The guy don't understand that the best case scenario in this contract Markov would be playing like he was before his injuries and in today market the value of a 7,5 millions defenseman. Which make in the best case scenario a 7 millions cap hit reduction over the 4 years. He also don't seem to understand that even if Markov in on the LTIR well the Habs have the money to pay the salary for player to replace him. He also fail to remember that even in one of the two terribles full of injuries seasons of Markov in one of them he played 45 games and had 34 pts which is about the production of a 4 millions dman now.
They would have had more of a point with the Cole signing but Markov ? lol. Sure it's a risk due to his history with injuries but if he's healthy he's worth his contract. The writer must be an Habs or Markov hater or something.
People laughed at the Habs the last time they signed Markov too...I think it has more to do with the fact that there's still a majority of people who really don't know how good Markov is.
We were talking about this in another thread before, and this part shows this guy pretty much knows nothing: Let's hope for the Canadiens' sake that Markov ends up making this contract look, well, acceptable, because that's as good as it could possibly look.
This write-up on Markov is so ridiculous I don't know where to start...Here it goes:
"The Canadiens signed Markov under the assumption that his last two years could never be repeated" -no
"and that he is still a consistent 50-60 point per season player." -yes, among other things
"That might prove to be true, but this contract only makes sense under that best case scenario."
-why? unless the writer is unfamiliar with the fact Markov eats up first D minutes, plays against the other team's top line, etc...
"You can find examples of this throughout pro sports, where a player has a terrible year or two before his contract expires and a team, seeing his potential, decides to sign him as if those years never happened."
-If by "terrible year" he means "injured", he's right. If by "potential", he means "not injured", he's right again.
"Sometimes it works out, but it seems like most bad contracts are born as a result of someone not adequately weighing the possibility that things might not work out perfectly."
-If the writer thinks there wasn't a discount in consideration "things might not work out perfectly", he's either unfamiliar with the market for an elite puck-moving D that plays in all situation and eats up huge minutes or he's unfamiliar that a healthy Markov falls in that category.
People laughed at the Habs the last time they signed Markov too...I think it has more to do with the fact that there's still a majority of people who really don't know how good Markov is.
This.
I laugh when I see other fans trying to describe Markov's play, usually calling him a defensive liability or average in his own zone.
And let's not forget Pierre McGuire's assessment of the Markov-Komisarek relationship, ie that Andrei owed more to Komi than vice versa. Markov's been making average d-men obscenely rich for the past decade.
this guy clearly is pandering to get extra hits on his article, and let's face it, we've now got a thread about it and hundreds of posters who will click on the link to see it for themselves.
I think his assessment is way off and a little all over the place. Not just on the Markov signing, although I do feel it was a riskier signing than most. He has missed a lot of hockey, but the analysis in this article is strange. He has Gagne at 2 yrs 3.5 per as one of the top signings, but Markov with 1 extra year and 2m more as the worst.
I think it would be safe to assume if both play an entire season, Markov would be worth at least twice as much as Gagne. Just one of many flaws in his article imo. To me the risk with Markov isn't in his play, it will be whether or not he can play all year and if he gets a long term injury, we put him on LTIR and are allowed to spend over the cap to make up the difference, limiting the risk a bit. If he plays, he'll be great, like always.
The only bad part with LTIR is it isn't retroactive, so you can only go over the cap by the amount remaining of Markovs cap hit, so if he gets hurt and takes a month to be properly diagnosed and then placed on LTIR we lose that month towards our spending and the likeliness of someone being available to use the extra money aren't good to begin with, but it does allow a little wiggle room.
At least that's my understand of LTIR, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
Last edited by habsjunkie2*: 07-19-2011 at 06:19 PM.
this guy clearly is pandering to get extra hits on his article, and let's face it, we've now got a thread about it and hundreds of posters who will click on the link to see it for themselves.
This post actually stopped me from clicking on the link. Thank you Miller Time.
If Markov stays healthy this is a great signing...this guys stupid. Andrei get's between 45 and 60 points every full season he plays, he's also great in his own zone, barley makes mistakes, and if he does he quietly makes up for it.
Perhaps they were sleeping during the Florida Buying spree.
