I'm curious what Gibson would do on a decent team, he's been pounded into the dirt mentally on the Ducks.
Why trade for Gibson if he isn’t good?A good goalie isn’t in the deal though
Without retention and a dump going back, people wontWhy trade for Gibson if he isn’t good?
Though very unlikely, does Zegras somehow get involved in this trade, either part of a larger deal or in a 3 team trade?
One or the other, retention or dump. Ducks shouldn’t do both.Without retention and a dump going back, people wont
Doubtful... Verbeek said Zegras won't be moved for futures and the Ducks biggest need are offense and big, physical defense. No one is going to offer a better offensive player than Zegras and I don't think there are any young, good RHD available.Though very unlikely, does Zegras somehow get involved in this trade, either part of a larger deal or in a 3 team trade?
If they want to move gibson they will. Even a 25% retained gibson with his last 4 years of GSAx/60 isn’t going to carry much interestOne or the other, retention or dump. Ducks shouldn’t do both.
Probably not since the Ducks are using him in the marketing of their jerseys today, but anything is possible.Though very unlikely, does Zegras somehow get involved in this trade, either part of a larger deal or in a 3 team trade?
We’ll see. There seems to be more of a market for this goalie than the average NHL fan was expecting.If they want to move gibson they will. Even a 25% retained gibson with his last 4 years of GSAx/60 isn’t going to carry much interest
Your agenda is showing again.Taking out the statistical argument because Detroit wouldn't be trading for him if he thought he was as bad as his numbers, I'm still not sure why people would expect Gibson to bring back a notable return with what Ullmark and Markstrom were just traded for.
Ullmark was moved with no salary retention for Korpisalo at $3 million, Kastelic and a 1st. Markstrom was moved at $4.125 million for Bahl and a 1st. Even if you assume Detroit views Gibson as a "good" starter on par with those two (which is bananas to me, but whatever), the return still looks like it would be something like Husso, Berggren and a 2nd for Gibson at $5 million at most. And honestly, that feels like an overpayment by Detroit.
Your agenda is showing again.
Anaheim has no motivation to trade Gibson w/o a reasonably good return. Cap is not an issue and the player hasn't asked for a trade.
Once again, other teams seem to be calling Anaheim and the interest is there. They know what Verbeek's price is and they are still engaged. Will there be a trade? Who knows. But if there is the Ducks will get a solid return.
What is the motivation for the Ducks to give him away for a subpar return? Bring receipts. I'll wait.Pagnotta has reported that the Ducks are actively trying to trade Gibson:
There are 2 teams in on Gibson and the Ducks are apparently trying to move him. Not sure how that's "we won't move him without a good return" territory.
What is the motivation for the Ducks to give him away for a subpar return? Bring receipts. I'll wait.
Marty Biron was on the Power Play with Steve Kouleous. He thinks Gibson gets traded, and that Carolina would be smart to acquire him and move Andersen.
A former NHL goalie thinks highly of Gibson. But sure random spreadsheet jockeys on the internet, tell me more about how much Gibson sucks
You got nothing to contribute except your agenda. Sad.Because maybe they want to move on from him because of his bad results that he has given them in the past 5 years? The dude just had the 2nd lowest save% of NHL goalies who played in more than 25 games last year.
Even if you want to argue that his results in Anaheim aren't reflective of his talent level, it doesn't change that he has given horrid results for the Ducks over the last 5 years. He absolutely collapsed on the team down the stretch (.870 save% in 22 games after January 1st) and has seemingly been surpassed by Dostal. Not only that, but a ton of fans say that he plays mentally checked out of Anaheim and has basically quit on the team.
Why do the Ducks trade him? Because frankly Anaheim is probably better without Gibson than with Gibson at this point. I don't know why you'd want to keep what looks like a toxic situation going just because someone won't overpay you for Gibson.
Watch Gibson get traded to their team lol.You got nothing to contribute except your agenda. Sad.
You got nothing to contribute except your agenda. Sad.
Think I’ve been pretty clear on analyzing goaltenders, and within let’s say 40 games of Gibson on a competitive team, the both of us can sit here and revisit how he’s been playing on whatever team that may be, and judge how he’s played. I’ll be here to have that conversation.
I’ll always stick to the Grant Fuhr never fail stat of judging a goaltender. Put it this way, if you’re gonna chase stats trying to figure it out, you’re gonna keep landing on Adin Hill and Linus Ullmark being top goaltenders, and keep scratching your head, as you use tenths of a percent to justify your opinion.
You didn't answer my question. I asked you why your opinion is worth more than anyone else with a post in this thread. And you replied with nothing but word salad. I know you have great disdain for that which you don't understand but you've already made that point clear.By far, the most ridiculous stats to follow (to judge a player) has always been goalie stats. It’s what drives the stat chasers crazy. You can keep crossing your Ts and dotting your Is, and the math doesn’t equal what you’re seeing during games. There’s a reason we praise goalies from winning teams the way we do. We literally get to see them stand on their head in playoff games, for example, or NOT make that important save.
It’s always been the eye test for goalies, and 9 out of 10 times, their actual stats aren’t much different from other starting goaltenders. It’s accepted and they land their contracts, because they make the saves they do, in the most important minutes. It’s literally always been how you judge what a great goaltender is, because there’s no way to justify one save over another UNLESS you’re actually watching.
I know it drives the stat watchers crazy, but that’s always how it’s been done.
I don’t think we will get any value back for him but I still think he could be good somewhere else.
Your suppositions about Gibson and the Ducks are totally without any factual support. You are sitting 2500 miles away from Anaheim and telling Ducks fans what Verbeek is thinking. It's crazy.Pathetic response, but that's to be expected I guess.
I think it's totally possible that Gibson is still a good goalie and has just been a victim of playing for a bad team. At least based on what I saw, there are a lot of people who say that Gibson's bad results are him checking out from playing for a perpetual rebuilding team and his awful results are due to that. If that's the case, why on earth would any Ducks fan want to keep him?
This idea that the Ducks have no reason to trade him is basically just saying "I don't care if my team wins". Because even if Gibson is actually good and just needs to go to somewhere else, we have a 5 year sample size of data that shows that he's extremely not good on Anaheim.