Dont do this. 6 years of Bobrovsky. Is Samsonov not going to be ready during this time and you will have to give Samsonov a raise if he plays really well. You could be at 15 million in goalies in 5 years

Terrible trade. Even with Florida retaining half on Bob the wrong team is sending the picks. Bob's gonna be useless deadcap by year 4/5.

Hard pass on that Bobrovsky trade. Not to mention the fact that the Caps are giving up a first and second for a goaltender who is drastically overpaid (even at the $7.5M mark with his performance this season), and the Caps aren't exactly a defensively focused team like Columbus was. I'd rather sign Holtby than make that trade for Bobrovsky lol.

Sorry -- I don't understand what you're trying to say here.

If Bobrowsky is going to bounce back from this below-average year, this would be the team to help him do it, don't you think?

Yeah but Samsonov is ready to be a starter!!

My prediction: Bobrowsky plays better than Holtby in 2020-2021, regardless of where they end up. And you can remind me of this a year from now!

Sorry i cant type whats in my head. If Bob goes to washington and also Samsonov plays well, In 2 years when Samsonov signs a new deal it could be worth 7 million as well. That is a lot of money to be tied up on 2 goalies

I was trying to ask you what you mean by "Is Samsonov not going to be ready during this time". That phrase has no meaning in English. Changing "is" to "if" doesn't render it intelligible, either. Are you trying to say that you think that Samsonov IS going to be ready to be the number-one guy? That's certainly a reasonable opinion.

There are quite a few people on CapFriendly whose opinion I respect and who use translation software because English is not their first language. I consider you very well informed on Edmonton in particular and understanding you is important to me.

Sorry what I meant by that was, is Samsonov not ready for a full 40 to 50 game schedule was my question. He totally should be by now. So maybe the caps can spend a lot less money and someone that they can give only a 3 year contract to instead.

Fair enough. You are absolutely right, this move makes no sense if Samsonov is ready to assume the #1 spot (hence my use of the phrase "not-entirely-serious" in my Team Explanation). I happen to be a little suspicious of young goalies who start out with a big flash; sometimes they don't have staying power. Remember Andrew "The Hamburglar" Hammond?

LOL that guy ate to many cheeseburgers ahahhahahah but fair enough.

Any trade like this comes down to risk tolerance. I personally do not have the risk tolerance to trade for Bob after what we saw last year, his age and contract.

Does that mean Bob can't return to form next year? Of course not but Im simply to willing to bet Panik, 1st, 2nd (especially when I have the heir apparent chomping at the bit) to find out.

This move has a huge upside but its also has a huge downside. Seeing where Washington is currently, why take that risk? Are they not capable of winning already....

Bang on. This was precisely my thinking in making up these companion posts.

In the other one, a commenter said I would be delusional if I thought Dale Tallon would be willing to eat $2.5 million per year to get rid of Bobrowsky. Well, if you're of the opinion that he's not going to get any better, Tallon is going to have to eat $58.5 million over the balance of his contract. You pays yer money and takes yer choice.

So since the quarantine started I've realized people don't bother to read the team explanation, not really my point here but just an observation and this posts comments just reinforced that observation.
I am also of the opinion that Bob isn't washed up yet. He may not be the Bob we saw in Columbus but he is better than the Bob we saw this year.
If the Panthers were willing to eat some of his contract and maybe add a prospect or draft pick I think it would be worth kicking the tires on him. My guess though is Bob is #1 in Florida atleast until Knight looks ready.

Well the risk is both ways.

Talon would have to risk moving Bob but retaining 2.5M for X years and replacing him with a new goalie cap +2.5M retention from Bob or keeping Bob, having to pay him full time but getting him to rebound. In the Fla scenario you brought in Markstrom at 5.7M but the way I see it, you paid to get rid of Bobrovsky for 2.5M so you are effectively getting Markstrom for 7.25M. Not sure that is much better. Markstrom might be a little cheaper but he has a much smaller sample size of quality hockey compared to Bob so you got factor in that it might be better off keeping Bob and trying to get him back to normal.

Bob had a bad year but I think any GM would be insane to trade with retention right now. He's still got minimum 4 years of decent hockey ahead of him. He just needs to re-find his game. Once he does, he'll be back to bare minimum decent #1 goalie. Not even Vezina calibre just good enough to get the job done.

Players have a notorious knack for taking the first year of their new contracts "off". Just as a little repose after working so hard to get the big contract previously. My gut tells me Bob took last year off a little. Not 100% focused, 100% ready to put in the work to be the Vezina Bob of old. After talks of being bought out or traded, etc, I think he'll get back to where he was before.

I wouldn't be surprised if that happened. Bobrovsky is still talented. I think he just benefited from the extremely defensively focused system that Tortorella imposed in CBJ. Think it's pretty well proven considering they've had three relatively "unproven" goalies in net this season, and have had decent success.