Proposal: What would you give for Markov ?

[prairie hab]

It is time to move on from Markov. You bite the bullet and go with the young stable of Beaulieu, Tinordi and Pateryn. Trade him for a high pick and some size/grit forwards. This team needs an identity change. Bergevin needs to use the few remaining assets he has like Markov to accomplish that.

 

[RC51]

It is time to move on from Markov. You bite the bullet and go with the young stable of Beaulieu, Tinordi and Pateryn. Trade him for a high pick and some size/grit forwards. This team needs an identity change. Bergevin needs to use the few remaining assets he has like Markov to accomplish that.

As good as Markov still is, he IS getting slower. If you sign him again by the time he finishes that contract you wont get much for him at all.
If you want good assets back it's now or never. the big problem is money.
Markov will want 5-6 mil per and he would get it from someone else, but now think, if you trade him off you might get something the habs need badly and it gives MB a bigger war chest for next summer. Imagine Beaulieu and Tinordi UP and MB gets 3-4 BIGGER good players with the same CORE. Cap going up and Gionta and Markov, Boullion, White, Bourque, Parros, Diaz ( That's millions extra on top of the CAP boost )

 

[RealityBytes]

Boston gave up Colborne and a 1st for Tomas Kaberle. I have no doubt that teams regard Markov more highly than Kaberle was. It's not as far fetched as you think it is.

Actually it was Colborne and a conditional 2nd and if the conditions weren't met, Toronto would not have got the 2nd, so it could easily have been just Colborne alone.

As to Markov being considered more valuable than Kaberle at that time, that is your opinion, but 35 year old Markov has been showing slow lately and 32 year old Kaberle at the time was fairly highly regarded. Even then it was considered a very poor deal for Boston when it was done.

Anyway, this is all speculation until a real trade happens ... and I think what will actually happen is that Markov will just be re-signed by MB (at a lower salary) since he has a lot of defensemen to sign for next year.

 

[HockeyF3ind]

I wish Markov would accept a trade to get a good young prospect or a high pick, and perhaps a combo of the two and then just resign with us in the offseason again. That would be sweet.

 

[Dr_Hook]

Actually it was Colborne and a conditional 2nd and if the conditions weren't met, Toronto would not have got the 2nd, so it could easily have been just Colborne alone.

As to Markov being considered more valuable than Kaberle at that time, that is your opinion, but 35 year old Markov has been showing slow lately and 32 year old Kaberle at the time was fairly highly regarded. Even then it was considered a very poor deal for Boston when it was done.

Anyway, this is all speculation until a real trade happens ... and I think what will actually happen is that Markov will just be re-signed by MB (at a lower salary) since he has a lot of defensemen to sign for next year.

Actually actually, it was Colborne + a 1st + a cond 2nd if he re-signed or if bruins went to Cup finals which they did. Colborne seemed like a so-so prospect even then (to me anyway) but not garbage either.

I suspect we'd get very similar offers from contender, maybe even a little higher, and I would absolutely do it.

edit : btw, I too think that we'll just re-sign Markov, probably to a dangerously long deal which we will come to regret. Timing is perfect for trading an aging D for young talent : we ain't contenders and we have like 3 youngsters close-to-ready for NHL duty in Beailieu, Tinordi and Pateryn.

So we SHOULD trade him, but sadly we won't

 

[RealityBytes]

Actually actually, it was Colborne + a 1st + a cond 2nd if he re-signed or if bruins went to Cup finals which they did. Colborne seemed like a so-so prospect even then (to me anyway) but not garbage either.

I suspect we'd get very similar offers from contender, maybe even a little higher, and I would absolutely do it.

edit : btw, I too think that we'll just re-sign Markov, probably to a dangerously long deal which we will come to regret. Timing is perfect for trading an aging D for young talent : we ain't contenders and we have like 3 youngsters close-to-ready for NHL duty in Beailieu, Tinordi and Pateryn.

So we SHOULD trade him, but sadly we won't

Whoops, my error, yes it did also include the 1st. It was about a week before the deadline, but it was considered a terrible trade for Boston even though Kaberle was held in high regard at the time, but, it looks like it did work out for them.

I don't think a Markov trade well before the trade deadline will happen (only six weeks away anyway) and I don't think he would bring as much in return as people hope, mainly because he is looking so slow lately. How many GMs will give up so much for an aging 35 year old who is looking slow? I don't think any GM now will go so overboard and offer for Markov what Boston did in 2011.

Anyway, aside from that, it was just before the deadline for Kaberle and if MB does trade Markov at the 2014 deadline for picks as well, he is also weakening the team at the end of the season and for the playoffs. It's like him writing the year off. I don't think he wants that or will do that, plus, he also needs to sign defensemen for next year. With Subban and Eller taking a big chunk of his salary cap, he will need a few players at a lower rate and Markov on a shorter contract at a lower rate fits the bill for him.

 

[djpass]

A lot of posters here just don't seem to catch on to that. They want to trade Markov because he is not as good as he was and is not worth the value for signing a new contract, yet they expect other teams to close their eyes and give full value the way he was a few years ago for him.

Markov is only worth to other teams what they will give for him, and if he has lost value in the eyes of posters here, he certainly has lost value to the other 29GMs as well. He is also an UFA so why would any team offer a lot to get him in trade when they can just wait it out till the end of the year.

He'll be re-signed in Montreal because MB has a lot of defense men to sign and trying to trade him wouldn't bring back even close to what people expect.

The point is he has real solid value to help a team make a run into the playoffs this year !

Look back all you want, historically players his caliber have been dealt for an interesting return at the trade deadline.

Obviously every other GM may have huge question marks about how he'll be in 2-3 years.

If a team wants him now, it's mainly for what he can bring right now...in the last year of his contract !

What people expect is to do the right thing and I'm fairly sure that signing Markov for 3-4 years at 6.5 - 7 (per), like he wants, will backfire on us.

 

[JAVO16]

If our team was a contender right now, Markov would still be a very valuable piece. He's one of the best PP QBs in the NHL (think about that for a second or two, one of the best in the NHL hence the world) and he as the the experience defensively to still be a positive factor on any team. Unfortunately for us, I think that by the time our team is ready to contend (and that's not a certitude), the chance that Markov will not be a positive factor anymore is much bigger than the chance that he will still be playing close to his current level of play. Sure, we could take the gamble of keeping him a few more years, but we would also take the gamble of not getting anything back in return for him. I'd try to create a bidding war from now until the trade deadline.

 

[vokiel]

There is no way I'd sign Markov to a deal length more than 3 years. If he wants a NTC, that figure drops to 2 years.

He's starting to slow down right now at game ~50. That won't be prettier in 2-3 years from now.

 

[otto bond]

Markov is one of the last player I would trade today. Get him signed and address other needs. Let me list them for what I think they are:

1-A solid defensive RHD with mobility
2- A true PWF
3-A dominating center
4- more size

 

[Lozela]

You're paying him 5 mil a year to play less than 20 minutes a game? I'd rather spend that on someone like Girardi who can actually play more than that.

Seabrook plays 21 mins
Shattenkirk plays 19 mins

they both have more pts and better +/- than Markov

 

[bsl]

What would you say is the price difference between Markov as strictly a rental with no contract extension commitment with the acquiring team vs. Markov signing a contract extension with his new team as part of the deal?

Significant. Markov will be an effective, smart and experienced no. 4 for 3 more years, no question.

That is why I would prefer a low 1st rounder and a young prospect from a desperate contender, with no conditionals, and then re sign Marky this summer. That would be fantastic. Free lunch. win win.

 

[bsl]

I would let him walk. I didn't like that we kept him last time. His age and injuries are starting to show and its only going to get worse. Time to turn the page and move on.

Misses point entirely. If Bergy does not re sign Markov, or get something decent for Markov at deadline, he should be fired.

Letting Markov walk is not an option.

Letting Koivu and Souray walk was also not an option. But it happened, and we are paying the price for it right now.

There can be no more losing effective FA from this team, to scrape into playoffs. Those days are over.

Sign them to extensions during the season, or trade them.

 

[The Gal Pals]

I don't understand those who are opposed to trading Markov at the trade deadline. If he chooses, he can always return to the habs this summer and sign for a few more years.

Also, we need to give something good to get something good. Trading an ageing player at the deadline would allow the habs to put their hands on a first rounder and/or a decent prospect. It's madness not to trade him at the deadline.

I am very worried that if we sign Markov for 3 yrs, he may just stink the bed for the rest of his career. His value is close to as high as it will ever be again. Time to snag something for this old horse.

 

[Hannibal]

Would try to get Ryan O'Reilly for him.

 

[bsl]

You're paying him 5 mil a year to play less than 20 minutes a game? I'd rather spend that on someone like Girardi who can actually play more than that.

