Come on Flames fans....the Pens are in a tough spot but if you think they are gonna trade MAF for Wideman and change you're crazy! IMO they would rather lose him in the expansion draft for nothing than get royally bent over in a trade like that!
- The-O-G

Its just so hard to take anything you post seriously with Bieb as your avvie...

Klimchuk and the 35th...

Come on Flames fans....the Pens are in a tough spot but if you think they are gonna trade MAF for Wideman and change you're crazy! IMO they would rather lose him in the expansion draft for nothing than get royally bent over in a trade like that!
- The-O-G

the issue is murray is the one that would be lost, not fleury.

even still. its not worth taking wideman back.

Its just so hard to take anything you post seriously with Bieb as your avvie...

Klimchuk and the 35th...
- geta02it

THat's me......

Your proposal is much more realistic! Klimchuk could use a fresh start and would be a solid prospect for Pitt.

the issue is murray is the one that would be lost, not fleury.

even still. its not worth taking wideman back.
- stayinthefnnet

Right.....even still though as you say, they would look like clowns getting Wideman and a third!

Wideman can help us get some angst out at the expense of the zebras! lol
But seriously...Wideman is not a good fit in the Burgh due to being slow for this D.

You can't tell me its not worth considering. You're looking at this through a very narrow lens.

Murray could fetch at least a top tier young player and probably more. Fleury is good enough to win a cup with. Murray could solve all of our roster holes and still have a fine goaltending situation for 5 years or more.

Its not just Fleury vs. Murray. Hypothetically, its Murray and no assets OR Fleury and a young stud top 6 winger/top 4 defenseman + pick + prospect.
- YouMeAndDupuis9

I did consider it, but just see it as such a poor option. And I don't think I'm using a narrow lens. I feel like I'm using a wide lens.

Option 1: Fleury, at age 31, for 2 more years at $5.75M. Maybe 3 or 4 more years after that at near the same price, but max of 6 years left in his career. Likely to physically decline towards the end of that 6 year period as well, due to age.

Option 2: Murray, at age 22, for 1 more year at $628k plus 4 cost controlled yrs of RFA + maybe a 10 year career after that; 15 years total. Use the savings from Murray's contract to get a few UFA's & picks from Fleury to draft a few more players.

I feel like people are arguing "Let's keep Halak & dump Price" from the 2010 Habs except 'Price' (ie, Murray this year) won the Cup that year. Or "Despres for Lovejoy was a great decision."

A third round pick and a crap defenseman that doesn't provide much of anything to Pittsburgh for a starting goalie that could do so for the next three or four years. LOL. Someone needs a reality check. Fools think Pittsburgh would be interested in Wideman.

Let's just see Calgary fan ... Fleury for a second and a decent prospect or two seconds. That is much cheaper than the alternatives that could come from Anaheim or TB. You would be forking over the 6th overall pick plus, if its Bishop and a nice package if its Anderssen from Anaheim. Then again, I guess James Reimer could be your answer. He won't get you anywhere good. Won't cost you a thing in a deal, but $4 million plus for a multi-year contract and he isn't good. Fleury's cost is a lot cheaper. People with brains know this.
- Oneonta Penguin

Again, I didn't say that is what Fleury is worth but the reality of the expansion draft and other factors really drops his value. I'm just saying that as the Flames GM, I wouldn't offer much more. Why would I? there are lots of options out there. It may take more, but I would certainly try all other options 1st.

But hey, thanks for the insult. Maybe read all posts and understand the slightest bit of economics before you call people brainless. People with brains understand what I'm saying. Go watch your Barney video's and see if you can get passed 2+2=4.

After hearing GMJR's comments today... It just seems like he's thinking MAF will be on his way out. He certainly didn't say anything definitive, but you could get the feeling he doesn't see another way with the expansion draft next year.
- madmike71

I personally think the writing is on the wall. It will be an interesting situation this summer regarding MAF.

I personally think the writing is on the wall. It will be an interesting situation this summer regarding MAF.
- acdc1206

His body language said it all during game 6. I always liked the guy and hope he succeeds wherever he goes.

I'm starting to think that whatever MAF trade ends up happening will come out of complete left field and will be something no one thought of. The most predictable trade the The Old Man has made was for Phil Kessel and even that one a lot of people didn't see coming in that form.

His body language said it all during game 6. I always liked the guy and hope he succeeds wherever he goes.
- sammy87

I agree.

I'm starting to think that whatever MAF trade ends up happening will come out of complete left field and will be something no one thought of. The most predictable trade the The Old Man has made was for Phil Kessel and even that one a lot of people didn't see coming in that form.
- Victoro311

I'm thinking the same.

I'm starting to think that whatever MAF trade ends up happening will come out of complete left field and will be something no one thought of. The most predictable trade the The Old Man has made was for Phil Kessel and even that one a lot of people didn't see coming in that form.
- Victoro311

Yeah I can see that definitely exciting times ahead.

I'm starting to think that whatever MAF trade ends up happening will come out of complete left field and will be something no one thought of. The most predictable trade the The Old Man has made was for Phil Kessel and even that one a lot of people didn't see coming in that form.
- Victoro311

I can see MAF dealt with BB, DP, Cole, Fehr all being pieces in a bigger deal.

