Proposal: Derrick Brassard

[blahblah]

Maybe it's just me but I don't see Bishop as a tweener goalie.

Of course you don't. You are trying to pimp him for way over market value.

As far as Brassard's value goes...I think he'd be more valuable on the Sens than he is in Columbus right now.

I don't even know this is supposed to even mean. For a team that lacks top end talent, one would think this is exactly where he would need to be. Sounds like another "You guys have garbage, we don't so he'll produce more" post.

Personally I don't care all that much because I don't even like Brass all that much. Having said that, we aren't going to give him away for, one again, another unproven talent. If we needed a backup, I'd give you a 4th or 5th round pick for him.

On a side note, do fans on other teams think if they say something over and over and over again in slightly different ways, they will eventually convince us that a silly trade proposal is actually reasonable?

 

[Roadman]

On a side note, do fans on other teams think if they say something over and over and over again in slightly different ways, they will eventually convince us that a silly trade proposal is actually reasonable?

But of course. We are a nontraditional market, devoid of any hockey knowledge whatsoever, the reason for the lock-out, and eminently suited for contraction. Did I miss any?

The ultimate whipping boy fan base.

 

[Crede777]

The talent of the team reflects the knowledge of its fanbase. Everyone knows that. Bad teams have dumb fans who don't know any better.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

The talent of the team reflects the knowledge of its fanbase. Everyone knows that. Bad teams have dumb fans who don't know any better.

Teams are bad because their fans are dumb.

 

[redsfanhere*]

I don't know why we are valueing derrick brassard as high as we are..just another 4th line center on any other team..Imo bishop might be a overpayment for this player. I would take bishop and trade mason.. bishop has shined all yr for ottawa when he played.check out JD's video when he's sitting there taking radio interviews after he signed with columbus. seems to me him and bishop defiently have a great relationship.I would love to have 1a bobrovsky 1b bishop and yes if we could swindle a additional player i'm all for that too.

 

[blahblah]

I don't know why we are valueing derrick brassard as high as we are..just another 4th line center on any other team..

Oh my. Yeah, not even remotely close to accurate.

 

[EspenK]

At the risk of being ridiculed by the experts on the board, I am still mystified as to how we solve our goaiie problems. We don't want to trade for the Bishops, Schneiders, Berniers, of the world because they aren't established #1 goalies.

We don't want Luongo because of his contract.

We don't want most free agents because they are too old or just are over the hill.

We don't want to draft a #1 goalie to high because other than Price, Fleury, et al they don't all work.

To me we either resign ourselves to a life of Bob's & Mase's or we roll the dice intelligently on a guy like Bishop if he is available.

if it costs Brass so be it. He will be an RFA after next season and i don't see him in the long range plans.

Don't bother to tell me I'm all wet; I figure I am, But i would love to hear how we solve the goalie situation without giving up assets and before we all grow old waiting for the prospects to develop.

 

[major major]

What is a Tweener Goalie?

A "Tweener Goalie" is a backup goalie who shows promise as a potential #1 goalie, but who hasn't yet played enough to prove he can be a number 1.

For a team like the BlueJackets who lack a #1 netminder, this is an important concept. Any of these goalies might become #1's, or they might just be wasted assets for another Mason/Bob level goalie. We have been talking about, and dismissing the following tweeners in particular:

Johnathan Bernier
Cory Schneider
Ben Bishop

I argue that a Tweener goalie is precisely who we should be looking at acquiring, and is an upgrade as long as the goalie in question is more likely to become a number 1 than Mason/Bob. This is where a lot of #1's come from. Craig Anderson was a tweener goalie not that long ago. At some point so was Tim Thomas, and perhaps even most of the league's #1s.

I also disagree in casting Cory Schneider as a tweener. At this point, he has proven himself to be a #1, and his trade value will merit that. It is only the fact that he is splitting duties with an all-star that has kept him back. Brassard/Bob for Schneider would be a lopsided deal in the Jackets favor.

 

[major major]

At the risk of being ridiculed by the experts on the board, I am still mystified as to how we solve our goaiie problems. We don't want to trade for the Bishops, Schneiders, Berniers, of the world because they aren't established #1 goalies.

We don't want Luongo because of his contract.

We don't want most free agents because they are too old or just are over the hill.

We don't want to draft a #1 goalie to high because other than Price, Fleury, et al they don't all work.

To me we either resign ourselves to a life of Bob's & Mase's or we roll the dice intelligently on a guy like Bishop if he is available.

if it costs Brass so be it. He will be an RFA after next season and i don't see him in the long range plans.

Don't bother to tell me I'm all wet; I figure I am, But i would love to hear how we solve the goalie situation without giving up assets and before we all grow old waiting for the prospects to develop.

I just caught this after submitting my post. I hope I answered you.

 

[alphafox]

At the risk of being ridiculed by the experts on the board, I am still mystified as to how we solve our goaiie problems. We don't want to trade for the Bishops, Schneiders, Berniers, of the world because they aren't established #1 goalies.

If this is true I agree with you. The problem is the price for these guys not the concept. Schneider is rumored to cost a 1st round pick plus, same with Bernier. Bishop likely will cost the same given his performance this year. Other guys like Lehner and Markstrom are nearly as untested as our own goalie prospects.

We don't want Luongo because of his contract.

Yes, Luongo's contract is the issue, if people complain about Wiz's contract Lu's contract will be an anchor around our necks in just a few years.

We don't want most free agents because they are too old or just are over the hill.

Disagree, the issue is that 90% of the time any goalie that gets to free agency is not an improvement over what we already have, or is too expensive/not interested in coming here.

We don't want to draft a #1 goalie to high because other than Price, Fleury, et al they don't all work.

The issue is that there haven't been any goalies of that class in quite some time. I think Fucale might be the first goalie to be worthy of a top 10 in a while.

To me we either resign ourselves to a life of Bob's & Mase's or we roll the dice intelligently on a guy like Bishop if he is available.
if it costs Brass so be it. He will be an RFA after next season and i don't see him in the long range plans.

The key here is intelligently. I'm not necessarily going to say that Brass of Bishop isn't, but it all depends on the price we can get for brass which should be more than an unproven tender.

Don't bother to tell me I'm all wet; I figure I am, But i would love to hear how we solve the goalie situation without giving up assets and before we all grow old waiting for the prospects to develop.

Frankly, developing goalies is the only way you get the coveted true #1. Look at the best goalies in the league currently.

Henrik- Drafted by the Rangers
Quick-Drafted by the Kings
Rinne- Drafted by the Preds
Brodeur-Drafted by the Devils
Miller-Drafted by the Sabres

I'll concede that some of the Goalies (Halak, Tukka Rask) have been gotten by trade, but the issue is always going to be cost. Particularly when we have a few guys that could develop into Solid goaltenders (Dansk, Korpisalo, Forsberg).

 

[Roadman]

At the risk of being ridiculed by the experts on the board, I am still mystified as to how we solve our goaiie problems. We don't want to trade for the Bishops, Schneiders, Berniers, of the world because they aren't established #1 goalies.

We don't want Luongo because of his contract.

We don't want most free agents because they are too old or just are over the hill.

We don't want to draft a #1 goalie to high because other than Price, Fleury, et al they don't all work.

To me we either resign ourselves to a life of Bob's & Mase's or we roll the dice intelligently on a guy like Bishop if he is available.

if it costs Brass so be it. He will be an RFA after next season and i don't see him in the long range plans.

Don't bother to tell me I'm all wet; I figure I am, But i would love to hear how we solve the goalie situation without giving up assets and before we all grow old waiting for the prospects to develop.

I don't know the answers to your questions. Goalie is such an odd duck of a position, so much more of a mental thing than a skater. I guess it comes down to how do you (meaning the CBJ brain trust) or you as a poster view/value the Mason/Bob pair. JD is a former goalie so maybe he has some insight the rest of us lack, and can make a better judgement. Lets hope so and that coupling that insight with JKI's eye for talent can figure out a solution for a long lingering problem.

How do you judge the Bishops, Schneiders, Berniers? I don't know. Many would say they are ready to assume the mantle but haven't proven it, so do you spend assets to obtain one? Are they really enough of an upgrade to warrant the acquisition and contract cost? Do you stick with the two headed beast you know? Both have had their moments good and bad as have all the other guys. Is the grass really greener on the other side of the fence, or just more fertilizer? If you jettison Mason and spend a ton to bring in a "starter" how does that play for Bob? Is there a veteran mentor out there for Bob? How long is the bridge to when the prospects might be ready?

Your questions are valid. Just not sure what the answers are. One thing for sure is the J's are going to earn their money on this one.

 

[YNWA14]

Holy Christ I didn't expect to have such a bitter response to a reasonable trade offer. If you read my post history you'll see that I'm just as high on Bishop as I am on Lehner and I'd actually really like to keep him. It's just not going to happen.

Columbus doesn't have a #1 goalie and Bishop has shown a lot of potential. He's put up a .920 sv % and around 2.3 GAA in his last 17 games in the NHL and that's with some terrible starts as well as not getting consistent playing time. He's trending upwards from that (.938 this year including letting in 5 goals in his first start). It's not like I'm offering you scraps for a all-world player. Jarmo drafted him and really believes in his talent to boot.

But you're right...offering you guys a potential #1 goalie as the centrepiece for a trade after a guy that puts up 45 points a year and has largely disappointed since his first year (as well as having multiple injuries) is just down right insulting. Your analysis of the situation is spot on. I am not offering this because I think that Brassard is a bad player, or because I think Bishop is a bad player. I think they're both good players and I think they both have potential to be even better than they already are. I also think this kind of trade helps both teams in the long run.

You can say you need offensive help but the reality is that Columbus needs help everywhere and building from the net out is a very successful way of going about building a successful franchise.

 

[Cash for Nash]

Holy Christ I didn't expect to have such a bitter response to a reasonable trade offer. If you read my post history you'll see that I'm just as high on Bishop as I am on Lehner and I'd actually really like to keep him. It's just not going to happen.

Columbus doesn't have a #1 goalie and Bishop has shown a lot of potential. He's put up a .920 sv % and around 2.3 GAA in his last 17 games in the NHL and that's with some terrible starts as well as not getting consistent playing time. He's trending upwards from that (.938 this year including letting in 5 goals in his first start). It's not like I'm offering you scraps for a all-world player. Jarmo drafted him and really believes in his talent to boot.

But you're right...offering you guys a potential #1 goalie as the centrepiece for a trade after a guy that puts up 45 points a year and has largely disappointed since his first year (as well as having multiple injuries) is just down right insulting. Your analysis of the situation is spot on. I am not offering this because I think that Brassard is a bad player, or because I think Bishop is a bad player. I think they're both good players and I think they both have potential to be even better than they already are. I also think this kind of trade helps both teams in the long run.

You can say you need offensive help but the reality is that Columbus needs help everywhere and building from the net out is a very successful way of going about building a successful franchise.

It's not an awful deal. But if we trade away scoring we'll need scoring in return. Have you seen us play? We suck up front.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

Holy Christ I didn't expect to have such a bitter response to a reasonable trade offer. If you read my post history you'll see that I'm just as high on Bishop as I am on Lehner and I'd actually really like to keep him. It's just not going to happen.

Columbus doesn't have a #1 goalie and Bishop has shown a lot of potential. He's put up a .920 sv % and around 2.3 GAA in his last 17 games in the NHL and that's with some terrible starts as well as not getting consistent playing time. He's trending upwards from that (.938 this year including letting in 5 goals in his first start). It's not like I'm offering you scraps for a all-world player. Jarmo drafted him and really believes in his talent to boot.

