View Single Post
Old
03-03-2013, 12:44 AM
  #992
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
You're still only thinking about THIS season... take a longer term view. Even if you're right and it messes us up... so what? It's worth it if we get a player who can be help us for the next decade.

Losing Markov isn't going to send us back to the stone age. Hell, we might lose him anyway if that knee goes away.
it's not just "this" season...

it's the direct impact this season and next, which also includes the impact Markov's presence and the teams results will have on a roster that right now has several key young players who should be integral parts of any future success.

There is no guarantee that whatever pick(s) we would end up getting for Markov will turn into successful players. there is risk involved.

I'm firmly supportive of management making decisions that contribute to a long-term vision of sustained success.

but that is not a simple equation of "trade veteran for draft pick + time = success for a decade".

it's a balancing act, and with the knowledge the team/organization has today, they have to weigh out the potential costs/potential benefits (and both are just that, "potential"), and then act on their "best guess" for overall success.

I think you underestimate both the potential benefits and costs of removing a player of Markov's impact from a team that is
A- enjoying immediate success
B- has several key young players in place who have little/no taste of playing for a successful NHL team and/or playoff run (Pacioretty, Eller, Diaz, Gally, Galch, Emelin have a COMBINED 7 NHL playoff games... Subban & Price have 21 & 26...)

This team with Markov is far more likely to advance past the first round then without him, let alone making a deeper run.

again, no guarantee that keeping markov = 2nd round or better, but I'm sure you'd agree that the odds go up significantly... and then there's next year.

these are factors that weigh on the "don't trade Markov" side, and should not be ignored/dismissed so casually.


none of this is to say that you don't trade Markov no matter what, just that the return has to be of the "can't say no" variety, as opposed to "best offer we could find".

what lottery bound team is going to give up a chance at one of this year's "can't miss" top-prospects for 1 season of Markov?

Miller Time is offline