Confirmed with Link: [CAR/FLA] Scott Darling + 2020 6th Round Pick for James Reimer

Wolfpuck

Jarvy Had To Do It To ‘Em
Jun 25, 2006
38,981
86,860
The 919
Reimer was always gonna be better than Darling, the point of the trade was for Florida to buy out Darling instead of us. He’s been great so far in a small sample, will probably be fine but not this good for the rest of the year, and be a competent 1b for the rest of the contract.

Given this was a cap move and not a “hockey trade” for Florida, comparing it to the Rask/Nino trade probably isn’t correct. They wanted the cap room to make a big UFA splash, which they succeeded in doing. Now, argue the wisdom of spending that much on Bob all you want, but they got the goalie they wanted, and made they trade they needed to in order to do so.
My point was Florida could have gotten more than a 6th to make the deal.
 

Navin R Slavin

Fifth line center
Jan 1, 2011
16,369
64,799
Durrm NC
Not really. We helped them out about as much as they helped us out. Darling GM was better to buyout than Reimer so that they could get Bob. Reimer was the way better goalie. Worked out for everyone

Did it, though? Reimer's sv% is .927, Bob's is .902.

Not saying it's gonna stay that way, but at the moment, one could argue that the Panthers paid a pretty high price to replace a pretty good goalie.
 

GIN ANTONIC

Registered User
Aug 19, 2007
19,222
15,549
Toronto, ON
Did it, though? Reimer's sv% is .927, Bob's is .902.

Not saying it's gonna stay that way, but at the moment, one could argue that the Panthers paid a pretty high price to replace a pretty good goalie.

Well like the other posters have said, whether the signing of Bob was a good idea is irrelevant. They wanted to go after him and make him their goalie for a long time. Trading Reimer for Darling was the best way to free up space for that.

Would I have done that? Hell no, but they got what they wanted and so did the Canes.
 
Jul 18, 2010
26,717
57,531
Atlanta, GA
Did it, though? Reimer's sv% is .927, Bob's is .902.

Not saying it's gonna stay that way, but at the moment, one could argue that the Panthers paid a pretty high price to replace a pretty good goalie.

Look I think they made the bigger mistake than we did, no doubt. Mainly because I think no goalie is worth the money and term they gave Bob, and time is proving me right on that.

My point though is that they approached the trade with us as enabling another move they were already dead set on making, and in that sense it doesn’t really matter how good Reimer turned out to be. Unlike Rask for Nino, it wasn’t a hockey trade, it was a cap thing. And because the trade enabled them to get the cap space to do the thing they wanted, they’re probably fine with it.
 

DaveG

Noted Jerk
Apr 7, 2003
52,240
52,253
Winston-Salem NC
Did it, though? Reimer's sv% is .927, Bob's is .902.

Not saying it's gonna stay that way, but at the moment, one could argue that the Panthers paid a pretty high price to replace a pretty good goalie.
on the flip side the concept that you need to build outward from the net seems lost on some teams. You can get an ace goalie but if they are behind a tire fire defense they're not gonna look like an ace goalie for long.

Their mistake was that they thought they were getting Breadman as a package deal with Bob. To be fair 90% of the fans around the league though the same thing, if not more.
 

Svechhammer

THIS is hockey?
Jun 8, 2017
25,491
92,957
He definitely looked like Darling against the Flyers. He had no idea what was going on from the opening puck drop to the end of the game.
Reimer during the Flyers game, in gif format

giphy.gif
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad