Friedman: Avalanche are looking at Blackwood and Gibson

[DavidBL]

Possibly. Gibson has put up 900 SP for about 5 seasons now. Is that the team? Is that just him regressing?
Are we just supposed to assume he will play better?

Either way. You’re comparing a 1M backup to a 3.2M backup. How much better does Gibson need to be AT MINIMUM just to make the difference in cap worth it?

You would want to look at goalies making around 3 mill and see what you get from them.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

Is the 1 mill back up as good as Gibson? No if they were the teams rumored to be after him would have done it.

You mean like how the Avs claimed Kahkonen off waivers?

 

[DavidBL]

You mean like how the Avs claimed Kahkonen off waivers?

And yet they still seem to be interested in Gibby. I'm not saying they should trade for him. Just that it doesn't make sense to trade him for a second with 50% retained, especially if we're taking g a dump as well.

 

[EdAVSfan]

You would want to look at goalies making around 3 mill and see what you get from them.

Wait? Why can I o my compare 3M goalies?

Why shouldn’t I be comparing it to all goalies, including the ones making under 3M?

Shouldn’t I being looking at quality of play vs salary? You seemingly are implying that the avs are required to choose from the 3+M backups only.

 

[DavidBL]

Wait? Why can I o my compare 3M goalies?

Why shouldn’t I be comparing it to all goalies, including the ones making under 3M?

Shouldn’t I being looking at quality of play vs salary? You seemingly are implying that the avs are required to choose from the 3+M backups only.

Sorry you can compare him to anyone. Total salary is of course a component when determining value. I just meant generally in terms of value of actual goalie skill if you're looking at Gibby at 3.2 mil you'd want to compare to other goalies you can get for that. Basic premise being that you get a better goalie for 3 mill than you would for 1 mil. If you think you can kind a 1 mill goalie to be your starter then there is no point to the conversation continuing.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

And yet they still seem to be interested in Gibby. I'm not saying they should trade for him. Just that it doesn't make sense to trade him for a second with 50% retained, especially if we're taking g a dump as well.

No. Friedman brought up Gibson as a name that he thinks might make sense for the Avs. There is zero reason to think the Avs are actually interested in him.

And I don't disagree that it doesn't make sense to give him away for nothing, unless of course ownership wants to save money while they aren't contending. But the bigger issue seems to be actually finding a team willing to gamble $3.2m on him for the next 2+ seasons in the first place, when there's guys available for free who are just as good for $1m with no commitment.

 

[DavidBL]

No. Friedman brought up Gibson as a name that he thinks might make sense for the Avs. There is zero reason to think the Avs are actually interested in him.

And I don't disagree that it doesn't make sense to give him away for nothing, unless of course ownership wants to save money while they aren't contending. But the bigger issue seems to be actually finding a team willing to gamble $3.2m on him for the next 2+ seasons in the first place, when there's guys available for free who are just as good for $1m with no commitment.

Fair enough and I don't disagree, except I think Gibsons numbers are more a result of his team than him and don't think a 1 mill goalie will be just as good. But we're free to disagree on that.

 

[duckpuck]

Possibly. Gibson has put up 900 SP for about 5 seasons now. Is that the team? Is that just him regressing?
Are we just supposed to assume he will play better?

Either way. You’re comparing a 1M backup to a 3.2M backup. How much better does Gibson need to be AT MINIMUM just to make the difference in cap worth it?

Yes - it is/was mostly the team. Again, as posted above, the ducks we're bit just bad. They were HISTORICALLY bad. They gave up a record number of shots. They had awful puck possession metrics.

And it wasn't just the volume. It was the quality. Lots of shots from high danger areas with the ducks defense no where in sight.

Gibson may never regain his elite form. We don't know. But I can say with confidence he's still been a good goalie even behind a bad team. I see only upside for him if he played behind a better team.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

Fair enough and I don't disagree, except I think Gibsons numbers are more a result of his team than him and don't think a 1 mill goalie will be just as good. But we're free to disagree on that.

So you're saying it's the team's fault that Gibson lost the starting job to Dostal, the $840k goalie who put up much more respectable numbers while playing a similar number of games behind the same Ducks team last year?

 

[DavidBL]

So you're saying it's the team's fault that Gibson lost the starting job to Dostal, the $840k goalie who put up much more respectable numbers while playing a similar number of games behind the same Ducks team last year?

Dostal is not a typical 1 mill goalie that a team can just add. Gibby has lost the starting role to a young emerging prospect that the Ducks developed. And they BOTH had rough numbers last year and Gibbys been dealing with it for literal years now. That is going to take a mental toll.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

Dostal is not a typical 1 mill goalie that a team can just add. Gibby has lost the starting role to a young emerging prospect that the Ducks developed. And they BOTH had rough numbers last year and Gibbys been dealing with it for literal years now. That is going to take a mental toll.

Yes, they did both have rough numbers last year, but Dostal's GSAA was a -2.4, compared to a -21.2 for Gibson. 0.902 SV% vs 0.888. If an emerging prospect can put up those kinds of numbers on a bad team, why couldn't Gibson? If it's the mental toll from being on a bad team for so long, what's to suggest that he's not mentally broken at this point and can actually recover enough to be worth $3.2m until his contract expires after 2 more seasons?

 

[DavidBL]

Yes, they did both have rough numbers last year, but Dostal's GSAA was a -2.4, compared to a -21.2 for Gibson. 0.902 SV% vs 0.888. If an emerging prospect can put up those kinds of numbers on a bad team, why couldn't Gibson? If it's the mental toll from being on a bad team for so long, what's to suggest that he's not mentally broken at this point and can actually recover enough to be worth $3.2m until his contract expires after 2 more seasons?

Gibson still had good games last year. What do you want me to say? That there is risk in trading for Gibson. Sure there's risk. Won't deny that. But he's also shown he's still capable of being a good goalie and a history if being a good goalie. Dostal overtaking him doesn't change that.