hab29RETIRED Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 His numbers since he joined the Habs: 283 regular season games played, 91 goals, 163 points. Playoffs: 28 games, 12 goals, 21 points. He has averaged 26 goals per year over an 82 game season with us. He is the captain of this team and will likely resign at a reasonable amount. You don't want this player on your team without having to give anything up to get him? He averaged 28.5 goals in his first two years and had 14 last year in roughly over half season last year. He has had two serious Bicep tears and is over 35 years old. In his 5th (and hopefully last season) he has 12 goals. I don't see any reason to retain him - he is a declining asset who i have no emotional attachment to and the team no longer needs. We should have kept our old captain (Koivu) instead of trading for gomer pyle. Koivu was a captain who should have retired, Gionta was paid well over the last 5 years and now should be cast aside for guys that are going to be more productive. We already have two undersized players and need someone who can actually be productive in the top 6 (which Gionta no longer is). Hell, if we could move Gionta now, i'd move him now. Markov and Pleks are the leaders I'd keep (I'd even move Pleks if we can get an Evander Kane in a package for Pleks). Gionta should be moved Wednesday or set free on July 1st. There won't be any room for him next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 He averaged 28.5 goals in his first two years and had 14 last year in roughly over half season last year. He has had two serious Bicep tears and is over 35 years old. In his 5th (and hopefully last season) he has 12 goals. I don't see any reason to retain him - he is a declining asset who i have no emotional attachment to and the team no longer needs. We should have kept our old captain (Koivu) instead of trading for gomer pyle. Koivu was a captain who should have retired, Gionta was paid well over the last 5 years and now should be cast aside for guys that are going to be more productive. We already have two undersized players and need someone who can actually be productive in the top 6 (which Gionta no longer is). Hell, if we could move Gionta now, i'd move him now. Markov and Pleks are the leaders I'd keep (I'd even move Pleks if we can get an Evander Kane in a package for Pleks). Gionta should be moved Wednesday or set free on July 1st. There won't be any room for him next year. yep right again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoRP Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 He averaged 28.5 goals in his first two years and had 14 last year in roughly over half season last year. He has had two serious Bicep tears and is over 35 years old. In his 5th (and hopefully last season) he has 12 goals. I don't see any reason to retain him - he is a declining asset who i have no emotional attachment to and the team no longer needs. We should have kept our old captain (Koivu) instead of trading for gomer pyle. Koivu was a captain who should have retired, Gionta was paid well over the last 5 years and now should be cast aside for guys that are going to be more productive. We already have two undersized players and need someone who can actually be productive in the top 6 (which Gionta no longer is). Hell, if we could move Gionta now, i'd move him now. Markov and Pleks are the leaders I'd keep (I'd even move Pleks if we can get an Evander Kane in a package for Pleks). Gionta should be moved Wednesday or set free on July 1st. There won't be any room for him next year. Couldn't agree more.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
l<OV4L3V Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 How injury prone is a player who hasn't missed a single game in two calendar years? His knees seem to be no more injury prone than anyone elses at this point. You are talking about one of the premier power play quarter backs in the league TODAY and you want to diminish his role? The same Markov that hasn't missed a game in two full calendar years? I must be missing something Yes the above statements are facts; but with age comes more wear and tear on the human body, meaning he could be a ticking timebomb and potentially be on LTIR sooner than later. The point is, he's already lost a few strides in his step, and despite being top 10% in offence, he could be a very expensive defensive liability in the coming seasons if he were to re-sign. I wouldn't mind seeing him getting shipped out of town for assets like stated in my previous post, but if he were to remain a Hab, my biggest fear is MB re-signing him at 6 million+ for 3-4 years. I think we all can mutually agree that if MB made some noise and somehow landed a top 4 d-man (possibly Alexander Edler), Markov's asking price would likely drop saving us cap space for replacing depth up front for next season...so here's to hoping for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PMAC Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 He averaged 28.5 goals in his first two years and had 14 last year in roughly over half season last year. He has had two serious Bicep tears and is over 35 years old. In his 5th (and hopefully last season) he has 12 goals. I don't see any reason to retain him - he is a declining asset who i have no emotional attachment to and the team no longer needs. We should have kept our old captain (Koivu) instead of trading for gomer pyle. Koivu was a captain who should have retired, Gionta was paid well over the last 5 years and now should be cast aside for guys that are going to be more productive. We already have two undersized players and need someone who can actually be productive in the top 6 (which Gionta no longer is). Hell, if we could move Gionta now, i'd move him now. Markov and Pleks are the leaders I'd keep (I'd even move Pleks if we can get an Evander Kane in a package for Pleks). Gionta should be moved Wednesday or set free on July 