Frolik has a puke worthy contract for an enigmatic guy who isn't any more of a top 6 lock than Rusty. I'd rather just let Fleury go in the expansion draft than take on a bad salary at a position that is pretty well stocked - they need a left winger much more than a right.

And there's literally no way Hornqvist gets traded. None. And why would they? He was a huge asset in the playoffs. Not just goals scored, but how many big goals did the Penguins score because he was screening the goalie? Three of Sheary's four goals featured a Hornqvist scree, IIRC.

Hornqvist > Frolik and it's not close.
- hardnosed

Fleury has to be protected. We wouldn't lose him in the expansion draft. We would lose Murray.

Trade Fleury for the worst of Calgary's second round picks (55) and Kylington and be done with it. Frolik, I like his talent and skill level a lot, but you have to wonder why he never produces even close to that skill level. Hornqvist >>>>>> Frolik, I agree.

It doesn't worry me at all - the worst case scenario is that they have Fleury and Murray next year, which is a luxury they can afford because they don't really need to spend any more money this offseason.

In fact, it's weird to me that they won a Cup because of goalie depth and youthful exuberance and then the offseason hits and we're in a big hurry to get rid of the goalie depth so we can acquire wastoid UFA replacements for the young guys that just played huge roles in that Cup win.
- hardnosed

You do understand that the worst case scenario is the Pens have to protect Fleury and Murray gets sniped in the expansion draft, right? Looking at Murray along with the other pens exposed in a 7+3 scenario it appears to be a no-brainer

It doesn't worry me at all - the worst case scenario is that they have Fleury and Murray next year, which is a luxury they can afford because they don't really need to spend any more money this offseason.

In fact, it's weird to me that they won a Cup because of goalie depth and youthful exuberance and then the offseason hits and we're in a big hurry to get rid of the goalie depth so we can acquire wastoid UFA replacements for the young guys that just played huge roles in that Cup win.
- hardnosed

I was originally in the elite goalie tandem camp, but now its very likely any player with a NMC is auto protected, so the idea that we can keep Fleury one more year and then expose him can't be done. Right now, my primary concern is how to keep Murray for the long haul.

Our necissary corse of action will become more clear once expansion and the concrete rules are announced officially at the NHL Awards show.

Fleury has to be protected. We wouldn't lose him in the expansion draft. We would lose Murray.

Trade Fleury for the worst of Calgary's second round picks (55) and Kylington and be done with it. Frolik, I like his talent and skill level a lot, but you have to wonder why he never produces even close to that skill level. Hornqvist >>>>>> Frolik, I agree.
- Oneonta Penguin

I don't think you can get Kylington and a second. Maybe if you give them Pouliot as a potential Kylington replacement, but I think they see him in their present and future top-4.

when you think of Murray as your starter next year just think of the faith and hope we had in Hedberg or Lalime... or more recently Andrew Hammond... This is all crazy talk to let an all star goalie go to keep an average goalie in Murray.
- vanhileman

It's not crazy talk. I get where you are coming from, but we just has a 22-year old kid win us a Stanley Cup in net. He has the composure of a 35-year old veteran and is a calm, cool cat in net. He doesn't let a bad goal impact him, like MAF does.

Love MAF to death, but its time to move him. We need cap room, plus would you rather lose the goalie who won you the Cup for nothing in the expansion draft next year? 99.9% of the fans wouldn't.

Now if there's a contender with a starter that's injured (such as the Habs this season - remember their start to the season??), then that's a new ballgame next season before any trade is completed.
- Aussiepenguin

Now that's good thinking. He's a guy whose value could actually be more at the deadline than now. Why trade him for spare parts or draft picks now when you could make a move at the deadline, possibly to pick up whatever pieces are needed for the Cup run.

Ryan Wilson: Trading Marc-Andre Fleury
Trading Marc-Andre Fleury
- Ryan_Wilson

I dont see Buffalo trading for another Goaltender with a high cap hit. Murray spent a first round pick on Lehner. He is going to live or die with him.

I don't think you can get Kylington and a second. Maybe if you give them Pouliot as a potential Kylington replacement, but I think they see him in their present and future top-4.
- jmatchett383

Then take a third or fourth and Kylington. Calgary doesn't need DP. If not, then a late second for Fleury and that would be it. He isn't worth a first round pick ... he isn't worth anything in a package for the #6 overall pick, unless you are giving up both Sprong and DP.

Frolik would be a nice add to this team. He is a good 2 way player who can play with speed and chip in offensively. He gives you more of that depth in the forward position that was a huge factor in winning the Cup, plus frees up 1.4M in cap space. He would also makes Kunitz expendable.

Love MAF to death, but its time to move him. We need cap room, plus would you rather lose the goalie who won you the Cup for nothing in the expansion draft next year? 99.9% of the fans wouldn't.
- Oneonta Penguin

I'd rather have another year of Fleury in case of injury or sophomore slump for Murray and then lose him in the expansion draft than to rush and trade him for middling players on big contracts like Frolik.

