05-01-2017, 12:19 PM
|
#1
|
Some kinda newsbreaker!
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Learning Phaneufs skating style
|
Couple of teams have inquired about acquiring Ben Bishop's rights
Pierre LeBrun @PierreVLeBrun
Couple of teams have inquired with LAK about trading for rights to pending UFA goalie Ben Bishop. Just like Carolina traded for Darling...
Going to be speculation Calgary is one of them.
Last edited by sureLoss; 05-01-2017 at 12:21 PM.
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to sureLoss For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-01-2017, 12:23 PM
|
#2
|
Franchise Player
|
Yeah, Calgary would have to be one of them you would think.
I could also see Winnipeg, Dallas, Philly and Vancouver being among teams looking to acquire his rights.
|
|
|
05-01-2017, 12:23 PM
|
#3
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: May 2016
Location: ATCO Field, Section 201
|
What is Bishops contract supposed to look like? Are there any comparable contract situations?
|
|
|
05-01-2017, 12:26 PM
|
#4
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden
What is Bishops contract supposed to look like? Are there any comparable contract situations?
|
It was rumored he wanted a 7 x $7m last summer as an extension. He was never going to get that much but you start high in a negotiation.
I would hope his ask has dropped a bit, but I bet not a ton.
|
|
|
05-01-2017, 12:26 PM
|
#5
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden
What is Bishops contract supposed to look like? Are there any comparable contract situations?
|
$6M x 6 yrs was the rumour last summer
Quote:
Bishop has said he thought he was going to Alberta last summer, and it’s believed the Flames were preparing a six-year offer in the $36M range.
|
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/3...-deadline-day/
Last edited by Canada 02; 05-01-2017 at 12:29 PM.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Canada 02 For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-01-2017, 12:28 PM
|
#6
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: CGY
|
I was wondering this weekend if Calgary was going to make a preemptive move to try and secure their goalie pre expansion but also didn't think they would make a move until the Pens decided what they were going to do.
I hope Calgary is a team in on Bishop as he is a top choice for me along with Fleury
|
|
|
05-01-2017, 12:31 PM
|
#7
|
Franchise Player
|
LA Kings already got a 5th from Tampa in exchange for a 7th and Budaj.
Now they will likely get a third+ for Bishop.
Pretty good move for them overall.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Oil Stain For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-01-2017, 12:32 PM
|
#8
|
Franchise Player
|
Also, this must be those new pricks in LA driving up the price for negotiating rights.
I imagine if Darling went for a 3rd, Bishop will go for at least that, probably more.
Hopefully Tre knows he has the inside track and will wait it out.
|
|
|
05-01-2017, 12:34 PM
|
#9
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy
It was rumored he wanted a 7 x $7m last summer as an extension. He was never going to get that much but you start high in a negotiation.
I would hope his ask has dropped a bit, but I bet not a ton.
|
The rumoured deal between CGY and Bishop was "in the range of 6x6".
I imagine it's more in the range of 6x5.5 now, but who knows with free agency.
Having Bishop signed until he's 36 doesn't seem like the worst thing to me, and I do hope the Flames are one of the teams in the mix (unless of course there's Wizardry afoot and someone unsuspected is inbound).
|
|
|
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ComixZone For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-01-2017, 12:38 PM
|
#10
|
Franchise Player
|
6 x 6 even better.
Hopefully the Flames can get him at 5 years then, and maybe even a tad lower than $6 million per too.
|
|
|
05-01-2017, 12:49 PM
|
#11
|
Lifetime Suspension
Join Date: Apr 2017
Exp:
|
He won't get more than Darling. If anything it is either a 3rd or possible a 4th/5th. Darling gets you a 3rd because his contract demands are going to be between 4m and 5m.
Last year Bishops agent was asking for 6y/8m or 7y/7m or 8y/6m. Idea is he was getting paid the same amount of money for what they are assuming is his final contract. Just a matter of what Calgary was comfortable paying for the annual cap hit.
The only advantage you get by acquiring his rights is the ability to do an 8 year contract.
Even with the down year he is not taking less than 6M.
I can see Treliving doing a 6y/40m contract.
There is no need for Bishop to take less than 6M a year. There are a few teams that would be in on signing him. When Treliving spoke with Bishop's agent last year all that was asked was how willing Bishop was to play in Calgary and what would Bishop consider accepting as a new contract.
I'm telling you right now the ask was 45-50M total. Bishop's agent was firm that Bishop giving up his only opportunity at free agency would cost any team a premium for his rights.
You need to realize prior to the 2016-2017 season Ben Bishop has made #### all compared to similarly aged goalies. At the time of the trade discussion Bishop had only made 4.6m/2yr contract. Before that it was all league minimum.
The guy is going to want to cash in. It's his one and only opportunity to do so.
If people would read what I am writing they would instantly agree that this is the same reason why Treliving was and still is willing to give us a massive amount of assets to acquire Matt Murray.
|
|
|
05-01-2017, 12:52 PM
|
#12
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: City by the Bay
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by guuar
The only advantage you get by acquiring his rights is the ability to do an 8 year contract.
|
Not that it matters with Bishop specifically, but I don't think this is correct. I think the player has to play a minimum number of games with the team or be on the team he is re-signing with as of a certain date in the previous season to qualify for an 8-year contract.
|
|
|
05-01-2017, 12:53 PM
|
#13
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Fernando Valley
|
Would not be surprised if the Flames are one of the teams. Would be interesting to see who the other team would be. Flames would have more money and cap space than most teams to spend on the position with a clean slate. I will rule out the Jets because they would probably be the least desirable and don't typically spend big in free agency. Canucks have the money and cap space but why would Bishop want to join that mess knowing they won't be close to a good team for a while? Not sure how Dallas could maneuver this. I'm thinking the other team is the Flyers as they may have just enough cap space. Both cities are kind of a graveyard for goaltenders but I expect the Flyers may be more attractive to Bishop seeing they are based in the East and a US market.
|
|
|
05-01-2017, 12:54 PM
|
#14
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Barthelona
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by guuar
He won't get more than Darling. If anything it is either a 3rd or possible a 4th/5th. Darling gets you a 3rd because his contract demands are going to be between 4m and 5m.
Last year Bishops agent was asking for 6y/8m or 7y/7m or 8y/6m. Idea is he was getting paid the same amount of money for what they are assuming is his final contract. Just a matter of what Calgary was comfortable paying for the annual cap hit.
The only advantage you get by acquiring his rights is the ability to do an 8 year contract.
Even with the down year he is not taking less than 6M.
I can see Treliving doing a 6y/40m contract.
There is no need for Bishop to take less than 6M a year. There are a few teams that would be in on signing him. When Treliving spoke with Bishop's agent last year all that was asked was how willing Bishop was to play in Calgary and what would Bishop consider accepting as a new contract.
I'm telling you right now the ask was 45-50M total. Bishop's agent was firm that Bishop giving up his only opportunity at free agency would cost any team a premium for his rights.
You need to realize prior to the 2016-2017 season Ben Bishop has made #### all compared to similarly aged goalies. At the time of the trade discussion Bishop had only made 4.6m/2yr contract. Before that it was all league minimum.
The guy is going to want to cash in. It's his one and only opportunity to do so.
If people would read what I am writing they would instantly agree that this is the same reason why Treliving was and still is willing to give us a massive amount of assets to acquire Matt Murray.
|
If you're going to claim some inside knowledge, can you at least confirm it with a mod?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by snipetype
k im just not going to respond to your #### anymore because i have better things to do like #### my model girlfriend rather then try to convince people like you of commonly held hockey knowledge.
|
|
|
|
The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to Mass_nerder For This Useful Post:
|
anyonebutedmonton,
bdubbs,
bubbsy,
Diemenz,
Flames Draft Watcher,
Iniggywetrust,
mile,
nemanja2306,
Roof-Daddy,
socalwingfan,
TheScorpion,
topfiverecords,
Yrebmi
|
05-01-2017, 12:56 PM
|
#15
|
Resident Videologist
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Calgary
|
Don't worry. He has inside knowledge about every team and every trade.
If people would only read what he is writing they'd see the truth. Hallelujah!
|
|
|
The Following 29 Users Say Thank You to AC For This Useful Post:
|
anyonebutedmonton,
bdubbs,
bubbsy,
Calgary4LIfe,
Cheese,
chummer,
CrazyCaper,
Cycling76er,
D as in David,
Diemenz,
Fire,
firebird,
Flames Draft Watcher,
Iniggywetrust,
JackJack,
jayswin,
KipperRules,
Mass_nerder,
mikephoen,
mile,
OldDutch,
Phaneufenstein,
Rhettzky,
socalwingfan,
T-Cowie13,
TheScorpion,
topfiverecords,
VilleN,
wired
|
05-01-2017, 12:56 PM
|
#16
|
Franchise Player
|
No kidding. Somebody shut that guy/girl up already.
Nothing more irritating than a pompous blow hard speaking in absolutes about private information he/she is likely just speculating on.
|
|
|
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Roof-Daddy For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-01-2017, 12:57 PM
|
#17
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Fernando Valley
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy
Not that it matters with Bishop specifically, but I don't think this is correct. I think the player has to play a minimum number of games with the team or be on the team he is re-signing with as of a certain date in the previous season to qualify for an 8-year contract.
|
You are correct. The most he could receive via free agency is 7 years and if any team is considering that then by all means they can have him.
|
|
|
05-01-2017, 12:57 PM
|
#18
|
Lifetime Suspension
Join Date: Apr 2017
Exp:
|
FYI if the ask was 6y/6m from Bishop's agent Treliving takes the trade without thinking twice. The agreed trade was;
To Calgary; Ben Bishop & Jonathan Drouin
To TampaBay; 2016 1st Round Draft Pick
That pick ended up being Matthew Tkachuk of course. This was the deal that was agreed to prior to the start of the draft. Treliving had briefly spoken to Bishop's agent to make sure;
a) Ben Bishop would be willing to play for the Calgary Flames.
b) Ben Bishop would be willing to take a max 6.750m/year deal.
Bishop didn't care where he played so long as they paid him what they thought he deserved. If you look at comparables for Bishop the other goalies were all making 5.5m to 6.5m as RFA goalies.
Vezina quality goalie is absolutely going to get 6.5m to 7.5m as a UFA. If anything the rumors last year were 7x7 for the most part. All Treliving was told was that Bishop wanted between 45m and 50m.
Think about it. IT's the only contract that Bishop is ever getting. Up until then all he had was RFA deals that pushed him as a backup making the league minimum. Even Tampa Bay only offered him a 2.6M/year deal as an RFA.
If Calgary won't give him 6.5M then Dallas certainly will.
|
|
|
05-01-2017, 12:57 PM
|
#19
|
Crash and Bang Winger
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Calgary SW
|
Remind me again why the Flames would want to spend top dollar for a slightly above average goalie for long term. Especially considering when we have two goalie prospects who will be seeing increasing ice time over the next 2-3 years. Bishop is a good option for lots of teams, I hope he lands a good contract. Just not with Calgary.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Ullr For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-01-2017, 12:59 PM
|
#20
|
Franchise Player
|
hockeyyinsiderr
|
|
|
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Ashasx For This Useful Post:
|
|
Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:36 AM.
|
|