Zubov vs Gonchar vs Andrei Markov

[seventieslord]

overall, it's easily Zubov, right? Then Gonchar fairly easily, then Markov.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Markov peaked later. Probably because he was a center converted to dman in his late teens. Unfortunate that his horrible injuries occurred just when he hit that peak. IMO that peak year was as good or better than zubov or gonchar at their best. Really reminded me of a lesser Lidstrom. But career wise Zubov and Gonchar were better IMO. Markov should have been better with better luck with injuries and team.

Zubov, at his best (2005-06), was a legit Norris contender, and was actually the favorite to win it at the halfway point of the season. Markov was never close to that level. Now, I think Zubov is generally overrated because his best season happened towards the end of his career, and there is a tendency to assume he was at that level for longer than he actually was. But if the question is "who was better at his best?" it's easily him.

 

[tony d]

Zubov
Gonchar
Markov

Is how I'd rank them.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Zubov was the best in that group, but am I the only one who would rather trust Markov than Gonchar with big minutes despite the latter earning significantly more accolades during his career??

You're not the only one.Markov was a beast circa 07-09.My impression is that Markov was better than Gonchar defensively.

 

[Moose Head]

Zubov, at his best (2005-06), was a legit Norris contender, and was actually the favorite to win it at the halfway point of the season. Markov was never close to that level. Now, I think Zubov is generally overrated because his best season happened towards the end of his career, and there is a tendency to assume he was at that level for longer than he actually was. But if the question is "who was better at his best?" it's easily him.

Markov between 2007 and 2009 was pretty close to Zubov in 2005-2006. Saying 'easily' is just hyperbole.

 

[MadLuke]

overall, it's easily Zubov, right? Then Gonchar fairly easily, then Markov.

Career wise, I think Zubov having easily the best career combined with Markov injuries in what was is prime make it easy yes.

Markov didn't play much between 2009 and 2012 in what would have been is prime. because of that he really had just 4/5 really good seasons.

He was better than expected after the last lockout and was serviceable but not elite anymore, too slow defensively.

 

[Sens Rule]

The HHOF has much lower standards for forwards than it does for defencemen.

I think none of these 3 make the HHOF. However if the HHOF had the same standards for defencemen as they do forwards then all three probably make the Hall.

 

[Regal]

Zubov, at his best (2005-06), was a legit Norris contender, and was actually the favorite to win it at the halfway point of the season. Markov was never close to that level. Now, I think Zubov is generally overrated because his best season happened towards the end of his career, and there is a tendency to assume he was at that level for longer than he actually was. But if the question is "who was better at his best?" it's easily him.

The lockout really seemed to favour Zubov. The '07 series against the Canucks was arguably the best I've seen from an opposing defenseman as a fan since Leetch's '94, and that's including some Keith gems. He and Turco completely destroyed any chance at a forecheck

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

The lockout really seemed to favour Zubov. The '07 series against the Canucks was arguably the best I've seen from an opposing defenseman as a fan since Leetch's '94, and that's including some Keith gems. He and Turco completely destroyed any chance at a forecheck

You're far from the only Canucks fan to say that

 

[Sorry]

Zubov and Gonchar were intracule parts of some very good teams.

Zubov
Gonchar
Markov

 

[GuineaPig]

I wonder how much Gonchar's late-career reputation was tarnished by that awful game 7 goal against Montreal. He was quite good in Ottawa still, and absolutely critical when Karlsson was injured in 2012-13.

 

[Hobnobs]

overall, it's easily Zubov, right? Then Gonchar fairly easily, then Markov.

Indeed. I mean you could easily have a discussion about hhof when it comes to Zubov. Not saying he should get in or not but atleast there is grounds for a discussion about it. The other two, not so much. Gonchar is miles ahead of Markov offensively and I dont know if Markov defense makes up for it.

 

[Kshahdoo]

Well, Markov at his best was a top5 defenseman in the league. I doubt Zubov and Gonchar were much better, than that.

 

[Hobnobs]

Well, Markov at his best was a top5 defenseman in the league. I doubt Zubov and Gonchar were much better, than that.

Zubov finished 3rd and 4th in Norris voting.

 

[MXD]

Zubov finished 3rd and 4th in Norris voting.

Yeah, at that time, he was probably the 3rd D-Man in the pecking order. After Lidstrom and Pronger.

 

[Hobnobs]

Yeah, at that time, he was probably the 3rd D-Man in the pecking order. After Lidstrom and Pronger.

Yup and I dont see Markov ever being considered to be that good. He was never seen as a better defenseman than Lidström, Chara and Weber. And I doubt people rank him above Suter, Boyle and Subban. Now we have Karlsson, Hedman and Doughty in that mix as well.

 

[MXD]

Yup and I dont see Markov ever being considered to be that good. He was never seen as a better defenseman than Lidström, Chara and Weber. And I doubt people rank him above Suter, Boyle and Subban. Now we have Karlsson, Hedman and Doughty in that mix as well.

Ehh....
Markov was, at one point, better than all of them except Lidstrom. I mean, there's like a 12-year gap between Subban and Markov...

If one didn't have Markov as a Top-5 D-Men in the League at some point, before his first injury, that person was probably not paying attention (and there were a few of these, considering his Norris voting). But it was a really, really short span.

 

[Hobnobs]

Ehh....
Markov was, at one point, better than all of them except Lidstrom. I mean, there's like a 12-year gap between Subban and Markov...

If one didn't have Markov as a Top-5 D-Men in the League at some point, before his first injury, that person was probably not paying attention (and there were a few of these, considering his Norris voting). But it was a really, really short span.

Im guessing we are talking about his '08 and '09 seasons? I dont think he was ahead of Chara and Gonchar in 08 but he was definitely better than Phaneuf who for some reason was second in voting that year.

 

[VanIslander]

I played hockey (1980-84), I assistant-coached hockey (1990-93) and I newspaper reported hockey (1994-2000) and I've been a fan of the sport for over four decades and I say with full confidence that Gonchar was the best of the trio of defensemen at stopping puck carriers (i.e., playing defense).

I've always thought that two Dallas Stars have been misappreciated on these HfBoards: overrated Zubov and underrated Nieuwendyk.

So I buck the trend around here and rank them:

1. Gonchar
2. Zubov
3. Markov

 

[K Fleur]

Ehh....
Markov was, at one point, better than all of them except Lidstrom. I mean, there's like a 12-year gap between Subban and Markov...

If one didn't have Markov as a Top-5 D-Men in the League at some point, before his first injury, that person was probably not paying attention (and there were a few of these, considering his Norris voting). But it was a really, really short span.

Better than Chara? Markov's best run was from 07-09, and I can't see any way he was better than Chara over that time frame.

 

[MXD]

Better than Chara? Markov's best run was from 07-09, and I can't see any way he was better than Chara over that time frame.

Well, 09 coincides with Markov's first injury AND Chara winning the Norris. Both were on par WHEN PLAYING...At worse (for Markov).
And I'm really adamant about that.

Then he was injured, and that was that.

 

[K Fleur]

Well, 09 coincides with Markov's first injury AND Chara winning the Norris. Both were on par WHEN PLAYING...At worse (for Markov).
And I'm really adamant about that.

Then he was injured, and that was that.

Which is fine.

I didn't see a case for Markov over(or on par) Chara at the time, and I don't see a case for it in hindsight.

Agree to disagree.

 

[shadow1]

It's Zubov, by a country mile. He's a guy that managed to stand out as a superstar in a league featuring the likes of Lidstrom, Pronger, and Chelios (to name a few).

Unlike the other two players, whose both took their game to another level in the second half of their careers, Zubov was basically a top flight guy from Day 1. And at his peak, he was better than each of the other two players - again, by a mile.

 

[Theokritos]

It's Zubov, by a country mile. He's a guy that managed to stand out as a superstar in a league featuring the likes of Lidstrom, Pronger, and Chelios (to name a few).

You have to use the word "superstar" rather inflationary if you want to apply it to Sergey Zubov.

 

[CHGoalie27]

Zubov allll day