HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Tampa Bay Lightning
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

[TB/OTT] Ben Bishop to TB for Cory Conacher and a 4th round pick (2013)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-03-2013, 07:52 AM
  #1
Jacko95
Registered User
 
Jacko95's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,085
vCash: 500
[TB/OTT] Ben Bishop to TB for Cory Conacher and a 4th round pick (2013)

Well I somehow have the feeling that he could be a Lightning soon, I know we all (me included) said we don't need him, but EE said no talks about Miller, no talks about Luongo (I really hope so), and we need another solid goalie.
And Janus decided he will stay in the KHL for one more year: http://www.hcslovan.sk/en/spravy/jan...second-season/

So I start to like the idea to get Bishop, at least he would give us an upgrade over Garon as backup and the chance that one of two goalies pans out is higher than one of one.

For the right price, I would be willing to trade for him.
I think they would want an AHL goalie back, along with a 2nd/ good prospect.

As I am not that sure if Panik will really hit his ceilling, I would be willing to trade Panik and Helenius/Desjardins for him.
But I would prefer to make it Brown and one of the goalies.
And 2nd and one of the goalies would be okay as well for me.


Last edited by Felonious Python: 04-03-2013 at 01:10 PM. Reason: tag
Jacko95 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 08:13 AM
  #2
The YzerJesus
Turns Piss Into Wine
 
The YzerJesus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: location location
Country: United States
Posts: 4,560
vCash: 50
Do not want

The YzerJesus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 08:14 AM
  #3
2 Weekes Notice
Registered User
 
2 Weekes Notice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Non-traditional Land
Posts: 861
vCash: 500
Just can't say I'm sure about Bishop. I do think he's more advanced than Lindback at the moment, but I also think he would put us at a really weird organizational logjam at goalie, especially if we have to give up something of value for him.

I think I'm of the mind that if you acquire Bishop, you have to try to recoup some of Lindback's value. Otherwise, you've invested an absurd amount of picks into 3 young, fairly unproven goalies. It feels like buying a bunch of scratch-off tickets just because you're more likely to win with several.

2 Weekes Notice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 08:21 AM
  #4
Xenophobia Catalyst
Legendary
 
Xenophobia Catalyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,255
vCash: 3073
I do not think he is the answer.

Xenophobia Catalyst is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 08:24 AM
  #5
Jacko95
Registered User
 
Jacko95's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Country: Germany
Posts: 2,085
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2 Weekes Notice View Post
Just can't say I'm sure about Bishop. I do think he's more advanced than Lindback at the moment, but I also think he would put us at a really weird organizational logjam at goalie, especially if we have to give up something of value for him.

I think I'm of the mind that if you acquire Bishop, you have to try to recoup some of Lindback's value. Otherwise, you've invested an absurd amount of picks into 3 young, fairly unproven goalies. It feels like buying a bunch of scratch-off tickets just because you're more likely to win with several.
Right now we have an incredible logjam at top6 prospects and we will have to move one or two of them, they can't all play for us. And I would prefer to have a logjam at a position, we have sucked for years than on our strongest postion.

I don't think we would destroy anything. Let's say both pan out to be solid starter goalies. We can play them 50-50 next year and the year after, then we can still move one of them to a team for picks/prospects and maybe get even more than we paid. If Lindbäck doesn't pan out, we have a real problem until Vasya comes. So Bishop gives us insurance.

Right now I can't see any good backup on the FA market this summer and we need an upgrade over Garon.

Jacko95 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 08:34 AM
  #6
2 Weekes Notice
Registered User
 
2 Weekes Notice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Non-traditional Land
Posts: 861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacko95 View Post
Right now we have an incredible logjam at top6 prospects and we will have to move one or two of them, they can't all play for us. And I would prefer to have a logjam at a position, we have sucked for years than on our strongest postion.

I don't think we would destroy anything. Let's say both pan out to be solid starter goalies. We can play them 50-50 next year and the year after, then we can still move one of them to a team for picks/prospects and maybe get even more than we paid. If Lindbäck doesn't pan out, we have a real problem until Vasya comes. So Bishop gives us insurance.

Right now I can't see any good backup on the FA market this summer and we need an upgrade over Garon.
Well, sure, but it's a weird logjam because it's a logjam of could-bes. Ottawa has a logjam too, but they've got a bona-fide #1, a backup with upside, and a stud prospect. That's a nice set of goalie to have. If we acquire Bishop, we'd have a good backup with upside, a developing backup with upside, a known backup, and a stud prospect (a few years away). That doesn't seem to solve much, certainly not at the rumored cost of 2nd + prospect.

