79 Andrei Markov 06-07

[Guest JL]

I have to disagree with you, my friend. IMHO, Markov is comparable to all of those players. Im not saying htey are the same players, but they all have pluses and minuses that make them similarly valued imo. Here is why:

A healthy salo a good player - but he's consistenly scored 20-30% less points than markov & imo makes a few more brain flubs in his own end. Thats no knock on him, I personally would consider him to be worth maybe $4.5m. BUT - he's NOT healthy - he's missed over 60 games in the last 4 years. He's always had injury problems (even worse in ottawa if memory serves) and that HAS to reduce his salary.

JovoCop is a similar situation. I personally think he was signed for too much. Healthy, sure he's worth a lot, but he's missed an average of 35 games a season. Also, this season, I dont think he was anywhere near as good as he can be...he was at the allstar game based on past play imho.

Chara - he's a phenomenal physical specimen, but again, he's averaged less points than markov & imo if I was on a PK against a speedy team like buffalo, Id much rather have markov than chara in the back line. His huge size makes him have trouble with fast, littel players - thus he often takes bad penalties.

McCabe...hits the same argument thats been going on the last 10 pages - Souray vs Markov.

Kubina...when you're best season ever is 38 points...and you average about 28...well, I think Markov is head & shoulders above this guy point wise...and somewhat better than him defensively.

Anyway, I dont want to fight, I just felt the statement was not warranted. Markov is as elite (in different ways) than any of those guys you noted...My 2 cents.

Jovanovski, McCabe, Chara and Kubina are offensive defensemen with serious lack in their own end. They are recognized around the league as high risk, offensive minded defensemen. They are comparable to Sheldon Souray, not Markov in my opinion.

As for Salo, you are right about his injuries but from watching him play here in BC, I strongly disagree with your assessment about the brain flubs in his own end as more often than not, he's the one covering for others mistakes in the Canucks' zone. Here's TSN's scouting report:

Assets Has one of the hardest point shots in the league. Reads the ice well and knows when to jump into the play. Is solid in his own end and executes good breakout passes.

Flaws Isn't very physical, despite being 6-3, 215 pounds. His durability is constantly questioned and staying healthy is always an issue.

Career potential Top four defenseman.

[tmash]

Very good post Graeme. My point is that Brewer, Phillips and Salo were all in the same boat though so why were we the only ones to take that into consideration? What you're saying is right, but even if Markov is slightly better than the other 3, it still doesn't justify us overpaying by that much of a difference.

Thanks. I don't think Brewer and Phillips are close enough to make a comparison, but Salo I'll give you is in the same league as Markov and he is not worth 2 million less, I give you that. Bang for buck wise, Salo next year will be better.

But, the whole point of my last post was market value, which none of those guys show anything since they didn't test the market. What I'm saying here, is that Markov's market value is probably over 6 million. I'm sure Salo's was much higher than he signed for as well. What this comes down to is Salo did his team a favour, Markov not so much. Would I have loved it if Markov had signed here for much less than his market value? Of course. But that doesn't change to me that if he was willing to move to another team (and despite the media reports, we don't know this, and likely neither did Gainey), there was no way Meehan was going to recommend he take any less than we gave him.

Gainey did what he had to do to keep him. Exactly how cheap we could have got him, well none of us have any idea because that really depends on how much of a pay cut was Markov willing to take to stay in Montreal, and unless Markov blabbed against his agents wishes, Gainey didn't know this either. Markov wasn't a saint and gave us a huge discount either. The way I see it, as hard as it may be to swallow, that salary is simply what it took to keep him. Just as I've admitted 6 million minimum is what it would take to keep Souray. The difference is that I felt in Markov's case this money was worth it, Souray's it wasn't. But that's a purely opinion element, whereas I really believe that Markov would have recieved at least this deal on the open market is closer to an unprovable fact. That sounds like an oxymoron, and I suppose kind of is, I just see now way Markov didn't get that kind of money this offseaosn.

[gracie12]

Jovanovski, McCabe, Chara and Kubina are offensive defensemen with serious lack in their own end. They are recognized around the league as high risk, offensive minded defensemen. They are comparable to Sheldon Souray, not Markov in my opinion.

well, i wasnt comparing them in the way they play (like i said) i was comparing them in earning potential. You believe they are not comparable but I think they are - they all should make similar money to markov. Its like ryder and bonk are different players, but make similar money - or did until this year lol.

As for Salo, you are right about his injuries but from watching him play here in BC, I strongly disagree with your assessment about the brain flubs in his own end as more often than not, he's the one covering for others mistakes in the Canucks' zone.

I'll take your word on Salo (maybe i'll see more of him now!! lol). I never said he was bad defensively, just that I dont think he's as good as markov - but my opinion is 4 years old as I havent seen much of him since he left ottawa.

[fourtrax]

Jovanovski, McCabe, Chara and Kubina are offensive defensemen with serious lack in their own end. They are recognized around the league as high risk, offensive minded defensemen. They are comparable to Sheldon Souray, not Markov in my opinion.

And all those guys are seriously overpaid. We don't want to make that same mistake.

[Guest JL]

And all those guys are seriously overpaid. We don't want to make that same mistake.

Agreed. So why have we overpaid Markov?

[tmash]

Agreed. So why have we overpaid Markov?

Because if we don't overpay anyone, and no one takes a big hometown discount, this is our D next season:

Komisarek-Dandenault

Bouillion- O'Bryne

Streit - Cote

Gorges

We basically had to overpay (depending on your definition of overpay) one of them, and I think we made the right choice which one. We are going to have to overpay to get any decent UFA as well, so if you're not willing to overpay anyone, we have to use what we already have. The other option is to play hardball and hope they meant it when they said they wanted to stay, of course this may have the same result as they are in the position of power and can easily leave to go somewhere else.

Basically, overplaying players is part of management, it happens everywhere. The issue isn't overpaying in general, it's that you need to overpay the right players. And in our case, I do think that is Markov. The reason I know I feel this way is if we lost Markov, say he didn't like the city and left, I'd be out there as GM begging Timonen to come here, trying to find some sort of replacement. Whereas if I'm GM and Souray leaves, I'm not about to call up JFJ and ask "how would you like to get rid of the Mccabe contract?" If we're not going to pay the price and replace the player if we lose them, are they really worth keeping? Keeping a player because they were on last years roster just isn't a good reason to keep someone in my mind. I support keeping, and maybe overpaying (depending on definition of overpaying) Markov because if he wasn't here, I'd say we'd need to be looking for a player just like him. Whereas, a PP specialist like Souray would be a nice fit on a complete team who could use some PP help, but it's not where we should be putting our money at this point. If there was no Souray, would I be saying right now "What we really need this offseason is a PP specialist dman"? no.

For the past 3 months I've supported overpaying Ryan Smyth, simply because I think he'd fit in well here. Is 6.5 million for Smyth really a better deal than Souray for 6.5? I don't think so, both are ridiculously high in my mind, but for a team desperate for even strength offense, where gritty players seem to fit in well, I think it's a better use of our money.

[Guest A Semin]

Agreed. So why have we overpaid Markov?

Because if Markov walks, it's a 4-5 years sets back. Maybe more. And anyway, in my opinion, Markov now has a contract base on the market and for him, it's not that bad of a deal.

[fourtrax]

I was going to reply, but Graeme said everything I wanted to say.

[gracie12]

Because if we don't overpay anyone, and no one takes a big hometown discount, this is our D next season:

Komisarek-Dandenault

Bouillion- O'Bryne

Streit - Cote

Gorges

We basically had to overpay (depending on your definition of overpay) one of them, and I think we made the right choice which one. We are going to have to overpay to get any decent UFA as well, so if you're not willing to overpay anyone, we have to use what we already have. The other option is to play hardball and hope they meant it when they said they wanted to stay, of course this may have the same result as they are in the position of power and can easily leave to go somewhere else.

Basically, overplaying players is part of management, it happens everywhere. The issue isn't overpaying in general, it's that you need to overpay the right players. And in our case, I do think that is Markov. The reason I know I feel this way is if we lost Markov, say he didn't like the city and left, I'd be out there as GM begging Timonen to come here, trying to find some sort of replacement. Whereas if I'm GM and Souray leaves, I'm not about to call up JFJ and ask "how would you like to get rid of the Mccabe contract?" If we're not going to pay the price and replace the player if we lose them, are they really worth keeping? Keeping a player because they were on last years roster just isn't a good reason to keep someone in my mind. I support keeping, and maybe overpaying (depending on definition of overpaying) Markov because if he wasn't here, I'd say we'd need to be looking for a player just like him. Whereas, a PP specialist like Souray would be a nice fit on a complete team who could use some PP help, but it's not where we should be putting our money at this money. If there was no Souray, would I be saying right now "What we really need this offseason is a PP specialist dman"? no.

For the past 3 months I've supported overpaying Ryan Smyth, simply because I think he'd fit in well here. Is 6.5 million for Smyth really a better deal than Souray for 6.5? I don't think so, both are ridiculously high in my mind, but for a team desperate for even strength offense, where gritty players seem to fit in well, I think it's a better use of our money.

Really good post.

[Guest JL]

Because if we don't overpay anyone, and no one takes a big hometown discount, this is our D next season:

Komisarek-Dandenault

Bouillion- O'Bryne

Streit - Cote

Gorges

We basically had to overpay (depending on your definition of overpay) one of them, and I think we made the right choice which one. We are going to have to overpay to get any decent UFA as well, so if you're not willing to overpay anyone, we have to use what we already have. The other option is to play hardball and hope they meant it when they said they wanted to stay, of course this may have the same result as they are in the position of power and can easily leave to go somewhere else.

I strongly disagree. What seemed like a good signing two years ago with Kovalev, what seemed like a good signing last year with Samsonov, contracts which kept us from improving our team at the trade deadline, contracts that make them impossible to trade, all came back to bite us in the behind. Haven't we learned that no matter the player involved, no matter if it "seems" like a good idea to some at the time, overpaying is still overpaying no matter who's concerned? I have learned, no need to tell me a third time. It's already starting to bite us as we are forced to offer a ridiculous contract to Souray (relatively speaking, when comparing to Markov's).

[tmash]

I strongly disagree. What seemed like a good signing two years ago with Kovalev, what seemed like a good signing last year with Samsonov, contracts which kept us from improving our team at the trade deadline, contracts that make them impossible to trade, all came back to bite us in the behind.

Read what I said again, I said if we overpay, it must be the right players. Slightly overpaying Samsonov and Kovalev would have been fine if they put up the stats they had in the past, but they weren't the right players for this situation we have here. We should have put that money in more gritty players who would work well under this coach.

By the way, the contracts didn't keep us from improving at the trade deadline, we had enough cap space (due to injuries during the season) to get any player we wanted.

Haven't we learned that no matter the player involved, no matter if it "seems" like a good idea to some at the time, overpaying is still overpaying no matter who's concerned?

But you have to overpay in a lot of cases. Otherwise you can't sign any good UFAs and you are most likely going to lose your own unless they take a good hometown discount. And every team does it, look at the top four teams this season, Anaheim didn't overpay any star, but some of their role players were somewhat overpaid, in Ottawa Redden comes to mind, he's good, but 6.5 million? In Detroit, didn't Datsyk just sign some ridiculous contract he didn't deserve? And Buffalo had Brierre's contract, which although worked out okay, was overpaid for when they signed it (it was an arbitrators decision, but they could have walked away). Overpaying happens, as that's the whole point of unrestricted free agency, by having 30 teams available bidding for you, you're going to get more than your regular value (what you'd likely get as a restricted free agent). So when a player is approaching UFA status, or is a UFA, they get overpaid.

The players who don't get overpaid as UFAs: guys like Jan Bulis. But we'll never improve signing players like that. If we want Smyth, Blake, Hannan, Stuart, Bertuzzi, Kariya, pretty much any of the good UFAs we've been talking about on here, we'll be overpaying.

If we wern't willing to overpay and Markov and Souray didn't take a couple million less to play here, that defense I listed would probably be what we'd have to go with. Maybe we could sign a Ninimaa type player, but we would need a guy like Dandenault on the top pairing, because we'd have to overpay for any top pairing (or second pairing for that matter) dman (and there's not many available to start with)

[Guest Lafleurs Guy]

Read what I said again, I said if we overpay, it must be the right players. Slightly overpaying Samsonov and Kovalev would have been fine if they put up the stats they had in the past, but they weren't the right players for this situation we have here. We should have put that money in more gritty players who would work well under this coach.

Was Zedeno Chara the "right player?" how about Marc Savard? Look what they did for the Bruins last year. And look at what Brad Richards' contract is doing to the Lightning. All of those guys are good players who were overpaid. That overpayment is not helping any of those teams.

By the way, the contracts didn't keep us from improving at the trade deadline, we had enough cap space (due to injuries during the season) to get any player we wanted.

But you have to overpay in a lot of cases. Otherwise you can't sign any good UFAs and you are most likely going to lose your own unless they take a good hometown discount. And every team does it, look at the top four teams this season, Anaheim didn't overpay any star, but some of their role players were somewhat overpaid, in Ottawa Redden comes to mind, he's good, but 6.5 million? In Detroit, didn't Datsyk just sign some ridiculous contract he didn't deserve? And Buffalo had Brierre's contract, which although worked out okay, was overpaid for when they signed it (it was an arbitrators decision, but they could have walked away). Overpaying happens, as that's the whole point of unrestricted free agency, by having 30 teams available bidding for you, you're going to get more than your regular value (what you'd likely get as a restricted free agent). So when a player is approaching UFA status, or is a UFA, they get overpaid.

The players who don't get overpaid as UFAs: guys like Jan Bulis. But we'll never improve signing players like that. If we want Smyth, Blake, Hannan, Stuart, Bertuzzi, Kariya, pretty much any of the good UFAs we've been talking about on here, we'll be overpaying.

If we wern't willing to overpay and Markov and Souray didn't take a couple million less to play here, that defense I listed would probably be what we'd have to go with. Maybe we could sign a Ninimaa type player, but we would need a guy like Dandenault on the top pairing, because we'd have to overpay for any top pairing (or second pairing for that matter) dman (and there's not many available to start with)

Not every team overpays. And we shouldn't join the ranks of those who do. Take a look at Anaheim's payroll. None of those guys are making more than they're worth. Ditto for Carolina and Tampa the year before that (BEFORE Richards' stupid contract.)

To get back to Markov though, I agree we overpaid. The fortunate part though is that we didn't overpay by much. The unfortunate part is that our players will use this contract as leverage in their negotiations.

[tmash]

Was Zedeno Chara the "right player?" how about Marc Savard? Look what they did for the Bruins last year. And look at what Brad Richards' contract is doing to the Lightning. All of those guys are good players who were overpaid. That overpayment is not helping any of those teams.

I always thought the Chara deal was ridiculous. Savard was the right player for Boston (he got almost 100 points, not sure how 5 million is a bad price for that), but I don't think he would have been for us. I would have gladly we overpaid for Shanahan or Arnott though. Those were the right players, a goalscorer and a big #2 center, they could have helped us. Savard, as good as he is, if we are going to spend money on a center, they better have some size.

Not every team overpays. And we shouldn't join the ranks of those who do. Take a look at Anaheim's payroll. None of those guys are making more than they're worth. Ditto for Carolina and Tampa the year before that (BEFORE Richards' stupid contract.)

Look at Anaheim's checkers. Granted, it may not look like they overpaid because they just won a cup. But that's the thing you hope that the players you overpay bring their A game at the end (there was a reason they got the big contract), and win you a cup. Marchant's salary is too high for what he brings (again using the definition of overpaying as basically what they'd get as an RFA as a percentage of what they mean to the team), but in the end Anaheim was sure glad they had him. But Anaheim also had other factors. One was their GM took risks, he traded away what seemed like a boat load of young talent to bring in a Pronger - he didn't overpay in cash, but in the team's future? Selanee he took a risk on bringing him back, and it payed off huge. Niedermier, they were lucky Rob was currently playing there and Scott wanted to come.

This is a loose definition of overpaid, but if you use a stricter definition (market value), then we didn't overpay for Markov. But for anyone who says we overpaid for Markov, you need to use a loose definition, and using that, every team overpays at least a couple of players.

