I doubt Fleury becomes available. He's HUGE (as Trump would say) in the locker-room...PIT has said many times over the years that he's untouchable for that reason. I could see Fleury-Murray 65/35 split next year, then Murray-Fluery 50/50 the year after that. Fleury will be 33 at that point and may be OK with 40/60 then sign on for another 1-2 years at 30/70 splits until he's 35/6 at which point he may retire...
- mventres

That sounds perfect, but with the expansion draft, sure would be crumby losing one of them for nothing.

My biggest "fear" with goaltending going forward is the very strong possibility of an expansion draft, and most discussion of when there is one teams will only be able to protect 1 goaltender.

So that means that should the Flames go out and spend the resources on a goalie with the some long term intent (Andersson, Bishop, Gibson, Murray, etc), that it pretty much means that there will be a very strong possibility of losing a player like Gilles (or McDonald depending on when the draft happens).

Or if they decide that Gilles would be the goalie to protect, then they could lose this goalie that they go and spend assets on now. And those assets are going to be significant to acquire one of those more proven starters.

I get the idea of getting a real player in place now, but this to me reinforces the idea of getting a spot holder for a couple years until the team can be sure what Gilles or McDonald are going to be.
- dal_johnson

What you have to realize is that the expansion draft which seems more and more likely that it's only ONE team means that they have a pick of a goaltender amongst all THIRTY teams (3 goalies sure....3/30)
Yes there is a chance they could pick from you, but you'd be assuming a guy like Gillies is their top pick amongst all other young and coming goaltenders? We're all super high on him, but there are tons of goalie prospects that are similarly projected to do well...

I would protect our #1 goalie whomever that may be (so if it's gonna be like an Andersson or Bishop, etc...)
maybe you protect the younger up and comer if we end up more with a guy like Reimer

That sounds perfect, but with the expansion draft, sure would be crumby losing one of them for nothing.
- Yeah...Baby

Hahaha read this article...written in 2015, it's funny who they predicted the Flames would protect lol

http://thehockeywriters.c...n-draft-whos-unprotected/

F: Jiri Hudler, Mikael Backlund, Michael Frolik, Joe Colborne, Drew Shore, Paul Byron, Lance Bouma, David Jones, Bill Arnold

D: Dougie Hamilton, Mark Giordano, TJ Brodie, Kris Russell, Dennis Wideman

G: Jonas Hiller

Notable Exempt: Johnny Gaudreau, Sean Monahan

Notable Unprotected: Matt Stajan, Mason Raymond, Brandon Bollig, Ladislav Smid, Deryk Engelland, Karri Ramo

Hahaha read this article...written in 2015, it's funny who they predicted the Flames would protect lol

http://thehockeywriters.c...n-draft-whos-unprotected/

F: Jiri Hudler, Mikael Backlund, Michael Frolik, Joe Colborne, Drew Shore, Paul Byron, Lance Bouma, David Jones, Bill Arnold

D: Dougie Hamilton, Mark Giordano, TJ Brodie, Kris Russell, Dennis Wideman

G: Jonas Hiller

Notable Exempt: Johnny Gaudreau, Sean Monahan

Notable Unprotected: Matt Stajan, Mason Raymond, Brandon Bollig, Ladislav Smid, Deryk Engelland, Karri Ramo
- cpltanto

Mason Raymond unprotected!! This writer clearly doesn't know anything about the flames!

Hahaha read this article...written in 2015, it's funny who they predicted the Flames would protect lol

http://thehockeywriters.c...n-draft-whos-unprotected/

F: Jiri Hudler, Mikael Backlund, Michael Frolik, Joe Colborne, Drew Shore, Paul Byron, Lance Bouma, David Jones, Bill Arnold

D: Dougie Hamilton, Mark Giordano, TJ Brodie, Kris Russell, Dennis Wideman

G: Jonas Hiller

Notable Exempt: Johnny Gaudreau, Sean Monahan

Notable Unprotected: Matt Stajan, Mason Raymond, Brandon Bollig, Ladislav Smid, Deryk Engelland, Karri Ramo
- cpltanto

With the two talked about expansion protection scenarios (7 forwards, 3 Defence, and 1 goalie or 8 players and 1 goalie) who the Flames protect is really pretty simple.

7 forwards: Monahan, Gaudreau, Bennett, Backlund, Frolik, Assumed top 6 UFA this off season (I hope Okposo or Lucic), and best option of prospects / younger players (Poirier, Shinkaruk, Klimchuk, Grant, Ferland, Colborne).
3 Defence: Giordano, Brodie, Hamilton
1 Goalie: #1 Starter if they get one this off season, or Gilles.

