Commandant

Keith is better than Weber. Seabrook is better than Alzner Right there, when they have you beat on the two best guys on the roster.... they likely have you beat as a core. But lets look deeper Petry is better than Murphy, but this doesn't make up for losing on the first two. Schlemko vs Kempny is a wash. We've got an edge with Jamie Benn vs Rozisval. Rutta vs Jerabek is a wash. So we have two defenceman better, they have 2 defenceman better. When their two are the top 2 who play the most minutes, but our wins are a 2nd pair guy and a 3rd pair guy, i'll take the Hawks. Winnipeg has Byfuglien, Myers, Trouba, Enstrom as their top 4, plus Josh Morrisey. Thats better than the Habs. We beat them on Byfuglien vs Weber They beat us on the next 4 guys. Myers > Alzener Trouba > Petry Enstrom > Schlemko Morrisey > Benn Washington, same thing... we beat them at #1, and then they beat us at 2, 3, 4, 5,

You do know that the issue isn't him as a third pairing dman. Its the fact that lack of a top pairing dman means he is legitimately being considered as a possible top pair guy? Thats the issue. I don't see anyone saying he's not a capable 3rd pair guy. I see big questions if he's a top 4.

We are not better a better defence than.... Florida, La, Carolina, Tampa, Washington, Winnipeg, Chicago IMO. All teams you named.

I like him as a third pair addition. I don't like him as a Markov replacement and top 4 guy.

In terms of getting offense from the defenceman, there is a ton to suggest it will be worse. None of the LHD has the offensive track record of Andrei Markov. Streit only matched the offense Nathan Beaulieu brought last year. Alzner is not an offensive Dman. Schlemko has a little offence, but just a little. Jerabek is an unproven rookie. Where is the offense.

Benn is not a good passer and does not move the puck forward efficiently and effectively through his passing skill.

A defence with 1 top pair player 2 guys who are decent in the second pair and a bunch of third pair/press box guys is not Above average. Add in the fact that there is a serious, and obvious deficiency in puck moving ability and skating, in a league where these things become more important each year, and its Not even average. Markov (or a player of his caliber) really was the difference between a good defence and a below average one.

Nearly 22 minutes a game is still big minutes. Over 20 minutes a night is something that only 3 defencemen on our current blueline have shown that they are currently able to handle. Where is the fourth.

With 8.5 in cap space... the oilers match that easily.

This defence as it stands is above average? No, its not. A team missing a top pair LHD is not above average.

This old timer was pretty good playing over 20 minutes a game last year. That seems like top minutes to me. But its ok, Don has to spin this so Bergevin looks good. So now we are making up facts that Markov can't play anymore. Don will do anything, even blatantly lie about how good/bad a player is, and what he did last year just to defend Bergevin.

There is nothing to suggest that this blue line will be better offensively than last year. Your post relies on blind faith. There is much to suggest they will be worse offensively and that the Habs transition game will suffer.

The flaw here is that Markov was willing to sign a one-year deal.

He says he was willing to sign for 1 year. Bergevin is ####ing stupid.

With the cap space that the Habs have, not working to get a deal done is a failure by Bergevin. No other way to really spin this.

They can if they want.

He can ask to be transferred back to Europe. He doesn't have to. Usually how these things work is if a player thinks he'll only be AHL for a short time, he sticks it out. if he thinks hes gonna be buried for a while, he asks to active the clause and go back.

Meh, I don't want another guy who is very similar to schlemko. He's not a clear top 4.

Sounds like Juolevi will go back to Europe for the year if he doesn't make the Canucks. Mete (who outplayed Juolevi last year anyway) will be the undisputed #1 D in London.

Canada has a long history of questionable choices..... nearly every team has one. Brenden Morrow in 2010. Rob Zamnur, Kirk Maltby, Kris Draper, Bryan McCabe Its not just a kunitz thing. Its sometimes hockey people make strange decisions. So being on team canada, or even being used prominently is not the be all and end all of talent evaluation.

1 year deals can be buried in the AHL. 2+ year deals on 35+ players can not. AFAIK.

Would you trade Chris Kunitz for Tyler Seguin. One was on the 2014 team in a prominent role with Sidney Crosby, and one wasn't on the roster. If your answer is no, then you've just shown that being on Team Canada, and being used in a prominent role, doesn't make you a better player than someone not on the team, or in the press box.

Team Canada management is not infallible. The team selections aren't always correct. Yes, They won the olympics, but should Chris Kunitz have been on the team over some of the players they left at home. Would you trade Tyler Seguin for Chris Kunitz cause one was on Team Canada 2014 and the other wasn't? If your answer is no, then it just proves my point. The team selection does not automatically prove one player is better than another. We've seen this throughout many Team Canada team selections,... they aren't 100% the best players. Sometimes they pick the wrong guys. Sometimes a guy is in there for chemistry reasons, etc...

The biggest criticism of this move is that it is only a small help, when a bigger move is still needed. However, this move also does nothing to prevent the bigger move.

The have $8.462 million to spend after this signing. Thats with 23 men on the roster. You can sign Markov, and send Joe Morrow, or Jerabek, or Streit to the minors, and you get their cap hit off the books. Freeing up the same $700k. This move prevents NOTHING.