Lafleurs Guy
Guuuuuuuy!
- Jul 20, 2007
- 74,904
- 44,586
You are full of crap dude.Ha! I remember that so vividly and you continue to wrongly defend it. Your proposal for JVR was to trade Pacioretty for him. That proposal looks kind of dumb now, and I told you how dumb that trade was the moment I saw it. That was back when everyone was hating on Pacioretty and calling him a bust. Good times.
I showed you the link a month ago. It was Markov for JVRD + a pick or Cammy + Halak (when he was a 2nd stringer) for him and a pick... And in that same link you'll see people saying it would be stupid to trade Markov for some kid named Claude Giroux and a pick.
Go find any post where I said we should deal Max. I don't believe in dealing away propspects when you are rebuilding.
It seems silly to you because you don't understand the concept of dealing for the future. You are also narrow minded and only see things through rose coloured glasses... You weren't able to understand that a core of Cammy, Gomez and Gionta wasn't going to take us anywhere...Not only that, but trading Markov for a JVR back then kind of seems pretty silly too, now that I think of it. 34 points in 45 games for Markov that season, +11 for a defenseman. JVR: 35 points in 75 games while playing top six minutes. Now that I think of it, even if you did propose Markov for JVR back then (which you didn't) it seems absolutely Pejorative Slured.
Does the proposal seem silly now? Will it seem silly three years from now or five?
You STILL don't get it.
He wasn't a question mark... He was an elite prospect. You're talking like it's a blind shot on a dartboard... it's not.Markov was an elite top defenseman and you wanted to trade him for a question mark rookie forward playing on a Philadelphia team who was just as bad as we were? Where is the logic in trading your one generational talent for a young kid with nothing but potential? At the time, we didn't know Markov was going to be out for three years and he was still putting up ridiculous numbers for a defenseman. The year before, he had 64 points in 78 games. Trading the best player on your team for JVR, what a joke!
Yeah... sure seems stupid now to have a 22 year old who's third in the NHL in goals. What was I thinking?Trading Markov, the best player on the Habs and our one true superstar, at the height of his career, for James Van Riemsdyk, a young rookie who hadn't proven he could do anything in the league, would've been absolutely stupid.
The fact that you can't admit you were wrong with the evidence in front of you just shows that you have no idea what you're talking about.
Two points:I don't recall the Canadiens rejecting those offers for Markov; could it be that it's because it didn't happen? Once again, there is a difference between being a GM and a guy typing on a keyboard. I am sure that there have been a number of trade proposals from Montreal GMs that would have been beneficially for the club, had only the other GM accepted the offer. I also doubt that you would be bringing up your proposals if Ryan and JVRD had turned out to be Terry Ryan and Matt Higgins.
1. The fans here didn't get it (and as our friend Mr. Lennon shows) still don't get it or can't admit it even when proven wrong...
2. Our club never shopped him.
We should've been making those kinds of trades. And it makes sense to trade him now.
It's not a prediction... it's a calculated risk. Elite prospects are not a roulette wheel.Hey Nostradamus, That's two predictions in three sentences. Even the French Astrologer wouldn't be so presumptuous.
And hey maybe it doesn't work out... but it's worth the risk.
Please don't waste my time with strawman crap.So you sitting in front of your computer can declare we're not winning the cup and if we trade Markov we'll be closer to winning it.
Jeeze, Bergevin must be a fool not to bring you onto his management staff.
Last edited: