Proposal: Trade Bob and use the cap space to improve D

[blahblah]

I just think if Bob doesn't have the entire team on his back and doesn't have to overwork himself he can maintain that vezina caliber. And if he can do that there's no reason to trade him.

There are 7+ million reasons to trade him. I'll be honest paying goalies that much is punitive. When they are on your ok, when you have to rely on your backup (injuries) not so much. You see that quite a bit, they end up going to the system because their backup can't handle the load.

The biggest issue with this team is that we can never get into a position in which we can play out backup - we're always digging ourselves out of holes. That and our head coaches get blinders on when he gets hot.

 

[punk_o_holic]

I would say no but if they tried, who would want him? Like others said, always injured and isn't he the 2nd highest paid goalie? Better options available as well imo. Anderson from the Ducks(He's a RFA and will get a raise but probably will be cheaper then Bob). Elliot of the Blues(Has 1 year left and for only a 2.5 cap hit). Miller from the Canucks(1 year left but has a NTC. I thought he was done last year but him and Markstrom are holding the fort for the Canucks). If you don't want to trade assets and want a cheaper but not as good of a goalie, you can sign someone like Hiller or Reimer as well.

 

[Cyclones Rock]

Bob will have to show durability and much improved performance levels in order to receive anything worthwhile coming back in a trade. At this point, trading him would probably include salary retention or a lousy player/deal coming back. Plus, Korpse has faced mainly non playoff teams. The Islanders are about the best whom he has faced. He's looked good against mediocre. He looks like he could be the real thing, but the sample size and competition strength is probably way too light to consider trading Bob. I think you have to run a healthy Bob out starting next season and see where that takes the team.

If Bob would be traded, then I'd suggest Brad Thiessen as the back up. He's shutting em down in Lake Erie. He started the season in the ECHL and was just way too good to be there. CMAC is not the answer, nor is Forsberg.

 

[Jackets Fan]

Korpi has been awesome, and I'm a big fan of his, but he's only played 18 games. Jfc at least lets see one more good season, with another pretty good sample size of games before we even consider this.

Personally, I'd prefer to have both Korpi and Bob. If Bob can return to elite form, and Korpisalo can keep up his hot play, we can give Bob his much needed rest, and keep him to a 50-55 game limit, and not have to worry about much of a drop off in talent ( if any ) when Korpi is in.

 

[Doug19]

Because of Steve Mason, I am against this thought.

 

[SuperGenius]

This entire thread is preposterous - but there are enough respectable posters involved that I at least tried to believe it might be sensible. It isn't.

You don't trade Vezina winning goalies because they have a few injuries. It's obviously a concern, but I don't see any reason for the CBJ to cut their losses at this point. Many of the top 10 goalies in the league have dealt with injury issues in more than one season.

I felt the same thing about Ryan Murray. IMO, people get a little too wrapped up in the moment with these things and forget the bigger picture. I think some of you forget how good Bob is - and I know I'd like to see how good he is behind this new and improved defense before I give up on him.

Korpisalo looks great, but handing the net to him at this point would be a colossal mistake. If he continues to prove himself over the next 50 starts or so, then maybe this kind of move deserves more consideration.

 

[We Want Ten]

Korpi has been awesome, and I'm a big fan of his, but he's only played 18 games. Jfc at least lets see one more good season, with another pretty good sample size of games before we even consider this.

Personally, I'd prefer to have both Korpi and Bob. If Bob can return to elite form, and Korpisalo can keep up his hot play, we can give Bob his much needed rest, and keep him to a 50-55 game limit, and not have to worry about much of a drop off in talent ( if any ) when Korpi is in.

If we could have a 60/40 or so split of bob/korpisalo I'd be a very happy guy. I think dumping bob for a guy who is still very green is misguided.

 

[Iron Balls McGinty]

This entire thread is preposterous - but there are enough respectable posters involved that I at least tried to believe it might be sensible. It isn't.

You don't trade Vezina winning goalies because they have a few injuries. It's obviously a concern, but I don't see any reason for the CBJ to cut their losses at this point. Many of the top 10 goalies in the league have dealt with injury issues in more than one season.

I felt the same thing about Ryan Murray. IMO, people get a little too wrapped up in the moment with these things and forget the bigger picture. I think some of you forget how good Bob is - and I know I'd like to see how good he is behind this new and improved defense before I give up on him.

Korpisalo looks great, but handing the net to him at this point would be a colossal mistake. If he continues to prove himself over the next 50 starts or so, then maybe this kind of move deserves more consideration.

I agree that's why I wasn't a proponent of trading Bob until after Korpisalo can potentially prove himself next season. I do however think he is well on his way towards beating Curtis out of a job for next season if not the remainder of this season.

 

[blahblah]

You don't trade Vezina winning goalies because they have a few injuries.

First off; he's not. He's a Vezina winner for a half season of work (38 starts). I've never seen soooo much emphasis on an award (with an asterisk) 3 seasons after it was won in which he's not even in the realm of that level of performance in the last three. One was kind of because he got hot at the end of the season but still ended up with only a 2.38 GAA season.

You can love him/hate him/whatever; but to keep citing the award is ridiculous. It's flawed and he hasn't repeated that performance for more than a half season at a time.

 

[Viqsi]

I get your point but we are currently in year 3 of waiting for Bob to regain his Vezina form.

Oh, c'mon. That suggests you think he was playing substandard the year he took us to the playoffs, because he won the Vezina the year prior to same.

I'd rather go with the 1A/1B approach next year (presuming Korpisalo continues his good play) and make sure that one of Forsberg or Merzlikins looks like they could be capable before trading Bob. There's better options if we want to go the cap savings route. Either way, it wouldn't be a "now" thing, nor would it be a next year's deadline thing either IMO.

 

[major major]

First off; he's not. He's a Vezina winner for a half season of work (38 starts). I've never seen soooo much emphasis on an award (with an asterisk) 3 seasons after it was won in which he's not even in the realm of that level of performance in the last three. One was kind of because he got hot at the end of the season but still ended up with only a 2.38 GAA season.

You can love him/hate him/whatever; but to keep citing the award is ridiculous. It's flawed and he hasn't repeated that performance for more than a half season at a time.

By my count Bob has put together a few of those amazing half seasons. And Korpi has an amazing, what, 12 games?

 

[SuperGenius]

I agree that's why I wasn't a proponent of trading Bob until after Korpisalo can potentially prove himself next season. I do however think he is well on his way towards beating Curtis out of a job for next season if not the remainder of this season.

I don't really want a young goalie backing up in the NHL at this point yet. I think it would kill his development unless they made a concerted effort to get him at least 30 games. Korpisalo and many others would be better options than McElhinney, IMO - I just don't want a 22 year old backup next year.

First off; he's not. He's a Vezina winner for a half season of work (38 starts). I've never seen soooo much emphasis on an award (with an asterisk) 3 seasons after it was won in which he's not even in the realm of that level of performance in the last three. One was kind of because he got hot at the end of the season but still ended up with only a 2.38 GAA season.

You can love him/hate him/whatever; but to keep citing the award is ridiculous. It's flawed and he hasn't repeated that performance for more than a half season at a time.

I don't see an asterisk in the record books.

Bob has had several dominating stretches in his few years here and many highlight plays. Given the defense playing in front of him for most of the past two seasons I think he's far closer to elite than not. This is, however, why I'd like to see him playing with the D, and overall system (Torts), heading into next season.

Whether you consider Bob elite or not, a Vezina goalie or not, I think that you're reasonable enough to realize that he's a far more known quantity than Korpisalo.

By my count Bob has put together a few of those amazing half seasons. And Korpi has an amazing, what, 12 games?

Exactly. I like what I'm seeing, particularly when I think of the improvement over McElhinney, but IMO, he isn't really close to being an NHL goalie on a regular basis.

 

[blahblah]

I don't see an asterisk in the record books.

And you know that Vezina is not of the same value as one earned in a full season. The NHL isn't going to do it, but it should be there.

Bob has had several dominating stretches in his few years here and many highlight plays. Given the defense playing in front of him for most of the past two seasons I think he's far closer to elite than not. This is, however, why I'd like to see him playing with the D, and overall system (Torts), heading into next season.

All I know is that he isn't worth 7+ million at this point in time.

Whether you consider Bob elite or not, a Vezina goalie or not, I think that you're reasonable enough to realize that he's a far more known quantity than Korpisalo.

I stated that if you were to trade Bob you would need someone to compete with Korp in camp. I also stated that if you want to trade Bob it's likely not going to happen before sometime next season as Bob is injured and might not play again this season. I also stated that you need to get Bob's value up again, so you should have Korp in the AHL to start next season so that you aren't tempted to create a goalie controversy.

It would be negligence to not consider moving him if a deal came along; to suggest otherwise is nonsense. There is plenty of data to suggest that Bob's peaks aren't sustained for the majority of a season.

You already have a garbage contract in Clarkson, Foligno hasn't earned his money this season and Bob hasn't earned his latest contract to this point. That is a lot of wasted cash. That doesn't include the wasted money in Tyutin and Bourque this season. I'm not all that sure that Savard is going to live up to his contract moving forward; but at least that money won't be a total waste.

As I stated elsewhere I tend to think spending more than 4 or 5 million for a goalie can end up being very punitive to your team. As a GM there are very few goalies I would even consider giving that kind of money to. They would have to have a lot more history that what Bob had. We left ourselves very exposed in that we had nothing after Bob; meaning we had to give him that money. Bad spot to be in. He did not earn that contract. I said it at the time and, sadly, he's proven that to this point. I really hope he turns it around. He can be one of the best in the league.

 

[Cowumbus]

If we retained like 2-3 million on his salary his value would be off the charts as a trade piece..

 

[Mayor Bee]

I'm trying to think of how many goalies I've seen erupt onto the scene, and in several cases force the incumbent out of town...and then it all comes crashing down very quickly.

Hell, that very scenario happened here with Marc Denis and Ron Tugnutt.

 

[EspenK]

Oh, c'mon. That suggests you think he was playing substandard the year he took us to the playoffs, because he won the Vezina the year prior to same.

No it was more of he has had worsening stats each year since the V year.

So change it to "two years".

Bob is inconsistent. Bob is streaky. Bob gets hurt a lot (the same repetitive injury-not injury prone). Bob gets paid too much. Other than that he is a really top 5 goalie in the NHL.

All that being said I would still trade him if we could add a Shattenkirk or Yandle to the D which also was part of the original proposal. Strengthening the D for next year and for the foreseeable future would be a tremendous team building move.

Its not about trading Bob per se, it's I 'd do it if it would really strengthen the team elsewhere.

 

[Viqsi]

I'm trying to think of how many goalies I've seen erupt onto the scene, and in several cases force the incumbent out of town...and then it all comes crashing down very quickly.

Hell, that very scenario happened here with Marc Denis and Ron Tugnutt.

*gasp!* HOW DARE YOU NOT BELIEVE IN THE GREAT KORPISOLID?!?!?!


To be fair, I don't expect Korpi to crash and burn anytime soon. But prudence dictates that one reasonably and adequately manage that risk all the same.

* * *​

No it was more of he has had worsening stats each year since the V year.

So change it to "two years".

Bob is inconsistent. Bob is streaky. Bob gets hurt a lot (the same repetitive injury-not injury prone). Bob gets paid too much. Other than that he is a really top 5 goalie in the NHL.

All that being said I would still trade him if we could add a Shattenkirk or Yandle to the D which also was part of the original proposal. Strengthening the D for next year and for the foreseeable future would be a tremendous team building move.

Its not about trading Bob per se, it's I 'd do it if it would really strengthen the team elsewhere.

And part of my followup point is that I think there's much less risky ways to achieve similar ends. A Bob trade is just too much of a high-stakes gamble.

 

[Tulipunaruusu*]

*gasp!* HOW DARE YOU NOT BELIEVE IN THE GREAT KORPISOLID?!?!?!

The name korpisolid turns almost to 'korpisoldier' or its non-Finglish form korpisoturi, the Finnish woodland warrior. I think that Bobrovski must be traded.

 

[Nordique]

I won't claim to understand the science behind groin injuries, but I wasn't aware there was an ongoing, chronic diagnosis here. I can't think of a precedent either. Name me a few goalies that had to retire because of chronic groin strain issues?

I have a lot of trepidation here. Korpi looks like a fine young goalie, but its far to early to say we have a new starter in him.

 

[We Want Ten]

If we retained like 2-3 million on his salary his value would be off the charts as a trade piece..

Retain up to 3 mil all for a guy with less than 20 career starts??? You guys are crazy.

Our best hope is bob can stay healthy and split starts with a more than capable backup. Due to bobs own poor starts and Cmacs inability to be any kind of viable option we get what we have gotten.

 

[Valdiz]

The name korpisolid turns almost to 'korpisoldier' or its non-Finglish form korpisoturi, the Finnish woodland warrior. I think that Bobrovski must be traded.

Wow, really? Woodland warrior? Awesome.
But wait...Did you know That Bobrovsky derived from Bobrov, which, in turn, derived from "Бобёр" (Beaver). So he is a beaver! A beaver, building a dam in the net protecting it from the puck, so he must stay!

Some posts in this thread made me angry. Apologies in advance, but this is crazy as hell: so, you trade your #1 goalie because of firm belief that a new, younger one is clearly ready to replace him right now because of his amazing 18 game perfomance. And #1's yearly injuries, don't forget the yearly injuries, we are so sick of them.
So! We are going to use the new goalie, friggin overplay him (sure, why not?) and then get him injured and pray for Forsberg/Cmac to save the day! Nice plan!

Seriously, i'm not even that much of a Bobrovsky fan, he is sometimes inconsistent, but please, for god's sake, show me a single goalie who is ALWAYS consistent? Lundqvist? Rask? Ooh, ooh, Price!..Who got maybe the best D in NHL in front of him, and then, when it crumbled, got overplayed and injured for a duration of a goddamn season (and I believe Price is the best one there is).

If a solid backup for Korpi is aquired (or a cheaper 1A for a 60/40 rotation) - now you're talking. You have to carefully approach young players. Giving him the reigns now and hoping for a brighter future is plain lunacy. What you have is a potential top 5 elite goalie for years to come, a team in a rebuild (or re-something, if you don't like the "rebuild") for 2 or 3 years, and you want him to perform now?
"But Valdiz" you say, "Korpi has got the nerves of steel!". Yeah. Now. Playing as #1? You have to be psychologicaly prepared for it. Give Korpi a little time, and I assure you, 2-3 years from now you'll have one of the best goalies in a league.

Tl;dr - play Bob as #1 for 1or2 seasons to increase his sell value, meanwhile play Korpi as a backup for a 1/3 of games.

Sorry for the rant.
Just got angry 'cause of a resemblance to Johansen trade (which turned out good, but nevertheless) Foligno trade talk, etc..

 

[The Jones Zone]

I don't see it happening, but if he did get traded, I'll bee placing a wager on that team to win that Stanley Cup and Bob and finals MVP.......4 shutouts first time ever

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

Despite my advocacy for serious consideration of the thread topic, my mind is hardly settled on the matter. But the kinds of counters you're offering here don't really move the discussion.

So! We are going to use the new goalie, friggin overplay him (sure, why not?) and then get him injured and pray for Forsberg/Cmac to save the day! Nice plan!

The overpay (never mentioned) and get him injured (baseless extrapolation) points you make here are just silliness. Certainly there are better counterpoints than straw men?

If a solid backup for Korpi is aquired (or a cheaper 1A for a 60/40 rotation) - now you're talking.

This is exactly what I said in a post supporting (potentially) the idea. And you're using it in one to (purportedly) oppose it. Exact. Same. Point.

 

[Valdiz]

The overpay (never mentioned) and get him injured (baseless extrapolation) points you make here are just silliness. Certainly there are better counterpoints than straw men?

Never mentioned, but a certain possibility - there is no solid backup as of now.
You can't dismiss the possibility of injury either.

This is exactly what I said in a post supporting (potentially) the idea. And you're using it in one to (purportedly) oppose it. Exact. Same. Point.

And you were right. I didn't refer to your post as a basis for my angry russian act - in fact, quite the opposite.
The thread name itself (and a certain part of posts) suggests trading Bob for someone other than G and not getting another G - that is what I am against.

 

[MoeBartoli]

I love Bob! IMO Bob is the type of goalie, when on, who has the ability to carry the CBJ into the playoffs and a better team deep into the playoffs. Such goalies are not common in the league. As such he has a contract reflecting it......Now here's the question: are we shooting to be a 6/7/8 playoff team next year or looking to build next year for the longer term without playoffs being a goal (though nice if it happens)? If the former I would keep Bob; but of its the latter, I would bite the bullet and seek a major trade (expecting good return) to gain cap space and rely on Korpisalo to be the man for 2017-18. That could be rolling the dice as the file on Korpisalo is thin - good so far, but thin.

My own take is I would explore the possible return for Bob and make the trade if attractive, but it's the kind of move, if fails, gets GMs fired. (And please, I don't want to start an off topic conversation on whether JK should be fired).