Value of: Fleury buyout

[kilowatt]

MAF to LA for Dustin Brown at 50%?

 

[Peat]

A good alternative may be to trade Fleury to a team where he'll be a clear cut #1 and in exchange take the other teams goaltender who doesn't have a NMC or that waives it to go to Pitsburgh.

Ex: Trade Fleury to Ottawa for Anderson. Anderson has no NMC and doesn't get protected in the expansion draft. Pitsburgh keeps Murray and Ottawa gets a younger starter. Ottawa could add a bit but you get the idea.

Not many teams if any are able to take on nearly 6M per year for Fleury unless Pitsburgh takes a goalie back.

Don't think anyone would be surprised if that happened.

There's an awful lot of things that could happen here and I don't get why some people are throwing around so many scenarios as definitely will/won't happen. I don't think even Rutherford can be completely sure at this stage because who knows how this season plays out.

About the only thing that can be sure though is that the Pens won't be exposing an asset like Murray to the expansion draft. There's too many ways to avoid letting him go for free. The only way Vegas get their hands on Murray is by trading a king's ransom for him.

 

[Woodtkachuk]

Pitts should have unloaded fleury to cgy when they came knocking

 

[Tripod]

A good alternative may be to trade Fleury to a team where he'll be a clear cut #1 and in exchange take the other teams goaltender who doesn't have a NMC or that waives it to go to Pitsburgh.

Ex: Trade Fleury to Ottawa for Anderson. Anderson has no NMC and doesn't get protected in the expansion draft. Pitsburgh keeps Murray and Ottawa gets a younger starter. Ottawa could add a bit but you get the idea.

Not many teams if any are able to take on nearly 6M per year for Fleury unless Pitsburgh takes a goalie back.

But again, Fleury could easily just say no to the trade and force Pitt to either buy him out, or he stays in Pitt. He dies not have to settle for going where he doesn't want to.

 

[Shrimper]

Great point.

All signs point to Fleury wanting to stay in Pittsburgh. When you consider that there are only a handful of teams that need a #1 goalie, have an open goalie spot to protect and can afford Fleury, all the guy has to do is put the 12 most likely teams to trade for him on his list, and the Pens will have no choice but to either trade Murray for assets and keep Fleury, or buy Fleury out. Either way Fleury wins. Guy has little incentive to waiving his NTC or not using his list to his advantage.

Pens fans won't be happy to hear it, this is the most likely outcome right now, given the information available at the moment.

Fleury doesn't win if they buy him out.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

So the choice would be...

a) take the bribe, and the other expansion player, or

b) don't take the bribe, MAF bought out, they get said other expansion player and then can sign MAF as a free agent if they choose and MAF wants to

MAF is a solid goalie for an expansion team, they'll likely have competition in signing him, but that bribe better be worth more than the chance to sign MAF as a free agent too.

Even if MAF doesn't sign there and signs somewhere else, that thins out the demand for other goalies. Bishop is a free agent this offseason as well.

Except as I said in a Penguins board thread it makes more sense for LV to tell Pitts to buy him out. It puts another goalie on the market for them to go after, a better one than anything they can get through expansion. It is McPhee's job to do the best thing for LV, not to do the Pens favours. A 1st is not cutting it not to touch Murray either, it will take a lot more than that to get LV to not select a young franchise goalie.

Why would Fleury, a 32 year old goalie with options and accustomed to winning, choose to play for an expansion team as a free agent?

Either Fleury waives his NMC and is traded or they have to buy him out, there is no other way this is playing out.

Of course there is. And it's exactly the way it's played out with previous goalies in previous expansion drafts.

Just because you choose to ignore it doesn't mean it's not a possibility with precedent.

Pitts should have unloaded fleury to cgy when they came knocking

Yeah we really regret not getting lowballed for Fleury, because then we could have had an underwheming asset AND no starting goalie for the first month of the year.

 

[Shrimper]

Ottawa is the best landing spot really.

Fluery at 30% retained = $1.725m. So around $4m to Ottawa
Anderson at 5% retained = $210k. So around $3.9m to Pittsburgh

Pittsburgh would be paying $5.65m, $100k less than Fluery's cap hit this season.
Ottawa would be paying $4.2m, same as Anderson's cap hit for two seasons, for a better goalie.

If Pittsburgh then wanted too they could buy out Anderson in the summer at a cost of I think of $700k over four years from next season. More than manageable with Scuderi's retention coming off.

 

[Riptide]

A good alternative may be to trade Fleury to a team where he'll be a clear cut #1 and in exchange take the other teams goaltender who doesn't have a NMC or that waives it to go to Pitsburgh.

Ex: Trade Fleury to Ottawa for Anderson. Anderson has no NMC and doesn't get protected in the expansion draft. Pitsburgh keeps Murray and Ottawa gets a younger starter. Ottawa could add a bit but you get the idea.

Not many teams if any are able to take on nearly 6M per year for Fleury unless Pitsburgh takes a goalie back.

Realistically, (unless Calgary comes calling after a disappointing season with Elliott) that's basically a given. There's multiple teams where their #1 (at least as of today) may not be all that strong. Unfortunately his NMC and his age could be a factor here. I mean if EDM is unhappy with Talbot then may there's something there. The same could be said for CAR, OTT, STL, DAL, VAN, BUF, and perhaps a few others.

 

[Riptide]

Ottawa is the best landing spot really.

Fluery at 30% retained = $1.725m. So around $4m to Ottawa
Anderson at 5% retained = $210k. So around $3.9m to Pittsburgh

Pittsburgh would be paying $5.65m, $100k less than Fluery's cap hit this season.
Ottawa would be paying $4.2m, same as Anderson's cap hit for two seasons, for a better goalie.

If Pittsburgh then wanted too they could buy out Anderson in the summer at a cost of I think of $700k over four years from next season. More than manageable with Scuderi's retention coming off.

I doubt they'd buy out that goalie unless Murray had the chance this year to really step up his game and get the starts needed to give the staff full confidence in him. Suck up paying almost 8m for your goalies for 1 season and 2 things happen. A) you give Jarry another year and give MM a year to be the guy while still having a competent backup and B) you shave 2 years off the penalty. And who knows, maybe you could trade Anderson when he only has a year left on his contract.

 

[Empoleon8771]

But again, Fleury could easily just say no to the trade and force Pitt to either buy him out, or he stays in Pitt. He dies not have to settle for going where he doesn't want to.

No he can't, that's not how NTCs work. He can't just say no to any trade, he had to submit a list of teams on July 1st that he wouldn't accept a trade to. If the Pens make a deal with someone not on his NTC, Fleury can't do anything about it.

 

[PensandCaps]

MAF to LA for Dustin Brown at 50%?

awful, dustin brown sucks.

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

Ottawa is the best landing spot really.

Fluery at 30% retained = $1.725m. So around $4m to Ottawa
Anderson at 5% retained = $210k. So around $3.9m to Pittsburgh

Pittsburgh would be paying $5.65m, $100k less than Fluery's cap hit this season.
Ottawa would be paying $4.2m, same as Anderson's cap hit for two seasons, for a better goalie.

If Pittsburgh then wanted too they could buy out Anderson in the summer at a cost of I think of $700k over four years from next season. More than manageable with Scuderi's retention coming off.

Don't see why this would be better than a buyout at all.

 

[Dying Alive]

I'm really excited about an entire season of goalie speculation threads regarding the Pens.

Pitts should have unloaded fleury to cgy when they came knocking

Yeah, we'd all be thrilled with Mike Condon as our starting goalie for the first 10 games of the season. Maybe Calgary should have made a reasonable offer, since Elliott isn't exactly setting the world on fire so far.

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

Yeah, we'd all be thrilled with Mike Condon as our starting goalie for the first 10 games of the season. Maybe Calgary should have made a reasonable offer, since Elliott isn't exactly setting the world on fire so far.

Or maybe we could have signed one of the better Free Agent goaltenders in Chad Johnson, Jonas Enroth, Al Montoya or Carter Hutton. If we would want something even better we could simply have traded the return from Fleury for a better option, that still doesn't have an NMC. We would even be able to fit another winger for Sid/Malkin with the cap we would have cleared.

Mike Condon isnt terrible either though.

 

[Dying Alive]

Or maybe we could have signed one of the better Free Agent goaltenders in Chad Johnson, Jonas Enroth, Al Montoya or Carter Hutton. If we would want something even better we could simply have traded the return from Fleury for a better option, that still doesn't have an NMC. We would even be able to fit another winger for Sid/Malkin with the cap we would have cleared.

Mike Condon isnt terrible either though.

Maybe not but given the choice between Condon and Fleury I'll take MAF ten times out of ten.

 

[Canada4Gold]

Why would Fleury, a 32 year old goalie with options and accustomed to winning, choose to play for an expansion team as a free agent?



Of course there is. And it's exactly the way it's played out with previous goalies in previous expansion drafts.

Just because you choose to ignore it doesn't mean it's not a possibility with precedent.



Yeah we really regret not getting lowballed for Fleury, because then we could have had an underwheming asset AND no starting goalie for the first month of the year.

Lots of people sign with bad teams. Money talks. If they're offering the biggest contract he could go there. He already has 2 rings so winning will likely be less of a motivation than for someone like say Bishop.

How many winning teams are out there looking for a starting goalie? Dallas, but they already have 2 expensive ones. Calgary might start winning next year but who knows.

I don't have to squint that hard to see a reasonable scenario where MAF signs in LV

Ottawa is the best landing spot really.

Fluery at 30% retained = $1.725m. So around $4m to Ottawa
Anderson at 5% retained = $210k. So around $3.9m to Pittsburgh

Pittsburgh would be paying $5.65m, $100k less than Fluery's cap hit this season.
Ottawa would be paying $4.2m, same as Anderson's cap hit for two seasons, for a better goalie.

If Pittsburgh then wanted too they could buy out Anderson in the summer at a cost of I think of $700k over four years from next season. More than manageable with Scuderi's retention coming off.

Why would both teams retain? The 2nd is a waste of a retention slot. Instead of 30% and 5%, can't you have 25% and not waste a retention slot for the 2nd team as well?

It might make sense when there's a fairly big difference in term. For 1 more year for an extra 5% off MAF for that 1 year I don't really get it.

 

[DANTHEMAN1967]

No he can't, that's not how NTCs work. He can't just say no to any trade, he had to submit a list of teams on July 1st that he wouldn't accept a trade to. If the Pens make a deal with someone not on his NTC, Fleury can't do anything about it.

Fleury can put on his no-trade list all the teams most likely to want him (Dallas being a good example) as teams he isn't willing to go to.
The Penguins will very likely not have any team of those not on Fleury's no-trade list willing to take on Fleury (and his $5,750,000) because they are already set in goal. The Penguins would probably need to include a significant sweetener (I'd want at least a 1st if I was the GM) to make a deal because every GM knows how desperate the Penguins would be at that point and what the ramifications would be if they didn't make that deal (and Las Vegas selects from the Pittsburgh Penguins...).

Is a deal possible...yes, probable... maybe it will depend on the greed of the GMs not on the no-trade list and how badly the Penguins want to rid themselves of Fleury without incurring a $1.9 million buyout cap penalty for the following 4 years.
It will be entertaining to watch.

 

[DANTHEMAN1967]

Lots of people sign with bad teams. Money talks. If they're offering the biggest contract he could go there. He already has 2 rings so winning will likely be less of a motivation than for someone like say Bishop.

How many winning teams are out there looking for a starting goalie? Dallas, but they already have 2 expensive ones. Calgary might start winning next year but who knows.

I don't have to squint that hard to see a reasonable scenario where MAF signs in LV



Why would both teams retain? The 2nd is a waste of a retention slot. Instead of 30% and 5%, can't you have 25% and not waste a retention slot for the 2nd team as well?

It might make sense when there's a fairly big difference in term. For 1 more year for an extra 5% off MAF for that 1 year I don't really get it.

I could see MAF signing in LV .... as a UFA after forcing the Penguins to buy him out and pay him $1.9 million each year for 4 years over and above whatever deal his agent makes with LV.

This could be very lucrative for Fleury (just ask Mikhail Grabovski).

 

[Clamshells]

Don't see why this would be better than a buyout at all.

With a buyout, Pitt pays 1.9m for 4 years. With the trade, Pitt pays 1.7m for 3 years.
Anderson is also a very capable goalie who isn't very far off from Fleury in terms of ability, so Pitt keeps a solid tandem for the year, while losing the NMC expansion problem.

Calgary and Dallas are other options as well.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Fleury can put on his no-trade list all the teams most likely to want him (Dallas being a good example) as teams he isn't willing to go to.
The Penguins will very likely not have any team of those not on Fleury's no-trade list willing to take on Fleury (and his $5,750,000) because they are already set in goal. The Penguins would probably need to include a significant sweetener (I'd want at least a 1st if I was the GM) to make a deal because every GM knows how desperate the Penguins would be at that point and what the ramifications would be if they didn't make that deal (and Las Vegas selects from the Pittsburgh Penguins..

And your evidence for this is.....?

You are completely clueless for who Fleury has on his NTC, so to act like you both know how Fleury decided to structure his NTC and how GMs would view Fleury is straight up talking out of your ass. You have no idea what Fleury will want with his NTC, so don't say it's "very likely that they won't be able to trade him" unless you have some actual evidence to support that. Fleury could just as easily put any team who has a starter on his NTC because he doesn't want to be a backup. It depends on what Fleury wants, does he want to be a starter, does he want to stay in Pittsburgh or does he want as much money as possible?

And again, Murray isn't a part of this equation. It's not "the Pens trade Fleury or lose Murray", it's "the Pens trade Fleury or they buyout Fleury" as the most likely scenario. The value in the Pens trading Fleury isn't not losing Murray, it's not buying out Fleury.

 

[Mr Misty]

A. McPhee isn't just "doing a favor for Pittsburgh", he's maximizing his assets by getting free assets in exchange for not taking a player that wouldn't be available for him anyway.
B. If you seriously think the first paragraph is how GMs operate, I don't know what to tell you. GMs don't go around trying to figure out how to screw over other teams. If it's a deal that helps Vegas, McPhee would definitely look into it. He's not going to say "oh, it helps you guys too, so go screw yourselves".

A. He's getting magic beans that won't be NHL contributors until after he's fired. It's not the way the expansion draft was designed nor does a late 2nd somehow build up excitement in a new market.

B. The Shea Weber offer sheet was designed to force a huge up front expense to Nashville's owners, the Hjalmersson offer sheet forced the Blackhawks to let Niemi go, and the Ryan O'Reilly offer sheet was designed to lock Colorado into a huge QO for a player they weren't convinced by. The NHL's contract rules don't allow NBA style poison pills so offer sheets aren't really feasible, but for them to work the other team must be backed into a corner. We are left with 2 scenarios: GMs are nice guys who do each other a solid all the time and choose not to use the CBA to its fullest extent because of friendship OR GMs are insanely competitive, type A winners who don't get the chance to screw each other over because the CBA doesn't give them a mechanism to do it. I know which camp I'd put Yzerman, Francis, Hextall etc in but feel free to make your own determination.

 

[Penske]

With a buyout, Pitt pays 1.9m for 4 years. With the trade, Pitt pays 1.7m for 3 years.
Anderson is also a very capable goalie who isn't very far off from Fleury in terms of ability, so Pitt keeps a solid tandem for the year, while losing the NMC expansion problem.

