Proposal: Quick to Calgary.

[KINGS17]

I would trade the 1st and maybe a small add like Mangiapane but your ask is ridiculous. No way in hell Quick returns Valimaki let alone Bennett and a 1st.

I think you are in the right ballpark on Quick's value. Maybe something like Rasmus Anderson and your 1st.

 

[blankall]

I think Rittich, Bennett, Jankowski and the Flames 1st for Quick would be a starting point.

Starting point?

Let me explain this to you. In 2012, Quick signed a 10 year extension on his contract that will take him to age 37. When a player signs a contract like that, the team that signs them is getting a discount on the first years of the contract and expects to take a hit on the final years, at least as far as the cap goes.

Quick is on year 6 of this contract and turning 33. It's almost a given that the last few years of his contract are likely to have negative value. The Kings have exhausted the majority of the good years of Quick's contract and are likely to be soon dealing with a negative asset.

No team is giving you a first and 2 solid cost controlled assets for Quick and his contract.

 

[Honour Over Glory]

Starting point?

Let me explain this to you. In 2012, Quick signed a 10 year extension on his contract that will take him to age 37. When a player signs a contract like that, the team that signs them is getting a discount on the first years of the contract and expects to take a hit on the final years, at least as far as the cap goes.

Quick is on year 6 of this contract and turning 33. It's almost a given that the last few years of his contract are likely to have negative value. The Kings have exhausted the majority of the good years of Quick's contract and are likely to be soon dealing with a negative asset.

No team is giving you a first and 2 solid cost controlled assets for Quick and his contract.

Nah, you guys traded for a crap Mike Smith.

Also, Luongo and Lundqvist are well into their 30's and neither are even remotely close to being a good cap hit like Quick and Quick is also an elite goalie and likely will be for the next 3-4yrs as well.

But hey, waste that window. Literally couldn't care any less than I do about either team.

 

[go4hockey]

if he keeps playing the way he has he will get some votes....but not in my top 5 for sure

Votes or no votes no way he is “in the running” for that award. But he is playing well, just not that well.

 

[Blake456]

If you want a Stanley cup winning, con smythe winning and recently Jennings winning goalie, that has a decent cap number, within your own division you’re gonna have to pay a premium, regardless of this year so far. Don’t see how it ever happens because LA is never taking back salary. So if you don’t wanna pay up, have fun losing to Las Vegas or San Jose this playoffs

 

[FameFlame069]

Some of these asks are just ridiculous! 1st and Valimaki? Bennett Janks and a 1st with rittich too? Like holy, when's the last time a goalie commanded more than a 1st + 2nd(value can be a prospect too)? Like you may get lucky and get a prospect like Kylington and a 1st, no way is Valimaki's name ooppipo up in the discussion unless LA retains 2+ Million, just delusional Kings fans

 

[debil]

I think Rittich, Bennett, Jankowski and the Flames 1st for Quick would be a starting point.

OK get off your drugs dude.

 

[evanreynolds1116]

WARNING (long post but worth it)

I can’t believe people are acting like they’d be doing us a favor by taking Quick off our hands. He would be returning a 1st + and here’s why:

His regular season stats average since we won the cup in 2011-2012 to 2017-2018:
GA: 2.14
Sv%: 0.918

His playoffs stats average from 2011-2012 to 2017-2018:
GA: 2.10
Sv%: 0.926

Dude is a solid during the regular season and a beast in the playoffs. Just look at last year against Vegas in RD 1:
GA: 1.55
Sv%: 0.947

Yes his stats this season are not great but if you’ve watched and Kings games this season (which I doubt it because as a Kings fan... they are not easy to watch) you can see his team is not doing him any favors. Like at all.

I get his injury history raises some concern but not to the extent that most of you blow it up to be:

Since 2011-2012, he’s played in 69.62% of the games (incl lockout season) which would be 57.08 games per season.
2012: 69 of 82 (84.14%)
2013: 37 of 48 (77.08%)
2014: 49 of 82 (59.75%)
2015: 72 of 82 (87.80%)
2016: 68 of 82 (82.92%)
2017: 17 of 82 (20.73%)
2018: 64 of 82 (78.o4%)

As far as his contract goes...

Quick is 32 w/ $5.8M for four more years after this season. He’ll turn 37 in his last season.

Fleury is 34 @ $5.750M this season which is jumping up to $7M for the next 3 seasons. He’ll also turn 37 in his last season.

Rinne is 36 @ $7M this season and then $5M the next two seasons. He’ll be 38 in his last season.

