HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Ben Bishop to Flyers

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-21-2013, 12:37 AM
  #1
Marvelous Manked
Ooh to be a Gooner
 
Marvelous Manked's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Sudbury/Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,391
vCash: 500
Ben Bishop to Flyers

Just wondering what thoughts are on both sides for this? Value? The Sens would want a return on their original investment of a 2nd rounder (or equivalent), if not higher.

Marvelous Manked is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 12:44 AM
  #2
orange is better
than other colors...
 
orange is better's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 8,165
vCash: 500
Ehh, No thanks. Not interested personally. Maybe I'd do a 3rd.

orange is better is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 12:46 AM
  #3
Marvelous Manked
Ooh to be a Gooner
 
Marvelous Manked's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Sudbury/Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,391
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orange is better View Post
Ehh, No thanks. Not interested personally. Maybe I'd do a 3rd.
I'm just curious as to why Philly wouldn't be interested. I won't object, but I'd be concerned for the short-term future of the Flyers in the goaltending position.

Marvelous Manked is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 12:56 AM
  #4
DeflatedFootball7
Registered User
 
DeflatedFootball7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Belleville
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,967
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manked View Post
I'm just curious as to why Philly wouldn't be interested. I won't object, but I'd be concerned for the short-term future of the Flyers in the goaltending position.
Boxscores are misleading. Bryzgalov has been our best player bar none these first two games.

DeflatedFootball7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 12:59 AM
  #5
litflyersfan
Registered User
 
litflyersfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Bryn Mawr, Pa
Posts: 969
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manked View Post
I'm just curious as to why Philly wouldn't be interested. I won't object, but I'd be concerned for the short-term future of the Flyers in the goaltending position.
Albeit its only been 2 games, Bryz has looked alright this season. Don't see the need to invest in a high price, asset wise, back-up. A serviceable backup is all we need, no reason to spend a 2nd or higher on that, when we could get a free one. Plus, you have Anderson and Regin, you will have to re-sign Bishop after this season as he is an RFA. Correct me if I'm wrong if you send him to the A, he would be subject to waivers. We could get him then and give up nothing cause we're not in the market for a back-up this year with Leighton and Boucher on our team, both UFAs in themselves after this season. Long story short we're fine in short-term, long term TBD.

litflyersfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 01:03 AM
  #6
Marvelous Manked
Ooh to be a Gooner
 
Marvelous Manked's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Sudbury/Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,391
vCash: 500
I wasn't really thinking about Bryzgalov not being a suitable #1 goalie, but after watching both yesterday and today's games I don't think it would hurt to have a quality back up. Personally don't trust Leighton haha...

Marvelous Manked is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 01:04 AM
  #7
Marvelous Manked
Ooh to be a Gooner
 
Marvelous Manked's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Sudbury/Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,391
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by litflyersfan View Post
Albeit its only been 2 games, Bryz has looked alright this season. Don't see the need to invest in a high price, asset wise, back-up. A serviceable backup is all we need, no reason to spend a 2nd or higher on that, when we could get a free one. Plus, you have Anderson and Regin, you will have to re-sign Bishop after this season as he is an RFA. Correct me if I'm wrong if you send him to the A, he would be subject to waivers. We could get him then and give up nothing cause we're not in the market for a back-up this year with Leighton and Boucher on our team, both UFAs in themselves after this season. Long story short we're fine in short-term, long term TBD.
Regin's struggled as a goalie though, hasn't made a save in his career yet...

Marvelous Manked is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 01:14 AM
  #8
litflyersfan
Registered User
 
litflyersfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Bryn Mawr, Pa
Posts: 969
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manked View Post
Regin's struggled as a goalie though, hasn't made a save in his career yet...


