Best players MTL has developed since the Patrick Roy days

[SOLR]

Subban did all that too...

I don’t have an issue with Markov being ranked ahead on account of his longevity, even though I personally disagree.

But if the argument is about peak or prime, I just can’t see how Markov is ahead of Subban. It’s nothing more than revisionist history in my opinion.

Or maybe you forgot about Markov in his prime, because let's face it, it's 6-7 years earlier - and we forget a lot in 7 years.

 

[Sugi21]

Develop is a tricky word here! Roy is a prime example he was just too good and saying Hab’s developed him gives them too much credit lol Price had a rocky development they pushed him way too soon he was just too good that he ended up being a damn good goalie despite the early beginnings!

 

[Lebowski]

Or maybe you forgot about Markov in his prime, because let's face it, it's 6-7 years earlier - and we forget a lot in 7 years.

Like calling Niedermayer a generational player?

Or are you the one person that remember things exactly as they were?

 

[Forsead]

I don't think there was a point in his career where Markov was considered a top 3. He was never even nominated for a Norris and he disappeared in the playoffs. He was a really, really good player.

Subban was a HOF caliber player. His stats were insane. He was physical, stepped up in the biggest games and had the numbers to support a top 3 ranking in the league. And I'd say he was a much better defensive player than Markov was. Yes, he'd lose the puck with some big giveaways... no doubt about that. But it was outweighed by the way he'd get the puck out of his own end. I'd say he did more by the age of 30 than Markov had done in his career. Now, his last two seasons have sucked and maybe his back has finished him. I don't know but that's entirely possible. At that point you could look at their respective careers and compare them. But at the end of the day though, at his peak Subban was the better player.

Here's the Norris trophy voting records for the two Markov prime seasons that we have witnessed:

Norris trophy voting: complete record

2007-2008
1st - Nicklas Lidstrom
2nd - Dion Phaneuf
3rd - Zdeno Chara
4th - Sergei Gonchar
5th - Brian Campbell
6th - Andrei Markov
7th - Mike Green
8th - Chris Pronger
9th - Brian Rafalski
10th - Scott Niedermayer

That year Phaneuf and Campbell should never have been voted ahead of Markov. How many points Gonchar had because he was playing with Crosby/Malkin on the PP ? Most lists had Markov in the top 3 that year, when taking everything into account IIRC.

2008-2009
1st - Zdeno Chara
2nd - Mike Green
3rd - Nicklas Lidstrom
4th - Shea Weber
5th - Dan Boyle
6th - Duncan Keith/Andrei Markov
7th
8th - Mark Streit
9th - Scott Niedermayer/Brian Rafalski
10th

Mike Green ? Dan Boyle should never have been voted ahead of Markov. I believe that Weber/Keith were overrated that year. Also, this is the first year Lidstrom started to get a lot of reputation votes, which was so clear in 2010-2011. Again, most lists had Markov in the top 3-5 for that year, when taking everything into account IIRC.

Also, wow at the talent that Markov was in competition with !

I would say that both were HOF talents, and if Subban does not get his thing together, it will be a case of very good/elite player for a long time vs a great player for a short time. That kind of debate often go to put longevity ahead. There would be no debate if Markov had a healthy prime though IMO.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

I don't think it's a terrible argument at all. We are not talking about once we are talking about a lot of times. You can't just wash away 6-7 tournaments with one-time examples (fishing the Corson example is priceless! you had to go to a time before Subban to make a point that doesn't even refute the argument, absurd).

It's a terrible argument. Yzerman was left off 87 and 91 because Keenan didn't like him. It's not a black mark on his abilities at all. Ditto with Taylor Hall and PK Subban.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Here's the Norris trophy voting records for the two Markov prime seasons that we have witnessed:

Norris trophy voting: complete record

2007-2008
1st - Nicklas Lidstrom
2nd - Dion Phaneuf
3rd - Zdeno Chara
4th - Sergei Gonchar
5th - Brian Campbell
6th - Andrei Markov
7th - Mike Green
8th - Chris Pronger
9th - Brian Rafalski
10th - Scott Niedermayer

That year Phaneuf and Campbell should never have been voted ahead of Markov. How many points Gonchar had because he was playing with Crosby/Malkin on the PP ? Most lists had Markov in the top 3 that year, when taking everything into account IIRC.