I agree that we have a logjam of forward prospects. That's why, if we do clear some of them out, I'd rather see it for something closer to an established #1, so that our goalie depth can resemble Ottawa's instead of....post-lockout Tampa Bay.

2 Weekes Notice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 08:47 AM
  #7
2 Weekes Notice
Registered User
 
2 Weekes Notice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Non-traditional Land
Posts: 861
vCash: 500
FWIW, I think Bishop ends up in Philadelphia.

One question that brings up: what happens if Philly amnesties Bryz? Would a (remarkably) less obnoxious atmosphere and a new (absolutely non-Frantz Jean) GK coach be able to coax some of the better Bryz back out of the guy? He might be willing to sign on the relative cheap if he's getting paid out the balance of his Philly contract anyway.

Not that I think it's a basket we should be putting eggs into, but I'm just not sure if I've heard any speculation. Obviously it would be during the offseason.

2 Weekes Notice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 08:49 AM
  #8
Benders Lindyhop
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Tampa
Country: United States
Posts: 4,053
vCash: 500
Holy crap, this thing has legs on it. Apparently we've been inquiring about him. Bad idea Stevie.

Oops, my bad. It was just a Garrioch tweet. Nothing to see here. Move along.


Last edited by Benders Lindyhop: 04-03-2013 at 08:57 AM.
Benders Lindyhop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 08:55 AM
  #9
Felonious Python
Moderator
Purple Squirrel
 
Felonious Python's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: The Hot Seat
Posts: 13,136
vCash: 500
SN reports that TB made an outside call to see what Ottawa wants for Bishop.

Felonious Python is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 09:03 AM
  #10
Alivesi
Registered User
 
Alivesi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 974
vCash: 133
Janus, in Sweden with Slovak national team, said of story he will be with HC Slovan in 13-14, "They made it up, like a rumor or something." Don't scratch janus out....

Alivesi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 09:07 AM
  #11
MattM92
Registered User
 
MattM92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Orlando, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 3,529
vCash: 500
If Yzerman makes this trade, he is officially losing 'SFY' status with me. Ridiculous trade to make that won't help us at all. There is absolutely no point to have 2 young goaltenders that need games to develop, where are we going to find playing time for both guys. I believe in Lindback and I see him being a very good #1 goalie, but only if he gets playing time. The only goalie I'd be willing to give up more assets for is AN ESTABLISHED #1. Hear that Stevie?! Don't make this ****ing senseless trade!!

MattM92 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 09:09 AM
  #12
TBLbrian
Registered User
 
TBLbrian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: NC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,733
vCash: 500
we need a 2b guy for next year. If the cost is low, why not?

who else is going to be Lindback's backup next year? Goalie competition is a good thing. Not saying Bishop is the answer but its a body with NHL games

TBLbrian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 09:09 AM
  #13
The Fear Boners
Plz stop pucks
 
The Fear Boners's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Scrip Club
Country: United States
Posts: 20,039
vCash: 500
Janus isn't going to be in Europe next year. He wants back over.

As for saying Bishop is more advanced than Lindback... I wouldn't be so sure about that.

The Fear Boners is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 09:12 AM
  #14
Benders Lindyhop
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Tampa
Country: United States
Posts: 4,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattM92 View Post
If Yzerman makes this trade, he is officially losing 'SFY' status with me. Ridiculous trade to make that won't help us at all. There is absolutely no point to have 2 young goaltenders that need games to develop, where are we going to find playing time for both guys. I believe in Lindback and I see him being a very good #1 goalie, but only if he gets playing time. The only goalie I'd be willing to give up more assets for is AN ESTABLISHED #1. Hear that Stevie?! Don't make this ****ing senseless trade!!
I understand, but I actually think it could work out. That doesn't mean I'm in favor of it, I would rather have Miller, but it could work. Split the time, maybe a touch in favor of Bishop. Have two good, young, huge developed goalies. At the very least one becomes a great future trade piece.

Benders Lindyhop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 09:12 AM
  #15
MattM92
Registered User
 
MattM92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Orlando, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 3,529
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBLbrian View Post
we need a 2b guy for next year. If the cost is low, why not?

who else is going to be Lindback's backup next year? Goalie competition is a good thing. Not saying Bishop is the answer but its a body with NHL games
No team has ever won with a 1A/1B. We need a #1 and a #2. That's it. If we don't trade for an ESTABLISHED #1, then ride Lindback for 60 games next year. That's it.

MattM92 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 09:14 AM
  #16
Felonious Python
Moderator
Purple Squirrel
 
Felonious Python's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: The Hot Seat
Posts: 13,136
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattM92 View Post
No team has ever won with a 1A/1B. We need a #1 and a #2. That's it. If we don't trade for an ESTABLISHED #1, then ride Lindback for 60 games next year. That's it.
Niemi/Crawford

Felonious Python is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 09:17 AM
  #17
TBLbrian
Registered User
 
TBLbrian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: NC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,733
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattM92 View Post
No team has ever won with a 1A/1B. We need a #1 and a #2. That's it. If we don't trade for an ESTABLISHED #1, then ride Lindback for 60 games next year. That's it.
even if he is just a backup, we still need another goalie. Of course I'd rather have a top tier goalie, but Garon will not be back IMO

TBLbrian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 09:21 AM
  #18
RussianGuyovich
Hella Ennui
 
RussianGuyovich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: ellenton
Country: United States
Posts: 1,842
vCash: 742
Send a message via MSN to RussianGuyovich
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattM92 View Post
No team has ever won with a 1A/1B. We need a #1 and a #2. That's it. If we don't trade for an ESTABLISHED #1, then ride Lindback for 60 games next year. That's it.
Khabi/Grahame

RussianGuyovich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 09:22 AM
  #19
Vieille Barbe
Radko's Modern Life
 
Vieille Barbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Hockey Paradise
Posts: 116
vCash: 500
However this all plays out, if it's true there has been no interest in Miller or Luongo, we're basically saying the Bolts head into next season without a proven NHL starter in goal - again. Not saying acquiring Miller or Luongo would be a good move, but here we go down the same road again, just with a different cast on board.

From my seats, Lindback looked like he could still could pan out, so it's not such a negative outlook. Just uncertain, as usual.

Vieille Barbe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 09:30 AM
  #20
Xenophobia Catalyst
Legendary
 
Xenophobia Catalyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,255
vCash: 3073
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussianGuyovich View Post
Khabi/Grahame
Not even close. Grahame was no where near #1 status.

Xenophobia Catalyst is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 09:34 AM
  #21
2 Weekes Notice
Registered User
 
2 Weekes Notice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Non-traditional Land
Posts: 861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBLbrian View Post
we need a 2b guy for next year. If the cost is low, why not?

who else is going to be Lindback's backup next year? Goalie competition is a good thing. Not saying Bishop is the answer but its a body with NHL games
I think therein lies the problem with Bishop, if the rumors are any indication.

2 Weekes Notice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 09:42 AM
  #22
MattM92
Registered User
 
MattM92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Orlando, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 3,529
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Felonious Python View Post
Niemi/Crawford
That year was a fluke because they played the circus of Phili in the Finals. And even so, that's 1 in the past 10+ years in special circumstances. You think those are good odds? Plus don't forgot that Chicago had/has 2 #1 dmen in Keith and Seabrook. We have 1 that is still developing. You can have a mediocre defense with a strong tender or a strong defense with a mediocre goaltender and have a chance at success. We have a mediocre defense and a mediocre tender. Can't win with that

MattM92 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 09:44 AM
  #23
MattM92
Registered User
 
MattM92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Orlando, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 3,529
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussianGuyovich View Post
Khabi/Grahame
Umm, Khabi was the #1. Just because Grahame played well in 20 games doesn't mean he was a 1B

MattM92 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 09:44 AM
  #24
Felonious Python
Moderator
Purple Squirrel
 
Felonious Python's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: The Hot Seat
Posts: 13,136
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattM92 View Post
That year was a fluke because they played the circus of Phili in the Finals. And even so, that's 1 in the past 10+ years in special circumstances. You think those are good odds? Plus don't forgot that Chicago had/has 2 #1 dmen in Keith and Seabrook. We have 1 that is still developing. You can have a mediocre defense with a strong tender or a strong defense with a mediocre goaltender and have a chance at success. We have a mediocre defense and a mediocre tender. Can't win with that
I'd rather be lucky than good.

Felonious Python is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 09:45 AM
  #25
MattM92
Registered User
 
MattM92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Orlando, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 3,529
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Felonious Python View Post
I'd rather be lucky than good.
Really? I'd rather be both.

MattM92 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 10:24 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.