Wait, so you think the Leafs should have played Samsonov the first game against the team that finished 32nd in the league instead of the team that released him regardless of Samsonov's wishes to justify that Samsonov is the starter. THEN, and only then, would you accept that Murray is not given the starter role?
The Leafs made it clear all training camp that they're running a tandem and that the starting position is open. I'm not saying Murray was traded for as the backup or the starter. He was going to get the same opportunities as Samsonov. If Murray was putting up a .920 save percentage, and Samsonov was struggling, Murray would be starting. The position is open for any goalie who plays better. The Leafs bet one goalie would outperform the other, they didn't have to bet which one it would be.
Yeah, Dubas took a gamble on this goalie. He was fully expecting him to either outplay Samsonov or be the backup. Where did I dispute that?
I'm saying Murray was not given the starter position, and the Leafs don't have to justify a contract they didn't sign. They got paid to take Murray. They were optimistic, I'm sure, that he could regain his form or that Samsonov could fulfill his potential. If the season continues to trend the same way, Samsonov would be the starter and Murray would be the backup. If Murray comes back and puts up .950, then he'd be the starter? Both goalies will be UFA's in 2 years, so the Leafs have no dog in the race - make the best goalie win.