Game 5 cost him the chance at the Smythe. Thought we were all okay with that and focused more on the Kessel snub?
- Guile

I firmly believe that if it was Fleury in net who turned in the exact same performance Murray did in the finals, his name wouldn't even be mentioned for the Smythe. A lot of the Murray for Smythe love stemmed from him playing great for a rookie. Murray was really good, but he wasn't Smythe level.

Do you buy glue bulk in advance or on impulse when you're jonesing ?
- golfingsince

Who's this nut?

I firmly believe that if it was Fleury in net who turned in the exact same performance Murray did in the finals, his name wouldn't even be mentioned for the Smythe. A lot of the Murray for Smythe love stemmed from him playing great for a rookie. Murray was really good, but he wasn't Smythe level.
- Victoro311

Oh, being the rookie 100% gave him a boost, and it should have. Had Chicago went deep, Panarin likely would have gotten a boost. Same if Edmonton or Buffalo did with their rookies.

I think the Crosby vs Toews comparison is always going to be there...and there will always be a debate about who is better. Leadership wise, given the way the season played out and the things Crosby has done in the last 12 months, I would say he and Toews are very close on the intangibles part of the list. Points wise, we all know there's really no contest.

Malkin...well...I love Geno...warts and all...but Toews leadership is well above what Geno has displayed to this point in his career. That's not really a knock on Geno, Toews is one of the best.
- icedog97

Could not agree more with this. Well said.

Once you start using leadership as a stat... you lose any credibility. Its not a stat, these are (frank)ing professional athletes. If being a cheerleader when off the ice is that needed for your team, YOUR TEAM IS A (frank)ING JOKE. Yes, I will say it, if the Blackhawks direly need a cheerleader aspect from a player, they shouldn't be playing.


Good thing people with brains in the sport don't count that as a stat.
- Guile

'I don't have rational or factual data to backup why Toews is better, but he definitely has a better personality! "

Could not agree more with this. Well said.
- Trammelt

10.5 mil for a cheerleader who puts up about 60 points... epic value

'I don't have rational or factual data to backup why Toews is better, but he definitely has a better personality! "
- YouMeAndDupuis9

Woah... if we are going personality, he is MILES above Malkin. Malkin got the personality of a tree. But they said leadership

1. Murray's performance so far has been good but Lalime. Hedberg, Carey and many other hard really good starts to their careers but weren't able to sustain.
2. Murray's RFA status is as big of an unknown as anything, there have been no comparable of other goaltenders who have been starters coming of of the ELC contracts, if he does continue and is the stud many believe he already is then there's no way to determine what his cost will be after this year and it's very feasible that if he's that good it could take Fleury money or more to retain him.
3. Murray is our starter in your eyes, there's no clue how things progress going forward, GMJR has already said Fleury starting next year is very possible and if they both remain and he outperforms Murray in camp and the preseason there's no reason to think he won't be the starter if he's playing better.
4. Murray is definitely young but the controllable part is not accurate, yes they will have the ability to qualify him but that doesn't guarantee his cost or his term, it also doesn't guarantee another team doesn't try to steal him through an offer sheet, the only guarantee they get with him being an RFA is that they will be compensated if he goes somewhere else but the compensation is pointless if it leads to them losing both Murray and Fleury.
5. Just proves that your stances comes from an anti-fleury bias
6.How can we possibly know what the time frame for a player drafted at #6 is when we have no clue who that player is? Getting a contribution year 1 is probably unlikely but many top 10 picks make impacts quicker than 2-3 years and there's a much higher chance of not getting a bust at #6 than there is with the 2nd or 3rd round pick we would get for Fleury. There's also no guarantees that the added cap space from moving MAF will yield any upgrades either so if Murray isn't the star goalie you think he is then we have an issue in goalie and a potential for no upgrades to the roster and even if he is the star goalie you beilieve he is that makes it that much tougher/expensive to reatin him next year.

As I said, pros & cons to both sides, only closed minded people can't see that.
- jaydogg1974

I'm very closed minded on this subject for the above reasons I put. I think trading Murray is absolutely dumb for the above reasons I mentioned. To be honest, I'm not reading most of this post, because we are on total opposite sides. The top two guys in this draft are immediate impacts. 3-whatever will take some time. And if 6th pick never pans out, which has happened, then you are left with what, when Calgary would reap every benefit by taking a more proven commodity in the NHL and just won the Cup. I have no anti-bias on Fleury. I have one of his jerseys. That said, we have a better suited goalie to move us forward; a younger one, a more calm one and a cheaper one. I recognize that it is smarter to keep Murray and deal Fleury for the above reasons. Oh, forgot to mention ... Murray didn't have two concussions in two months.

If a second or third rounder guy busts that we get back for dealing Fleury, it isn't as big of a problem than trading Murray, a younger, cheaper and dare I say better solution, for the number six guy to bust. And, there have been several top 10 guys busting in drafts. We might be sitting on one right now in DP.

By the way ... what do the following people have in common - Brent Connolly (2010), Nikita Filatov (2008), Sam Gagner (2007), Gilbert Brule (2005), Brian Finley (1999), Rico Fata (1998), Daniel Tkaczuk (1997), Boyd Devereaux (1996), Steve Kelly (1995), Scott Sissons (1990), Adam Bennett (1989), Scott Pearson (1988), Dave Archibald (1987)

10.5 mil for a cheerleader who puts up about 60 points... epic value
- Guile

He didn't hit 60 this year.

I firmly believe that if it was Fleury in net who turned in the exact same performance Murray did in the finals, his name wouldn't even be mentioned for the Smythe. A lot of the Murray for Smythe love stemmed from him playing great for a rookie. Murray was really good, but he wasn't Smythe level.
- Victoro311

I would go as far as saying the opposing goalies in the last three rounds were better than Murray. They didn't make the difference for them obviously, as much as Murray wasn't the real difference maker for the Pens. He played on average good enough, had one great game, at least two that could be described as bad and the rest good enough for a playoff caliber goalie. Not Conn Smythe caliber.

He didn't hit 60 this year.
- Oneonta Penguin

I really shouldn't have to point out... I used the word about... do I?

I firmly believe that if it was Fleury in net who turned in the exact same performance Murray did in the finals, his name wouldn't even be mentioned for the Smythe. A lot of the Murray for Smythe love stemmed from him playing great for a rookie. Murray was really good, but he wasn't Smythe level.
- Victoro311

IMO, I agree with Guille. Pains me to say this. If Murray did what he was supposed to do, he very well could have been the Conn Smythe winner. That performance cost him dearly for that trophy ... not that he cares.

I really shouldn't have to point out... I used the word about... do I?
- Guile

Good point.

Woah... if we are going personality, he is MILES above Malkin. Malkin got the personality of a tree. But they said leadership
- Guile

But Malkin's wife hotter than Towes' SO.

Gotta be worth something.

But Malkin's wife hotter than Towes' SO.

Gotta be worth something.
- NJPensfan

That falls into the intangible category, again

Well, expansion's getting announced at 4pm today, so if it turns out all NMCs are autoportected, there is no longer a rational argument to keeping MAF.
- Victoro311

Unless the expansion draft is scheduled for tomorrow it changes nothing, even when the official rules are announced and it does become known that all NMC are autoprotected, the draft is still more than a year away, GMJR has even directly acknowledged that there is more than enough time to wait and make a decision.

Nothing rational about buying out a No. 1 goalie when you don't even have a backup to your brand new starting goalie who 2 months ago was nothing more than a backup himself.
- NJPensfan

You don't buy him out now. You buy him out next March after you see what you have in your cost controlled guy, and if MAF doesn't waive his no trade to be exposed to Vegas, AND he refuses to be traded in March as a cap move. Who knows, Murray may regress substantially (doubtful) and then you expose him in the draft instead.

MAF is known universally as a good guy, by the way. I doubt you would get to such a brink with him, even though this is a business. Pens have treated him well over the years, and he has treated them well. I'm sure they can come to some sort of understanding.

