Toggle sidebar

Extend Quick Now 3 years

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates

Should the kings extend the legendary Jonathan Quick for?

  • 1. For one year

    Votes: 34 55.7%

  • 2. For two years

    Votes: 23 37.7%

  • 3. For three years

    Votes: 1 1.6%

  • 4. For 5 years

    Votes: 4 6.6%

  • 5. For life (future Kings goalie coach heir apparent to Ranford)

    Votes: 4 6.6%
  • Total voters
    61
Surf Nutz

Surf Nutz

Hockey Remote Viewer With A Frozen Finger
May 16, 2022
3,129
1,084
In the tube
Go ahead and extend Quick now.
You can trade him if Peterson comes on.
You can trade Peterson after you see how he does until at least the trade deadline.
A cheaper but promising backup is probably being scouted already.
Important not to overplay Quick and T MAc tends to do that with his top guys.
We saw what future HOF JQ can still do, seems to be over the injury bug for now.
Mike Smith is 40 and we saw what a goalie in that age range, can do against less than very top tier teams (CO Ava).
Please add your recommended new contract parameters in the comments.
Thank you!

Thanks to the moderators, I am trying to figure out what you can and cant say and not over react. Referee is one of the toughest jobs.
Click to read more...
 
Last edited:
Voted for one or two years. Even declining, he is still our #1, and keeping him around is a good idea; however, for someone his age, I don't know if you want to throw that deal at him without playing out the year... Two years is risky but does make Petersen's contract less risky as you just feel better knowing you have Quick. Either that, or Quick finally succumbs to age and you have two mediocre goalies on bad contracts... lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rumpelstiltskin
Telos said:
Voted for one or two years. Even declining, he is still our #1, and keeping him around is a good idea; however, for someone his age, I don't know if you want to throw that deal at him without playing out the year... Two years is risky but does make Petersen's contract less risky as you just feel better knowing you have Quick. Either that, or Quick finally succumbs to age and you have two mediocre goalies on bad contracts... lol.
Click to expand...
Good thoughts. I have not given up on Cal and would give him a big opportunity, especially early in the season. That way you have Ranford and the crew scout him and decide, what to do. Give JQ some rest too, before the standings potentially force your hand or you are in the stretch.
 
One or two years would be just fine with me, especially if the cap hit is under $2 million. But we're going to have a real serious Cal Petersen problem if he doesn't pick up his play. I think Quick's play last season is his peak moving forward, we won't get much better goaltending from him, and he's too inconsistent at this point to be a top ten goalie in the league.

Paying $5 million for a backup goalie is not a great use of cap.
 
i'm sorry, I love Quick, but gonna be a contrarian here.

We are literally one year out from a complete 180 on opinions on our two goalies.

You go back one year, and it was people doing anything they could to get rid of Quick, he was done, etc.

I think you just have to see this year out while working on goaltending in both the system and on the big club. If Cal can't rebound, odds are you see a journeyman get a year or two while we work on a prospect similar to Wallstedt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Little Psycho, kenito7, Statto and 4 others
kilowatt said:
One or two years would be just fine with me, especially if the cap hit is under $2 million. But we're going to have a real serious Cal Petersen problem if he doesn't pick up his play. I think Quick's play last season is his peak moving forward, we won't get much better goaltending from him, and he's too inconsistent at this point to be a top ten goalie in the league.

Paying $5 million for a backup goalie is not a great use of cap.
Click to expand...
Seriously!

We need Cal to take steroids, HGH, and a shitload of PEZ this offseason
 
Raccoon Jesus said:
i'm sorry, I love Quick, but gonna be a contrarian here.

We are literally one year out from a complete 180 on opinions on our two goalies.

You go back one year, and it was people doing anything they could to get rid of Quick, he was done, etc.

I think you just have to see this year out while working on goaltending in both the system and on the big club. If Cal can't rebound, odds are you see a journeyman get a year or two while we work on a prospect similar to Wallstedt.
Click to expand...
But we don't have a prospect similar to Wallstedt. We needed one three years ago. After Quick and Petersen, we've got Villalta, Ingham, Hrenak, Markkanen, and Parik.

Villalta was a third round pick in 2017, and being honest, a huge miss taken before a guy like Jeremy Swayman. Hrenak and Ingham were taken in the fifth and sixth rounds in 2018. Parik was taken in the third round of the 2019 draft, even though Dustin Wolf fell all the way to the seventh round. Markkanen was a 2020 fourth round pick, even though Devon Levi fell to the seventh round as well. Are Parik and Markkanen better than Wolf and Levi? If we had Wolf and Levi right now, I'd be pretty pumped.

The best goalie prospect in the 2022 draft is Tyler Brennan (Tyler Brennan - 2022 NHL Draft Prospect Profile), a late second or early third rounder by the sounds of it, and he's not especially noteworthy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SlimCharles, DoktorJeep, Rumpelstiltskin and 1 other person
kilowatt said:
But we don't have a prospect similar to Wallstedt. We needed one three years ago. After Quick and Petersen, we've got Villalta, Ingham, Hrenak, Markkanen, and Parik.

