Sweatred
Erase me
- Jan 28, 2019
- 13,408
- 3,324
It’s connected to expansion - lots of similar contracts - when’s the next expansion draft ? And who says he wouldn’t prefer Seattle ?
Prospect Info: Filip Gustavsson (G)
- Thread starter AchtzehnBaby
- Start date
It’s connected to expansion - lots of similar contracts - when’s the next expansion draft ? And who says he wouldn’t prefer Seattle ?
I doubt they take Murray with that contract. I see no point in protecting him.
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 53,737
- 30,921
We signed Dadonov and Zub recently, Zaitsev waived his NTC to come here, so sure, never say it can't get worse because it inevitably will.
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 53,737
- 30,921
Sure, he might prefer Seattle, but these guys have egos and nobody likes finding out their team doesn't value them. Phaneuf refused to waive his NMC, until he shows otherwise I wouldn't assume Murray would rather be in Seattle.
Alf Silfversson
Registered User
- Jun 8, 2011
- 5,767
- 4,808
I get this mentality but I think the majority of NHL players want to play on a winning team. Seeing us make bad moves that hurt our future might be just as problematic in the eyes of those players.
I say make the moves that will make you successful on the ice and the rest will start to fall in place.
Sweatred
Erase me
- Jan 28, 2019
- 13,408
- 3,324
Who knows ... he didn’t force a NTC which would have protected him against that reality. He could of traded a NTC benefit for less term or AAV if it was more important than cash to him.
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 53,737
- 30,921
Murray has a NTC in every year he was eligible for one. Are you thinking a NMC? Hard to imagine he was in any position to demand a full NMC.
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 53,737
- 30,921
Do you think players will see exposing a two time SC champ in favour of an unproven rookie as good or bad? I don't think players will immediately jump to the conclusion that protecting Murray is a bad move that hurts our future, he's 26 afterall.
I think that if they want to expose Murray in order to gain “an extra protection spot”, they need to have a discussion with him, and perhaps his agent first to make sure that they let them know that they are wanted here.
If done right it could be conveyed that they are simply trying to leverage the situation to best suit the team and the players, like they tried to do with Phaneuf.
I personally think that we need Murray going forward for a while. We have Foresberg and D’accord and Gus, with Gus still being very young.
We need stability in net next season, and we have seen how important steady goaltending is , and we need it to start the year next season.
Just my opinion, but Murray was playing great hockey when he went down, and we need his veteran experience and talent on our team right now.
If done right it could be conveyed that they are simply trying to leverage the situation to best suit the team and the players, like they tried to do with Phaneuf.
I personally think that we need Murray going forward for a while. We have Foresberg and D’accord and Gus, with Gus still being very young.
We need stability in net next season, and we have seen how important steady goaltending is , and we need it to start the year next season.
Just my opinion, but Murray was playing great hockey when he went down, and we need his veteran experience and talent on our team right now.
Sweatred
Erase me
- Jan 28, 2019
- 13,408
- 3,324
Ya - sorry. I assume there would have been a trade off point that PD would have gladly “sold” a no movement to protect Murray at least through the expansion draft. My point is Murray preferred the $$$ over that price of that NMC.
Murray willingly signed a contact knowing he could be moved to Seattle. It’s a reality he already acknowledged and accepted.
Last edited:
NyQuil
Big F$&*in Q
Murray received a handsome contract given his run of play over the past two seasons, to the point where he's likely un-selectable by the Kraken.
I don't think you have to apologize for making the shrewdest move when it comes to protecting the roster.
That's why you have a coach that is different from the GM.
I don't think you have to apologize for making the shrewdest move when it comes to protecting the roster.
That's why you have a coach that is different from the GM.
DrEasy
Out rumptackling
He wants to annoy the GM so he gets unprotected and ends up in Seattle. Pretty smart!
cudi
Mojo So Dope
- Feb 2, 2020
- 8,023
- 12,054
I love Swedish honesty. So to the point lol
This one is good also lol. I assume they meant 'yard'.
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 53,737
- 30,921
Sure, everybody has a price, I just think a NMC tends to cost a lot, I think saying he could have just held out for one if he didn't want to end up in Seattle is a bit like saying why didn't we just sign that high profile UFA or trade for that great player. It takes two to agree and Murray frankly lacked the leverage to be making demands.
There really hasn't been any indication he'd rather be in Seattle, him not demanding a full NMC isn't really evidence, heck even if he had demanded a full NMC and managed to get it, it wouldn't kick in until 28 July 2021 so it would be week too late, he wasn't eligible for a NMC this year.
I don't think it signals giving up on him at all - it shows that GMPD is reading the situation and that currently Murray's contract is in the upper tier for goalies while also seeing the numbers he has put up (and the risk of his current injury and injury history) reflect a very risky pick from the Kraken.
If he chooses to expose both of our young goalies GMPD has make a massive mistake IMO.
Alf Silfversson
Registered User
- Jun 8, 2011
- 5,767
- 4,808
That's possible. But if we manage to keep both that's a plus. I don't think Seatlle will take Murray if he's exposed. And if they do, then you can overpay any FA (like we did with Murray) and the whole point is moot.
Yeah the Scandinavians come off as extremely blunt. Work with them quite a bit and it’s pretty funny but I can see some other people being maybe offended. Totally different ways of speaking the English language
Sens of Anarchy
Registered User
- Jul 9, 2013
- 65,240
- 49,846
Filip Gustavsson succeeds in bid to show the Senators he has a strong future with the club | Ottawa Sun
Now did Bruce not just say that Gustavsson would likely get exposed and Daccord would be protected... is he back tracking on that with this headline?
Now did Bruce not just say that Gustavsson would likely get exposed and Daccord would be protected... is he back tracking on that with this headline?
coladin
Registered User
- Sep 18, 2009
- 11,812
- 4,500
Keep Gustavsson way from big club,we need to be shite for Wright next year and he'll ruin that
Sensmileletsgo
Registered User
- Oct 22, 2018
- 5,101
- 4,308
Sensinitis
Registered User
- Aug 5, 2012
- 15,934
- 5,526
In a year where goaltending has been a massive question mark, Gus has been by far our best option at that position. He’s so composed, smart and athletic which makes you think the sky is the limit with this kid
dumbdick
Galactic Defender
- May 31, 2008
- 11,328
- 3,738
Reminds me of when Alfie said we wouldn't come back in that playoff series.
DylanSensFan
BEESHIP: NBH
I'm not sure what people are on about, because I've only read this page tonight. But for sure we protect Murray. If it is an argument between Gus and Daccord? I choose Gus, because he has more pedigree than Daccord. I'm not sure why people would want to protect Daccord over Murray. It is absolutely insane talk.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
Pelicans Lahti @ Tappara Tampere - Tappara leads series 2-0Wagers: 2Staked: $15,126.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
-
-
