No Canadiens for Markov
Stu Cowan of the Montreal Gazette: Montreal Canadiens GM Marc Bergevin has said that they are not interested in bringing back free agent defenseman Andrei Markov.
“Two years ago, his contract was due, we made an offer,” Bergevin told RDS’s Marc Denis on a special edition of “Table d’hôte” that aired Saturday night. “Efforts were made to sign it and he chose another direction that was KHL. It was two years ago.
“Since that time, things have changed,” the GM added. “The player has aged. The organization has changed direction. We have a lot of young people growing up. I will name them. The (Noah) Juulsen, the (Victor) Mete, the (Josh) Brook … (Alexander) Romanov, who will be here in a year. Then, we really want to give our young people a chance.”
The 40-year old Markov has only played with Canadiens – 990 regular season games in total.
Agent Allan Walsh has said he’s talked to “numerous teams” who have questions about conditioning. Markov has spent the past two years in the KHL.
Notes on Maple Leafs and Marner
Maple Leafs Hot Stove: Elliotte Friedman on Sportsnet 960 on the three-year contract offer that is on the table for Mitch Marner, and about the other RFAs.
“I think there is a three-year deal on the table right now, but the numbers… It’s not going to be 3×4 anymore for those guys. I think the problem with that situation is what the third year is because, for example, say it’s a three year deal and the third year is over $10 million. And then the player takes the qualifying offer and he walks right to unrestricted free agency. Why would teams want to do that?”
Pierre LeBrun on TSN 1050 earlier this week on the Toronto Maple Leafs and Mitch Marner, and if it’s term or money that is holding a deal up.
“80% of are stuck on term… If you want to talk about why teams are mad at Toronto, they hate the five-year precedent. They either want to go long or short, but not five.
I think the Marner one is not on term. The two sides have talked about a bunch of different years and both sides would do a three-year deal. But we know why they haven’t signed: They can’t agree on money.”