Litany might be a bit much. It's a cap space thing. If the asking price for MAF was Muzzin, or a top notch prospect and a 1st is one thing. The asking price is probably a pick. The question is does that pick (probably a first or a second) deter the Kings from making the trade and then putting MAF on the non protected list for the expansion draft. If they wouldn't be bothered, then make the deal. However, its all a non factor due to the cap situation there. MAF has the ability to play well there. LAK is more defensive minded then Pittsburgh. It's the cap.
- Oneonta Penguin

I guess litany could be a bit over the top, but I still think there's more than just cap reasons that MAF doesn't make sense. Cap is the overwhelming majority of it for sure though.

If the Ducks want to resign Lindholm, then they need to free up cap space. Trading Bernier for Zatkoff or Budaj frees up nearly $3.5M in cap space. All that money can go into a new Lindholm contract.
- tkecanuck341

Yeah, but how do the Kings fit Bernier's money?

This would never work in a million years.

1. Quick is not on LTIR. He is on the regular 'ol IR.

2. Even if Quick were to be placed on LTIR today, the allowable overage would only be $4,201,473 (assuming CapFriendly's numbers are correct) which is around $1.5M less than Fleury makes. The Pens would have to retain salary, which I doubt they want to do considering they're already tight enough to the cap.

3. Your "worst case scenario" would put the Kings more than $5,000,000 over the cap ceiling when Quick returned to action
- eichiefs9

1. That's a minor technicality which is fixed with a letter faxed to the league office. The King's don't have a pressing need to move him from IR to LTIR right now as they're currently under the cap. The requirement to be moved from IR to LTIR is the expectation the player will miss at least 10 games / 24 days, which is far less than Quick's expected 3-4 month recovery.

2. The Kings are under the cap by ~ $1.5 million at the moment, so they could fit in Fleury's $5.75 mil salary with Quick's $4.2 LTIR overage. I haven't done the exact math but it's very close (within $100k). The Kings could easily do one or two one-day call-up to max out the available overage if needed.

3. That's assuming that no salary in terms of roster players or retained money goes back Pittsburgh's way. I did mention that I had no idea what or if there were any acceptable terms a trade could take place. Regardless of that fact, there are numerous other ways the Kings could reduce their cap in the next ~3 months through trades, burying, injuries, etc. If the Kings really wanted to do it, they could.

Gardiner, Kapenen, and a pick for Trouba.

Laine and Kapenen could look dangerous on a line.
- Babcock_block

Pretty sure Laine would prefer to stay in the NHL.

Pretty sure Laine would prefer to stay in the NHL.
- stormey

I laughed at this. Have to admit.

As an old song started out All my bags are packed and ready to go...MAF theme song these days

i don't believe it. I'm going to need a source on this one.......
- bcallaway

Big if true.

Yeah, but how do the Kings fit Bernier's money?
- eichiefs9

Math

1. That's a minor technicality which is fixed with a letter faxed to the league office. The King's don't have a pressing need to move him from IR to LTIR right now as they're currently under the cap. The requirement to be moved from IR to LTIR is the expectation the player will miss at least 10 games / 24 days, which is far less than Quick's expected 3-4 month recovery.

2. The Kings are under the cap by ~ $1.5 million at the moment, so they could fit in Fleury's $5.75 mil salary with Quick's $4.2 LTIR overage. I haven't done the exact math but it's very close (within $100k). The Kings could easily do one or two one-day call-up to max out the available overage if needed.

3. That's assuming that no salary in terms of roster players or retained money goes back Pittsburgh's way. I did mention that I had no idea what or if there were any acceptable terms a trade could take place. Regardless of that fact, there are numerous other ways the Kings could reduce their cap in the next ~3 months through trades, burying, injuries, etc.
- TheMaritimer

Yes, of course he is eligible to be placed there. But my point is that it doesn't make any sense for the Kings to do. It would be a way to get a suitable fill-in for Quick while he's out but would wreak hell on their financial situation when he returned.

Even if they were able to max the overage, get MAF, and be cap compliant, it still makes no sense. It's essentially a 3-month band-aid that will cause a mammoth headache when Quick is healthy.

Going off CapFriendly, the Penguins currently have literally $0 in cap space. I can't speak for Rutherford, but I would imagine that he isn't looking to retain any money on a potential Fleury trade and that they're not going to be looking to take back any players that LA might send over. At least not any that would make this trade actually feasible without retained salary. If I were Rutherford and Lombardi wanted MAF with a significant portion of his salary retained, I'd be asking for a 1st + Toffoli or Muzzin in return.

Only matter of time before Trouba is paired next to McDonagh

Math
- glove_was_stuck

Kings do a trade for MAF becuz of 2.3 maths under cap space

Yes, of course he is eligible to be placed there. But my point is that it doesn't make any sense for the Kings to do. It would be a way to get a suitable fill-in for Quick while he's out but would wreak hell on their financial situation when he returned.

