HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Ottawa Senators (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=19)
-   -   Are you happy with the Bishop deal? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1397873)

Stylizer1 04-06-2013 10:52 PM

Are you happy with the Bishop deal?
 
I for one thought we needed more out of the deal and get that top line forward. We have a lot of depth at all positions and I thought we could have made a pretty good package to acquire a top line forward with Bishop being the key piece in a trade. Going for a rookie who was surrounded by offensive minded players didn't really show Conacher's true value imo.

He has the opportunity to thrive on our team so I will give him the chance to succeed but nonetheless I thought we should have gotten more for Bishop.

HavlatMach9 04-06-2013 10:57 PM

Yes. Lots of goalies are available this off season. Bishop would eventually test free agency knowing Lehner would take the back up role. If we could have packaged Bishop, then I think we already would have but reality I think was Bishop wasn't a guaranteed #1 and would have been a risk to give up something big for other teams.

I'd have been fine with a 2nd+ or a 1st and I think Conacher's value is roughly a 1st so I'm happy.

Patvolcom65 04-06-2013 10:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stylizer1 (Post 63476119)
I for one thought we needed more out of the deal and get that top line forward. We have a lot of depth at all positions and I thought we could have made a pretty good package to acquire a top line forward with Bishop being the key piece in a trade. Going for a rookie who was surrounded by offensive minded players didn't really show Conacher's true value imo.

He has the opportunity to thrive on our team so I will give him the chance to succeed but nonetheless I thought we should have gotten more for Bishop.

I wouldnt have paid the price for a top line foward, which this year was quite high, see the Pommivile trade. Im happy with the trade Conacher while being surrounded by offensive minded players is capable of creating chances and bring energy as we needed.

Quo 04-06-2013 11:17 PM

I think it was a very fair deal. Both players are in a very similar position in their respective careers.

Both have emerged this year as relatively sure-bet NHLers and have had early success.

Bishop was great but was a spare part here.

Conacher was also great in TB but they have T. Johnson in a similar role pushing for time.

Tampa got a good player with good potential at a need position and so did we.

The extra pick coming our way, I'd wager, is a product of other teams competing for Bishop's services. Bonus.

I am very happy with this deal but Conacher still has to follow through for the long-haul. Ditto for Bishop in TB. A fair deal.

Cowen Time 04-06-2013 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stylizer1 (Post 63476119)
I for one thought we needed more out of the deal and get that top line forward. We have a lot of depth at all positions and I thought we could have made a pretty good package to acquire a top line forward with Bishop being the key piece in a trade. Going for a rookie who was surrounded by offensive minded players didn't really show Conacher's true value imo.

He has the opportunity to thrive on our team so I will give him the chance to succeed but nonetheless I thought we should have gotten more for Bishop.

Even the legendary Sam Pollock would have a tough time turning an unproven goalie obtained one season for a 2nd round pick into a proven top 6 forward. We saw Bishop's potential, but he is unproven as a #1 goalie over an extended period of time, and that is what would have been required to net the return.

Senacus Maximus 04-06-2013 11:21 PM

Where's the "too early to say" option. It's too early to say.

Caeldan 04-06-2013 11:27 PM

Too early to say. But my initial reaction was that it was an unnecessary move, and pulled away a strength.

We'll see though. Mostly I'm not familiar with Conacher, and of the opinion that we should have a full stable of goaltenders. So obviously that biases my opinion

Cowen Time 04-06-2013 11:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caeldan (Post 63477919)
Too early to say. But my initial reaction was that it was an unnecessary move, and pulled away a strength.

We'll see though. Mostly I'm not familiar with Conacher, and of the opinion that we should have a full stable of goaltenders. So obviously that biases my opinion

I actually didn't think it was to early. While it lasted, the 3 goalie set-up was fine, but if extended it can turn corrosive very quickly. One of them had to go by the summer at the latest, and I don't think the return was going to get any better than it is now. IMHO 2 is a full stable of goaltenders, 3 is not, even if one is NHL ready but in the AHL.

Hale The Villain 04-06-2013 11:31 PM

We got a 23 year old top 6 forward/Calder candidate in return for a goalie with 36 NHL games under his belt, who we acquired for a 2nd round pick a year earlier.

Murray did good.

