Has Florida got good return on that Bobrovsky investment or it's still not enough?

[ScottyMascotty]

Bob struggled when FL was running and gunning and too often leaving him on an island. His play greatly improved when FL started focusing more on playing solid defense in front of him. Funny how the two are so intertwined....
Goalie stats can be so misleading, like the goalie is playing in a vacuum and his team’s play in front of him has no impact on his performance.

Bob has been good in 21-22 season (including playoffs) when Florida literally tried to outscore everyone

 

[Coffey]

Lmao are you asking “what more could he have done than won the cup?”

The f***

 

[Three On Zero]

Lmao are you asking “what more could he have done than won the cup?”

The f***

Bob to fans “why you heff to be mad? “

 

[Statto]

They won, there’s no additional discussion or context needed.

 

[sabremike]

Is this a serious question?

 

[Golden_Jet]

Bob to fans “why you heff to be mad? “

Wasn’t that Bryzgalov, I thought

 

[Crosby2010]

Yes.

- Signed every Maple Leafs fan alive.

 

[Maliks PlusMinus]

You can make mistakes or make poor investments and still win the cup. The bruins traded away Joe Thornton in a horrible deal and then won the cup shortly afterward. The Panthers' team last year spent 3m in cap money on Spencer Knight's buried deal. It's not that black and white.

It is black and white when he very, very clearly was crucial to both cup runs

 

[bert]

I mean as far as I remember it was considered a pretty risky investment.

Is this a sarcastic thread?

 

[LOFIN]

They won the cup, and he was a big factor in it. End of story. It's so hard to win multiple cups these days, a single one is a great achievement and they got it.

 

[Three On Zero]

Wasn’t that Bryzgalov, I thought

It was, I was just piggy backing on the Russian Goalie aspect

 

[Auston Marlander]

I'm confused how this is a question. They won a cup. The only goal of the GM, Coach and players is the win a cup; they achieved that goal.

You've mentioned a few times it's a risky contract. Correction, it was a risky contract...that risk has paid off.

So to answer the question. A resounding yes, without even a hint of doubt.

I'd say the ultimate goal is actually to be profitable.

For the owners and stakeholders. They do that by hiring a GM that will win the most, as teams who win are more profitable than those who don't (in the same market). GM to players to trainers, the only goal is to win the cup.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Without a doubt.

A big blow to the “Don’t pay a goaltender” argument.

 

[Clint Eastwood]

I think any team would pay 10M$ for a goalie per year 7 years if they get a cup out of it

I'd pay a goalie 50M a year for that long if it meant a cup out of it.

 

[rogking65]

I mean as far as I remember it was considered a pretty risky investment.

of course he was worth it. 32 team league, so if you win once in 32 yrs you are par. Finals one yr and cup next yr. What are your expectations?

 

[Midnight Judges]

There was a time when that deal looked pretty bad, but new shit has come to light.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

They won a president trophy, went to the finals in back to back, and won a cup last year.

What is this thread?

 

[KingsFan7824]

If you win, whatever you did/do is good enough. If you lose, whatever you did/do wasn't good enough. It's that boring and simple. If you win the Cup, anything you did must've been at least ok, because you won, and wouldn't have won otherwise. It's ok that one of your top defenseman was a waiver wire pick up. You can't count on something that ridiculous to happen, but it did happen, so it's all just part of building a team. But 5 years before a Cup run, if you say "oh, we'll just get one of our best players on waivers, don't worry about it", fans would go apeshit, because that's not how you properly build a team.

Objectively, if you give a 30+ year old $10m, especially a goalie, that's a bad move. It's still a bad move, even though Florida won. Because so many things had to go their way for that to have happened after they gave that contract to him. If Tkachuk wants to stay in Calgary, they're not taking Huberdeau nearing 30 with a year left on his deal. That trade simply does not happen. However, Tkachuk wants out, at the same time as Huberdeau has a 100+pt season, and both sides get to make that work. If either variable doesn't exist, if Tkachuk is fine in Calgary, and/or Huberdeau has his career average of 75pts or so, it's not a deal that happens. Calgary wouldn't be that stupid. But they were forced into it, and could justify it in some way. Then the terrible contract they give to Huberdeau, that's all on the Flames. They didn't have to do that.

The Panthers won, so anything they did before June 2024 is no longer up for debate. If they don't win again this year, then questoions can start again. And they just keep adding on the more years they go without winning.

 

[benfranklin]

They won the Cup and he arguably couldve/shouldve been the Conn Smythe. The answer is yes. They can be a lottery team for the rest of his contract and it was a win.

 

[Drake1588]

Odd timing. It's a reasonable question only in the sense that for the early years of the deal, it was looking like a huge mistake. Almost as soon as he put it together again, though, the Panthers started on their long run of great success, all the way to a title.

It's really difficult to win the Cup, and if in one seven-year period you win it, well it very nearly justifies everything you've done in cap terms to get there. Post Cup, there is no question it has been worth it. He has been excellent for at least the last two years. That's enough, even if he hasn't been playing at that level for the whole deal. Winning in this league is very hard. He doesn't need to win 2-3 Cups. He's already justified the contract. Anything more is gravy.

 

[Goose]

I thought the signing was absolutely idiotic, mainly because I don’t think any goalie is consistent or reliable enough to tie that much salary up in, but it was absolutely worth every penny given the outcome.

Let’s not forget he was one game away from the narrative being the biggest goalie collapse in history though. After Game 3 he was pretty much a lock for the Conn Smythe, then he imploded before hanging on in Game 7.

I still don’t think that much payroll on a goalie makes sense with how volatile the position is, and how you can’t buy production as reliably as you can with skaters, but the guy won them a cup, and cups are so effing hard to win that you stop caring about anything else once it’s achieved.

It’s like the TO core, if they win a cup all of it will be justified, if they don’t, they’ll be perpetually shat on for years to come.

 

[Bleedred]

I think the cup win definitely negates anything you can say bad about this contract. At least this current one.

I do hope that the cup win doesn't cause them to give him an absurd retirement contract when this contract is up in 2 more years though.

 

[olli]

They won a cup that’s all that matters. Just like if the Habs had won in 2021 that crazy contract they gave him would’ve still been worth it.

 

[Jumptheshark]

1. this is seriously an argument about a guy pissing into the wind. Back to Back finals. That is what it is all about

 

[HuGo Sham]

2 cup finals and a cup win = great return on investment