Calgary and Dallas are other options as well.

You forgot to add we have a 4.2 million dollar back up next season.

So with the trade we pay 5.9 million for 2 years then 1.7 million (plus new back up).

Versus 1.9 million (plus new back up) for 4 years.

In that scenario the latter is the better option but at least those aren't the only options at the moment.

 

[Empoleon8771]

A. He's getting magic beans that won't be NHL contributors until after he's fired. It's not the way the expansion draft was designed nor does a late 2nd somehow build up excitement in a new market.

What a crap argument

Are you really trying to argue that draft picks have no value because "they won't do anything until after he's fired"? Seriously? A brand new teams wouldn't be interested in prospects to build their base?

B. The Shea Weber offer sheet was designed to force a huge up front expense to Nashville's owners, the Hjalmersson offer sheet forced the Blackhawks to let Niemi go, and the Ryan O'Reilly offer sheet was designed to lock Colorado into a huge QO for a player they weren't convinced by. The NHL's contract rules don't allow NBA style poison pills so offer sheets aren't really feasible, but for them to work the other team must be backed into a corner. We are left with 2 scenarios: GMs are nice guys who do each other a solid all the time and choose not to use the CBA to its fullest extent because of friendship OR GMs are insanely competitive, type A winners who don't get the chance to screw each other over because the CBA doesn't give them a mechanism to do it. I know which camp I'd put Yzerman, Francis, Hextall etc in but feel free to make your own determination.

No, the Weber offersheet was made as an attempt for the Flyers to get Weber. They gave him a contract that they thought would be undesirable for the Predators to match. They didn't just say "know what, **** the Predators, let's hit them with a crippling offersheet". They did that because they wanted Weber and were tired of negotiating for him.

The Hjalmarsson offersheet was an attempt by the Sharks to get Hjalmarsson, not an attempt to screw over the Hawks. You're thinking offer sheets=screwing over the other team, not offer sheets=trying to get a vulnerable RFA. That's insanely stupid logic, teams don't go around just giving out offer sheets for fun. They were trying to get those players.

 

[Canada4Gold]

Based on a lot of logic I've heard in this thread Pit should just offer a 7th round pick. It's better than what LV would get if Pit buys out MAF or traded Murray so obviously they would accept a 7th round pick in a heartbeat because it's best case scenario for them. Not sure why anyone is offering up a 2nd when your logic dictates LV would accept a 7th.

And then you realize there's a minimum acceptable price that LV might accept and be better off than getting nothing(7th), a maximum price Pittsburgh might offer and still be better off(Just less than Murray's trade value, or the equivalent asset cost of a MAF buyout, whichever you think would happen worst case scenario).

Then a negotiation will happen where they meet in the middle for a reasonable solution. It will have nothing to do with this a 2nd is better than LV gets if MAF gets bought out so they might as well accept that logic. If that logic were true then the same logic applies for a 7th round pick.

Sorry, was gonna say this yesterday and forgot.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Based on a lot of logic I've heard in this thread Pit should just offer a 7th round pick. It's better than what LV would get if Pit buys out MAF or traded Murray so obviously they would accept a 7th round pick in a heartbeat because it's best case scenario for them. Not sure why anyone is offering up a 2nd when your logic dictates LV would accept a 7th.

But a 7th round pick is essentially valueless. Having a shot at signing Fleury is more valuable than a 7th round pick, seeing how UFA rights in the past have been traded for 3rd round picks and such.

Then a negotiation will happen where they meet in the middle for a reasonable solution. It will have nothing to do with this a 2nd is better than LV gets if MAF gets bought out so they might as well accept that logic. If that logic were true then the same logic applies for a 7th round pick.

Who's saying there won't be a negotiation here? I don't know what arguments you're reading. People here are saying that the cost to not take Murray wouldn't be the trade value of Murray, because Murray is never going to be available for a trade. The negotiation will be on how much the Pens value not buying out Fleury and how valuable Vegas thinks a UFA Fleury is to them.