Seams like his contract is pretty reasonable and comparable to the other top goalies around his age. Especially when you compare it to Price’s $10.5M until age 39 and Lundqvist’s $8.5M until age 39. Cap projection for next season is $83M. Quick’s $5.8M would only be 6.98% of that. You’re trying to say that’s too much for an elite goaltender and someone that can mentor any up and coming goalies in the system ?

If your team already has a shot at the cup AND you have the opportunity to add Quick ? You do what you need to do to make that happen (within reason). I’m not saying you have to break the bank but you’re gonna have to give up a couple pieces you’d like to keep. Kings had to make a lot of trades that are currently hurting us in order to win the cup in 2012 and 2014 but I wouldn’t take it back because seeing Brown raise the cup twice in three years was 110% worth it. Only reason I’m on board for trading Quick is I don’t think we will be winning the cup in the near future. But it would really really hurt to see him go to another team in the pacific.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

Right now you're paying a 5.7 million dollar goalie who you WANT to sit out half the time, so depends on what it's worth to you. Flames aren't going far unless they solve for 'x' here.

Quick is a tested and proven goalie who would be a massive upgrade in the clutch for the Flames, its' going to take more than a late 1st and a cap dump.

It won't though. Goalies don't have the value you think they do.

 

[SmellOfVictory]

The best return you can hope for by trading a goalie is a 1st rounder. You are right, they don't command a big package for some reason even though its one of the most important positions.

There's normally not a huge demand for them, and when a team is willing to trade a goalie it's generally because they need to clear out room for another goalie. Important position, but since there is only one starter per team (ignoring platoon setups) there isn't a significant market as there can be with skaters.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

I think Rittich, Bennett, Jankowski and the Flames 1st for Quick would be a starting point.

Yep, and step two will be the Flames GM saying "hahahahaha, but really, what do you want?"

With his contract, Rittich + 1st + either a toss-in prospect or a 3rd/4th rounder.

There is enough worries about Quick from the Flames and dumping his 7Mx5 contract may be enough for LA to take a package a bit lighter on the futures. There is certainly no way they will toss in two young, cost-controlled NHL fowards too.

Right now, there is no way in hell I'd pursue Jonathan Quick. Elite or not, his bread and butter in net is something that does not tend to age well, no matter who you are. If he were a rental for this year, maybe, but locking yourself into 5 years more of him when he'll be 33-37 at 7M a year? Hell to the no.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

It won't though. Goalies don't have the value you think they do.

I posted examples of very similar goalies on the previous page that had similar returns. You can say 'no thank you' because of health or similar reasons, but there's precedent for high profile goalies.

Edit: I'll copy and paste here for posterity:

Looking back over some history,
Varlamov for a 1st and 2nd
Ryan Miller (and Steve Ott) went for Halak, Stewart, Carrier, 1st, 3rd
Luongo was traded for a bluechip goalie prospect, Matthias, and Anthony

Yep, and step two will be the Flames GM saying "hahahahaha, but really, what do you want?"

With his contract, Rittich + 1st + either a toss-in prospect or a 3rd/4th rounder.

There is enough worries about Quick from the Flames and dumping his 7Mx5 contract may be enough for LA to take a package a bit lighter on the futures. There is certainly no way they will toss in two young, cost-controlled NHL fowards too.

Right now, there is no way in hell I'd pursue Jonathan Quick. Elite or not, his bread and butter in net is something that does not tend to age well, no matter who you are. If he were a rental for this year, maybe, but locking yourself into 5 years more of him when he'll be 33-37 at 7M a year? Hell to the no.

Why do people keep recycling this garbage?

It's 5.8x5. 5.8.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

WARNING (long post but worth it)

I can’t believe people are acting like they’d be doing us a favor by taking Quick off our hands. He would be returning a 1st + and here’s why:

His regular season stats average since we won the cup in 2011-2012 to 2017-2018:
GA: 2.14
Sv%: 0.918

His playoffs stats average from 2011-2012 to 2017-2018:
GA: 2.10
Sv%: 0.926

Dude is a solid during the regular season and a beast in the playoffs. Just look at last year against Vegas in RD 1:
GA: 1.55
Sv%: 0.947

Yes his stats this season are not great but if you’ve watched and Kings games this season (which I doubt it because as a Kings fan... they are not easy to watch) you can see his team is not doing him any favors. Like at all.

I get his injury history raises some concern but not to the extent that most of you blow it up to be:

Since 2011-2012, he’s played in 69.62% of the games (incl lockout season) which would be 57.08 games per season.
2012: 69 of 82 (84.14%)
2013: 37 of 48 (77.08%)
2014: 49 of 82 (59.75%)
2015: 72 of 82 (87.80%)
2016: 68 of 82 (82.92%)
2017: 17 of 82 (20.73%)
2018: 64 of 82 (78.o4%)

As far as his contract goes...

Quick is 32 w/ $5.8M for four more years after this season. He’ll turn 37 in his last season.

Fleury is 34 @ $5.750M this season which is jumping up to $7M for the next 3 seasons. He’ll also turn 37 in his last season.

Rinne is 36 @ $7M this season and then $5M the next two seasons. He’ll be 38 in his last season.

Seams like his contract is pretty reasonable and comparable to the other top goalies around his age. Especially when you compare it to Price’s $10.5M until age 39 and Lundqvist’s $8.5M until age 39. Cap projection for next season is $83M. Quick’s $5.8M would only be 6.98% of that. You’re trying to say that’s too much for an elite goaltender and someone that can mentor any up and coming goalies in the system ?

If your team already has a shot at the cup AND you have the opportunity to add Quick ? You do what you need to do to make that happen (within reason). I’m not saying you have to break the bank but you’re gonna have to give up a couple pieces you’d like to keep. Kings had to make a lot of trades that are currently hurting us in order to win the cup in 2012 and 2014 but I wouldn’t take it back because seeing Brown raise the cup twice in three years was 110% worth it. Only reason I’m on board for trading Quick is I don’t think we will be winning the cup in the near future. But it would really really hurt to see him go to another team in the pacific.

This was not worth it.

Comparing Quick to comparable age goalies, particularly Fleury and Rinne is a fallacy.

Rinne and to a lesser extent Fleury are both goalies who use their size and positioning to shut everything off. Quick uses his fabulous skating and agility. Positioning and size don't change. Rinne will still be a passable goaltender for as long as he plays because he plays enormous. Quick is most likely a better goaltender, but he will slow down and he'll drop off REAL fast. Not even injury related, just aging.

Also, I wouldn't want Quick mentoring my goalies. Just like I wouldn't want Hasek. Guys who do stuff with crazy athleticism make terrible coaches/mentors.

Nobody should be acting like they're doing you a favor... but you also shouldn't be acting like Quick is going to return much more than a 1st rounder. He definitely pulls a 1st and probably a mediocre prospect. Someone had tossed out Kylington. I could see that. 1st + Kylington. But any more than that and you're dreaming.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

I posted examples of very similar goalies on the previous page that had similar returns. You can say 'no thank you' because of health or similar reasons, but there's precedent for high profile goalies.

Edit: I'll copy and paste here for posterity:

Looking back over some history,
Varlamov for a 1st and 2nd
Ryan Miller (and Steve Ott) went for Halak, Stewart, Carrier, 1st, 3rd
Luongo was traded for a bluechip goalie prospect, Matthias, and Anthony





Why do people keep recycling this garbage?

It's 5.8x5. 5.8.

I just took what was in this post. I apologize.

Even so, maybe ditching a 5.8M contract for 5 is enough for LA.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

I just took what was in this post. I apologize.

Even so, maybe ditching a 5.8M contract for 5 is enough for LA.

I get what you're saying, but cap isn't really an issue for a sinking team in LA. Quick's contract is the least of our worries. If it would help, I'm sure they'd even retain (not saying CAL would take him).

Re: a 1st + Kylington I think that's what most sane people were asking for, a 1st and a good/great prospect (a third asset would be nice but a solid prospect makes it kind of irrelevant). I'd push for Anderson maybe, and understand why Valimaki is off the table even though we'd probably push that way too. But I still get why Cal doesn't do it.

 

[evanreynolds1116]

This was not worth it.

Comparing Quick to comparable age goalies, particularly Fleury and Rinne is a fallacy.

Rinne and to a lesser extent Fleury are both goalies who use their size and positioning to shut everything off. Quick uses his fabulous skating and agility. Positioning and size don't change. Rinne will still be a passable goaltender for as long as he plays because he plays enormous. Quick is most likely a better goaltender, but he will slow down and he'll drop off REAL fast. Not even injury related, just aging.

Also, I wouldn't want Quick mentoring my goalies. Just like I wouldn't want Hasek. Guys who do stuff with crazy athleticism make terrible coaches/mentors.

Nobody should be acting like they're doing you a favor... but you also shouldn't be acting like Quick is going to return much more than a 1st rounder. He definitely pulls a 1st and probably a mediocre prospect. Someone had tossed out Kylington. I could see that. 1st + Kylington. But any more than that and you're dreaming.

