Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens
Canadiens de Montreal

79 Andrei Markov 06-07


jl-1

Recommended Posts

It has to go both ways. We can't pay Markov $5.75 million and expect Souray to sign for less than that due to the market value.

I can't speak for Gainey, but I really don't think he expected anything from Souray (even without Markov's deal, I don't think Souray would be expected to sign for that low). The deal was probalby just to say "we want you here, but we just can't compete with what other teams will offer you", I'm sure Gainey knew Souray wasn't going to sign the thing

This was moreso a matter of Souray or Markov. Because both would fetch big money on the open market, and to keep them we likely had to be competitive, and we just can't put 11-13 million into those 2 players. So it came down to Souray vs. Markov, and Gainey picked Markov

Even in your conservative assessment, you are saying that Souray would fetch ½ million more than Markov so offering him $1.25 million less than Markov is a pure slap in the face.

But again, you don't just offer players what they're worth on the market when they aren't the piece you need, that's what causes overpaying or a team with no chemistry. Your right, that if we were serious about keeping Souray (which Gainey obviously wasn't), he should have been given a higher offer. But Gainey has every right to basically say "at that price, you just aren't the type of player we need right now", which is what he basically did. And I don't see that as a slap in the face. Souray and Gainey both know this is a business, Souray understands The Habs have a cap and can't just match what he'll get on the market, and Gainey understands Souray is human and is likely to leave for more money.

In the eyes of GMs around the league, Souray is a rarity, in the class of Jovanovski, Chara, McCabe, PP QBs with a great shot who can put up major numbers from the blue line, players who other teams need to make game plans around them. Can't say that they do that with Markov.

Right, and that's why the market value is so high for these guys. But that doesn't change the fact in my mind, that this isn't the type of player we need right now. You don't just give any player their market value, you need to be selective. Ottawa did it with Redden and Chara last season: both had similar values, they chose the one they felt fit in there better. Unless you're the Leafs, you can't just go around throwing money at every player who may help your team, managing requires being selective.

Basically it comes down to, we really had to let one of our defensman go, and I think Gainey made the right choice. I wish we could have gotten both for under 10 million dollars, I really do, but I just see no way it could have realistically happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest bigsby
Hey JL take abreak from all this contract stuff for a moment! ;). What are your thoughts on Markov being a potential mentor to Valentenko now that he's signed and Emelin (If we can get him over here). I really like the fact that Markov is here to help these two young guys along. Of coarse those guys are probablya few seasons away.

i don't think emelin is even a season away let alone a few. he really stepped up his game at the world championships when markov was injured. he's young and is still improving but he has a good shot at making the team. having markov around to help these guys is awesome!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Lafleurs Guy
I can't speak for Gainey, but I really don't think he expected anything from Souray (even without Markov's deal, I don't think Souray would be expected to sign for that low). The deal was probalby just to say "we want you here, but we just can't compete with what other teams will offer you", I'm sure Gainey knew Souray wasn't going to sign the thing

This was moreso a matter of Souray or Markov. Because both would fetch big money on the open market, and to keep them we likely had to be competitive, and we just can't put 11-13 million into those 2 players. So it came down to Souray vs. Markov, and Gainey picked Markov

But again, you don't just offer players what they're worth on the market when they aren't the piece you need, that's what causes overpaying or a team with no chemistry. Your right, that if we were serious about keeping Souray (which Gainey obviously wasn't), he should have been given a higher offer. But Gainey has every right to basically say "at that price, you just aren't the type of player we need right now", which is what he basically did. And I don't see that as a slap in the face. Souray and Gainey both know this is a business, Souray understands The Habs have a cap and can't just match what he'll get on the market, and Gainey understands Souray is human and is likely to leave for more money.

Right, and that's why the market value is so high for these guys. But that doesn't change the fact in my mind, that this isn't the type of player we need right now. You don't just give any player their market value, you need to be selective. Ottawa did it with Redden and Chara last season: both had similar values, they chose the one they felt fit in there better. Unless you're the Leafs, you can't just go around throwing money at every player who may help your team, managing requires being selective.

