Rutherford: Having two top goalies 'hasn't worked … as well as I thought'

Postby **shafnutz05** » Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:22 pm

Thanks for everything Marc.

Postby **Gaucho** » Wed Nov 30, 2016 8:26 am

At least wait until he's dead before you bury him.

Postby **Silentom** » Wed Nov 30, 2016 8:33 am

Marc will never not be a Penguin.

Postby **NTP66** » Wed Nov 30, 2016 8:44 am

Marc will never not be a Penguin.

Postby **the wicked child** » Wed Nov 30, 2016 8:51 am

So he's going to retire?

Postby **Gaucho** » Wed Nov 30, 2016 8:52 am

Marc will never not be a Penguin.

Postby **Morkle** » Wed Nov 30, 2016 10:26 am

Source of the post Some people have mentioned the Pens making a deal with Vegas to not pick Murray, but I recall seeing that the NHL did NOT like that when it happened in the previous expansion drafts and that they will kabosh, and potentially punish, any such attempts.
That is not my recollection, nor current interpretation. That doesn't make Jim wrong, but that's just not my perception of things, for the record.

Even if it was the case. Nothing would stop the GMs from having a "gentleman's agreement" and trading something at a later date. I could see loopholes to get around that.

Postby **meow** » Wed Nov 30, 2016 12:20 pm

GMJR is the only goalie on earth that thought this thing could work out. Starters start. Back-ups back up. Platoon guys platoon.

It was a nice little experiment, and certainly could continue a while longer, but it ain't working all that well.

Postby **Craig** » Wed Nov 30, 2016 12:43 pm

Im sure i could go back and find a lot of people that thought it was a good idea.

Postby **NTP66** » Wed Nov 30, 2016 12:45 pm

I thought it was worth a shot.

Postby **Gaucho** » Wed Nov 30, 2016 12:45 pm

But not many goalies, I guess.

Postby **Troy Loney** » Wed Nov 30, 2016 12:49 pm

I'm pretty sure a common sentiment was that the Pens needed Fleury because there was concern that Murray wasn't the real deal, or needed to prove that he was a true number one over the course of the season or something.

Postby **NTP66** » Wed Nov 30, 2016 12:52 pm

That was my reasoning, for sure.

Postby **dodint** » Wed Nov 30, 2016 1:03 pm

I wanted a 46/36 split, favoring MAF. If they set it up as long stretches for each I would be fine with that.

Postby **Troy Loney** » Wed Nov 30, 2016 1:09 pm

I wanted them to deal MAF for a draft pick and then get Bonino under contract beyond this season.

Postby **meow** » Wed Nov 30, 2016 1:09 pm

Murray hasn't provided he can handle a starters load yet. That's one of the reasons why Fleury is still even here. He's a safety valve - a known commodity. If/when Murray proves he can do it without wearing down, Fleury becomes expendable, possibly even a detriment given his contract. But the dream having keeping both, splitting games and both playing well had a very low chance of being successful.

Postby **Troy Loney** » Wed Nov 30, 2016 1:14 pm

Murray hasn't provided he can handle a starters load yet. That's one of the reasons why Fleury is still even here. He's a safety valve - a known commodity. If/when Murray proves he can do it without wearing down, Fleury becomes expendable, possibly even a detriment given his contract. But the dream having keeping both, splitting games and both playing well had a very low chance of being successful.

He hasn't, they probably needed to bring in an established veteran backup, sort of like the Vokoun signing they did a couple of years ago. I think regardless of the confidence level you had in Murray, having Fleury as the backup plan or 1B, dual starter was a bad call.

Postby **Dickie Dunn** » Wed Nov 30, 2016 1:53 pm

Wonder if we can trade that 5th round pick back to Ottawa for Mike Condon.

Postby **shafnutz05** » Wed Nov 30, 2016 2:29 pm

I wanted a 46/36 split, favoring MAF. If they set it up as long stretches for each I would be fine with that.

Who would mind the net in the other 18% of games? Jarry?

Postby **Craig** » Wed Nov 30, 2016 2:34 pm

I wanted a 46/36 split, favoring MAF. If they set it up as long stretches for each I would be fine with that.
Who would mind the net in the other 18% of games? Jarry?

82 games.

Postby **shafnutz05** » Wed Nov 30, 2016 2:45 pm

I know, although I did do a double take at first glance.

Postby **Gaucho** » Wed Nov 30, 2016 2:47 pm

(never mind, I'm slow ...)

Postby **dodint** » Wed Nov 30, 2016 2:49 pm

I wanted a 46/36 split, favoring MAF. If they set it up as long stretches for each I would be fine with that.
Who would mind the net in the other 18% of games? Jarry?

Bales. Duh.

Postby **Pitts** » Thu Dec 01, 2016 4:53 pm

GMJR is the only goalie on earth that thought this thing could work out. Starters start. Back-ups back up. Platoon guys platoon.

It was a nice little experiment, and certainly could continue a while longer, but it ain't working all that well.

Although I agree this situation is not working out very well, one could ask Anaheim how trading your veteran starter and handing the reins to your very young starting goalie is working out.

Postby **Craig** » Thu Dec 01, 2016 5:06 pm

GMJR is the only goalie on earth that thought this thing could work out. Starters start. Back-ups back up. Platoon guys platoon.

It was a nice little experiment, and certainly could continue a while longer, but it ain't working all that well.
Although I agree this situation is not working out very well, one could ask Anaheim how trading your veteran starter and handing the reins to your very young starting goalie is working out.

What are you trying to get at with this comment?