2015/2016 Trade Speculation and Rumors v2 - Page 192 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

jmac98 · 05-13-2016, 10:06 AM

I've only skimmed the past few posts regarding Murray and our 6th overall, so maybe this point has already been made:

Murray isn't the only option out there. There's a host of valuable goaltenders under a myriad of scenarios of which to obtain. Why would Calgary give up such a valuable pick for a good goalie when we can surely have both.

bax · 05-13-2016, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmac98

I've only skimmed the past few posts regarding Murray and our 6th overall, so maybe this point has already been made:

Murray isn't the only option out there. There's a host of valuable goaltenders under a myriad of scenarios of which to obtain. Why would Calgary give up such a valuable pick for a good goalie when we can surely have both.

Fair point, my argument against this is that if the Flames management think that Murray is a slam dunk (future star goalie) then you do that deal and pay a premium instead of sending a couple seconds or whatever it may be for a goaltender that will only ever be an average starter.

The prospect of Murray is that the option to trade for a goalie with this much potential rarely comes around. We could be looking at a guy that wins Multiple Vezinas.

Average goalies will always be available to acquire. Exceptional ones won't be. Yes, the risk that he doesn't pan out is there, but that risk is there for whoever we draft as well. In fact more so.

SuperMatt18 · 05-13-2016, 10:12 AM

Goalies are tough though because performance can fluctuate so much from year to year and small sample sizes can be deceiving.

Does Murray end up being Carey Price or does he end up being Steve Mason?

Jacob Markstrom had great AHL stats, put up good numbers in his first 30 or so NHL games, looked like a stud, and since then it took him 4 years to put it all back together.

Robin Lehner was hyped in a similar way. He had great NHL numbers at 21, and looked amazing in the AHL. Then he fell back to earth a little bit and is starting to figure it out in the NHL again now in Buffalo.

Jonathan Bernier had similar hype as well. Dominated the AHL as a 20 & 21 year old. Had great games as a back up in L.A. and was labeled the best young goalie in the NHL. He's had some success in Toronto but it's been very hit or miss overall and his game fell apart this year.

Lots of examples of goalies that are the best goalie prospect in the world at 21, and have instant success but then take a couple years to truly put it all together. Somebody else had mentioned that Murray only being 21 is a positive but IMO it might actually be a risk since the sample is so small.

Personally I'm only moving that 6th overall pick if a team is looking at trading a goalie who is more proven. Schneider was a good example of that. Already had 100 NHL games with a .927 save percentage, enough of a sample size there that a top 10 pick was worth it. Still way too much risk with guys like Murray or Pickard to be moving that good of a pick on a goalie.

jmac98 · 05-13-2016, 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bax

Fair point, my argument against this is that if the Flames management think that Murray is a slam dunk (future star goalie) then you do that deal and pay a premium instead of sending a couple seconds or whatever it may be for a goaltender that will only ever be an average starters.

The prospect of Murray is that the option to trade for a goalie with this much potential rarely comes around. We could be looking at a guy that wins Multiple Vezinas.

Or we could be looking at Rick Dipietro

bax · 05-13-2016, 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmac98

Or we could be looking at Rick Dipietro

I didn't know Murray had bunk knees and a 100 year contract??

Kidding aside, that's the point. You evaluate the guy on his style, attitude, demeanor, and skills. If the Flames think this guy is a future stud then you do the deal. If they don't, then you move on.

From watching him play in juniors, the minors, and the NHL I believe he has what it takes and I'm sure many scouts agree with me. It's unfortunate, but I think we're more likely to get Fleury instead of Myrray at this point.

edslunch · 05-13-2016, 10:18 AM

If the Flames can steal an up and coming goalie without giving up the 6th I'm all for it. Otherwise get a solid vet (UFA or relatively cheap trade) to hold the fort for a year or two while the goalie prospect situation sorts itself out

bax · 05-13-2016, 10:19 AM

I'm just a believer that there is just as much if not more risk with whoever we draft then there is with Murray.

