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.
why exactly is lats, a guy who loves the city and wants to be as close to his hometown as possible without actually going there, not a long-term solution as a top line forward?
I don't think we got taken or anything. Not sure why we should expect more.... I wanted more but that's b/c I'm a selfish and totally ignorant armchair GM. Both guys seem like they're just starting to prove they're NHLers and both might fill needs for their respective clubs and both might develop into even better players and both might not... plus we got a fourth round pick. Cheers.
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....
Bobby Butler had a potential ?
Be a NHL player with health problems shows what kind of warrior he is. There is no way he comes to camp out if shape or stops to hard working. Exactly character this team needs. I guess thats why BM makes this deal. MacLean likes hard working players and he is definitely one.
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.
If anyone thinks we could have gotten more for Ben Bishop, he needs to get his hockey head checked... However I am not really surprised about this thread when I saw the OP, always make me scratch my head.
This was my reaction when I learned about the return via TVA Sports :
I also had no idea how we were able to get a draft pick too. This has got to be one of the best single asset management I have ever seen (1 year of Bishop = help make the playoffs twice + triple his value)
Goalies don't have as much value as people seem to think, unless they are elite and proven.
It doesn't mean that Tampa LOST the deal. It's just a hockey trade (something else people don't want to understand), teams deal from a position of strength, to address a position of need. This is as simple as that
This is basically the 1st deal under Murray that is not heavily bashed. Heck, Elliott for Anderson was criticized a lot too. Methot for Foligno, Rundblad for Turris (even I bashed this one at first). I can't think of any deal or signing that was as initially liked as this one
Originally Posted by Stylizer1
Why is everyone so sure of every deal the sens make?
Mr. Skepticism is just trying to keep it real.
Nah, Mr. Skepticism is just skeptic because that's what he is. It has nothing to do with reality, except his OWN reality. That's something a lot of people have a hard time to understand : YOUR reality doesn't necessarily = THE reality
The only reality you can approach is when you stick with facts and objectivity
That being said, you can be skeptic, but that would mean that you KNOW a lot about Conacher and that you have WATCHED him play more than a few times to doubt him that much and that is why you don't see a lot of potential. That would also mean that you think that Bishop is or will be better than both Anderson and Lehner...
Originally Posted by Stylizer1
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.
Brian Elliott had awesome stats with St-Louis (the city) last year as well. A system can help goalie numbers, unless you really think we had the best 3 goalies in the world.
In terms of contract/RFA status, playing style, and production Conacher is exactly what we were looking for. If he can continue his play from earlier in season he'll find a long term role on the team. Sure, Conacher isn't a proven player like Cammy, Pominville, etc.. but there were other considerations that made Conacher a better option than anything else:
1. A draft pick wasn't going to help us. We have plenty of prospects. In fact, we're as deep as any NHL team. We needed an NHL player for this season which ruled out a long term asset acquisition for Bishop. The prospect would have been caught in a jam for playing time eventually.
2. Bishop wasn't going to return an established NHLer without additional assets. Also, we're in the middle of a rebuild so giving up those assets isn't smart. So few prospects, maybe 1/3 of the top-10, will become regular NHLers if we're lucky. If we give up the wrong ones we could really set the team back.
3. If we did get an established NHLer they would have cost more in salary terms than we could have afforded long term. (Cammy, Pominville, etc..). Melnyk has spent money in years when we were contenders that the team couldn't support financially, he's been a great owner in that respect. Spezza, heatley, Karlsson, Kovalev, Gonchar, etc.. He's spent the money when we needed to.
Having said that, we need to be a financially viable team long term and we need to stay on budget. If we acquired a big name guy, he might cause issues down the road. I'd rather have a Senators team in 10 years in Ottawa than have a few years spending to the cap max and end up having the team sold.
4. A rental would have been fine salary-wise, but it wasn't worth it long term because of our injuries. Giving up an asset in a year where the team wasn't contending isn't a good idea. Without Karlsson, Spezza, Michalek, etc.. who might not/won't be back for the playoffs we're not contenders. It would be pissing away an asset to achieve practically nothing. At least a guy like Conacher, could, in theory contribute next season.
I'm not happy with the trade mainly because I don't know if we traded the right goalie away. I was more impressed with Bishop than I was with Lehner in the games they played. Which, of course, goes against almost everyone else's opinion, but it is my opinion. Lehner's five-hole was as big as a crater in the shoot outs and he got beat everytime. That's not to say it can't be corrected and he's still very young.
I was also more nervous everytime Lehner was in nets than I was with Bishop.
I also was looking for that "little ball of hate" (Denis Potvinism) from Conacher and didn't see anything. Will need to watch him more closely this afternoon but from what I saw the other night I don't see how he's a top six player. We need a "big" power forward and it's not Conacher. "Big" being the operative word.
I'm not happy with the trade mainly because I don't know if we traded the right goalie away.
Look at it this way. We have 3 goalies who want to be #1 or else they will just walk away. Lehner can't walk away for another half a decade, while Bishop & Anderson can walk away soon. The decision seemed to be between Bishop & Anderson with Lehner as the back up.
Goalies have wild values when traded. Some good goalies can be had from waivers (Bryzgalov), some go for 1st rounders and prospects (Varlamov).
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
This. Bishop was great here because he put pressure on Lehner to perform and gave Andy a solid backup while he recovered. WIth no roster limits post trade deadline, it really doesn't hurt the team to have Bishop around. They can move him at the draft or in the summer and probably get a good return on him.
Now, the trade is decent for both teams but I'm not sold on Lehner being "the guy" just yet, he seems to have trouble "closing the door" after allowing a goal or two and isn't super super good in the shootout. That said, he is young so hopefully he grows into his role.
Definitely happy. The sample size on Bishop was not much bigger than on Conacher. Despite Sens fans being sold on Bishop, league-wide he was about as proven as Conacher. Both teams dealt from depth, and both teams ended up with a young player that will potentially be part of their core group going forward. I'm happy that Murray didn't overpay in the deadline market to get a guy who was 30+ and just about ready to go on the decline.
Size might be a concern if we acquired a "soft" player, but when most comparisons talk about Brendan Gallagher, MSL, and even the odd Theo Fluery comparison, it's very hard to complain. And anyway, most of us have already seen a bit of CC this year on the Lightning and liked his game before Murray acquired him.
And if the deal "pans out" and Conacher tears it up here, we can applaud Murray for getting fair value at the deadline. It's not often that you see teams make an even swap at this time of year. And there's no way Bishop was going to return a "proven" veteran top 6 forward. Having success in parts of 2 seasons didn't yet make him a sure bet.
It's always a little scary dealing a young goaltender with lots of potential, but Ottawa had to move one of their young goalies and they made the decision to part with Bishop. Hopefully this doesn't end up being like Chicago letting hasek go and keeping belfour, although if Lehner ends up being belfour Ill be a happy guy
One thing about Bishh is he really needs to figure his 5-hole out. That glaring weakness was one of the reasons I didn't mind seeing him go (still absolutely loved him). I know it seems like a small thing to dislike, but he's gonna give up some important goals through the 5-hole.
Give conacher some time, it's not exactly unlikely that a solid calder candidate turns out to be a top six forward. I know he's 23 already, but it's not exactly old. I really like this deal for us, Conacher slots in well in our very young core.