You are full of crap dude.
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...
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.
Yeah... sure seems stupid now to have a 22 year old who's third in the NHL in goals. What was I thinking?
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.
Sorry dude, you're wrong. You wanted to give Pacioretty for JVR about three years ago. But whatever, believe what you want, because Markov for JVR was still a stupid deal three years ago regardless. Both your trade proposals were ridiculous and would get you fired as GM.
I love how you ignore the fact that I repeated many times how Markov WAS the Montreal Canadiens, he was the singular proven, elite player on the team; the superstar of the Habs. I even showed you his point totals. Why on EARTH would you trade your superstar for James ****ing Van Riemsdyk, who had proven NOTHING as of yet in the league, playing on a team just as bad as we were? It is the most ridiculous trade proposal I have ever seen someone so desperately grasp at in a long time.
Your argument for trading Markov for JVR was, and I quote "a core of Cammy, Gomez and Gionta wasn't going to take us anywhere..." LOL WHAT? Okay, correct as that may be, you don't trade arguably your most prized possession, your one proven superstar on your team, for a kid who hadn't done anything in the league and wasn't even that highly touted as a prospect. Look at his numbers, he has never gotten above 40 points in any competitive league. He has never won any awards of any note at all. If you don't like your core, trade THEM away, not your biggest piece for a player who hadn't proved anything as of yet and would only play a SUPPORT role to THE VERY CORE that you despised so much.
Do you see now how terrible your logic is?
If you wanted to trade Markov three years ago, in his prime, you could've gotten WAY more than just James Van Riemsdyk. What a terrible idea for a trade. And so what if JVR has 11 goals so far? Big deal! It doesn't prove anything. It proves he could get some decent goal scoring for 19 games in a season (and only four assists, mind you). He's never even gotten more than forty points in his life in any competitive league. He still hasn't proven anything yet, but of course you wanted to trade our superstar away to get him.
Absolutely hilarious how you're still defending the ridiculous trade proposal.
Being 1st in the East and a possible SC contender is not a false objection.
As for value yes he has value. A lottery ticket has value as well. The worse your odds of winning the lower the value will be. Same goes for Markov the risks associated with his injuries have reduced what people are willing to pay for him. Which makes him more valuable to us then what we could get in a trade.
This makes too much sense.
I can't comprehend how some people cannot see how Markov has way more value on our team than anything we can get coming our way in a trade would be to us. Obviously if we get an amazing return for him, go for it... but the fact that we will NOT is something that is hard to get through some of the thick skulls in here.
