Friedman: Gibson is interested in Carolina, or Edmonton

[Breakers]

The year is 2045

Mason McTavish is the GM of the ducks and he fielding question from the media about Gibson potentially being traded at the deadline to a contender

 

[FiveTacos]

This is a case of which gamble makes more sense: hoping Gibson regains his form in Carolina when motivated by playoffs, or hoping Andersen stays healthy into and through the playoffs?

Because when he's been healthy, Andersen has been better than Gibson the past 2 years. That's why I think Carolina is more likely to revisit in the off-season when Andersen is a UFA at 34 and the UFA market is quickly dwindling.

Andersen is a guy you don't feel bad about heading into the playoffs, but don't really feel great about either. Or at least you shouldn't. He isn't likely to be the best goalie in the series against the best teams, so if you have Cup aspirations maybe you need to do better. Ducks fans found that out firsthand

Gibson showed in the early part of previous seasons, and thus far this year, that when his team is not totally out of the running he's still pretty effective. Right now he's giving a lesser team a puncher's chance to win nearly every night. Of course, it's unknown how he'd perform while backstopping the superior team most nights, as he hasn't had that privilege for ... well pretty much the entirety of his prime.

 

[SherVaughn30]

I’m really curious to see what happens to Thatcher Demko in Vancouver.

He keeps getting injured and I wonder what the Canucks appetite is to keep betting on his health. They can’t count on an Arturs Silovs Cinderella run again.

Demko is also from SoCal and this is as close as he would get to playing from home.

If not this TDL, maybe next off-season, I could see Vancouver and Anaheim doing a Demko-for-Gibson swap.

Both goalies are starters and not the type I see wanting to do a platoon type role again. Ducks would have to add if it was Gibson for Demko. Demko is the better goalie, while also being 2 years younger and costing $1.4 million less of a salary cap hit than Gibson. Rarely or not at all, do you see a trade swap of starting goalies like these two.

 

[McDoused]

I wonder if there is some good faith between the ducks and oilers after the Henrique trade last year.

Anaheim moving on from Gibson would be doing the player a favor.

 

[Three On Zero]

I’m really curious to see what happens to Thatcher Demko in Vancouver.

He keeps getting injured and I wonder what the Canucks appetite is to keep betting on his health. They can’t count on an Arturs Silovs Cinderella run again.

Demko is also from SoCal and this is as close as he would get to playing from home.

If not this TDL, maybe next off-season, I could see Vancouver and Anaheim doing a Demko-for-Gibson swap.

Gibson for Demko swap wouldn’t be the worst thing. Demko/Dostal would be a nice 1a/1b, if Demko can’t stay healthy I’m sure he would be fine taking the backseat position.

You do have to wonder with Anaheim wanting to be competitive if they would even trade Gibson within the Pacific division though.

 

[quackquackquack]

Gibson for a lesser goalie (mainly in term and cost) and draft capital please.

I wonder if there is some good faith between the ducks and oilers after the Henrique trade last year.

Anaheim moving on from Gibson would be doing the player a favor.

It would also be doing the team a favor as we could spend the $ elsewhere needed (top end forward help)

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

Time for opposing fans to just admit they were wrong about Gibson

Missed out on cups not getting him sooner

 

[Rubi]

I don't know how likely a Gibson trade to Edmonton would be. That would be a major trade for the Edm organization. They haven't done anything like that since the Taylor Hall trade. They prefer to make minor trades where risk isn't too great.
I could see Carolina doing a deal though.

 

[KeithIsActuallyBad]

I don't know how likely a Gibson trade to Edmonton would be. That would be a major trade for the Edm organization. They haven't done anything like that since the Taylor Hall trade. They prefer to make minor trades where risk isn't too great.

As much as I kind of agree, this is overlooking the Ekholm trade.

That said, Gibson's insistence on being the starter above all else rubs me the wrong way.

Also any interest from the Oilers likely means that Dustin Schwartz says yes. In which case the Oilers should say no.

 

[McJedi]

Watching Skinner give up a few bunnies to the Avs in their last game.... The floor on his play is concerning.

Bad Skinner is a bad NHL goalie. The floor value on his play is pretty low. I'd certainly be exploring upgrades in net if I ran the Oilers.

Not sure how you afford Gibson's AAV though. They are so tight to the cap to begin with.

 

[Gliff]

Thought it was about getting out his contract now that he has become tradeable...he wasn't the last 2 years.

The Ducks have the most cap space in the league. In fact, they will likely ben under the floor if they got out of his contract.
Moving him just to get out of his contract would be the dumbest thing ever. Especially considering he is barely over the league average for goalie contracts, and they will have to retain/take back cap.

 

[The Hockey Tonk Man]

Friedman adds that Gibson wants to be the guy and he's not sure if a Gibson- Skinner duo would work for him.

