MAC331 Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 #6OA is not the price for Bishop, is it? I wouldn't think we would be using our 6th pick to get a goalie. We stand to get a skilled forward with this draft and should stick with this as a plan. Also Bishop has some miles on him with a few accidents mixed in there, I would hate for us to spend big and have an injury riddled goalie making that kind of money eating our popcorn. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheersMan Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 Does anyone remember Bishop going down for the count like a soccer player a few weeks back vs PITS? Rolling around on the ice in agony like he just torn something of importance, then stretchered off? Couple days later pics were shown of the guy walking down main street with buddies like nothing happened and he was listed as day to day. Something is not adding up with this guy. Hopefully BT has eyes wide open. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan52 Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 I think neither Pittsburgh or Tampa are in a hurry to trade their goalies, both teams will consider it for the right return, but they aren't just going to give them away. Both teams still very much have cup aspirations and both have better chances of getting there by keeping their goaltending intact. TB needs the cap to keep players now, not in a year. Pitts know they will lose 1 of their 2 to LV in a year when there will be even less market (I can't imagine Calgary going another year without an NHL quality goalie). They posture, ask for the sun & the moon but the closer to training camp we get those GMs will realize they turned down the best offers they are likely to get. When they call back they'll find the refused offer was thrown in the trash but a new, lower 1 is available. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kehatch Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 I don't think Pittsburgh wants to start the season with a 5.5 million dollar back up. Fleury doesn't want to spend his prime years on the bench and thst is a distraction they don't need. They could use the cap space. Plus, the longer they wait the higher the risk they can't move Fleury and that costs them Murray. Tampa is in real cap trouble and have a cheap alternative to Bishop. Plus Bishop is a UFA. They might lose Stamkos for nothing and he missed the playoffs. Do they want to do the same thing with Bishop? Sure neither needs to make a trade now. But in both cases there is a real chance they want to make the trade this summer. Preferably this weekend before Calgary finds an alternative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheersMan Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 I don't think Pittsburgh wants to start the season with a 5.5 million dollar back up. Fleury doesn't want to spend his prime years on the bench and thst is a distraction they don't need. They could use the cap space. Plus, the longer they wait the higher the risk they can't move Fleury and that costs them Murray. Tampa is in real cap trouble and have a cheap alternative to Bishop. Plus Bishop is a UFA. They might lose Stamkos for nothing and he missed the playoffs. Do they want to do the same thing with Bishop? Sure neither needs to make a trade now. But in both cases there is a real chance they want to make the trade this summer. Preferably this weekend before Calgary finds an alternative. Eeny, meeny, miny, mo…… Tree’s looking to deal, but has limited doe. Eeny, meeny, miny, mo…… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 Eeny, meeny, miny, mo…… Tree’s looking to deal, but has limited doe. Eeny, meeny, miny, mo…… We spent $8m+ on crap goaltending last year, and $7m the year before for average. Are ya really concerned about spending $5.9m? Money is not the issue here. Return is. Quality is. The GM's are all playing a game of chicken. BT is making it known he is interested in Reimer. Let's see how long GM of the year and Stevie Y go before they back down a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheersMan Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 We spent $8m+ on crap goaltending last year, and $7m the year before for average. Are ya really concerned about spending $5.9m? Money is not the issue here. Return is. Quality is. The GM's are all playing a game of chicken. BT is making it known he is interested in Reimer. Let's see how long GM of the year and Stevie Y go before they back down a bit. No, I’m not concerned about the $, I’m more concerned about the assets required to acquire. BT has numerous choices available and he is unmistakably in the driver’s seat to get the best deal, that was the intent of the message. The question is, who wants to deal with BT and his terms? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LouCifer Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 Heard about us offering pick 35 to ANA for Andersen, and thought about that Dallas pick for Russell that could've been a 1st at 25th overall... then remembered ANA would never deal Andersen to a divisional opponent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LouCifer Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 I don't think Elliott is available (I've said that in previous post, re: Hitchcock's last year behind the bench, going for cup, etc). But I heard on the radio this morning speculation that Elliott is pretty disgruntled with the way he's been handled in St. Louis. If he's on his way out, a salary of $2.5mil this season, UFA next, I'd target him for sure. You know St. Louis can't take much back in salary, so could be those 2nd round picks trade scenario. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 I don't think Elliott is available (I've said that in previous post, re: Hitchcock's last year behind the bench, going for cup, etc). But I heard on the radio this morning speculation that Elliott is pretty disgruntled with the way he's been handled in St. Louis. If he's on his way out, a salary of $2.5mil this season, UFA next, I'd target him for sure. You know St. Louis can't take much back in salary, so could be those 2nd round picks trade scenario. It would make sense to get Elliott at 2.5M for a year vs Bishop at 6M, if neither is willing to sign extensions BT will not want to be putting to much on the table. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 I don't think Elliott is available (I've said that in previous post, re: Hitchcock's last year behind the bench, going for cup, etc). But I heard on the radio this morning speculation that Elliott is pretty disgruntled with the way he's been handled in St. Louis. If he's on his way out, a salary of $2.5mil this season, UFA next, I'd target him for sure. You know St. Louis can't take much back in salary, so could be those 2nd round picks trade scenario. I was alluding to that previously. He's not going to get a raise unless Allen somehow craps the bed. Even then, I think they believe that they can ice a playoff team without him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StarkRaving Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 Y'know, none of the goalie options are really blowing me away. Some options have a cost/benefit issue that doesn't sit well with me, while others seem like a lateral move from where we were this past season. I'd like to pick up a UFA goalie and sign him to a one-year deal. That's probably going to be a very hard sell, but it'd give BT a ton of flexibility at the expansion draft next year when (1) he has one less player to protect and (2) there's a ton of money coming off the books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 Y'know, none of the goalie options are really blowing me away. Some options have a cost/benefit issue that doesn't sit well with me, while others seem like a lateral move from where we were this past season. I'd like to pick up a UFA goalie and sign him to a one-year deal. That's probably going to be a very hard sell, but it'd give BT a ton of flexibility at the expansion draft next year when (1) he has one less player to protect and (2) there's a ton of money coming off the books. I have a lot of respect for GM Lou now in TOR and I would be following his lead on getting a future top goalie such as Vasilevskiy. Similar situation with Vasilevskiy having a year extra before his RFA year which will cost extra from us but try to structure something similar to what they put on the table for ANA. Let TB keep Bishop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 I have a lot of respect for GM Lou now in TOR and I would be following his lead on getting a future top goalie such as Vasilevskiy. Similar situation with Vasilevskiy having a year extra before his RFA year which will cost extra from us but try to structure something similar to what they put on the table for ANA. Let TB keep Bishop. I think youd have a better shot at getting Korpikoski out of Columbus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 I think youd have a better shot at getting Korpikoski out of Columbus But I don't want Korpikoski. LOL or should we ? I don't know much about him. Star material ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 Y'know, none of the goalie options are really blowing me away. Some options have a cost/benefit issue that doesn't sit well with me, while others seem like a lateral move from where we were this past season. I'd like to pick up a UFA goalie and sign him to a one-year deal. That's probably going to be a very hard sell, but it'd give BT a ton of flexibility at the expansion draft next year when (1) he has one less player to protect and (2) there's a ton of money coming off the books. Bishop is a realistic target, but a hard sell. He's a legit top 5 goalie in the league right now. If Tampa wasn't in such a bad state with the cap, they would keep him over Vasilevskiy, if the choice had to be made. But they have to make hard choices. RFA's like Killorn and the bunch. Trying to keep your franchise player before he goes UFA. Trying to keep your #1 goalie when he is a year away from a big raise. Trying to retain a possible long term replacement for your #1. If you are closing on a deal for Bishop, there has to be the discussion about the re-signing with the player. If you are going for Elliott, you have less of an issue, but need to keep the cost reasonable. Reimer is a fall back plan only. Any others have to be short term deals so you aren't stuck with a goalie that can't handle the starts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 But I don't want Korpikoski. LOL or should we ? I don't know much about him. Star material ? Oops sorry I meant Korpisalo, and yep only 22 .920 in 31 nhl games if you dont wanna take the risk put him behind Reimer for a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 If it is true Elliot wants out, and it shoudln't shock me, he is the number 1 target IMO. Between style of play, acquisition cost, salary etc he is by far the best fir for the Flames. As a pending UFA the following year expansion draft isn't as big an issue and I also think they can get him to a more reasonble deal becuase he doesn't have the Vezina or Vezina nominee behind his name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 Oops sorry I meant Korpisalo, and yep only 22 .920 in 31 nhl games if you dont wanna take the risk put him behind Reimer for a year. OK let's put him on the watch list today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 If it is true Elliot wants out, and it shoudln't shock me, he is the number 1 target IMO. Between style of play, acquisition cost, salary etc he is by far the best fir for the Flames. As a pending UFA the following year expansion draft isn't as big an issue and I also think they can get him to a more reasonble deal becuase he doesn't have the Vezina or Vezina nominee behind his name. Between Elliott, MAF and Bishop, I would rate the best fit as Elliott and Bishop. I started to think about a pending reduction of goalie equipment and think that MAF would look like a squirt in smaller pads and gear. Both Elliott and Bishop cover the net pretty well as it is. I think there is a deal there, for either Elliott or Bishop. We should get a freebie for the JBow trade, or at least considerations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kehatch Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 Y'know, none of the goalie options are really blowing me away. Some options have a cost/benefit issue that doesn't sit well with me, while others seem like a lateral move from where we were this past season. I'd like to pick up a UFA goalie and sign him to a one-year deal. That's probably going to be a very hard sell, but it'd give BT a ton of flexibility at the expansion draft next year when (1) he has one less player to protect and (2) there's a ton of money coming off the books. Who is available to sign to a 1 year deal that will be a competent starter? Between Elliott, MAF and Bishop, I would rate the best fit as Elliott and Bishop. I started to think about a pending reduction of goalie equipment and think that MAF would look like a squirt in smaller pads and gear. Both Elliott and Bishop cover the net pretty well as it is. I think there is a deal there, for either Elliott or Bishop. We should get a freebie for the JBow trade, or at least considerations. Fleury is ideal in my opinion. Good contract and the term aligns with the Flames system. If Pittsburgh wants the moon that changes things, but right now he is my top pick based on his contract. That said, all three are solid options (as is Reimer) at the right price and contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LouCifer Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 Matchsticks and Gasoline actually put together a nice comparison of most of the available goalies here: http://www.matchsticksandgasoline.com/2016/6/24/12022524/flames-james-reimer-marc-andre-fleury-jaroslav-halak-jonathan-bernier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAC331 Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 Matchsticks and Gasoline actually put together a nice comparison of most of the available goalies here: http://www.matchsticksandgasoline.com/2016/6/24/12022524/flames-james-reimer-marc-andre-fleury-jaroslav-halak-jonathan-bernier Everyone always tosses the big known names around first such as Bishop, Fleury, Elliott all with their own set of circumstances. I would go for the gusto on Vasilevskiy and if unavailable strike a deal with Reimer. I like a guy that feels he has a lot to prove and wants the opportunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlamesLogic Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 Bishop is best goalie but Im not convinced Tampa needs to deal him. MAF needs to be dealt. Bobrovsky contributes to a horrible CBJ roster management problem. Could be rewarded for helping them out.Niemi or Lehtonen need to be moved. Rask/Subban have similar issue to Pitt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted June 24, 2016 Report Share Posted June 24, 2016 Bishop is best goalie but Im not convinced Tampa needs to deal him. MAF needs to be dealt. Bobrovsky contributes to a horrible CBJ roster management problem. Could be rewarded for helping them out. Niemi or Lehtonen need to be moved. Rask/Subban have similar issue to Pitt. Hard to convince a cup winner to part with their #1 guy, even if he sat out the playoffs. They talk tough, but have very little latitude that gives them a decent return. Niemi/Lettin-it-in is the worst choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now