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

  • PLEASE check any bookmark on all devices. IF you see a link pointing to mandatory.com DELETE it Please use this URL https://forums.hfboards.com/

Peltz

Registered User
Oct 4, 2019
3,650
5,085
There is zero argument in favor of the contract being a mistake. His play got the franchise its first ever cup. It was worth it.

The end.
This, but it also shouldn’t be used as a basis for future goalie contracts or anything. That contract looked bad up until two strong playoff runs (50-60 games max?) that luckily coincided with a really strong roster. Goalies tend to fall off/get hurt more these days, it seems, and Bob struggled for a few seasons after that big deal. It’s a coin flip as to whether a guy can right the ship, and then whether he can produce in the playoffs (see: Freddie Andersen). Bob did both those things because he’s awesome, but I wouldn’t bank on that with 90% of goalies.

Glad he did it- I remember people saying he got lazy after the deal, and I hate that narrative. Nah, pressure just be like that, performance comes and goes, dude took some shit and came back stronger. Worth it.
90% of goalies wouldn't be offered 10m per year in the first place though.

On Hfboards cap space > everything else. Sure, they got a cup but what else could they have gotten with that cap space?!

Also, people simply cannot let go of things like that. He had a couple of bad seasons to start his contract which burned it into their heads that it was a bad contract, which of course it was until it wasn't. People are like children with their inability to pivot to a different opinion based on different circumstances.

It's the same with Brock Boeser here in Vancouver. People could not let go of his previous seasons and simply could not come to terms with the fact that he had turned it around. Because that would mean they were wrong, and that just can't be. 40 goals and leading playoff goal scorer? Nice, that'll up his trade value and some sucker will finally take him off our hands.
When evaluating a contract do you evaluate every year, or just the peaks?

I say both, but it depends on just how high those peaks are. A cup cancels out every setback.
 

Beukeboom Fan

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
16,037
1,955
Chicago, IL
Visit site
Yeah, but they've paid him a lot of money and still owe some, pretty big some I'd say. That's why the question.
Honestly don't know if this is a trick question.

1) One team wins a Cup a year. If your team wins a Cup, every contract for ever player on the team was justified IMO. If you are a guy who a key contributer even being in Conn Smythe discussion at one point, the contract was justified 10x over.
2) It should also be noted that Bob was the key player in FLA's run last year. If the Panthers had been healthier, FLA might have won back to back Cups and Bob would have been the best player over those two play-off runs. I can make a case that Bob's performance in the prior year had justified his contract.

I was lucky enough to have my favorite team win the Cup 3 times, when I honestly never expected them to win in my lifetime. I don't care how badly the team ended after that - that experience was worth all the subsequent pain. And while I was disappointed with some decisions made, I understood taking another kick at the can to try and climb that mountain one more time because so many things have to go right to be a serious contender when you're borderline it is easy to justify a hail mary (Seth Jones trade for the Hawks & signing MAF).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fatass

OgeeOgelthorpe

Riccis per 60 record holder
Feb 29, 2020
18,038
19,553
He hasn't been able to hit the .920 mark he did in Columbus four out of seven seasons. That said his performance in the playoffs for the past three postseasons is very good (his save percentage was great last playoffs but he got lit up once every series which skewed it. He was the Conn Smythe favourite until Edmonton.)

Last season he was a .915 but 6th in save percentage for goalies that played at least 30 games.

I think he got paid to be a .920+ goalie and he hasn't done it, so one could argue he was overpaid. He struggled at the start of the deal but bounced back and if he finishes his final two seasons strong then once you add the Cup I would say he was a good return.

Pro scouting matters but I would rather pay Bobrovsky a couple million more than whatever his "true value" is over what too many teams do, which is skimp on the goalie budget while overpaying free agents to fill holes in the lineup.

Context matters. Scoring was much lower and league average save percentages were much higher in Bob’s time in Columbus. It was DPE 2.0.

Now scoring is higher. Save percentage is lower. Bob is still providing excellent goaltending.
 

Rodgerwilco

Entertainment boards w/ some Hockey mixed in.
Feb 6, 2014
7,773
7,110
I don't know if this is tongue-in-cheek, but winning the cup is everything, so yes the investment has been returned.
 

Reality Czech

Registered User
Apr 17, 2017
5,501
8,916
If you really wanna break it down in terms of year by year performance and factor in the value the got for their money, then maybe it wasn't such a great deal. But who in their right mind would want to do that? Considering the fact that he's been a big part in their recent success and helped bring them a Cup, I doubt anyone is gonna split hairs about the money.

That being said, it's probably not wise to be handing out $10 million a year contracts to goalies in general.
 

FanCos

Registered User
Jun 4, 2016
97
138
Do you mean there are people who'd prefer a 6.5M AAV and 4 conference finals losses in a row -- more bang for the buck?
 

Anaheim4ever

Registered User
Jun 15, 2017
9,186
5,783
Anything is worth a cup, the ultimate goal.
A great gamble that payed off. A team giving a goalie a record breaking contract either ends up in a DiPietro situation or gets many deep playoff runs possibly ending with a cup.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad