He has a full NMC because how do you offer a limited-NMC? "I have to submit a list of 10 teams that you can waive me to"? A NMC is an addition to a NTC. As far as we've been told, NMC have to be protected. No one but the board of governors knows the exact details or whether or not the players will be allowed the option to waive them. All we can assume based on the information I've seen (Elliote Friedman) is that any NMC has to be protected.
- MaximumBone

He has a Limited NMC that allows him to list eight teams that he would not allow a trade to. Elliott Friedman reported that contracts like these do not mandate protection.

He's had no major injuries in his career till 2 months ago ... How does that constitute "injury prone"?
- Brianandr1

When and where did i say he was injury prone?

When and where did i say he was injury prone?
- TandA4Flames

you didn't. but the first comment on the blog said this:
Injury prone, inconsistent, the wrong side of 30, and expensive.

No thanks. Andersen please.

MAF is a great fit for any team. He will be 32 in November but goalies can play at a high level right into their mid 30's especially the superstar goalies like Fleury. With 3 years left at 5.75 he has a great contract & he's isn't injury prone. He played 58 games this year his lowest level other than the lock out year in essentially a decade. The only goalie to play more games in the last 5 seasons is Quick. Hell he's 4th in the last 10 years. You want to go the other way. last 4 4th, last 3 4th, last 2 9th. Even this year with injuries he finished 11th in games played, yet still finished 7th for wins, 6th for shut outs & for goalies that played at least 1/2 their teams games; 41, he was 8th for SV%.

If I were those of you that think he's old & injury prone I would be hoping he's willing to play in Calgary & doesn't have him on his no trade list as your not getting a better goalie at 5.75 for 3 years. At the start of the season he has to provide a list of 18 teams he will except a trade to.

He has a Limited NMC that allows him to list eight teams that he would not allow a trade to. Elliott Friedman reported that contracts like these do not mandate protection.
- hipcheck_goalie

That's not a limited-NMC, though. That's a limited-NTC with a NMC attached to it, because it's its own clause. The listing of eight teams in for purpose of a trade; how do you limit a no-movement clause? This is the delineation that's bugging me. Maybe I'm seeing something wrong.

Also, do you have a source for what Friedman said on this topic? Does he give a list? Just curious cause I haven't seen it.

If we follow Pittsburgs model of finding a winning culture; we'd have to take a few more years of trying to get lucky and win top picks.

Should we blow an entire year in order to pick a goalie 1st overall too?
- fry

It takes skilz to do that which you don't have.
They traded up to number 1 to get him so sure, give that a shot.

That's not a limited-NMC, though. That's a limited-NTC with a NMC attached to it, because it's its own clause. The listing of eight teams in for purpose of a trade; how do you limit a no-movement clause? This is the delineation that's bugging me. Maybe I'm seeing something wrong.

Also, do you have a source for what Friedman said on this topic? Does he give a list? Just curious cause I haven't seen it.
- MaximumBone

I'm not sure the exact lingo... He can either reject a trade to 8 teams or he gets to submit a list of teams that he does allow...

I'm not sure the exact lingo... He can either reject a trade to 8 teams or he gets to submit a list of teams that he does allow...
- hipcheck_goalie

I don't think you're seeing my point, though. The list of 8 teams is for the purpose of a trade. I don't believe a NMC includes coverage from trades cause if it did why would we also include a NTC in a contract already featuring a NMC? So, by this line of thinking, how would you limit a no-movement clause when no-movement clauses only protect a player from waivers or demotion of other sorts (to my knowledge).

This leads me to believe that any and all NMCs (unless waived) have to be honoured in the expansion draft.

I don't think you're seeing my point, though. The list of 8 teams is for the purpose of a trade. I don't believe a NMC includes coverage from trades cause if it did why would we also include a NTC in a contract already featuring a NMC? So, by this line of thinking, how would you limit a no-movement clause when no-movement clauses only protect a player from waivers or demotion of other sorts (to my knowledge).

This leads me to believe that any and all NMCs (unless waived) have to be honoured in the expansion draft.
- MaximumBone[/quote
]http://nhl.com/hockey/comments/players-who-can-be-exposed-in-the-nhl-expansion-draft

I said very clearly earlier that if I was Calgary I would not trade the 6 for fleury .... Murray woukd take the 6 and Bennett at this point ( not happening)
- Brianandr1

Any GM asking for 2 #1's for a guy that has played exactly 20 NHL games is drunk, stoned or stupid, and any GM offering that is at the same party...

http://nhl.com/hockey/com...n-the-nhl-expansion-draft
- hipcheck_goalie

Thanks

http://www.generalfanager...hoots=Both&team=all&NMC=1

General Fanager has Fleury on the need to protect list. And the link provided didn't say anything to the contrary.

