Jump to content
  • Join us — it's free!

    We are the premiere internet community for New York Rangers news and fan discussion. Don't wait — join the forum today!

IGNORED

Georgiev to Toronto?


Phil

Recommended Posts

If that's all we get then that's all we get, but I wouldn't be happy about it. At this point in time, I need more than that.

 

Doesn't mean we can't pair him up with someone to get a better haul, but on his own, I don't really see a whole lot more than that in return.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 187
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'd be happy with a #2 for 2020....for Georgie alone.

 

I wouldn't.

 

We have a good history of bringing backups to starter level roles and cashing in on them. We got a 2nd, a 3rd, and a 6th for Talbot and a 7th, and we sold high enough on Raanta (figure DeAngelo for Raanta?) in that deal. I'd want more than a late 2nd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't.

 

We have a good history of bringing backups to starter level roles and cashing in on them. We got a 2nd, a 3rd, and a 6th for Talbot and a 7th, and we sold high enough on Raanta (figure DeAngelo for Raanta?) in that deal. I'd want more than a late 2nd.

 

Talbot Rangers stats

53W 33L, .931 SV%, 2.00GAA, .623 Quality start Percentage

Raanta Rangers stats

44W 27L, .921 SV%, 2.25GAA, .682 Quality start Percentage

George Rangers stats

52W 26L, .918 SV%, 2.89GAA, .558 Quality start Percentage

 

Talbot and Raanta just a slight tick better than Georgie.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not going to rehash my Georgiev argument from the other thread, read that if you wish but I'll use this thread to argue that Lehner and Varlamov are his strongest comparables for trades. Lehner and Varlamov were both dealt at age 24, Varlamov upon expiration of his ELC and Lehner in the midst of second deal worth $6.675M over three years. Varlamov signed for $8.499M over three years upon being traded.

 

At the time they were both dealt their stat lines were as follows:

 

Varlamov GP: 59 GS: 53 W: 30 L: 13 OT: 12 SV%: .917 GAA: 2.39 SO: 4

Lehner GP: 86 GS: 76 W: 30 L: 36 OT: 13 SV: 914 GAA: 2.88 SO: 2

 

Varlamov also made 18 playoff starts of which he won 10 and posted a .915 SV%, 2.49 GAA and 2 shutouts. I think most of us can remember how well he played in those playoffs from firsthand account but keep in mind he was also on a Capitals team that won four straight divisional championships and won a Presidents Trophy in his second season.

 

Lehner made 2 playoff appearances but only ever in relief. The Senators weren't a great team at the time but they made the playoffs three out of his five seasons with the team.

 

Now let's look at Georgiev who is soon to be 24 and on an expiring ELC:

 

GP: 57 GS: 52 W: 26 L: 22 OT: 6 SV%: .918 GAA: 2.89 SO: 4

 

His numbers are pretty damn close to both and all while playing on worse teams. He's in an identical situation to Varlamov contract wise while Lehner was just a season into his second deal upon being dealt. Lehner was dealt right before the 2015 draft for the 21st overall pick. Varlamov was dealt during the summer for a 1st and 2nd round pick. You should be selling Georgiev for something of equivalent value. The Capitals sold high on Varlamov while dealing with a three-headed goalie monster of their own with Holtby and Neuvirth.

 

Any argument about Raanta and Talbot and what they got doesn't really matter. Talbot was soon to be 28 when he was dealt and had a one year deal he had signed via extension the season prior. Raanta was 28 when he was dealt and had just the second year of a two year deal remaining after which he would become a UFA. There's a reason they didn't get as much as we would've liked despite our efforts to compare them to the former two goalies at the time. The only goaltender who could remotely be a comparable for them was Schneider, 27 at the time of his deal, who seems more like an exception than the rule.

 

Georgiev is 24 and an RFA. That gives him more value than Raanta and Talbot. Then you look at his performance relative to two goaltender trades that match his situation. If you sell him for just a second round pick then you've gotten hosed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Talbot Rangers stats

53W 33L, .931 SV%, 2.00GAA, .623 Quality start Percentage

Raanta Rangers stats

44W 27L, .921 SV%, 2.25GAA, .682 Quality start Percentage

George Rangers stats

52W 26L, .918 SV%, 2.89GAA, .558 Quality start Percentage

 

Talbot and Raanta just a slight tick better than Georgie.

 

I'd argue the defense those two played in front of was more than a tick better than what we've got now, no? There's also the matter of trading for team control for multiple years without a big ass contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Talbot Rangers stats

53W 33L, .931 SV%, 2.00GAA, .623 Quality start Percentage

Raanta Rangers stats

44W 27L, .921 SV%, 2.25GAA, .682 Quality start Percentage

George Rangers stats

52W 26L, .918 SV%, 2.89GAA, .558 Quality start Percentage

 

Talbot and Raanta just a slight tick better than Georgie.

 

Different eras tho. No joke, goal scoring significantly up and goaltending stats significantly down these past two years. .918 in this NHL is really good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Talbot Rangers stats

53W 33L, .931 SV%, 2.00GAA, .623 Quality start Percentage

Raanta Rangers stats

44W 27L, .921 SV%, 2.25GAA, .682 Quality start Percentage

George Rangers stats

52W 26L, .918 SV%, 2.89GAA, .558 Quality start Percentage

 

Talbot and Raanta just a slight tick better than Georgie.

 

Yeah but those were much better defensive teams that Talbot and Raanta were playing behind. What would Georgie's stats have been on those rosters? Probably comparable, if not better.

 

Edit - Sorry for the redundant post, I see it was already addressed above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Different eras tho. No joke, goal scoring significantly up and goaltending stats significantly down these past two years. .918 in this NHL is really good.

 

Quality start percentage equalizes that, a bit, no?

 

"Starts with SV% > average SV% for the year, or at least 88.5% on nights with 20 or fewer shots against."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't.

 

We have a good history of bringing backups to starter level roles and cashing in on them. We got a 2nd, a 3rd, and a 6th for Talbot and a 7th, and we sold high enough on Raanta (figure DeAngelo for Raanta?) in that deal. I'd want more than a late 2nd.

 

Don't get me wrong, G-Man!! I'd take a better deal for sure...I just don't think Georgie is going to bring that big of a return this year. I think teams are going to be coveting their picks a little more knowing that this draft of 2020 is supposed to be better and deeper than the last few.

 

But like I said, I'd take whatever they send us more than a "deuce" ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Raanta passed Hank in his last season here. Just check the numbers, he beat Hank silly. Had he played against Ottawa we probably beat them. He's really, really good. His issue is health and the other guy in Arizona is also really really good.

 

They packaged him with Derek Stepan for an early 1st and Deangelo. That's a pretty good return.

 

I really don't understand why he's referred to as a backup here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Raanta passed Hank in his last season here. Just check the numbers, he beat Hank silly. Had he played against Ottawa we probably beat them. He's really, really good. His issue is health and the other guy in Arizona is also really really good.

 

They packaged him with Derek Stepan for an early 1st and Deangelo. That's a pretty good return.

 

I really don't understand why he's referred to as a backup here.

 

That's way too easy to say. Even though Lundqvist had a poor regular season that year, he still posted stellar playoff numbers.

 

He's a backup because... he backed up Lundqvist lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Should call up Shesty for a cup of coffee before all the Georgie trade talk IMO

 

+1 No way they can make future plans on a goalie who never touched the ice in an NHL game. Knowing Lundys window is coming to a close; I was concerned we were going to revisit the Mike Dunham, Kevin Weekes days in NY. These two are a blessing, one of them has to work out. Hopefully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12. I’m not convinced Toronto’s going to alter its backup situation. They just don’t seem enamoured with what’s out there. Tristan Jarry’s gone from potential trade target to Pittsburgh record-holder, with a shutout streak of 177:15 ended by the Canadiens. Until a long-term decision is made with Matt Murray, will the Penguins move either Jarry or Casey DeSmith? There’s a lot of love for Alexandar Georgiev — and deservedly so, he looks terrific — who is three games from becoming waiver-eligible. The Rangers have Igor Shesterkin lighting up AHL Hartford in his first North American season, but 37-year-old future Hall-of-Famer Henrik Lundqvist is signed for only one more year. Is Georgiev/Shesterkin the future?

 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/31-thoughts-jim-montgomery-firing-hockeys-latest-bombshell/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Acquiring Panarin and Trouba suggests the franchise believes that it is ready to compete. Trading Georgiev and going with Lundqvist/Shest would be an admission that Rangers are still in rebuilding mode, especially with the limited trade return of a draft pick. I think we aren't serious contenders until 2022-2023 so I'm OK with turning the next year plus into the Lundqvist farewell tour and giving an opportunity for Shest to play, and expect our ceiling to be a first round playoff exit.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Acquiring Panarin and Trouba suggests the franchise believes that it is ready to compete. Trading Georgiev and going with Lundqvist/Shest would be an admission that Rangers are still in rebuilding mode, especially with the limited trade return of a draft pick. I think we aren't serious contenders until 2022-2023 so I'm OK with turning the next year plus into the Lundqvist farewell tour and giving an opportunity for Shest to play, and expect our ceiling to be a first round playoff exit.

