Todd Cordell: Calgary Flames, Marc-Andre Fleury Linked Again

Send Wideman back the other way, cap next season is a non-issue (and you are going to have to pay a goalie above average salary if you are looking for an above average goalie.

Yes he's 32, but we have a couple of young goalies that will looking at taking the reins in the next few seasons anyhow

Current deal is 3 years in length and expires when he is 35 - we need at least a 2 year stopgap, if not 3 years.

Concussions are worrisome, more from a performance point of view than from a cap perspective. LTIR absolves cap issues anyways.

If he's healthy and costs little in return, it's worth a shot in my opinion. The same is true for any player though. We could sign Anderson to a 3 year deal and have him blow out his knee and then regret the contract...

A very surprisingly balanced article. Only negative I don't think the Pens have cap issues this offseason.

If you received Dallas first then I think a deal would happen. Dallas 1st plus the mid-2nd and B prospect would be fair.

That's kind of a stretch saying he's being linked to Calgary. Anyone talking about the Flames right now is speculating about every goalie available.

I'm kind of surprised I haven't heard anyone bring up the Blue Jackets goalies yet. Joonas is yet another young goalie who looks like the real deal.

Well, just wait for the Pens fans to come in here and trash Duhatschek's 2nd part. Many of them think we should give up our #6 for Fleury.

Some are reasonable and would be happy with our 2 late 2nds. Definitly more reasonable and something I would consider. But like you said, Todd, there will be better options.

I think the 1st thing that needs to happen is confirmation as to who is exempt. If Gillies is NOT exempt, I think you go after a goalie that costs next to nothing to acquire and doesn't have to be protected due to some NMC rule. I know Gillies is coming off an injury and he may not be looked at from the expansion club. But if he bounces back and has a Murray-esque season, he would be at great risk to be picked up. I wouldn't want to risk that.

Well, just wait for the Pens fans to come in here and trash Duhatschek's 2nd part. Many of them think we should give up our #6 for Fleury.

Some are reasonable and would be happy with our 2 late 2nds. Definitly more reasonable and something

If the Flames give up the 6th overall pick, I'll just assume Brian Burke is running the show in CGY lol....(and probably thinks Fleury exudes truculence, or something)

But yeah, realistically, the expansion draft is the only situation in which the Pens might be forced to deal Fleury for a bit lower of a return. A couple 2nds is probably the best outcome for the pens.

I think the 1st thing that needs to happen is confirmation as to who is exempt. If Gillies is NOT exempt, I think you go after a goalie that costs next to nothing to acquire and doesn't have to be protected due to some NMC rule. I know Gillies is coming off an injury and he may not be looked at from the expansion club. But if he bounces back and has a Murray-esque season, he would be at great risk to be picked up. I wouldn't want to risk that.
- TandA4Flames

Don't think Fleury has to be protected, can't remember where I heard that. I would be totally fine with giving up #53 & #55 & a better prospect like Klimchuk if they take Wideman or Raymond off of us. It truly is a make sense deal for both teams. If Pitt can get better return then good luck & God bless.

Todd, I don't think the cap hit is such an issue. Resigning Ortio for the same 1 way deal at $600K & Fleury is still over 2.5mill cheaper than what we allocated to goaltenders last year. That covers Gio's raise. With Russell & Hudlers & Jones deals off the books & the cap probably going up to $74 mill, I don't see Tre having much issue fitting in Fleury, especially if we improve the prospect & send Raymond or Wideman back.

If rumors are true about expansion....Fleury will have to be dealt or the Pens lose Murray...so they have little power in this deal

I'd be up for snagging Fleury.....2 second round picks might be a little much given the current surplus goalie market, but if they would take back Wideman or Smid as well i'd probably do it. Sure his concussion history is worrisome but if he goes on LTIR he doesn't count against the cap, so a shot to the head in 2 years might be a good thing! (I kid, I kid)

From the last thread.....

Here is a hypothetical idea for you all. If you could acquire both the #2 and the #3 picks but it costs you #6.....and Gaudreau (among a few other novelty pieces), would you do it?
- TandA4Flames

(frank) NO!

Haha...I don't want to be the guy that is super overprotective of his hometown players...but as others have said, Gaudreau is a sure-fire NHL superstar and he's only 22. There's just no reason to do it.

If rumors are true about expansion....Fleury will have to be dealt or the Pens lose Murray...so they have little power in this deal
- YuenglingJagr

Not only that but there's lots of tendies on the market right now. Couple that with many other teams who have cap issues and the Pens will definitely be in a tough spot.

Don't think Fleury has to be protected, can't remember where I heard that. I would be totally fine with giving up #53 & #55 & a better prospect like Klimchuk if they take Wideman or Raymond off of us. It truly is a make sense deal for both teams. If Pitt can get better return then good luck & God bless.

Todd, I don't think the cap hit is such an issue. Resigning Ortio for the same 1 way deal at $600K & Fleury is still over 2.5mill cheaper than what we allocated to goaltenders last year. That covers Gio's raise. With Russell & Hudlers & Jones deals off the books & the cap probably going up to $74 mill, I don't see Tre having much issue fitting in Fleury, especially if we improve the prospect & send Raymond or Wideman back.
- Kevin R

Fleury will costs a lot more than that unless he forces a trade. #6 pick is too high. But two 2nds and a B prospect plus taking a contract we don't want won't get it done. Goalie depth is useful. A cup contender isn't giving up a tandem for no good reason.

2 2nds and B prospect with Wideman not included might get it done.

I don't have good read on Klimchuck though.

I'd prefer resigning schultz over wideman so its a significant negative for penguins to include wideman. Wideman with 1.5 million retained probably makes that deal work. Then I think the pens can re-trade him and maybe retain another million and have the cap room we need.

