Eklund Rumor: MAF to LA Kings?

Toronto makebeleifs

Registered User
Jul 4, 2014
1,964
688
I can see the logic. Apparently Quick is out for 3+ months. Cam Budaj/Zatkoff hold the load? Maybe. If the Kings management don't think so, they could make a move.

The problem is cap space. The Kings have less than $2mil I believe. They'd need to free up almost $4mil. The Pens will absolutely not retain on MAF. So it will have to be contracts coming back. I can't imagine who would be moved from LA that the Pens would need/want that the Kings would be willing to move.

See, that's the thing, there is no logic as soon as the cap us factored in. Both teams are up against it meaning similar salaries would have to go each way (or retention). This, again, is Eklund throwing stuff against a wall. MAF dispite his salary still holds value as a very good goalie. The cost for LA to acquire him would be prohibitive and result in them giving up too much.
 

OCPenguin

Registered User
Jan 22, 2013
3,146
171
See, that's the thing, there is no logic as soon as the cap us factored in. Both teams are up against it meaning similar salaries would have to go each way (or retention). This, again, is Eklund throwing stuff against a wall. MAF dispite his salary still holds value as a very good goalie. The cost for LA to acquire him would be prohibitive and result in them giving up too much.

We can forget LA. Tomorrow, Ek will post Calgary calling Pittsburgh for a goalie. That is a better fit.
 

Rufus

Letangarang
May 27, 2014
1,929
18
LOL ... the last player we need back is Dustin Brown. What part of Pittsburgh won't be taking on salary BECAUSE IT NEEDS CAP ROOM at the end of the season don't you understand?

[mod]

Welp, no one is going to trade for Fleury without sending some cap back. Sorry to ruin your fantasy
 

OCPenguin

Registered User
Jan 22, 2013
3,146
171
Welp, no one is going to trade for Fleury without sending some cap back. Sorry to ruin your fantasy

If so, its for some BS player of lesser value, so the enticement to take back non factor player with salary better be pretty significant.
 

varano

Registered User
Jun 27, 2013
5,161
1,917
There is literally NO trade out there for the kings because of their cap space. It would have to be a goalie on an expiring contract with 50% retention or a guy like kuemper who doesn't make much money and could be a slight upgrade over their current situation.

I think they ride budaj for a while.
 

Mad Brills*

Guest
It would have to be a goalie on an expiring contract with 50% retention or a guy like kuemper who doesn't make much money and could be a slight upgrade over their current situation.

Basically, him, pavelec, or ryan miller.
 

Greg Schuler

Registered User
Apr 3, 2012
347
39
I just find it frustrating how ever Eklund thread if full of people complaining about Eklund instead of talking about logistics of the deal.
Nobody called out Friedman and he gifted even less of a source.

I get it, Friedman has a recorded reliability (and I love Friedman, don't mean to knock him), but it's Eklund has a recorded history of passing on all talks he hears.
So instead of talking about Eklund, talk about the rumours he has heard; teams talk literally all the time and you better believe the Kings have talked to other teams about goaltenders. Let's talk about that.

Okay, let's do that. Yes, Matt Murray just signed a 3-year extension. Matt Murray is hurt and has not played yet this season. For Pittsburgh to trade Marc-Andre Fleury, they need a healthy Murray who has proved he is an above average NHL goaltender. Playoff heroics aside, Murray is not a proven NHL goaltender - yet. Until he is healthy, it is foolish for Pittsburgh to consider trading Fleury.

On the Los Angeles side, making the cap work would be tricky. Fleury is not happy with the potential tandem situation in Pittsburgh. I imagine he would not be happy as a clear backup in Los Angeles when Quick returns from injury. Unless Lombardi has some CBA trickery to divest Fleury from the the Kings, there don't seem to be many dots connect aside from Los Angeles needs a goalie, Pittsburgh just signed Murray, Fleury has to be protected (oh, yeah, about that). That even assumes that Fleury does not have Los Angeles on his No-Trade list.
 

mazmin

Wig like a mink skin, soft like Twinkie dough
May 15, 2004
3,399
1,130
Winnipeg
No way this happens...

Maybe Pavelec for a 4th rounder.

Or an AHL signing hoping for the next Hamburgler.
 

SEALBound

Fancy Gina Carano
Sponsor
Jun 13, 2010
40,602
18,774
I don't see any logical way for the Kings to carry MAF and Quick once he comes back. However, when Quick does come back, the need for MAF could grow among other teams in the league. Once MAF waives his NMC, it goes away. So he could be traded anywhere.

Pearson for MAF+Wilson

then later something like:

MAF to Calgary for picks or a young player...whatever.

Long shot I realize but...it's just so hard to make a trade with these two teams and these players.
 

Cherpak

Registered User
Jan 1, 2014
5,059
3
Okay, let's do that. Yes, Matt Murray just signed a 3-year extension. Matt Murray is hurt and has not played yet this season. For Pittsburgh to trade Marc-Andre Fleury, they need a healthy Murray who has proved he is an above average NHL goaltender. Playoff heroics aside, Murray is not a proven NHL goaltender - yet. Until he is healthy, it is foolish for Pittsburgh to consider trading Fleury.

On the Los Angeles side, making the cap work would be tricky. Fleury is not happy with the potential tandem situation in Pittsburgh. I imagine he would not be happy as a clear backup in Los Angeles when Quick returns from injury. Unless Lombardi has some CBA trickery to divest Fleury from the the Kings, there don't seem to be many dots connect aside from Los Angeles needs a goalie, Pittsburgh just signed Murray, Fleury has to be protected (oh, yeah, about that). That even assumes that Fleury does not have Los Angeles on his No-Trade list.

Not to mention the Kings would have two goalies they would need to protect. Trading for Fleury would almost ensure they would have to leave him available for the draft. So they risk losing him for a few months of service time and get little value back. Makes no sense.
 

Trolfoli

Registered User
May 30, 2013
4,640
0
I don't see any logical way for the Kings to carry MAF and Quick once he comes back. However, when Quick does come back, the need for MAF could grow among other teams in the league. Once MAF waives his NMC, it goes away. So he could be traded anywhere.

Pearson for MAF+Wilson

then later something like:

MAF to Calgary for picks or a young player...whatever.

Long shot I realize but...it's just so hard to make a trade with these two teams and these players.

Have you seen the Kings play without Pearson recently? :laugh:
 

mwalluk

Registered User
Jul 2, 2009
299
6
The only way this trade would work is if Kings traded either Brown or Carter for Flower. Essentially getting one of those 2 off the books with hopes Flower will be taken by LV.
 

SEALBound

Fancy Gina Carano
Sponsor
Jun 13, 2010
40,602
18,774
The only way this trade would work is if Kings traded either Brown or Carter for Flower. Essentially getting one of those 2 off the books with hopes Flower will be taken by LV.

Has Carter fallen off?
 

Jim Bob

RIP RJ
Feb 27, 2002
56,200
35,356
Rochester, NY
MAF --> LAK --> LV

This idea makes sense if the Kings are cool with renting MAF and LV takes him in the expansion draft or they figure that they can trade MAF at the draft if LV takes someone else.
 

SEALBound

Fancy Gina Carano
Sponsor
Jun 13, 2010
40,602
18,774
Glad other people around the league are noticing!

I can't imagine LA giving him up, one of our only young top sixers.



He fought through injuries last year and looked rusty, but he's beastmode again now.

Been wanting him for awhile. I catch more west coast games than east coast games.

The game I saw Carter in he looked fine...but heck if LA wants to do a Carter-MAF swap...I'd be okay with that.
 

Trolfoli

Registered User
May 30, 2013
4,640
0
MAF --> LAK --> LV

This idea makes sense if the Kings are cool with renting MAF and LV takes him in the expansion draft or they figure that they can trade MAF at the draft if LV takes someone else.

I'm actually thinking the Kings could gamble exposing Quick in the draft instead. I'm not sure Vegas would take a goalie Quick's age to build around. Ok that's a little crazy.

Do want to see what Ranford could do with MAF though.
 

pheasant

Registered User
Nov 2, 2010
4,226
1,376
You can honestly, and I'm not joking here, read the comments section underneath NHL news articles and watch for trade suggestions, and you will find the same quality as Eklund rumors.

This looks like some random fan heard about the Quick injury, remembered PIT has two goalies, and wrote down an idea without thinking it through. Absolute garbage that this guy gets paid to write about hockey.
 

SEALBound

Fancy Gina Carano
Sponsor
Jun 13, 2010
40,602
18,774
You can honestly, and I'm not joking here, read the comments section underneath NHL news articles and watch for trade suggestions, and you will find the same quality as Eklund rumors.

This looks like some random fan heard about the Quick injury, remembered PIT has two goalies, and wrote down an idea without thinking it through. Absolute garbage that this guy gets paid to write about hockey.

Technically he doesn't...he runs hockeybuzz which gets it's $$ from advertisers. Most of why I got there is to read the other bloggers he has, most of whom are decent.
 

mwalluk

Registered User
Jul 2, 2009
299
6
From a Pens prospective, the only way Carter or Brown would work is if LA retained some salary. Otherwise, CAP hits wouldn't work.

Both have 5 years left, 31 years old and have cap hits around 9 million.

Honestly, that's the only way I think a deal can be worked. Maybe Gaborik? I think either Brown or Carter would do well with Crosby, would also help on PK, but not at that cap hit. Maybe LA retains a little to get it closer to Fluery's cap hit since Pitt will be stuck with those contracts for another 5 years?

Other than that, teams aren't a match.
 

Kingspiracy

Registered User
Nov 13, 2006
6,323
2,420
From a Pens prospective, the only way Carter or Brown would work is if LA retained some salary. Otherwise, CAP hits wouldn't work.

Both have 5 years left, 31 years old and have cap hits around 9 million.

Honestly, that's the only way I think a deal can be worked. Maybe Gaborik? I think either Brown or Carter would do well with Crosby, would also help on PK, but not at that cap hit. Maybe LA retains a little to get it closer to Fluery's cap hit since Pitt will be stuck with those contracts for another 5 years?

Other than that, teams aren't a match.

Out to lunch, we're gonna trade Carter for Fleury? Really, why the hell would we want to do that? Carts could be a 1c on a weak team and has a cap hit of about 5mill. Keep Fleury, absolutely no interest in him. A rather expensive back up don't you think?
 

HookKing

Registered User
Dec 12, 2008
8,795
2,580
The only way the Kings are looking at MAF is if they think Quick may be permanently done.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad