Value of: John Gibson

  • PLEASE check any bookmark on all devices. IF you see a link pointing to mandatory.com DELETE it Please use this URL https://forums.hfboards.com/

SherVaughn30

Registered User
Jan 12, 2010
5,339
3,389
Los Angeles
What would his trade value be right now if the Ducks were willing to trade him? Asking as a Caps fan. Samsonov/Vanecek are not anywhere near #1 goalies and the Caps are gonna need one soon with all the injuries piling up.

From my standpoint, I would be willing to trade Samsonov($2 million and will still be a RFA after the season) + 1st + a player with contract(like a healthy Mantha($5.7 million for another 3 years).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Caps8112

McDonald19

Registered User
Sep 9, 2003
23,082
4,040
California
From my standpoint, I would be willing to trade Samsonov($2 million and will still be a RFA after the season) + 1st + a player with contract(like a healthy Mantha($5.7 million for another 3 years).

An ok goalie, a late 1st round pick, and a winger with a bad contract? I don’t see how that’s a good trade for a rebuilding Ducks team.
 

crowi

Registered Loser
May 11, 2012
8,489
3,234
Helsinki
Ducks are doing just fine right now with Gibson there to make it happen. I'd say NO is the best way to answer your proposal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HabsQC

Rec T

Registered User
Jun 1, 2007
1,549
1,236
NKY
Closer to the deadline I’d like to see the Sabres trade their Vegas 1st + for Gibson.

I'm sure you would. On the flip side, closer to the deadline I'd like to see the Ducks trade their 22 3rd + for either Power or Quinn... maybe even both. Chances of either of those happening though are roughly equivalent of my favorite actress showing up at my front door, naked, holding a pizza & saying "I'm hungry & horny, let's do this..."

However, short of him flat out demanding a trade, I can't see the Ducks wanting to trade him for anything but a big overpayment. Especially now that they're doing far better than expected this season & the light at the end of the tunnel no longer is an onrushing train.
 

Zegs2sendhelp

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 25, 2012
41,748
38,245
Ducks fans want an unrealistic amount for Gibson in my opinion. Most discussions seem to include 3 or 4 marquee pieces for the future.
That’s fine, I don’t think any duck fans really want to move him anyway…. It’s mostly other teams hoping they can get him cheaper
 

Romang67

BitterSwede
Jan 2, 2011
30,279
23,067
Evanston, IL
The Varlamov and Schneider trades are probably good points of reference. Gibson is older, but significantly more proven (and, IMO, much better), so you're probably looking at a 1st rounder plus significant value. Wouldn't be surprised to see him command the equivalent of two first rounders for a team in need of a quality goalie.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sean Garrity

Kalv

Slava Ukraini
Mar 29, 2009
23,981
11,832
Latvia
Ducks fans want an unrealistic amount for Gibson in my opinion. Most discussions seem to include 3 or 4 marquee pieces for the future.
As a Ducks fan, I have to say that the goalie market up to date does not offer much optimism IF we trade Gibby. And that will only happen if we see our team will suck for the upcoming years as well, as we know, then Gibby will want out.

In our favor would be the nice contract of his, but the return in any case would most likely be disappointing to us. Goalies are so weird :laugh:
But I don't see Gibby going anywhere this season. MAYBE in the summer but big question mark, IMO. After that, who knows.
 

duckpuck

Registered User
Sponsor
Jul 10, 2007
2,559
2,675
Ducks fans want an unrealistic amount for Gibson in my opinion. Most discussions seem to include 3 or 4 marquee pieces for the future.

The ducks have a top goalie on a pretty good contract, plenty of cap room, and a team that seems to have turned the corner after bottoming out last year. Why would they want to trade gibson and open up a hole in net ? Dostal seems promising but is not ready and unproven. The only reason to trade Gibson is for a massive haul or if he's asked to be moved.
 

Sean Garrity

Quack Quack Quack!
Dec 25, 2007
17,526
6,183
Dee Eff UU
:laugh::laugh:
The Varlamov and Schneider trades are probably good points of reference. Gibson is older, but significantly more proven (and, IMO, much better), so you're probably looking at a 1st rounder plus significant value. Wouldn't be surprised to see him command the equivalent of two first rounders for a team in need of a quality goalie.

You’re clearly in the wrong thread. Logic doesn’t work here bud.

It’s been stated (and ignored) ad Nausea at this point. Look at the history of #1 goalies in their prime being traded, and then add slightly because the Ducks have no real reason to trade Gibson. It’s not that hard folks, but ya they’ll accept cap dumps + your late first :laugh:.
 

Trojans86

Registered User
Dec 30, 2015
3,238
2,223
The fundamental issue with these threads is that the Ducks really believe he is a top goalie in the league and his stats were down because we sucked and he got really frustrated (and why we are not surprised that he is playing better now that we are healthier and playing better as a team). Under that premise we aren’t going to trade him for a late pick or mediocre prospect that has no chance of ever becoming as good or as valuable as Gibson. If you don’t think Gibson is elite than don’t offer. There are plenty of other Ducks that we don’t think so highly of.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HabsQC

Raccoon Jesus

Draft em but don't play em
Oct 30, 2008
62,796
64,700
I.E.
:laugh::laugh:

You’re clearly in the wrong thread. Logic doesn’t work here bud.

It’s been stated (and ignored) ad Nausea at this point. Look at the history of #1 goalies in their prime being traded, and then add slightly because the Ducks have no real reason to trade Gibson. It’s not that hard folks, but ya they’ll accept cap dumps + your late first :laugh:.


Which is the part that so many are (deliberately) overlooking; this is a "make me move" situation. Ducks have no reason to trade Gibson for anything less than his full possible value and then some. The spare parts bullshit has to get tiring. If "he's not worth that much" it's no skin off the Ducks' behind. Yet the same people come into every thread to complain about it.
 

Sean Garrity

Quack Quack Quack!
Dec 25, 2007
17,526
6,183
Dee Eff UU
Which is the part that so many are (deliberately) overlooking; this is a "make me move" situation. Ducks have no reason to trade Gibson for anything less than his full possible value and then some. The spare parts bullshit has to get tiring. If "he's not worth that much" it's no skin off the Ducks' behind. Yet the same people come into every thread to complain about it.

Correct. Gibson has publicly made statements about being sick and tired of losing(paraphrasing here). You can take that however you’d like. As a Ducks’ fan, I take that as a goalie in his prime challenging his team and organization to figure it the f*** out, and rightfully so because that’s how I’d want my goalie to feel. IF people argued he wants out based on comments then I’d at least understand. However, people don’t state that when making proposals and just think they can get Gibby for peanuts on the dollar. Even if he did want out, his value would likely be higher than what’s being proposed a majority of times based on historical precedent.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad