Trade Rumors and Free Agent TalkTrade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.
Because Lehner is better off in the AHL playing every game than in the NHL sitting on the bench. And Ottawa has no other goaltenders to come up and play. Which means either we hurt Lehner's development by trading Bishop for a normal deal, OR we wait for a great deal (1st) and then take any negatives to Lehners development (our only goaltender prospect I think) that may come as a result.
AS stated by seanlinden "trade value isn't determined by what you WANT for Bishop", it is determined by what Ottawa will take for him.
Contrary to the belief, Bishop does not have to be traded.
Agree to disagree. I think Lehner would be much better off seeing ~30 NHL games this year. He has nothing to prove in the AHL, dominated regular seasons, dominated the playoffs.
Agree to disagree. I think Lehner would be much better off seeing ~30 NHL games this year. He has nothing to prove in the AHL, dominated regular seasons, dominated the playoffs.
Agreed.
At a certain point, the best way to learn how to play in the NHL is to play in the NHL.
How has Bishops value gone up since last year? He has done nothing to improve his value.
Bishop is worth a 2nd, or a mid tier prospect, nothing more.
His value has gone up slightly since he played more games with the Sens last season than he had in his NHL career and was able to play well in very important games, keeping the Sens in a playoff position. That's not a tonne, but far from nothing.
Sens have 0 need for mid tier prospects and very little of 2nd round picks. As stated before, we would like to use him as a piece to land a top 4 defenseman since that's the only need we have at this point so labelling him as only worth a 2nd ignores the fact that a trading Bishop for a draft pick is unrealistic at this point.
His value has gone up slightly since he played more games with the Sens last season than he had in his NHL career and was able to play well in very important games, keeping the Sens in a playoff position. That's not a tonne, but far from nothing.
Sens have 0 need for mid tier prospects and very little of 2nd round picks. As stated before, we would like to use him as a piece to land a top 4 defenseman since that's the only need we have at this point so labelling him as only worth a 2nd ignores the fact that a trading Bishop for a draft pick is unrealistic at this point.
To use him as a piece to land a top 4 Dman would mean adding in another player of value.
Than you are minimally back to someone like Zack Smith plus Bishop to land a 3/4 dman.
To use him as a piece to land a top 4 Dman would mean adding in another player of value. Than you are minimally back to someone like Zack Smith plus Bishop to land a 3/4 dman.
Not necessarily. Plus I highly doubt Murray extends Smith and then trades him.
At a certain point, the best way to learn how to play in the NHL is to play in the NHL.
Of course, but Anderson is the undisputed #1 goalie and he'll get the majority of the games. Once Bishop is traded, Lehner will be up and ready to steal the job, but no harm in letting him dominate in the AHL.
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyhawk
To use him as a piece to land a top 4 Dman would mean adding in another player of value.
Bishop's value is dictated by the market. The market is different but realistically we want a top 4 D that's worth a 2nd rounder. It doesn't have to be a good top 4, just a fringe (or overpaid/UFA) one so Phillips doesn't have to play in the top 4.
Last edited by HavlatMach9: 01-24-2013 at 11:38 AM.
Smith if off the market. We had a rumoured deal on the table with Chicago, but we decided to move Foligno for Methot instead. Then we extended Smith. Don't think he's going anywhere now.
To use him as a piece to land a top 4 Dman would mean adding in another player of value.
Than you are minimally back to someone like Zack Smith plus Bishop to land a 3/4 dman.
Thanks but I didn't have any difficulty understanding my own post...
I'm not sure what you're getting at. Sens have more assets than Zach Smith and he's someone we'd rather not move.
Sens aren't going to trade one of the best goaltending prospects in the league, who looks poised to break out soon for a largely unknown forward prospect. We'll take Seabrook for Anderson though.
I won't get into the specifics of the offer.
But I doubt a top 50 prospect as graded out by HF (HP has him in the top 25) is "largely unknown". I'm not saying either team should leap out and take the trade but just because you don't know about him, doesn't mean he's unknown... Lehner is closer to the NHL but Teravainen has legitimate talent and will only get better.
no, Bishop is not better than Crawford. He would be the backup.
Bishop will not get a 1st and he won't get it from a team that wouldn't pick until the 4th round.
Hawks will not trade their 1st for a questionmark
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chelios
Oh stereotypical HFBoard poster, don't you ever change.
Yes he is better than Crawford. Crawford is one of the worst starting goalies in the league. If he wasn't, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Bishop is at least a solid backup. He has a chance at being a #1, better than Crawford. Hawks fans want him, a potential #1 goalie, for nothing of value. For crap prospects like Olsen or Pirri who the Sens literally have dozens of.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledHawkFan
Send fans want a young top 4 defenseman but aren't willing to give up quality NHL pieces. Good luck with that.
I'm perfectly comfortable with not getting a top 4 D.
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden
There's one problem with that theory... trade value isn't determined by what you WANT for Bishop, it's determined by what another team is prepared to give up.
Sure
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden
The fact is, Bishop's a backup goalie at this point. The team that trade for him, is going to do so with the intention of replacing an injured goaltender, or upgrading the backup position. You don't give up top draft picks to do either of those things.
Edmonton
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanlinden
Now, you can use the "we'll hold onto him" mentality... but then reality sets in. He's an impending UFA. Robin Lehner is your goalie of the future and has nothing left to learn in the AHL. Every game Bishop stays on the team is probably wasted development time for Lehner.
He's RFA.
Lehner playing in the AHL > sitting on bench in NHL
I don't know what Bishop will get moved for, but it will be for more than a 2nd rounder. And that's because he brings more to the table than just a backup.
Yes he is better than Crawford. Crawford is one of the worst starting goalies in the league. If he wasn't, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Bishop is at least a solid backup. He has a chance at being a #1, better than Crawford. Hawks fans want him, a potential #1 goalie, for nothing of value. For crap prospects like Olsen or Pirri who the Sens literally have dozens of.
we do not want to replace Crawford with Bishop. We want to upgrade the backup spot and get rid of Emery. We want a goalie that potentially could push Crawford. We know that Emery can't.
Crawford actually has 2 30 wins season already, Bishop hasn't even played that many games. In 10/11, Crawford was the backup that outplayed the starter. With the 10/11 Crawford, nobody would talk about bad goaltending when it comes to the Hawks.
Bishop would get the #2 spot with hopes that he is good enough there.
Yes he is better than Crawford. Crawford is one of the worst starting goalies in the league. If he wasn't, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Bishop is at least a solid backup. He has a chance at being a #1, better than Crawford. Hawks fans want him, a potential #1 goalie, for nothing of value. For crap prospects like Olsen or Pirri who the Sens literally have dozens of.
I'm perfectly comfortable with not getting a top 4 D.
Sure
Edmonton
He's RFA.
Lehner playing in the AHL > sitting on bench in NHL
I don't know what Bishop will get moved for, but it will be for more than a 2nd rounder. And that's because he brings more to the table than just a backup.
This discussion is happening because the Hawks fans believe we need an upgrade for our back up position. Crawford had a sophomore slump but so far so good this year. No way Bishop is the better at this point but ya never know. Just as even Saint Lehner is not a slam dunk. Oh and by the way you're off on your assessment of Pirri for sure.
we do not want to replace Crawford with Bishop. We want to upgrade the backup spot and get rid of Emery. We want a goalie that potentially could push Crawford. We know that Emery can't.
Crawford actually has 2 30 wins season already, Bishop hasn't even played that many games. In 10/11, Crawford was the backup that outplayed the starter. With the 10/11 Crawford, nobody would talk about bad goaltending when it comes to the Hawks.
Bishop would get the #2 spot with hopes that he is good enough there.
Yes, and what I'm saying is Bishop would push Crawford, and has a (good) chance of overtaking him. Therefore his value is much higher than your typical backup goalie.
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyhawk
This discussion is happening because the Hawks fans believe we need an upgrade for our back up position. Crawford had a sophomore slump but so far so good this year. No way Bishop is the better at this point but ya never know. Just as even Saint Lehner is not a slam dunk. Oh and by the way you're off on your assessment of Pirri for sure.
the best deal for Ottawa when moving Bishop is to add another asset to create enough value to get what we actually need rather than tossing him away for 2nd round pick.
i dont think anyone thinks he's bringing back more than the equivalent of a good 2nd round pick.
that and a good prospect? he adds good value.
Yes, and what I'm saying is Bishop would push Crawford, and has a (good) chance of overtaking him. Therefore his value is much higher than your typical backup goalie
Thats not what you said. You said he is better than Crawford... which he isn't.
