I really don't like the Flames going after Bishop even if they're able to sign him. I just don't think you get enough cap value out of paying a goalie 7 or 8 million dollars a year. There's really not that big of a difference between an 8 million dollar goalie and a 4 million dollar goalie. Teams that win cups have deep talented teams and I think the Flames would be better off with a 4 million dollar goalie and a 4 million dollar forward than they would be with an 8 million dollar goalie.

bishop is definitely the better goalie.

but it all depends on cost and what your plan is. if youre giving up a ton for bishop, youre doing it basically with the plan to sign him to a huge deal in a years time. i thought the plan was to have a good solid goalie who would bridge time until gilles.

fleury will be damn solid. cheaper to acquire. cheaper the next 2 years, and then be gone right in time for the kid to be up.

but if youre looking to go out and plunk the prime assets down, and then have someone on board long term, yeah bishop could be the cornerstone guy
- stayinthefnnet

Problem is fcking Rutherford asked for the #6, end of negotiation. I agree, I think getting Bishop makes a statement with Gilles & doesn't make sense & why Backlund going back doesn't make sense. Cap space is the issue, Bishop is about 6.0 mill, the return of Gilles , #54 & #58 is probably more inciting than Fleury if Bishop is determined to be that cornerstone. I actually prefer the Klimchuk or Hickey & #58 for Fleury. Keeps life simple & the direction is still now with a flavour of rebuild in seeing what we have in Gilles in 2 years time. Bishop is just so tantalizing though. Good on Tre in letting JR know he better smarten up.

What's the most you would be willing to offer for bishop ?
- Redmile247

For just Bishop without getting an opportunity to discuss an extension with him? #35, #56 and Hickey. Hickey is our 3rd best D prospect in my opinion. But it depends on what TBL want. We could offer a roster player but I'm not sure they want that. We could discuss taking back a bad contract but they have some bad ones that won't work for us. Would they like a swap of Frolik for Callahan? Saves a them $ and term I believe (they may be the same).

I'm not offering Mony, Johnny, Bennett, Brodie, Hamilton, Gio, Andersson, Kylington or Gillies. If talking extension 1st, it changes to which I may (but not likely) offer Gillies.

Pav's deal is up after this season and he hasn't exactly been lights out. Think they'll want to just extend him?

Maybe they'll trade him to Calgary so they can act on Bishop.

See how that works?
- golfingsince

That's not the point. If Winnipeg wants Bishop, TBL would have to take pavs as part of the trade. For that to happen Winnipeg would have to include some major pieces. That's not realistic. For Winnipeg to get involved they would have to buy him or first, which could happen, but hasn't.

http://www.generalfanager.com/teams
- golfingsince

Really. So you think all 30 teams could realistically afford and fit Bishop into their lineup. Credibility.........gone.

This is a non-issue. Think seriously about this expansion draft. We have ridiculous leverage. Bishop is THE best goalie, and 100% will be taken in the expansion draft. The Lightning are 100% not letting their 1st rd Vasilevsky exposed in the expansion draft. What else? Depending on the Stamkos deal, and even if they don't sign Stamkos, Tampa can't afford Bishop. Why? Kucherov, Hedman...

So, Tampa absolutely MUST get rid of Bishop by next season. There is other goalies on the market: MAF, Elliot maybe, and Reimer is our last resort "free" option. So Tampa either trades with the Flames, or lets him walk for free.

I reckon we could get it done with a late 2nd, maybe even a 3rd if we wait a bit more.

Keep in mind, we were able to spend $9 mil on poopty goaltending last year, I have no problem spending $7 mil on Vezina-tier goaltending.
- BobHartley

Except Bishop is a UFA at expansion so it's definitely no guarantee that he gets taken. They could protect Vasi and Bishop could easily just become a free agent and then re-sign in Tampa after the expansion draft, no?

Bottom line, it's not getting done for a late 2nd or 3rd imo. That's just wishful thinking.

Problem is fcking Rutherford asked for the #6, end of negotiation. I agree, I think getting Bishop makes a statement with Gilles & doesn't make sense & why Backlund going back doesn't make sense. Cap space is the issue, Bishop is about 6.0 mill, the return of Gilles , #54 & #58 is probably more inciting than Fleury if Bishop is determined to be that cornerstone. I actually prefer the Klimchuk or Hickey & #58 for Fleury. Keeps life simple & the direction is still now with a flavour of rebuild in seeing what we have in Gilles in 2 years time. Bishop is just so tantalizing though. Good on Tre in letting JR know he better smarten up.
- Kevin R

JR could literally erode into dust at any moment. he literally gives 0 (frank)s. you just give him a cup of lime jello and ask him what it was like to buy a load of bread for 4 cents.

and then say alright heres the pair of seconds. done deal.

For just Bishop without getting an opportunity to discuss an extension with him? #35, #56 and Hickey. Hickey is our 3rd best D prospect in my opinion. But it depends on what TBL want. We could offer a roster player but I'm not sure they want that. We could discuss taking back a bad contract but they have some bad ones that won't work for us. Would they like a swap of Frolik for Callahan? Saves a them $ and term I believe (they may be the same).

I'm not offering Mony, Johnny, Bennett, Brodie, Hamilton, Gio, Andersson, Kylington or Gillies. If talking extension 1st, it changes to which I may (but not likely) offer Gillies.
- TandA4Flames

You forgot the future MVP in your list. Probably because he is currently cleaning the hallway floors, but absolutely should not be traded. These skills are invaluable.

JR could literally erode into dust at any moment. he literally gives 0 (frank)s. you just give him a cup of lime jello and ask him what it was like to buy a load of bread for 4 cents.

and then say alright heres the pair of seconds. done deal.
- stayinthefnnet

You forgot + Wideman

For just Bishop without getting an opportunity to discuss an extension with him? #35, #56 and Hickey. Hickey is our 3rd best D prospect in my opinion. But it depends on what TBL want. We could offer a roster player but I'm not sure they want that. We could discuss taking back a bad contract but they have some bad ones that won't work for us. Would they like a swap of Frolik for Callahan? Saves a them $ and term I believe (they may be the same).

I'm not offering Mony, Johnny, Bennett, Brodie, Hamilton, Gio, Andersson, Kylington or Gillies. If talking extension 1st, it changes to which I may (but not likely) offer Gillies.
- TandA4Flames

Fck me I love this more than the boring TDL. You can actually talk real hockey trades with a dash of cap implications.

Some real interesting scenarios. Cant imagine what Tre is going to pull off come Friday. Talking Friday afternoon off.

For just Bishop without getting an opportunity to discuss an extension with him? #35, #56 and Hickey. Hickey is our 3rd best D prospect in my opinion. But it depends on what TBL want. We could offer a roster player but I'm not sure they want that. We could discuss taking back a bad contract but they have some bad ones that won't work for us. Would they like a swap of Frolik for Callahan? Saves a them $ and term I believe (they may be the same).

I'm not offering Mony, Johnny, Bennett, Brodie, Hamilton, Gio, Andersson, Kylington or Gillies. If talking extension 1st, it changes to which I may (but not likely) offer Gillies.
- TandA4Flames

Need to get Callahan to waive his NMC but:

Bishop + Callahan for Frolik, #35, #56 and Hickey is a good deal for Tampa in my opinion.

(frank) it. I would rather just sign Reimer or hell, even Enroth than give up what some are thinking/offering. Reimer 3x3-3.5 done. We don't need a $7-8 mil G we just need someone above average.

Need to get Callahan to waive his NMC but:

Bishop + Callahan for Frolik, #35, #56 and Hickey is a good deal for Tampa in my opinion.
- RonPielep

Didn't need to be said but I wouldn't give that up for Callahans contract. Close though. Take out Hickey or at least #56.

You forgot + Wideman
- FLflames34

So... do you just want us to have the most expensive blueline in the history of the NHL?

But you can throw in concussion boy, since Pitt has GREAT success with injured players. But we will require that #6 now, for the bad contract.

Need to get Callahan to waive his NMC but:

Bishop + Callahan for Frolik, #35, #56 and Hickey is a good deal for Tampa in my opinion.
- RonPielep

Is Callahan and his worse contract a better RW option than Frolik? I would much rather the Backlund proposal mentioned earlier and retain Frolik. It would hurt to lose Backlund, but not as much as carrying Callahan's contract + Bishop who will likely take 7mm+

So... do you just want us to have the most expensive blueline in the history of the NHL?

But you can throw in concussion boy, since Pitt has GREAT success with injured players. But we will require that #6 now, for the bad contract.
- Guile

UFA, and can play bottom pair min.

I am not serious abt Wideman, I just think it is funny how little anyone wants him. He can technically still contribute.

Well where there's smoke there's fired...MAF or Bishop I would be shocked if one of them isn't a Flame by the end of Friday.

Didn't need to be said but I wouldn't give that up for Callahans contract. Close though. Take out Hickey or at least #56.
- TandA4Flames

If I'm Tampa I take out Hickey and still do that deal.

UFA, and can play bottom pair min.

I am not serious abt Wideman, I just think it is funny how little anyone wants him. He can technically still contribute.
- FLflames34

5 mil... for bottom pairing... and thus, defeating the main purpose of the Flower trade, cap space...

Is Callahan and his worse contract a better RW option than Frolik? I would much rather the Backlund proposal mentioned earlier and retain Frolik. It would hurt to lose Backlund, but not as much as carrying Callahan's contract + Bishop who will likely take 7mm+
- FLflames34

I think moving forward Calllahan is going to drop off a lot more than Frolik. He is 3 years older and has some tough miles on him. Also, he has already seen a pretty big decline recently. This is why I think it's a good deal for Tampa.

I feel like Bishop's asking price is going to start almost MILES higher than Flower's... and hes gonna be over 7 mil in a year.


Flower does seem the lot safer choice.
- Guile

But Bishop doesn't play in the playoffs.

Except Bishop is a UFA at expansion so it's definitely no guarantee that he gets taken. They could protect Vasi and Bishop could easily just become a free agent and then re-sign in Tampa after the expansion draft, no?

Bottom line, it's not getting done for a late 2nd or 3rd imo. That's just wishful thinking.
- RonPielep

Doubt Yzerman is banking on that happening, though. Not sure Tampa can even afford Bishop, even is expansion wasn't an issue.

5 mil... for bottom pairing... and thus, defeating the main purpose of the Flower trade, cap space...


- Guile

The main purpose is the expansion draft. The second purpose is cap space after this season, which they absolutely will need. Are Schultz and Lovejoy why they need huge swaths of cap space this year?

I think a point everyone is missing is the fact, and correct me if i'm wrong, is that Gillies will have to be protected in the expansion draft. So if this is accurate, can the flames really fix their goal-tending long term this summer?

*EDIT* Gillies will be an RFA 2017 summer, I know Brad Treliving says he doesn't give out no trade clauses but he could technically keep Gillies protected by giving him one on his new deal.

*EDIT2* ahh n/m it would just mean we would be forced to protect him and use our 1 goal-tending slot for him.

This is a non-issue. Think seriously about this expansion draft. We have ridiculous leverage. Bishop is THE best goalie, and 100% will be taken in the expansion draft. The Lightning are 100% not letting their 1st rd Vasilevsky exposed in the expansion draft. What else? Depending on the Stamkos deal, and even if they don't sign Stamkos, Tampa can't afford Bishop. Why? Kucherov, Hedman...

So, Tampa absolutely MUST get rid of Bishop by next season. There is other goalies on the market: MAF, Elliot maybe, and Reimer is our last resort "free" option. So Tampa either trades with the Flames, or lets him walk for free.

I reckon we could get it done with a late 2nd, maybe even a 3rd if we wait a bit more.

Keep in mind, we were able to spend $9 mil on poopty goaltending last year, I have no problem spending $7 mil on Vezina-tier goaltending.
- BobHartley

bishop is a Ufa in 2017. He is exempt from the draft. The flames have no leverage.