Proposal: Monahan for Matt Murray + conditional 2nd
- Thread starter Conbon
- Start date
Ledge And Dairy
Registered User
This is troll af. Calgary is catastrophically better off buying Monahan out than paying 6.25M for their 3rd (arguably 4th) best goaltender for the following 2 years.
Murray's career isn't over, he's just "maybe" out for the remainder of the season
Murray's career isn't over, he's just "maybe" out for the remainder of the season
Akrapovince
Registered User
- May 19, 2017
- 3,859
- 4,350
I’m not quite sure what the conditions are on Monahan’s modified no trade clause, however I am sure if it allows him to veto the process of going from a cup contender to a basement dweller he would exercise his right to deny that move.
If you are looking for cap space, it is much easier to find a suitor for Monahan and then trade to fill that newly accrued cap space than to LTIR Murray for the year and have him be a boat anchor for the remainder of his contract.
In your scenario, if Murray LTIRetires Ottawa has no incentive to trade him. Especially for a bad player with a year remaining that has a pretty big cap hit at a position that we seem to be set at. And especially for a second round pick.
This deal would make sense if Calgary didn’t already have a stellar goaltender in Markstrom and Murray in his current state was an elite goalie that could backstop a Stanley Cup team. You guys could LTIR him and shed Monny’s cap hit to add 6m in depth before activating Murray for the playoffs after cruising with a back up goalie to the top of the pacific.
Unfortunately Murray can’t be depended on to be consistent enough to do that with his current play and Markstrom is an elite goalie.
If you are looking for cap space, it is much easier to find a suitor for Monahan and then trade to fill that newly accrued cap space than to LTIR Murray for the year and have him be a boat anchor for the remainder of his contract.
In your scenario, if Murray LTIRetires Ottawa has no incentive to trade him. Especially for a bad player with a year remaining that has a pretty big cap hit at a position that we seem to be set at. And especially for a second round pick.
This deal would make sense if Calgary didn’t already have a stellar goaltender in Markstrom and Murray in his current state was an elite goalie that could backstop a Stanley Cup team. You guys could LTIR him and shed Monny’s cap hit to add 6m in depth before activating Murray for the playoffs after cruising with a back up goalie to the top of the pacific.
Unfortunately Murray can’t be depended on to be consistent enough to do that with his current play and Markstrom is an elite goalie.
Last edited:
There's been speculation all year that Monahan would waive to the Sens to be closer to his hometown and potentially rejuvenate his career. The assumption is that Matt Murray is completely done so Calgary's goalie tandem is a moot point. LTIR saves us real world $ vs buying him out and allows us some cap flexibility to add mid season.
Recipe Unlimited
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2019
- 1,052
- 1,529
Then explain why Tampa traded Tyler Johnson and a 2nd for the corpse of Brent Seabrook?
Neiler
Registered Loser
- Jul 16, 2006
- 2,195
- 786
I don't think Murray will be a permanent LTIR, though he may as well be with the on off on off.
Regarding the deal, it's a 1 year deal at about the same cap to move on from Murray instead of having him linger around in any capacity. Murray's salary goes up to 7M and then 8M over the next two years. Gross. Monahan's goes down to 6M next year.
Good chance Monahan could end up as #3C with Pinto returning (he looked really good before he went down) so crossing the 0.5ppg threshold would be tougher and we probably wouldn't have to give up that pick.
Without having the cap knowledge about LTIR that other posters in this thread seem to, I'd do this just to make Murray go away.
Regarding the deal, it's a 1 year deal at about the same cap to move on from Murray instead of having him linger around in any capacity. Murray's salary goes up to 7M and then 8M over the next two years. Gross. Monahan's goes down to 6M next year.
Good chance Monahan could end up as #3C with Pinto returning (he looked really good before he went down) so crossing the 0.5ppg threshold would be tougher and we probably wouldn't have to give up that pick.
Without having the cap knowledge about LTIR that other posters in this thread seem to, I'd do this just to make Murray go away.
Akrapovince
Registered User
- May 19, 2017
- 3,859
- 4,350
In the case that Murray is completely done, why are we taking on a negative asset with him being in the deal? It doesn’t do anything for us. And it doesn’t do anything for the Flames either.
Not sure how acquiring an LTIR player saves you real life money as opposed to buying Monahan out. Would insurance even cover Murray with his injury history? Again, Murray being in this deal does nothing for anyone. If it isn’t insured I could honestly see Eugene doing some dumb shit like Murray + 1st for Monahan to atleast pay a player that’s paying.
It would just be Monahan + sweetener to Ottawa to get rid of the contract. If Murray is LTIRetiring there is no point of us sending him anywhere.
UNLESS, like I said- he was a competent goaltender that could be activated when playoffs start. But again it’s a redundant point because Calgary has Markstrom and you don’t trust Murray to backstop a cup winning team + multi year left.
So in both scenarios regardless if he LTIR until healthy or LTIRetires it doesn’t work with the flames.
Last edited:
Monahan is a negative asset as well, this gets the Flames a possible 2nd if he bounces back and at worst frees up cap so they can get a useful player in the bottom 6. Admittedly I am assuming that since the Horton debacle every major contract is probably insured which is where the real world savings come from. Ottawa has been needing a center all season and would be the most logical spot for Monahan to go in my eyes. If Monahan sucks still its one less year the Sens have to pay vs Murray.
Jumptheshark
Rebooting myself
Akrapovince
Registered User
- May 19, 2017
- 3,859
- 4,350
You’re missing the point I am making. In the case that Murray LTIRetires and the salary is insured, what does Ottawa benefit from this trade?
They take back a negative asset in Monahan and adds a second round pick while doing so when they can just sit pretty and let Murray LTIRetire.
I do not see Monahan beating out Norris, Stützle or Pinto for a spot down the middle. And the slight chance that he does, does not outweigh having to pay an asset and take on 6m+ in cap when we could just sit pat and let insurance pay Murray and not give up an asset.
It doesn’t matter how many years Murray has if he’s going to LTIRetire? Any years of Monahan over 0 years makes no sense if we do not have to pay Murray or have his cap hit count against our cap and have to pay an asset.
TLDR: If Murray LTIRetires and insurance covers the money, the deal is essentially Ottawa sends 2nd round pick to Calgary for Monahan. No thank you.
Last edited:
Jumptheshark
Rebooting myself
Larry Hanson
Registered User
- Aug 1, 2020
- 1,934
- 3,446
If we knew for sure that Murray wasn't coming back then sure. Problem is that if he does come back that screws the Flames over even more than they are now capwise.
