Rumor: MAF has submitted a 10 team no-trade list

93gilmour93

Registered User
Feb 27, 2010
18,290
20,372
I'd I had to guess.......

Ottawa
Edmonton
Winnipeg
Calgary
Los Angeles
Anaheim
San Jose
Detroit
Buffalo
New Jersey
 

SML2

Registered User
Jan 1, 2018
4,751
6,790
If he put even the slightest amount of thought into this, he could figure which ten teams even had the space to fit him, put them on the list and just be the awkward moment in the room in Vegas for the rest of his contract.
 

BurgoShark

Registered User
Jul 1, 2004
3,640
689
Gold Coast
Probably moot because of all the NTC/NMC’s, but Ottawa would entertain something like ....

Fleury (2 years $7m AAv, $12.5m owed)
Stastny (1 year, $6.5m AAv, $5.5m owed)

for

Ryan (2 years, $7.25m AAv, $15m owed)
Nilsson (1 year, $2.6m AAv, $2.4m owed)

***

Pretty close to money-in/money-out for Ottawa, it makes Tierney expendable, and they could flip Stastny at the deadline for futures.

Note that Bobby Ryan does not require ED protection, but he can not be sent to the minors.

I don’t think Vegas does this - and it would need 3 players waiving - but from an Ottawa PoV that is what sort of deal it would take for them to be interested in Fleury.
 

GIN ANTONIC

Registered User
Aug 19, 2007
18,786
14,617
Toronto, ON
Then he should've negotiated that in his contract if he wanted that level of control. Look, there are some people who will look to maximize their leverage in situations. It's possible Fleury may do that but plenty of players with these sorts of clauses also keep it pretty simple with the intent that they're either just going through the motions because it's an annual event and have no real fear of being dealt or just want to move on and don't try to play 3D chess when it just doesn't matter that much.

Until we know what Fleury is looking for or what he's looking to avoid because those are both viable ways to approach it, it's impossible to say with any real certainty.

You ask why waste 10 picks on teams that aren't going to trade for you as if teams don't change quickly on these things depending on what's out there for them. You're not diminishing your options no matter what reasoning is used to pick the ten teams you don't want to go to. It's your negotiated contract and your power to wield as you see fit for whatever reason. It's not like jury selection because things change in a hot second in the NHL. Typically, a no-trade list is to avoid organizations for whatever reason...and whichever team that Vegas completes a deal with he is fine with playing for regardless of their situation.

Because demanding a complete NTC on your contract means in a negotiation with the team you are going to have to give something the other way. Maybe you get a year less of term or AAV. Doing a limited NTC allows you to have your cake and eat too in a sense.

And it’s exactly like the jury selection thing. If you know that a team isn’t in a position to trade for you then it’s idiotic to put them on your list. You don’t submit the list at the beginning of the contract and then it’s set in stone. It’s done after each year so you can change it based on the current situation.
 

Mosby

<3 Uncle Gary
Feb 16, 2012
23,373
18,075
Toronto
Rumor: Marc-Andre Fleury Has Submitted No-Trade List To Vegas Golden Knights

I bet the 10 teams are

1) Toronto
2) Vancouver
3) Calgary (he did reject it 5 years ago, don't see why it would change now)
4) Edmonton
5) Philly
6) Washington
7) Ottawa
8) ?
9) ?
10) ?

It doesn't make sense for him to waste spots on teams that clearly aren't going to acquire him. Vancouver has no interest in adding a goalie so why add them? If he makes smart selections he can effectively expand the list and better choose where he ends up.
 

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
70,232
13,597
Folsom
Because demanding a complete NTC on your contract means in a negotiation with the team you are going to have to give something the other way. Maybe you get a year less of term or AAV. Doing a limited NTC allows you to have your cake and eat too in a sense.

And it’s exactly like the jury selection thing. If you know that a team isn’t in a position to trade for you then it’s idiotic to put them on your list. You don’t submit the list at the beginning of the contract and then it’s set in stone. It’s done after each year so you can change it based on the current situation.

And thus it limits your level of control so it's pointless to try and portray it as having your cake and eating it too because it isn't like that just because you want it to be.

And no, it's not like a jury selection thing because jurors are static in what they present to you as an option. Teams are not. Off-seasons are fluid and while you could make reasonable gambles to that end if you want, I sincerely doubt players really think that much into it. It's going to come down to what Fleury prioritizes for his next team and try to avoid the teams that present the least amount of opportunity toward that end. Pretty simple.
 

BobClarkesfrontteeth

Registered User
Feb 6, 2020
1,361
848
Parts unknown
I would be surprised if San Jose is on his no trade list. I think a trade around him and jones makes sense for both sides. Maybe San Jose takes Stastny as well? They have a ton of unproven kids on that roster at center right now.
Would be a good way to dig out from under that Jones contract.
 

GIN ANTONIC

Registered User
Aug 19, 2007
18,786
14,617
Toronto, ON
And thus it limits your level of control so it's pointless to try and portray it as having your cake and eating it too because it isn't like that just because you want it to be.