Basically it comes down to, we really had to let one of our defensman go, and I think Gainey made the right choice. I wish we could have gotten both for under 10 million dollars, I really do, but I just see no way it could have realistically happened.

I just don't get why we didn't deal Souray at the deadline. It made zero sense not to trade him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest A Semin
I just don't get why we didn't deal Souray at the deadline. It made zero sense not to trade him.

I agree, yes and no. It's a lot easier for you and me to say lets trade Souray and Rivet at the deadline, end-up with Dandenault and Bouillon as number 3 and 4 and say to the fans, sorry no playoffs this year. It's probably just too much pressure to takes and he was sure to lose if he would have made that move.

The medias and the fans really makes it tought for him....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Lafleurs Guy
I agree, yes and no. It's a lot easier for you and me to say lets trade Souray and Rivet at the deadline, end-up with Dandenault and Bouillon as number 3 and 4 and say to the fans, sorry no playoffs this year. It's probably just too much pressure to takes and he was sure to lose if he would have made that move.

The medias and the fans really makes it tought for him....

A few things though,

- I'm pretty sure, his team was out of a playoff spot at the time anyway.

- Huet was injured. Right there that's a built in excuse to do whatever you want to do.

- There was a good chance Souray would leave after the season was over. Probably happening now.

- We could've got a ton in return for him.

All he had to do was make the trade and explain things by blaming the situation on Huet's injury. He would've gotten off pretty easy. And as it is, he barely did anything at all at the deadline. If you're going to sell, SELL. If you're going to buy, BUY. He did neither and probably got more heat for that than anything.

I get what you're saying but I'm being consistent with what I said at the time. I felt it was a mistake then as I felt we'd miss the playoffs anyway and not dealing Souray would hurt us in the long run. Its looking like I was right on that one unfortunately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just don't get why we didn't deal Souray at the deadline. It made zero sense not to trade him.

I'm with you on that one. I bet we could have gotten two top round picks or equivalent. If we entered the draft with potentially 4 first round picks (which we really don't need with our depth), that would give us some good leverage in trying to get a player or prospect we could really use.

But I guess that's all in the past now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest A Semin
A few things though,

- I'm pretty sure, his team was out of a playoff spot at the time anyway.

- Huet was injured. Right there that's a built in excuse to do whatever you want to do.

- There was a good chance Souray would leave after the season was over. Probably happening now.

- We could've got a ton in return for him.

All he had to do was make the trade and explain things by blaming the situation on Huet's injury. He would've gotten off pretty easy. And as it is, he barely did anything at all at the deadline. If you're going to sell, SELL. If you're going to buy, BUY. He did neither and probably got more heat for that than anything.

I get what you're saying but I'm being consistent with what I said at the time. I felt it was a mistake then as I felt we'd miss the playoffs anyway and not dealing Souray would hurt us in the long run. Its looking like I was right on that one unfortunately.

Then again, people are never happy. They were not when we traded Rivet and at least got something. People whould have said the same things with Souray: we didn't have enougth for him, we should have keep him and signing him this summer (of course for cheap), we were still in the playoffs hunt,etc. Gainey felt he could not trade him, even if I think that's what he wanted to do. He probably wanted to show to the fans that he tried to put a playoff team on the ice and at the end of the season, that he tried to sign Souray.

Just look at the Markov signing. Gainey did what he thought was the best. He signed Markov and gave him big bucks and people are once again complaignin. He had two choices, let Markov walks or guive him what he wanted. He chose the second option, but the fans wanted an option who wasn't an option for him and that's signing Markov for less than 5,75.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Lafleurs Guy
Then again, people are never happy. They were not when we traded Rivet and at least got something.

I don't remember too many people complaining about that one. We completely ripped off San Jose on that trade.

People whould have said the same things with Souray: we didn't have enougth for him, we should have keep him and signing him this summer (of course for cheap), we were still in the playoffs hunt,etc. Gainey felt he could not trade him, even if I think that's what he wanted to do. He probably wanted to show to the fans that he tried to put a playoff team on the ice and at the end of the season, that he tried to sign Souray.