Nothing is set in stone for expansion draft. Don't even know if/when going happen. Also, no one knows if Murray is for real. I get it, he has been great in AHL and pretty good in NHL. Still not enough to convince management to trade Fleury..... Especially for Frolik.....

Of course this is my opinion but the entire idea seems ludicrous.

I personally think the writing is on the wall. It will be an interesting situation this summer regarding MAF.
- acdc1206

Would either Bozak, Lupul or Matt Hunwick plus a B-level prospect be enough to get MAF?

I can see MAF dealt with BB, DP, Cole, Fehr all being pieces in a bigger deal.
- sammy87

Why so? the teams that need tendies don't need any of those you listed. Should MAF be moved its him and a pick for (all thats been said in the previous 400+ posts)...

I did consider it, but just see it as such a poor option. And I don't think I'm using a narrow lens. I feel like I'm using a wide lens.

Option 1: Fleury, at age 31, for 2 more years at $5.75M. Maybe 3 or 4 more years after that at near the same price, but max of 6 years left in his career. Likely to physically decline towards the end of that 6 year period as well, due to age.

Option 2: Murray, at age 22, for 1 more year at $628k plus 4 cost controlled yrs of RFA + maybe a 10 year career after that; 15 years total. Use the savings from Murray's contract to get a few UFA's & picks from Fleury to draft a few more players.

I feel like people are arguing "Let's keep Halak & dump Price" from the 2010 Habs except 'Price' (ie, Murray this year) won the Cup that year. Or "Despres for Lovejoy was a great decision."
- s0rcerer1984

So option 1, you get 6 years of solid goaltending at a higher (albeit fair value) contract and also have someone like Sam Bennett added to the roster + potentially more. When else are we going to get a chance to land another player of that level? Particularly with no drop in production at the position we are trading away from?

And This Sam Bennett (or equivalent) will also be cost controlled for 4 years and may be the first line LW for the duration of Sid's career.

You aren't putting enough value into the return for Murray, imo. I'm not saying we need to do one or the other, just that it merits discussion.

So option 1, you get 6 years of solid goaltending at a higher (albeit fair value) contract and also have someone like Sam Bennett added to the roster + potentially more. When else are we going to get a chance to land another player of that level? Particularly with no drop in production at the position we are trading away from?

And This Sam Bennett (or equivalent) will also be cost controlled for 4 years and may be the first line LW for the duration of Sid's career.

You aren't putting enough value into the return for Murray, imo. I'm not saying we need to do one or the other, just that it merits discussion.
- YouMeAndDupuis9

Isn't Bennett a C?

Isn't Bennett a C?
- sammy87

He can play wing as well. I'd be thoroughly surprised if we were able to pry him away somehow

Nothing is set in stone for expansion draft. Don't even know if/when going happen. Also, no one knows if Murray is for real. I get it, he has been great in AHL and pretty good in NHL. Still not enough to convince management to trade Fleury..... Especially for Frolik.....

Of course this is my opinion but the entire idea seems ludicrous.
- kgrpitt

Which is why it hasn't happened yet but if the rules are as we expect then holding Fleury is risky. If he doesn't waive or you cannot find a team he would waive to then you HAVE TO lose Murray to expansion.

Also if Murray does decrease then trading him now is the only other option. Before he dips and you cannot get max value.

So option 1, you get 6 years of solid goaltending at a higher (albeit fair value) contract and also have someone like Sam Bennett added to the roster + potentially more. When else are we going to get a chance to land another player of that level? Particularly with no drop in production at the position we are trading away from?

And This Sam Bennett (or equivalent) will also be cost controlled for 4 years and may be the first line LW for the duration of Sid's career.

You aren't putting enough value into the return for Murray, imo. I'm not saying we need to do one or the other, just that it merits discussion.
- YouMeAndDupuis9

Exactly. Both options have merit though. Almost can't lose. Lol

He can play wing as well. I'd be thoroughly surprised if we were able to pry him away somehow
- Victoro311

Yeah you're not getting him in a deal centered around MAF. Now if they were to move Malkin that is the type of player + I would base the deal around.

Exactly. Both options have merit though. Almost can't lose. Lol
- Steven_Dean

The issues the Pens have this off season are really good problems to have.

Nothing is set in stone for expansion draft. Don't even know if/when going happen. Also, no one knows if Murray is for real. I get it, he has been great in AHL and pretty good in NHL. Still not enough to convince management to trade Fleury..... Especially for Frolik.....

Of course this is my opinion but the entire idea seems ludicrous.
- kgrpitt

I'm sure this has been beat to death in the last 25 pages but if you don't trade MAF now, then IMO you're accepting the loss of Murray next summer to expansion.

The likelihood of a playoff team needing a starting goalie at the deadline next year is minimal at best.... so if he's not traded by the draft or at some point this summer, you might pigeon hole yourself into taking a 4th for him and nothing more to avoid losing Murray.

Also you can't really find out what you have in Murray unless you play him..... so unless Fleury is content with getting 30 starts this season as a backup, he's going to want out ASAP.