Proposal: Ducks/Avs/Isles

[Zegs2sendhelp]

So the Avs give up a first and take on a higher cap hit for a player that has been one of the worst starters in the league the past five seasons and probably isn't any better than Georgiev?

Gross.

Okay shane lets not get carried away

Gibson sitting at a 915 Save percentage
Georgiev is at 874

Id say Colorado has a much better roster/defense than anaheim.

Colorado gives up 25.6 shots a game
Anaheim gives up league worse 34 per game

Gibson is a significant upgrade on Georgiev... no matter how much you hate him.

 

[John Mandalorian]

Okay shane lets not get carried away

Gibson sitting at a 915 Save percentage
Georgiev is at 874

Id say Colorado has a much better roster/defense than anaheim.

Colorado gives up 25.6 shots a game
Anaheim gives up league worse 34 per game

Gibson is a significant upgrade on Georgiev... no matter how much you hate him.

Now consider that Gibson hasn’t been over .910 since 2019 in spite of having a cap hit that almost doubles Georgiev’s.

 

[PAZ]

Okay shane lets not get carried away

Gibson sitting at a 915 Save percentage
Georgiev is at 874

Id say Colorado has a much better roster/defense than anaheim.

Colorado gives up 25.6 shots a game
Anaheim gives up league worse 34 per game

Gibson is a significant upgrade on Georgiev... no matter how much you hate him.

Lets wait until more than 4 a game sample size, ya?

At least Georgiev is only 1 year removed from is .919 SV% season. The last time Gibson was anywhere near that was in 2018-19. Somehow Gibson had a worse SV% than George last year too.

Bad team vs good team argument, lost motivation, etc. End of the day Gibson's track record the past 5 years doesn't indicate he'd be a significant upgrade on Georgiev. He could be and there is an argument for it which is why a 1st/conditional 1st is being discussed, but it's by no means a guarantee.

 

[Shane Diesel]

Okay shane lets not get carried away

Gibson sitting at a 915 Save percentage
Georgiev is at 874

Over the past five seasons combined Georgiev has a higher SV% than Gibson.

NHL Stats

The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.

www.nhl.com

The fact you're making your argument based on four games is highly telling, though.

Id say Colorado has a much better roster/defense than anaheim.

Colorado gives up 25.6 shots a game
Anaheim gives up league worse 34 per game

Gibson is a significant upgrade on Georgiev... no matter how much you hate him.

If you want to take the skaters out of it the stats don't get any better for Gibson, but I know you dismiss GSAx completely.

 

[Pierce Hawthorne]

Seems like way too steep of a price to pay for the Avs. We aren't even getting Gibson at 50% retention either?

Easy pass. Make it 50% retention and take out the 3rd, then I'd consider it. Although even then I think a 1st outright is steep.

What would be more reasonable IMO would be like a 2026 2nd that becomes a 1st if Gibson plays x number of games over the next 2 years. Say 50 games total over the next two years.

 

[Shane Diesel]

For a fan base obsessed with drafting it's weird to see so many Avs fans wanting to willingly set a first round pick on fire and flush it down the toilet.

 

[duckpuck]

For a fan base obsessed with drafting it's weird to see so many Avs fans wanting to willingly set a first round pick on fire and flush it down the toilet.

Colorado's first round pick is going to be at the very low end of the first round. Worst case its the middle of the first round. Not as much value to that pick as it seems.

 

[Shane Diesel]

Colorado's first round pick is going to be at the very low end of the first round. Worst case its the middle of the first round. Not as much value to that pick as it seems.

Still far, far more than Gibson is worth.

I'd maybe give you a conditional 5th for 50% retention, but anything more is gross overpayment.

 

[John Mandalorian]

Colorado's first round pick is going to be at the very low end of the first round. Worst case its the middle of the first round. Not as much value to that pick as it seems.

Do you honestly believe teams in the top ten of the draft will be looking to trade for Gibson? It’s cute that you thought you were making a point with that comment.