2008-2009
1st - Zdeno Chara
2nd - Mike Green
3rd - Nicklas Lidstrom
4th - Shea Weber
5th - Dan Boyle
6th - Duncan Keith/Andrei Markov
7th
8th - Mark Streit
9th - Scott Niedermayer/Brian Rafalski
10th

Mike Green ? Dan Boyle should never have been voted ahead of Markov. I believe that Weber/Keith were overrated that year. Also, this is the first year Lidstrom started to get a lot of reputation votes, which was so clear in 2010-2011. Again, most lists had Markov in the top 3-5 for that year, when taking everything into account IIRC.

Also, wow at the talent that Markov was in competition with !

I would say that both were HOF talents, and if Subban does not get his thing together, it will be a case of very good/elite player for a long time vs a great player for a short time. That kind of debate often go to put longevity ahead. There would be no debate if Markov had a healthy prime though IMO.

He's only top six in two years over his entire career... and he loses out to guys like Campbell and Gonchar. He was a very good blueliner but never a great one. Sorry.

Where he might wind up having the edge is longevity. If Subban has crashed and burned it would be a sad end to a great career. Up until two years ago he was easily on a HOF trajectory. Now that's very much in question.

 

[SOLR]

Like calling Niedermayer a generational player?

Or are you the one person that remember things exactly as they were?

So the guy who won Gold or Cups at every level multiple times, not a generational player. That's new.

 

[SOLR]

It's a terrible argument. Yzerman was left off 87 and 91 because Keenan didn't like him. It's not a black mark on his abilities at all. Ditto with Taylor Hall and PK Subban.

What the hell are you talking about, you are not even addressing the issue at hand.

1) If Subban was so good why does he keeps not being chosen? No excuses.
2) If Subban is so good, why does he keeps being ejected from every group?

Sorry, you don't get to run away from this one with a shitty argument about things that happened in the 1980s when Subban was a new born.

 

[Montreals Forum]

I've said the same thing before. Lots of people disagree, but to me Markov was a Lidstron-lite. I would have loved to see Markov play with a team as skilled as the wings were back then.

For sure he was

The guys whole game came from his incomparable hockey sense (only a select few matched his).
Many forget he was drafted as a center man, He was so smart he turned himself to a #1 LD.
The guy was not the quickest, but his stick work and hockey sense was so sharp that he never looked terribly out of place, like ever. I honestly do not recall Markov ever getting caught making defensive lapses in judgement, and he almost always shouldered the responsibility to drive the offence from the point.
I used to crush Leaf fans back in the day with Kaberle/Markov comparisons, and that was when Kaberle was a highly touted offensive d-man. But it was always clear to me that he was indespensible. You could count on him anytime, anywhere.
Even at advanced age, The General deserved better from our front office. He was still our 2nd most valuable d-man, and was never respected as the player he actually was.
Those days when Markov was at his peak were pretty bleak. He stood his ground, never bitched about it, and commanded oppositions respect.

Even the playoffs, his ppg totals went down some.. that will happen with little else to focus on in a 7 game series... his defence was always still there however.

Not to shoot down Subban, but hes only played on ONE team as bad as those in the early 2000's Canadiens.
The NJ Devils, and even then they had Taylor Hall for a chunk to work with. Markov didn't have that at all in those years.
Subban made a tonne of mistakes here in his last season here. Hotdogging on the blue line, and taking on too much. He showed he was passionate, but was biting off more he could chew.

I guess I could be biased, but he was my favorite Canadien in the last 20 years. In a lineup of the best habs after the last cup, I literally believe Markov is the best of them.

Koivu being the second... Saku had the heart of a lion. His injuries degraded his game to just above Plekanec's however, and what puts him 2nd to me is the locker room messes he was a part of. There was a tonne of talk about the fractured locker room, and he was the Captain in question at the time.

Kovalev would IMO have the best season as a hab skater. He was by far the most talented Canadien in this stretch (watch that Boston series where he picked up the glove behind the net if you doubt it).

Theodore's Hart/Vezina season is the best performance driven season in those years. He was amazing that year... I freaking love Price, but he hasn't hit that level of excellence in a habs Jersey.

It's all opinion I know but that's my hot take on it I could talk Markov for days though, that's how much I appreciated him. Hes definitely my next option whenever I pick up a jersey. #79, assistant captain home whites (well, back when whites were the home jersey).

 

[BJCOLLINS]

Am I wrong to think that 25 well developed players over the course of 35 years is nothing to be proud of???

 

[dcyhabs]

What the hell are you talking about, you are not even addressing the issue at hand.

1) If Subban was so good why does he keeps not being chosen? No excuses.
2) If Subban is so good, why does he keeps being ejected from every group?

Sorry, you don't get to run away from this one with a shitty argument about things that happened in the 1980s when Subban was a new born.

Subban dropped off a cliff lately. I heard his back was done, but who knows? If Bergevin somehow knew he was done he made a great trade. If not then he is very fortunate Weber has aged well.

Markov was underrated by everyone. Russian factor, and he was a quiet guy on a bad team. They should have rotated scrubs as his partner, inflated stats, and traded them.

 

[FerrisRox]

I was curious about this so I decided to make a ranking. For the record I included only players who spent the beginning of their career in the Montreal Canadiens organization. It doesn't mean they were drafted by Montreal but they could have been acquired at 19 or 20 years old for exemple. As long as they didn't play too many games with another team (Eller is included for exemple, but not McDonagh).

What would be your ranking?

1. Patrick Roy
2. Carey Price
3. Chris Chelios
4. Saku Koivu
5. Guy Carbonneau
6. Eric Desjardins
7. Mats Naslund
8. Andrei Markov
9. Petr Svoboda
10. John Leclair
11. Stephane Richer
12. Brendan Gallagher
13. Jose Theodore
14. PK Subban
15. Max Pacioretty
16. Claude Lemieux
17. Tomas Plekanec
18. Jaroslav Halak
19. Shayne Corson
20. Lars Eller
21. Mike Ribeiro
22. Valeri Bure
23. Mike Komisarek
24. Phillip Danault
25. Benoit Brunet / Brian Savage / Michael Ryder / Darcy Tucker / Patrice Brisebois / Craig Rivet

Hopefully I didn't miss too many old timers!

How is Mathieu Schneider not on this list?

 

[Lebowski]

So the guy who won Gold or Cups at every level multiple times, not a generational player. That's new.

Ah yes, team awards are the best way to evaluate a players’ individual merit.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

What the hell are you talking about, you are not even addressing the issue at hand.

1) If Subban was so good why does he keeps not being chosen? No excuses.
2) If Subban is so good, why does he keeps being ejected from every group?

Sorry, you don't get to run away from this one with a shitty argument about things that happened in the 1980s when Subban was a new born.

Dude, it's a terrible argument and we've been there done that many times on this forum.

Not being selected for Team Canada is irrelevant to his abilities. Rob freaking Zamner made Team Canada. It's an arbitrary decision made by coaches who may not like certain players. It's not an indication of the player not being good enough. There's really not much more to say here unless you think Shane Corson is better than Steve Yzerman.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

How is Mathieu Schneider not on this list?

Yeah, he was a good player as well. Forgot all about him.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

So the guy who won Gold or Cups at every level multiple times, not a generational player. That's new.

Niedermayer was nowhere near a generational player. Come on man.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Subban dropped off a cliff lately. I heard his back was done, but who knows? If Bergevin somehow knew he was done he made a great trade. If not then he is very fortunate Weber has aged well.

Subban was absolutely awesome for Nashville and led them to the finals.

Going forward... we'll see. I thought he'd be better last year but he was also stuck in Jersey. He might be toast but he could also bounce back. He's definitely got a lot to prove going forward.

 

[Franck]

Streit was like 26-27 when we drafted him i would say he was already fully developed in Europe. I don't know the drafting rule but like i think he could have signed UFA so why were we able to draft him lol?

To lock his rights early before anyone gets to sign him?

Not sure how Euro players rights were handled before 2005 CBA but now when a player is drafted, team retains exclusive rights for a few years. He was drafted in 2004 as NHL was heading for a lengthy lockout that everyone excepted. Betting a 9th round pick there was a very small price to pay and turned out such a great deal.

Yeah Streit was older but I'd still give Habs credit for turning him into a good NHLer. Went underrated his whole career or maybe I just had a soft spot for the guy. Kinda like Petry these days.

Before the 2004-05 lockout European players had to be drafted to play in the NHL, there was no process that would make an undrafted European into a free agent, that's why older Europeans like Streit or Franzén were drafted. In the 80's guys who were 30+ years old got drafted, Helmuts Balderis got drafted at 36 and made his NHL debut at 37.

Today undrafted European players become free agents after a few years (the year they turn 22, iirc) so a player like Streit would just be signed right away.

 

[JianYang]

I don't think there was a point in his career where Markov was considered a top 3. He was never even nominated for a Norris and he disappeared in the playoffs. He was a really, really good player.

Subban was a HOF caliber player. His stats were insane. He was physical, stepped up in the biggest games and had the numbers to support a top 3 ranking in the league. And I'd say he was a much better defensive player than Markov was. Yes, he'd lose the puck with some big giveaways... no doubt about that. But it was outweighed by the way he'd get the puck out of his own end. I'd say he did more by the age of 30 than Markov had done in his career. Now, his last two seasons have sucked and maybe his back has finished him. I don't know but that's entirely possible. At that point you could look at their respective careers and compare them. But at the end of the day though, at his peak Subban was the better player.

Markov's lack of notoriety around the norris was also partially stunted by the bad timing of his reconstructive surgeries. He was coming off 57 and 64 point seasons, and he was on the verge of getting the notoriety he deserved, but he only played 85 games over the next 3 seasons, and he was no longer on anyone's radar.

Mind you, he came back from all that adversity, and put up 30 points in 48 games in that lockout year, at which point he was 32 years of age. I find that remarkable as well. There was lots of concern that he would be done given the nature of his injuries, but he continued to evolve well.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Markov's lack of notoriety around the norris was also partially stunted by the bad timing of his reconstructive surgeries. He was coming off 57 and 64 point seasons, and he was on the verge of getting the notoriety he deserved, but he only played 85 games over the next 3 seasons, and he was no longer on anyone's radar.

Mind you, he came back from all that adversity, and put up 30 points in 48 games in that lockout year, at which point he was 32 years of age. I find that remarkable as well. There was lots of concern that he would be done given the nature of his injuries, but he continued to evolve well.

Markov was really good. Not a franchise level talent though. Maybe injuries got in the way... whatever, it doesn't matter for purposes of this discussion.

But he deserves full credit for coming back the way he did. It was truly a 'best case scenario' for Montreal the way he returned.

 

[Paddyjack]

Subban dropped off a cliff lately. I heard his back was done, but who knows? If Bergevin somehow knew he was done he made a great trade. If not then he is very fortunate Weber has aged well.

If you remember the context of the trade, this was the last chance he could be traded before his NTC was kicking in. And he had just missed the past two months on a mysterious neck injury.... so my personnal opinion on this is that MB very well knew the possible long term consequences on that injury and decided to take a gamble.

 

[Notabaguette]

Shayne Corson, Stefan Richer and Brian Savage were all good picks

 

[BehindTheTimes]

Reads more like a list of best 25 players drafted by Montreal than it does developed by Montreal. John Leclair for example, turned out to be a great player, but I don’t think we did anything to help his development. It wasn’t until he left Montreal that he finally became the player we hoped he could be.

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

Reads more like a list of best 25 players drafted by Montreal than it does developed by Montreal. John Leclair for example, turned out to be a great player, but I don’t think we did anything to help his development. It wasn’t until he left Montreal that he finally became the player we hoped he could be.

What Philly did wasn't development. What they did is offer better linemates with better chemistry and more ice time.

He more than doubled his PPG simply by changing team. 43 pts in 74 games (0.58ppg) in his last full season with the Habs, then had 6 more points in half the games, 49 pts in his first 37 games (1.32ppg) with Philly in the lockout shortened season. He skyrocketed right from the start with Philly. 25 goals in 37 games!

I agree with your point about the list, but Leclair is a bad example. The problem wasn't development in his case, but one of philosophy regarding usage and strategies, or maybe he just didn't gel well enough with anyone.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

What Philly did wasn't development. What they did is offer better linemates with better chemistry and more ice time.

He more than doubled his PPG simply by changing team. 43 pts in 74 games (0.58ppg) in his last full season with the Habs, then had 6 more points in half the games, 49 pts in his first 37 games (1.32ppg) with Philly in the lockout shortened season. He skyrocketed right from the start with Philly. 25 goals in 37 games!

I agree with your point about the list, but Leclair is a bad example. The problem wasn't development in his case, but one of philosophy regarding usage and strategies, or maybe he just didn't gel well enough with anyone.

Yep, it was crazy. Leclair turned into an instant superstar once he went to Philly. He was immediately put on Lindros' line and crushed it.

54 point season in his last year in Montreal.
1 goal 5 points in his first nine games that year with the Habs.

Gets traded

17 goals and 32 points in his next 20 games. It was insane.

Lindros was the best player in the world at the time. If he could've stayed healthy he'd have won mutliple cups. What a waste of talent.