He offered Hamrlik a 1 year deal, so it's not like no offer was made. Gill accepted a 1 year deal, Hamrlik could have done the same. PG could have offered two, but with a new CBA coming in, that may have swayed PG away from giving him two years. The defence is now younger, and at some point you have to turn the page on guys nearing the end of their career, even it means short term growing pains for younger replacements.
Yeah, Hamrlik is done. Playing 21 1/2 minutes on the best team in the league.
The defence is now younger, and at some point you have to turn the page on guys nearing the end of their career, even it means short term growing pains for younger replacements.
That's if you believe that Diaz, Emelin or Weber eventually turn into tough minute dmen. IMO that's not a safe bet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price
I like Hamrlik and all but for anything more than a 1 year deal it's a bad gamble on a 35+ contract. Markov on the other hand is a game changer, he makes everybody else better, regardless of bad luck with injuries you HAVE to to what needs to be done to keep him. His 3 year deal is only a 1 year deal if he blows out his knee again as they'll sign somebody else next summer and put him on LITR. They have the deep pockets to pay the salary above the cap.
It seems to me as if the Habs were just plain wrong about Markov's health. The longer he's out, the more likely it is that he's not the same player when he returns. He might play out the 3 years with reduced effectiveness, or, as you say, be put on LTIR for the rest of his contract. Even if that happens, that's one year where the team is likely to miss the playoffs (unacceptable), and two more where the offseason cap is affected (I believe LTIR cap relief is applied retroactively, not immediately).
Yeah, Hamrlik is done. Playing 21 1/2 minutes on the best team in the league.
Didn't say he was done, said a 1 year contract (which they offered) is a better move long term vs. a two year. But how many years of quality does he have left 5 - 10 or 1 - 2? He could have signed a 1 year deal this year, and then a 1 year deal the following year just as easily, if his steady play maintained for another season and playoff. I think the player was just as involved on the decision as was the club. He turned down the deal, asked for two, and the club didn't want another 35+ contract on the books, understandable. Playing in Washington as a compliment to a D core at 37 is also different than being the workhorse carrying the load on a team that doesn't play run and gun.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roulin
That's if you believe that Diaz, Emelin or Weber eventually turn into tough minute dmen. IMO that's not a safe bet.
It's not a safe bet at all, the easy thing to do would have been to give in and sign him for two years... but they felt they could bring in some youth and overcome the loss. If they chose wrong, well at least they're young players are gaining experience.
That's if you believe that Diaz, Emelin or Weber eventually turn into tough minute dmen. IMO that's not a safe bet.
Wait, do you mean that none of them will turn into long minutes Dmen ??
what do you mean by tough minute dmen ?
Isn't Weber allready playing around 23 mins a game ? of course with an uncomplete roster. But in some years, i am convinced he can fulfill the 25 min. role. And all 3 have a serious potential to be top 4 at least!
Wait, do you mean that none of them will turn into long minutes Dmen ??
what do you mean by tough minute dmen ?
Isn't Weber allready playing around 23 mins a game ? of course with an uncomplete roster. But in some years, i am convinced he can fulfill the 25 min. role. And all 3 have a serious potential to be top 4 at least!
Its not so much the number of minutes but the matchups. Hamrlik can match top lines no problem, not so much for the youngsters.
Its not so much the number of minutes but the matchups. Hamrlik can match top lines no problem, not so much for the youngsters.
Well Diaz or Weber did it. in the WC and in the Olympic games ... without looking to much out of place !!! and against the top of Canadian, Russian, American, Swed .... name them players.
I can't talk for Emelin ... but for the 2 swiss it is sure.
That's if you believe that Diaz, Emelin or Weber eventually turn into tough minute dmen. IMO that's not a safe bet.
It seems to me as if the Habs were just plain wrong about Markov's health. The longer he's out, the more likely it is that he's not the same player when he returns. He might play out the 3 years with reduced effectiveness, or, as you say, be put on LTIR for the rest of his contract. Even if that happens, that's one year where the team is likely to miss the playoffs (unacceptable), and two more where the offseason cap is affected (I believe LTIR cap relief is applied retroactively, not immediately).
The type of surgery he has shouldn't affect his effectiveness, the rest of the join should move just as before. NFL running backs get this type of surgery and don't really lose any speed.
Well Diaz or Weber did it. in the WC and in the Olympic games ... without looking to much out of place !!! and against the top of Canadian, Russian, American, Swed .... name them players.
I can't talk for Emelin ... but for the 2 swiss it is sure.
While he's playing well now Weber struggled in the Olympics...
The type of surgery he has shouldn't affect his effectiveness, the rest of the join should move just as before. NFL running backs get this type of surgery and don't really lose any speed.
I really hope you are right. I'm just as worried about the missed time as I am about his knee. Markov is turning 33 in December, he hasn't played a game since turning 32. At an age when many players start to decline, a year off the ice doesn't help. Anyway, fingers crossed, I will be overjoyed if he comes back soon, as the same great player he used to be.