 

This isn't true. You need NHL players to field and build a team. You need good ones. Why not start building your lineup with good players when they're available? You can't possibly ice a team of 24 rookies and expect good results.

 

So they add Trouba and Panarin to help them improve from last season, which they have. You continue to tinker. You see where you're at at the deadline - maybe trade Kreider, maybe trade Fast or whoever depending on the situation. Trading or keeping Georgie doesn't signify anything, IMO. If they can get something good for him, they probably think about it long and hard. But if not, there's no harm in hanging on to him.

 

Let's be clear: the best path forward for this team is Shesterkin/Georgiev, not Shesterkin/Hank.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn't true. You need NHL players to field and build a team. You need good ones. Why not start building your lineup with good players when they're available? You can't possibly ice a team of 24 rookies and expect good results.

 

So they add Trouba and Panarin to help them improve from last season, which they have. You continue to tinker. You see where you're at at the deadline - maybe trade Kreider, maybe trade Fast or whoever depending on the situation. Trading or keeping Georgie doesn't signify anything, IMO. If they can get something good for him, they probably think about it long and hard. But if not, there's no harm in hanging on to him.

 

Let's be clear: the best path forward for this team is Shesterkin/Georgiev, not Shesterkin/Hank.

 

1. I'll buy your premise that Trouba and Panarin is improvement from last season.

2. I'll buy your premise that the team will tinker and could make some deadline deals.

3. I'll buy your premise that the best path forward for this team is Shesterkin/Georgiev.

 

But I have no idea how this team would end up with Shesterkin/Georgiev.

https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/rangers

 

Lundqvist has got almost 2 years left on his contract, Georgiev is a restricted free agent after this year. Lundqvist has shown no inclination to be willing to give up the NMC to be traded nor any inclination to retire. You'd have to keep Shesterkin buried in the minors until next year some time, and sign Georgiev with raise, since he is still on entry-level contract. I don't know how you juggle the contracts until Lundqvist's deal expires.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. I'll buy your premise that Trouba and Panarin is improvement from last season.

2. I'll buy your premise that the team will tinker and could make some deadline deals.

3. I'll buy your premise that the best path forward for this team is Shesterkin/Georgiev.

 

But I have no idea how this team would end up with Shesterkin/Georgiev.

https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/rangers

 

Lundqvist has got almost 2 years left on his contract, Georgiev is a restricted free agent after this year. Lundqvist has shown no inclination to be willing to give up the NMC to be traded nor any inclination to retire. You'd have to keep Shesterkin buried in the minors until next year some time, and sign Georgiev with raise, since he is still on entry-level contract. I don't know how you juggle the contracts until Lundqvist's deal expires.

 

The contract juggling is a non-issue. The Rangers have the cap space to re-sign Georgiev if they wish to do so. He won't cost very much on a bridge deal. The issue is convincing Shesterkin to stay in the AHL another year. He can go back to Russia on account of his European Assignment Clause, which isn't an issue, but he could also very well decide not to re-sign with the Rangers when his ELC expires after next season and just stay in Russia.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn't true. You need NHL players to field and build a team. You need good ones. Why not start building your lineup with good players when they're available? You can't possibly ice a team of 24 rookies and expect good results.

 

So they add Trouba and Panarin to help them improve from last season, which they have. You continue to tinker. You see where you're at at the deadline - maybe trade Kreider, maybe trade Fast or whoever depending on the situation. Trading or keeping Georgie doesn't signify anything, IMO. If they can get something good for him, they probably think about it long and hard. But if not, there's no harm in hanging on to him.

 

Let's be clear: the best path forward for this team is Shesterkin/Georgiev, not Shesterkin/Hank.

This never happens in the NHL. You, inevitably, have to make a move (that is, if you think these guys are NHL starter caliber)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The contract juggling is a non-issue. The Rangers have the cap space to re-sign Georgiev if they wish to do so. He won't cost very much on a bridge deal. The issue is convincing Shesterkin to stay in the AHL another year. He can go back to Russia on account of his European Assignment Clause, which isn't an issue, but he could also very well decide not to re-sign with the Rangers when his ELC expires after next season and just stay in Russia.

 

agreed. might be one of the most important deCisions gorts/davidson will make in their tenure.

 

not sure i agree with having to trade one. this league is definitely moving towards having to goalies split more or less an equal load.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

agreed. might be one of the most important deCisions gorts/davidson will make in their tenure.

 

not sure i agree with having to trade one. this league is definitely moving towards having to goalies split more or less an equal load.

 

I disagree. While we dont see Brodeurs playing 80 games anymore, we also dont see 1B goalies. Anytime there is close to being a tandem, or 1B, there is a trade made... because it doesnt work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...