You’re thinking about it too far into the future. Quick could help any contender that needs a goalie RIGHT NOW and atleast another 1-2 seasons after that. You can’t project if/when his play is going to drop off. You could even expose him in 2021 to Seattle and it could be Fleury situation 2.0. You can’t bank on that happening but that would only be 2.5 seasons if you are so worried about the contract. If you get him this season before the deadline, that’s 3 shots at a cup with Quick. I would think he’d return 1st, 2nd or 3rd, and a decent prospect based off past trades.

Martin Jones got a 1st + young prospect.
Cam Talblot got a 2nd, 3rd, and 7th.
C. Schneider got a 1st.

And look at all the other goalie trades that were posted above. Quick is better than all those goalies that were traded.

 

[YP44]

I get what you're saying, but cap isn't really an issue for a sinking team in LA. Quick's contract is the least of our worries. If it would help, I'm sure they'd even retain (not saying CAL would take him).

Re: a 1st + Kylington I think that's what most sane people were asking for, a 1st and a good/great prospect (a third asset would be nice but a solid prospect makes it kind of irrelevant). I'd push for Anderson maybe, and understand why Valimaki is off the table even though we'd probably push that way too. But I still get why Cal doesn't do it.

reasonable post right here

 

[YP44]

You’re thinking about it too far into the future. Quick could help any contender that needs a goalie RIGHT NOW and atleast another 1-2 seasons after that. You can’t project if/when his play is going to drop off. You could even expose him in 2021 to Seattle and it could be Fleury situation 2.0. You can’t bank on that happening but that would only be 2.5 seasons if you are so worried about the contract. If you get him this season before the deadline, that’s 3 shots at a cup with Quick. I would think he’d return 1st, 2nd or 3rd, and a decent prospect based off past trades.

Martin Jones got a 1st + young prospect.
Cam Talblot got a 2nd, 3rd, and 7th.
C. Schneider got a 1st.

And look at all the other goalie trades that were posted above. Quick is better than all those goalies that were traded.

at the time Schneider was leading the league in SV% and was a top 5 goalie. It was also rumored that Edmonton offered more but Vancouver wanted to send him out of division.

 

[evanreynolds1116]

at the time Schneider was leading the league in SV% and was a top 5 goalie. It was also rumored that Edmonton offered more but Vancouver wanted to send him out of division.

True but he also had a very small sample size of games played. 25 games in 2011, 33 games in 2012, and 30 games in 2013. 88 games over three seasons. Stats were very good but you'd still consider that "unproven" as a young goaltender but you could definitely see the potential.

All I'm saying is Quick is proven, a two time stanley cup champion, 2012 + 2016 Vezina nominee, 2012 Conn Smythe trophy winner, and 2014 + 2018 Jennings trophy winner. He's worth more than a late 1st round pick and the Flames... maybe 5th best prospect ? (Kylington). Don't know the Flames prospects very well but that's what it seems like based off what I can find.

 

[Stickpucker]

Canes have two cheap goalies doing well on short contracts.

Y'all got any of that....offense to spare?

 

[Rangediddy]

True but he also had a very small sample size of games played. 25 games in 2011, 33 games in 2012, and 30 games in 2013. 88 games over three seasons. Stats were very good but you'd still consider that "unproven" as a young goaltender but you could definitely see the potential.

All I'm saying is Quick is proven, a two time stanley cup champion, 2012 + 2016 Vezina nominee, 2012 Conn Smythe trophy winner, and 2014 + 2018 Jennings trophy winner. He's worth more than a late 1st round pick and the Flames... maybe 5th best prospect ? (Kylington). Don't know the Flames prospects very well but that's what it seems like based off what I can find.

So are we trading our assets for a starting goaltender for the next 4 years, or for his trophy case?

Nobody's arguing that Quick wasn't an elite goalie in the league for a long time. We're arguing that we don't want a broken down tendy with an anchor of a salary, at the cost of our draft picks and top prospects. If we wanted that, we'd go after Price. Simple as that.

 

[Yog S'loth]

This really isn't impossible. Quick is 32 and has four more seasons left... but at significantly less money than his cap hit. ($16m in cash; $23.2m in cap hit) If you think he can still provide quality service for a few years, a cash-conscious team like Calgary could be a fit. The Kings aren't going to win anytime soon and have two "goalies of the future" both ready to go for NHL service.

Mike Smith would have to come back the other way in order to make it work this season... and that could be tough to get him to waive his no-trade clause.

I'm not commenting on what else Calgary would need to include... just pointing out this could really be a sensible move for both teams.