Woah... if we are going personality, he is MILES above Malkin. Malkin got the personality of a tree. But they said leadership
- Guile

Really they're the same thing to me, a players personality and his leadership don't have bearing on anything tangible. Effort on the ice matters, and all these players we are speaking of work hard.

Example: Kane is the opposite of 'leadership' as is being defined in this argument. He assaults women, and still really doesn't affect the on-ice play of the Blackhawks.

Unless the expansion draft is scheduled for tomorrow it changes nothing, even when the official rules are announced and it does become known that all NMC are autoprotected, the draft is still more than a year away, GMJR has even directly acknowledged that there is more than enough time to wait and make a decision.
- jaydogg1974

damn straight

People are going to like "their guy". I get it. I don't hold it against a fan for loving their 3 time cup winning captain. On the surface, the offensive talent is not close. It's hard to give Toews an edge because of "leadership". Leadership doesn't mean squat if the puck isn't going in the net.

To your other point... Yes, the Hawks are finding out what it's like to construct a team with two really big contracts. We've been down this road.
- madmike71

Yes, but we weren't dumb to give two guys 10.5 million each, especially one of them is a big cheerleader and a 58-point guy. Toes shouldn't be making north of 7.5 IMO.

Yes, but we weren't dumb to give two guys 10.5 million each, especially one of them is a big cheerleader and a 58-point guy. Toes shouldn't be making north of 7.5 IMO.
- Oneonta Penguin

That is hilarious. That's what I call him to a buddy who is a Hawks fan.

Yes, but we weren't dumb to give two guys 10.5 million each, especially one of them is a big cheerleader and a 58-point guy. Toes shouldn't be making north of 7.5 IMO.
- Oneonta Penguin

The 10.5 isn't as bad as how they both have their cap numbers peak at 13.8 next season and the season after. Mismanagement of cap budget much there?

I'm very closed minded on this subject for the above reasons I put. I think trading Murray is absolutely dumb for the above reasons I mentioned. To be honest, I'm not reading most of this post, because we are on total opposite sides. The top two guys in this draft are immediate impacts. 3-whatever will take some time. And if 6th pick never pans out, which has happened, then you are left with what, when Calgary would reap every benefit by taking a more proven commodity in the NHL and just won the Cup. I have no anti-bias on Fleury. I have one of his jerseys. That said, we have a better suited goalie to move us forward; a younger one, a more calm one and a cheaper one. I recognize that it is smarter to keep Murray and deal Fleury for the above reasons. Oh, forgot to mention ... Murray didn't have two concussions in two months.

If a second or third rounder guy busts that we get back for dealing Fleury, it isn't as big of a problem than trading Murray, a younger, cheaper and dare I say better solution, for the number six guy to bust. And, there have been several top 10 guys busting in drafts. We might be sitting on one right now in DP.

By the way ... what do the following people have in common - Brent Connolly (2010), Nikita Filatov (2008), Sam Gagner (2007), Gilbert Brule (2005), Brian Finley (1999), Rico Fata (1998), Daniel Tkaczuk (1997), Boyd Devereaux (1996), Steve Kelly (1995), Scott Sissons (1990), Adam Bennett (1989), Scott Pearson (1988), Dave Archibald (1987)
- Oneonta Penguin

Well as I said earlier, thank God we have a calm, rational GM in charge, 1 who is willing to take his time and look at all sides before firmly deciding on a correct path to take.

Just continuing to throw out ideas...what about Fleury for Elliott+pick/prospect? St. Louis may be feeling bold on Hitchcock's last season. They may be trading Shattenkirk so would have the cap room. Penguins get a quality backup and save some cap space.

edit: Yeo is there now so there is that connection.

Nope, no coincidence at all. And for whatever reason the line he's on now is performing well enough to be the best line on the team many nights. So simply by association, calling him the 3rd line center just because Malkin is on the team makes no sense, does it?
- NJPensfan

IMO
Crosby 1C
Malkin 1C
Bonino 3C

But I get why pens fans are extremely high on him at this moment