To here, I'm with you. I've argued against Bishop for the same reasons as most others. I don't see him as an upgrade over the "potential #1 netminders" on the team right now. Your point about Jarmo drafting him is well-taken (although I'd like a recent link suggesting he "believes in his talent." I just don't see the benefit in making a move that doesn't fill a hole when there are so many to be filled. That you see Bishop as less of a question mark doesn't really change my mind.

But you're right...offering you guys a potential #1 goalie as the centrepiece for a trade after a guy that puts up 45 points a year and has largely disappointed since his first year (as well as having multiple injuries) is just down right insulting. Your analysis of the situation is spot on. I am not offering this because I think that Brassard is a bad player, or because I think Bishop is a bad player. I think they're both good players and I think they both have potential to be even better than they already are. I also think this kind of trade helps both teams in the long run.

You can say you need offensive help but the reality is that Columbus needs help everywhere and building from the net out is a very successful way of going about building a successful franchise.

But this is BS and isn't going to go over well. Thanks for the sanctimony and the hockey lesson. I'm going to ask the CBJ posters to go easy on you despite what this post deserves.

 

[blahblah]

Holy Christ I didn't expect to have such a bitter response to a reasonable trade offer. If you read my post history you'll see that I'm just as high on Bishop as I am on Lehner and I'd actually really like to keep him. It's just not going to happen.

Columbus doesn't have a #1 goalie and Bishop has shown a lot of potential. He's put up a .920 sv % and around 2.3 GAA in his last 17 games in the NHL and that's with some terrible starts as well as not getting consistent playing time.

I think you missed the part, again, in which it was stated that some of us think that it is not in our best interest to bring in another unestablished goal tender that has played a grand total of 30 NHL games. I certainly have no interest in giving up an offensive center for him. There are better uses for that asset.

You've done an amazing job of doing what I stated a while ago, you said the same thing again looking for a different result.

Enjoy your solid back up goal tender and please don't attempt to sell the proposal again. Ultimately he may turn out to be a solid #1 goal tender. That doesn't change the immediate needs for this team.

 

[Mayor Bee]

I think we can look at Anders Lindback in Tampa as a perfect example of how this doesn't always pan out (at least in the short term) anyway. We can argue until the cows come home about Cory Schneider or Jonathan Bernier, but we can look at Lindback right now...

 

[EspenK]

And lets not forget that Brass is burning it up right now- projects out to 12 goals-40 pts and a whopping -32 over 82 games. Why give that up for a guy who could potentially be a goalie in the NHL for a long time to come?

 

[Samkow]

I think we can look at Anders Lindback in Tampa as a perfect example of how this doesn't always pan out (at least in the short term) anyway. We can argue until the cows come home about Cory Schneider or Jonathan Bernier, but we can look at Lindback right now...

Didn't realize how dreadful he's been. Glad we didn't end up getting him.

And lets not forget that Brass is burning it up right now- projects out to 12 goals-40 pts and a whopping -32 over 82 games. Why give that up for a guy who could potentially be a goalie in the NHL for a long time to come?

This question was answered numerous times by people responding to your earlier post.

 

[CapnCornelius]

I think we can look at Anders Lindback in Tampa as a perfect example of how this doesn't always pan out (at least in the short term) anyway. We can argue until the cows come home about Cory Schneider or Jonathan Bernier, but we can look at Lindback right now...

Lindback will be fine once Tampa gives up on him and Phoenix picks him up. I'm only half kidding.

 

[YNWA14]

But this is BS and isn't going to go over well. Thanks for the sanctimony and the hockey lesson. I'm going to ask the CBJ posters to go easy on you despite what this post deserves.

This is BS? Sanctimony? Have you read through this topic?

Anyway, I'm not going to keep posting in here I just thought that maybe there would be a reasonable conversation to be had. I never said "Bishop for Brassard" it was something that the deal could be based around (such as Bishop + Regin).

Again, I was being complimentary still after the proposal was nothing but bashed and then the whole "woe is me Columbus fans are so dumb hurr durr" stuff came out.

I still think it's a good deal and I actually think it's pretty likely given the outside factors in this deal (Jarmo, Brassard's hometown, Murray rumoured to have been after Brassard for a while).

 

[Viqsi]

This is BS? Sanctimony? Have you read through this topic?

Anyway, I'm not going to keep posting in here I just thought that maybe there would be a reasonable conversation to be had. I never said "Bishop for Brassard" it was something that the deal could be based around (such as Bishop + Regin).

Again, I was being complimentary still after the proposal was nothing but bashed and then the whole "woe is me Columbus fans are so dumb hurr durr" stuff came out.

I still think it's a good deal and I actually think it's pretty likely given the outside factors in this deal (Jarmo, Brassard's hometown, Murray rumoured to have been after Brassard for a while).

The conversation stopped being feasible as soon as Ben Bishop was mentioned.

 

[KeithBWhittington]

At the risk of being ridiculed by the experts on the board, I am still mystified as to how we solve our goaiie problems. We don't want to trade for the Bishops, Schneiders, Berniers, of the world because they aren't established #1 goalies.

We don't want Luongo because of his contract.

We don't want most free agents because they are too old or just are over the hill.

We don't want to draft a #1 goalie to high because other than Price, Fleury, et al they don't all work.

To me we either resign ourselves to a life of Bob's & Mase's or we roll the dice intelligently on a guy like Bishop if he is available.

if it costs Brass so be it. He will be an RFA after next season and i don't see him in the long range plans.

Don't bother to tell me I'm all wet; I figure I am, But i would love to hear how we solve the goalie situation without giving up assets and before we all grow old waiting for the prospects to develop.

The best category I can compare this to is NFL QB. All of the really good ones are locked up and the keys been thrown away. You have the "possibles" (Bernier, Schneider, Bishops) Like the Matt Cassels, Matt Flynns, Kevin Kolbs, Matt Schaubs (all pre-trades) then you have the journeyman type backups that go on the market but are too old to build around and haven't started games in the league consistently in years (Garrard, Leftwich, etc)

The best path for longtime goaltender stability, like the QB in football, is to draft and develop it yourself. We can throw pieces at the wall in the short term to hold the fort, but we don't want to take on a large, hamstringing contract or roll the dice with a "flavor of the month"

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

This is BS? Sanctimony? Have you read through this topic?

Anyway, I'm not going to keep posting in here I just thought that maybe there would be a reasonable conversation to be had. I never said "Bishop for Brassard" it was something that the deal could be based around (such as Bishop + Regin).

Again, I was being complimentary still after the proposal was nothing but bashed and then the whole "woe is me Columbus fans are so dumb hurr durr" stuff came out.

I still think it's a good deal and I actually think it's pretty likely given the outside factors in this deal (Jarmo, Brassard's hometown, Murray rumoured to have been after Brassard for a while).

1) You post a potential trade proposal.
2) It is almost universally panned. This apparently surprises you.
3) Since you can't possibly understand why others don't share your opinion, instead of reassessing the trade from your own perspective or just accepting that another fanbase doesn't share your assessment, you decided to give the fanbase a lesson in why your idea was so good and they were, to a man, all wrong about it. That would qualify as sanctimony.

That's why. And yeah, I read the entire topic. Seems your position was unpopular.

 

[blahblah]

The conversation stopped being feasible as soon as Ben Bishop was mentioned.

I think he's kind of missing that. Plus I like the "pretty likely" part. He's managed to build up this proposal on the foundation of all kinds of past relationships.

Brassard might end up in another city. Might end up in Ottawa. However, I don't know how Bishop ends up here with either Bob or Mason as the other goal tender. It's as if the outside factors trump the realities of the CBJ roster to him.

 

[SuperGenius]

OP must be thinking we owe them one after the Leclaire +2nd / Vermette deal.