Also...

Gibson is a 6.4 million dollar goalie who hasn’t been at or above .910 since 2019...not as valuable as you seem to believe.

 

[Cypher]

Screw it, everything and the kitchen sink for Gibson. Avs just let in 5 in the 1st period.

 

[MCB]

Do you honestly believe teams in the top ten of the draft will be looking to trade for Gibson? It’s cute that you thought you were making a point with that comment.

Also...

Gibson is a 6.4 million dollar goalie who hasn’t been at or above .910 since 2019...not as valuable as you seem to believe.

Do you honestly believe a top ten first pick is equal value to a 25-32 pick? Because that was the point (Colorado's first will be low, and not worth as much as a top ten), obviously teams in the top ten of the draft won't be trading away their firsts for John Gibson. That's just stupid to consider, It's cute you thought that was the point though. We aren't talking about a team (Colorado) in the bottom 10 of the standings.

Ducks are in no rush to trade Gibson, he won't get anything of value we will just keep him as a back up, it's not like we need the capspace yet.

Edit: typos and spacing

 

[John Mandalorian]

Do you honestly believe a top ten first pick is equal value to a 25-32 pick? Because that was the point (Colorado's first will be low, and not worth as much as a top ten), obviously teams in the top ten of the draft won't be trading away their firsts for John Gibson. That's just stupid to consider, It's cute you thought that was the point though.

We aren't talking about a team in the bottom 10 of the standings.
Ducks are in no rush to trade Gibson, he won't get anything of value we will just keep him as a back up, it's not like we need the capspace yet.

Why even complain about where the pick is? Anyone considering this is most likely be picking late in each round. And it’s also not that all picks are worth the same if they’re not top 16.

 

[MCB]

Why even complain about where the pick is? Anyone considering this is most likely be picking late in each round. And it’s also not that all picks are worth the same if they’re not top 16.

Just clarifying duckpuck said the Colorado pick would be late in the first round, I just don't understand where bringing up the top ten of the draft came from. The only team that will be picking there of the three teams in this proposal is the ducks.
Just saying no one is imagining John Gibson will return a top ten pick.

 

[John Mandalorian]

Just clarifying duckpuck said the Colorado pick would be late in the first round, I just don't understand where bringing up the top ten of the draft came from. The only team that will be picking there of the three teams in this proposal is the ducks.
Just saying no one is imagining John Gibson will return a top ten pick.

So why complain about late 1sts when it should be a given that teams considering this will generally be picking late?

 

[duckpuck]

So why complain about late 1sts when it should be a given that teams considering this will generally be picking late?

I wasn't complaining and I certainly said nothing about a top 10 pick. I was simply pointing out that not all "first round picks" are the same and first round pick late in the draft - two years from now - is on the very low end of the value.

And just to be super clear, all of the discussion in this thread assume there will be retention on Gibson's contract to achieve any kind of value. At the same time, the ducks have no need to trade him for a bag of pucks. At least not yet. He's useful in a 1a/1b type of arrangement.

 

[duckpuck]

Still far, far more than Gibson is worth.

I'd maybe give you a conditional 5th for 50% retention, but anything more is gross overpayment.

You're right. Colorado absolutely should stick with its current goaltending tandem. I'm sure they'll win a lot of games giving up 8 goals. But at least they'll have all their picks in 2026.

 

[John Mandalorian]

Blackwood seems like a likely target.

 

[Shane Diesel]

You're right. Colorado absolutely should stick with its current goaltending tandem. I'm sure they'll win a lot of games giving up 8 goals. But at least they'll have all their picks in 2026.

Where did I say Colorado shouldn't shop for a goalie?

I simply said they shouldn't be targeting the worst starter in the league. And definitely not at the cost of a first round pick.

 

[Rec T]

And just to be super clear, all of the discussion in this thread assume there will be retention on Gibson's contract to achieve any kind of value. At the same time, the ducks have no need to trade him for a bag of pucks. At least not yet. He's useful in a 1a/1b type of arrangement.

That's what makes me shake my head, all the people insisting that what the Ducks 'must' do is trade Gibson for a lower round pick ... at 50% retention. It doesn't matter that the Ducks are absolutely not worried about the cap for the rest of his contract. It doesn't matter that if they were to offer a player as well that there's no use for said player on Anaheim's roster. It doesn't matter that the 1a/1b rotation (in it's very short sample size) seems to be one of the very few things on the team actually working. Nope, all that matters is tying themself into a Gordian Knot deal of such complexity that people will overlook that the Ducks would get hosed there.

And then get offended if you call them on it...

 

[benfranklin]

Id do it at this point. The Avs are wasting a prime season of Makar/Rantanen/MacKinnon because their goalies gift the other team 2-3 goals every night.

This is pitiful.

In a perfect world, Id want Gibson 50% retained for a 2nd and 3rd and Georgiev, then use the 2026 1st on Provorov. Get whatever teams involved to make it happen, but thats what the Avs offer.

 

[Shane Diesel]

Id do it at this point. The Avs are wasting a prime season of Makar/Rantanen/MacKinnon because their goalies gift the other team 2-3 goals every night.

This is pitiful.

In a perfect world, Id want Gibson 50% retained for a 2nd and 3rd and Georgiev, then use the 2026 1st on Provorov. Get whatever teams involved to make it happen, but thats what the Avs offer.

You should go look up Gibson's GSAx stats the prior five seasons, doubt you'd still be interested after that. In fact he hasn't finished ahead of Georgiev once.

 

[StewieP19]

Colorado played poorly defensively since the beginning of the season.
They give too much A1 scoring chance.
Yes Colorado goaltending could be better but I don't think Gibson is an option because he's not a major upgrade and he's a fragile goalie

 

[benfranklin]

You should go look up Gibson's GSAx stats the prior five seasons, doubt you'd still be interested after that. In fact he hasn't finished ahead of Georgiev once.

The Ducks have been garbage that entire time. The Avs simply need an average goaltender and Gibson can easily be that. If he steals any, then its a bonus.

 

[biturbo19]

Genuinely asking are the islanders okay with using a retention slot for only 17% to facilitate this?

Yeah. To me, that seems like a major stumbling block to this sort of deal. That's a few years of tying up an important retention slot on some sort of dinky amount as a cap intermediary. Doesn't really make any sense to me for the Islanders to commit to that. There are probably much more lucrative options, and shorter-term options that don't tie the slot up for as long, available out there for them if that's where they're headed.

Would make more sense to me, for Anaheim to just shoulder the whole retention themselves i think. If that's even viable with ownership and stuff.

 

[WhatTheDuck]

Yeah. To me, that seems like a major stumbling block to this sort of deal. That's a few years of tying up an important retention slot on some sort of dinky amount as a cap intermediary. Doesn't really make any sense to me for the Islanders to commit to that. There are probably much more lucrative options, and shorter-term options that don't tie the slot up for as long, available out there for them if that's where they're headed.

Would make more sense to me, for Anaheim to just shoulder the whole retention themselves i think. If that's even viable with ownership and stuff.

The Ducks ownership apparently takes issue with spending money off the roster. They seemed willing to spend right up to the cap during the last contention window, sort of putting those "internal budget" talks to rest. But there was some comment from Bob Murray towards the end of tenure about the owners being discontent with spending so much on players who aren't on the active roster. It was more an issue of long term injuries at the time but I would assume the same would apply to all forms of "dead money". So while I can understand that some retention would be necessary, I can't see the Ducks eating a full 50% for another two years, nearly 10M on top of what they need to spend on a replacement. That's why I had another team taking some of that sting in return for a pick, but I also had the Isles dumping significant cap for next year to perhaps try and offer them some additional incentive.