Value of: Bob with 35-40% retained.

[mighty Stanley Duck]

Personally... I'm not seeing how you get out of the Bob contract.

He lives in Florida. He's got 3 years left on his deal and is 34 years old.

Could you convince Chicago (or some other bottom-dwelling team) to take him? Sure.

But he has a full NMC next year followed by a 50% of the league no-trade list for the following 2. For a goalie it's VERY easy to stretch that 16-team list.

While you can make the justification that he'd be a decent fit with a young team trying to make the next step (a la Detroit, Ottawa, Buffalo), those teams are far from the most desirable locales, and are likely going to be weary of the term on his deal.

The logical destination to me, would be Anaheim. For whatever reason, i think Gibson has value (maybe to one of those 3 teams). If Gibson goes, Bob could come right into his spot at maybe a little bit higher cap hit. Anaheim gets whatever they get for Gibson, plus something from Florida for taking on Bob. 1 less year of term as well... so gives them some runway to try and develop a goalie.

Don't agree, if we are looking for experience, we have that already in Gibson,
Other thing, he is gone just at the time we are (i hope) gonna be competitive and good enough for playoffs.

 

[Petes2424]

Never say never but it’s still a huge ask at 50%.. Florida is probably going to be eating this one. Just a matter of when.

 

[Laus723]

Bob 25% retained and Luostarinen for Granlund and Desmith.

I’d do this. We’d have to flip Granlund and we’d miss Luostairinen, but has the potentiality of creating a lot of cap of space and I’d take DeSmith to cover for Knight either until he comes back or is just ready for the full time job. Could re-sign Lyon as the 3rd/backup, or go with Guzda as that guy.

 

[McSuper]

He’d have to waive this year for any trade, has a modified no movement after next season. I think Bob at 6-6.5 per (only 17.5 in real money still owed) is more palatable than his current rubbish.

There’s obviously question marks with him, 3 coaches have chose a rookie and two journeyman goalies over him in the playoffs (Driedger, Knight, and Lyon), but when he’s on he’s solid.

Not sure what Zito does with him this off-season, just gauging interest, or the overall lack thereof. Would mean we’re going with Knight (provided he’s back and ready) and Lyon maybe.

Not really opposed to 50% retention.

At 6.5 I would do Campbell with 500K retained. Now before you get upset I look at it this way. It would be pretty well the same dollars but it would be spread over 4 year instead of 3 .

Not that it matter as he isn't waiving for Edmonton

 

[malcb33]

Even at 50% retained, he's still not a positive asset to most of the league, then add on he has an NMC and you're still looking at a cap dump/ declining asset coming back.

It's going to be difficult to move Bob, not impossible, but the stars will have to align. Matt Murray got moved, so I guess there's a chance

 

[Winger98]

You're saving around 33% of his cap by just buying him out, and that doesn't cost you other assets. If you really want the guy gone, I think that's the route you take because you're not getting jack or squat back in a deal.

 

[ShootIt]

Given this, if I was the Cats, I would pull out the stops to get Ian Clark to Florida.

Somehow our goalie coach, Rob Tallas, is the Teflon Don of coaches.

Doesn't matter how many times the HC has been fired, GMs canned, new ownership, Tallass has been here since 2009.

 

[wedge]

buy-out is probably the only solution here.

 

[BruinsBtn]

Goaltending is crazy.

Not long ago, Florida had the best goaltending prospect in the world (Knight), a two-time Vezina trophy winner and Devon Levi.

Now they have a 30-year-old journeyman pending UFA and a salary cap headache.

 

[TGWL]

At 6.5 I would do Campbell with 500K retained. Now before you get upset I look at it this way. It would be pretty well the same dollars but it would be spread over 4 year instead of 3 .

Not that it matter as he isn't waiving for Edmonton

With those prime players you have, it might be better to just trade Campbell at 50% and eat the 4th year of having an extra cap hit. Buying out Campbell is only around 1.5, for most of the 8 years it would take, which will be peanuts when the cap goes up. Probably better than paying 7.0 for the next 3 years when you really need the cap to go all in.

 

[TGWL]

You're saving around 33% of his cap by just buying him out, and that doesn't cost you other assets. If you really want the guy gone, I think that's the route you take because you're not getting jack or squat back in a deal.

Yup. Attaching a real good asset instead of paying 1.5ish in in years 3 to 6 doesn't really make any sense.

 

[Laus723]

Yup. Attaching a real good asset instead of paying 1.5ish in in years 3 to 6 doesn't really make any sense.

You're saving around 33% of his cap by just buying him out, and that doesn't cost you other assets. If you really want the guy gone, I think that's the route you take because you're not getting jack or squat back in a deal.

buy-out is probably the only solution here.

Maybe, but we’d still need to bring in a backup and he takes at least 1 mil of that. As I said in the OP, if (I get it’s a big if) he waives at whatever the amount, it’s only 3 years at that retention plus the added cap space.

 

[seanlinden]

Ducks have been bad for 5 seasons now. 5 top 10 picks i clueing 3 in the top 5. They aren’t in a position to write off the next 3 seasons. Have to look to turn it around sooner rather than later.

Don't agree, if we are looking for experience, we have that already in Gibson,
Other thing, he is gone just at the time we are (i hope) gonna be competitive and good enough for playoffs.

Downgrading from Gibson to Bob isn't about "getting" experience. It's about cashing out on whatever value Gibson may have, cashing in on what Florida would give up to get rid of Bob (even at ~$6-7m), and not really making your team all that worse / shortening the goaltending commitment you have.


If the Panthers buy out Bob, it's the financial equivalent of trading him with 67% retained, plus a 3 year cap penalty at the end of $1.67m.

If you're a team that can offer to take on Bob, at say 30% retained ($3m penalty for Florida for 3 years), that should be a pretty valuable proposition to them.

 

[Comely]

Downgrading from Gibson to Bob isn't about "getting" experience. It's about cashing out on whatever value Gibson may have, cashing in on what Florida would give up to get rid of Bob (even at ~$6-7m), and not really making your team all that worse / shortening the goaltending commitment you have.


If the Panthers buy out Bob, it's the financial equivalent of trading him with 67% retained, plus a 3 year cap penalty at the end of $1.67m.

If you're a team that can offer to take on Bob, at say 30% retained ($3m penalty for Florida for 3 years), that should be a pretty valuable proposition to them.

Actually because of the bonus structure its worse then that buy out would be a cap hit of 6.67M for 3 years followed by 1.67M for 3 years

 

[Goalie_Bob]

Actually because of the bonus structure its worse then that buy out would be a cap hit of 6.67M for 3 years followed by 1.67M for 3 years

That's exactly what they said.

 

[TotalHomer]

Maybe, but we’d still need to bring in a backup and he takes at least 1 mil of that. As I said in the OP, if (I get it’s a big if) he waives at whatever the amount, it’s only 3 years at that retention plus the added cap space.

I don't see any cap savings coming even if he waives and gets traded. Even with 50% retention teams won't be taking that deal without some heavy sweeteners ( that Florida probably can't afford) or sending equal amount of cap back. Maybe if he had a year left a team could take a chance if he was making a million but with three years? Between his age and terrible numbers teams can find backups for league minimum in their system to do what he does.

 

[Comely]

That's exactly what they said.

Perhaps you are correct I was reading it wrong as if they cap hit was only a third of the contract.

 

[SomeDude]

Cats best hope is to pray a team is stupid enough to hire Ron Hextall again. He’s the only GM I could see willingly taking on a contract that bad.

 

[Poppy Whoa Sonnet]

Two years to go I could see it for a desperate team but three years is too long.

 

[Ace Card Bedard]

Sure:

To:



Jason Dickinson
or
Nikita Zaitsev


To:



Sergei Bobrovsky at 50%
Anton Lundell

 

[dekelikekocur]

Eat 50%, take Chiarot at full contract, and shuffle future considerations and Det will take him to play backup to Husso.

 

[Laus723]

I don't see any cap savings coming even if he waives and gets traded. Even with 50% retention teams won't be taking that deal without some heavy sweeteners ( that Florida probably can't afford) or sending equal amount of cap back. Maybe if he had a year left a team could take a chance if he was making a million but with three years? Between his age and terrible numbers teams can find backups for league minimum in their system to do what he does.

I realize we're likely stuck with him for at least another year, unless Zito sees buying him out as the best way. Athletes are proud though and want to play, which is why I could see him waiving for the right location.

Eat 50%, take Chiarot at full contract, and shuffle future considerations and Det will take him to play backup to Husso.

What's the point of this?

Sure:

To:



Jason Dickinson
or
Nikita Zaitsev


To:



Sergei Bobrovsky at 50%
Anton Lundell

We're not desperate to move him.

 

[seanlinden]

Actually because of the bonus structure its worse then that buy out would be a cap hit of 6.67M for 3 years followed by 1.67M for 3 years

That's exactly what I said... equivalent of trading him at 67% retained, plus a 3 year penalty.

 

[TotalHomer]

I realize we're likely stuck with him for at least another year, unless Zito sees buying him out as the best way. Athletes are proud though and want to play, which is why I could see him waiving for the right location.

Agreed, I don't see waiving being an issue but finding a taker. And if you do find someone that fits the profile I don't see any cap savings, they'll send an equally bad contract back. Whatever ability or stature Bob held in the game before is long gone by now, quite frankly I don't see a trade unless it's purely a dump for dump type. Rather have the minor savings from the buyout.

 

[Jyrki]

$5M cap hit for a goalie with mediocre stats who gets benched when games actually matter is still a tough pill to swallow. You're getting into Campbell territory with the 50% retention, whose contract is still a big net negative.

And unlike a forward or defenseman contract you can't really bury Bob somewhere in the lineup, either he's playing or riding the bench. A team trying to use their cap space as an asset can't even absorb his contract without messing up their goaltending situation significantly. The amount of assets the Panthers would need to give up just to make it a less bad deal would be staggering. They might as well do some math to see how a buyout fits their cap planning instead because a trade wouldn't save them much no matter how many assets they bundled with Bob.