hf101 Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 Lombardi had said he had wanted to strengthen his team in net even though it takes most of us by surprise. Tampa gets Peter Budaj in return as it free's them from haveing to expose Vasilevskiy in the Expansion draft. Cernak was a 2nd round pick of the Kings in 2015. Looks like a deal that benefits both teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TropicalFruitGirl26 Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 I am a bit sad to see Big Ben go...but can't say I am surprised. Chances of the Lightning being able to sign him (and keep a competitive team up front) were nil, so I think everyone knew he was going.....but the Kings is a bit of a surprise. I was thinking more along the lines of say Dallas, St. Louis, or even Calgary. Still though, expiring Bishop contract for an expiring Budaj contract (with Budaj only costing a fraction of Bishop's) works for TB in terms of cap relief. And hey, if Budaj would be willing to play for around $1M per or so to back up Vasilevskiy (Budaj currently makes only $600K), that would fine by me. Peter Budaj has had an underrated season playing for the Kings after all. As for the D-man the Bolts got back, it seems TB is looking to maintain their blueline size. Earlier this year, Nikita Nesterov (5'11 190) was traded so they could promote Jake Dotchin (6'2 215), and now this Erik Cernek is around 6'3 220 and is only 19 yrs old....PLENTY of room to grow. I dunno. Cernak may never see the light of day at the NHL level, but I think the Bolts overall were 'soft' on D, and they desperately need some size and 'mean-ness' back there....Dotchin and Cernak may provide that. Dotchin has already shown he plays with a bit of snarl, while still being a good puck mover and decent defender. Playoffs for the Bolts are a pipe dream this year, but hopefully, with Stamkos back fully healthy next year, and the underperforming players from this season gettting back on track as well, this team could see a quick turn around come October 2017. That is the hope anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TropicalFruitGirl26 Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 Also, Ben Bishop may simply be a rental or insurance policy for LA should they get into the playoffs (still a very real possibility). Despite Bishop's down season, he may have more than enough suitors come the off season to where he may end up signing elsewhere. His bad season could have cost him a 'max contract' type deal, but I think his paycheck will be just fine no matter where he ends up come 2017-18. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 What if this trade opens up the Lightning to trade Budaj to Pittsburgh for Fleury? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TropicalFruitGirl26 Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 12 minutes ago, ruxpin said: What if this trade opens up the Lightning to trade Budaj to Pittsburgh for Fleury? That's actually an interesting scenario. Main problem I would see there would be that Fleury makes about as much as Bishop does (with two more years on his contract after this one), and the Bolts would be right back to their previous cap situation. NOT having a goalie making almost $6M certainly frees up TB's options for other contracts. EDIT: Wow...just checked...Fleury actually makes MORE than Ben Bishop did (cap hit)...so not sure if that would have worked money-wise for TB. Still though, if the Bolts DO pull this flip stunt, you can say you thought of it first here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 @TropicalFruitGirl26 Yeah, good point on the contract situation. I'm just not convinced Vasil is a starting goalie. I realize he had an injured team in front of him, but he certainly dropped the torch when it was handed to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TropicalFruitGirl26 Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 2 minutes ago, ruxpin said: @TropicalFruitGirl26 Yeah, good point on the contract situation. I'm just not convinced Vasil is a starting goalie. I realize he had an injured team in front of him, but he certainly dropped the torch when it was handed to him. I've been saying for quite awhile I believe Vasilevskiy needed about another season or two more as an 'understudy'. Obviously, the Bishop contract situation didn't match up with that time frame and now Vasy will HAVE to become a number one....or fall by the wayside I think he is still a good goalie (certainly ahead of the other Bolts goalies in the system), but he may not be quite ready for prime time. Maybe with a healthy team next season he shows everyone different. That's the thing with goalies. Hard to gauge them. Hard enough for pro scouts....dam near impossible to tell from our fan point of view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samifan Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 Does MAF have a NMC/NTC? I heard the twits from NBC say last night that Fleury told the GM he wants to be the starter wherever he plays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 1 minute ago, Samifan said: Does MAF have a NMC/NTC? I heard the twits from NBC say last night that Fleury told the GM he