On Tuesday, the Kings sent UFA Ben Bishop's negotiating rights to the Dallas Stars for a 2017 fourth-round draft pick. A couple days later, Dallas announced that they had signed the 30-year-old netminder to a six-year, $29.5 million dollar contract.
This sums up the Bishop trade for Los Angeles:
Despite all the criticism that Dean Lombardi received for this deal, I thought it was a clever move for the playoff push, essentially adding a potential impact player for a prospect in Erik Cernak who had
lost some luster.
That Bishop didn't play particularly well in his handful of Kings appearances probably speaks more to the volatility of goaltending in small sample sizes, as opposed to his actual talent. Jim Nill agrees, I imagine.
Anyway, shortly after Lombardi was sacked,
reports emerged that he had wanted to keep Bishop. This brought a fresh wave of ridicule on the deposed GM. After all, in the salary cap era, where's the wisdom in investing 10 million-plus in two starting goalies?
But what if he had intended to re-sign Bishop...and trade Jonathan Quick?
Now I have no idea why Lombardi may have wanted to keep Bishop. Perhaps he intended to trot out a Quick-Bishop one-two punch.
But there was a case for Los Angeles to explore a Quick trade.
Before we get there though, let's run down the reasons why the Kings didn't/shouldn't have considered dealing Quick:
•
Quick is a Kings institution. Parting with a sentimental favorite of his stature would be devastating to the fanbase. Of course, it wouldn't be the first time in franchise history -- the organization has traded Marcel Dionne, Luc Robitaille, Wayne Gretzky, and Rob Blake, while allowing Rogie Vachon and Robitaille to walk as free agents.
•
As much as the fans love Quick, he seems equally beloved and respected by his teammates. While it's difficult to pinpoint his exact "intangible" value, he is acknowledged as a locker room leader.
•
He's a two-time Cup winner. While it's easy to say so-and-so goalie could've accomplished the same feat in Quick's stead, especially in 2014, the fact is he has enough rings to plug his ears and most goaltenders don't.
•
Quick is arguably the better netminder. While Quick and Bishop both suffered injury-plagued campaigns, Quick (.917 Overall Save %, +1.71 Adjusted Fenwick Save %) outperformed his counterpart (.910, -0.23). Even from 2013-16, when Bishop starred with a pair of Vezina finalist finishes, Quick had a superior Adj.FSv% (+0.7 to +0.45), though Bishop owned the Save % edge (.922 to .917). So beyond reputation, there's some statistical argument in Quick's favor -- he also received the nod as Team USA's starter in the World Cup. Bishop served as his backup.
(Adjusted Fenwick Save Percentage “shows if a goalie is saving more or less shots than an average NHL goalie would be expected to save if they faced the same quality of unblocked shots.”)
This leads us into why LA should've at least considered trading Quick:
•
Quick is generally thought of as the superior goalie, so he should have greater trade value than Bishop. For a cap-strapped, top-heavy squad like the Kings, you have to consider every option to improve your team, especially when you're operating under the guise of being a Stanley Cup contender. It's a big if, but what if Quick could have brought back a legitimate top-six forward or top-four defender?
•
Los Angeles would've saved money. This is assuming Bishop would've signed the same Stars deal with the Kings. Let's say he was willing and the organization sent Quick off -- that would represent an almost 900K cap hit difference (Bishop $4.916, Quick $5.8 million AAV). That's also another way the roster could potentially be improved. Both contracts end in 2023; Quick will be 37, Bishop 36.
•
Bishop would be a more-than-adequate replacement. From 2013-16, the two-time Vezina finalist won 112 games and boasted a .922 Save %. In that span of time, this is tied for most wins and sixth-best Save % out of 37 qualified keepers (5000+ minutes) -- for what it's worth, Quick's 103 wins is third, while his .917 Save % is 18th. Bishop is also a proven playoff performer with two Conference Finals appearances to his credit.
Ultimately, as distasteful as it might be, I hope the Kings at least did their due diligence and checked on Quick's trade value around the league.
***
On Tuesday, Los Angeles also signed Tanner Pearson to a four-year, $15 million extension. This $3.75 million AAV represents a solid value for a 24-year-old winger who scored 24 goals last year. Players under similar terms include Anders Lee, Jakob Silfverberg, and Cody Eakin. Lee, Silfverberg, and Eakin all signed four-year extensions as 24-year-olds in 2015.
This leaves almost 11-14 million (depending on whether or not the salary cap rises) in cap space for RFAs Tyler Toffoli, Andy Andreoff, Nick Shore, Jonny Brodzinski, Michael Mersch, Paul LaDue, and Kevin Gravel. Los Angeles will probably also be in the market for a veteran back-up goalie.
Considering Toffoli's down year, which is likely to lower his salary demands, there should be no issue fielding a similar squad to last year's. But how much Blake can improve the Kings this summer with the remaining cap space is still in question.
***
Stats as of 5/14/17, courtesy of Behind the Net, Corsica, Hockey Analysis, Hockey Reference, Natural Stat Trick, NHL.com, Puckalytics, and Sporting Charts.
++++I AM CURRENTLY LOOKING FOR ADVERTISERS! If you, or anyone you know would be interested in placing an ad here at HockeyBuzz, then send me a PM!++++
Blogger • 
Join the Discussion:
»