|
|
Post by Cranky on Feb 12, 2002 0:06:42 GMT -5
AS was not going to make any personnel changes before the Olympic break, however, I believe that he is going to bring up Hainsy, Hossa and Ward after the break. Cits play six more games during the break.
The only thing I do not understand are the semantics involved in clearing waivers. However, if AS can get ANY decent return for Boullion, Robidas and Traverse, I would be happy to see them go. They do not belong in the NHL, of at least, they do not belong on our team. Perhaps Minnesota.
After tonight’s loss, I wonder what AS has up his sleeve. One thing I have noticed about AS. He will give someone a million chances to prove himself. Months went by before he dealt Rosie. Again with Salvage. His trades are slow in comming and methodical, but they do happen.
If everyone on this board had his fill of the defensman/TeleTubbies, or the lack of size, do you think AS is not aware of the problems?
|
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Feb 12, 2002 9:06:37 GMT -5
You read it here first. Hainsey will get the call up, but it will be Markov who gets demoted.
I got good money says Markov won't be with the organization in 6 months.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Feb 12, 2002 10:11:50 GMT -5
BC,
If Markov can not learn what is expected from a defenseman then whatever they do with him is fine by me.
Kaberle in Toronto is of similar build and "talent". Watch him play defense properly and then watch Markov. Kaberle still gets his points and is considered on ofthe better young defenseman.
This is not the Russian Elite League or the AHL. This is the NHL and worse, it is the Eastern Conference. Defenseman have to play defense first and provide offence secondly. There are dozens of examples of defenseman having loooong careers in the NHL because they knew the simple rules. Richardson is one example.
Hab's had plenty of defenseman who knew their roles but where not offensivly gifted. Harper, Laperriere, Green and many others. The joke was that Terry Harpers shot killed more fans then landed on the net.
Do I want them to lose Markov ? NO. But if the dummy does not get the message of what is expected of him, well..........
|
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Feb 12, 2002 10:42:41 GMT -5
I have no problem with trying to teach Markov some defence, none at all. In fact, I fully expected him to be benched following his play against Toronto.
What bothers me though, is the double standard of it all. We are not putting Markov in a position where he can succeed, and then complaining when he doesn't.
Markov is, and has a reputation for being, a powerplay specialist. So who plays the powerplay? 3rd line checking center Joé Juneau, stay-at-home defenceman Craig Rivet, little Stephane Robidas, and no-shot Patrick Traverse. Even when Markov gets to play the point, its only the second pairing, for the last 25-30 seconds.
I am not saying Markov should be given free reign, but he should also be given some latitude to do what he does best. Otherwise its just a wasted talent. Markov is not a great defensive defenceman, nobody would argue that, but he is a good offensive defenceman. Why isn't he being used for that?
Stephane Robidas is -22. Let that sink in for a little bit. -22. The standard argument has been "well, he's on his wrong side." Well, what is better? Robidas on his wrong side at -22, or Markov on his good side, with a questionable defence? I'd go with Markov. At least there is some potential for some offence.
Montreal scored 2 goals last night. That equalled their total for the previous three games. We have one of the best goaltenders in the NHL right now. If ever there was a goalie who could make a defence look good, it is Theodore. Let Markov learn. What is the worst that can happen? He plays as bad as Robidas does on his wrong side? That's whats happening now. On the other hand, Markov might learn some defence, if he is used properly, and he can help the team score some goals, again, if he is used properly.
I like Stephane Robidas, just as I like Franky Bouillon. But I think everyone agree their upsides aren't nearly as good as Markov's is. Markov can be a special player, but that's not going to do us any good if he does it playing for Atlanta, or for Moscow Dynamo. Will Robidas be a special player?
The question is then, given that Markov's and Robidas' performances on the ice are equal, why are we going with the lesser talent?
Mark my words. We are going to lose Markov.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Feb 12, 2002 11:18:05 GMT -5
I wouldn't argue that Markov is probably being mismanaged, however from the tone of people's comments it would appear nonetheless that Markov's stock HAS indeed fallen. It is clear that Markov is at best a one-dimensional offensive dman with above average puck skills and below average skating ability; certainly not the second coming of Phil Housley or Sergei Zubov as some folks were projecting. I agree that Markov will probably be playing someplace else next year, but I don't know how big a loss that is given his somewhat limited upside.
I could be wrong, but I just don't think Markov will make it. At his size, you need to be an EXCEPTIONAL skater to compensate and Markov is not. I remember when Petr Svoboda broke in with Habs (all 160 pounds of him!!) and he was immediately a productive player because he knew how to play defense, and more importantly, he was a great skater. In fact I always thought Svoboda had more offensive skills than he ever showed, but he was definitely one of the most fluid skaters I've ever seen.
|
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Feb 12, 2002 16:35:01 GMT -5
AS was not going to make any personnel changes before the Olympic break, however, I believe that he is going to bring up Hainsy, Hossa and Ward after the break. Cits play six more games during the break. The only thing I do not understand are the semantics involved in clearing waivers. However, if AS can get ANY decent return for Boullion, Robidas and Traverse, I would be happy to see them go. They do not belong in the NHL, of at least, they do not belong on our team. Perhaps Minnesota. After tonight’s loss, I wonder what AS has up his sleeve. One thing I have noticed about AS. He will give someone a million chances to prove himself. Months went by before he dealt Rosie. Again with Salvage. His trades are slow in comming and methodical, but they do happen. If everyone on this board had his fill of the defensman/TeleTubbies, or the lack of size, do you think AS is not aware of the problems? I want Hainsey up ASAP.Enough with these midgets and big stiffs that don't hit.As for Hossa,you need to make room up front. |
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Feb 12, 2002 16:36:25 GMT -5
You read it here first. Hainsey will get the call up, but it will be Markov who gets demoted. I got good money says Markov won't be with the organization in 6 months. I also believe Markov will be gone.And he will come back to bite us for years to come.Teams will want this guy baddly.Can we at least wait to see if Ron can QB a PP before trading Markov? |
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Feb 12, 2002 16:41:58 GMT -5
I have no problem with trying to teach Markov some defence, none at all. In fact, I fully expected him to be benched following his play against Toronto. What bothers me though, is the double standard of it all. We are not putting Markov in a position where he can succeed, and then complaining when he doesn't. Markov is, and has a reputation for being, a powerplay specialist. So who plays the powerplay? 3rd line checking center Joé Juneau, stay-at-home defenceman Craig Rivet, little Stephane Robidas, and no-shot Patrick Traverse. Even when Markov gets to play the point, its only the second pairing, for the last 25-30 seconds. I am not saying Markov should be given free reign, but he should also be given some latitude to do what he does best. Otherwise its just a wasted talent. Markov is not a great defensive defenceman, nobody would argue that, but he is a good offensive defenceman. Why isn't he being used for that? Stephane Robidas is -22. Let that sink in for a little bit. -22. The standard argument has been "well, he's on his wrong side." Well, what is better? Robidas on his wrong side at -22, or Markov on his good side, with a questionable defence? I'd go with Markov. At least there is some potential for some offence. Montreal scored 2 goals last night. That equalled their total for the previous three games. We have one of the best goaltenders in the NHL right now. If ever there was a goalie who could make a defence look good, it is Theodore. Let Markov learn. What is the worst that can happen? He plays as bad as Robidas does on his wrong side? That's whats happening now. On the other hand, Markov might learn some defence, if he is used properly, and he can help the team score some goals, again, if he is used properly. I like Stephane Robidas, just as I like Franky Bouillon. But I think everyone agree their upsides aren't nearly as good as Markov's is. Markov can be a special player, but that's not going to do us any good if he does it playing for Atlanta, or for Moscow Dynamo. Will Robidas be a special player? The question is then, given that Markov's and Robidas' performances on the ice are equal, why are we going with the lesser talent? Mark my words. We are going to lose Markov. Yup,it seems that Therrien doesn't think much of Markov's offensive ability.Please,tell me why he was on the ice in T.O with 10 seconds to go in the 2nd period? and not on the numerous PP's in that game? something is obviously crooked here.As you said Markov, is not a great defensive d-man,but he is learning and he has improved since last year.So why blame him for a loss when it was his first big mistake in weeks and the goal didn't even cost us the game like the Traverse blunder did last night? On top of that,EVERY d-man was brutal in that game.Bouillon,Robidas,Rivet were all terrible.Dykhuis was slightly better and Quintal was the only one who was 'good'. |
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Feb 12, 2002 22:50:02 GMT -5
Why do we want to get rid of Markov and why would some other team give us a great package to get him. We need to play Markov and give him a chance to make our team. When his value is established we can consider trading him for a prospect who will help us or better still keep him for the potential he has. Markov for Alexeev, drool.................
|
|
|
|
Post by Vichab on Feb 13, 2002 2:28:34 GMT -5
Markov is still just a kid. Giving up on him now would be foolish. He clearly has more skills than our other Dmen except maybe Brisebois who i believe is also prone to the odd defensive lapse. Our other Dmen are a dime a dozen which is why we have so many of them and can't give them away. If as we all agree Dmen take time to develop and God knows we are being patient with some of these slow learners, Souray, Traverse, etc. why would we give up on a kid who I believe is our third best Dman right now. If we give up Markov it better be for something good in return. Meantime let the kid play on the PP and I'll tolerate his defensive mistakes while he learns. Markov is the least of our problems as is his salary.
|
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Feb 13, 2002 16:08:50 GMT -5
Why do we want to get rid of Markov and why would some other team give us a great package to get him. We need to play Markov and give him a chance to make our team. When his value is established we can consider trading him for a prospect who will help us or better still keep him for the potential he has. Markov for Alexeev, drool................. Oh Baby,Nikita Alexeev would be a terrific pickup for our team.A potential power forward and only 20 years old.I know the Habs wanted him baddly in the 2000 draft and would have drafted him if he was available when they were picking. |
|
|
|
Post by HFTO on Feb 13, 2002 17:04:40 GMT -5
Seems to me we,ve tolerated a defenceman for quite sometime who's gonna earn 4+ mill next year.Giving up on Markov would be a huge mistake.If we can live with Breeze-bye why can't we be patient with Markov.Mr theerien is using him as a scapegoat because he knows his neck is on the line even with a contract extention in his pocket.
HFTO
|
|
