Not that bad.

Kings should buy him out than do this.

Pretty sure 90% of the kings fan base would agree that there is no rush to get rid of Petersen.

If he has another bad season next season however this mindset would be different......

The Kings have no need to dump Petersen. They can stash him in the AHL until next summer and buy him out with a minimal cap hit.

Also, Demko is not worth Turcotte or a 1st, let alone Turcotte and a 1st. Hard no.

Clearly Demko is worth a 1st and prospect. Maybe more.

Goalies are weird. Peterson could come back and be fine next year. I dont know why you'd pay to dump him now

I'm not sure how "clearly" that is. He's been terrible this year. What's the going rate for a previously good goaltender having a terrible season? Cal Petersen would suggest that it's not very much.

The only difference between the Kings and the Canucks is that LA isn't willing to be bad this year, so they waived Petersen to bring up a better option to win games. Vancouver seems content to let Demko continue to suck and let the team finish in the league basement.

Demko is injured but good one. Anyway I guess Horvat is worth 3 premium assets now that he's been lights out for 3 months. Good logic.

He's 3-10-2 this season with a 3.93 GAA and a .883 SV%. Petersen was 5-3-2 with a 3.75 GAA and a .868 SV% before he was waived. Both were exceptional goaltenders in previous seasons. Explain to me why Demko is worth a 1st and a prospect and Petersen is negative value.

I assume you are referring to Petersen's 20-21 season when you say he used to be good? The only yr he's been a starter. His Goals Saved Above Expected that yr was -3.1(53rd iin the league) Demko that yrs was 9th in the league 6.8. Demko had an even better yr the next yr (last yr) 10.5. He also got a Vezina vote. Petersen last was -8.4. Demko struggled in a small sample size early this season, on a dreadful Canucks team. And it seems you've based his worth on those games. Do you also apply that to players who play well for 10 games? Your reasoning is flawed here.

So ya they are really not comparable. Demko is a top 10 goalie in the league. Petersen is replacement level.

Petersen has supposedly been "bad" this season, however the team was winning games in front of him. The previous years when Petersen had very good stats, the team was dreadful, including during his quality 2020-21 season when the Kings finished near the bottom of the standings. So Petersen is able to play well on a "dreadful" team, while Demko apparently cannot.

Demko WAS a quality goalie in the league. Now he sucks.

Petersen was a quality goalie in the league. Now he sucks.

I'm not saying they're equal value, but it's laughable to suggest that Demko would return a 1st and a prospect while Petersen would require that much just to dump.

He played 15 games. Does that just completely outweigh the 100 games he carried the Canucks on his back? Jeez...

WAS a quality goalie? Are you kidding me, he had a bad 15 games in front of a terrible defense core. He is still a top goalie. Every goalie has short slumps... He was also playing through an injury. Peterson hasn't been good in 3 years. Demko hasn't been good for 20% of the season

You're just so off it is hilarious. Difference is one was elite last year, and one was elite 3 years ago. Peterson has been consistently bad for years now whereas Demko has had a bad FIFTEEN games. He was a top goalie last season.

not only that its not like he came out of nowhere too. Hes was the best goalie in NCAA, then was one of the best goalies when he was in the AHL. Dude has pedigree. But yeah 15 games in, playing injured in front of one of the worst D teams in the NHL. Must be washed lol.

The problem is that it's the most recent 15 games, and no one is going to pay top dollar for a goaltender playing poorly of late. If he comes back and gets 15 quality games under his belt, then maybe someone will pay that. Until then, he's not worth a 1st and a prospect.

Then they just won’t trade Demko now 💀. Crazy how you think 15 games changed their value so much

I agree they won't trade him now. You should never sell low. I'm not the one that made this ACGM.

The Kings aren't looking to dump Petersen or bring on another long-term goaltender now anyway. They're still expecting Petersen to rebound and aren't ready to give up on him.

I think my last post laid out pretty succinctly that Petersen was never the goalie you thought he was. He did not play well on a bad team. He was a -3.1 in goals saved above expected. Your response I think has shown you didn't understand how good Demko has been. He was in on the periphery of the Vezina talk last yr on an awful team.

The simple fact is you are being misled by the traditional counting stats. Wins and save % often don't tell the whole story, so I dont blame you for being unaware. You walked it back from "the only difference is the way the team is treating them" to "Im not saying they're equal value" now you're just 1 more step away from getting it right.

I hear your concern over the 15 games Demko played this season but I would suggest you're overvalueing those 15 games. To give you an idea, even if Demko comes back and he tanks the rest of the season he has far more value than Petersen given he was actually good every yr previously.

I walked nothing back. I never contended they were equal value. I said that they were both good goaltenders that were playing well previously and have not this season, and that it's asinine to think that one should carry top quality value while the other has negative value.

I think you are being misled by GSAx. That stat is similarly flawed because it relies entirely on "high/medium/low danger chances" which are entirely based on where the shot originated. It does not account for odd-man rushes, one-timers, or traffic in front of the net. A shot from the point through traffic will count as low danger, while multiple whacks at a puck from the slot directly into the goaltenders pad will count as multiple high-danger chances.

You like Demko because he's your team's goalie. I get it. I similarly like Cal Petersen because he's my team's goalie. However, I at least admit that he's not playing well and that his value should suffer accordingly. His value is, in fact, negative right now.

I do not believe that Demko's value is negative. He definitely wouldn't clear waivers like Petersen did. However, I do not think anyone would give up a 1st round pick for him. If Vancouver were to retain 25% of his salary, I think they could likely get a 2nd. That's a far cry from "1st and a prospect."

My bad I thought you were smart enough to know when you got it wrong. Then again your logic is that a 15 game sample size negates the previous 3 seasons by Demko. Petersen has never been good as a starter. Even 3 yrs ago when you thought he was good he was below average. That's what you don't seem to get. Since that he has been dreadful for 2 seasons. Demko was bad for 15 games. His previous what 100+ he was good.

I'm more than willing to critically analyze my team's players. You got this one wrong thinking Petersen was a similar case to Demko. There is nothing to suggest that they should be evaluated similarly. You haven't even tried to make any data driven argument to support your feeling on this. If Demko sucks for the rest of this season and then next his value will almost gone, though still it will be better than Petersen's value is currently simply because he has a history of having been good in the league.

Your point regarding gsax is well taken. It could even mean the margin with which Demko is better than Petersen is even greater. Anecdotally I have never seen a team give up as many cross ice free one timers as the Canucks. Bottom line though is stats tend to even out. Your argument that the stats are lying isn't a great one unless you can point to the stats that would prove your point.