This team is worse, there are better options out there. Gibson might be the most overrated goalie in the league.

Ducks and Kings won’t be making a trade around a starting goalie

Most I can see is doing is like an AHL swap

The 2018-19 season was the last time oft-injured 30-year-old John Gibson put up higher than .910 SV%. We'll be looking elsewhere for our goaltender.

You say "often injured" like he isn't available to start 50+ games a season.

Mrazek, Murray, Lehner are examples of often injured goalies. Gibson goes on IR for a few games at a time a couple times a season to deal with wear and tear. His longest IR stint he got his wisdom teeth pulled.

He's also consistently one of the most worked goalies the league based on the amount of shots he faces in every game. Locking in above average goalie with elite potential for 4mil AVV for the next four years is going to cost.

He can start 50+ games, but in almost every facet what he gives a team is not worth his contract even with retention. I think you can't call me biased for saying statistically this guy has been getting worse, with this season being particularly bad.

- 8th highest GAA, that's more than Cal Petersen (14th)
- 41st ranked in save percentage (.899) that's .001 more than Cam Talbot who the Kings got for $1M this season
- Leads the league in goals allowed (200), Vejmelka had 3 fewer starts and put up 167
- His save percentage has hovered around or below .900 for the last 4 years (.904, .903, .904, .899) compare that to his backup for the last three seasons (.926, .917, .897)
- His GAA has continued to get worse over the past 3 seasons (2.98, 3.19, 3.99)

With goalies like Helleybuck and Ullmark being on trading blocks, do you really think Gibson should be able to demand LA's best prospect ++?

Leagues worst defense, as is evident by his backups drop in SV%, explains your first three points. No, we're not proud to admit how bad our defense was, but it was basically AHL quality after the top pairing.

Stolarz's 0.926 season was a total of 8 games, it's not difficult to hold that SV% when your 8 games are against the leagues weakest teams. You can dig further and see the teams that Stolarz and Dostal typically started against were mostly against the leagues other bottom feeding teams (San Jose, Arizona, Chicago, etc). Gibson pulls the harder assignments where the Ducks are even more mismatched against their opponents. Compound that with a lack of goal support, of which the Ducks have been bottom 5 4/5 last years, and dead last for two of them.

As to his GAA, so have his backups, because the defense has gotten worse year on year.

Now, the final point? No, it's a bad trade. For starters, another center, even a former 2OA isn't hugely high on our list. Byfields more of a project at this point as you'd expect someone of his draft pedigree to have solidified a full time NHL spot and he just hasn't, probably why LA went and got Dubios. Anaheims also not in a position to move off from Gibson yet. A tandem of Talbot Stalock would guarantee us another last place finish.

I'd imagine Boston would be desperate to retain 50% for Ullmark if they heard Byfield was an option, and would be a smarter trade partner, though I might try to land Swayman at that point.

I think I'm more impressed by goaltenders who can still put up solid numbers even with poor defense. Korpisalo was on one of the worst defensive teams and put up 0.911 save percentage, he was seeing 33+ shots per game in CBJ which is 3-4 less than Gibson but that is still an impressive difference between the two. Gibson was an exceptionally good player, but we haven't seen his elite goaltending statistics or the brick wall he once was for nearly 5 years. If you have a trade comparable I'd love to see it, but typically basement teams aren't able to move their elite goaltender unless that goaltender is still putting up elite stats.

I really have to drill this point, Byfield wasn't an available option for PLD or Fiala trades who had max extensions, he is at no risk to be traded, LA only trades these assets when their value is at it's highest like Vilardi or Durzi. Google search anything from the Kings brass about Byfield and Clarke and it's about assuring both they are not going to be traded. Byfield even as a project is playing on the top-line of a playoff team, he has value to a team that is trying to win now and the defensive accumen to play against strong competition. I do expect the Kings will be willing to move futures for a goaltender at the deadline, but they'd be much better situated both from a cap perspective and for the future with a younger and cheaper goalie who has established themselves recently where goal scoring as reached highs it hasn't accomplished since the mid-90s . To me I think Lankinen, Raanta, etc. would be a better fit in LA than Gibson. This isn't a rivalry issue, the Ducks should have moved Gibson away a while ago, his stats/age/injuries does impact the ability to move him. Try to move Gibson to any other team and I think you'll hear a similar argument.

Byfield might be on the top line, but his production isn't up to par for topline player. The goalies you're suggesting is Korpisalo who fell apart in the playoffs, Raanta that can't stay healthy, Lankinen, who is a carrier backup goalie. You're not getting much better value on the market than Gibson for 4mill for 4 years.


Back to deal
Arvidson is in there to make money work
Talbot is in surplus, you can put Phoenix in instead
Byfield is the attraction, if not him it will need to be a first.
Draft picks is to eat salary for 4 years. Maybe remove one of them.

And the reason it makes sense for the kings is the timeline, four years from now Doughty and Kopitar are both done.
As comp: Kuemper was traded to the Avalanche for: 1st, 3rd and a solid prospect(timmins). hehad one year left on the contract and coyotes retained 1 mill. He had truly injury problems in years past and came off season with 0.907 save pct.

Byfield needs to improve his production but the guy was 20 and playing against the toughest competition in the NHL, I think LA is fine being patient. Korpisalo was one of LA’s best players, your stats will get a bit hairy when playing McDavid and Drai 6 times in a row, his play is what priced him out of LA.
Keumper broke out with LA’s goalie development staff and he statistically was much better than Gibson at a cheaper cap hit. Kuemper had a .928 sv % the season before he was traded, and .907 sv% (both with the Yotes), Gibson is five seasons removed from putting up similar stats. Not a fair comparable unless Gibson really puts on a clinic this season.

Someone can pay that for Gibson, but it doesn’t make sense for the Kings, the Kings are trending younger and Blake will be reluctant to make any long term bets at goal.

It doesn’t work (the deal). Aside from Anaheim and LA steering away from trading with one another. The acquisition of PLD was to make it so the Kings are icing 3 top-6 lines with a scoring threat on each: Kempe, Fiala, and Arvidsson. If between Rittich, Copley, Portillo, and Talbot the Kings can’t find a goalie who is at or around .900 they will make their push for another goaltender. But it’s a round peg in a square hole, if it’s Gibson. Blake is unlikely to give a large contract or acquire a large contract for a goalie. His worst blunder has been signing a big money goaltender in Cal Petersen, which he is still paying for. He’s likely to follow what Minnesota or Vegas did, acquire a lesser known backup and put them in front of a better defense. I fully expect him to move picks and prospects and not sacrifice any active roster players to improve at goal. Like it or not Blake saw Adin Hill win with good defense in front of him and he resolved to gamble on making a team strong in every area but goal.