You're probably right. I wasn't one of those people though and I can only speak for myself. I argued at the time as I do now, that we should've traded him. If Souray wanted back, we always had the opportunity to sign him back as a UFA. As it is we'll lose him for nothing AND we missed the playoffs. I don't see how anyone can see that as being the right move hindsight or otherwise.

Just look at the Markov signing. Gainey did what he thought was the best. He signed Markov and gave him big bucks and people are once again complaignin. He had two choices, let Markov walks or guive him what he wanted. He chose the second option, but the fans wanted an option who wasn't an option for him and that's signing Markov for less than 5,75.

Yeah, we complained but I'm not overly angry with Bob on that one. I can at least see where he and others are coming from when they say that Markov is worth the money.

I can't say the same thing as with the Souray situation. It made no sense to me then and it makes even less sense to me now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest bigsby
A few things though,

- I'm pretty sure, his team was out of a playoff spot at the time anyway.

- Huet was injured. Right there that's a built in excuse to do whatever you want to do.

- There was a good chance Souray would leave after the season was over. Probably happening now.

- We could've got a ton in return for him.

All he had to do was make the trade and explain things by blaming the situation on Huet's injury. He would've gotten off pretty easy. And as it is, he barely did anything at all at the deadline. If you're going to sell, SELL. If you're going to buy, BUY. He did neither and probably got more heat for that than anything.

I get what you're saying but I'm being consistent with what I said at the time. I felt it was a mistake then as I felt we'd miss the playoffs anyway and not dealing Souray would hurt us in the long run. Its looking like I was right on that one unfortunately.

i understand your point but i'm pretty sure we were in a playoff spot at the deadline. that makes a huge difference. you don't trade your leading goal scorer (at the time) when you are holding on to playoff spot. if we were out of a spot we were out by a point or so but not by much. yes, we hadn't been playing well but how do you explain selling when you're right in the race? it did come down to one game in the end and that put gainey in a really tough position. i think he was right to show faith in our team. i understand the argument to build for the future (rather than making the playoffs and going out in the first round) i just don't think the deadline was the right time for gainey to make that move. i think there would have been hell to pay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't speak for Gainey, but I really don't think he expected anything from Souray (even without Markov's deal, I don't think Souray would be expected to sign for that low). The deal was probalby just to say "we want you here, but we just can't compete with what other teams will offer you", I'm sure Gainey knew Souray wasn't going to sign the thing

This was moreso a matter of Souray or Markov. Because both would fetch big money on the open market, and to keep them we likely had to be competitive, and we just can't put 11-13 million into those 2 players. So it came down to Souray vs. Markov, and Gainey picked Markov

If that's the case, why didn't Gainey trade Souray at the deadline then? I really thought that Gainey was serious in re-signing Souray, I just think he shot himself in the foot in giving too much to Markov, not leaving enough for Souray...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Lafleurs Guy
i understand your point but i'm pretty sure we were in a playoff spot at the deadline.

You sure about that? I thought we beat the Leafs to get within a couple of points for a spot but were still on the outside looking in.

that makes a huge difference. you don't trade your leading goal scorer (at the time) when you are holding on to playoff spot. if we were out of a spot we were out by a point or so but not by much.

I still would've done it. Huet was out, the team was slumping badly and we had zero chance at a cup. Add to that Souray's imminent departure and it was a no brainer.

If I'm the GM I make the move and tell the truth. This move was made for the long term betterment of the team. And if that doesn't work, blame it on Huet's injury. Either way, make the trade.

yes, we hadn't been playing well but how do you explain selling when you're right in the race? it did come down to one game in the end and that put gainey in a really tough position. i think he was right to show faith in our team. i understand the argument to build for the future (rather than making the playoffs and going out in the first round) i just don't think the deadline was the right time for gainey to make that move. i think there would have been hell to pay.

How much hell was there to pay after we missed the playoffs? How much hell will there to be to pay when Souray leaves? Moreover, how much hell was there to pay considering Gainey dealt away Rivet but not Souray? Moreover, if you're going for the playoffs... then GO FOR IT. The guy did nothing to improve our chances at the deadline. At least if he was a buyer I could see where he was coming from but he deals Rivet but not Souray? That made ZERO sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that's the case, why didn't Gainey trade Souray at the deadline then? I really thought that Gainey was serious in re-signing Souray, I just think he shot himself in the foot in giving too much to Markov, not leaving enough for Souray...