All other youth would be exempt based on what year of their contract they would be in (Andersson, Kylington, McDonald, Jankowski, this years 1st round pick, Pollock, Mangiapane).

I really don't foresee any real alternative to those protections.

With the two talked about expansion protection scenarios (7 forwards, 3 Defence, and 1 goalie or 8 players and 1 goalie) who the Flames protect is really pretty simple.

7 forwards: Monahan, Gaudreau, Bennett, Backlund, Frolik, Assumed top 6 UFA this off season (I hope Okposo or Lucic), and best option of prospects / younger players (Poirier, Shinkaruk, Klimchuk, Grant, Ferland, Colborne).
3 Defence: Giordano, Brodie, Hamilton
1 Goalie: #1 Starter if they get one this off season, or Gilles.

All other youth would be exempt based on what year of their contract they would be in (Andersson, Kylington, McDonald, Jankowski, this years 1st round pick, Pollock, Mangiapane).

I really don't foresee any real alternative to those protections.
- dal_johnson

"Choose to protect either nine forwards, five defensemen, and one goalie or seven forwards, three defensemen, and two goalies"

"Players on entry-level contracts are automatically exempt, and every existing team will have exactly two players selected"

Bennett and some of those other players will be exempt

"Choose to protect either nine forwards, five defensemen, and one goalie or seven forwards, three defensemen, and two goalies"

"Players on entry-level contracts are automatically exempt, and every existing team will have exactly two players selected"

Bennett and some of those other players will be exempt
- cpltanto

Not saying that isn't true, but that is completely different then was being said after the GM meetings last month:

"While nothing is set in stone until the NHL Players’ Association agrees on the details, we have a rough idea of how the process would work. As reported by TSN’s Frank Seravalli, each of the existing NHL teams would stand to lose one player if the league expands by one team and two if the league expands to include Las Vegas and Quebec City. Teams can protect (a) seven forwards, three defensemen and one goaltender or (b) eight skaters at any position and one goaltender."

First-and second-year players on entry-level contracts would be exempt from the expansion draft. It remains to be seen if no-movement clauses would give veterans automatic amnesty. Every team would have to expose at least 25 percent of its salary cap, while the expansion squad(s) would have to reach a salary floor. Hello, high-profile money dumps. That situation would grant existing NHL teams the equivalent of compliance buyouts – especially if no-movement clauses are nullified."

Any of the entry players that I listed will be past that second year of their entry level from there.

Not saying that isn't true, but that is completely different then was being said after the GM meetings last month:

"While nothing is set in stone until the NHL Players’ Association agrees on the details, we have a rough idea of how the process would work. As reported by TSN’s Frank Seravalli, each of the existing NHL teams would stand to lose one player if the league expands by one team and two if the league expands to include Las Vegas and Quebec City. Teams can protect (a) seven forwards, three defensemen and one goaltender or (b) eight skaters at any position and one goaltender."

First-and second-year players on entry-level contracts would be exempt from the expansion draft. It remains to be seen if no-movement clauses would give veterans automatic amnesty. Every team would have to expose at least 25 percent of its salary cap, while the expansion squad(s) would have to reach a salary floor. Hello, high-profile money dumps. That situation would grant existing NHL teams the equivalent of compliance buyouts – especially if no-movement clauses are nullified."

Any of the entry players that I listed will be past that second year of their entry level from there.
- dal_johnson

Would this not make Gillies exempt?

Would this not make Gillies exempt?
- K-man25

Because of his age (coming out of College) then at the end of next season he will be done his second year of his entry level, and now considered a third year. Therefore he wouldn't be exempt.

I had to look that one up to be sure as I was hoping he would be exempt.

Because of his age (coming out of College) then at the end of next season he will be done his second year of his entry level, and now considered a third year. Therefore he wouldn't be exempt.

I had to look that one up to be sure as I was hoping he would be exempt.
- dal_johnson

I believe this to be true as well. When he signed with CGY he was assigned to the big club and spent the rest of year here - year 1... Theoretically.

Treliving addressed this on garbage bag day....he said he believes he would be exempt but that they need clarification on it.

I guess we'll find out.

I believe this to be true as well. When he signed with CGY he was assigned to the big club and spent the rest of year here - year 1... Theoretically.

Treliving addressed this on garbage bag day....he said he believes he would be exempt but that they need clarification on it.

I guess we'll find out.
- TandA4Flames

We can only hope BT is right. Would make a big difference in who they chase.