ShareThis Page

Fleury or Murray? Game 4 goalie debate divides some Penguins fans

| Friday, May 19, 2017, 3:51 p.m.
Christian Tyler Randolph | Tribune-Review
Penguins goalie Matt Murray (30) congratulates Penguins goalie Marc-Andre Fleury (29) on a shut out win against the Senators after game 2 of the Eastern Conference finals in the NHL Playoffs on Monday May 15, 2017 at PPG Paints Arena.

Are you in Camp Murray or Camp Fleury?

Or maybe you're just in Camp Penguins?

Who would think having two Stanley Cup-winning goaltenders on your team could be a problem for a fan?

There perhaps is no more polarizing debate than whether Marc-Andre Fleury or Matt Murray should start for the Penguins — on any given night, really, not just in Game 4 tonight.

But coach Mike Sullivan announced this afternoon that Murray will start Game 4 . Fleury allowed four goals in the first 13 minutes of Game 3 in a 5-1 Penguins loss.

Fleury was forced into the starter's role when Murray was injured during warm-ups before Game 1 of Round 1. And with a depleted defense in front of him, he has done an admirable job keeping the Penguins in games and getting them to this point.

Some thought it was a short leash for Fleury, who has gone 9-5 with a 2.32 goals-against average and .931 save percentage in the Stanley Cup playoffs.

But there was no hiding the fans who agreed with — or at the very least understood — the decision to start Murray.

There's no hiding that Sullivan has always been a fan of Murray's. But he also had been the primary starter all season and until the last month of the season was in the conversation for the Calder Trophy as the league's top rookie.

And — oh, yeah — he helped them win a Stanley Cup championship last season.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.