man you guys are the easiest bunch of posters on the site. possibly on the entire internet.


all hail james (frank)ing tanner. puppet master extraordinaire.
- kicksave856

They (frank)ing love it.

The reason this qualifies as a potential trade is the recent Elliot and Andersen deals. Goalies arent going for a ton, and with Calgary and Toronto off the trade front they are likely going for even less heading into the expansion year...regardless how good bishop is. Especially considering how much bishop is going to want next year. I don't see why Tampa would take back the overpaid Vermette. And I think it'd take a better prospect (Fischer?) but really we would let Tampa choose from our second tier prospects.

All that said, I don't hate this. I also don't love it, since the coyotes aren't getting what they need most...top shelf right d and a top 3 right wing. If we are giving up a first rounder and a top prospect and muphy AND our valuable cap space, I hope it's in an effort to close one of those gaps.

They (frank)ing love it.
- Blackstrom2

it really is the best

Not gonna happen, Tampa rather let Bishop walk out of his contract than make this deal I'm afraid.

What are the lines for the Yotes without trades and Doan signed?? Something like this?

McGinn - Hanzal - Duclair
Domi - Strome - Rieder
Martinook - Vermette - Doan (if not signed Fischer?)
Dauphin - Richardson - White

OEL - Murphy
Goligoski - Stone
Connauton - Michalek

Dahlbeck/McBain

I don't really think it's that bad. Callahan is awful. Bish is gone after this year, Namestnikov has skill but is never consistent, Palat is a huuuuuuuuge blow though. If I was Tampa, I'd rather try and hustle one of their top prospects instead of Palat.

Somebody has been playing a little too much NHL 16 lately.

Those JVR and Bozak trades you guaranteed at the draft were great....you gave those a KG5 didn't you?
- Iggysbff

First I didn't guarantee anything, and 1 of them is still in talks.....secondly.....How's Taylor Hall..,,,lol

JT, sent you a PM yesterday, where's my response!

The Don Quixote of Corsi strikes again this time by being? creative? Where did you find a creative column on your spreadsheet? It's obvious you didn't have any toys as a kid. You are fast becoming the New Garth. Please take a vacation
- tpd11

Hey buddy, it's a hockey blog and you need to dial back how serious you take it by about a mile.

This is like former Oilers blogger Richard Cloutier's daily blog about the Oilers "helping" Nashville by trading a 1st and a 2nd for the then-newly-signed Shea Weber.
- jmatchett383

In retrospect, I bet both teams would have benefited from such a trade.

The reason this qualifies as a potential trade is the recent Elliot and Andersen deals. Goalies arent going for a ton, and with Calgary and Toronto off the trade front they are likely going for even less heading into the expansion year...regardless how good bishop is. Especially considering how much bishop is going to want next year. I don't see why Tampa would take back the overpaid Vermette. And I think it'd take a better prospect (Fischer?) but really we would let Tampa choose from our second tier prospects.

All that said, I don't hate this. I also don't love it, since the coyotes aren't getting what they need most...top shelf right d and a top 3 right wing. If we are giving up a first rounder and a top prospect and muphy AND our valuable cap space, I hope it's in an effort to close one of those gaps.
- Dahlmanyotes

I see what you're saying, but adding three young forwards who are ready for more NHL ice time and are already guaranteed not to be busts would help the Coyotes out by allowing them to trade some of their younger prospects, most of whom are forwards.

If you put Palat, Namestnikov and Janmark on any team, they're going to be massively better.

As for Bishop not being much of an upgrade over Smith, that's taking everything into consideration.

1) Bishop is 29 and going to get more than you're paying Smith, which is over six million longterm.

2) Bishop's high danger save percentage isn't much better than Smith's, suggesting that a great part of his being perceived as way better than Smith is the fact that Bishop plays on a Cup Contender.

3) I don't think either of them are in the Lundqvist/Price/Schneider level where you're almost an instant contender by having them.

So I think it's pretty safe to say that Bishop over Smith isn't a massive upgrade while you're still playing behind Grossmann, Dahlbeck, Murphy, Tinordi etc.

Given the cost and the best-case-scenario of Bishop playing awesome, I still don't think he's a guy because of talent/age/contract/existing commitments that they need.

Not gonna happen, Tampa rather let Bishop walk out of his contract than make this deal I'm afraid.

What are the lines for the Yotes without trades and Doan signed?? Something like this?

McGinn - Hanzal - Duclair
Domi - Strome - Rieder
Martinook - Vermette - Doan (if not signed Fischer?)
Dauphin - Richardson - White

OEL - Murphy
Goligoski - Stone
Connauton - Michalek

Dahlbeck/McBain
- DutchSenators

These top two lines likely can't handle most other team's top two lines and the 3/4th line players would be among the worst in hockey, and the D is close to the worst.

They need to make some MAJOR moves or they'll be 30th with their current roster.

JT, sent you a PM yesterday, where's my response!
- mykokes

Are you entitled to one? I didn't see it, I'll have to check.

What a time to be alive.

These top two lines likely can't handle most other team's top two lines and the 3/4th line players would be among the worst in hockey, and the D is close to the worst.

They need to make some MAJOR moves or they'll be 30th with their current roster.
- James_Tanner

yeah the forward group will be slaughtered. I think the D group is fairly solid after acquiring Goligoski, as long as OEL/Goligoski/Stone are able to eat most of the minutes from the third pairing.

Are you entitled to one? I didn't see it, I'll have to check.
- James_Tanner

Thanks for the response g.

yeah the forward group will be slaughtered. I think the D group is fairly solid after acquiring Goligoski, as long as OEL/Goligoski/Stone are able to eat most of the minutes from the third pairing.
- DutchSenators

The main problem is that Murphy as OEL's partner just about ruins any advantage you gain with OEL in the lineup.

Also, bottom pairings win you games and this is one of the worst collection of bottom pairing D in the NHL. It's not a given for every team, but on average, most top fours probably cancel each other out to a wide degree. Sure, there are advantages, but I would bet you the biggest advantage you could get is having a bottom pairng that wold be another team's second pairing.

Thanks for the response g.
- mykokes

Read in DMX voice:

Anytime Dog.

Hey buddy, it's a hockey blog and you need to dial back how serious you take it by about a mile.
- James_Tanner

Relax Tanner. It's s hockey blog

Hey buddy, it's a hockey blog and you need to dial back how serious you take it by about a mile.
- James_Tanner

Take you serious. Never. Boy you're easier than I thought

ummm..

"Entitled"

never going to happen. the lightning aren't going to trade ryan callahan. while he is too expensive for what he brings, they love what he brings and so do i. there are other contracts that need to be moved way before his. bishop will be traded to free up cap space. you are not taking drouin or namestnikov or palat. those 3 will be lightning for a very long time. johnson may be expendable if namestnikov can play 2C , which he can but is stuck behind 2 really good centermen. if you think steve yzerman would even consider this then that is strange

I don't really think it's that bad. Callahan is awful. Bish is gone after this year, Namestnikov has skill but is never consistent, Palat is a huuuuuuuuge blow though. If I was Tampa, I'd rather try and hustle one of their top prospects instead of Palat.
- j.boyd919

namestnikov was one of the best forwards on the tampa bay lightning roster this past season..

you can have filppula's contract