Best Montréal defenseman in the last 30 years

[ForsbergForever]

Injuries robbed Markov of a Norris... he made so many mediocre d partners look good.

 

[Regal]

30 years? I would be tempted to put Eric Desjardins into this debate.

30 years would cut off after the Habs were eliminated from the ‘94 playoffs. He only played 9 games the following year before being traded to Philly

 

[Moose Head]

Bargain Bin was a piece of shit for sure

Hey, when you have the opportunity to sign perennial Norris contender, Karl Alzner, you say, ‘Andrei who?’.

 

[JianYang]

It was markov, but it's tragic that so much of his prime was spent with devastating injuries.

But then again, it speaks to how adaptable of a player he was because when he came back from those injuries in his 30s, he was still a pretty darn effective player.

 

[JianYang]

PK Subban was a legit HOF talent. He was better for sure.

Who had the better career? It's closer because Subban's ended prematurely. A lot closer from that perspective.

I disagree that subban was better "for sure". At the very least, it shouldn't be cut and dry.

 

[Bouboumaster]

Hey, when you have the opportunity to sign perennial Norris contender, Karl Alzner, you say, ‘Andrei who?’.

It was without a doubt the thought process lol

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

I disagree that subban was better "for sure". At the very least, it shouldn't be cut and dry.

He was definitively better. A top theee blueliner at worst and great from the moment he stepped on the ice in his first game. He was also an absolute monster in the playoffs. Injuries derailed his career or he’d be a blue chip HoFer.

For all the shit he took for his defensive game (it was well deserved as he would sometimes hotdog and hang onto the puck too long) he was pretty good in his own end. Physical, good at clearing the crease, he didn’t shy away from anything.

Markov at his best was a top ten blueliner. And it took him a long time to get there. Some Montreal fans also overate his defensive game. He wasn’t physical and other teams would target him on dump and chase and then smash him into the boards. He wasn’t great at clearing the crease and he was pretty mediocre in the playoffs.

But Markov was best in class on transition and his first pass was as good as any player who’s played. That was his strength. But he didn’t carry the puck the way Subban did.

Incredibly, Markov had a strong later career (I thought he was done after those knee issues) but he gutted it out. Their careers in the end are closer than they should've been.

But Subban was absolutely the better blueliner overall. Tragic that his career was cut so short.

 

[ESH]

The guy who made the other guy look good

Subban won his Norris playing mostly next to Josh Gorges

 

[JianYang]

Markov with HM to Hamrlik, Weber and Subban.

They ended up using hamrlik alot more than they were expecting due to markov's injury streak.

I thought hamrlik stepped in admirably but I wouldn't quite have him in that tier.

 

[Nicko999]

If you understand how hockey works, there can only be one vote and it's Markov.
PK had a very high peak but even then, he wasn't able to Markov' single season mark. When you factor in longevity as well, it becomes a no contest.

 

[Nicko999]

Subban won his Norris playing mostly next to Josh Gorges

Subban was not even the most used D-man on the team in his Norris year. It was 34 years old Markov.

 

[double5son10]

Technically I'd say Desjardins, but he'd barely be making the 30yr cut-off here, so voted Markov. Criminally underrated player with a high hockey IQ.

 

[ESH]

Subban was not even the most used D-man on the team in his Norris year. It was 34 years old Markov.

Most used isn’t equivalent to best

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

Subban? He isn't close.... flashy skater, excellent slapshot but greatly overrated in almost every aspect.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

If you understand how hockey works, there can only be one vote and it's Markov.
PK had a very high peak but even then, he wasn't able to Markov' single season mark. When you factor in longevity as well, it becomes a no contest.

If you understand how hockey works you don’t look at raw numbers, you look at how players compared to their peers. You also look at playoff performances and Norris voting. It’s a clean sweep for Subban.

Honestly, this is pretty open and shut. Subban was better by pretty much every measure.

Subban was also a big game player and Markov never was. To put it in perspective, Subban’s numbers actually went up in the playoffs. He had a better playoff point rate with the Habs than Claude Lemieux did with Montreal - and isn’t far off in goals. That’s in a lower scoring era and he was a defenseman. It’s beyond me how anyone could take Markov over him. Subban’s better by every measure.