Ed Wood 04-06-2013 11:35 PM

I would have liked to trade Anderson and go with a Bishop/Lehner duo but, having said that, Conacher is a more enticing return than I expected. Lehner had nothing more to prove in the minors and you can't horde three NHL capable goalies when you need help elsewhere. I'm satisfied.

Stylizer1 04-06-2013 11:35 PM

I think Bishop would have helped us more than Conacher. Yes, the goalie pool in the off season would be deep but I think for our future Conacher will just be good. For some reason I see him having the same potential as Andrew Cogliano.

It is too early but I guess that is why we pay BM the big bucks.

I just see him right now as a player who was in the right place at the right time to get the points he has thus far in his brief time in the NHL. Not that his points were lucky but that he was part of a system with good players. I was hoping for a return of someone who was a sure thing and not a wait and see.

ReginKarlssonLehner 04-06-2013 11:36 PM

Lol, stylizer. You never disappoint.

danishh 04-06-2013 11:36 PM

yeah, i'm happy.

- Bishop was gone in the offseason at the latest.
- Bishop would have got a late first at the most in the offseason.
- We got a player with similar trade value, but NOW, not some pick we have to wait 3 years for.


yes, conacher has his flaws (size, defensive play), but he's going to help us for 2-3 years immediately while some draft pick we would've got in the summer would still be developing.

Stylizer1 04-06-2013 11:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by danishh (Post 63478427)
yeah, i'm happy.

- Bishop was gone in the offseason at the latest.
- Bishop would have got a late first at the most in the offseason.
- We got a player with similar trade value, but NOW, not some pick we have to wait 3 years for.


yes, conacher has his flaws (size, defensive play), but he's going to help us for 2-3 years immediately while some draft pick we would've got in the summer would still be developing.

There is still a chance we have to wait three years for him to develop. He could be the second coming of Bobby Butler? Great potential but....

Quo 04-06-2013 11:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stylizer1 (Post 63478351)
I think Bishop would have helped us more than Conacher. Yes, the goalie pool in the off season would be deep but I think for our future Conacher will just be good. For some reason I see him having the same potential as Andrew Cogliano.

It is too early but I guess that is why we pay BM the big bucks.

I just see him right now as a player who was in the right place at the right time to get the points he has thus far in his brief time in the NHL. Not that his points were lucky but that he was part of a system with good players. I was hoping for a return of someone who was a sure thing and not a wait and see.

Is that because you think Bishop is a sure thing to be a bonafide #1 in the NHL? I love him as a player but I don't think he's there yet. He could get there. Same way Conacher has a chance to become a bonafide top 6. It's no sure thing on either side.

Bishop gets a chance to grab the #1 position in TB. Conacher gets a chance to grow as part of our core.

costermonger 04-06-2013 11:44 PM

I think the only way Bishop + nets us a legit top-line talent is if the + is at least Zibanejad or Silfverberg and I'd be unwilling to deal those kinds of players at this point. I think Conacher is a very fair return for Bishop because while neither player is proven, both show signs of great things to come and both TB and Ottawa dealt something they had plenty of for something they needed.

If Bishop and Lehner could've split time in the AHL then maybe keeping him would've been an option, but I think making Lehner a full-time AHLer simply due to waiver ineligibility runs a real risk of him getting jaded and asking to be dealt. And I'd have a hell of time getting upset with him for it - after all, the organization would be playing the "it's just business" card with him, he'd be stupid not to play it right back.

In this situation you've got to deal one of them, or risk one or more of them losing value and forcing your hand later. I love Bishop but he's the easy choice.

Stylizer1 04-06-2013 11:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ReginKarlssonLehner (Post 63478409)
Lol, stylizer. You never disappoint.

Why is everyone so sure of every deal the sens make?

Mr. Skepticism is just trying to keep it real.

Cujomi 04-06-2013 11:45 PM

I'm ok with the deal. I liked Bishop a lot (I remember getting flak for suggesting it might not be wrong to keep him over Lehner).

With that said, I think it is a good return given the market and what Conacher could potentially provide for this team.

BK201 04-06-2013 11:51 PM

Look at the Pomenville trade If we moved bishop for a similar player were probably looking at

Ben Bishop
Shane Prince
First round draft pick
Second round draft pick

Plus if you listen to Murray and what he looks for in players Conacher just fits that mold perfectly.

Stylizer1 04-06-2013 11:57 PM

89's size seems to weigh on me a little. Seeing as Latendresse is not a long term solution for that top line forward I am just wondering how this guy will add to our offense. Points are one thing but contributing in the other aspects of the game are another. Is he really the one dimensional player that we need? I think his ceiling is not so high. There comes a point when his size becomes a factor. Now, if he is one of those generational players where size doesn't matter like a St. Louis, Theo Fleury, or Danny Briere, then cool, but I'm not sure he is one of those. Time will tell.

ReginKarlssonLehner 04-06-2013 11:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stylizer1 (Post 63478787)
Why is everyone so sure of every deal the sens make?

Mr. Skepticism is just trying to keep it real.

Lol, it's not that man. This trade is brought up very early. Conacher hasn't been as productive lately while Bishop was playing lights out.

This thread doesn't take into consideration that Conacher was brilliant in his rookie year last year in the A winning MVP only to do so as 4th player ever. Also came in this year and is 2nd in points as a rookie facing a very difficult class.

Conacher could be that top-line forward for us scoring 60-70 points. You aren't giving Conacher enough credit.

Also, goalies don't have much value and even if they did and you wish to package them for star forward, who would you have done it for this year?

Ryan, Eriksson are the ones to come to mind that could be available yet they don't need Bish as center piece, they are set in goal.

You can't hold onto Bish cause Lehner wants the job next year and is deserving so the only options were to make a trade for a young budding forward or package for a trade up in the deadline.

Murray tried going after Yandle(Big name player) but price was way too high for players this deadline, like someone pointed out.

He settled for the next best thing and I think it was just as good an option as any.

ReginKarlssonLehner 04-07-2013 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stylizer1 (Post 63479327)
89's size seems to weigh on me a little. Seeing as Latendresse is not a long term solution for that top line forward I am just wondering how this guy will add to our offense. Points are one thing but contributing in the other aspects of the game are another. Is he really the one dimensional player that we need? I think his ceiling is not so high. There comes a point when his size becomes a factor. Now, if he is one of those generational players where size doesn't matter like a St. Louis, Theo Fleury, or Danny Briere, then cool, but I'm not sure he is one of those. Time will tell.

I think Conacher perfectly slots into our core top 6 moving forward.

Centers:
Spezza
Turris

Wingers:
TRADE/UFA
Silfverberg
Conacher
Michalek

Would be an amazing number 3 winger on the team, imo. Could be pushed to 4th.

costermonger 04-07-2013 12:03 AM

Aside from the value goalies generally have (less than an 'equivalent' skater), people really do need to remember that a lot of pretty damn good goalies in the league these days. The trade market for a guy like Bishop was definitely not 29 teams.

Stylizer1 04-07-2013 12:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ReginKarlssonLehner (Post 63479371)
Lol, it's not that man. This trade is brought up very early. Conacher hasn't been as productive lately while Bishop was playing lights out.

This thread doesn't take into consideration that Conacher was brilliant in his rookie year last year in the A winning MVP only to do so as 4th player ever. Also came in this year and is 2nd in points as a rookie facing a very difficult class.

Conacher could be that top-line forward for us scoring 60-70 points. You aren't giving Conacher enough credit.

Also, goalies don't have much value and even if they did and you wish to package them for star forward, who would you have done it for this year?

Ryan, Eriksson are the ones to come to mind that could be available yet they don't need Bish as center piece, they are set in goal.

You can't hold onto Bish cause Lehner wants the job next year and is deserving so the only options were to make a trade for a young budding forward or package for a trade up in the deadline.

Murray tried going after Yandle(Big name player) but price was way too high for players this deadline, like someone pointed out.

He settled for the next best thing and I think it was just as good an option as any.

Being an MVP in the A is not so rosey for some (see Corey Locke)

St. Louis has shown he can make you look very good as long as you are on his line some of the time.

For a young team Conacher is a great piece but for assuring a top line threat, not so sure. that's all.

FolignoQuantumLeap 04-07-2013 12:14 AM

Absolutely. Conacher maybe not pan out as a consistent top 6 guy but he's got a ton of heart and skill and unfortunately only one goalie can play and we have two better goalies than Bishop. Plus we got ourselves a lottery ticket in June. Like in the Vermette/Leclaire deal, that pick could very well be the best asset in trade.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:46 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.