Value of: Fleury buyout

[Unsustainable]

Canes: MAF
Pitt: Lack + NYR 2nd

 

[leaflover]

I think it was on That's Hockey a couple days ago that Penguin management loves Fleury so I doubt he's viewed as a buyout candidate.

 

[Penske]

Canes: MAF
Pitt: Lack + NYR 2nd

This seems like a good deal for both teams. Carolina get a goalie that can get them to the playoffs. Pittsburgh get a great back up that can take over the starter job if needed.

Although the front office of both teams may get in the way of this.

 

[KIRK]

This seems like a good deal for both teams. Carolina get a goalie that can get them to the playoffs. Pittsburgh get a great back up that can take over the starter job if needed.

Although the front office of both teams may get in the way of this.

Fine.

Old deal . . .

Lack, NYR 2nd for MAF

New Deal . . .

Lack, NYR 2nd, 2022 Canes 7th for MAF, Karmanos kids dropping lawsuit against dad for failure to repay family trust

 

[Riptide]

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

Two reasons - both of which should be pretty clear. 1) Because Anderson does hold value - both around the league and as someone who can backup Murray. 2) Because buying out Anderson next summer would cost us roughly 2x1m.

 

[Creativero]

I think it was on That's Hockey a couple days ago that Penguin management loves Fleury so I doubt he's viewed as a buyout candidate.

What do you expect them to say? We're doing everything we can to dump this guy? Fleury didn't do anything, they just have to get rid of him because of the situation.

 

[Creativero]

MAF to LA for Dustin Brown at 50%?

Haha this might be the only deal that would actually work. He probably isn't blocking the Kings.

 

[Creativero]

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.

How's this good for Fleury? I'm pretty sure Ottawa is going to be on his block list and there a pretty bad team. He's throw out winning lottery tickets for a few extra mouths with the senators? Why in world do you think he asked for a no trade clause in the first place?

 

[Creativero]

faulty premise....

No team will sign MAF to a contract at $4M per after a buyout.

They could entice Vegas to take MAF in the expansion draft.

Dude, if you don't think Fleury can get $4M a year then this really is a faulty premise because he's completely un-tradeable anyways.

 

[Dying Alive]

Haha this might be the only deal that would actually work. He probably isn't blocking the Kings.

It wouldn't work because Brown has 3 extra years of term on his contract. Even at 50% he'd be making more than the Pens would want to or be able to pay for him.

 

[Tender Rip]

Canes: MAF
Pitt: Lack + NYR 2nd

Sold to that Southern Gentleman.

 

[Clamshells]

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.

The assumption is that LV would take Anderson in the draft. Anderson would likely be the best goalie exposed in the draft, and if LV thinks they won't be able to sign Bishop, then it would be in their best interest to take Andy as their starter. If not, he's worth something in a trade to a team looking for a goalie.

I'm not saying Pitt should make the trade, just pointing out that there is a pretty clear reason why it would be beneficial to them.

How's this good for Fleury? I'm pretty sure Ottawa is going to be on his block list and there a pretty bad team. He's throw out winning lottery tickets for a few extra mouths with the senators? Why in world do you think he asked for a no trade clause in the first place?

I'm pretty sure you don't know anything about Fleury's block list. Ottawa is the closest he'd be able to play to his home town (he'll never play in Montreal as a starter obvious reasons.) Ottawa is a bubble team at worst, and is a fairly young team, playing in a weaker division with a bunch of other bubble teams. There are worse options for him than Ottawa, regardless of your opinion of the team.

No matter where he ends up going, he's ending up on a weaker team than his current one. I'm sure he realizes that.

 

[blinkman360]

If I'm Vegas I don't make any deal that involves not taking a goalie. Perhaps some picks for avoiding certain forwards/D, but there won't be enough high-end goaltenders available to afford passing any of them up - IMO, at least.

 

[Empoleon8771]

If I'm Vegas I don't make any deal that involves not taking a goalie. Perhaps some picks for avoiding certain forwards/D, but there won't be enough high-end goaltenders available to afford passing any of them up - IMO, at least.

But again, for like the 4th time, they won't be getting Murray regardless of what they do. It's either the Pens buyout Fleury or they bribe Vegas into not taking Murray, Murray won't be available for Vegas.

 

[Mr Misty]

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?

The 2nd round of the 2011 draft averages 70 NHL games played and the 2010 draft averages 72. I don't know how long you think GMs stick around for, but for the GMs who oversaw the 2010 draft and stuck around for now 6 subsequent seasons, they got almost nothing on average out of the 2nd round. Nobody with any sense is jumping for joy over a 2nd.

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.

Actually the Hawks had limited space to fit both Niemi and Hjalmarsson, so driving up the price on Hjalmarsson via an offer sheet meant there wasn't enough cap space for Niemi. These are easy dots to connect, just like the structure of the O'Reilly offer sheet.

The mental gymnastics you are doing over the Weber offer sheet are really hilarious. You are laying out all the evidence yourself but refuse to see any hostile intent on the part of the Flyers because you don't understand the difference between strategy and tactics. There were like a half dozen trades between Philly and Nashville before that, so was it because of the strong friendship between the GMs that the Flyers backed Nashville into paying out over 20m in the first year of the deal?

Just look at how teams desperately tried to screw over their most productive employees this offseason in Gudreau, Kucherov, Trouba, etc. Do you really think GMs who behave this way toward players they drafted and rely on to keep their jobs wouldn't try to hurt their competitors?

 

[xxxx]

that won't happen.

 

[blinkman360]

But again, for like the 4th time, they won't be getting Murray regardless of what they do. It's either the Pens buyout Fleury or they bribe Vegas into not taking Murray, Murray won't be available for Vegas.

That really doesn't change anything that I said. Buy him out. Vegas still won't be making deals to not choose a goaltender.

 

[chethejet]

Under the Bylsma wanting a goalie, MAF is traded to Buffalo along with OLI, for Bogo and Kane. Money is close and Buffalo gets a needed upgrade and LH defenseman. Pens get a winger for Sid who may benefit for the Pens leadership core. Bogo gives them RH D man who still has talent.

 

[Empoleon8771]

The 2nd round of the 2011 draft averages 70 NHL games played and the 2010 draft averages 72. I don't know how long you think GMs stick around for, but for the GMs who oversaw the 2010 draft and stuck around for now 6 subsequent seasons, they got almost nothing on average out of the 2nd round. Nobody with any sense is jumping for joy over a 2nd.

Are you seriously trying to argue that rebuilding teams aren't interested in picks or prospects? Jesus, the mental gymnastics you have to do to get to that conclusion is astounding.

Actually the Hawks had limited space to fit both Niemi and Hjalmarsson, so driving up the price on Hjalmarsson via an offer sheet meant there wasn't enough cap space for Niemi. These are easy dots to connect, just like the structure of the O'Reilly offer sheet.

So where is your evidence for this, that the Sharks only signed Hjalmarsson to an offer sheet to screw over the Hawks? You seem to be taking your conspiracy theories as law here. What support do you have that the Sharks didn't want Hjalmarsson and they thought they could get him with an offer sheet? Same with ROR. Teams go after RFAs in those situations because they're vulnerable to be taken, not because they want to go mess with some teams.

The mental gymnastics you are doing over the Weber offer sheet are really hilarious. You are laying out all the evidence yourself but refuse to see any hostile intent on the part of the Flyers because you don't understand the difference between strategy and tactics. There were like a half dozen trades between Philly and Nashville before that, so was it because of the strong friendship between the GMs that the Flyers backed Nashville into paying out over 20m in the first year of the deal?

The only person performing mental gymnastics here is you, you're assuming that Philly gave Weber that offer not because it was the offer they thought Nashville wouldn't watch (which is exactly what happened), but instead to screw over the Predators. The only person here that is jumping through mental hoops is you, Philly gave him that offersheet because they were afraid someone else was going to trade for him, they were getting impatient with trade talks and they thought the Predators couldn't afford to match that offer. They didn't say "you guys are pissing me off, so I'm gonna give Weber an offersheet that cripples your money supply". That's straight up nonsense.

Just look at how teams desperately tried to screw over their most productive employees this offseason in Gudreau, Kucherov, Trouba, etc. Do you really think GMs who behave this way toward players they drafted and rely on to keep their jobs wouldn't try to hurt their competitors?

1. Trouba wasn't screwed over, he asked for a trade because he wanted to be a RD.
2. Kucherov wasn't screwed over, Tampa Bay just had no cap space.
3. The only one you could argue that was screwed over was Gaudreau, since he wasn't eligible for an offer sheet. However, Calgary set the ceiling for AAVs at what Giordano contract is, which is what Gaudreau got.

It's a GMs job to get the best deal for his team, which is exactly what you can argue happened here. Forcing the Pens to buy out Fleury does nothing for his team, so the comparison completely fails there. You're just making baseless claims that GMs go around trying to hurt other teams more than help their own teams and you're citing non related examples (treatment of RFAs) or completely contradictory points that you morphed to fit your agenda (Weber offer sheet) as evidence for that. So either bring up some valid points for how GMs go out of their way to screw over other teams, because I sure as hell can't think of any. Giving hard to match offersheets or playing hardball with players that have no leverage isn't "going out of their way to screw over other teams".

That really doesn't change anything that I said. Buy him out. Vegas still won't be making deals to not choose a goaltender.

You said Vegas shouldn't take any deals to not take young goalies because so few will be available. But whether Vegas takes those deals is irrelevant to the availability of those young goalies, there are probably quite a few teams who will go out of their way so Vegas doesn't get their young goalie, whether it be by buyouts or trades.

 

[Jumptheshark]

I just want to point our how lucrative a buyout is for Fleury this summer since people seem to think he might waive his no trade clause to facilitate a trade. He'll have a 2 year $11.5 million contract with a buyout of $7.66 million. If he is bought out and signs a team friendly 3 year $12+7.66=19.66 million he is in effect tacking on 1 year 8.16 million to his last contract. Why in the world would he pass that up to join a team a couple months sooner? To be clear I'm not suggesting he defiantly won't be trade, just that the no-trade teams are specifically chosen to prevent a trade and he won't waive the NTC.

Players in the Negotiation

1. Fluery
Whats he wants: Max earning or stay in Pittsburgh
How he gets it : JUST DO NOTHING
2. Las Vegas: Murray
How they get him:JUST DO NOTHING
3. Teams that want Fleury: Acquire Fluery as cheaply as possible.
How they get it: JUST OFFER NOTHING or maybe less than that.
4. Penguins
What they want: Murray to stay and Fluery to go
How they get it: trade or buyout

Everyone in involved knows whats everyone else is thinking. The only way 3 of 4 parties involved here get what they really want is to not allow remotely even trade to happen. The Penguins are the only ones with anything to loose. I just think its an interesting negotiations setup where the Penguins are in a very weak position.

I'll also point out Fleury a obscenely wealthy professional athlete, not a business with day to day cash flow issues. Waiting 2 extra years for millions of additional dollars means nothing to him. He's not going to make that up with any sort of legal investment.

Pens need to convince him to waive his NMC. If not.. Murray goes to Vegas.

 

[Dying Alive]

Pens need to convince him to waive his NMC. If not.. Murray goes to Vegas.

Or, for the 100th time, they can buy him out. Also for the 100th time, he has a limited NTC. He can be traded to 18 teams without waiving, and nobody knows whether he'd waive for a team on his list or not or which teams are even on the list. If it meant a starting job he very well may waive.

 

[Mr Misty]

Are you seriously trying to argue that rebuilding teams aren't interested in picks or prospects? Jesus, the mental gymnastics you have to do to get to that conclusion is astounding.

What is Vegas rebuilding from exactly? The draft is designed to expose good players to be taken which tells us the NHL hopes to have a competitive team right away. Do you expect them to still be competitive in the 6th year when that 2nd rounder plays his 82nd career NHL game? I don't because that isn't really how the NHL works.

It isn't particularly controversial to say a 2nd isn't really worth anything because those are the facts. Have those picks in 2010 done the guys who made them any good? No, because there are more new GMs than NHL regulars from that class. If you think a 2nd isn't a handful of magic beans, make your case with evidence.

So where is your evidence for this, that the Sharks only signed Hjalmarsson to an offer sheet to screw over the Hawks? You seem to be taking your conspiracy theories as law here. What support do you have that the Sharks didn't want Hjalmarsson and they thought they could get him with an offer sheet? Same with ROR. Teams go after RFAs in those situations because they're vulnerable to be taken, not because they want to go mess with some teams.

What conspiracy theories? They signed Hjalmarsson to an offer sheet. Since he signed it we can assume it was more than the Blackhawks offered otherwise he'd already have signed with them. Then Chicago didn't have enough space to sign Niemi, who went on to sign with the offer sheeting team in San Jose. Everyone can make up their own mind whether this is a bunch of coincidences that benefited San Jose and hurt Chicago or part of a plan; I go for the latter because people who run teams tend to be smart.

And I'm not arguing they didn't want Hjalmarsson. Driving up his price was a win-win because it ensured they could get one of two good players.

