cross16
-
Posts
30,210 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
517
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Videos
Events
Gallery
Everything posted by cross16
-
I'm not too upset if it's not personally. Elliott is the type of goalie that can get on a hot streak and when he does you ride him because he's great but you do it knowing full well he is eventually going to implode, that's happened basically all throughout his career. While guys like Steven Mason (Free agent), Mike smith ( probably cheap in trade) and Ryan Miller (Free agent) maybe don't have the same upside as Elliott when he is on, I think over the course of a season you are getting pretty similar goaltending. There are plenty of backup options too if CJ didn't want to come back so that part i'm not concerned about at all. MIke Condon would lead my list of backup options, in terms of Free agents.
-
That is right and it wasn't the best choice of words on my part. Obviously yes he "agreed' to go to certain teams but what I meant was he lkikely has a ranking of certain teams he would prefer to go to. This comes down to "What does Fleury want" and because we can't answer that this discussion can't be solved, but alot of what i've read said that he wants to play and he wants to be the guy, not a backup or a tandem. My point was that the Penguins could move him to a less than ideal situation based on the fact they have 18 teams they could move him too without him giving the final ok. Only point being that both sides can get a bit nasty if they want and for the reason I fully expect everyone to "play nice" for lack of a better term. I'm honestly not sure that either Elliott or CJ will be or want to be back. Elliott looked really beat down after the playoffs and while he put on a brave face you could tell he was pissed at the quick hook. He came here to be a starter and I could easily see how he would feel that maybe he wasn't support in the way that he thought (I would disagree with him but I could see how he would feel that way) and he was publicly questioned multiple times this year. If they money/opportunity is the same elsewhere I could see Elliott's preference to be moving on. I think Elliott will be high on the list of teams that have some young goalies but want that veteran presence in a tandem. He'd be a great fit in Vancouver, Philly and WPG so I expect he will have suitors. I think CJ will come down to what the Flames do as their number 1. If they acquire someone like a Mrzaek or MAF I think he'd say Peace Out. I think he wants to be in a situation where he can do what he did last year and steal the net for periods of a time and the Flames may not be able to offer him that next year. he was also pretty candid that while he is interested in coming back, there are challenges that go with playing in your home town.
-
Correct. For that scenarios to take play it would have to be a station where Fleury wants to leave and start elsewhere but not play for. Vegas.
-
Correct. They don't want to lose someone else via expansion. Is gaining a first worth losing someone like Doumalin or Hornqvist? I would say no if I was the Pens but that's part of the decision they need to make. And maybe that's the way it plays out. I don't believe it will but that is another potential scenario that could play out. The counter point to that that is the Pen could then trade him to a place he doesn't not want to go to as he only has a limited no trade. They'd have to acquire an exposable goalie but that likely isn't tough. So I think it's the best interest if all parties to just work together but maybe I'm misguided on that being possible. But again lots of scenarios. Will be interesting.
-
there would be no trade in place for Vegas to trade for Fleury outside the expansion draft. Any deal involved with Fleury would be a deal for his selection in the expansion draft. even if Fleury doesn't want to play for Vegas here is another scenario. Pittsburgh sends Vegas a 3rd rounder to ensure they select Fleury. Vegas selects Fleury and then turns around and trades him to the Flames for a first rounder. Everyone gets what they want and vegas gets 2 assets plus can still claim various other goalies some that would fit better long term. Values could be off but this is for scenario purposes only. There are so many different ways that things can go down and multiple scenarios in play.
-
But that assumes that staying with the Penguins is an option and I personally don't think it is. I don't think under any circumstances will the Pens trade Murray.
- 13,148 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- goalies
- goaltending
- (and 2 more)
-
Why burn a bridge? Small world and I don't think it says much about Fleurys character to go out of his way to screw over a team that was very good to him.
-
Yes my assumption is it's a deal that will allow Vegas to claim MAF via the expansion draft or at least an understanding thst it will happen. There is no word on whether or not a "deal" is in place in terms of assets moving or if it's just an understanding the MAF will be available. MAF benefits by going to one of the few teams that needs a number 1 and playing a lot plus gets t okay in Vegas and be part of an expansion team. I known people assume no one wants to do that but I bet some will find the experience exciting. That being said nothing stops Vegas from claiming Fleury and the flames having a deal in place to acquire him from Vegas either. ?
-
Vegas claiming Fleury helps the Pens too though. He is a luxury they don't need so losing him via expansion means they don't lose any other, and arguably more important, pieces off their roster. Not to mention gives them 5.7 mill in cap space. Fleury going to Vegas is a win-win for both Pens and Vegas which is why i think it will happen.
- 13,148 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- goalies
- goaltending
- (and 2 more)
-
There are rumours circulating that Vegas and the Pens already have an agreement in place that will send Fleury to Vegas.
-
I like Korpisolo too. Not likely as a 40+ game starter so you'd need a strong platoon
-
All decent talents, Saros especially but none eligible for the expansion draft and I think in all cases I don't see their clubs giving them up. Saros is well positioned to take over from Rinne in a couple years.
-
i think if it got to that point they'd buy him out first but I also don't think it's going to come to that. All reports are he and the pens have a great relationship. But a non zero chance so does make for valid discussion.
-
Funny enough, the numbers between Bishop and Lehtonen last year are not all that different. Only main different is Bishop was much better on low danger shots, but medium/high danger there really isn't a drop from Bishop to Lehtonen. That being said I do think it was a down year and Bishop will bounce back and Lehtonen is on the downside of his career. However, I do agree that Bishop alone will not turn that team around. Goaltending is not their only problem.
- 13,148 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- goalies
- goaltending
- (and 2 more)
-
Agree to a point but if you move both Bennett and Janko I would argue that strength becomes a weakness fast. Not a lot of other centers options past those 2 guys. I get they don't have goalies but goalies are not that difficult to acquire. It just depends on what level you are after. I know the last few years have been frustrating when it comes to goalies but I don't think that means you deviate form your plan and get a bit crazy with offering big trade packages. But I mean as fun as this discussion is, Pittsburgh isn't going to move Matt Murray not IMO at least.
-
See and that's where we differ, I think it is a massive over payment but like I said earlier we will disagree because we disagree on Bennett. I still think Bennett is going to be a very good player in this league and I think Jankowski will too. I have no doubts that they will pan out. It looks like we also differ on the construction of a roster. Part of the reason I think its a massive over payment is because you are giving up alot for 1 position and 1 position where the drop off from someone like say Murray, to someone like a Mrzaek, Steve Mason, MAF, even Brian Elliott, is not that large. So when I say massive over payment its also because I think you can keep Bennett/Janko, give up less to get someone who is not a large downgrade from Murray, and have a better team overall so to be fair to you, you are right that maybe from a pure talent level its not an over payment, but I think from an asset management perspective its an over payment. Not to mention if you look at the history of goalie trades it sure looks like a massive over payment to me.
- 13,148 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- goalies
- goaltending
- (and 2 more)
-
All fair but I just don't believe in overpaying for goalies. Without debating the merits of individuals prospects, I think you can win and contend without elite goaltending but you cannot contend with a mediocre roster. I really worry about the Flames roster if you start taking guys like Bennett and Janko out of the mix, Murray wouldn't cover that up. Goaltending got the attention in the Anaheim series but not enough attention was paid to the fact the Flames only scored 2 EV goals and were in the bottom 3rd in both regular season and playoffs for their ability to create scoring chances. Getting better in that area, IMO, is more important than getting better in the net so to weaken that area pretty significantly to get better in net is not a formula i'm a fan of.
- 13,148 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- goalies
- goaltending
- (and 2 more)
-
Adding in their First and or a prospect like Jankowski/Kylington/Andersson
-
See and my fear is it would take more than that. And for me i'm not a fan of trading Bennett for Murray but I know you and I will have to agree to disagree on that one.
-
Pretty minute one IMO. I think the only way they do that is if you run into a situation like Vancouver did with Luongo/Schneider and someone gives you huge value for Murray. I shudder a bit to think what the Flames would have to give up to convince Pens to part with Murray over Fleury.
-
Depends on what he wants. If he wants to start and be the guy then he has very little say in where he goes because there aren't many of those jobs available. Based on what i've read, he wants to play.
-
Calgarians were polled on their support for a new arena 50% feel a new arena is needed 60% Support it but just so long as it doesn't affect their tax dollars. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/calgary-councillors-plan-b-arena-calgarynext-survey-1.4110440
-
How did they turn their back on him? They've kept him and stuck by him despite the many people who said they should move him or that he wasn't good enough. Everyone said they should trade him last summer and they didn't. I think there is a lot of loyalty there both ways. All reports are that Fleury wants to play. His options now if he wants to play and be the guy are dwindling. You basically have Calgary, Philly and Vegas as the teams that are searching for a number 1 guy and even then Philly is highs on Stolarz so do they want MAF?. Does he risk going somewhere where he has to compete or Vegas where he will be thee guy? Vegas is a pretty viable option IMO and I can see valid reasons why he would want to go there. If you want to assume otherwise that's fine but i'm not sure I see the value in it given we don't know what he is thinking. Point is there are more options than you are suggesting.
-
Not quite. Fleury can agree to waive his NMC and be exposed, Murray is protected, Fleury exposed, Vegas takes Fleury and story is over. A Player can agree to waive the NMC and then is eligible to be exposed in the expansion draft.
-
so here is a wrinkle in the "trade for MAF" camp. Pittsburgh does not have another goalie to expose to the expansion draft. There only eligible goalies are MAF and Murray so they can't trade MAF unless they get a goalie back in return who meets the exposure requirements. Unfortuatnely, the Flames only have 1 themselves so you are in a situation where you'd have to do something like a sign and trade with Johnson (assuming Elliott not an option becuase I think he will cost more $ than Pens will want to pay). another wrinkle for the "Penguins have no bargaining power" camp. What I find always gets lost in the expansion draft discussion is that every team is going to lose a player. If you are Pittsburgh and Vegas wants MAF, are you not better off letting them have him and then losing nothing else off your roster, especially when the return for MAF is only going to be a 3rd round pick (as some have suggested)? Why should the Penguins trade MAF for nothing AND then lose someone like Doumalin, Hornqvist or Schultz off their roster, why not just let Vegas take MAF, who you don't need, and call it a day. Much more complicated situation than people are making it out to be and Pittsburgh has more options than most are suggesting here.
