Vegas ready to deal before expansion draft

[BreadManPanarin]

Also I think it be more logical for Eberle over Nash

Do you think the Oilers would have to give up a top pick for someone to take Eberle?

[newfcollins]

Yes, Fleury fits the bill too. And I think it is fairly likely he is traded to Vegas. Although I would be surprised if Pittsburgh would have to give up a "pretty significant draft pick" to get rid of him. I am sure there must be a team or two out there who would give a late pick or at least accept a late pick to take Fleury off Pitt's hands. He doesn't have a particularly whack contract like some of the guys referenced above do. So in that respect I don't think Fleury is the one being referenced in that particular quote. Also this quote "Based on the player that I know should be going there....I think the roster's going to be better than people think" doesn't seem to apply to Fleury. Goalie is not the position that we think Vegas will be particularly weak at, so them getting Fleury wouldn't make their roster a lot better than people think.

Not a lot of teams out there looking to pay Fleury $5.75 million for the next two years. Maybe Calgary and Philly? I don't think there's a big market out there for Fleury.

If Fleury isn't dealt, then he has to be protected, so Vegas could grab Murray instead.

I think Pittsburgh would absolutely give up a late first rounder next year to keep Murray and save $5.75 million.

Good point on whether Fleury makes Vegas significantly better, but Pierre might be a big fan.

[BreadManPanarin]

Not a lot of teams out there looking to pay Fleury $5.75 million for the next two years. Maybe Calgary and Philly? I don't think there's a big market out there for Fleury.

If Fleury isn't dealt, then he has to be protected, so Vegas could grab Murray instead.

I think Pittsburgh would absolutely give up a late first rounder next year to keep Murray and save $5.75 million.

Good point on whether Fleury makes Vegas significantly better, but Pierre might be a big fan.

I totally agree that Pittsburgh would give up a late first rounder to avoid losing Murray if necessary. I just don't think it will be necessary... Wouldn't at least one of Calgary, Philadelphia, or Winnpeg likely take Fleury for free if the Pens offered it? Maybe I am off in my thinking there.

[PenguinHunter]

I totally agree that Pittsburgh would give up a late first rounder to avoid losing Murray if necessary. I just don't think it will be necessary... Wouldn't at least one of Calgary, Philadelphia, or Winnpeg likely take Fleury for free if the Pens offered it? Maybe I am off in my thinking there.

I would love if Philadelphia traded for him. Then expose Neuveurth.

[LawMan]

Both Brown and Ryan have limited no-trade to selected teams lists. Since Vegas is a new team, I assume it won't figure on their lists.

I've been wondering about this a lot recently with Vegas coming up. I've seen limited NTC framed both as positive and negative lists i.e. "list 10 team player can be traded to" and others that say "list 10 teams player cannot be traded to".

So long as the league was at 30 teams the language doesn't matter. i.e. 10 teams can go to is 19 you cannot go to and vice versa. However, with Vegas being added could this be an issue? By adding Vegas if a player has "can trade to" list at first blush it seems Vegas is not on the list, conversely if the player has a "cannot trade list" and Vegas is not on that list can the player be traded to Vegas?
This distinction could be quite relevant because CapFriendly lists Fleury's NTC as "list 18 teams he CAN be traded to" presumably Vegas was not on the that list to start the year as it wasn't a team capable of trading until March. I've also wondered how often a player must/can update their trade list... anyone know? It would seem a team would want some prior notice to updating in case they had a deal in the works etc.

Anyways, Fleury has a list of 18 teams he can go to, assuming he hasn't updated it it would seem he would have to waive his NTC to go to Vegas. This is of course all separate from his NMC, which he would have to waive to be exposed to Vegas in expansion...

[newfcollins]

I totally agree that Pittsburgh would give up a late first rounder to avoid losing Murray if necessary. I just don't think it will be necessary... Wouldn't at least one of Calgary, Philadelphia, or Winnpeg likely take Fleury for free if the Pens offered it? Maybe I am off in my thinking there.

I don't think any of those three teams would want Fleury. I think Winnipeg sticks with what they have, and Philly/Calgary will try to go the cheaper goalie route.

[BreadManPanarin]

I don't think any of those three teams would want Fleury. I think Winnipeg sticks with what they have, and Philly/Calgary will try to go the cheaper goalie route.