Given that a goalie is by far this teams biggest need, I would rather go with Murray then Nylander or whoever.

jmac98 · 05-13-2016, 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bax

I didn't know Murray had bunk knees??

Kidding aside, that's the point. You evaluate the guy on his style, attitude, demeanor, and skills. If the Flames think this guy is future stud then you do the deal. If they don't, then you move on

If he was that highly thought of from Calgary, wouldn't they have selected him in the draft? Murray went late 3rd round, a few picks after Gilles in fact. It seems Calgary has already zeroed in on their prospect of tomorrow.

bax · 05-13-2016, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmac98

If he was that highly thought of from Calgary, wouldn't they have selected him in the draft? Murray went late 3rd round, a few picks after Gilles in fact. It seems Calgary has already zeroed in on their prospect of tomorrow.

A lot has changed in 4 years...

Evaluations on prospects can vary greatly over the course of one year, let alone four. According to that argument we should still be hyped on Sven Baertschi becoming a future star.

jmac98 · 05-13-2016, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bax

A lot has changed in 4 years...

Yes. Murray and Gilles have proven to be highly touted prospects. Good news for us is we have one. I'd love to have them both, but would much rather have a fairly can't miss top 6 forward as well as one of these prospects as well as F Anderson (etc)

howard_the_duck · 05-13-2016, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bax

If Murray could have been had for that cheap a couple of months ago then we would have him already. Rumors were that Calgary was after him, but Pittsburgh declined, probably because that they knew Murray was a stud.

I understand your logic, but just look five years ahead. Say Murray doesn't develop into the next Price or Holtby, but still a top 10 goaltender. Are we really going to be upset that we missed out on a 50-60 point forward from the draft?

Why give up assets for an average goaltender like Andersen? I understand the cost of acquisition is lower, but in my opinion so is the asset. Sure he's more proven, but he's been playing behind a stacked Ducks team. I'd rather go for the slam dunk, then settle for average. I believe that it's these kinds of risks that a GM must make to create a championship team.

Regardless, I don't think the pens move Murray at all now as he's looking like a Conn Smyth favorite.

You're right that it's most likely a mute point. The Pens goalie that is most likely to be available is Fleury anyway. I happen to really like the prospect range at 6 and think the ceiling is higher than a 50-60 pt player, so that seems to be the crux of the disagreement of value here.

Having that elite goaltender is a very nice luxury but it's also clearly not the only recipe to have a cup contending team. Only need to look at the Blackhawks as evidence of this. Heck, even in the WCF right now, Brian Elliot is a very unheralded starting goaltender and has been a big part of the Blues' run.

Part of what's made Tampa Bay/LA and even the Flames team of a decade ago so successful was that they didn't need to gut their team to acquire that elite starting goaltender; the acquisition cost was either a below market trade or a late draft pick selection. Being able to hit that kind of home run without opening holes elsewhere in their rosters allowed the development of these teams to become elite (Flames were on the fringe of this, but you get my point).

I think paying a premium value for a goaltender, at this juncture in the Flames development, would inhibit the growth trajectory of this team.

For me, the team is in a better position if they acquire merely a good starting goaltender for the interim (Andersen/Fleury/Reimer/Howard) + the potential of a very good starting goaltender in Gillies (still unproven) + top 6 selection that is likely to be a core piece of the team's future. To me, that team is deeper and better set up for the future than the team that trades 6th OA for an elite goaltender.

bax · 05-13-2016, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmac98

Yes. Murray and Gilles have proven to be highly touted prospects. Good news for us is we have one. I'd love to have them both, but would much rather have a fairly can't miss top 6 forward as well as one of these prospects as well as F Anderson (etc)

Gillies isn't even close to Murray. I wish this wasn't the case, but unfortunately it is.

Gillies has 7 games of pro experience. Murray has been playing fantastic pro hockey for two years now including what he is doing in the playoffs.

Hopefully Gillies gets there eventually, but he's far from a sure thing. Especially coming off a major surgery and missing a full year of development.

jmac98 · 05-13-2016, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bax

Gillies isn't even close to Murray. I wish this wasn't the case, but unfortunately it is.

There isn't any evidence to support this at the NHL level. There's hardly any at the AHL level as Gilles was hurt.

bax · 05-13-2016, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmac98

There isn't any evidence to support this at the NHL level. There's hardly any at the AHL level as Gilles was hurt.

Sorry, went back and edited my post before you quoted. Have a read now.

Fact is we need a goalie for next year. Best case scenario for Gillies is that he becomes what Murray is now 2 years down the line.

VladtheImpaler · 05-13-2016, 10:34 AM

Stop talking about Murray - if he is all that, Pittsburgh is not trading him, not for the 6th OA, and not for Bennett or whatever. If he is all that, they will keep him and lose MAF for nothing if they have to. Pointless discussion. Just like discussing whether we should trade the 6th for Price.
None of the other available goalies are worth anywhere near that.

jmac98 · 05-13-2016, 10:34 AM

Andersen has also been playing fantastic pro hockey for the past few years.

Ok I'm off to walk my dog. Thank you kindly for the conversation. You're very passionate on the topic but also extremely respectful in refute. Thank you for the courtesy.

All the best.

edslunch · 05-13-2016, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bax

That's the point though. The Flames employee people to make the judgment whether or not Murray is they real deal. If they think that he is, then you do the deal. It's a risk, but there's also a risk in drafting Tkatchuk, Dubois, Keller, Nylander, Brown, or whoever.

Also, Jones was 25, Lehner was 24, and Talbot was 27.

Murray is 21. He's looking like the next Price/Holtby. The opportunity to trade for a player with that potential is rare. Also, none of Jones, Lehner, or Talbot did was Murray is doing right now and I really don't think they have the potential to. Maybe Jones

If Murray is that good (not suggesting he isn't) then the Penguins will not trade him. They are much much more likely to trade MAF for a reasonable price

bax · 05-13-2016, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

Stop talking about Murray - if he is all that, Pittsburgh is not trading him, not for the 6th OA, and not for Bennett or whatever. If he is all that, they will keep him and lose MAF for nothing if they have to. Pointless discussion. Just like discussing whether we should trade the 6th for Price.
None of the other available goalies are worth anywhere near that.

Sorry Vlad! Didn't mean to have a discussion about the Flames on this Flames forum.

Losing Marc Andre for nothing would be great, but he does have that NMC. Things could get very murky with expansion coming soon.

Got a new topic for me to discuss? Slow work day today..

SuperMatt18 · 05-13-2016, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bax

Gillies isn't even close to Murray. I wish this wasn't the case, but unfortunately it is.

Really the issue is it's impossible to know how close he is because of the injury.

In the 7 games pre-injury the kid had 2 shutouts and a .920 save percentage which is pretty good.

Maybe Gillies doesn't get hurt, puts up a .930 save percentage in the AHL and then everybody is saying his performance in the AHL this season was just as good as what Matt Murray did last season.

Murray looks like the better goalie right now but that's just because he's actually had the opportunity to prove himself. Sadly the injury prevented Gillies from getting that opportunity.

VladtheImpaler · 05-13-2016, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bax

Sorry Vlad! Didn't mean to have a discussion about the Flames on this Flames forum.

Losing Marc Andre for nothing would be great, but he does have that NMC. Things could get very murky with expansion coming soon.

Got a new topic for me to discuss? Slow work day today..

I am all for discussing this topic, but this is pure fantasy - Murray is not available. Let's focus on Mrazek/Vasilevsky/Bishop/Elliott/Allen/Picard/Varlamov/Bobrovsky/Halak.