Value of: Bobrovsky to CGY at deadline

Ainsy01

Registered User
Jun 12, 2014
1,187
627
Flames cant afford to sign him long term, but what would his value be as a rental? If Columbus is missing the playoffs and Bob is walking July 1, they realistically could ship his as a rental.

What would it take for CGY to acquire him and take him on a run ? Goalie rentals are almost unheard of as far as I'm aware of. Has it been done? Whats the price? 2nd round pick? B prospect?
 

typicalsavage

Registered User
Oct 31, 2018
1,496
822
Flames cant afford to sign him long term, but what would his value be as a rental? If Columbus is missing the playoffs and Bob is walking July 1, they realistically could ship his as a rental.

What would it take for CGY to acquire him and take him on a run ? Goalie rentals are almost unheard of as far as I'm aware of. Has it been done? Whats the price? 2nd round pick? B prospect?
Lol are you high? He's had bad start but he's still a top goalie. If all you're offerings a 2nd rounder the Blue Jackets would just keep him. Start with a 1st and Bennett/Jankowksi and go from there.
 

blankall

Registered User
Jul 4, 2007
14,966
5,296
Lol are you high? He's had bad start but he's still a top goalie. If all you're offerings a 2nd rounder the Blue Jackets would just keep him. Start with a 1st and Bennett/Jankowksi and go from there.

CBJ fans are going to be very disappointed when they see the actual return. If you expect a 1st +Bennett + extra for taking back an expiring goalie contract for a rental goalie that's just not going to happen.
 

innitfam

Registered User
Oct 18, 2017
2,918
2,146
For a rental?

1st + retained Mike Smith + good prospect/young roster player. The 1st and prospect/young player are for Bob's value, Smith is for cap and positional reasons (for Calgary).

I don't see why Columbus does it though. Panarin is clearly not re-signing with CBJ, so they'll have money to sign him. Unless he agrees to reup with CBJ after he's done in Calgary.

Columbus is also still flirting with trying to be a relevnt playoff team so trading your #1 would be... bizarre. Although, Bob hasn't exactly lit it up in the playoffs so idk, maybe its time to move on? He deserves one more shot though IMO
 

Viqsi

"that chick from Ohio"
Oct 5, 2007
53,777
31,196
40N 83W (approx)
To fit Bob into their lineup they will have to ditch a goalie, so yeah, Smith or Gillies is coming back
I have no problem with getting Smith as a Bob trade throw-in / temporary cap dump given that he's also a pending UFA. If one expects that handing him to us constitutes some kind of value for us that would adjust the price downward in any way, though, then we've got a problem.

* * *​
CBJ fans are going to be very disappointed when they see the actual return.
What return? The plan right now is to keep him.
 

CoachWithNoTeam

Registered User
Jul 1, 2006
1,534
819
San Diego
I believe that five or six 1sts were traded at last year’s deadline. I would think somewhere close to one of those packages. A first + B+ prospect + salary offset.
 

typicalsavage

Registered User
Oct 31, 2018
1,496
822
CBJ fans are going to be very disappointed when they see the actual return. If you expect a 1st +Bennett + extra for taking back an expiring goalie contract for a rental goalie that's just not going to happen.
Bobrovsky easily gets a 1st, 2nd ++. Bennett isn't that valuable. CGY would easily give up Bennett in order to get Bobrovsky.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fro

blankall

Registered User
Jul 4, 2007
14,966
5,296
I have no problem with getting Smith as a Bob trade throw-in / temporary cap dump given that he's also a pending UFA. If one expects that handing him to us constitutes some kind of value for us that would adjust the price downward in any way, though, then we've got a problem.

* * *​

What return? The plan right now is to keep him.


Right... He's already given you a trade list. Good luck with that.
 

Viqsi

"that chick from Ohio"
Oct 5, 2007
53,777
31,196
40N 83W (approx)
Right... He's already given you a trade list. Good luck with that.
1) That's a rumor from about two weeks ago, and things have improved in the interim.
2) A trade list is not a trade request. It may arrive as part of one, but the rumor in question did not go there - it was mentioned in the context of the Jackets making the call to trade Bob, not Bob wanting to be traded from the Jackets. Indeed, every indication we have is that the current issues between player and front office is that Bob wants to stay, but feels like he's underappreciated and not getting offers worthy of his value to the team.
 

Crede777

Deputized
Dec 16, 2009
14,639
4,164
1) That's a rumor from about two weeks ago, and things have improved in the interim.
2) A trade list is not a trade request. It may arrive as part of one, but the rumor in question did not go there - it was mentioned in the context of the Jackets making the call to trade Bob, not Bob wanting to be traded from the Jackets. Indeed, every indication we have is that the current issues between player and front office is that Bob wants to stay, but feels like he's underappreciated and not getting offers worthy of his value to the team.
3. The Flames are almost certainly not on the list.
 

Deen

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
12,590
4,937
Calgary can't afford to give away any more 1st round picks and that would be the starting point.
 

CaptainCrunch67

Registered User
Aug 23, 2005
6,472
1,063
This, I'd pass on trading for Bob because the Flames have to keep their first round draft pick and young assets after giving them away.


Calgary can't afford to give away any more 1st round picks and that would be the starting point.
 

madmike77

Registered User
Jan 9, 2009
6,602
574
A deadline deal wouldn’t really make sense for the Flames.

They won’t be a playoff team at the deadline if Smith keeps playing the way he has been. They need another goalie now. And they can’t afford someone like Bobrovsky.

I think they’re better off just going with someone like Mason. Sure he’s not at Bobrovsky’s level but he has to be better than Smith.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad