Jump to content

Markov: Tradewinds blowin' ?


ICEWATER77

Recommended Posts

Do we do Markov a solid and trade him to a top contender so he can win a cup and retire? It's happened many times before..and he doesn't seem to have anything left in the tank. Ducks need a 3rd pairing guy after losing Beauchemin..Whatta ya say?..bring back a 2nd round pick from Ducks? Bolts? Preds? Blues?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt Markov would see a trade as 'doing him a solid.' He's been pretty staunch in his commitment to Montreal for over a decade. I also suspect that, with minutes properly managed (unlike last year), he can be a real asset to a contending team. Like us.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think the Habs have any desire to move him whatsoever and Markov has no desire whatsoever to move.

Anaheim has no need whatsoever for Markov. They have plenty of offence from Fowler, Vatanen, Lindholm, and Bieksa (Despres is no slouch either) plus they have Stoner signed long-term(ish) with guys like Theodore and Manson on the cusp. They're more than well stocked on D. Nashville has seven good D signed already as well.

Tampa's capped out as well. St. Louis could maybe add a D but part of the reason they let Jackman go was to try to allocate more funds up front. Adding $5.75 M in Markov goes against that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm getting cross-eyed just looking at that word! :nuts: Anywho, fair enough, I guess I'm the only one that would consider moving him. We sure could use that extra loot though. Where the hells 30, he'd move AM in a split second! haha :thumbs_up:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm getting cross-eyed just looking at that word! :nuts: Anywho, fair enough, I guess I'm the only one that would consider moving him. We sure could use that extra loot though. Where the hells 30, he'd move AM in a split second! haha :thumbs_up:

I wouldn't be against trading AM. Not that I want him gone, but I like the idea of keeping value rather than losing it to a retiring player. Just the logical side of it. Hockey is a business they say!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got a soft spot for Markov and hope he retires a Hab. Even if slows a bit and is more a 3rd pairing guy in 16-17 season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't be against trading AM. Not that I want him gone, but I like the idea of keeping value rather than losing it to a retiring player. Just the logical side of it. Hockey is a business they say!

Yeah. This. But i think he has an NTC.

I also suspect that, with minutes properly managed (unlike last year), he can be a real asset to a contending team. Like us.

Yeah. Out defensive corps is stronger this year than last, though, overall. Petry is there. Pateryn was more than solid at the end of the year. Beaulieu is finally starting to look like he might be an NHL defenseman. Tinordi might be healthy. Emelin and Gilbert are still here (for now.) Subban is still the best in the league.

There's no reason to lean heavily on Markov. Let him rest, use him more opportunisticly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do we do Markov a solid and trade him to a top contender so he can win a cup and retire? It's happened many times before..and he doesn't seem to have anything left in the tank. Ducks need a 3rd pairing guy after losing Beauchemin..Whatta ya say?..bring back a 2nd round pick from Ducks? Bolts? Preds? Blues?

Seriously? With that attitude you might want to consider finding a new team to cheer for. Bergevin is going to do right by Markov by building a team to win the cup so Markov can win and then retire a Hab

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed, keep Markov around, he's still more than fine on the blue line, just keep his minutes in check...let the younger studs eat those up, save AM for the PP units.

And yes he will win that cup with Montreal...2 years to do it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hockey is a business PMAC. AM has been atrocious the last two playoffs. He's done as a top pair D and we should consider moving him while he still has some value. No GM in the league will keep a player for sentimental reasons. Especially in the Cap era. And hey, we can always bring him back to retire as a Hab.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hockey is a business PMAC. AM has been atrocious the last two playoffs. He's done as a top pair D and we should consider moving him while he still has some value. No GM in the league will keep a player for sentimental reasons. Especially in the Cap era. And hey, we can always bring him back to retire as a Hab.

I don't see it as being about sentiment. Markov is still capable of seriously helping a team (as you yourself suggest, given your belief that a 'contender' would want his services). The true debate in your post is about whether the Habs are close enough to being contenders that they should be looking to retain a declining player who can help a team, rather than 'maximize the asset'; or whether, because we have no real chance, we should be looking to dump Markov for a 2nd round pick. Given that Montreal is a guaranteed 'buyer' at the trade deadline and a top team in the conference, I have no problem with keeping Markov and being a better team in consequence, especially if a 2nd rounder is the kind of return we're looking at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're also in that off season point of exaggerating how bad or good everyone is.

Markov had a mediocre playoffs, no doubt about it. But people talk like he was dreadful every shift. He wasn't. Therrien overplayed him in the regular season with Subban because the original strategy of Emelin - Subban / Markov - Gilbert did not work. This season the Canadiens need to try Nathan Beaulieu with P.K. Subban and see how he handles the extra minutes. At this point I'd prefer putting Jeff Petry on his wrong side to work with Subban and put someone else on their wrong side (Emelin more than likely) than put Markov back with Subban. It's just too much for him.

With all of his injury history, with his current age, he was the 11th most used defenceman in the regular season. Only 12 D in the league averaged more TOI:G. With Gonchar and Timonen retiring he's currently the 12th oldest D (and there's a good chance Salvador, Weaver and others retire). Out of the 12 oldest D in the league, the only ones that average 22 minutes or more? Markov, Chara and Streit. Everyone else plays less.

That doesn't mean we throw him away. That means we cut his minutes down to the 20-22 minute mark. That's right where we had Jeff Petry playing. Unless we make a trade (and I hope we make a trade), the best D combination we could have is:

Beaulieu - Subban

Markov - Petry

Emelin - Gilbert

Tinordi - Pateryn

That means Beaulieu stepping up with Subban, but it's a challenge we need to take. Emelin can't hang with Subban and Tinordi is still fighting for a roster spot. Markov needs to be moved down to the second pair. If we have to make that spot a revolving door with Subban so be it.

TOI: 11th among all D

TOI/G: 13th among all D

G: 25th among all D

A: 11th among all D

PTS: 11th among all D

+/-: 6th among all D

Powerplay PTS: 4th among all D

Shooting % Leaders: 28th among all D

You don't trade that for a second round pick. You utilize him better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also suspect that, with minutes properly managed (unlike last year), he can be a real asset to a contending team. Like us.

Agreed! If you cut Markov's minutes to 18-20 per game, I'm pretty sure he'll be better in the playoffs. I don't want to see him go, and I doubt Markov wants to leave Montreal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see it as being about sentiment. Markov is still capable of seriously helping a team (as you yourself suggest, given your belief that a 'contender' would want his services). The true debate in your post is about whether the Habs are close enough to being contenders that they should be looking to retain a declining player who can help a team, rather than 'maximize the asset'; or whether, because we have no real chance, we should be looking to dump Markov for a 2nd round pick. Given that Montreal is a guaranteed 'buyer' at the trade deadline and a top team in the conference, I have no problem with keeping Markov and being a better team in consequence, especially if a 2nd rounder is the kind of return we're looking at.

If we were going to trade him it was 2 years ago. that window passed. He will retire a hab. Nothing wrong with that. The market simply wasn't there 2 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And we all like Petry & Beaulieu offensive "potential", but between them they average 6g/82gms.

So if Markov's production isn't there or drops off; we gotta pray Petry &/or Beaulieu starts burying a few more frickin pucks. Or maybe Pateryn's big shot will be the offensive weapon to put on the PP point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Petry is what he is - a good all-around Dan Hamhuis type, not an offensive powerhouse.

Beaulieu does have potential to be a top-4 (top-2?) D-man with offensive flair. He has to supplant Markov as the 'secondary' offensive driver on the back end within the next year or two IMHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stogey24

Petry is what he is - a good all-around Dan Hamhuis type, not an offensive powerhouse.

Beaulieu does have potential to be a top-4 (top-2?) D-man with offensive flair. He has to supplant Markov as the 'secondary' offensive driver on the back end within the next year or two IMHO.

30pt season from Beaulieu would be ideal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One critique when Oil traded Petry was that (by Oiler blogger), he has a nice shot but refuses to use it often enough (but he same shots/gm with Oil as Markov had last year).

With Habs he had 5g on 50 shots, which is awesome shooting%; but can he do that (or close to that) for full year?

(off in left field, I see Yannick Weber had 11g for 9.4% shooting for Canucks, if Petry could match that, it would be sweet!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30pt season from Beaulieu would be ideal

Considering he's only likely going to see 2nd unit PP minutes at best, 30 is probably a stretch. As things stand, I'd peg him somewhere in the 18-23 point range if he plays regularly this coming season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering he's only likely going to see 2nd unit PP minutes at best, 30 is probably a stretch. As things stand, I'd peg him somewhere in the 18-23 point range if he plays regularly this coming season.

I would be happy if Beaulieu gets 20 points this year...especially if he only gets 2nd unit PP minutes! In a few more years, we can expect him to be a 40 point d-man!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beaulieu played 20 to 25 minutes/game in mid-Feb for 5 games, was a + player and scored his only goal. And hopefully he has trained hard this summer and will be a bit stronger and confident come Oct.

If injury happens he may do very well with increased workload?

Link to comment
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.

×
×
  • Create New...