Toggle sidebar

Proposal: Derrick Brassard

YNWA14

YNWA14

Onbreekbaar
Dec 29, 2010
34,543
2,560
I'm sure that we're not the only fanbase hearing about speculation that Jarmo could look to get Bishop, and realistically speaking you guys could use a potential #1 (I'm not sold on Bobrovsky...maybe you guys are).

Assuming that you guys are interested in Bishop do you think there's a deal to be made with Bishop and Brassard as the central pieces to a trade?
Click to read more...
 
CBJx614

CBJx614

Registered User
May 25, 2012
14,895
6,505
C-137
I wouldn't mind it, but I think we need to move one of bob/mase before we acquire another goaltender. Also we need to get offense back.
 
Hello Johnny

Hello Johnny

Registered User
Apr 13, 2007
13,208
1,142
As much as Brass may be on the table, it would be stupid to deal him for another tweener goalie.
 

major major

Registered User
Feb 18, 2013
14,598
1,669
The going rate for Bishop was a 2013 second rounder, and we'd have to see more of him before upping the offer past that. I do think he'd be an upgrade for the Jackets, and he might be the real deal #1, but he hasn't seen enough playing time to prove it.
 

blahblah

Registered User
Nov 24, 2005
21,327
972
We could have Bishop last year for less than Brassard. Howson didn't pull the trigger and JK isn't going to give up Brassard for yet and another unproven goal tender.

Thx, bye.
 
EspenK

EspenK

Registered User
Sep 25, 2011
15,621
4,188
We tend to over value our players. Collectively they suck; individually they are worth top line players and first round draft picks. :shakehead

I wouldn't rule it out completely. If there are no other offers for Brass and there are no other goalie options I think it is much more possible.

The alternatives would then be let brass become an RFA and lose him for less than Bishop or resign him because he suddenly lives up to his draft hype. And we could resign both mason & Bob and thenn ***** about them for a couple more seasons.

In a void maybe the trade doesn't make sense but i think you have to look big picture and further than this season or next to finally right this ship.
 
CapnCornelius

CapnCornelius

Registered User
Oct 28, 2006
10,986
0
I'm honestly not in love with the deal. Depending on what is added, I could like it. But I'd be more interested in acquiring scoring or picks.
 
Xoggz22

Xoggz22

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
7,485
2,747
Columbus, Ohio
Don't see why we would further weaken our forward group for another unproven goaltender. Not that Bishop is bad or worthless or whatever, but he isn't proven and we need offense more than anything in my opinion.
 
EspenK

EspenK

Registered User
Sep 25, 2011
15,621
4,188
I'm still waiting for us to either develop one or have someone propose trading a #1 to us.

Substitute Anderson for Bishop in the proposeddeal and the response would be:

Anderson is a career journeyman type goalie who is just playing lights out the last year and a half

Ranger fan proposal:

how about Lundqvist & Torts for Savard, Brassard & Richard(s) and any other ard's you guys have?

Lundqvist is on the downside of his career and besides we love our 'ard's

Of course we have already turned down Schneider and Bernier so no need tg cover them again.

Mason & Bob till one of our prospect goalies become the next Patrick Roy.
 
Viqsi

Viqsi

"that chick from Ohio"
Oct 5, 2007
53,831
31,353
40N 83W (approx)
EspenK said:
I'm still waiting for us to either develop one or have someone propose trading a #1 to us.

Substitute Anderson for Bishop in the proposeddeal and the response would be:

Anderson is a career journeyman type goalie who is just playing lights out the last year and a half

Ranger fan proposal:

how about Lundqvist & Torts for Savard, Brassard & Richard(s) and any other ard's you guys have?

Lundqvist is on the downside of his career and besides we love our 'ard's

Of course we have already turned down Schneider and Bernier so no need tg cover them again.

Mason & Bob till one of our prospect goalies become the next Patrick Roy.
Click to expand...
It's certainly preferable to the flailing about "surely the grass is greener on THIS side" approach. :)
 
YNWA14

YNWA14

Onbreekbaar
Dec 29, 2010
34,543
2,560
Maybe it's just me but I don't see Bishop as a tweener goalie. The reason he was had for so cheap out of St. Louis is because they had Elliott and Halak playing so hot and Bishop was clearly ready for the big show but hadn't shown anything. If you've been watching Sens games recently you have to be impressed with what Bishop has been doing. He'd be an easy goalie to build around with his size and puck handling ability -- he's also got some intensity and seems to be a good locker-room guy...always smiling and joking around even with Lehner (who comes off as a bit of a dick IMO).

Honestly I'd like to keep Bishop and Anderson (I know it's not going to happen, nor is it the popular opinion) but yeah.

Maybe something like Bishop + Hoffman for Brassard. I know 'unproven' goalies are undervalued as a commodity in general (especially on this site) but Bishop is going to be a stud and is already performing like one in the NHL.

As far as Brassard's value goes...I think he'd be more valuable on the Sens than he is in Columbus right now. He has the talent to be more than a 45 point a season guy. Everyone's seen it. I also like that he gets physical at times and isn't afraid of the corners (small sample on my part). He's an Ottawa boy to begin with and great friends with Methot...I think it'd be a good trade for both teams.
 
Viqsi

Viqsi

"that chick from Ohio"
Oct 5, 2007
53,831
31,353
40N 83W (approx)
Cujomi said:
Maybe it's just me but I don't see Bishop as a tweener goalie.
Click to expand...

Your perspective on this judgment call really doesn't change a thing. Until you can point to the games he has played wherein he has established himself as a proven, full-time NHL starter, we don't have any need to trade assets for him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom