring centre or winger (move one Briere or Gio) to be a strong contender. It seems to me that many of our defensive problems stem from our wingers not being able to clear the zone when the defense sends the puck around the boards or otherwise being outmuscled.

My point? I would like to see MB make a couple of shrewd moves right now--not at the trade deadline-- to make us stronger contenders. Failing a strong run to the playoffs, I think Markov has to go. Rememer a few years ago Rivet! brought us Gorges and the pick that became Paccioretty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess that I am in the minority here that sees this team as needing a big scoring winger (replace Bourque) and a consistent scoring centre or winger (move one Briere or Gio) to be a strong contender. It seems to me that many of our defensive problems stem from our wingers not being able to clear the zone when the defense sends the puck around the boards or otherwise being outmuscled.

My point? I would like to see MB make a couple of shrewd moves right now--not at the trade deadline-- to make us stronger contenders. Failing a strong run to the playoffs, I think Markov has to go. Rememer a few years ago Rivet! brought us Gorges and the pick that became Paccioretty.

I don't think you are in a minority at all. i am not a fan of putting UFA's in the position to walk. i would think about resigning Markov only after he comes back from Sochi healthy. i think that is a better time to evaluate what to do with him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And when we're talking leadership, let's remember - it's not like Markov has won Cups or anything.

There is no argument more disingenuous than criticizing an individual for their lack of team accomplishments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also decide what to do with Gionta before the deadline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no argument more disingenuous than criticizing an individual for their lack of team accomplishments.

Apt.

Payton Manning (even though has won 1) might not ever be considered better than a Montana-Brady because they won more championships.

But who had better rosters to work with has to be a bigger factor. (still may be Brady but besides the point).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:rolleyes: Oh brother. I wasn't "criticizing" Markov. I was responding to the idea that we should re-sign him based mainly on his "leadership." No doubt he commands great respect in the room (assuming he ever says anything in it), but I question the idea that his "leadership" is some irreplaceable asset. He is not a guy who is likely to grab a team by its lapels and show them "this is how we win championships." How would he know? This isn't Bob Gainey or Mark Messier or even Jonathan Toews we're talking about. In short, trading or not trading Markov should be a hockey move instead of being rooted in some mystical about his leadership super-powers.

Now, if I DID want to criticize Markov, I would point out that his career playoff track record has only been so-so, at least statistically, with PPG totals well below his regular season results. Stats aren't everything, but this is a little more support for the idea that we should be careful not to exaggerate the irreplaceability of his leadership.

Markov seems to have become a secular saint in the eyes of some Habs fans. I loved his game in his prime (as anybody would) and still have great respect for him. I'm willing to entertain the idea that his suckitude over the past month and a half is a product of a compressed schedule and pre-Olympic drift rather than terminal decline. But come on. Larry Robinson he ain't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Markov seems to have become a secular saint in the eyes of some Habs fans. I loved his game in his prime (as anybody would) and still have great respect for him. I'm willing to entertain the idea that his suckitude over the past month and a half is a product of a compressed schedule and pre-Olympic drift rather than terminal decline. But come on. Larry Robinson he ain't.

This is basically the same situation Bruin's fans have with Patrice Bergeron. I just got tired of hearing all the team's ills being blamed on his absence a few seasons ago. He's a great player, but at no point in his career was he considered a top 5 defenseman, and never got nominated for a Norris. It's interesting how he's become such a fan favorite when his personality is halfway between a zwieback cookie and a glass of lukewarm milk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trading Markov has nothing to do with contract or term. It is only a hockey decision. He is not good enough any more, but can provide prospects, and maybe roster players of value. I really am a big fan of Markov and have always spoken against trading him for the last 3-4 years. BUT I now believe we need to move forward and he is one big chip we can move to improve this team over the next 2-3 years when we win the cup. He will be retired or totally useless when we have the parade.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trading Markov has nothing to do with contract or term. It is only a hockey decision. He is not good enough any more, but can provide prospects, and maybe roster players of value.

In today's NHL it has everything to do with contract and term. How is he not good enough? He is definitely worthy of playing out the rest of his days as a Hab, providing that he is playing around equal to the value signed. An argument could be had that he was our MVP over the first quarter of the season, and now we want to take the ol' dog out back and shoot him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it's called asset management. The current I don't even think will make the playoffs this year. they have been terrible for a month and I don't expect it to change. Markov will btring you the biggest return back. Top prospect and a 1sr or 2nd rounder I'm guessing.

MB can then call him July 1st and offer him whatever he sees fit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it's called asset management. The current I don't even think will make the playoffs this year. they have been terrible for a month and I don't expect it to change. Markov will btring you the biggest return back. Top prospect and a 1sr or 2nd rounder I'm guessing.

MB can then call him July 1st and offer him whatever he sees fit.

This is the deciding factor. If it doesn't look like we are going to make the playoffs. I'm all for moving Markov. If we have a chance we keep him - I don't see us making the playoffs without him.

Gorges and Gionta are different cases. I'd move both without hesitation. Gorges still has value based on reputation. The longer we hold on, the lower his value. I could see a team like Edmonton or Winnipeg giving a decent return for him, or as part of a package.

Gionta is done. Spirit is still there, the body has given away. He is holding up a spot on Pleks line that someone else should get and is taking up a roster spot that a kid like Leblanc deserves a serious look at. He should bring in a 2nd rounder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In today's NHL it has everything to do with contract and term. How is he not good enough? He is definitely worthy of playing out the rest of his days as a Hab, providing that he is playing around equal to the value signed. An argument could be had that he was our MVP over the first quarter of the season, and now we want to take the ol' dog out back and shoot him.

yup unfortunately that is how it works. We need to build. He is now tradeable, due to the fact he is only good for 45 games then the grind gets to him. If we are going to win the cup we need new assets, he will provide that. And yeah we could sign him on July 1st.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<yep!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems like every time someone doubts Gionta he gets on the board.

Keep doubting!

That isn't quite true I have been calling for him to be traded all year. He needs to go. And get us someone better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They'll be lucky to get a 2nd rounder at the deadline for Gionta.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gionta could draw a 2nd and a prospect.

I would like to try a package of Markov DD to land a good right handed defenseman and a 2nd liner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as I like Markov and as much as I think it would be useful to keep him around to help with the development of Beaulieu and Tinordi, if we can get a good return for Markov in a trade this year, I think we should do it! Markov will fetch at least 5.5 million per year and he'll want a 3 or 4 year contract....The Habs can't give him a contract that long, that would be irresponsible!

It's not like the Habs are a serious contender for the cup. We're still a few years away, so overall, I think we should trade him if we can!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Stogey24

As much as I like Markov and as much as I think it would be useful to keep him around to help with the development of Beaulieu and Tinordi, if we can get a good return for Markov in a trade this year, I think we should do it! Markov will fetch at least 5.5 million per year and he'll want a 3 or 4 year contract....The Habs can't give him a contract that long, that would be irresponsible!

It's not like the Habs are a serious contender for the cup. We're still a few years away, so overall, I think we should trade him if we can!

Irresponsible is a good word to use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a rumor report claiming that the Habs are listening to offers on Andrei Markov as they decide whether or not to re-sign him. Take it for what it's worth:

http://www.xnsports.com/2014/02/03/murphs-musings-habs-listening-to-trade-offers-on-andrei-markov/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...