Villalta was a third round pick in 2017, and being honest, a huge miss taken before a guy like Jeremy Swayman. Hrenak and Ingham were taken in the fifth and sixth rounds in 2018. Parik was taken in the third round of the 2019 draft, even though Dustin Wolf fell all the way to the seventh round. Markkanen was a 2020 fourth round pick, even though Devon Levi fell to the seventh round as well. Are Parik and Markkanen better than Wolf and Levi? If we had Wolf and Levi right now, I'd be pretty pumped.

The best goalie prospect in the 2022 draft is Tyler Brennan (Tyler Brennan - 2022 NHL Draft Prospect Profile), a late second or early third rounder by the sounds of it, and he's not especially noteworthy.
Click to expand...

of course, that's' why I said they'll be working on it.

There's no quick or immediate solution and if the rumored attempt at Wallstedt in the draft is true (and even if it isn't!) they clearly know they need to shore up the G pipeline.

But there's also no real point in extending Quick this early; he's unlikely to go anywhere, an extension would likely diminish his trade value anyway.
 
IMO right now there is no path forward with either Quick or Petersen on the Kings if they want to be cup contenders. With our style of play we need elite goaltending just to get in the playoffs. Extending Quick now is not the answer, we need a long term solution, if it is not Cal then we are in trouble because that cap hit is atrocious.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kenito7, Raccoon Jesus and YP44
Mats26 said:
IMO right now there is no path forward with either Quick or Petersen on the Kings if they want to be cup contenders. With our style of play we need elite goal tending just to get in the playoffs. Extending Quick now is not the answer, we need a long term solution, if it is not Cal then we are in trouble because that cap hit is atrocious.
Click to expand...
Some great thoughts from knowledgeable fans here, thank you.
However, extending Quick, even if it is just for one year, is the option to open up numerous other options.
1. Suss out a Peterson decision, and put some pressure on CP.
2. Quicks value goes up if he continues his healthy second peak in play and he goes RFA. We then pay more and its a tougher decision with competition from other teams driving price up.
3. He has earned it. I feel he is having a renaissance aided by hard work, modern sports therapy and health regimes.
4. Gives us time for short, medium and long term solutions for the most important position.
5. I trust Ranford and the team to if they agree and resign him.
6. Sell some jerseys and give teamates and fans increased confidence and hope.
 
If Petersen flops and is somehow moved out all in the next year than you re-up quick as a back up. So for right now it is a pass for me, or a "lets wait and see"
 
Quick is just an average goalie at this stage of his career, no need to extend him at all.

Petersen needs to be given the #1 role for an extended period of time to see how he reacts. This platooning stuff may work out for the team temporarily, but goaltending is almost all psychological and expecting his confidence to grow and soar into that #1 role is less likely to happen when you think one bad game puts you right back on the bench. The financial commitment was made to Petersen, its about time that the game time is his as well so you can truly see what you have.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raccoon Jesus
Mats26 said:
IMO right now there is no path forward with either Quick or Petersen on the Kings if they want to be cup contenders. With our style of play we need elite goaltending just to get in the playoffs. Extending Quick now is not the answer, we need a long term solution, if it is not Cal then we are in trouble because that cap hit is atrocious.
Click to expand...
I agree but I don't see a long term solution. You could sign and give Husso a shot and trade CP or JQ now. My suggestion is to set up a short and medium term solution and a long term backup for a reasonable cap hit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gjwrams
bland said:
Quick is just an average goalie at this stage of his career, no need to extend him at all.

Petersen needs to be given the #1 role for an extended period of time to see how he reacts. This platooning stuff may work out for the team temporarily, but goaltending is almost all psychological and expecting his confidence to grow and soar into that #1 role is less likely to happen when you think one bad game puts you right back on the bench. The financial commitment was made to Petersen, its about time that the game time is his as well so you can truly see what you have.
Click to expand...
I rate JQ as still above average and still close to elite when he gets hot. Indeed Mats26 said above, "we need elite goal tending just to get in the playoffs." Well we made it and took the Oil to 7, whereas Flames only could win one off them. I am exited about it especially with JQ's resurgence, Blakes trades and signings, and our prospects and younger potential core maturing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ghetty Green
YP44 said:
Where is the, Not thank you, option?
Click to expand...
No and I like how it worked out because it necessitates a comment in lieu of that option. Some solid posters explained their viewpoints very well. I think I will use this skewed options in a poll again in the future.
 
Telos said:
Voted for one or two years. Even declining, he is still our #1, and keeping him around is a good idea; however, for someone his age, I don't know if you want to throw that deal at him without playing out the year... Two years is risky but does make Petersen's contract less risky as you just feel better knowing you have Quick. Either that, or Quick finally succumbs to age and you have two mediocre goalies on bad contracts... lol.
Click to expand...
Awesome Avatar!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom