Yup. About the only way MAF makes sense for BUF is if Lehner falls on his face, and BUF decides that perhaps he isn't the guy that can move them forward.
Proposal: MAF for E. Kane
- Thread starter Toby Flenderson
- Start date
Yup. About the only way MAF makes sense for BUF is if Lehner falls on his face, and BUF decides that perhaps he isn't the guy that can move them forward.
- Jun 13, 2010
- 42,814
- 21,674
I disagree. When I see Buffalo, I see a younger Dallas team. Dallas is hampered by their goaltending. Neither Lehtonen nor Niemi are taking them to a cup despite having the roster to do so.
I just do not see Lehner as being the starting goalie Buffalo needs to make a big jump.
Regardless of the views on MAF, Buffalo is not competing seriously any time soon unless Lehner has an explosive break out season. MAF is a goalie that helps you fills the gaps in coverages. He's the goalie that helps you make up for errors on defense. Sure, he wasn't a rock in 3 playoff seasons a couple years ago but in 14 and 15, he was the least of the Penguins issues. This past year was a big reason (arguably THEE reason) the Penguins didn't fall further out of contention that they did. Flat out, MAF will win you games the team has no business winning. Can Lehner?
Now don't forget, teams bring in 1B's or high value backups all the time. Florida brought in Reimer...Blues ran Elliot and Allen (and hell even Halak!)...Ducks has Gibson and Andersen...Wings have Mzarek and Howard...Canucks ran Schneider and Luongo...so stop acting like brining in another starting goalie ESPECIALLY on a team like Buffalo, is just so illogically unheard of that it hurts the hockey's ears.
I'm not so much worried about the on ice as the off ice. I'm not sure the Penguins are the kind of organization that want Kane's antics tied to it. If you could lock him away in a closet between games and practices, sure why not. Worse things than to have a gritty LW in the system. His off ice antics are just too much for me though.
If it becomes an issue you send him home and tell him to stay away from the team so you can buy him out in June. I just see it as a very cheap way to ensure that MAF is not on this roster when the expansion draft rolls around. Buying out MAF is 4x1.92m. Buying out Kane is significantly cheaper.
gdsmack267
Registered User
Wouldnt really be a competition at all. MAF would be the clear cut starter and Lehner would be the back up which is his perfect role.
That being said neither team does this trade. Kane is too much of a risk/liability for the Pens and Sabres have to play Lehner for at least a few years even thought they grossly overpaid for him
Liferleafer
TSN Scrum Lurker
- Feb 9, 2011
- 39,848
- 13,005
Luongo/Schnieder caused problems...Elliot gone, Andersen gone, Howard done, and Reimer is insurance against Luongo's health. Bringing in MAF will only cause problems in Buffalo, we saw it here with Reimer/Bernier. Sink or swim, Buffalo has made Lehner their#1, much like every team you listed has a clear #1 now (except FLA).
It's the same issue the Pens are about to face...who's your #1? Marray or MAF? The sideshow will be intersting just like the Luongo/Schnieder and Andersen/Gibson ones were.
- Jun 13, 2010
- 42,814
- 21,674
Those goalies were only traded (argument for Andersen) after a considerable amount of time to establish themselves as #1s that the teams could lean on moving forward. There was no clear cut #1's on those teams I listed. At best, 1A/1B which is only a problem if the teams let it be. Luongo/Schnieder became a problem based upon Luongo's personality more than anything.
Sink or swim is not the position you want to be in with goalies on an up and coming team. You will dabble in mediocrity forever if that's the case. Having MAF as the #1 for 1 or 2 years with Lehner as the backup would not create the catastrophic conditions you think it will. MAF has 3 years let. 1 as #1, 1 as 1A/1B, 1 as #2 is not an unreasonable position to be in. And again, you are getting a goalie that has proven his ability to take the team to the next level.
This thread is amazing.
People trying to act like Buffalo should go after MAF so that they can take the next step. Never mind the reason he's available is because he's been injured and was surpassed by Matt Murray. Never mind the fact that Pittsburgh fans wanted to get rid of MAF because he's had trouble helping the team win playoff games. So for Buffalo to take the next step they should go after an aging goalie who couldn't help a superior team in Pittsburgh take the next step? Some great logic there. It's hilarious to see a fanbase that just won the cup with Matt Murray say that Robin Lehner isn't ready to take the next step when he hasn't had the chance to yet.
People trying to act like Buffalo should go after MAF so that they can take the next step. Never mind the reason he's available is because he's been injured and was surpassed by Matt Murray. Never mind the fact that Pittsburgh fans wanted to get rid of MAF because he's had trouble helping the team win playoff games. So for Buffalo to take the next step they should go after an aging goalie who couldn't help a superior team in Pittsburgh take the next step? Some great logic there. It's hilarious to see a fanbase that just won the cup with Matt Murray say that Robin Lehner isn't ready to take the next step when he hasn't had the chance to yet.
WeDislikeEich
Registered User
- Jun 22, 2015
- 6,037
- 4,469
Yeah, but there is an expansion draft next summer and you can only protect 1 goalie. So that changes things completely. It would be terrible asset management to trade away Kane (who we just gave up a ton for) to get MAF to battle for the #1 spot with Lehner (who we also just gave up a 1st in a deep draft for) just so we could lose one of those assets for nothing after this season. It'd be like giving away Kane and everything we gave up to get him for 1 season of MAF. That's not happening. It would be so stupid.
Also, anyone who has listened to anything Tim Murray has said about Robin Lehner knows that he will give Lehner every opportunity to be Buffalo's #1. He even said that Legner just needed a place where he could be the unquestioned starter. He's not going to change his mind about that after only 20+ games by Lehner (and especially since he looked damn good in those 20 some games (.924)).
So yes, in this case the trade proposal is highly illogical IMO.
Empoleon8771
Registered User
The bolded is just blatantly false. The sole reason that Pens fans want to get rid of Fleury is Murray. That's it, that's the only reason.
Oh you guys wanted to get rid of MAF to give the unproven goaltender a chance? Yet Buffalo shouldn't afford Robin Lehner the same opportunity? Makes a lot of sense. "Here take our goaltender we wanted to get rid of to give someone else a chance. You guys shouldn't give your goaltender a chance though because reasons..."
Empoleon8771
Registered User
So unproven!!!
Pens fans want to trade Fleury for the same reason that Bolts fans want to move Bishop, believe it or not. And no, I never talked about whether it made sense for the Sabres or not, I was just calling out the nonsense you were saying.
