Confirmed with Link: [TOR/OTT] Matt Murray (25% retention), a 3rd in 2023 and a 7th in 2024 for Future Considerations.

[Gary Nylund]

Very true. For me, i prefer getting a bona-fide starter rather than tandems. Never see tandems win the cup really. If your going to go starter make sure they have the physical capacity to handle that many games. I have concerns that Murray (or Campbell) can do that

I prefer bona-fide starters to tandems as well. I'm hopeful because Murray's done it before so I see no reason why he can't do it again. I mean in the playoffs of course, I would like to see us get a backup that can start maybe 30-35 games or so during the season.

As it looks right now, our cup hopes are basically riding on Murray's health. Seems like a pretty big gamble but since we agreed to take him on at that cap hit, I have to assume that our medical staff did their due diligence on this one and there's a decent chance of this one paying off, we'll see.

 

[RoadWarrior]

Not a fan of the trade, will continue to say that. Wanted more retention for this risk.

I am more concerned with his injury history than his play, I think the upside of this is higher than pretty much anything else available, the downside is just also the lowest. The short-term risk is also the highest but the long-term is also the lowest.

That's the rub here. It's a significant cap risk given the strong possibility Murray will only play 30 or 40 games for this team. The injury history is the biggest problem here.

Of course Jack Campbell carries some risk as well but not quite as bad as Murray.

 

[ITM]

Understandably a lot of frustration at Dubas for this move. However, its worth noting that he's GMing for his life right now. He knows that the gig is up if he fails this season.

How many GMs in that situation hand out ridiculous money/term, with the "it's the next guy's problem" mentality, or mortgage the future for marginal moves in the present?

Dubas' hail Mary gamble, is one that doesn't absolutely skewer the Leafs over the next several years. It's still only a 2 year deal for a goalie that you paid nothing to obtain

I would pay to listen to a press conference in which Dubas reasons and advanced stats avalanches us with this decision.

My sense is he's seeing Murray as though he was made available as a Penguin before Pittsburgh offered him up and that the bet is the muscle memory of being a playoffs goalie is there and will surface when the first round arrives.

To gamble against Murray's health having just gambled and lost on Mrazek's health is...

 

[Ziggdiezan]

I prefer bona-fide starters to tandems as well. I'm hopeful because Murray's done it before so I see no reason why he can't do it again. I mean in the playoffs of course, I would like to see us get a backup that can start maybe 30-35 games or so during the season.

As it looks right now, our cup hopes are basically riding on Murray's health. Seems like a pretty big gamble but since we agreed to take him on at that cap hit, I have to assume that our medical staff did their due diligence on this one and there's a decent chance of this one paying off, we'll see.

Ya agreed with giving Murray a lighter load in the regular season to try to reduce injuries. Leafs are a good enough team they should be making the playoffs regardless of who is in net.

Ya my big worry is we go with Kalgren/Woll as the backups and Murray gets injuried late in the season. Definitely a big risk, hopefully the multiple day medical check was really thorough lol

 

[notbias]

That's the rub here. It's a significant cap risk given the strong possibility Murray will only play 30 or 40 games for this team. The injury history is the biggest problem here.

Of course Jack Campbell carries some risk as well but not quite as bad as Murray.

I think Campbell carries more risk, just it is long term, if Campbell doesn't work out, that's a tough contract to move, this is 2 years and maybe some LTIR if he is constantly injured.

 

[CabanaBoy5]

I don't dislike Murray, but I am concerned about having a number 1 who might not give us 40 games given that we have no reliable backup if he ends up getting injured. Let's wait and see what Dubas does to acquire that second goalie. We can't go into the season with Kallgren or Woll as backup and expect to win a Cup. And here lies the problem with this trade. With the risk we're taking, not enough retention was involved so I'm not sure we can acquire a decent backup who can step into a no. 1 if Murray is out.

 

[Nineteen67]

I wonder if the leafs will be trading kerfoot and maybe holl to the Sens tomorrow for a 2nd round pick. (After the leafs pay kerfoot's signing bonus)

Wouldn the bonus have been pain on July 01?

 

[ShaneFalco]

Toronto will look for another goalie and try to sign Rasmus Sandin with their remaining cap room. One team indicated that even 1B or No. 2 goalies could still do very well in this market, so it won’t be as easy as it sounds. One potential depth target for the Maple Leafs: forechecker extraordinaire Zach Aston-Reese. They could also bring back Denis Malgin from Switzerland.

