Value of: Matt Murray

[airbus220]

I wouldn't trade Murray for anyone. Kids that good.

Would you pay Vegas two 1st round picks?

 

[sxvnert]

If the pens are forced into protecting Fleury or he's unwilling to waive they can buy him out.

2017-18 $1,916,666
2018-19 $1,916,666
2019-20 $1,916,666
2020-21 $1,916,666

A small price to pay to keep Murray in the fold.

 

[airbus220]

If the pens are forced into protecting Fleury or he's unwilling to waive they can buy him out.

2017-18 $1,916,666
2018-19 $1,916,666
2019-20 $1,916,666
2020-21 $1,916,666

A small price to pay to keep Murray in the fold.

That's what they will do and they will even save money, replacing Fleury with a cheaper goalie.

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

there also wasnt an impending expansion draft where every team could only protect 1 goalie, so that should lower the value.

If only one team is interested, you are correct. However if two or more are interested they will drive up the price to good value again.

Anyhow, to hell with our management if Fleury is still here next season.

 

[USE Fi]

San Jose traded a first-round pick in the 2016 NHL Draft and forward prospect Sean Kuraly to get Martin Jones. Something similar to this.

Martin Jones didn't accomplish any of the stuff Matt Murray has so it's a start, but you'd have to add more, to get a Cup Winning goalie that isn't some fluke.

I wrote similar value.
I have a feeling who ever trades their "#1" goalie first will get more, Pittsburgh or Tampa Bay.

 

[deathtouchtrample]

PIT will keep Murray. They can buy out Fleury and that's also Fleury's trade value if he would waive his NMC for a trade, no value. Other teams won't pay much for Fleury. There will be many UFA goalies available in July.
PIT might trade Fleury for nothing to save the buy out cap hit if Fleury waives his NMC, otherwise he will be bought out.
The funny thing is, if Fleury would waive his NMC for the expansion draft he even might not be drafted. But if PIT asks Vegas to exempt Murray from the draft it will be expensive

Vegas has to both take 3 goalies in the draft and get to 60% of the salary cap in the draft. IF MAF waived for the exp draft, who in the **** else the pens would be exposing would they take instead

 

[Seanaconda]

Vegas has to both take 3 goalies in the draft and get to 60% of the salary cap in the draft. IF MAF waived for the exp draft, who in the **** else the pens would be exposing would they take instead

They only have to draft like less than a 2 mill player from all 30 to hit the cap requirement

 

[BHD]

you think fleury would want to go to an expansion team, knowing full well they would likely try to move him at some point as he gets older?

surely that wasnt what he had in mind when he got a full NMC

Or that he could not be the starter in Pittsburgh. I'm sure that wasn't on his mind when he got a NMC.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

They aren't keeping MAF they aren't Vancouver they aren't trading the young goalie to keep the old veteran only to have the old vet want out anyway

 

[Empoleon8771]

I really don't think some people here know how NMCs and NTCs work. Fleury has already established his NTC for this year, that is done every year in July. If he wanted to force the Penguins to keep him, he would have had to do that already. It's not like the Pens would work out a deal with Dallas and he says "nah, I don't want to go there" and the trade is voided.

My best guess is that his NTC included bad teams like Toronto, Arizona, Edmonton and Vancouver, not any team that needs a starting goalie. I'm just interested to see if he put Vegas on his NTC, if he didn't he could be traded there next summer. The only situation where Murray gets traded is if someone offers a ridiculous package for him, thunk of what the Oilers offered for Schneider (2 prospects and 7th overall). Otherwise, the Pens will just trade Fleury.

 

[Viqsi]

It really is quite remarkable how many folks seem bound and determined to insist that certain teams must get nailed to the wall by the expansion draft. Maybe it's sort of a "well, at least we're not THOSE guys; THOSE guys are really gonna suffer" thing.

I want to see Pittsburgh screwed over as much as anyone else, but let's be realistic here. They know the problem. They have time to work out a solution.

 

[ss53mech]

You guys are WAY overrating Murray here, I think.

You're attributing the Pens generally outplaying the Sharks to Murray, and attributing the Sharks playing a poor game/being outplayed to Jones. It's simply not accurate at all. The Pens were a far better team in the finals. That's for sure. Murray was fantastic when he needed to be, but he simply wasn't all that tested in the Sharks series. No doubt he deserved to start, he was really good. Jones was really good too throughout most of the year and the playoffs. He looks like Price-lite sometimes. Jones was a big reason the Sharks weren't swept.

So suggesting that Jones is inferior because he hasn't won the cup (as a starter) is just plain silly.

I don't think they are attributing that series to the goalies. I agree with pretty much everything you wrote except that you don't seem to be taking in to account the time of the trade. Jones was traded before he went to the finals and stole some games along the way. Murray in this scenario would be traded after he had been to the finals and won. I like Murray but Jones may well have been the better goalie in that series. If Jones were moved today he would garner a greater return than the trade that brought him to San Jose because of what he has accomplished since the trade, much like Murray carries more value at this time.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

You guys are WAY overrating Murray here, I think.

You're attributing the Pens generally outplaying the Sharks to Murray, and attributing the Sharks playing a poor game/being outplayed to Jones. It's simply not accurate at all. The Pens were a far better team in the finals. That's for sure. Murray was fantastic when he needed to be, but he simply wasn't all that tested in the Sharks series. No doubt he deserved to start, he was really good. Jones was really good too throughout most of the year and the playoffs. He looks like Price-lite sometimes. Jones was a big reason the Sharks weren't swept.

So suggesting that Jones is inferior because he hasn't won the cup (as a starter) is just plain silly.

1. Had Jones won a Cup when he was traded?
2. How old was Jones when he was dealt?

 

[CanadienShark]

I don't think they are attributing that series to the goalies. I agree with pretty much everything you wrote except that you don't seem to be taking in to account the time of the trade. Jones was traded before he went to the finals and stole some games along the way. Murray in this scenario would be traded after he had been to the finals and won. I like Murray but Jones may well have been the better goalie in that series. If Jones were moved today he would garner a greater return than the trade that brought him to San Jose because of what he has accomplished since the trade, much like Murray carries more value at this time.

That's a fair point about the trade, but he was still regarded as a high quality potential starter at the time.

1. Had Jones won a Cup when he was traded?
2. How old was Jones when he was dealt?

1.

2. He was 25.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

1. Yes.
2. He was 25.

1. I should have re-phrased that haha. The difference between his contribution to the Kings' 2014 Cup and Murray's contribution to the Pens 2016 Cup is considerable, to put it mildly.

2. And Murray just turned 22.

Both of these factors are obviously huge when talking about value.

 

[CanadienShark]

1. I should have re-phrased that haha. The difference between his contribution to the Kings' 2014 Cup and Murray's contribution to the Pens 2016 Cup is considerable, to put it mildly.

2. And Murray just turned 22.

Both of these factors are obviously huge when talking about value.

1. Absolutely. The difference between Jones' and Murray's 2016 contribution to their cup runs isn't though.

2. Murray turned 22 like 4 months ago, not sure that's still a "just turned" situation.

 

[Empoleon8771]

There's a difference between sitting on the bench as a backup and winning a cup and winning 15 playoff games and being a Conn Smythe candidate and winning a cup. Murray right now definitely has more value than Jones had last year, Murray is a proven starter at this point and won a cup as a starter.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

There's a difference between sitting on the bench as a backup and winning a cup and winning 15 playoff games and being a Conn Smythe candidate and winning a cup. Murray right now definitely has more value than Jones had last year, Murray is a proven starter at this point and won a cup as a starter.

Murray is a proven starter? because he won a cup?

Remember so did Cam Ward in fact he did more because he won playoff MVP

 

[mgd525]

Murray is a proven starter? because he won a cup?

Remember so did Cam Ward in fact he did more because he won playoff MVP

If Ward would have been traded the next season after his cup win he would have fetched a Kings Ransom just like Murray would. Murray isn't going to get traded.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

1. Absolutely. The difference between Jones' and Murray's 2016 contribution to their cup runs isn't though.

2. Murray turned 22 like 4 months ago, not sure that's still a "just turned" situation.

1. Uh, that's fine, but Jones was mentioned because of his trade value at the time of his trade. He can't retroactively gain value for a feat he accomplished 2 years later.

2. Put it this way: Murray will be 22 for the duration of the '16-'17 NHL regular season. He turned 22 less than 3 weeks before winning the Cup.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Murray is a proven starter? because he won a cup?

Remember so did Cam Ward in fact he did more because he won playoff MVP

If Ward would have been traded the next season after his cup win he would have fetched a Kings Ransom just like Murray would. Murray isn't going to get traded.

Exactly this. Ward also wasn't as good as Murray was in the regular season either. Murray is definitely a starting caliber goalie right now.

 

[Human]

1. Absolutely. The difference between Jones' and Murray's 2016 contribution to their cup runs isn't though.

2. Murray turned 22 like 4 months ago, not sure that's still a "just turned" situation.

what does this have to do with anything?

you know after 22 comes 23, then 24 and only after that 25, right? you don't turn 25 after 22. if you haven't "just turned" 22 it's not like you're going to have 25 next...

 

[BHD]

Are we actually debating Murray's age? The point is that he played (operative word here) a role in his team winning the Cup, and did so at a younger age. You can't change facts.

 

[mgd525]

Are we actually debating Murray's age? The point is that he played (operative word here) a role in his team winning the Cup, and did so at a younger age. You can't change facts.

This is HF, facts are just those stupid things that get in the way of someone's opinion.

 

[CanadienShark]

what does this have to do with anything?

you know after 22 comes 23, then 24 and only after that 25, right? you don't turn 25 after 22. if you haven't "just turned" 22 it's not like you're going to have 25 next...

What does it have to do with anything? He didn't "just turn 22." That poster said he "just turned 22."

What don't you understand?