1st. There won't be any room for him next year. I was against moving Gionta at the deadline, but if he were part of a package that brought back a scoring winger, i would be all for it. Mostly, i want Borque gone and for us not to move Markov--unless the package is eye-poppingly wonderful My overwhelming feeing right now is relief that we don't have a GM like Gillis--whose trades are more and more starting to remind me of a certain R. Houle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habsfan Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 He averaged 28.5 goals in his first two years and had 14 last year in roughly over half season last year. He has had two serious Bicep tears and is over 35 years old. In his 5th (and hopefully last season) he has 12 goals. I don't see any reason to retain him - he is a declining asset who i have no emotional attachment to and the team no longer needs. We should have kept our old captain (Koivu) instead of trading for gomer pyle. Koivu was a captain who should have retired, Gionta was paid well over the last 5 years and now should be cast aside for guys that are going to be more productive. We already have two undersized players and need someone who can actually be productive in the top 6 (which Gionta no longer is). Hell, if we could move Gionta now, i'd move him now. Markov and Pleks are the leaders I'd keep (I'd even move Pleks if we can get an Evander Kane in a package for Pleks). Gionta should be moved Wednesday or set free on July 1st. There won't be any room for him next year. :clap: Couldn't agree more. Not that I don't like Gionta, it's just that he's 35 and we have enough smurfs. It's way past time we get bigger up front! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbigbear Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 (edited) Too late to trade him, the deadline is past. I hope MB can sign him for 2 years otherwise we lost him for nothing.........the big nada if Markov signs elsewhere this summer. I would have traded him because some bonehead dinosaur like Sather will offer him a 5 year deal.......... Edited March 5, 2014 by bigbigbear Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Too late to trade him, the deadline is past. I hope MB can sign him for 2 years otherwise we lost him for nothing.........the big nada if Markov signs elsewhere this summer. I would have traded him because some bonehead dinosaur like Sather will offer him a 5 year deal.......... Realistically, you can't really make the Vanek move and then turn around and deal Markov though, could you? Fill one hole, create another, and still have lots of question marks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illWill Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 The answer to the thread question is no Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine of Loving Grace Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Realistically, you can't really make the Vanek move and then turn around and deal Markov though, could you? Fill one hole, create another, and still have lots of question marks. Kind of what the Ducks ended up doing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 The Vanek trade has changed the dynamic of this team completely. If we could pick him for nothing, like we did, then the need to trade Markov becomes a lot less of a priority. I have to say that I am completely blown away by the deal that MB put together, Snow is an idiot and should be retained on a life time contract only for the purpose of trading with us. We have our Millbury. I would say that Markov will probably retire a Hab, if MB can sign him. What will be interesting is if MB signs Vanek. That will be heavy duty in terms of length and dollars. Judging from what teams were getting for ufa's such as Markov, there was no deadline day bonus. And if we couldn't get real value for him then there would no point in trading him. At any rate that ship has sailed, trading him next year would be pointless so if we were going to trade him it had to be this year. We didn't, so upwards and onwards. If he wasn't so shy we could make him captain. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Yeah, it's pretty clear that it wasn't nearly as much a seller's market as in past years, and that no team was gonna give up a high-end near-ready prospect for Markov, which was the whole point of trading him in the first place. So keeping him was indeed the smart move, under those circumstances. Vanek really does change things, giving us potentially two very effective scoring lines, as well as partly addressing the size issue up front, our even strength profile, etc., etc.. I don't know if this is enough to make us legit contenders, but it is a HUGE move to solve structural weaknesses on the team. If indeed Vanek fits in and delivers for us, I increasingly think it makes sense to try to sign him long-term. Yes, we would have to overpay in both dollars and term. But for someone like myself who has long been skeptical that we have the organizational pieces to become serious contenders, we will sooner or later have to overpay a UFA if we do want to take that next step. Might as well be a big, right-handed shot and proven scorer with, possibly, 4-5 elite seasons left in the tank. MB is obviously doing what Gainey did with Kovalev - bringing the UFA rental on board and hoping that exposure to the team, the city and the whole organizational mix will give the Habs a special "in" when it comes to signing the guy. While the trade is defensible even if Vanek walks away, I'd feel a lot better about everything if he does end up signing long-term. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IN THE HEARTS OF MEN Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 clearly MB's thought process about this team moving forward is in line with exactly what i was thinking. a couple savvy moves away from contending Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.