Good one meant to say Lehner. Makes a big difference. Sorry, late here. I just don't see the Flyers pulling the trigger on Bishop we have bigger needs at the moment (PMD and something who knows how to kill a penalty).

litflyersfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 06:52 AM
  #9
thelos
Bunk
 
thelos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,633
vCash: 500
I would definitely prefer Bishop to Leighton.....

thelos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 07:06 AM
  #10
dookie88
Registered User
 
dookie88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Germany
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,710
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thelos View Post
I would definitely prefer Bishop to Leighton.....
And I would definitely prefer Leighton +2nd to Bishop...

dookie88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 07:24 AM
  #11
litflyersfan
Registered User
 
litflyersfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Bryn Mawr, Pa
Posts: 969
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dookie88 View Post
And I would definitely prefer Leighton +2nd to Bishop...
The plot thickens, HFboards worthy poll question. Who would you rather have as a backup Sergei Bobrovsky or Ben Bishop? Makes zero sense to trade Bob, re-sign Leighton, re-acquire Boucher then trade for Bishop at the start of the season, what chaos.

litflyersfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 07:42 AM
  #12
TSA0402
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,235
vCash: 500
I would think Flyers upper brass would think long and hard about using the amnesty buyout clause on Bryzgalov if he doesn't start playing closer to his contract soon. Then, Bishop for the 2nd maybe plus something small is pretty good. Oilers are a better fit though.

Unless Bryz gets injured or the buyout happens, I don't see Philly giving up the assets needed for Bishop. As previously stated, they traded Bobrovsky because they wanted to tell Bryz he is their goalie.

TSA0402 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 07:54 AM
  #13
Oshie97
Registered User
 
Oshie97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,451
vCash: 500
I'm surprised Flyers fans are saying they are ok with Bryzgalov, I thought he looked bad in that third against Buffalo. Not sure why Ott is so eager to trade Big Ben, I would hold onto him if possible.

Oshie97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 08:00 AM
  #14
stempniaksen
Alright, I'm mad
 
stempniaksen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,664
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oshie97 View Post
I'm surprised Flyers fans are saying they are ok with Bryzgalov, I thought he looked bad in that third against Buffalo. Not sure why Ott is so eager to trade Big Ben, I would hold onto him if possible.
Nothing personal against Bishop, but Lehner is our future in nets and is ready to start his NHL career. Bishop may stay for the rest of the season, but the future in nets is Lehner, so may as well try and get some value for Bishop.

stempniaksen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 08:07 AM
  #15
Gigantor The Goalie
Registered User
 
Gigantor The Goalie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: New London
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,562
vCash: 500
When did Bishop become such a high priced goalie? He hasn't done anything in the NHL yet, only serving a few games last season when Anderson was injured. I don't see him as anything more then a minor piece in a big trade, kind of like Ramo in the Cammalleri trade last season.

Gigantor The Goalie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 08:18 AM
  #16
dan1el
Registered User
 
dan1el's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,737
vCash: 500
I don't wanna move Bishop, he has much more value serving Anderson as backup then he does in a trade at this point, while Lehner gets one more year of carrying the BSens. Lehner's on a two-way contract, no sense in rushing things. If Bishop proves himself as pretty capable in goal this year, either he has much more value by the year's end, or we decide to go with Bishop and Lehner and we trade Anderson for a more significant piece. Let's not run Bishop out just yet.

dan1el is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 08:34 AM
  #17
BonkTastic
"Small Sample Size!"
 
BonkTastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Jakarta, IDN
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,547
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gigantor The Goalie View Post
When did Bishop become such a high priced goalie? He hasn't done anything in the NHL yet, only serving a few games last season when Anderson was injured. I don't see him as anything more then a minor piece in a big trade, kind of like Ramo in the Cammalleri trade last season.
I'm curious why you would think that a guy who was moved for a 2nd round pick less than a calendar year ago, then played admirably after the deal, would see his stock go down.

Not trolling, or trying to be condescending. I'm just wondering your reasoning behind that sentiment.

BonkTastic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 08:48 AM
  #18
Qward
Because! That's why!
 
Qward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Behind you, look out
Posts: 14,030
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manked View Post
Regin's struggled as a goalie though, hasn't made a save in his career yet...
Excuse me. Since 2009/10 Regin has 50 blocked shots.

Qward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 08:50 AM
  #19
Qward
Because! That's why!
 
Qward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Behind you, look out
Posts: 14,030
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gigantor The Goalie View Post
When did Bishop become such a high priced goalie? He hasn't done anything in the NHL yet, only serving a few games last season when Anderson was injured. I don't see him as anything more then a minor piece in a big trade, kind of like Ramo in the Cammalleri trade last season.
Supply and demand.

Bishop is a proven AHL goalie and many GM's feel he is ready for the next step. Perfect for starting as a back up. There are a few teams in need of a quality back right now.

Qward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 09:28 AM
  #20
Gigantor The Goalie
Registered User
 
Gigantor The Goalie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: New London
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BonkTastic View Post
I'm curious why you would think that a guy who was moved for a 2nd round pick less than a calendar year ago, then played admirably after the deal, would see his stock go down.

Not trolling, or trying to be condescending. I'm just wondering your reasoning behind that sentiment.
He played decently. Not enough to show that he's a starter. His stock may not go down, however it certainly does not go up. Back-ups are nice to have, however Bishop was brought in to compete for the no. 1 job. If a team is acquiring him to be a back-up they aren't going to pay too much. He has less value then Bobrovsky or Lindback.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Qward View Post
Supply and demand.

Bishop is a proven AHL goalie and many GM's feel he is ready for the next step. Perfect for starting as a back up. There are a few teams in need of a quality back right now.
Don't you need to send a goalie down to the minors? Bishop is waiver eligible, not sure about Lehner. No way Lehner would be sent if he is waiver eligible. If Bishop gets puts on waivers then I see other GM's picking him up then for nothing. I don't see many GM's overly anxious to pick him up unless their starter gets injured and they have no one left. Bishop or Anderson has to be gone at some point to make room for Lehner.

Gigantor The Goalie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 09:29 AM
  #21
NitHeel
Mucker/Grinder
 
NitHeel's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Reading, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,249
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manked View Post
I wasn't really thinking about Bryzgalov not being a suitable #1 goalie, but after watching both yesterday and today's games I don't think it would hurt to have a quality back up. Personally don't trust Leighton haha...
I don't trust Leighton either, but if the difference between the Flyers being successful and not successful is Leighton, we're already f***ed.

NitHeel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 09:31 AM
  #22
RJ8812
Hellooooo ladiiiies
 
RJ8812's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sudbury
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,543
vCash: 500
meh, I'm fine with Leighton as the back-up during a shortened season. He'll be gone at the end of the year and we can replace him then

RJ8812 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 09:49 AM
  #23
Qward
Because! That's why!
 
Qward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Behind you, look out
Posts: 14,030
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gigantor The Goalie View Post
Don't you need to send a goalie down to the minors? Bishop is waiver eligible, not sure about Lehner. No way Lehner would be sent if he is waiver eligible. If Bishop gets puts on waivers then I see other GM's picking him up then for nothing. I don't see many GM's overly anxious to pick him up unless their starter gets injured and they have no one left. Bishop or Anderson has to be gone at some point to make room for Lehner.
We kept three goalies last year after Anderson returned.

Anderson/Auld/Bishop

We can afford Bishops prorated contract of 650k and Lehner's 870k and have one sit in the press box. Heck, we can afford to buy them Nachos too. But not beer, Ottawa is giving out free beer as it is and Eugene isn't made of money.

Qward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-21-2013, 09:53 AM
  #24
Oshie97
Registered User
 
Oshie97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,451
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan1el View Post
I don't wanna move Bishop, he has much more value serving Anderson as backup then he does in a trade at this point, while Lehner gets one more year of carrying the BSens. Lehner's on a two-way contract, no sense in rushing things. If Bishop proves himself as pretty capable in goal this year, either he has much more value by the year's end, or we decide to go with Bishop and Lehner and we trade Anderson for a more significant piece. Let's not run Bishop out just yet.
Exactly what I was thinking, Bishop has good potential, just needs a chance to get some exp. I wish the Blues could have kept him but with Halak and Elliott playing so good he would of been in the AHL for at least a couple more yrs.

Oshie97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:30 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.