And no, it's not like a jury selection thing because jurors are static in what they present to you as an option. Teams are not. Off-seasons are fluid and while you could make reasonable gambles to that end if you want, I sincerely doubt players really think that much into it. It's going to come down to what Fleury prioritizes for his next team and try to avoid the teams that present the least amount of opportunity toward that end. Pretty simple.

Well we have no idea what Fleury prioritizes but IF he does care about maximum control of the situation and choosing his destination then leaving teams off the list who aren’t in any position to make a move for a goalie would be wise. At least that’s a plausible strategy and I think it’s pretty naive to say that players and their agents don’t take their NTC lists seriously.
 

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
70,232
13,597
Folsom
Well we have no idea what Fleury prioritizes but IF he does care about maximum control of the situation and choosing his destination then leaving teams off the list who aren’t in any position to make a move for a goalie would be wise. At least that’s a plausible strategy and I think it’s pretty naive to say that players and their agents don’t take their NTC lists seriously.

Taking it seriously and looking to maximize leverage are two different things. It's still taking it seriously to just put a list of ten teams that you just don't want to be on for whatever reason. It depends on how he's approaching it. He could just approach it looking to avoid going to certain teams rather than looking to join a specific set of teams.
 

Eggtimer

Registered User
Jul 4, 2011
15,066
12,131
Calgary Alberta
You guys think Devils are on the list ? Combo of sucking and Pens rival ...
I would like MAF to spliut with Blackwood . Teach Blackwood the ropes for two years is perfect. Only issue is Schneider and MAF together would be over 13 mil in cap for goalies plus blackwoods salary....
Not sure if Schneider is bought out or what will happen but he is cooked and no way in hell should be starting another game for the Devils.
I cant see any NHL team willing to take him no matter what kind of asset is attached.
 

hmc1987

Registered User
Jun 2, 2019
1,378
570

Sinbad

Registered User
Jun 22, 2018
631
420
Parts Unknown
I'm guessing every Canadian team plus Columbus, Arizona and Buffalo.
Why would he include Montreal, they already have Price and Allen, no way they are trading for Fleury.

Vancouver has Demko, Di Pietro and would probably try to retain Markstrom first, so they really Have no need for Fleury either.

Winnipeg has Hellebuyck so no need there either.

To include either of those teams would be a waste for Fleury if he is trying to dictate his destination.
 

DudeWhereIsMakar

Bergevin sent me an offer sheet
Apr 25, 2014
15,596
6,618
Winnipeg
Edmonton would be one of his best options if you ask me.

Think if Anaheim sends Gibson to a contender, hopefully Colorado, Anaheim considers making Fleury their starter.
 

Headshot77

Bad Photoshopper
Feb 15, 2015
3,887
1,822
Honestly it's not a bad deal for both teams. Vegas gets out of having a $7m goaltender sitting on their bench for most of the season.

Engo may retire. JMFJ is a terrible defenseman the more you have him play even strength but he's an excellent penalty killer. He's a cheaper buyout option than MAF if they want to go that route and it's probably cheaper to pay someone a 2nd or 3rd to take him off your hands than a 1st or more to take MAF off your hands.
This would SUCK for Vegas. They should buy out Fleury instead of wasting 3.5 million in cap (3.25 million in real dollars) on him, and THEN having 3.25 in dead cap/salary in a player that makes the team worse. A Fleury buyout is 2.083 million for four years. So Vegas saves a good 5 million by buying him out. A buyout saves them 4 to 5 million dollars in cap space those first two years.
 

Sinbad

Registered User
Jun 22, 2018
631
420
Parts Unknown
I mean if he wants to choose where he goes, he puts ten teams that have no interest in him.

Actually the opposite of what you just said, why put ten teams that you know aren’t going to trade for you? You already know your not going there.

If you put the 10 teams most in need of goaltending then you can remove them from the list if the negotiations go well (i.e. get another year added to your deal).
 

New Liskeard

Registered User
Jul 7, 2007
10,486
334
I believe, if the Knights buy out MAF, the cap hit remaining would be 2.5 million freeing up 4.5 million in space. Leaving them with approx 10 million in total cap space. Not exactly a bad spot to be in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Duck Knight

Gurglesons

Registered User
Dec 18, 2009
91,437
73,623
San Diego, CA
last-train-tocool.blogspot.com
Actually the opposite of what you just said, why put ten teams that you know aren’t going to trade for you? You already know your not going there.

If you put the 10 teams most in need of goaltending then you can remove them from the list if the negotiations go well (i.e. get another year added to your deal).

It really sure what this means. But, the idea behind putting ten teams that don’t want him gives Fleury a full NTC so he can essentially force the trade ala Kessel and the Yotes.
 

WhalerTurnedBruin55

Fading out, thanks for the times.
Oct 31, 2008
11,346
6,708
7M is too expensive for a backup which is what MAF is at this point

Going to cost Vegas a good asset or eating a lot of cap to move him IMO

I hope so. The way they gamed the system, and ended up as a contender out of the expansion, just seems like the franchise never paid it's dues, and deserves some struggles. That's just me though.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->