Well I think he should have, but the reason he didn't was likely keeping Souray was sort of our rental, we were still in a playoff hunt, and Gainey didn't want to just basically say "we're giving up". I assume that's why he didn't deal him, not because of bargaining this offseason. I didn't agree with teh choice, but I understood it.

Anyways, I'm not sure that the 4.5 million rumoured offer was necessarily a result of giving all our money to Markov. I think, and this is just my opinion, but I think that it had more to do with Gainey not wanting to give Souray a lot more than he felt he was worth into a contract that could hurt us now and in the future. Of course, if Markov left, we'd be desperate for Souray, but had Markov gotten a million less, I honestly don't think Souray would be getting a nicer offer. The extra 2 million on top of what he was offered that it would likely take to keep Souray could be spent elsewhere, regardless of how much we signed Markov for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You sure about that? I thought we beat the Leafs to get within a couple of points for a spot but were still on the outside looking in.

I think you're right, I think that was around the time we had just taken the big drop.

I still would've done it. Huet was out, the team was slumping badly and we had zero chance at a cup. Add to that Souray's imminent departure and it was a no brainer.

I get why Gainey didn't do it, but I felt that what we could have gotten for Souray would be great in creating some sort of trade, either at the last deadline or around now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest habinto
:lol: I get why Gainey didn't do it, but I felt that what we could have gotten for Souray would be great in creating some sort of trade, either at the last deadline or around now.

Maybe no one offered anything good!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest A Semin
Timonen was signed to a 6 year deal with a 6.3 million cap hit per year. Was Markov overpaid at 5.75 million per year?

No and that's why I've said wait untill Timonen and Rafalski sign and you will see.

Six years for 6,3? It's huge!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Banishing Blade

Anyone remember several pages ago when I said I'd hold judgment on Markov's contract until someone else was signed?

Well, thanks to the Timonen signing, I have little to no problems with this contract anymore. A sad price to pay, for sure, but if Timonen's getting $6.30 million per season and is four years older than Markov (and I'd give Markov the edge over him as a player), then I can't complain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest hatethoseleafs
Timonen was signed to a 6 year deal with a 6.3 million cap hit per year. Was Markov overpaid at 5.75 million per year?

It will be interesting to see the reaction of those who said we overpaid big time for Markov. Anybody out there still disapointed we didnt play hardball with Markov and let him test the market??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Lafleurs Guy
Timonen was signed to a 6 year deal with a 6.3 million cap hit per year. Was Markov overpaid at 5.75 million per year?

Just because Timonen was signed for something stupid doesn't mean that the Markov signing was good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Lafleurs Guy
Anyone remember several pages ago when I said I'd hold judgment on Markov's contract until someone else was signed?

Well, thanks to the Timonen signing, I have little to no problems with this contract anymore. A sad price to pay, for sure, but if Timonen's getting $6.30 million per season and is four years older than Markov (and I'd give Markov the edge over him as a player), then I can't complain.

Jovo was paid 7 million. Richards close to 8. Neither of those made the Markov deal any better or worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest hatethoseleafs
Just because Timonen was signed for something stupid doesn't mean that the Markov signing was good.

It doesnt justify the money but it prooves that there are other GM's out there willing to dish out those huge amounts if you dont step up and make your own deal.If we had not offered Markov the bucks then rest assured we would be looking for a replacement at this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Habsfan_11
Just because Timonen was signed for something stupid doesn't mean that the Markov signing was good.

Well a player's market value is what the teams are willing to pay. How do we define "overpay"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Timonen was signed to a 6 year deal with a 6.3 million cap hit per year. Was Markov overpaid at 5.75 million per year?

Let's not forget that the contract issue (regarding Timonen and Markov) works both ways. Timonen's contract was padded by the fact that Markov's was already out there, regardless of whether Markov's deal is good or not.

As predicted, Markov's contract played a huge part in Timonen's newly signed contract, as it had become the new bargaining bar for 50 points defensemen. Sad really...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...