Phil Posted August 4, 2018 Posted August 4, 2018 Mobile link: Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Phil Posted August 5, 2018 Author Posted August 5, 2018 Dollar-wise? Absolutely. It's a hair over 8% of the cap. He's like 25 and is easily one of the best goalies in the game. The issue, like with pretty much every goalie not named Lundqvist or Luongo is the years. Too few maintain that level of excellence beyond a four- to five-year window.
Stephen Posted August 5, 2018 Posted August 5, 2018 Dollar-wise? Absolutely. It's a hair over 8% of the cap. He's like 25 and is easily one of the best goalies in the game. The issue, like with pretty much every goalie not named Lundqvist or Luongo is the years. Too few maintain that level of excellence beyond a four- to five-year window. I see your point. Gibson has the youth to keep the Ducks in the future of playoff contention. But he is not one of those big-name goaltenders. You're correct about how he is not that much of a cap hit on ANA. If he plays well within that four/five-year window, then I'll see why Gibson got this contract
Phil Posted August 5, 2018 Author Posted August 5, 2018 I guess that's their goal, really. Win while he's still viable. By year six, seven, and eight, it might get ugly. Hard to say. Or he could buck the trend and go the way Luongo and Hank did. Who knows? The odds aren't in his favor, is all. Most goalies have that four- to five-year window when they're really really dominant.
Pete Posted August 5, 2018 Posted August 5, 2018 That's not the contract of a dominant goalie. It's the contract of a starter who's "good enough".
Gravesy Posted August 5, 2018 Posted August 5, 2018 Seems like a fair deal for both parties. I like Gibson. He’s a very good goalie that seems to fly under the radar at times.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.