wants to be the starter wherever he plays. I believe he at least has a partial. St. Louis or Calgary is possible. Or Dallas. Actually, even with Fleury instead of the clowns they currently have, Dallas becomes a much better team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TropicalFruitGirl26 Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 2 minutes ago, Samifan said: Does MAF have a NMC/NTC? I heard the twits from NBC say last night that Fleury told the GM he wants to be the starter wherever he plays. I checked capfriendly.com...he does indeed. A modified NTC,NMC. Says there are 18 teams he would be willing to be traded to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TropicalFruitGirl26 Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 As for the Kings, like I said before, I think their play is to have insurance for Jonathan Quick.....provided they make it in of course. Thing is, can you really justify having a backup (Bishop) making almost 5 mil, while you KNOW LA is gonna play Quick as long as he is healthy? Maybe the "flip" isn't coming from TB...but rather, LA flips Bishop over to Dallas, St. Louis, or Calgary. Or maybe LA sends back East to somewhere like Columbus, seeing as how Bob has issues staying healthy there as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pilldoc Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 9 minutes ago, TropicalFruitGirl26 said: I checked capfriendly.com...he does indeed. A modified NTC,NMC. Says there are 18 teams he would be willing to be traded to. Ahh beat me to it... I checked the same source .... CURRENT CONTRACT STANDARD CONTRACT COMPARE THIS CONTRACT LENGTH: 4 YEARS EXPIRY STATUS: UFA SIGNING TEAM: Pittsburgh Penguins VALUE: $23,000,000 C.H.% : 8.33 SIGNING DATE: November 5, 2014 SOURCE: Sportrac SEASON CLAUSE CAP HIT AAV S. BONUSES P. BONUSES NHL SALARY MINORS SALARY 2015-16 Modified NTC, NMC $5,750,000 $5,750,000 $0 $0 $5,750,000 $5,750,000 2016-17 Modified NTC, NMC $5,750,000 $5,750,000 $0 $0 $5,750,000 $5,750,000 2017-18 Modified NTC, NMC $5,750,000 $5,750,000 $0 $0 $5,750,000 $5,750,000 2018-19 Modified NTC, NMC $5,750,000 $5,750,000 $0 $0 $5,750,000 $5,750,000 CLAUSE DETAILS: Lists 18 teams he can be traded to. Source: Post-Gazette CLAUSE SOURCE: www.spotrac.com/nhl/pittsburgh-penguins/marc-andre-fleury/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 8 minutes ago, TropicalFruitGirl26 said: As for the Kings, like I said before, I think their play is to have insurance for Jonathan Quick.....provided they make it in of course. Thing is, can you really justify having a backup (Bishop) making almost 5 mil, while you KNOW LA is gonna play Quick as long as he is healthy? Maybe the "flip" isn't coming from TB...but rather, LA flips Bishop over to Dallas, St. Louis, or Calgary. Or maybe LA sends back East to somewhere like Columbus, seeing as how Bob has issues staying healthy there as well. Could quite possibly be. They didn't give up too much in the Bishop part, so they could make out in a potential flip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDevil Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 7 hours ago, ruxpin said: I believe he at least has a partial. St. Louis or Calgary is possible. Or Dallas. Actually, even with Fleury instead of the clowns they currently have, Dallas becomes a much better team. Pittsburgh would have to take Lehtonen or Niemi back in the deal if they did that, which I'm not sure they'd want to do. Although I guess Niemi might not be the worst backup for Murray through the rest of this season + next season. Also, that would mean Dallas would have two goalies eating up almost $12 million next year unless they somehow get rid of Lehtonen. I'm still not sure what the hell Nill was thinking going with Lehtonen/Niemi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpikeDDS Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 1 hour ago, MadDevil said: I'm still not sure what the hell Nill was thinking going with Lehtonen/Niemi. Nill hasn't made too many mistakes with Dallas, but this is one of them, and it's a big one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yave1964 Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 Bishop for not much of anything gives the Kings solid insurance in case Quick is incapable of finishing the season and the whispers are that he is struggling physically. If nothing else, the twitter feeds are erupting all over with the pun of Bish-Quick and the two of them pancaking the opponents, lol which although moan worthy has me laughing. I thought Tampa could have gotten more, apparently there is zero interest in goalies so guys like Pavelec and Halak may be stuck in Hell until the offseason. The return for Bishop was more along the lines of what I thought one of those two might net. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nossagog Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 2 hours ago, MadDevil said: Pittsburgh would have to take Lehtonen or Niemi back in the deal if they did that, which I'm not sure they'd want to do. Although I guess Niemi might not be the worst backup for Murray through the rest of this season + next season. Also, that would mean Dallas would have two goalies eating up almost $12 million next year unless they somehow get rid of Lehtonen. I'm still not sure what the hell Nill was thinking going with Lehtonen/Niemi. The only problem with this scenario is that Tristen Jarry is already being tabbed as Murray's backup next season. Jarry is playing lights out for the Baby Pens, much like Murray was prior to coming up last year. Rutherford has already stated publicly that his intention is for him to be in the NHL next year. 11 hours ago, ruxpin said: What if this trade opens up the Lightning to trade Budaj to Pittsburgh for Fleury? Trading Budaj to the Pens would only work out if Budaj signs a one year contract for next year so that he qualifies for the Expansion Draft, full knowing that if he does not get selected he's probably going to the AHL or getting bought out(if that's even legal to do). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJgoal Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 14 hours ago, hf101 said: Lombardi had said he had wanted to strengthen his team in net even though it takes most of us by surprise. Tampa gets Peter Budaj in return as it free's them from haveing to expose Vasilevskiy in the Expansion draft. Not true. Budaj is a pending UFA, so he doesn't meet the requirements unless he's re-signed. However, the Bolts never needed him, as they have Gudlevskis who is a pending RFA with 4 years pro experience and is not exempt from the draft. There's no NHL games played requirement for the goalies, only that they be under contract, or have been issued a qualifying offer. Budaj just gives Tampa an experienced backup and clears some cap space for LA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hf101 Posted February 27, 2017 Author Share Posted February 27, 2017 1 hour ago, AJgoal said: Not true. Budaj is a pending UFA, so he doesn't meet the requirements unless he's re-signed. However, the Bolts never needed him, as they have Gudlevskis who is a pending RFA with 4 years pro experience and is not exempt from the draft. There's no NHL games played requirement for the goalies, only that they be under contract, or have been issued a qualifying offer. Budaj just gives Tampa an experienced backup and clears some cap space for LA. true, I guess I could have clarified my statement better. But didn't Bishop have a NTC or NMC that had to be protected by the Lightning? Thus the need to find a trading partner as they couldn't protect both? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJgoal Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 I don't know if he had an NMC, but since it would be expiring with his contract it wouldn't matter (expiring NMCs don't require protection). Per the NHL list, Tampa is only required to protect Stamkos, Filppula, Hedman, and Callahan (source). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Rick Posted February 28, 2017 Share Posted February 28, 2017 This is a shocker to me. Do the Kings want to create a controversy between Quick and Bishop? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FD19372 Posted February 28, 2017 Share Posted February 28, 2017 1 minute ago, Hockey Junkie said: This is a shocker to me. Do the Kings want to create a controversy between Quick and Bishop? No, the Kings want to have insurance policy for Quick, and have one hell of a tandem, likely the best in the league when healthy. Budaj was and is a career backup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jammer2 Posted February 28, 2017 Share Posted February 28, 2017 Really hard for me to stomach the inactivity of GM's for Winnipeg and Calgary. This was not a huge asking price and both teams have decent borderline playofff teams, which goaltending front and center as their weakness. This tells me Jets are satisfied with not making the playoffs, and really it might be to late anyways. Stunning both teams mentioned did not go for the quick fix. Biship can be a top elite goalie with proven playoff experience...a HUGE thing. He could have pushed Hell boy, who has NOT taken the reigns as expected, same for Calg and their less than dynamic duo. It also opens up LA to trade Bishop at a later time, maybe in the off season...for a higher asking price. Perhaps they hope that Vegas will not want the hassle of an injury plagued goalie with a bit higher salary......even better for Lombardi then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpikeDDS Posted March 1, 2017 Share Posted March 1, 2017 @jammer2 i agree reed with you about Winnipeg and Calgary. Missed opportunity for sure. It's one thing for a team like Detroit to be settling for a non-playoff spot after 26 years of not doing that. It's quite another for teams like the Jets and the Flames to show no effort to get above the line. They needed a good goalie probably more than just about anyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Rick Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 On 2/27/2017 at 7:38 PM, FD19372 said: No, the Kings want to have insurance policy for Quick, and have one hell of a tandem, likely the best in the league when healthy. Budaj was and is a career backup. But isnt it sort of like in football having two QBs going at it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.