Jump to content

Our Defense


Neech
 Share

Recommended Posts

The thing with Markov is that he has considerable value as a deadline trade chip. Organizationally speaking, that is important. Also, what will be his salary demands? I can think of way better uses for $5 mil than a an erratically declining "leader." Finally: you can't sign a guy and then issue instructions to the coach. The coach will use the players as he sees fit, and it's pretty clear that most coaches are going to reach for a Markov over a Beaulieu because of the built-in bias in favour of vets; which is just to say that if re-signing him has to be conditional on his playing only 18 minutes a night, that is wishful thinking.

This may be the slump talking, but lately I've had a strong inclination for the organization to decisively turn the page and hand over the keys to the young guys. This doesn't mean purging the franchise of all veterans - that way lies Edmonton - but it does mean being willing to move out obviously declining assets like Gio and Markov while they still have value, and not being hamstrung by a fear of losing their "leadership." It'll be up to middle-aged guys like Pleks, Gorges, and whichever UFA defenceman we sign to bring that dimension in the absence of #79 and #21. Nothing lasts forever, and it just feels like time to turn the page.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We'll have to wait until after the Olympic break if we want to deal Markov, because of injury concerns. By that time, he and the team may very well have turned it around. And THAT is precisely the time to trade him, if we want to do so - when his value is high.

In the offseason I argued for dealing him, when we would have gotten even more. He probably won't still be effective when we're supposed to be contending. On the other hand, no one can fill the hole he'd leave. But maybe we should start to get used to that as a team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This may be the year to bite the bullet, and get rid of some ufa vets and none ufa vets to teams that have a shot at the cup. Judging from how we have played lately we have a shot at nothing. We can't have too many good young prospects and young nhlers with potential. So lets play make a deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This may be the year to bite the bullet, and get rid of some ufa vets and none ufa vets to teams that have a shot at the cup. Judging from how we have played lately we have a shot at nothing. We can't have too many good young prospects and young nhlers with potential. So lets play make a deal.

Diaz for a 2nd

Markov for two 2nds & a 3rd.

Boullion for a 5th

Gionta for a 3rd

any takers.... anyone want em? :pray:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Diaz for a 2nd

Markov for two 2nds & a 3rd.

Boullion for a 5th

Gionta for a 3rd

any takers.... anyone want em? :pray:

We could easily get a first + for Markov, but like I've said before, I'd keep him. His problem is how's he's being used. Keep him under 20 minutes and he will provide the puck moving ability and help develop Tinordi and Bealieau. MT is really the reason markov is looking so bad. There is no way he should be playing the minutes he is, just like there is no way Murray should be paired with Subban - I can't see any other coach in the whole bloddy world that would put together that pairing.

I'd take a 3rd for Gionta, the fifth for Bouillon. I think if packaged with another player (i.e. Gorges), Diaz could bring back a good young player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Diaz for a 2nd

Markov for two 2nds & a 3rd.

Boullion for a 5th

Gionta for a 3rd

any takers.... anyone want em? :pray:

Markov is going to net you a 1st round pick AT MINIMUM. Gionta will also get you more. Diaz less. Bouillon about right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Markov is going to net you a 1st round pick AT MINIMUM. Gionta will also get you more. Diaz less. Bouillon about right.

just kinda, sorta kidding anyways, they wont clean house and still say will only be a minor tweek or 2 by March 5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We could easily get a first + for Markov, but like I've said before, I'd keep him. His problem is how's he's being used. Keep him under 20 minutes and he will provide the puck moving ability and help develop Tinordi and Bealieau. MT is really the reason markov is looking so bad. There is no way he should be playing the minutes he is, just like there is no way Murray should be paired with Subban - I can't see any other coach in the whole bloddy world that would put together that pairing.

I'd take a 3rd for Gionta, the fifth for Bouillon. I think if packaged with another player (i.e. Gorges), Diaz could bring back a good young player.

Markov is going to command 5+ million, that's not what you pay for 16-18 minute defensemen. There's only so many sweet deals to go around, and Gorges has a deathgrip on being the overpaid #5. That Markov money can land a top line guy on this team. If we resign Markov, and Subban gets 8+, with Gorges, Price and Emelin on the backend, that's thirty million dollars on five guys. Severe overpayment on Gorges and Emelin unless Emelin can return to last year's form. Too much for defense and goaltending. I would resign Diaz and promote Beaulieu and Tinordi. That Markov money has to go up front.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Markov is going to command 5+ million, that's not what you pay for 16-18 minute defensemen. There's only so many sweet deals to go around, and Gorges has a deathgrip on being the overpaid #5. That Markov money can land a top line guy on this team. If we resign Markov, and Subban gets 8+, with Gorges, Price and Emelin on the backend, that's thirty million dollars on five guys. Severe overpayment on Gorges and Emelin unless Emelin can return to last year's form. Too much for defense and goaltending. I would resign Diaz and promote Beaulieu and Tinordi. That Markov money has to go up front.

I would keep Markov and move Gorges

Markov would be a great 2nd pairing dman. Gorges is a 3rd pairing.

I think the return on both would be good, but Markov would be draft picks and a mid range prospect from a contender, whereas, we could probably get a good young player for gorges from teams like the Oilers, isles, panthers, Stars, sabres, or blue jackets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with moving Gorges, but that's probably a move for the offseason (although you never know). Moving them both would be a big hit, but I think that we'd eventually be able to replace them internally and on the market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with moving Gorges, but that's probably a move for the offseason (although you never know). Moving them both would be a big hit, but I think that we'd eventually be able to replace them internally and on the market.

No one is going to replace Markov for the next two years. Bealieau will have his growing pains even if he is full time next year.

Also keep in mind that while I can't see MB trading Markov within the division or conference, you can bet if he is available as a UFA, Detroit, Philly, Boston and Ottawa will all be interested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one is going to replace Markov for the next two years. Bealieau will have his growing pains even if he is full time next year.

Also keep in mind that while I can't see MB trading Markov within the division or conference, you can bet if he is available as a UFA, Detroit, Philly, Boston and Ottawa will all be interested.

79 has 9 pts in last 27 games.

Or a 27 point pace for a season, are that production & his intangibles worth $5.75/year anymore?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

79 has 9 pts in last 27 games.

Or a 27 point pace for a season, are that production & his intangibles worth $5.75/year anymore?

I would throw 3/9million at him or 2/8 million, if he won't play for cheap, move him. With his declining foot speed and defense, when the power play isn't clicking he's useless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stogey24

I would throw 3/9million at him or 2/8 million, if he won't play for cheap, move him. With his declining foot speed and defense, when the power play isn't clicking he's useless.

3 million would be excellent. I still think he would be bring a pretty big return on the Market though...

When the team was clicking he was our best defenceman.

This obsession with Markov's foot speed is getting silly.

How is it silly? Its factual, the guy is wearing down.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Here's a quality article from Sportsnet about the choice of Murray over Diaz:

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/habs-bought-into-a-myth-when-they-dealt-diaz/

The jist: Murray gives up more shots, chances and goals against (and fewer for) than Diaz, mainly because he can't move the puck effectively out of the zone. He looks like a good defender because he is always defending, while Diaz, although weaker without the puck, spends less time without it in the defensive zone. And this despite Murray being sheltered from top competition and harder zone starts.

It's pretty illuminating about Murray's liabilities. Sure, we'd prefer him on a 2-minute 5 on 3 like yesterday, but at 5 on 5 he's not an effective NHL defenseman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a quality article from Sportsnet about the choice of Murray over Diaz:

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/habs-bought-into-a-myth-when-they-dealt-diaz/

The jist: Murray gives up more shots, chances and goals against (and fewer for) than Diaz, mainly because he can't move the puck effectively out of the zone. He looks like a good defender because he is always defending, while Diaz, although weaker without the puck, spends less time without it in the defensive zone. And this despite Murray being sheltered from top competition and harder zone starts.

It's pretty illuminating about Murray's liabilities. Sure, we'd prefer him on a 2-minute 5 on 3 like yesterday, but at 5 on 5 he's not an effective NHL defenseman.

I don't think the choice was Diaz or Murray. They are both ok when used properly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a quality article from Sportsnet about the choice of Murray over Diaz:

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/habs-bought-into-a-myth-when-they-dealt-diaz/

The jist: Murray gives up more shots, chances and goals against (and fewer for) than Diaz, mainly because he can't move the puck effectively out of the zone. He looks like a good defender because he is always defending, while Diaz, although weaker without the puck, spends less time without it in the defensive zone. And this despite Murray being sheltered from top competition and harder zone starts.

It's pretty illuminating about Murray's liabilities. Sure, we'd prefer him on a 2-minute 5 on 3 like yesterday, but at 5 on 5 he's not an effective NHL defenseman.

Fancy stats propaganda. The article doesn't mention the lack of NHL ready young bottom six prospects we have in the minors, the advanced stats guys want this to be "Murray vs Diaz" but there's more to the debate than that. The reality is that neither player would have been signed next year and MB wanted a roster player back. For a movement all about shot attempts equaling possession equaling goals and wins, they should focus on the zero goals Diaz had in two years. No one wants a soft defensive defense man, especially when we have Josh Gorges.

I'd like to see an advanced stats article that didn't resort to meta-discusssion, ie talking about advanced stats themselves.

Here's my analysis: Raphael Diaz couldn't even knock Corey Conacher off the puck in the playoffs last year, ergo, he sucks. Raphael Diaz was an undrafted free agent who wouldn't be signed after this year, so getting anything for him is a coup. Raphael Diaz had zero empty net goals in two years, although he was billed as an offensive defense man with the upside of Mark Streit, and he never lived up to his potential.

RAPHAEL DIAZ IS A LOSER, AND WATCHING THE HABS WITH HIM ON IT MADE THE FAN EXPERIENCE WORSE.

Easy enuff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you heard his opinions on austerity in the Euro-zone? Highly questionable.

I doubt that dirty rat has heard of John Maynard Keynes or can contrast the Fianna Fail budget with the Celtic tiger era. But if he plans on signing on the States, beware, "expert stick checker" doesn't qualify as a skilled occupation for an H1-B visa.

  • Upvote 2
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...