Even if they were able to max the overage, get MAF, and be cap compliant, it still makes no sense. It's essentially a 3-month band-aid that will cause a mammoth headache when Quick is healthy.

Going off CapFriendly, the Penguins currently have literally $0 in cap space. I can't speak for Rutherford, but I would imagine that he isn't looking to retain any money on a potential Fleury trade and that they're not going to be looking to take back any players that LA might send over. At least not any that would make this trade actually feasible without retained salary. If I were Rutherford and Lombardi wanted MAF with a significant portion of his salary retained, I'd be asking for a 1st + Toffoli or Muzzin in return.
- eichiefs9

Muzzin? Kings aren't moving that guy for a goalie who in four months will be the backup to Quick.

Only matter of time before Trouba is traded for McDonagh
- Anthony5967

Exactly

Muzzin? Kings aren't moving that guy for a goalie who in four months will be the backup to Quick.
- Anthony5967

...That was kinda my point.

Only matter of time before Trouba is paired next to McDonagh
- Anthony5967

and you guys will still suck.

Kings do a trade for MAF becuz of 2.3 maths under cap space
- eichiefs9

Only matter of time before Trouba is paired next to McDonagh
- Anthony5967

Seems to be the biggest rumor out there.

and you guys will still suck.
- glove_was_stuck

Team is under the radar this year. Faster NYR team. Whole league will continue to write them off and that is fine.

...That was kinda my point.
- eichiefs9

lol.

Yes, of course he is eligible to be placed there. But my point is that it doesn't make any sense for the Kings to do. It would be a way to get a suitable fill-in for Quick while he's out but would wreak hell on their financial situation when he returned.

Even if they were able to max the overage, get MAF, and be cap compliant, it still makes no sense. It's essentially a 3-month band-aid that will cause a mammoth headache when Quick is healthy.

Going off CapFriendly, the Penguins currently have literally $0 in cap space. I can't speak for Rutherford, but I would imagine that he isn't looking to retain any money on a potential Fleury trade and that they're not going to be looking to take back any players that LA might send over. At least not any that would make this trade actually feasible without retained salary. If I were Rutherford and Lombardi wanted MAF with a significant portion of his salary retained, I'd be asking for a 1st + Toffoli or Muzzin in return.
- eichiefs9

I will start by saying this trade makes 0 sense and will likely never happen (E6). But I'm pretty sure Cap Friendly is wrong or isn't taking into consideration LTIR correctly. I remember at the beginning of the year the Pens had about 1.5 mil to play with, but wanted to leave space so they don't get stuck not being able to call up players later in the season in case of injury like 2 years ago.

That being said, the only way a trade to LA could possibly make sense, and I don't think this would ever be the case, is if LA had plans to trade Fleury in off-season or prior to the trade deadline. A Quick/MAF tandem would be good for the year, but makes 0 sense for LA long-term. If they could get him for relatively cheap while Quick was hurt, and then flip him again to recoup some assets, that seems like the only way it would work out for them.

Last night in leafs intermission they talked about LA and possible goalies. They eluded to the fact Pavelec and mason could be options but their salaries are too high. And a better option is someone like Berra who has a better cap hit and can start some games. Is this some sort of alternate universe how the f is MAF going to LA. And why. Seems ridiculous. Classic hockeybuzz. Classic

i don't believe it. I'm going to need a source on this one.......
- bcallaway

My sources confirmed this.

The thing is, they said they got it from your sources... your very strong sources!

He is good at keeping his lip shut for sure....but with Trouba talks been going on for so long it is going to get out.

I will start by saying this trade makes 0 sense and will likely never happen (E6). But I'm pretty sure Cap Friendly is wrong or isn't taking into consideration LTIR correctly. I remember at the beginning of the year the Pens had about 1.5 mil to play with, but wanted to leave space so they don't get stuck not being able to call up players later in the season in case of injury like 2 years ago.

That being said, the only way a trade to LA could possibly make sense, and I don't think this would ever be the case, is if LA had plans to trade Fleury in off-season or prior to the trade deadline. A Quick/MAF tandem would be good for the year, but makes 0 sense for LA long-term. If they could get him for relatively cheap while Quick was hurt, and then flip him again to recoup some assets, that seems like the only way it would work out for them.
- mw630

I was about to write a whole long-winded response but we are in agreement that there is no chance that trade happens, so I'm just going to leave it at that.

Last night in leafs intermission they talked about LA and possible goalies. They eluded to the fact Pavelec and mason could be options but their salaries are too high. And a better option is someone like Berra who has a better cap hit and can start some games. Is this some sort of alternate universe how the f is MAF going to LA. And why. Seems ridiculous. Classic hockeybuzz. Classic
- Trevrrrgavo

Classic.