Now that's good thinking. He's a guy whose value could actually be more at the deadline than now. Why trade him for spare parts or draft picks now when you could make a move at the deadline, possibly to pick up whatever pieces are needed for the Cup run.
- hardnosed

I agree. Say a team like LA has Quick go down, or any playoff-contending team has their starter go down long-term. Maybe you can grab a 2nd and/or decent prospect at or before the TDL for a guy who's proven he can carry the load. The kicker is that he'd have to drop his NTC and not take it with him.

If I was running Calgary I would say I will give you a 6th rounder...take it or leave it

I think the Pens should still do that trade for the cap relief and to protect Murray

Judging by the comments, I would assume Pens fans will be underwhelmed with the return if Fleury is traded without salary retention.

Then take a third or fourth and Kylington. Calgary doesn't need DP. If not, then a late second for Fleury and that would be it. He isn't worth a first round pick ... he isn't worth anything in a package for the #6 overall pick, unless you are giving up both Sprong and DP.
- Oneonta Penguin

I know they don't need DP right now, but if you're ripping Kylington away, DP is their possible replacement (although on a lower-tier on the development curve). I think just one of their later 2nds gets it done and call it a day.

Now that's good thinking. He's a guy whose value could actually be more at the deadline than now. Why trade him for spare parts or draft picks now when you could make a move at the deadline, possibly to pick up whatever pieces are needed for the Cup run.
- hardnosed

Because waiting on a juicy opportunity to open up is a dangerous game to play. If that doesn't happen and we end up getting stuck with Fleury, then we lose Murr to expansion.

I'd rather have another year of Fleury in case of injury or sophomore slump for Murray and then lose him in the expansion draft than to rush and trade him for middling players on big contracts like Frolik.
- hardnosed

I'm not a fan of Frolik when you look at the production. We are in agreement. Fleury for Frolik isn't really that great of a deal for us. So, you would rather lose Murray in the expansion draft for nothing so you can keep Fleury in case of injury or sophomore slump? We wouldn't lose Fleury in that draft ... it would be Murray and that would be worse than trading MAF for Frolik. Neither good, but one certainly worse.

Anaheim is in the same situation we're in. They're not going to trade for a goalie when they one too many already.
- Victoro311

I know nothing of their goalies though....are they any good? Or as good as MAF?

I'd rather have another year of Fleury in case of injury or sophomore slump for Murray and then lose him in the expansion draft than to rush and trade him for middling players on big contracts like Frolik.
- hardnosed

Dude MAF is auto protected until proven otherwise.

You do understand that the worst case scenario is the Pens have to protect Fleury and Murray gets sniped in the expansion draft, right? Looking at Murray along with the other pens exposed in a 7+3 scenario it appears to be a no-brainer
- YuenglingJagr

Not knowing the small print as yet, what happens if we extend Muzza with a full NMC? Who do we have to protect, the limited or the full? The longer contract or he who has had the contract the longest?

I'd rather have another year of Fleury in case of injury or sophomore slump for Murray and then lose him in the expansion draft than to rush and trade him for middling players on big contracts like Frolik.
- hardnosed

Teams will be required to protect any players on contract carrying a NMC, and they will count against the number of players that the team is allowed to protect.

There is no "exposing Fleury in the expansion draft" He has to be protected if he remains on the Penguins until the end of next season

I know nothing of their goalies though....are they any good? Or as good as MAF?
- sammy87

Yes. Andersen is as good as MAF but six years younger and Gibson = Murray = Vaselevskiy. Anaheim needs to move Andersen or risk loosing Gibson, and Andersen is leagues more attractive than Fleury due to his RFA status/youth. Andersen being on the market makes me nervous.

I'd rather have another year of Fleury in case of injury or sophomore slump for Murray and then lose him in the expansion draft than to rush and trade him for middling players on big contracts like Frolik.
- hardnosed

For MAF's career, he will demand a trade if they want to keep him. He will be 33 or 34 when his contract expires....If he spends a year as a backup here thats how he will be perceived and he will not get another contract after this one. His agent will be pushing the agenda...he gets a cut of his next contract after all.

Not knowing the small print as yet, what happens if we extend Muzza with a full NMC? Who do we have to protect, the limited or the full? The longer contract or he who has had the contract the longest?
- Aussiepenguin

Can't give players clauses until their RFA years run out.

Not knowing the small print as yet, what happens if we extend Muzza with a full NMC? Who do we have to protect, the limited or the full? The longer contract or he who has had the contract the longest?
- Aussiepenguin

Fleury has a limited NTC. Is there such a thing as a limited NMC?

But what you said is actually hilariously interesting. However, it would not work, as players cannot get NMCs until their RFA years are up

I know nothing of their goalies though....are they any good? Or as good as MAF?
- sammy87

They have Gibson and Andersen, both good young (22 and 26) goalies. They will have to decide which one is there future here soon, or risk losing one for nothing.

There is no "exposing Fleury in the expansion draft" He has to be protected if he remains on the Penguins until the end of next season
- YuenglingJagr

Actually, players can waive their NMC and be exposed to the expansion draft.