I’d be all for it depending what he wants on his next contract. I’m sure a lot of people here will not want him because all they did was look at his numbers from last year.
He was in the 50s in every major stat on a "good" defensive team. Murray in this system would be a diaster waiting to happen. He hasnt been the same since 2017 tbh
So are we now going to give up assets and cap space for a goalie on what will likely be a losing team?
Awesome!
Are they going to be losing forever? I could see your aguement if we were trading for a 1 year UFA goalie.
It really depends. We have no idea what the ask is for Murray, and we have no idea what his extension will look like. It's Stan's job to look into these things. Whether he makes the trade or not, I don't know, but he should be checking these things.Any real source on this?
Garrioch is Eklund level when it comes to anything outside of Sens
Also Murray makes no sense for a variety of reasons
1) He would cost asset/assets to bring in ,, That would be mistake #1
2) He requires a new contract that will be overpayment and nearly impossible for Hawks to fit under cap ,, That would be mistake #2
3) He is downgrade from Crawford ,, Acquiring Murray to be #1 would be mistake #3
If Murray doesn't cost much to acquire, I'm ok with it. He's a potential long-term solution if he turns it around.It really depends. We have no idea what the ask is for Murray, and we have no idea what his extension will look like. It's Stan's job to look into these things. Whether he makes the trade or not, I don't know, but he should be checking these things.
It's possible. It's not like Pittsburgh has a lot of leverage here. Cap crunch, good goalie UFA market, and they've shown their hand by re-signing Jarry.If Murray doesn't cost much to acquire, I'm ok with it.