NHL market buzz: Latest on Flyers, Senators, what's next for Malkin

With free agency opening on Wednesday, Elliotte Friedman shares the latest buzz around what the Flyers and Sens plan to do next, where Evgeni Malkin could go, and more.

www.sportsnet.ca

oh boy

 

[Sypher04]

Which backup is playing those extra 17 games? Thats then big question i think, most people know Campbell was horrible for the 2nd half of the season

Ottawa had 3 goalies and had made Forsberg their no 1. Not all games he missed were because he wasn’t available

 

[al secord]

I would pay to listen to a press conference in which Dubas reasons and advanced stats avalanches us with this decision.

My sense is he's seeing Murray as though he was made available as a Penguin before Pittsburgh offered him up and that the bet is the muscle memory of being a playoffs goalie is there and will surface when the first round arrives.

To gamble against Murray's health having just gambled and lost on Mrazek's health is...

Gambling on a much better goalie with a winning track record. But your point still stands.

 

[Ziggdiezan]

Ottawa had 3 goalies and had made Forsberg their no 1. Not all games he missed were because he wasn’t available

Fair enough, but he was on the injury list 7 different times in Ottawa so definitely a concern.

 

[BertCorbeau]

Toronto will look for another goalie and try to sign Rasmus Sandin with their remaining cap room. One team indicated that even 1B or No. 2 goalies could still do very well in this market, so it won’t be as easy as it sounds. One potential depth target for the Maple Leafs: forechecker extraordinaire Zach Aston-Reese. They could also bring back Denis Malgin from Switzerland.

NHL market buzz: Latest on Flyers, Senators, what's next for Malkin

With free agency opening on Wednesday, Elliotte Friedman shares the latest buzz around what the Flyers and Sens plan to do next, where Evgeni Malkin could go, and more.

www.sportsnet.ca

oh boy

Malgin had a good year in Europe but he’s not the type of player needed in the forward group

 

[colchar]

I don’t like the move, obviously. But would people be happier and more confident in our situation if we did what Detroit or Colorado did and traded a third rounder for Husso or Georgiev?

Yes.

 

[notbias]

Yes.

Why? One is less proven than basically anyone on the market, the other has AHL level numbers.

 

[ShaneFalco]

Malgin had a good year in Europe but he’s not the type of player needed in the forward group

It would be so Dubas

 

[Ianturnedbull]

Agreed.

Just being dramatic on the point that Dubas cannot go into the season with JUST Murray.

He needs a tandem.

I know they did their due diligence on his medicals and firmly believe he will return to form based off that, but its still such a question mark that makes even the most faithful uneasy.

Trying to be positive has me looking at it this way…

Dubas moved down 13 picks to grab a more expensive (800k) albiet higher ceiling goalie and two additional draft picks (3+7).

I take that was a small win, with the potential of it being a much bigger win.

I respect that, but gambling on the Leafs is a long shot before they even acquired Murray.

The counter to this is that Dubas and company have failed miserably in the goaltending department. Whether it's with Andersen or Campbell. Now it's such a dire situation in the worst possible moment (lack of goalies in the market). It didn't have to come to this had they not considered that drafting/developing goalies is just as important as everything else.

Hopefully it works out because TOR is my favorite team. We all want to see Murray rebound and help TOR.

Would any other GM take this gamble? I would think that most wouldn't.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Yeah there's an arrogance there for sure. And it's always been about him. "I will stake my career" isn't what you want to hear from a GM.

That says to me that he has confidence in his decisions and at the same time, he is fully prepared to take the responsibility and pay the price if they don't work out. That's exactly what I want to hear from a GM.

What is it that you would like to hear form a GM? Something like "maybe it'll work out and maybe it won't, we'll see"?

maybe he just puts the team ahead of himself or is confident they will do well this year so no need to sign a terrible contract like Campbell at 5x5?

More people should be giving Dubas credit for this IMO. I must have read 100 times early this year that Dubas would be allin at the last TDL and happily trade away a boatload of futures in a desperate attempt to win a round and save his job and guess what, we were one of the only contenders that didn't trade a 1st round pick at the TDL. Say what you want about the guy but it's 100% clear that he is putting the team first and I do appreciate that kind of integrity.

That's the rub here. It's a significant cap risk given the strong possibility Murray will only play 30 or 40 games for this team. The injury history is the biggest problem here.

Of course Jack Campbell carries some risk as well but not quite as bad as Murray.

Campbell for 5 years vs Murray for 2 years is the problem and in that sense, the risk attached to Campbell would be much bigger. If we could have signed Jack at 5x2, I'm almost certain that we would have done it.

 

[Fogelhund]

To gamble against Murray's health having just gambled and lost on Mrazek's health is...

Mrazek has chronic groin issues. That’s never going to get better, and will be a risk every time he stretches to make a save.

Murray has a history of concussion issues. Sure, that’s bad, but as long as he doesn’t get run, it’s not a risk of a re-occurring injury, by moving the wrong way.

Campbell’s biggest risk is his mental health. He’s shown a history of not being in the right place mentally, to excel as an athlete. Campbell wanted five years, which is far too much term to gamble on, given the history.

So the choices, within these three, was to gamble on a wonky groin, someone with concussion history, or someone struggling with mental health wanting a five year term.

To me, assuming all else is equal, the two year term is the lower risk, and I’d choose concussion risk, over chronic groin risk. The groin will fail, that is guaranteed. The concussion risk, depends on getting hit, so less absolute.

But if someone hits him, they better pay. Douglas?

Also, not defending the trade, it should have been far better.

 

[JKG33]

LOL, Ok then.

Even if you think Matthews doesn't f*** off outta here the first chance he gets, the window gets slammed shut when he's being paid $16m or whatever it'll take to keep him

 

[rocketman588]

maybe he just puts the team ahead of himself or is confident they will do well this year so no need to sign a terrible contract like Campbell at 5x5?

He could have just spent 3x4.75 on husso and had a goalie that hasn't been hurt for 3 years

 

[ShaneFalco]

That says to me that he has confidence in his decisions and at the same time, he is fully prepared to take the responsibility and pay the price if they don't work out. That's exactly what I want to hear from a GM.

What is it that you would like to hear form a GM? Something like "maybe it'll work out and maybe it won't, we'll see"?


More people should be giving Dubas credit for this IMO. I must have read 100 times early this year that Dubas would be allin at the last TDL and happily trade away a boatload of futures in a desperate attempt to win a round and save his job and guess what, we were one of the only contenders that didn't trade a 1st round pick at the TDL. Say what you want about the guy but it's 100% clear that he is putting the team first and I do appreciate that kind of integrity.


Campbell for 5 years vs Murray for 2 years is the problem and in that sense, the risk attached to Campbell would be much bigger. If we could have signed Jack at 5x2, I'm almost certain that we would have done it.

I dunno Gary maybe a GM who realizes his plan isn't working and is able/willing to adapt. Rather than sticking with his plan no matter what.
Stephen said it well:

I wish Dubas didn't dial up the rhetoric like that, should be more about constant evaluation and building the best program possible with resources at hand, and keep the messaging generic. The Leafs success isn't about your career or any individual player or group of players. He doesn't get it.

 

[Fogelhund]

f***ing stupid stats.

Say you can’t comprehend stats, without saying it.

 

[notbias]

He could have just spent 3x4.75 on husso and had a goalie that hasn't been hurt for 3 years

That's another risk with Husso, he just lost his starting job.

No clue which is best, but every goalie available has some risk attached to them.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Even if you think Matthews doesn't f*** off outta here the first chance he gets, the window gets slammed shut when he's being paid $16m or whatever it'll take to keep him

I expect he'll be extended at the first chance he has for well below 16m. Fear the worst if you must, but I suggest you leave the door open for the possibility that we see something other than the doomsday scenario unfold

 

[hamzarocks]

Meaningless, no, but certainly it should be assumed that people understand relatively low number of games aren’t the be all and end all. Despite this being a poor trade, Murray, when healthy might be an upgrade. Also note, Murray’s issues last year were post concussion symptoms. That can be seen as risky to some degree, but perhaps not as risky as a chronic groin issue (Mrazek).

With Murray having concussion issues, it does suggest a need for some players who are a deterrent to running him.

People won't like having an enforcing/punishing d-men but we probably should get one

Murray could give us good numbers but he's still a very skinny goalie. He's been great despite thst at times but he's also been injured a lot.

We need either our players to protect the net and not allow for players to try and bull dooze their way to the net, or get some guys who have strong board play, front of the net play and are able to beat any one who trys to take out Murray back and blue

Simmonds could be replaced for a more physical player

Holl Likewise