 

[Nicko999]

Most used isn’t equivalent to best

It is a pretty good indicator. If a coach is playing one player more than the other, it's because that player gives him a better chance to win.

If you understand how hockey works you don’t look at raw numbers, you look at how players compared to their peers. You also look at playoff performances and Norris voting. It’s a clean sweep for Subban.

Honestly, this is pretty open and shut. Subban was better by pretty much every measure.

Subban was also a big game player and Markov never was. To put it in perspective, Subban’s numbers actually went up in the playoffs. He had a better playoff point rate with the Habs than Claude Lemieux did with Montreal - and isn’t far off in goals. That’s in a lower scoring era and he was a defenseman. It’s beyond me how anyone could take Markov over him. Subban’s better by every measure.

We've had this conversation before and I agree that Subban is a better playoffs performer. But not everything is playoffs. Rene Bourque was a beast in the playoffs. Doesn't make him more useful for 90% of other games.
The team's record with and without Markov is pretty telling. Lottery team without him, 100+ pts team with him.
Even after we traded Subban, the team still made the playoffs. You might say it was because of Weber but the year the team did not renew Markov's contract was the last time the Habs made the playoffs in a normal year. Weber was not able to do anything without the General. Got outproduced by a 38 years Markov the year they played together.

I don't need Norris voting to see who is better. I watched both on the same team for years. Markov was the better player as simple as that. Not everyone can appreciate the things he did on the ice because they are not flashy. Marky doing those things allowed Subban to be a free as he was.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

It is a pretty good indicator. If a coach is playing one player more than the other, it's because that player gives him a better chance to win.



We've had this conversation before and I agree that Subban is a better playoffs performer. But not everything is playoffs. Rene Bourque was a beast in the playoffs. Doesn't make him more useful for 90% of other games.
The team's record with and without Markov is pretty telling. Lottery team without him, 100+ pts team with him.
Even after we traded Subban, the team still made the playoffs. You might say it was because of Weber but the year the team did not renew Markov's contract was the last time the Habs made the playoffs in a normal year. Weber was not able to do anything without the General. Got outproduced by a 38 years Markov the year they played together.

I don't need Norris voting to see who is better. I watched both on the same team for years. Markov was the better player as simple as that. Not everyone can appreciate the things he did on the ice because they are not flashy. Marky doing those things allowed Subban to be a free as he was.

The playoffs are only one part of it.

Subban was a better player period. Better relative numbers, better Norris placement, amazing analytics, more physical, better defensively, better earlier in his career, more clutch player.

Markov was great but one dimensional. Amazing PP, amazing transition, amazing first pass. But Subban could do all of that while being one of the best rushing blueliners in the league. And Subban could dish out punishment and clear the crease.

Subban was a shoe in for the HOF before getting hurt. Markov was never at that level.

The playoffs just reinforce what should be pretty clear: Subban was an objectively better blueliner.

 

[Nicko999]

Markov was great but one dimensional. Amazing PP, amazing transition, amazing first pass. But Subban could do all of that while being one of the best rushing blueliners in the league. And Subban could dish out punishment and clear the crease.

One dimensional? That's why the team record suffered so much while he was injured?

What happened in 2011-2012 when Markov missed the whole season? The Habs drafted 3rd overall LOL.
Subban was a 30 pts D-man. The next season, Markov is back and magically the team makes the playoffs and Subban wins the Norris (lockout shortened season).

Subban put up 60 pts in his best season playing with Markov

Markov put up 64 pts in his best season playing with 34 year old Hamrlik, Josh Gorges and Mike Komisarek and leading the team in pts until the last game.

So even peak Subban doesn't beat Marky.

 

[Mrb1p]

Subban peaked higher, but that was relatively short. Subban from 13 to 15 was the best D in the league.

Markov was probably top 3 in 2006-2010 but he missed a lot of time then and had stiffer competition, prime Chara, Keith, Lidstrom.

Markov was essentially great for 10 years though. A true 1D.

 

[CTHabsfan]

The guy Montreal did not let to play 1000 games with the club

Absolutely pathetic move by then Russophobic Habs management, getting rid of all Russian players including Markov who had 10 more games to reach 1000 with Montreal and who was 0.5 PPG in his last season

I also voted for Markov, but his getting injured cost him the chance to play 1000 games. I can't blame Marc Bergevin for not wanting to sign someone who could no longer skate (although I never was able to figure out the Alzner signing). I also think calling Bergevin "Russophobic" is a bit much. Did he not realize Alexander Radulov was Russian when he signed him and let Radulov walk a year later after finding out his nationality?

 

[JianYang]

I also voted for Markov, but his getting injured cost him the chance to play 1000 games. I can't blame Marc Bergevin for not wanting to sign someone who could no longer skate (although I never was able to figure out the Alzner signing). I also think calling Bergevin "Russophobic" is a bit much. Did he not realize Alexander Radulov was Russian when he signed him and let Radulov walk a year later after finding out his nationality?

Yeah, they weren't "russiaphobic". He also traded for gonchar early in his tenure.

Each case has to be looked at individually. Radulov was simply bad asset management. Bergevin was playing poker and lost.

Losing markov came down to a dispute on length of contract. It's sad that they couldn't reach a deal. He was close to a 1,000 games and he was one point away from having sole possession of 2nd place in dman points in Habs history.

There were alot of flowers to give because he was so understated in his whole career.

 

[NyQuil]

Subban peaked higher, but that was relatively short. Subban from 13 to 15 was the best D in the league.

Markov was probably top 3 in 2006-2010 but he missed a lot of time then and had stiffer competition, prime Chara, Keith, Lidstrom.

Markov was essentially great for 10 years though. A true 1D.

Subban was never the best defenceman in the league.

He won the Norris (and rightly so) in a shortened season with a lot of powerplay production.

Even at the time, I don’t think it was widely believed that he was the best blueliner in the NHL.

Anyway, I voted for Markov.

 

[General Fanager]

Markov then Weber then Subban.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

Weber might have an argument if you take overall career but not if you limit it strictly to time played in Montreal.

With that said, I will forever respect him for being an ultimate pro and that his last gasp was an Herculean effort on his end to help us get to the finals. He was a fantastic player despite the injuries.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

One dimensional?

Very much so.

That's why the team record suffered so much while he was injured?

What happened in 2011-2012 when Markov missed the whole season? The Habs drafted 3rd overall LOL.
Subban was a 30 pts D-man. The next season, Markov is back and magically the team makes the playoffs and Subban wins the Norris (lockout shortened season).

I didn’t say Markov sucked. Really good offensive player. And the Canadiens were an offensively challenged shallow club. And yes, if you took Markov away, the club’s offense would sink. And Subban was only 22 at the time.

And take a look what happens to Markov in 2016. 39 in 67 with Subban. Then PK got hurt. Without Subban his points sink like a stone. 5 in 15 without Subban. Markov benefited a lot more playing with Subban's than the other way around.

And Subban would put up 59 points the very next year in Nashville on an offensively challenged club. He didn’t need Markov to do that.

Subban put up 60 pts in his best season playing with Markov.

Sure. But he was able to finish top 3 in Norris voting without him. And in Subban’s Norris season he was played mostly with Josh Georges.

Markov put up 64 pts in his best season playing with 34 year old Hamrlik, Josh Gorges and Mike Komisarek and leading the team in pts until the last game.

So even peak Subban doesn't beat Marky.

You are mistaken. And maybe this is where the disconnect is. 64 points in Markov’s time is radically different from getting 60 points in the 2010s.

Again, how did he do va his contemporaries? Offense was way down in the 2010s. 89 points won a scoring championship back then.

Subban fared much better vs his contemporaries than Markov did. That’s why his Norris voting is much higher.

Markov was great but he doesn’t have a case against PK. By every meaningful measure Subban was a better player.

Scoring vs contemporaries: Subban
Norris finishes: Subban
Analytics: Subban
Physical play: Subban
First pass: Markov
Rushing transition: Subban
Playoff/Clutch play: Subban