Favourite Habs player in the post-1993 era: #3

[Lafleurs Guy]

I really dont agree with the notion that Koivu and Markov are below Subban and Price in quality. All four of them were elite. Price reached the highest peak for sure, but hes a goalie and goalies are volatile.

But that works in Price's favour, not against him. He's been consistently strong and that gives him even more value.

Subban benefited a whole lot from weak conpetition in his Norris year (even though I tried to convince everyone it didnt matter at the time ) and even then his win is one of the worst in recent memory, probably only bested by Lidstrom stealing the Norris away from... well, Markov.

It's not just winning the award though, it's putting up trophy quality seasons. If you finish with a year that could win a trophy in any given year but lose out to some guy having an incredible season then you're well ahead of the game.

Subban and Price have consistently been at or near the top of their respective fields. Both guys have put up multiple years where they were Norris/Vezina worthy. They may not have won the award but they were damn good.

Markov was never close to that. He was very good and good for a long period but not near as dominant as those other two.

 

[DAChampion]

Okay let's say top ten with him at his peak.

And given how good he was late in his career I'd say Markov actually has an outside shot at the HOF because he was very good for a long period of time. I'd say he's at a level above Koivu for sure but not at the peak of Price/Subban.

Unlike those other guys though, Markov's career is pretty much complete. He was good for a long period of time and we don't have to wait and see with him. Borderline HOF candidate who I think will make it in eventually.

I think that Markov would be a lock for the HOF if not for those three lost seasons.

But I also think that Koivu would be a lock if not for his injuries.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

For me, how ‘elite’ a player is doesn’t really come into the equation for me in these polls. Granted, I loved Lapierre, but it’s hard to like him more than someone like Koivu given the different roles and effects they had on the Habs. But among the most notable, it’s not a deal breaker.

For example, I liked Souray more than Subban. I was more upset when we lost Souray than when Subban was traded. Subban is clearly a better defenseman than Souray.

I find I like two types of players:

1) really cerebral players that think the game on a different level (Damphousse, Richer, Kovalev, Price)...I’m even willing to forgive them if their effort isn’t consistent.

2) players with skill and grit that are good teammates and stand up for their team (Souray). I'd probably also have Weber in my top 5 if he'd been here for more than 2 years.

It's definitely two different things. You can love say - Lapierre as you mention - but that doesn't make him a better hockey player than Kovalev.

I just think people conflate the two when it comes to Koivu. He gets a lot of love here from people who watched him while they were growing up. For those of us who remember players like Lafleur, Naslund and Smith though... Koivu isn't all that impressive.

 

[DAChampion]

It's definitely two different things. You can love say - Lapierre as you mention - but that doesn't make him a better hockey player than Kovalev.

I just think people conflate the two when it comes to Koivu. He gets a lot of love here from people who watched him while they were growing up. For those of us who remember players like Lafleur, Naslund and Smith though... Koivu isn't all that impressive.

I don't remember players like Lafleur, Naslund, Bobby Smith, Martin Lapointe, Bob Gainey, but my honest suspicion is that they not win 5+ Stanley Cups if they had played their careers on some iteration of the 1994-2018 Habs. None of their jerseys would be retired.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

I think that Markov would be a lock for the HOF if not for those three lost seasons.

But I also think that Koivu would be a lock if not for his injuries.

It's a sad truth that injuries are part of the game. You might very well be right on these guys but who knows? The sad truth is that Koivu never demonstrated his ability to dominate though so his case is far weaker.

Jeremey Roenick is always the guy I think of when this comes up. That guy was a monster in a breakout year (I think it was '94) and he was just dominating. He had all this hype around him and he was finally going to fulfill his promise. Then he got hurt and never became the player he could've been.

What happens if Price doesn't get run in 2014? Do we go onto the finals? And what happens to both Price and PK in 2016 if that injury doesn't pop up again? The club looked invincible to start the year...

Maybe you're right on Koivu but apart from a great start in '96 he never came close to being a truly dominant player.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

I don't remember players like Lafleur, Naslund, Bobby Smith, Martin Lapointe, Bob Gainey, but my honest suspicion is that they not win 5+ Stanley Cups if they had played their careers on some iteration of the 1994-2018 Habs. None of their jerseys would be retired.

Guy Lafleur was the best player in the league. He was a true superstar and one of the best players to lace up skates. He'd be a superstar no matter what.

Naslund and Smith don't have their jerseys retired and they were on cup winning teams.

 

[DAChampion]

Maybe you're right on Koivu but apart from a great start in '96 he never came close to being a truly dominant player.

Two counterexamples:

Saku Koivu had 22 goals, 75 points, in 81 games in 2006-07 while playing on a line with Michael Ryder and Chris Higgins.

He had 16 goals, 48 points in 54 playoff games with the Habs. That's dominant. It's better than the 73 points in 82 games that some might naively suspect, as scoring is typically lower in the playoffs across the board due to the absence of weaker teams, and the paucity of power plays due to the referees going to sleep.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Two counterexamples:

Saku Koivu had 22 goals, 75 points, in 81 games in 2006-07 while playing on a line with Michael Ryder and Chris Higgins.

He had 16 goals, 48 points in 54 playoff games with the Habs. That's dominant.

Many players have done more with less. I don't see how you can point to a 75 point season and call it dominant. That same year Jarome Iginla put up 94 points and almost 40 goals on a crappy Calgary team. And that was an off season for him.

The leading point getter that year got 120 points... How is 75 points in any way dominant? Michael Ryder isn't that bad.

His 48 points in 54 playoff games is great. But that doesn't put you in the HOF.

 

[Genesis76]

You have got to be kidding... acre you seriously comparing 1000 games of General Andrei Markov to 1000 games of Patrice "Breeze by" Brisebois?

Not at all im not....... i’m indirectly comparing Subban to Markov

 

[DAChampion]

Many players have done more with less. I don't see how you can point to a 75 point season and call it dominant. That same year Jarome Iginla put up 94 points and almost 40 goals on a crappy Calgary team. And that was an off season for him.

The Flames were a substantially better team than the Habs that year. Contrast a +32 goal differential to a -11 one.

The leading point getter that year got 120 points... How is 75 points in any way dominant? Michael Ryder isn't that bad.

Did the 120 point guy play with Ryder?
Ryder was a middle-six winger. The point is that even in Koivu's best season, he did not have a 1st line winger.

His 48 points in 54 playoff games is great. But that doesn't put you in the HOF.

The point that I was making is that Koivu would make the HOF if he had played on better teams, for example by scoring 148 points in 162 playoff games.

 

[BehindTheTimes]

I really dont agree with the notion that Koivu and Markov are below Subban and Price in quality. All four of them were elite. Price reached the highest peak for sure, but hes a goalie and goalies are volatile. Subban benefited a whole lot from weak conpetition in his Norris year (even though I tried to convince everyone it didnt matter at the time ) and even then his win is one of the worst in recent memory, probably only bested by Lidstrom stealing the Norris away from... well, Markov.

I would say career wise Price is behind them all imo. He's had one great season, followed by a couple very good ones and the rest are a bit of a roller coaster ride.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

The Flames were a substantially better team than the Habs that year. Contrast a +32 goal differential to a -11 one.

They had an amazing goalie.

Did the 120 point guy play with Ryder?
Ryder was a middle-six winger. The point is that even in Koivu's best season, he did not have a 1st line winger.

Iginla was playing with Tanguay and Langkow. Not exactly Hull and Oates.

The 120 point guy was Crosby. An actual dominant player.

The point that I was making is that Koivu would make the HOF if he had played on better teams, for example by scoring 148 points in 162 playoff games.

If he'd played on better teams he wouldn't have gotten the same ice time. On many teams he'd have been the number two center.

 

[BehindTheTimes]

I don't remember players like Lafleur, Naslund, Bobby Smith, Martin Lapointe, Bob Gainey, but my honest suspicion is that they not win 5+ Stanley Cups if they had played their careers on some iteration of the 1994-2018 Habs. None of their jerseys would be retired.

I'd argue Saku was better than them all minus Guy Lafleur.

 

[DAChampion]

If he'd played on better teams he wouldn't have gotten the same ice time. On many teams he'd have been the number two center.

Perhaps, perhaps not. Koivu was not the problem with those teams, the problem was his surroundings.

They never gave him good wingers.

I remember being exasperated when Carbonneau put him with Matt D'Agostini and Max Pacioretty. Why waste an asset like that? He should have played more with Tanguay, Kostitsyn, Latendresse, etc.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Perhaps, perhaps not. Koivu was not the problem with those teams, the problem was his surroundings.

They never gave him good wingers.

If your argument is that he didn't play with great players, I'll agree. But that doesn't automatically make him a dominant player. The fact is that he was never a dominant player. You can point to injuries and teammates but the bottom line is that he was never ever considered a tier one player in the NHL. That's just a fact.

I remember being exasperated when Carbonneau put him with Matt D'Agostini and Max Pacioretty. Why waste an asset like that? He should have played more with Tanguay, Kostitsyn, Latendresse, etc.

I won't disagree. I feel the same way about Galchenyuk. But that doesn't mean I consider Chuck an elite player either.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

I'd argue Saku was better than them all minus Guy Lafleur.

I should clarify, I didn't mean to say that Naslund and Smith were much better than Koivu was. I brought them up because they were good but not superstar players and they never got near the kind of hype that Koivu does. And at least those guys were in the top 20 in scoring in some seasons. I think Naslund was actually our last top ten scorer. How sad is that?

 

[BehindTheTimes]

I should clarify, I didn't mean to say that Naslund and Smith were much better than Koivu was. I brought them up because they were good but not superstar players and they never got near the kind of hype that Koivu does. And at least those guys were in the top 20 in scoring in some seasons. I think Naslund was actually our last top ten scorer. How sad is that?

Mats was one of my favs too. Definitely in my top 10.

 

[LyricalLyricist]

#1 Saku Koivu
#2 PK Subban

Subban is removed due to winning
Roy is removed as he's not really part of the pist-1993 era, as argued by @Laurentide.

Added: Plekanec, Halak, Sourray, Cammalleri

Poll will be open for forty eight hours.

Wait, why is Roy not part of post 1993 era?

He played more games than Turgeon who is on the list and Roy is a goalie.

 

[DavePeak]

Wait, why is Roy not part of post 1993 era?

He played more games than Turgeon who is on the list and Roy is a goalie.

Yeah, Roy is in a weird position as our #1 goalie from the '93 Cup win till his trade, but the years a lot of us will remember the most will be before and after that (86-93 and Colorado). I still think he deserved his place there and I know people voted for him.

This round, Kovalev (again, but I don't disagree with the choices so far), add Radulov.

 

[Sir Jacques Demers]

Kovalev by default; no one other forward cracked the 1 Point Per Game mark after Damphousse/Turgeon.

Markov was an important player but not an exciting player for me.

The problem with Koivu is his entire career as a Hab was a tease. He could have been, early in his carrer the 2nd line hero everyones loves, and his prime, 1st line superstar with good wingers. Granted, he's not Joe Sakic, but he could easily have had a prime like Marc Savard's prime if better surrounded.

 

[Vicious]

Markov.

Add Gorges