 

[Rangediddy]

This really isn't impossible. Quick is 32 and has four more seasons left... but at significantly less money than his cap hit. ($16m in cash; $23.2m in cap hit) If you think he can still provide quality service for a few years, a cash-conscious team like Calgary could be a fit. The Kings aren't going to win anytime soon and have two "goalies of the future" both ready to go for NHL service.

Mike Smith would have to come back the other way in order to make it work this season... and that could be tough to get him to waive his no-trade clause.

I'm not commenting on what else Calgary would need to include... just pointing out this could really be a sensible move for both teams.

Disagree. We have more cap concerns over the next 2 years than concerns about actual cash. And we don't believe Quick can still provide quality service for a few years (at least that's my opinion and appears to be shares among many other Flames fans here).

If Quick is going to be an elite level goalie for the rest of his contract, why would any Kings fan want him out? 4 years is a long time to turn things around. You could be one Jack Hughes away from being back in playoffs, so why is everyone pushing Quick out the door?

 

[Yog S'loth]

If Quick is going to be an elite level goalie for the rest of his contract, why would any Kings fan want him out? 4 years is a long time to turn things around. You could be one Jack Hughes away from being back in playoffs, so why is everyone pushing Quick out the door?

I don't think Kings fans are "pushing him out the door", but it's basic sports sense: The Kings are awful. They're not getting better anytime soon. We have a high-end tradeable asset that we can let sit doing nothing for us, or trade him for future assets. Especially given the fact the Kings could conceivably be ready to roll with a Peterson/Campbell tandem... why would you NOT entertain trading a valuable asset?

 

[blankall]

WARNING (long post but worth it)

I can’t believe people are acting like they’d be doing us a favor by taking Quick off our hands. He would be returning a 1st + and here’s why:

His regular season stats average since we won the cup in 2011-2012 to 2017-2018:
GA: 2.14
Sv%: 0.918

His playoffs stats average from 2011-2012 to 2017-2018:
GA: 2.10
Sv%: 0.926

Dude is a solid during the regular season and a beast in the playoffs. Just look at last year against Vegas in RD 1:
GA: 1.55
Sv%: 0.947

Yes his stats this season are not great but if you’ve watched and Kings games this season (which I doubt it because as a Kings fan... they are not easy to watch) you can see his team is not doing him any favors. Like at all.

I get his injury history raises some concern but not to the extent that most of you blow it up to be:

Since 2011-2012, he’s played in 69.62% of the games (incl lockout season) which would be 57.08 games per season.
2012: 69 of 82 (84.14%)
2013: 37 of 48 (77.08%)
2014: 49 of 82 (59.75%)
2015: 72 of 82 (87.80%)
2016: 68 of 82 (82.92%)
2017: 17 of 82 (20.73%)
2018: 64 of 82 (78.o4%)

As far as his contract goes...

Quick is 32 w/ $5.8M for four more years after this season. He’ll turn 37 in his last season.

Fleury is 34 @ $5.750M this season which is jumping up to $7M for the next 3 seasons. He’ll also turn 37 in his last season.

Rinne is 36 @ $7M this season and then $5M the next two seasons. He’ll be 38 in his last season.

Seams like his contract is pretty reasonable and comparable to the other top goalies around his age. Especially when you compare it to Price’s $10.5M until age 39 and Lundqvist’s $8.5M until age 39. Cap projection for next season is $83M. Quick’s $5.8M would only be 6.98% of that. You’re trying to say that’s too much for an elite goaltender and someone that can mentor any up and coming goalies in the system ?

If your team already has a shot at the cup AND you have the opportunity to add Quick ? You do what you need to do to make that happen (within reason). I’m not saying you have to break the bank but you’re gonna have to give up a couple pieces you’d like to keep. Kings had to make a lot of trades that are currently hurting us in order to win the cup in 2012 and 2014 but I wouldn’t take it back because seeing Brown raise the cup twice in three years was 110% worth it. Only reason I’m on board for trading Quick is I don’t think we will be winning the cup in the near future. But it would really really hurt to see him go to another team in the pacific.

No one is disputing that Quick has played great. The issue is how will he play going forward.

Quick unlike Rinne and Fleury is coming off injuries and some very bad recent play. If Quick can get things back on track for a sustained period, then yes, the Flames would take another look. However, with Quick's age, contract, and injury issues, it's a non-starter right now.

You have also pointed out the success stories of goalies Quick's age, but fail to point out the many goalies that simply fall off a cliff in their mid-30s, which is actually much more likely. The majority of the starters from 2009 no longer play in the league:

2009-10 NHL Goalie Statistics | Hockey-Reference.com

Quick needs to separate himself from those guys first.