Fleury will costs a lot more than that unless he forces a trade. #6 pick is too high. But two 2nds and a B prospect plus taking a contract we don't want won't get it done. Goalie depth is useful. A cup contender isn't giving up a tandem for no good reason.

2 2nds and B prospect with Wideman not included might get it done.

At that price I hope BT hangs up the phone without saying goodbye. Fleury has a NTC so the only way he is traded is if Pittsburgh is bent over a barrel and there is enough pressure to force MAF into accepting a trade (we'll know for sure in June if expansion is coming).

The most I'd want us to give up would be one of our 2nds and maybe a 4th/mid level prospect. We could possibly add if Pittsburgh took a bad contract back but I don't really think that will be necessary for us to fit him into our cap.

If Pittsburgh doesn't like that price then I'd move onto one of the 6 other stop-gap options available to us.

Hurry up and hire a (frank)ing coach already you slackers.

At that price I hope BT hangs up the phone without saying goodbye. Fleury has a NTC so the only way he is traded is if Pittsburgh is bent over a barrel and there is enough pressure to force MAF into accepting a trade (we'll know for sure in June if expansion is coming).

The most I'd want us to give up would be one of our 2nds and maybe a 4th/mid level prospect. We could possibly add if Pittsburgh took a bad contract back but I don't really think that will be necessary for us to fit him into our cap.

If Pittsburgh doesn't like that price then I'd move onto one of the 6 other stop-gap options available to us.
- Saskabush

Expansion doesn't effecdt Fleury's value. It means theres one more team in the league needing a goalie. Penguins can afford his cap hit this year and are able to expose him in the expansion draft. They really have no reason to trade him unless the deal brings value there way. Fleury is valuable to Pittsburgh. Maybe Murray tears a groin next year and Pittsburgh still has a top 10 netminder. There cup run next year is still possible.

so basically any fleury deal has to be a fair trade.

At that price I hope BT hangs up the phone without saying goodbye. Fleury has a NTC so the only way he is traded is if Pittsburgh is bent over a barrel and there is enough pressure to force MAF into accepting a trade (we'll know for sure in June if expansion is coming).

The most I'd want us to give up would be one of our 2nds and maybe a 4th/mid level prospect. We could possibly add if Pittsburgh took a bad contract back but I don't really think that will be necessary for us to fit him into our cap.

If Pittsburgh doesn't like that price then I'd move onto one of the 6 other stop-gap options available to us.
- Saskabush

Penguins would laugh at that offer. fleury is well-liked and since Murray only cost 700k or so next year they are able to afford him. Value for Value is the only way anything happens. Why would a cup contender give up a top 10 goalie for a 2nd round pick.

Fleury will costs a lot more than that unless he forces a trade. #6 pick is too high. But two 2nds and a B prospect plus taking a contract we don't want won't get it done. Goalie depth is useful. A cup contender isn't giving up a tandem for no good reason.

2 2nds and B prospect with Wideman not included might get it done.
- sditulli

That is just false. If teams are forced to protect players with NMCs...that means the Penguins have from the start of next season to the trade deadline to get rid of Fleury or else risk exposing Matt Murray to expansion

That is just false. If teams are forced to protect players with NMCs...that means the Penguins have from the start of next season to the trade deadline to get rid of Fleury or else risk exposing Matt Murray to expansion
- YuenglingJagr

Yes but fleury doesn't have a full NMC. so he's fair game

Expansion doesn't effecdt Fleury's value. It means theres one more team in the league needing a goalie. Penguins can afford his cap hit this year and are able to expose him in the expansion draft. They really have no reason to trade him unless the deal brings value there way. Fleury is valuable to Pittsburgh. Maybe Murray tears a groin next year and Pittsburgh still has a top 10 netminder. There cup run next year is still possible.

so basically any fleury deal has to be a fair trade.
- sditulli

So you would rather have a backup that makes 6 million for the next 3 years than another player on your team that could significantly improve it, just in case? I'm glad you're not the GM of my team!

Yes but fleury doesn't have a full NMC. so he's fair game
- sditulli

Wrong again...he doesnt have a full NTC. NMC is a different animal

So you would rather have a backup that makes 6 million for the next 3 years than another player on your team that could significantly improve it, just in case? I'm glad you're not the GM of my team!
- The-O-G

Not for 3 years. You are not offering a meaningful contributor. A few ok lottery tickets. For a cup team I'd rather have 1 year of goalie insurance and lose him in the expansion draft than a 2nd round pick. We would prefer to resign schultz than have wideman. And nothing you are offering is better than schultz.

Not for 3 years. You are not offering a meaningful contributor. A few ok lottery tickets. For a cup team I'd rather have 1 year of goalie insurance and lose him in the expansion draft than a 2nd round pick. We would prefer to resign schultz than have wideman. And nothing you are offering is better than schultz.
- sditulli

I mean you are basically saying that you wouldn't even take 2 seconds if Wideman was left out? You could turn the cap space into a contributor! It's just as valuable in my opinion. You're silly to think otherwise!

Fleury will costs a lot more than that unless he forces a trade. #6 pick is too high. But two 2nds and a B prospect plus taking a contract we don't want won't get it done. Goalie depth is useful. A cup contender isn't giving up a tandem for no good reason.

2 2nds and B prospect with Wideman not included might get it done.
- sditulli

Not when you factor in the expansion draft... You risk losing the future to protect the past.
Having a 1A and 1B isn't always the recipe for success. If Murray continues to improve and grow, when does MAF play? When he forces a trade? He'll get #1 min in Calgary (or a few other teams). Unless Murray suddenly regresses, he doesn't with the Pens... Allot of cap space to sit...