Long term at 10 is something you shouldn’t do long term at around goalie average at the time is a yes
I feel like if the term was 4-6 years he was looking at 7.5-8 a year... but they gave him 8 so he took a pay cut for more years.
People look at Anaheim roster and assume hes carried by a good defense + defensive game but don't actually read into the stats and realize (at least last season) Gibson hard carried that team to 2nd place in the pacific.
That's a fair question but as a Ducks fan my opinion when they were both here is that Anderson was more consistent and solid with less bad goals at the time but Gibson had much more upside and would make saves very few goalies in the league could. At the time they were right about equal in my opinion and both middle of the road goalies but both still young. I think most fans and Ducks management saw Gibson as the younger guy with significantly more upside and made the bet to go with him. Not a knock on Anderson at all though. Since the trade Gibson has gotten much better and was phenomenal last year for us. We left him out to dry with our whole team being injured the first half of the season and he stole a ton of games for us. Just ask the fans who our most important player last year was and almost everyone agrees it was Gibson.I heard quite a few remarks when Andersen was traded to TOR that ANA traded the wrong goalie. They also called the Andersen deal "Lou Lamoriello's best trade as a TOR GM". How do you repond to that the day after you handed an 8 year contract to a goalie. The wrong goalie?
That's a fair question but as a Ducks fan my opinion when they were both here is that Anderson was more consistent and solid with less bad goals at the time but Gibson had much more upside and would make saves very few goalies in the league could. At the time they were right about equal in my opinion and both middle of the road goalies but both still young. I think most fans and Ducks management saw Gibson as the younger guy with significantly more upside and made the bet to go with him. Not a knock on Anderson at all though. Since the trade Gibson has gotten much better and was phenomenal last year for us. We left him out to dry with our whole team being injured the first half of the season and he stole a ton of games for us. Just ask the fans who our most important player last year was and almost everyone agrees it was Gibson.I heard quite a few remarks when Andersen was traded to TOR that ANA traded the wrong goalie. They also called the Andersen deal "Lou Lamoriello's best trade as a TOR GM". How do you repond to that the day after you handed an 8 year contract to a goalie. The wrong goalie?
Still plays roughly the same amount as other starting goaltenders. And when he does get hurt, it’s not usually for long. The injury history is a tad exaggerated.
At this point, I don't even understand what the hell you're going for. It must be about leaf player being better as that's usually what you do.
Which numbers actually are those supposed to be? The last time Rask put together better numbers than Gibson was the year Gibson started to settle into the league. Since then, only one goalie with more than 10 games played has a better SV% than Gibson (that's Raantta). In the advanced goalie stats, he ranks second (among starters) behind Bobrovsky in adjusted save percentage and goals saved above average. Anyone willing and able to look at the underlying skills can also see Gibson being an exceptional goalie, easily within the top-10 by now, since his lateral movement and tracking made massive strides. He was already elite when it comes to stopping primary shots.
Which numbers actually are those supposed to be? The last time Rask put together better numbers than Gibson was the year Gibson started to settle into the league. Since then, only one goalie with more than 10 games played has a better SV% than Gibson (that's Raantta). In the advanced goalie stats, he ranks second (among starters) behind Bobrovsky in adjusted save percentage and goals saved above average.
