Proposal: Quick

[LGB]

Eh, the term's not good - he still has 4 years left - but the salary averages $5.8 mil per year, and he doesn't have any NMC.

Out of 50 goalies with at least 1,500 minutes last season Quick ranked last in both raw save percentage and save percentage above expected (per both corsica and EvolvingHockey's xG models, by a pretty large margin I might add). I don't think it's impossible for him to bounce back to some degree because goaltending is pretty random, but you absolutely cannot bet 5.8 x 4 on a 33 year old goalie coming off that type of season. He is a negative asset.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

The fun part about judging all of LAs players based solely on last season is that when they start bouncing back we'll inevitably hear "yeah yeah small sample size."

 

[YP44]

Out of 50 goalies with at least 1,500 minutes last season Quick ranked last in both raw save percentage and save percentage above expected (per both corsica and EvolvingHockey's xG models, by a pretty large margin I might add). I don't think it's impossible for him to bounce back to some degree because goaltending is pretty random, but you absolutely cannot bet 5.8 x 4 on a 33 year old goalie coming off that type of season. He is a negative asset.

neat, how about the 4 games against vegas the year before, Or how about looking at his body of work.

Teams are right to be skeptical of Quick given last year but it cannot be the be all end all.

 

[LGB]

neat, how about the 4 games against vegas the year before, Or how about looking at his body of work.

Teams are right to be skeptical of Quick given last year but it cannot be the be all end all.

It's not the end all be all. If it was he should be bought out.