[News] Ben Bishop thought trade to Flames was 'close'

[hockey.modern]

http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/lightn...-close/2292084

Lightning goalie Ben Bishop thought he was headed to Calgary.

Bishop, 29, the two-time Vezina Trophy finalist, was one of the league's most sought-after trade targets during the June NHL Draft in Buffalo. The Flames, in need of a No. 1 goalie, were hot on his trail and received permission from Tampa Bay to discuss contract with Bishop, who is entering the last year of his deal at a $5.95 million cap hit.

Bishop said his camp was "in the process" of working out a potential contract with Calgary, but the Flames instead acquired Bishop's former Blues teammate, Brian Elliott, from St. Louis on June 24 for a second round pick and conditional third round pick in 2018.

"It looked like for a little bit it was going to happen," Bishop told the Tampa Bay Times by phone Friday. "At kind of the last minute (the Flames) went out and got Elliott. It was close, but there was never... It wasn't that close, obviously."

Close could be a matter of perspective. Lightning GM Steve Yzerman said after the draft he wasn't close to making a deal. Flames GM Brad Treliving declined to comment on Bishop. But the fact it got to the point where Bishop, who has a partial no-move clause, was talking contract with Flames, and was considering it, means things were at least advanced. And it makes one wonder if Bishop might already be in Calgary if negotiations had gone better.

[neo45]

Contract negotiations with Elliot here and Bishop in Tampa are going to be really interesting. I don't think the gap between the two is that significant. Both are top 10 in the league, Bishop might be top 5. Very happy with how the goaltending has been worked on so far


Chad Johnson is also a solid backup and a nice signing

[bigrangy]

If him and Brad have talked contract, I'd imagine they'll be able to get through talk rather quickly once he becomes a UFA next year. I'd rather throw big money at Bishop than at Elliott (solely due to age, I think they're very comparable goalies for the upcoming season though). A 5 year deal to Bishop at anywhere under 7 mil per (dreaming, I know) would be a great way to lock down a great goalie through the core's prime.

[Gaskal]

I think his contract ask was too much, but that we had the pieces in place for a deal to go down if it was an acceptable ask.

Would I have been happy with Bishop? Yes. But that's in retrospect, and I'm currently much more happy getting Brouwer + Elliott rather than dishing out the cap for just Bishop.

[dammage79]

The deal had to be in place before negotiations opened up. Or at the very least the framework was there.

Bishop could still be a Flame going into next season. But I feel like Elliott is the guy for a few years now and will be re-signed after the half way mark of the season. He'll be good for Gillies as the natural path to the #1 role is to be a back up for a season or two. And Elliott will be cheaper than Bishop.

I like the way things went down more than the Bishop way. Just for the same reason as Gaskal, We got Brouwer and Elliott. With only maybe a slight downgrade on the goaltending. And even then it's not a massive downgrade. If only because of injury history.

[cannon7]

Bishop's injury history and Elliott's ironman-esque quality are what makes this look great to me from a Flames perspective. We already have a big goalie in the system with a ton of potential in Gillies, so ride the Elliott train until then.

[Northendzone]

"It was close, but there was never... It wasn't that close, obviously."

So Ben which was it - close or not close?

[TheScorpion]

I'm fine, really, with having Elliott on the team instead. He's cheaper and less prone to injury.

[cKy]

Originally Posted by cannon7

Bishop's injury history and Elliott's ironman-esque quality are what makes this look great to me from a Flames perspective. We already have a big goalie in the system with a ton of potential in Gillies, so ride the Elliott train until then.

umm wut? Elliot has never played over 42 games in the last 8 years of hockey.

A starter should be playing around 65-70 games a year in my opinion..

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by cKy

umm wut? Elliot has never played over 42 games in the last 8 years of hockey.

A starter should be playing around 65-70 games a year in my opinion..

He has played more than 42 games in 4 of the past 8 years

[Finger Cookin]

Originally Posted by cKy

umm wut? Elliot has never played over 42 games in the last 8 years of hockey.

A starter should be playing around 65-70 games a year in my opinion..

Dude, you're on the internet. You can take a sec to actually search for things instead of just spouting them off off the top of your head.





Only 29 goalies have played in 65+ games over the last eight seasons (some more than once). With all NHL goalies combined having 47 seasons of 65+ games played in the last 8 seasons, that's an average of less than 6 goalies per season. I guess there's only 5-6 starting goalies in the NHL at any given time.

[AC]

Originally Posted by Finger Cookin

Dude, you're on the internet. You can take a sec to actually search for things instead of just spouting them off off the top of your head.

43 with Ottawa and 12 with Colorado in 2010-2011 in fact.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by cKy

umm wut? Elliot has never played over 42 games in the last 8 years of hockey.

A starter should be playing around 65-70 games a year in my opinion..

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

He has played more than 42 games in 4 of the past 8 years

lol, i love when it's the very next post.

[Camronius]

Just love the fact good, higher profile players would consider waiving NM clause to come here. It says something.

[Bandwagon In Flames]

It's Brad "The Wizard" Treliving after-all. I wouldn't be surprised if 5 other goalies felt the same way as Bishop during those weeks of searching.

[Hackey]

The acquisition cost to acquire Bishop just didn't make sense to me when you considered the fact he was UFA at years end and even if he was re-signed would likely want money and term. I much prefer the route the Flames went. Gives a bit more flexibility to either re-sign Elliot or consider their options, especially with expansion. I think Elliot is gonna be really good for us though. Seems like a good leader who I think will really excel with this opportunity. He's ready for it.

[heep223]

I got chirped at the time for posting this information.

[Strange Brew]

I believe good chance Bishop is our starter next year.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by heep223

I got chirped at the time for posting this information.

Didn't you say that the Flames were looking to flip Elliott for Bishop?

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I believe good chance Bishop is our starter next year.

I think he ends up in Dallas personally