Commandant Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 13 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said: Markov has been one of our best - if not best - defenceman over Weber's 40 game slump (which now seems mercifully over). It would be folly to trade him if we have the intention of winning. I hope its over. And seeing him score was nice. He also lost his man on the rangers first goal, Emelin was bad on that too, but he didn't take his guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 1 hour ago, Commandant said: Scrambled draw. Won a puck battle on the play. Puck battles are important. We won a puck battle to gain possession on shaw's goal too. The idea is that one puck battle (faceoffs) isn't more important than all the others that happen in a game. A won faceoff by Pacioretty to #79 over to #6 and goal. Had Galchenyuk or Plekanec been on the draw, odds are McDonagh wrister out of zone and Habs would of been chasing puck down the ice instead (which we see too often on the PP)...which could of been game changing. Not rocket science. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Yes winning battles is important and sometimes leads to goals. Its just as likely that winning a battle in the corner will lead to a goal, as it is that winning a faceoff will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted February 23, 2017 Author Share Posted February 23, 2017 6 hours ago, IN THE HEARTS OF MEN said: does pateryn DD and and 2nd this year get it done with a conditional 1st if we sign him? with us paying the rest of DD's salary ( can you pay the salary but the cap hit go to St. Louis?) I don't know I don't think that proposal would be all that close. To answer your other question, a team can't retain cap hit while paying salary or vice versa. If you retain in a deal, it's both cap hit and salary (and it has to be the same percentage for each). 5 hours ago, habs rule said: Don whether we like it or not, he is 38 and slowing down fast. He get's beat at the blue line, a lot. There is no point in trying to trade him, you wouldn't get anything. Too many athletes hang on too long. His knees are in bad shape hence the loss of speed. He is still one of the smartest players on the ice, but the end is coming close. I would give him a 1 year contract for 2.5 to 3 million. At his age the salary decreases. It is just my opinion but I want him to retire as a Hab. He's getting $4.25 million this year in actual salary. Considering his point totals, he could probably command something in that range (maybe a bit lower) on a one year deal in free agency. To get him closer to that mid-to-low $3M range, I think they'd have to go with a multi-year deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 I'd be fine with another year of Markov at 4.5. Let him teach Sergachev. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 15 minutes ago, dlbalr said: I don't think that proposal would be all that close. To answer your other question, a team can't retain cap hit while paying salary or vice versa. If you retain in a deal, it's both cap hit and salary (and it has to be the same percentage for each). He's getting $4.25 million this year in actual salary. Considering his point totals, he could probably command something in that range (maybe a bit lower) on a one year deal in free agency. To get him closer to that mid-to-low $3M range, I think they'd have to go with a multi-year deal. He doesn't have multiple years left. He is over 35, which means you have to be very careful. It is only my opinion but his career is definitely on the skids. Every athlete reaches this point. Do you pay him for what he did or what he can do. I pay him for what he can do which is a depreciating asset. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neech Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 It could be that the end of the road for Markov is right around the corner, but as of now he's still one of our better D-men, and often has a better night than our Big Daddy #1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 Yes, I honestly don't see a big decline in Markov relative to the last couple of seasons. There's still some hockey left in those old legs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IN THE HEARTS OF MEN Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 the 1 yr 4.25mil next year sounds good to me... if we can get him cheaper than great but he's still playing like a 5 million dollar defender Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trizzak Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 I'd even be comfortable with Bergevin putting a 2 year deal on the table for Markov, provided the salary were reduced to 4 million. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoRP Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 7 hours ago, Trizzak said: I'd even be comfortable with Bergevin putting a 2 year deal on the table for Markov, provided the salary were reduced to 4 million. Me too, and really as others have said, he's still pretty good... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 Normally, I'm all about 'asset management,' but in this case, letting The General retire a Hab actually serves the interest of both team and player. What a warrior he has been for us, through some very tough times to boot. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 I assume Markov would have little chance of being "the" Hab to be chosen by Vegas and wouldn't require protection, if extended? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 Markov is still one of our best defencemen, that can change in a hurry, I wonder if he is one of our best because he is still that good, or if our general defence is that bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted February 23, 2017 Author Share Posted February 23, 2017 7 hours ago, DON said: I assume Markov would have little chance of being "the" Hab to be chosen by Vegas and wouldn't require protection, if extended? I wouldn't rule it out, actually. A proven veteran who you can turn around and flip at the deadline for a pick or two. He wouldn't be a slam dunk choice but I imagine they'd consider it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 5 hours ago, habs rule said: Markov is still one of our best defencemen, that can change in a hurry, I wonder if he is one of our best because he is still that good, or if our general defence is that bad. former Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine of Loving Grace Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 25 minutes ago, dlbalr said: I wouldn't rule it out, actually. A proven veteran who you can turn around and flip at the deadline for a pick or two. He wouldn't be a slam dunk choice but I imagine they'd consider it. More likely the Habs offer a pick to ensure Vegas skips him. 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.