The only person performing mental gymnastics here is you, you're assuming that Philly gave Weber that offer not because it was the offer they thought Nashville wouldn't watch (which is exactly what happened), but instead to screw over the Predators. The only person here that is jumping through mental hoops is you, Philly gave him that offersheet because they were afraid someone else was going to trade for him, they were getting impatient with trade talks and they thought the Predators couldn't afford to match that offer. They didn't say "you guys are pissing me off, so I'm gonna give Weber an offersheet that cripples your money supply". That's straight up nonsense.

It's clear you don't get it. By your logic, that offer sheet was the most heinous betrayal of a long and productive relationship between GMs, yet it happened anyway. Why wasn't Holmgren made a pariah whom no one would deal with? As I said before, you make such a fine case for my argument that I don't need to respond. All the dots are there for you to connect, I can't force you to read this and understand it any more than I can get you to stop parroting "mental gymnastics" back at me incorrectly.

1. Trouba wasn't screwed over, he asked for a trade because he wanted to be a RD.
2. Kucherov wasn't screwed over, Tampa Bay just had no cap space.
3. The only one you could argue that was screwed over was Gaudreau, since he wasn't eligible for an offer sheet. However, Calgary set the ceiling for AAVs at what Giordano contract is, which is what Gaudreau got.

It's a GMs job to get the best deal for his team, which is exactly what you can argue happened here. Forcing the Pens to buy out Fleury does nothing for his team, so the comparison completely fails there. You're just making baseless claims that GMs go around trying to hurt other teams more than help their own teams and you're citing non related examples (treatment of RFAs) or completely contradictory points that you morphed to fit your agenda (Weber offer sheet) as evidence for that. So either bring up some valid points for how GMs go out of their way to screw over other teams, because I sure as hell can't think of any. Giving hard to match offersheets or playing hardball with players that have no leverage isn't "going out of their way to screw over other teams".

There's no Giordano-based ceiling on AAVs in the CBA, nor is there a rule about forcing a better defenseman to play on his off side to keep down his value by depressing his numbers, nor is there a rule about constraining your cap such that you can't offer Kucherov his true value. If these were good guys who would never try to hurt their competitors, they'd pay Gudreau like he is the best player on the team, because he is and that is what he is worth. They'd play Trouba ahead of Myers and pay him what he's worth, and they'd trade Killorn or Coburn so they could pay Kucherov what he's worth. If you don't see how those players were screwed over, that's on you, and if these aren't enough examples to convince you then you will never be convinced.

 

[Empoleon8771]

What is Vegas rebuilding from exactly? The draft is designed to expose good players to be taken which tells us the NHL hopes to have a competitive team right away. Do you expect them to still be competitive in the 6th year when that 2nd rounder plays his 82nd career NHL game? I don't because that isn't really how the NHL works.

They have literally no farm system and they have no prospects. That's why they'd be interested in picks. They're not "rebuilding", they're "building". They'll be getting a bunch of middle pair defensemen and fringe 2nd/3rd liners from the expansion draft. They're not going to be even close to competitive at the start, hence why they'd be interested in picks and prospects to set them up well for the future.

It isn't particularly controversial to say a 2nd isn't really worth anything because those are the facts. Have those picks in 2010 done the guys who made them any good? No, because there are more new GMs than NHL regulars from that class. If you think a 2nd isn't a handful of magic beans, make your case with evidence.

I think you need to look up the definition of a "fact". Because your opinion isn't a fact. If you can find somewhere that I said that 2nd round picks weren't mystery beans, I'll give you a cookie. Mystery beans still have values, to write off 2nd round picks as valueless because most of them bust completely ignores the actual trade landscape of the NHL.

What conspiracy theories? They signed Hjalmarsson to an offer sheet. Since he signed it we can assume it was more than the Blackhawks offered otherwise he'd already have signed with them. Then Chicago didn't have enough space to sign Niemi, who went on to sign with the offer sheeting team in San Jose. Everyone can make up their own mind whether this is a bunch of coincidences that benefited San Jose and hurt Chicago or part of a plan; I go for the latter because people who run teams tend to be smart.

And I'm not arguing they didn't want Hjalmarsson. Driving up his price was a win-win because it ensured they could get one of two good players.

But using that as an argument for how GMs screw over each other really undermines the idea that the Sharks wanted Hjalmarsson. You've been using that RFA situation as evidence for how GMs screw each other over, which is just dumb as ****. Your conspiracy theories of "teams are trying to screw over other teams with offer sheets instead of trying to get those players" is exactly that, a conspiracy theory. You're making baseless assumptions that teams want to screw over other teams more than they want to get players, which is downright asinine and you have no support for it other than your twisted interpretation of reality.

It's clear you don't get it. By your logic, that offer sheet was the most heinous betrayal of a long and productive relationship between GMs, yet it happened anyway. Why wasn't Holmgren made a pariah whom no one would deal with? As I said before, you make such a fine case for my argument that I don't need to respond. All the dots are there for you to connect, I can't force you to read this and understand it any more than I can get you to stop parroting "mental gymnastics" back at me incorrectly.

So wait, you're allowed to accuse me of mental gymnastics but I can't do it the opposite way? Oh, that's rich

You're twisting what actually happened so it can fit your agenda, that's literally 100% what you're doing. Again, you're drawing baseless conclusions based on morphed information and leaps in logic. You're just saying "connect the dots!!", as if that makes your theory suddenly not stupid or something. You're either just ignoring me on purpose or you're just that dense that you can't admit you're wrong here. Do you really think that Philly gave that offer sheet to Weber just to screw over the Predators and not as a way to get him without having to trade for him? Where's your evidence for that?

There's no Giordano-based ceiling on AAVs in the CBA

And there's no rule that says that the Ducks can't spend to the salary cap ceiling, but they don't because they don't have the money. Crazy, huh, each team operates differently.

nor is there a rule about forcing a better defenseman to play on his off side to keep down his value by depressing his numbers

Jesus, in all of your **** arguments here, this one I think takes the cake for the dumbest. This is another perfect example of your morphing reality to fit your agenda. No way it could be that they played Trouba at LD because they liked Myers and Byfuglien more at RD, no, they were intentionally trying to sabotage Trouba. Yeah, sure

nor is there a rule about constraining your cap such that you can't offer Kucherov his true value.

There is a rule about this thing called a salary cap though, maybe you should look it up. Are you really trying to argue that the Lightning screwed over Kucherov because they have a bunch of good players making a lot of money? If not for your previous point on Trouba, this one would be in contention for worst arguments you've made.

If these were good guys who would never try to hurt their competitors, they'd pay Gudreau like he is the best player on the team, because he is and that is what he is worth.

Or maybe the Flames view Giordano (their captain, btw) as the team's best player and no one should be getting more than their captain or best player. I also don't see how this is related to hurting their competitors or not, this has nothing to do with GMs screwing over other teams.

They'd play Trouba ahead of Myers and pay him what he's worth

A. Trouba is better than Myers
B. Trouba is the one holding out here and refusing any offers from the Jets, not the other way around.

and they'd trade Killorn or Coburn so they could pay Kucherov what he's worth.

Oh yeah, that's obviously so easy to do. They can just trade them at the drop of the hat and take back no cap so easily /s

You really seem to not understand how trade markets work. Like at all.

If you don't see how those players were screwed over, that's on you, and if these aren't enough examples to convince you then you will never be convinced.

None of those players were screwed over, and in fact I'd actually even argue that Trouba is screwing over the Jets more.

This is the last thing I'm going to say because you're twisting so much information here that it's making me dizzy. GMs don't act with the intention of screwing over other teams, they act with the intention of making their own teams better off. Offer sheets are teams trying to get better, not screwing over other teams. An example of screwing over other teams with an offer sheet would be the Penguins signing Kucherov when he was an RFA to an offer sheet only to immediately trade him to a team in the Atlantic for more than what the offer sheet was worth. That's actually what screwing over another team looks like. Philly giving Weber an offer sheet that they thought Nashville couldn't match wasn't them screwing over Nashville, it was them trying to get Weber. Teams not paying RFAs what the RFAs think is fair isn't "screwing over other teams", it's trying to make your team as good as possible by trying to get the RFAs for cheap as possible. In fact, RFAs are completely irrelevant to the idea that "GMs operate under the premise of hurting other teams". So basically, provide some actual arguments for how GMs screw over other teams and then I'll actually respond to you in a non sarcastic tone.

I genuinely can't remember the last time a GM went out of their way to screw over another team. Maybe the Schneider trade, where the Canucks took less to trade Schneider to New Jersey instead of Edmonton? I can think of more examples of players trying to screw over teams, like the Trouba situation, the Kessel trade and the Iginla trade just off the top of my head.

 

[Penske]

Pens need to convince him to waive his NMC. If not.. Murray goes to Vegas.

Why would Murray be going to Vegas?

That is not happening!

If the Pens want to keep Fleury they would be trading Murray and not lose him for nothing.

If the Pens want to keep Murray they will trade or buyout Fleury, or try to bribe Vegas.

 

[caniac247]

That's just blatantly false, Vegas is allowed to make trades before the draft.

Vegas won't have any players until the draft, so who are they trading before?