I already addressed that. I said Markov guiding Sergachev, Mete and Juulsen would help them develop better. Would you rather Markov helping the kids with their game or do you actually believe any of Benn, Schlemko, Alzner (even in his prime yeas) or even Petry for that matter is better than Markov?
I am sure they could of learned a lot from Markov, but he is a player not a coach so I am looking at his impact on the ice. Hey maybe its possible Markov gives a +10 buff to each guy or maybe there careers are the same. Juulsen would of only played 30 games with Marky, Serge isn't here, and Mete about 60.
I
Slowed down but he's still one the best defensemen in his team and instrumental in their win last season. His hockey IQ and puck moving skills are still very high level.
I don't watch the KHL so I can't comment, I only see his stats. Last year he was key, but this year is he their best Dman? 9 points in 29 games in the KHL is a downtrend from last year. And thats the KHL so that is like 3 or 4 NHL points. But if you have watched him and say he still has NHL gas in him this year then I defer to you.
Please tell me you didn't just say Markov might not be better than Benn or Oulette?
40 year old Markov, with 9 points in the KHL I think its possible outside of the PP he might not be better than Benn/Oulett playing as a 5/6 Dmen. And if Marky played 20+ mins a night against top NHL competition its very possible he would sturggle and be exposed just as Benn has been. But I haven't seen Markov in the NHL since 2016 so I can't say 100% for sure. But with the speed of the game today I don't know if he could still be a 20 minute a night guy. If you watched him the KHL this year let me know if he still has the speed and ability to keep up with guys like Stamkos, matthews, eichel, and all the other NHL speed demons.
Slightly better? Not sure how much simpler I can say it.
Markov>>>>>>>>>>Alzner+Benn+Schlemko COMBINED to say anything to the contrary is either you being obtuse or trolling.
Again I haven't watched him in the KHL this year so if you have then I will defer to you. He is better than Alzner who isn't an NHLer anymore. But Oulette and Benn playing >15 mins a night on the 3rd pair, against 40 year old Markov (not counting PP) I think it might actually be close to even.
Fair point but doesn't negate my original point, this team with Radulov on it is much better than without him. Be it Radulov with Max or Radulov with Tatar or whomever else we would have traded Max to when he was coming off another 30 goal season instead of 17. I mean if Tatar's value was double because of his stats in Detroit then Patches's value would have been double as well.
I was never against Radu, but he didn't want to accept the same pay to play here. Whatever his reasons he took the same money to go to Dallas. In the end to me it worked out because I feel if we had Radu we would be like the stars are now a team that misses the playoffs buy a point or 2 that chases middling UFA's.
I am glad with who we got for Max, and if he had a better season maybe MB keeps him (eek) or we trade for something that doesn't work out. No one knows but I take the move we did. I just don't think you can plug Radu into the lineup we have today, because if we resigned him the team wouldn't be what it looks like today. and BTW Radu in our line up would look good and make the team better.
Again, that proves my point. The team would have been better had we kept Radulov and Markov than it currently is, which is a bubble to bottom feeder range team.
I think it would of been better than 5th worst, but it would of been the same team we saw for the last few years. We already saw this team with Radu/Markov get bounced from the 1st round. And we wouldn't have JK and Suzuki waiting in the wings to make our forward group better. We probably sign a guy like Bozak or something.
The team won its division with those 2 (2 years younger) but would we still win the division going against todays Boston/Tor/TB with those 2? I don't know about that.
Again, you just backed up my argument.
Yes, it's all hypothetical but reason stands that with better players, your team is better. Thus you're no longer a bubble team or a team in need of a full rebuild, in other words, closer to a contender.
Finally, you keep quoting me saying we are closer to being a contender with those players as if saying closer to a contender means we're somehow guaranteed the Stanley Cup. There's a difference between what I'm saying and what you're taking or insinuating it to be, so stop trying to twist my words to make your failing point seem more justified.
So are you saying we were closer to contending when the Rangers bounced the team? We already saw this team with Radu and Markov on it and how far they went. Unless MB pulled some magic out of his ass and made some sick trades I don't see how the team that was bounced by the Rangers was going to be closer to contending. It would of been more of the same. So sure we could of kept those 2 guys and the habs are most likely in the same boat today. And its ironic because even with those 2 guys most people on here were not calling us contenders or anything more than a bubble team, with many people calling for a rebuild LOL.
I would not have been upset if Radu took MBs contract offer and if MB caved and payed Markov. But then we would be in the same spot of making the playoffs with anything can happen. MB wasn't going to pull a trade out of his butt for a 1C or sign big time UFA. Of course we have no JK or Suzuki and probably don't snag Domi so outside of Radu we would have no young offense coming onto the team. MB's mistake and disaster of a year had a silver lining to it which allowed a reset and to bring in some young guys up front and draft JK. The guy failed ass backwards into a pot of gold. Molson sticking with him to rebuild this team might end up being a huge mistake.