You may very well be right. Honestly though if I am Vegas and Pittsburgh offers me a late first rounder to let them keep Murray, and I KNOW they have no other options, then I am asking for multiple first rounders or just taking Murray. lol. Murray seems WAAAY more valuable than a late first rounder.

[LawMan]

I don't think any of those three teams would want Fleury. I think Winnipeg sticks with what they have, and Philly/Calgary will try to go the cheaper goalie route.

I can see Calgary going after MAF, assuming he's not on MAF's no-go list. Calgary had a solid season and each of their cheaper option goalies put together decent stretches but they got absolutely decimated by terrible goaltending in the playoffs. With even average goaltending Calgary wins 2 games in the first round and is on the verge of advancing. That memory of brutal goaltending is going to stick in the minds of the fans and the GM. If Pittsburgh gets desperate and the expansion deadline is approaching, and they don't have a way to protect Murray I can see Pittsburgh dumping MAF for a 5th rounder- basically free, to Calgary.

If you're Calgary how do you turn that down? $5.75m for a legitimate starter, who is 32, only has 2 years left on his deal seems pretty reasonable. With a $1.5m journeyman backup you're looking at $7.25m invested in goaltending, which is very reasonable. Lots of ifs involved obviously but if Pittsburgh starts offering to dump MAF for free I think teams would seriously consider it.

[BreadManPanarin]

I can see Calgary going after MAF, assuming he's not on MAF's no-go list. Calgary had a solid season and each of their cheaper option goalies put together decent stretches but they got absolutely decimated by terrible goaltending in the playoffs. With even average goaltending Calgary wins 2 games in the first round and is on the verge of advancing. That memory of brutal goaltending is going to stick in the minds of the fans and the GM. If Pittsburgh gets desperate and the expansion deadline is approaching, and they don't have a way to protect Murray I can see Pittsburgh dumping MAF for a 5th rounder- basically free, to Calgary.

If you're Calgary how do you turn that down? $5.75m for a legitimate starter, who is 32, only has 2 years left on his deal seems pretty reasonable. With a $1.5m journeyman backup you're looking at $7.25m invested in goaltending, which is very reasonable. Lots of ifs involved obviously but if Pittsburgh starts offering to dump MAF for free I think teams would seriously consider it.

I agree completely with this analysis.

[Rodgort]

Do you think the Oilers would have to give up a top pick for someone to take Eberle?

If Edmonton wants to get rid of him yes. Especially with how the EDM media love knocking the value of players they want to trade

[PenguinHunter]

I don't think any of those three teams would want Fleury. I think Winnipeg sticks with what they have, and Philly/Calgary will try to go the cheaper goalie route.

I am biased, but I think Philly is a great landing spot:

a) I have heard that Fleury doesn't want to have to move his family very far... and Philly is in the same state.
b) Fleury's 2 more years is a great fit to let Stolarz learn from and grow.
c) I think the Flyers are going to have to go all in to be competive while PRovorov is in hi entry contract... which is for 2 more years...

[BreadManPanarin]

If Edmonton wants to get rid of him yes. Especially with how the EDM media love knocking the value of players they want to trade

Isn't it currently being assumed that Edmonton protects Eberle in the expansion draft?

If they didn't, then wouldn't the Knights likely take him off their hands via expansion? Or would they still take Pouliot or Letestu regardless of whether Eberle is protected?

[BreadManPanarin]

I am biased, but I think Philly is a great landing spot:

a) I have heard that Fleury doesn't want to have to move his family very far... and Philly is in the same state.
b) Fleury's 2 more years is a great fit to let Stolarz learn from and grow.
c) I think the Flyers are going to have to go all in to be competive while PRovorov is in hi entry contract... which is for 2 more years...

I agree with this, although realistically I'm not sure Fleury is a huge upgrade from Mason. Or an upgrade at all, really. Pretty sure Mason has a higher even strength save % over the past 5 years than Fleury. If they could re-sign Mason for less $ for 2 years I'd rather see them do that.

[Mr. Guru]

The last time the Flyers and Pens made a deal was for the rights to Dan Hamhuis. 7 years ago.

Have these rivals ever made a big trade? Can't see them shipping Fleury off to Philly.

[BreadManPanarin]

The last time the Flyers and Pens made a deal was for the rights to Dan Hamhuis. 7 years ago.

Have these rivals ever made a big trade? Can't see them shipping Fleury off to Philly.

Not even if it was the only possible option to allow them to keep Murray besides giving up multiple first rounders to Vegas?

Most interesting offseason ever.