Proven young 25 minute effective NHL D will all be earning more than 5 mill pretty soon dude. They are quite rare, as in about 40 of them. I have no problem with extending Markov at 5 Mill 3 years, to be a very effective no. 3 or 4.

 

[bsl]

Markov want 7-7,5 per. We can deal him to Vancouver for Kassian. If Murray fetch last year a generous return. A Markov fetch a 1rst, a 3rd and a young talented winger.

Uh. He's a rental. And no, he will not ask for 7 per. Otherwise, good post.

 

[RealityBytes]

The point is he has real solid value to help a team make a run into the playoffs this year !

Look back all you want, historically players his caliber have been dealt for an interesting return at the trade deadline.

Obviously every other GM may have huge question marks about how he'll be in 2-3 years.

If a team wants him now, it's mainly for what he can bring right now...in the last year of his contract !

What people expect is to do the right thing and I'm fairly sure that signing Markov for 3-4 years at 6.5 - 7 (per), like he wants, will backfire on us.

I agree in that anything over two years for Markov is an error. I also think Markov has slipped/slowed enough already though, that he wouldn't bring in all that people think he would bring. However, it's not me making those decisions, its the GMs of other teams and if they offer, they will offer what they think he is worth, not what we think he is worth.

My original post on this goes back to the original question, would you offer a 1st round pick and a good prospect and even more for Markov the way he is now and even in a temporary role. The fact that you would trade him for that implies you think it is a good value trade and would be to your advantage and that is with your higher value of him. In other words, even valuing him highly it is an over pay for him, an equal value trade would bring less. Just because there were a few overpayments for acquiring rentals in the past doesn't mean they will automatically happen again in this tight cap environment.

This is discussion is probably all for naught though because if you believe in what the Gazette writers say, in todays paper it was that Diaz will be let go and Markov re-signed to be one of the top four of the defensive core. Still, you have to take a lot of what the Gazette writers say with a grain of salt but they probably are correct this time.

What I think will happen is that Markov will be re-signed for two years at around $3.5 M because MB needs to sign defensemen, but anything more would certainly be a mistake. (Markov is 35 years old and slowing down, he certainly can't realistically expect to get $6.5M to $7M per year nor a 3-4 year contract.)

 

[Le Barron de HF]

It's so frustrating to think that Washington traded Forsberg for Erat. I'm sure we could have gotten Forsberg for Markov if he was still part of Washington's organization.

 

[Lozela]

It's so frustrating to think that Washington traded Forsberg for Erat. I'm sure we could have gotten Forsberg for Markov if he was still part of Washington's organization.

very true

thats why Bergevin should've rolled the dice last year

we had a chance to go far

 

[Maliki2]

Resigning Markov is going tobe another mistake by MB...mark my words. So far his record isn't looking so hot.

 

[djpass]

GMs of other teams if they offer, they will offer what they think he is worth, not what we think he is worth.

The fact that you would trade him for that implies you think it is a good value trade and would be to your advantage and that is with your higher value of him.

I don't evaluate it on behalf of what I solely think he's worth, but rather what we have seen throughout the years for a player of his caliber. Getting a 1st rounder + a decent young player is definitely not out of reach.

I would trade him for the most I can get and yes I would agree for a deal involving what I just mentioned above, which again is based on the past and not personal beliefs or opinions of how this year will turn out...

Nothing prevents us from trying to then sign him in the off-season for 2 years like you say. As a matter of fact, that could be the best possible way to see how much he really wants to finish his career in Montreal.

By the way...if you think Markov would re-sign for 2 years at 3.5 per year....now you're not being realistic at all, no disrespect.

 

[HeShootsHeScores]

Unless he'd accept a one year contract, habs need to trade him. They'll probably wait to the deadline for the best return. I'd trade him for anything, yakupov coming to mind.

 

[AmeriHab]

Unless he'd accept a one year contract, habs need to trade him. They'll probably wait to the deadline for the best return. I'd trade him for anything, yakupov coming to mind.

Cause Edmonton is right in the thick of the playoffs, Markov will give them the push over the top near the deadline to be contenders and they'll give up their 20 y.o. former #1 pick for a 35 year old UFA...

 

[HeShootsHeScores]

Cause Edmonton is right in the thick of the playoffs, Markov will give them the push over the top near the deadline to be contenders and they'll give up their 20 y.o. former #1 pick for a 35 year old UFA...

You never know with that crappy organization. They might think markov is in his prime and that yakupov is pouliot.