Too bad he isn't a number 1. Calgary should sign Reimer if they want to continue their losing culture. He's only 3 years younger and no real resume to speak of. MAF is the best option that has been mentioned and would be exactly what this team needs.
- all-pgh

Best option mentioned? I think only he and Reimer have been the ones brought up so far. So

There are and will be plenty of options out there, especially once the expansion draft (likely) is announced. It's been said that Kuemper is likely available since MIN can't afford his raise. He doesn't have the resume that Fluery does but he's at the age where he is likely to break out. Maybe BT would rather put his marbles towards a guy with great potential and the right age bracket that will cost much less than a 31 year old Fluery.

Hutchinson/Pavelec
Bernier
Elliott/Allen
Niemi/Lehtonen
Bishop/Vaselevski
Halak
Neuvirth

These are just some names I've heard, off the top of my head. There is upside and benefits to many of them.

Best option mentioned? I think only he and Reimer have been the ones brought up so far. So

There are and will be plenty of options out there, especially once the expansion draft (likely) is announced. It's been said that Kuemper is likely available since MIN can't afford his raise. He doesn't have the resume that Fluery does but he's at the age where he is likely to break out. Maybe BT would rather put his marbles towards a guy with great potential and the right age bracket that will cost much less than a 31 year old Fluery.

Hutchinson/Pavelec
Bernier
Elliott/Allen
Niemi/Lehtonen
Bishop/Vaselevski
Halak
Neuvirth

These are just some names I've heard, off the top of my head. There is upside and benefits to many of them.
- TandA4Flames

Frederik Andersen, though

Frederik Andersen, though
- MaximumBone

Right. How could forget him?

Right. How could forget him?
- TandA4Flames

Were I in your situation, I'd be all-in on that route. He's just reaching prime age, has a track record of strong performance through every league, and he already plays against the West on a regular basis. Anaheim is also gonna be in the situation where they'd have to leave one exposed if they don't move him so that'll bump the cost to acquire down at least a touch.

He has a Limited NMC that allows him to list eight teams that he would not allow a trade to. Elliott Friedman reported that contracts like these do not mandate protection.
- hipcheck_goalie

If he was smart Calgary would top the list

Hamonic and halak plus our first round pick to the flames....whos in and for what

Injury prone ... No concussions this season
Inconsistent... Not the last 2 seasons
Yes he s 31
Expensive? ... He's the 18th highest paid goaltender in the league

I would not give up the 6 for him ... But maybe a second and prospects
- Brianandr1

He had 4 straight years of shaky-to-bad playoff performance.

He was out for 3 months in the 07-08 season and add to that 2 concussions in 1 season...this season, which is something to be concerned with.

Lastly, he is expensive due to the cost Pitt will want in return (IF he waives). Andersen is younger, battle tested, and has played in the West his entire career. I would further argue Fleury has had the benefit of playing behind a top flight franchise for a decade, and there is no guarantee how this would translate to a young and inexperienced team mired in a rebuild.

Hamonic and halak plus our first round pick to the flames....whos in and for what
- Flexingtheshaft

The 6, Backlund and Wideman

Sportsnet addressed Fleury's NMC specicly. It may still be on their website. Or you can find a link in the rumour chat area a spectorshockey from May 5th. Fleury's NMC was written on only include wavers & depotition so not required to be protected. He can be exposed but Pitt will trade or simply let him be selected in expansion.

Any GM asking for 2 #1's for a guy that has played exactly 20 NHL games is drunk, stoned or stupid, and any GM offering that is at the same party...
- rmull905

It said "not happening" in the post!!!!! But ok... I agree

He had 4 straight years of shaky-to-bad playoff performance.

He was out for 3 months in the 07-08 season and add to that 2 concussions in 1 season...this season, which is something to be concerned with.

Lastly, he is expensive due to the cost Pitt will want in return (IF he waives). Andersen is younger, battle tested, and has played in the West his entire career. I would further argue Fleury has had the benefit of playing behind a top flight franchise for a decade, and there is no guarantee how this would translate to a young and inexperienced team mired in a rebuild.
- FLflames34

He had exactly one bad playoff series vs the Iles

Where are the other 3? The 4 2-1 loses to the Rangers last season????

The Flames have way too many holes in their lineup to be trading draft picks and prospects away. I thought it was a bad idea last year to trade away all those picks and it would be even worse this year.

If the Penguins or Red Wings are looking to dump a goalie and will make a trade for someone like Wideman, that would be great. If not, keep building the team and bring back Ramo and Ortio.

The fact that the flames have not been granted permission to talk with Bruce Broudreau, makes me think the chances of us being trade partners to land Anderson very small. Just my thoughts but it seems less likely now.

I would be alright with Fleury! I think he would be a perfect stop gap for Jon Gillies to get the experience he needs.

Hamonic and halak plus our first round pick to the flames....whos in and for what
- Flexingtheshaft

Take out Hamonic (love to have him but we'd lose him to expansion) and add Strome for our 6th OA and FLA 2nd