Murray traded to Ottawa

[The Comish]

Woof from this dog as well.
Woof, woof.

Keep woofing and I'll take ya to the vet for a procedure you won't want! lol

[jtloveshack]

Sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo happy I traded him in my tight cap league I am in. I traded him for Wahlstrom and a pick which turned out to be Jacob Perrault.

This is crazy money...

[stevegamer]

Man, Dorion doesn't even understand how to be cheap properly.

If you're going to overpay Murray, you can do that in FA without trading a pick. And you could get to the floor by simply saving $2M and getting a couple more NHL bodies.

[SeaDawg]

That contract is insane in so many ways. Wow.


Actually, I guess instead of wow I should have said woof.

[rataylor22]

Waivers

[The Comish]

Wow, less than 14 months after signing a 4 year contract. Brutal.

[ericdaoust]

Not sure if they're doing this to try to motivate him or if they intend to demote him. They're not a playoff team this year so I would use him as cannon fodder and see what happens. Maybe he turns it around and they can eventually trade him with salary retained.

[kovalchuk17]

i think most (if not all) of us knew there was a pretty high chance this was going to be a disaster. for whatever reason, ottawa also wanted to nuke his trade value as much as publicly possible at the same time

[pmorrow]

Friedman in the Leafs/Sharks intermission said something along the lines of we'll see if theres a trade that develops here. So I guess theyve called/teams have called? You can always make a trade if you can find a team willing to swap bad contract for bad contract, or do a 3 way with retained money. AZ? Buffalo?

[Axeman33]

Friedman in the Leafs/Sharks intermission said something along the lines of we'll see if theres a trade that develops here. So I guess theyve called/teams have called? You can always make a trade if you can find a team willing to swap bad contract for bad contract, or do a 3 way with retained money. AZ? Buffalo?

EKane for Murray?

[SeaDawg]

i think most (if not all) of us knew there was a pretty high chance this was going to be a disaster. for whatever reason, ottawa also wanted to nuke his trade value as much as publicly possible at the same time

it is so bizarre how many times teams sign players to bad contracts that, from the moment the ink dries, the majority of people know the contract will not age well. It is almost as though GMs don't have much common sense, or they are so close to the situation that they can't think/see objectively.

There was absolutely no need to sign Murry to a 4 year deal. A one or two-year "show me" contract would have been good for Ottawa.

[rufio.85]

it is so bizarre how many times teams sign players to bad contracts that, from the moment the ink dries, the majority of people know the contract will not age well. It is almost as though GMs don't have much common sense, or they are so close to the situation that they can't think/see objectively.

There was absolutely no need to sign Murry to a 4 year deal. A one or two-year "show me" contract would have been good for Ottawa.

100%
And that cap hit was absolutely gross, no matter the duration of the contract.

[Axeman33]

it is so bizarre how many times teams sign players to bad contracts that, from the moment the ink dries, the majority of people know the contract will not age well. It is almost as though GMs don't have much common sense, or they are so close to the situation that they can't think/see objectively.

There was absolutely no need to sign Murry to a 4 year deal. A one or two-year "show me" contract would have been good for Ottawa.

He came into town with two Stanley Cup rings as the starter. What else did he really need to show them?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Murray fan but it's not like he came to Ottawa without a pedigree to some extent. He should be in his prime years as a goalie and Ottawa thought they were getting that leadership and backstop. He hasn't played well but the team in front of him hasn't been great either.

[stevegamer]

He came into town with two Stanley Cup rings as the starter. What else did he really need to show them?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Murray fan but it's not like he came to Ottawa without a pedigree to some extent. He should be in his prime years as a goalie and Ottawa thought they were getting that leadership and backstop. He hasn't played well but the team in front of him hasn't been great either.

One thing I realize where I disagree with most people it seems is on the tendency to treat goalies (and quarterbacks in football) as the main reasons their teams win titles. It happens, but it's not the usual case. He was a starter in Stanley Cup Finals for the Penguins when they won 2 cups, but once Fleury played over half the playoff games.

Somehow BOTH of those guys get credit for being stud Cup-winning starting goalies for that team, and I'm unsure how they both pull it off for the same timeframe.

I didn't really think of Murray as a leader type, as I heard more about him being flaky.

In hindsight I am so glad I dealt him in my cap league. I really wanted him off my roster and managed to get Koskinen as the goalie coming back. I may have lost the other forward parts of the deal, but the goalie part worked well.

[SeaDawg]

He came into town with two Stanley Cup rings as the starter. What else did he really need to show them?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Murray fan but it's not like he came to Ottawa without a pedigree to some extent. He should be in his prime years as a goalie and Ottawa thought they were getting that leadership and backstop. He hasn't played well but the team in front of him hasn't been great either.

I had no issue with Ottawa acquiring Murray, for the reasons you list. And I had no problem with them re-signing him, if the term and cap hit were reasonable (neither were). IMO, they could have (and should have) signed him to a one or two-year deal with a low cap hit to see if he could rebound. Sometimes it is worth taking a risk and signing a player to a long-term deal above current value in the hopes that the team ends up with a steal of a deal (Mackinnon, Barkov, etc.). Perhaps that will happen with Hughes' new contract. However, this was one case where it was pretty clear the risk was too much to take for a goalie who, despite a couple of excellent seasons, had shown serious signs that he might not be a quality NHL goalie.