Yup, but Murray is a complete mess. Maybe at 1.5m as a backup.

Depending on who becomes the next goalie coach who knows

Like if Dubas can get Korn or Rosati (both apparently are leaving their positions) then we could see Murray rebound into a 1B

Especially with Korn as he has worked with some very good goalies

where did murray finish in sv percentage and where did mrazek finish. keep in mind one team is vastly superior to the other

tbh I don't see any real reason other than slight cash savings for the Sens to do this. Murray was the better goalie last season, his issue is injury troubles and considering that's largely concussions, there's a real solid chance that Murray gets hurt again and ends up on LTIR by the end of his contract. So why would the Sens downgrade just for a very slim margin of cap savings during years they're not against the cap anyways, when the potential reward of the better goalie or just having all the cap space cleared via LTIR is way higher for the Leafs?

I could pretty much say the exact same about mrazek and his groin. But I'm not foolish enough to call either of them the better goalie. They're both horrible.

Murray has probably been the most injury prone NHL player the last 5 years. This includes SEVERAL concussions

Very high chance he just ends up on LTIR. I'm actually quite surprised he still gets cleared for contact.

Can't see Ottawa buying him out as that would mean 2.5 M$ cost for the next 4 years.



Sometimes nothing can convince some people, might as well let them believe what they want to believe. Any goalie or ex-goalie will tell you that Murray is much better in terms of ability, it's not a question. The problem is he is (both are) "damaged goods".

But there is absolutely NO INCENTIVE for Ottawa to make this proposed deal. Poorly thought out

I agree, please tell the rest of the sens fans that murray isn't going to Toronto for assets.

Murray: 20- .898, 21- .893, 22-.904 = 6.25m
Mrazek: 20- .905, 21- .923, 22,.888 = 3.8m

How anyone can look at these two goalies and say leafs need to add is beyond me.

Problem is the major difference in AAV

Both goalies have 2 years left, both are injury prone


Now, If you retain $2,250,000 on Murray it brings their AAV almost equal at 4.0 vs 3.8

So please tell me what is the objective for Ottawa to do that?

I am looking at it objectively. That's why I only retained 2m as a small insentuve and made it an even swap. This agm is in response to sens and leafs fans thinking we are going to send assets for Murray. If mrazek is a cap dump at 3.8m than so is Murray. Equally so I would say.

But instead we have idiot leaf fans (and some by sens fans) doing dumb stuff like this:

https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/team/3325985

It's ok if you have your own motivations

I am still asking the same question :

If both goalies have the same contract, what would be the objective for Ottawa to do that swap?

200k that is it and that is all. Now what is the objective for the leafs?

Because all this talk was based on the ASSUMPTION that the Leafs were the ones who WANTED to acquire Matt Murray

If not, these ACGMs wouldn't exist... Why did I need to remind you that? I mean lol

Again, IF and only IF the Leafs want Murray, what would they pay to make the swap if contracts are made similar with retention?

If you tell me "NOTHING", then again, why would Ottawa do this?


I mean, this is clear, no?

This all over CJ saying Murray is from the soo maybe dubas might have interest. It is a stupid premise to begin with that can be ignored.

you are coming to an agm that is clearly titled "the only Matt Murray teades" I gave two options as the only reason leafs would even consider taking in Murray. Then you continue to quiz me about why ottawa would do it after I told you several times and to be honest I don't really care. I don't want Murray and neither does dubas.


Option 1. Save 200k in cap space.

Option 2. Get some assets for taking on 900k in cap space.


This was all listed in the details of the trade.

Reason for the leafs to do option 1: absolutely none. Not a reason in the world. We are in a worse position with no starter. But at least we aren't being mugged.

Option 2. Again really none. Leafs are 900k better and paid for it when they should just be trading a 3rd and a prospect to move mrazek and be 3.8m better.

I hope this clarifies everything.

https://www.cbssports.com/fantasy/hockey/news/senators-matt-murray-will-be-ready-for-camp/

Hes not staying on LTIR he already said hes ready for Camp so unless Ottawa decides to lose Gustavsson for nothing they are gonna have to either buy him out or try and trade him

Yeah but you know all athletes want to continue playing. I am 42 years old and I am currently spending over 5 000$ on a chiro treatment to continue playing with my friends...

Clarke MacArthur and Anders Nilsson also wanted to continue playing, but at some point it was not in their control. It's not entirely over for Murray but with his injury AND concussions history, he's at least very close to not be cleared for contact again.



Ok they won't have to waive Gustavsson. They can just keep a goalie as a scratch (Murray could be on IR 50% of the time again). You still have the right to carry 23 players even if you only dress 19 for a game. With Murray propensity to get injured, Ottawa will need 3 goalies this season

They also won't buy him out. That would be a 2.5 M$ DEAD COST for the next 4 years. I doubt they would do that to save just 5 M$ split in 4 years.

Trade him, it depends. With Melnyk, they would have looked to save money first and foremost. Now it's uncertain.

To be followed...

Yes but which Sens fan on this site or which report in real life suggested that Ottawa would be interested in making that swap?

With no retention, yes they would be interested as we know they like to save money (even without Melnyk?) but it is different with retention


You are telling me "I gave two options as the only reason leafs would even consider taking in Murray" as if it was Ottawa's side looking to make this deal...


That you find the premise stupid or not, it doesn't change that fact

But it's ok if you don't understand this. Let's just move on

But don't worry, I understood that you are not interested in giving up any asset to take on Murray, retention or not. This part was clear before we started exchanging

Where did I ever say ottawa was interested in those deals?

Besides you based on your ridiculous comment in the other thread...

This guy... but neither of you are based in reality https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/team/3323838

One day you'll realize that your "opinion" is not gospel.

My opinion is based on following the NHL the hardcore way for 3+ decades but it doesn't even mean that I'll be right every time.

On equal AAV, every team would pick up Matt Murray which is why people think the Leafs need to give an asset in that scenario. But you are free to be in the minority if you want

From where I sit, your comments are ridiculous not mine. But again, you are free to believe what you want to believe and I don't give a crap, there's like 8 billion people on the planet lol

You base your opinion on your bias. I'm just handing out facts. Next time you come to try and say someone is wrong try bringing those instead.

I have no bias. I tell things exactly like they are. I could say for example that Auston Matthews is probably the second best goal scorer of all time behind Ovechkin. I don't care at all, I way way past this garbage homerism.

Oh and I'm sorry but you haven't brought any fact outside of numbers that can't be compared.

Are we done now?

I gave facts numbers and sound reasoning based on math, you gave "bUt mUh OpINiOn" and MurRaY wAs GoOd SiX yEaRs AgO"

Feel free to quit commenting on my agm at any time.

It's ok, you just don't understand anything but I'll summarize one last time to give you a chance

People say :

Matt Murray (3 years younger) at same contract length and same AAV has MORE value than Petr Mrazek

You say he doesn't. This is YOUR opinion. OK fine

You bring up general stats that don't even take context in consideration. OK fine

Maybe some will agree with YOUR opinion, but not everyone will

It is as simple as that

Context: maybe he does have a bit more value if the money were equal. Does that make it enough to even be positive value? We are comparing him to mrazek lol. Do the leafs want a washed up bum playing in net?

Leafs would happily just pay to move Mrazek. The two trades I listed are the only way we should consider taking on Murray. Even then it still makes zero sense because we are still need of a starting goalie. Leafs don't want to pay a backup/ahl goalie 4m.