But if we don't overpay anyone, all that's going to happen is we're going to have a bunch of left over cap space, because we won't get any UFAs, we'll lose all our UFAs, and we'll have to walk away from potential arbitration awards for RFAs. Overpaying happens and needs to be looked at on a case by case basis on whether it is worth it. I think Koivu is overpaid, he has never been a point per game player (although I don't completely blame him for that), but I still think he's a good use of our money. I don't mind overpaying a player or two, it's these players who don't fit in here (Sammy) or the low end players (Begin, Dandenault, etc.) that bugs me. If we need to overpay a little to get Smyth or Blake or someone in here, that's fine by me, but the extra half a million here, half a million there, will hurt us. If we are going to overpay, make it for players that we need.

[Guest Lafleurs Guy]

This is a loose definition of overpaid, but if you use a stricter definition (market value), then we didn't overpay for Markov. But for anyone who says we overpaid for Markov, you need to use a loose definition, and using that, every team overpays at least a couple of players.

If Anaheim overpaid anyone, it isn't grossly. Todd Marchant's contract isn't going to break anyone and most of that team (the real superstars) are paid what their worth or less.

Yeah, they got lucky with Selanne (nobody expected him to be a superstar again), got lucky with Niedermayer who wanted to play with his little brother, and got lucky with Pronger who already had a sweet contract (and who wanted out of Edmonton and would only go to select markets). The point is though that the core of that team is not overpaid. That's why they were successful. If they wanted to eat Marchant's contract (if it isn't up this year) they can. They don't have any albatross that's going to kill them.

Markov isn't an albatross either, but we did overpay for him and our other players will use this as leverage in their negotiations. Nobody is going to point to Sammy's contract as leverage because they'll be laughed out of the room.

But if we don't overpay anyone, all that's going to happen is we're going to have a bunch of left over cap space, because we won't get any UFAs, we'll lose all our UFAs, and we'll have to walk away from potential arbitration awards for RFAs. Overpaying happens and needs to be looked at on a case by case basis on whether it is worth it. I think Koivu is overpaid, he has never been a point per game player (although I don't completely blame him for that), but I still think he's a good use of our money. I don't mind overpaying a player or two, it's these players who don't fit in here (Sammy) or the low end players (Begin, Dandenault, etc.) that bugs me. If we need to overpay a little to get Smyth or Blake or someone in here, that's fine by me, but the extra half a million here, half a million there, will hurt us. If we are going to overpay, make it for players that we need.

I'd prefer not to overpay at all. We aren't willing to overpay for Souray so I don't see why we should overpay for anyone. And again, I think we could've done a better job negotiating with Markov.

[Guest JL]

Read what I said again, I said if we overpay, it must be the right players. Slightly overpaying Samsonov and Kovalev would have been fine if they put up the stats they had in the past, but they weren't the right players for this situation we have here. We should have put that money in more gritty players who would work well under this coach.

By the way, the contracts didn't keep us from improving at the trade deadline, we had enough cap space (due to injuries during the season) to get any player we wanted.

But you have to overpay in a lot of cases. Otherwise you can't sign any good UFAs and you are most likely going to lose your own unless they take a good hometown discount. And every team does it, look at the top four teams this season, Anaheim didn't overpay any star, but some of their role players were somewhat overpaid, in Ottawa Redden comes to mind, he's good, but 6.5 million? In Detroit, didn't Datsyk just sign some ridiculous contract he didn't deserve? And Buffalo had Brierre's contract, which although worked out okay, was overpaid for when they signed it (it was an arbitrators decision, but they could have walked away). Overpaying happens, as that's the whole point of unrestricted free agency, by having 30 teams available bidding for you, you're going to get more than your regular value (what you'd likely get as a restricted free agent). So when a player is approaching UFA status, or is a UFA, they get overpaid.

The players who don't get overpaid as UFAs: guys like Jan Bulis. But we'll never improve signing players like that. If we want Smyth, Blake, Hannan, Stuart, Bertuzzi, Kariya, pretty much any of the good UFAs we've been talking about on here, we'll be overpaying.

If we wern't willing to overpay and Markov and Souray didn't take a couple million less to play here, that defense I listed would probably be what we'd have to go with. Maybe we could sign a Ninimaa type player, but we would need a guy like Dandenault on the top pairing, because we'd have to overpay for any top pairing (or second pairing for that matter) dman (and there's not many available to start with)

I've read the post and I still think that no matter who the player is, overpaying is overpaying, and there is no right player to overpay, we just pay them MORE. Overpaying a player is paying them too much to the point that it affects our ability to sign other players and we did just that with Markov.

I'm glad Markov is back, I'm not happy with the contract issued. But in a couple of years, when the salaries catch up to what we gave him, it will be within the norms. Until then, he's overpaid, right player or not.

[Guest Lafleurs Guy]

I've read the post and I still think that no matter who the player is, overpaying is overpaying, and there is no right player to overpay, we just pay them MORE. Overpaying a player is paying them too much to the point that it affects our ability to sign other players and we did just that with Markov.

I'm glad Markov is back, I'm not happy with the contract issued. But in a couple of years, when the salaries catch up to what we gave him, it will be within the norms. Until then, he's overpaid, right player or not.

Here's a thought... what if the salary cap comes down?

[Guest JL]

Here's a thought... what if the salary cap comes down?

That's true. We know that it will go up next year, but how can we predict the future?

[franck5890]

If the salary cap goes down, I'm sure there'd be some sort of roll-back in existing salaries (or their respective cap-hits).

[tmash]

If Anaheim overpaid anyone, it isn't grossly. Todd Marchant's contract isn't going to break anyone and most of that team (the real superstars) are paid what their worth or less.

They are still overpaying players. But no their stars aren't overpaid, but, as I said, they paid the price in draft picks and prospects to get Pronger. If you want to get, or even keep, good players you need to be willing to shell out the money, or else look for players who signed their deals 2 years ago (due to cap inflation these will normally be good deals by todays standards), and pay the price to trade for them.

Besides, watch Anaheim this offseason. They either need to re-sign Selanee or replace him (it sounds like he'll retire), and I have a feeling they'll be overpaying someone. And just wait until this current core's contracts are up. This year was very weird and we can't just cross our fingers and hope it happens to us.

In Tampa's case, overpaying isn't their problem, it's having 3 superstars. If you took 2 - 3 million away from Richards, they'd all be paid fairly, and would that maximum 3 million really solve their goaltending and depth crisis?

Markov isn't an albatross either, but we did overpay for him and our other players will use this as leverage in their negotiations.

Why? Looking at Kubina and Kaberle's contracts (somewhat similar players), and taking all factors into account, Markov's deal wasn't anything groundbreaking.

I'd prefer not to overpay at all. We aren't willing to overpay for Souray so I don't see why we should overpay for anyone.

Because Souray isn't hte type of player we need. If Souray wasn't on our team and we're looking forward to the offseason and asking "what should be go out and get", no one is going to say a PP specialist dman. We only want to re-sign him because he's already here. There is a big difference between overpaying for a player just because he's here and overpaying for the type of player who will really help your team.

Besides, if you prefer not to overpay at all, what happens this offseason if Ryder gets tough in negotiations, and if things really break down, he goes to arbitration? Say he's demanding an amount we don't like, and the arbitrator gives and amount we don't like (say maybe 4 - 4.5 million), do we just lose our top scorer for nothing over 1 million dollars?

Saying not to overpay anyone is a lot easier said than done.

[tmash]

Here's a thought... what if the salary cap comes down?

If it does, which is doubtful, it would be very minimal. So unless the GM has no contracts expiring at the end of the season (will never happen), it's not a bid deal. And there's buyouts and the minors as a worst case. The cap isn't going to suddenly drop 10 million dollars though.

[tmash]

I've read the post and I still think that no matter who the player is, overpaying is overpaying, and there is no right player to overpay, we just pay them MORE. Overpaying a player is paying them too much to the point that it affects our ability to sign other players and we did just that with Markov.

Wait, so you're against overpaying because it prevents us from signing other players, but what players are you planning to sign without overpaying?

The stance of most players becoming free agents is more or less "I want to stay here, but also want to get around my market value". We don't know for sure, but I have a feeling this is what Markov and Souray felt like. Now if you're not willing to overpay either of them, potentially we lose both. Now we can't replace them, because do you think Timonen or Hannan or anyone is going to come knocking on Gainey's door saying "I want to take 2 million less to play for the Habs"? Of course not, we'd have to overpay to replace them as well.

[Guest JL]

Wait, so you're against overpaying because it prevents us from signing other players, but what players are you planning to sign without overpaying?

The stance of most players becoming free agents is more or less "I want to stay here, but also want to get around my market value". We don't know for sure, but I have a feeling this is what Markov and Souray felt like. Now if you're not willing to overpay either of them, potentially we lose both. Now we can't replace them, because do you think Timonen or Hannan or anyone is going to come knocking on Gainey's door saying "I want to take 2 million less to play for the Habs"? Of course not, we'd have to overpay to replace them as well.

That's what we're asking Souray to do, no? Seriously, where do you take the $2 million less? Salo, Phillips, Brewer all signed for $3.5 million. Markov is a bit superior to Salo, one million more a year would have been pretty much market value. So I would have signed Markov for $4.5-4.75 million a year. This way, Souray could have signed for about $5 million and it would have been an easier sell. But now that we've shown Souray that we have too much money and threw $5.75 million at Markov, we come back and slap him in the face in offering him $4.5 million (if that's the true figure)? We can't have it both ways. We're either fair with both our UFAs or not.

[tmash]

That's what we're asking Souray to do, no?

Not asking him to. I've not once said that Souray is selfish if he goes somewhere else. Maybe not the total team player either. Gainey gave him what he felt he was worth to this team, if Souray chooses to walk, I don't blame him. While I think the contract is fair in terms of what he brings, it is far below his market value. I don't think anyone is asking him to do this.

Seriously, where do you take the $2 million less? Salo, Phillips, Brewer all signed for $3.5 million. Markov is a bit superior to Salo, one million more a year would have been pretty much market value.

Well for one that 2 million is what I feel we'd need to overpay Hannan or Timonen, but anyways ...

But you're basing this on players who aren't making market value. You're just looking for the deals that you like and not at the big picture. Markov's market value would have been what 1 single team was willing to offer him as a UFA. When you look at UFAs last year, add a bit for inflation, Markov's deal seems more or less like what he'd get market value.

So I would have signed Markov for $4.5-4.75 million a year.

That's great what you would of done, unfortunately a contract requires 2 signatures

We're either fair with both our UFAs or not.

Why's this? They are two completely different players. So we're not allowed to give more to the player we (by we I mean Gainey) feels is more important to this team? So I suppose we have to offer Ninimaa and Abby fair contracts as well, even though they aren't really where we should be putting our money?

[Guest Miltie01]

Markov has been signed to a contract at fair market value. It is no ones fault that 5.75 is what the market would bare.

He is not over paid, I am quite sure that Meehan told Markov he could make more using the TML signings a year ago.

That is the benchmark every agent for UFA Dmen will use. If McCabe makes that much, Markov is worth more.

To say Markov has been over paid when it comes to what the market will bare is using your heart instead of your head.

Unfortunately, this means Souray may not be offered enough to keep him from looking to get what the market will bare for his services.

This is just life in a Cap world, not a slap in Souray's face.

[Guest JL]

But you're basing this on players who aren't making market value. You're just looking for the deals that you like and not at the big picture. Markov's market value would have been what 1 single team was willing to offer him as a UFA. When you look at UFAs last year, add a bit for inflation, Markov's deal seems more or less like what he'd get market value.

Just as a FYI, I originally took 3 defensemen who were all scheduled to become UFAs who all chose to re-sign with their respective teams a few weeks before Markov signed with the Habs, not wanting to compare apples with oranges with players who signed last year in a different market all together. Whether you guys want to admit it or not, it's a fair comparaison as it related to the same variables of time, position, situation and salaries. Not picking to prove my point, simply making my point with those variables.

Markov has been signed to a contract at fair market value. It is no ones fault that 5.75 is what the market would bare.

He is not over paid, I am quite sure that Meehan told Markov he could make more using the TML signings a year ago.

That is the benchmark every agent for UFA Dmen will use. If McCabe makes that much, Markov is worth more.

To say Markov has been over paid when it comes to what the market will bare is using your heart instead of your head.

Unfortunately, this means Souray may not be offered enough to keep him from looking to get what the market will bare for his services.

This is just life in a Cap world, not a slap in Souray's face.

Then let him walk instead of overpaying. Haven't we learned anything from the Theodore, Kovalev and Samsonov situations, all of which seemed like a good idea at the time? Why to we need to keep gambling like that? Brian Burke doesn't!