Around the 44 minute mark I believe.

I was too busy eating and forgot to look at the time stamp

Go in, play good and steal the starting role then. Not like Skinner lights the world on fire.

 

[DaveG]

Gibson to Carolina mostly feels like an option if they can't keep Freddy in UFA. When healthy, since coming to Carolina, he's been elite while here.

I'm not sure if Gibson would be the guy over Kooch either.

 

[cheesymc]

I don't think Verbeek is in any hurry to trade Gibson at this point, but Gibson to Carolina makes the most sense if it does happen because they have players and contracts that would allow the Ducks to continue to compete and not just go into tank mode.

If Verbeek wants zero net retention, how about something like this?

Gibson at max retention (at 3.2 M, 6.4 million retained over 2 years) for Kotkaniemi (at 3.22 M, 6.4 million retained over 4 years). This would help Carolina with cap space in their window in the next 2 years and give them goalie insurance and Gibby gets to play for a contender and pay less taxes. Ducks would get a big center who can win faceoffs and has some untapped potential.

Maybe also include a swap of Fabbri at max retention, so 2 M for Kotchekov who's contract matches exactly at 2 million. Hurricanes get a forechecking depth scorer and Ducks get a decent backup goalie with some upside for the next 2 years.

I do think the Ducks would want some form of sweetener. Maybe a prospect swap of Dionicio for Badinka?

 

[KeithIsActuallyBad]

The Ducks have the most cap space in the league. In fact, they will likely ben under the floor if they got out of his contract.
Moving him just to get out of his contract would be the dumbest thing ever. Especially considering he is barely over the league average for goalie contracts, and they will have to retain/take back cap.

Yeah, I'm not sure what incentive the Ducks have to deal him unless they're offered a kings ransom. He's not crowding their cap or dragging them down in net this year.

 

[Chrispy]

I don't think Verbeek is in any hurry to trade Gibson at this point, but Gibson to Carolina makes the most sense if it does happen because they have players and contracts that would allow the Ducks to continue to compete and not just go into tank mode.

If Verbeek wants zero net retention, how about something like this?

Gibson at max retention (at 3.2 M, 6.4 million retained over 2 years) for Kotkaniemi (at 3.22 M, 6.4 million retained over 4 years). This would help Carolina with cap space in their window in the next 2 years and give them goalie insurance and Gibby gets to play for a contender and pay less taxes. Ducks would get a big center who can win faceoffs and has some untapped potential.

Maybe also include a swap of Fabbri at max retention, so 2 M for Kotchekov who's contract matches exactly at 2 million. Hurricanes get a forechecking depth scorer and Ducks get a decent backup goalie with some upside for the next 2 years.

I do think the Ducks would want some form of sweetener. Maybe a prospect swap of Dionicio for Badinka?

I doubt Carolina has any interest in retaining on Kotkaniemi for 5 years (signed through 2030.) Buying Kotkaniemi out this off-season would cost them $6.42M and half and sometimes 1/4 the cap hit you quote them retaining for the next 5 years. Next off-season (still 25) would be even less total and fewer years.

Carolina would be more likely to just do Gibson for Kotkaniemi with no retention either way. And I don't think they have any interest in moving Kochetkov at this point.

Edit: Also, where do you get the idea that Carolina's window is 2 years?
Aho is signed through 2032 and is 27.
Svechnikov is signed through 2029 and is 24.
Jarvis is signed through 2032 and is 23.
Slavin is signed through 2033.

There are lots of UFAs this off-season. I can see logic in claiming Carolina needs to rebuild to open a new window after last season's losses. But I don't see logic in claiming Carolina is in a currently closing window when the core is signed long-term, there are a lot of good prospects close to being ready to contribute, and there's a ton of cap space available this off-season to re-load for the next few years.

 

[qc14]

At this point I feel like Gibson and Verbeek are just in on one big prank against Friedman and all the other insiders about how he's going to get moved.

This is what, year 3 of the Gibson rumor mill and we're still in exactly the same place we started

 

[sd1976]

Where does either article state that he is in play? That is Verbeek's decision to make and I see no quotes from Verbeek in that regard. The only comments ever attributed to Verbeek are that the price for Gibson remains "very high". Is Edmonton or Carolina willing to pay a "very high" price for him? If so, bring the proposals on...but make them consistent with a "very high" price tag.

Omg dude. I hate talking with people that are so stuck in their own thoughts that they can’t or just refuse to see what is right in front of their eyes. Look at the highlighted within your own statement to prove that he is in play. The fact that he states the price is high, should show you that he is in play.

Why are you so offended by it?

Why even come on a rumours board if you aren’t going to accept the rumours?

 

[tomd]

Omg dude. I hate talking with people that are so stuck in their own thoughts that they can’t or just refuse to see what is right in front of their eyes. Look at the highlighted within your own statement to prove that he is in play. The fact that he states the price is high, should show you that he is in play.

Why are you so offended by it?

Why even come on a rumours board if you aren’t going to accept the rumours?

OMG is so 80s valley but whatever. It depends on what you mean by "in play". Most of the league could be considered "in play" at any given time. Gibson and Zegras have been the media rumor darlings for 2 years now and nothing has come of either. Invariably these rumors lead fans to assume that the player in question is going to be sold at fire sale prices. My point (OMG!!!!!!) was that Gibson - if he is traded - will be expensive to acquire. Why are you so offended with that concept??

 

[thadd]

Oh yes, I'm sure Gibson would love to go to a team expected to go deep into the playoffs.

Lol

 

[TFHockey]

OMG is so 80s valley but whatever. It depends on what you mean by "in play". Most of the league could be considered "in play" at any given time. Gibson and Zegras have been the media rumor darlings for 2 years now and nothing has come of either. Invariably these rumors lead fans to assume that the player in question is going to be sold at fire sale prices. My point (OMG!!!!!!) was that Gibson - if he is traded - will be expensive to acquire. Why are you so offended with that concept??

Would he though? I think that depends on the amount of retention offered.

Almost every player discussed in a trade on HF requires "at least a 1st", according to the opinions of fans of that franchise, that is.

We, collectively, almost never get trades even remotely right.

 

[VeteranPresence]

My point (OMG!!!!!!) was that Gibson - if he is traded - will be expensive to acquire. Why are you so offended with that concept??

Probably because there isn't anything in recent history that supports your assertion. Goalies typically don't go for much as it is, never mind one with a single positive blip after many years of playing on bad teams and having the numbers to go with it.

If Gibson was a pending UFA this is a different story, but he's not and there's a lot of risk for an acquiring club. Add in his NTC and "expensive" is not a word I'd use here.

 

[FiveTacos]

Thought it was about getting out his contract now that he has become tradeable...he wasn't the last 2 years.

It's a funny thing, with the rising cap there's actually cap floor teams that are going to be needing to acquire "bad contracts" to keep up with the floor. That's why multiple floor teams were trying to get Trouba.

Time for opposing fans to just admit they were wrong about Gibson

Missed out on cups not getting him sooner

Well to be fair his salary WAS high, and his play behind an awful team had suffered. Getting it wrong two years ago with 5 years of term left at a top goalie salary was a big risk.

That said my feeling has always been that his talent was still there, and from what he's showing now IMO if someone like say Edmonton had risked it on him him last year there's a pretty good chance we're talking about them as the defending champs right now.

 

[ChaoticOrange]

Probably because there isn't anything in recent history that supports your assertion. Goalies typically don't go for much as it is, never mind one with a single positive blip after many years of playing on bad teams and having the numbers to go with it.

If Gibson was a pending UFA this is a different story, but he's not and there's a lot of risk for an acquiring club. Add in his NTC and "expensive" is not a word I'd use here.

Gibson's got really nice numbers this year, both raw and underlying, but he's been hot garbage for five years prior, he'd have to okay the move, and he's got a relatively pricey cap hit. I really think the trade return won't be as high as Ducks fans are hoping for.

Luckily they've already got their goalie of the future in Dostal.

 

[tomd]

Would he though? I think that depends on the amount of retention offered.

Almost every player discussed in a trade on HF requires "at least a 1st", according to the opinions of fans of that franchise, that is.

We, collectively, almost never get trades even remotely right.

Probably because there isn't anything in recent history that supports your assertion. Goalies typically don't go for much as it is, never mind one with a single positive blip after many years of playing on bad teams and having the numbers to go with it.

If Gibson was a pending UFA this is a different story, but he's not and there's a lot of risk for an acquiring club. Add in his NTC and "expensive" is not a word I'd use here.

Gibson's got really nice numbers this year, both raw and underlying, but he's been hot garbage for five years prior, he'd have to okay the move, and he's got a relatively pricey cap hit. I really think the trade return won't be as high as Ducks fans are hoping for.

Luckily they've already got their goalie of the future in Dostal.

I think the point that is being missed by everyone north and east of Anaheim is that the Ducks are under absolutely zero pressure to trade Gibson. Verbeek has to be thrilled that the team is at .500 and slowing moving up the standing towards a playoff spot. They are getting playoff caliber goaltending every single night now. Meaningful games in March is what Verbeek said he wanted and it looks like he'll get them. If a team like Carolina desperately wants Gibson then they'll have to pay Verbeek's price. I personally don't think they will pay that price and so Gibson will remain a Duck. Regarding Edmonton...they just don't have the assets to acquire Gibson IMO.