[Trade] Stars trade for Bishop and sign him to 6 year deal ($4.916 mil AAV)

[MisterJoji]

Originally Posted by ResAlien

MAF is playing well right now though so that makes him more palatable to many. As fans we often have the memory of a goldfish.

He started the playoffs well but in his last four starts he has a goals against average over 4.00 and a save percentage less than .850.

[Erick Estrada]

Elliott is going to be such a hard sell to the fan base and maybe even the head coach who lost confidence in him during the playoffs. Heck with Treliving looking to trade for Bishop at the deadline it appears even the GM wasn't sold on Elliott. If Treliving can't get any trades done for a goaltender by the trade deadline then there is a short window where he can negotiate with Elliott prior to free agency but you have to imagine that's last resort at this point.

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

Can't Dallas just expose one of their goalies to waivers?

They can put them both on waivers and they will both clear. Trying to stash them in the minors only doesn't help a whole lot in terms of cap. The team only saves 950k of a contract stashed as the rest of the salary counts towards the cap still.

Nill has probably been trying for a couple years to shed one of those contracts so he probably knows there is zero interest and that will be confirmed if one one is bought out as soon as the buyout window opens.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

MAF has been a number 1 goalie in the league for a decade. Elliott was never a true number 1. Yes Elliott had a better season marginally but he faltered in the playoffs when it mattered the most and Fleury has excelled.

I am not convinced bringing in a backup from a good team is the answer but you could be right in the fact there are not many other options. Considering there are no sure things taking on the 2 years left on the Fleury deal feels like the safe move. Get a legit number 1 goalie and not have a long term commitment tied up

In the 11 seasons (10 as a starter) Fleury has posted a playoff SV% below .900 SIX times.

It's nice that Fleury had a good round 1. He's no more a legit #1 than Elliott, and he's more often than not terrible in the playoffs.

If we're going to get another headcase goalie, why not get the statistically better one in Elliott? He'll be cheaper (in both asset cost and contract).

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Elliott is going to be such a hard sell to the fan base and maybe even the head coach who lost confidence in him during the playoffs. Heck with Treliving looking to trade for Bishop at the deadline it appears even the GM wasn't sold on Elliott. If Treliving can't get any trades done for a goaltender by the trade deadline then there is a short window where he can negotiate with Elliott prior to free agency but you have to imagine that's last resort at this point.

Yup there are really no circumstances where I am happy with Elliott returning to the Flames in a number 1, or tandem role. Outside of a 20 game run in the second half of the season I felt like he was Hiller 2.0. Game 3 is unforgivable in my opinion.

[burnitdown]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Let's be realistic with our expectations: there is no goaltender available at this point that is any more a sure thing than Elliott was last year, and we've seen how that could end up.

I agree that Elliott is likely one of the top goalies available right now but the problem is he's an especially risky signing from the Flames perspective. He likely will demand at least 2-3 years on his deal (perhaps more as at his age, term likely means more than AAV) and the fans/media have already lost all faith in him.

While that should have no bearing whatsoever...it does. And I'm sure the Flames definitely won't want to be in a situation where Elliott starts the first 3-4 games poorly and there's immediate uproar and pressure from fans and media to relegate their newly signed $4M "starter" to the bench for the next 2-3 years. At least if we gamble on a similarly skilled goalie, they'll get a longer leash and come with less media distraction.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

In the 11 seasons (10 as a starter) Fleury has posted a SV% below .900 SIX times.

It's nice that Fleury had a good round 1. He's no more a legit #1 than Elliott, and he's more often than not terrible in the playoffs.

If we're going to get another headcase goalie, why not get the statistically better one in Elliott? He'll be cheaper (in both asset cost and contract).

Funny hockeydb shows him with a single season under .900 so not sure where you got your numbers.

Elliott failed miserably here why bring back a guy that a lot of fans blamed the sweep on? Especially when we cough up another pick to sign him? Why not bring in the guy that saves his teams season last year, is bailing them out this year, and has been around a winning program for a decade?

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Funny hockeydb shows him with a single season under .900 so not sure where you got your numbers.

Elliott failed miserably here why bring back a guy that a lot of fans blamed the sweep on? Especially when we cough up another pick to sign him? Why not bring in the guy that saves his teams season last year, is bailing them out this year, and has been around a winning program for a decade?

His playoff stats not his regular season.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...fleurma01.html

[burnitdown]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

In the 11 seasons (10 as a starter) Fleury has posted a playoff SV% below .900 SIX times.

It's nice that Fleury had a good round 1. He's no more a legit #1 than Elliott, and he's more often than not terrible in the playoffs.

If we're going to get another headcase goalie, why not get the statistically better one in Elliott? He'll be cheaper (in both asset cost and contract).

Yeah but if you look at his recent body of work, he's been at .915 or better in 3 of the past 4 years and his only bad year was an extremely small sample size of 2 games before Murray took over.

I don't think what Fluery did in the playoffs 5+ years ago has any bearing on his game today. He's won 2 cups already and is a proven starter in the league that could bring stability to our net. All the top goalies in the league...Price, Dubnyk and Bobrovsky...had shaky stats over their first few years in the playoffs.

[ricosuave]

I'd be fine with the Flames re-signing Elliott as long as he comes dirt cheap, we fire Sigalet, and Elliott changes his jersey number to anything other than "1".

[Itse]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

If we're going to get another headcase goalie, why not get the statistically better one in Elliott? He'll be cheaper (in both asset cost and contract).

The statistical advantage IMO comes from Elliot playing behind one of the better defensive teams in the league.

IMO bad Fleury is less terrible then bad Elliott, good Fleury is about the same as good Elliott, and Fleury is more likely to be good than bad in the playoffs than Elliott.

In other words I think fair to say Fleury comes with the same problems, just not as bad and not as often. (... when you put it like that it does sound a lot like the less bad of two terribles.)

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by transplant99

His playoff stats not his regular season.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...fleurma01.html

Thanks. Using that site showed me Elliott has had a sub .900 save % in 3 of the 6 seasons he played in the playoffs and only 1 with a .920. Fleury has 3 over a .920

[savemedrzaius]

No way Elliot re-signs with you guys unless he has zero options from any other team (which is definitely possible).

If I was him I would be pretty pissed about how game 4 went down. But beggars can't be chosers I guess.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by savemedrzaius

No way Elliot re-signs with you guys unless he has zero options from any other team (which is definitely possible).

If I was him I would be pretty pissed about how game 4 went down. But beggars can't be chosers I guess.

I believe Gary Lawless already mentioned this but he thinks that Elliott is a target of the Jets. He seems like a Jets type move

[N-E-B]

Originally Posted by savemedrzaius

No way Elliot re-signs with you guys unless he has zero options from any other team (which is definitely possible).

If I was him I would be pretty pissed about how game 4 went down. But beggars can't be chosers I guess.

He has no one to blame but himself for game 4. If he blames the team for that then he's not a guy I want on this team.

[Flash Walken]

I have been thinking a lot about goaltending since the flames were sent packing in 4 games this year.

At this point in the Flames rebuild, if you don't have goaltending, you don't have anything.

When you are in the situation of having an incomplete roster, on either the offensive or defensive side of the puck, you NEED a goalie who can make the difference for you.

The Flames are going to have an incomplete skating roster for probably (hopefully) another year or two while they wait for a couple of prospects to turn themselves into something. In the meantime, they are absolutely going to need a goalie that can help them make up the difference.

The team needs a top 10 goalie if they have the desire to be a top 10 team. With a prominent top goalie presumably off the market now, it means the Flames will likely have to spend assets on top of dollars to get that goalie, instead of just the dollars it would've taken in free agency.

I absolutely do not want Elliott to play another game in a Flames sweater, but alternatives that seem plausible/attainable right now don't inspire a ton of confidence.

Pretty freakin' frustrating, I must say.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

If they sign Bishop for $6 million and buy out Niemi they will have 13.4 million against their cap for goalies next year.

If they sign Bishop for $6 million and buy out Lehtonen they will have 13.1 million against the cap for goalies next year.

####ing idiots.

The alternative being don't sign Bishop and have Lehtonen and Niemi at 10.6 million? I'll take option A or B if I'm the Stars.

Originally Posted by ripTDR

why don't the flames target Ryan miller?

i know he was on a horrible Canucks team, but there was many times he bailed them out

ready to be called a complete idiot but he might be a good short term stop gap that provides reasonable goal tending in front of a reasonable defensive team

one year for relatively cheap contract?

Miller sucked when he went to St. Louis for the playoffs a couple years ago. They have/had a lot bette defence than we do. He's only older now.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Thanks. Using that site showed me Elliott has had a sub .900 save % in 3 of the 6 seasons he played in the playoffs and only 1 with a .920. Fleury has 3 over a .920

And 6 under .900. But you also have to account for the difference in playoff appearances. Fleury has been in the playoffs nearly twice as much and (unsurprisingly) his number of good seasons and number of bad seasons are nearly double Elliott in both categories. They are similar.

Cherry pick it however makes you comfortable with Fleury. The biggest single improvement he'll give you over Elliott is name recognition. That's not enough for me.

Fleury, just last year, put in two dismal games on a cup winning squad in the playoffs. This year's chapter isn't finished, but he's been sub .900 in 4 of his 11 games so far in what everyone would consider a "great" playoffs for him. He's also been above .950 in a good number of games. But you have to recognise both.

Again, I won't shed a tear if Fleury comes in next year. I think he's one of the better options. But anyone who thinks he's a legit solution has no idea who MAF is, because he's got an equal likelihood of being a disaster and being run out of town in two years.

Fleury is not anymore guaranteed to be the saviour as Grubauer or Raanta, so why pay more for him? If you can produce an answer as to why Fleury is worth the cost that doesn't involve "well, if you take out his bad play he's been good" because I haven't seen it. That's Fleury, he's incredibly good and incredibly bad. You don't just get incredibly good Fleury because you're the Calgary Flames, you also get incredibly bad Fleury. Looking at both sides of the coin, I'm not sure why I'd send over assets and pay almost 6mil for that.

[Split98]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I could be wrong, but I'm about 85% sure Saros is exempt from the expansion draft. Doesn't need protecting.

Originally Posted by bigrangy

Saros does not need to be protected in the ED.

Ahhhh yes, ty.

Shoot.

[Jacks]

With the benefit of hindsight the trade deadline might have been a waste since L.A. didn't make the playoffs but ....

In:
Bishop
Iginla
2017 5th round pick
2017? 4th round pick (for Bishop's rights)

Out:
Peter Budaj
Erik Cernak
2017 7th round pick

If Calgary made those trades we have a lot better chance of getting past the first round.

Disclaimer:
I realize it is rumoured that Iggy didn't want to come here
I haven't looked at if it was possible with cap considerations but these things can be worked out.