A More Forceful Decision Is Needed With Lundqvist

All hail the goalie with one Vezina, a single finals appearance, a penchant for letting in back breaking goals in from behind the goal line, who handles the puck like a pee wee house league D man, and who hasn't been good since getting embarrassed by Pittsburgh 4 years ago. He must never be dictated to. He's The King of the tri-state area and Sweden. Nobody giving a shit about him elsewhere.

I'll agree that the biggest issue on the Rangers is the defensive zone play, particularly the defensemen.

 

His salary is prohibitive given his level of play, which is why it's unlikely he could be traded without the Rangers eating salary.

https://www.spotrac.com/nhl/rankings/average/goaltender/

1 Carey Price $10,500,000

2 Sergei Bobrovsky $10,000,000

3 Henrik Lundqvist $8,500,000

4 Tuukka Rask $7,000,000

5 Marc-Andre Fleury $7,000,000

6 John Gibson $6,400,000

7 Connor Hellebuyck $6,166,667

8 Braden Holtby $6,100,000

9 Corey Crawford $6,000,000

10 Cory Schneider $6,000,000

11 Jonathan Quick $5,800,000

12 Martin Jones $5,750,000

 

So assuming Georgiev gets traded, you are paying a lot of money to Lundqvist to backup Shesterkin and mentor. I understand that the most likely scenario is Lundqvist is here for the next 1.5 years, getting at least 20 starts a year. And I'm OK if this is a hockey decision. Just there's no place in professional hockey for keeping someone on a roster hoping that they can finally get a Cup, or making present/future decisions based on the past. A team has to believe that management is working toward building a contender - otherwise you develop a franchise with a losing culture, not where you want to be with the young players that are developing with the Rangers organization.

Exploring a hypothetical trade - so what if we eat 50%?

He's objectively better than five goalies on that list at this very moment (Jones, Quick, Schneider, Crawford, Bob), and frankly, I'd argue he's on still par with Fleury. Complicate that with the monster deal someone's gonna give Holtby and add Vasilievsky to that list since he's gonna hop over all but Bob and Price, and you're still looking at a pretty decent deal at 4.25M. Doubly so if he just decides to hang em up at the end of the year post-trade.

Carolina, Edmonton, Calgary, Colorado, and Arizona could all use a steady goalie capable of making high-danger saves with regularity. Most of those teams are playoff bound, have the space, and have significant goaltending questions that need answering.

I'm not saying we should make the deal - and I'll be sad if and when we do - but there's almost assuredly one to be had.

Look at the names around the league that have been bought out. His legacy is secure. Professional athletes get told their time is up, before they are ready to retire. I'm mystified as to how a transaction in the best interests of the Rangers is an insult. Lots of elite athletes would play into their 40s or 50s if they were the ones to decide when their time is up.

Let's see these names. How many HOF worthy guys are there?

I get what people are saying. I just think there's this indescribable bond between the organization and Lundqvist. Tons of respect and adoration. If there's a way to cut that umbilical cord and have a mutual agreement, sure I can maybe see that. But the way I'm reading it is it's a "fuck you, get out or we will push you out" mentality.

Lundqvist has said all the right things. Let's hope the Rangers can find a trade partner that gives him that Bourque send off.

I don't see it that way. It's frustrating having him here, because he's both cap punishing and redundant, but his contract is his contract. He can stay here and play 20 games next year. That's fine. He'd probably even do a good job. We can trade Georgiev for something, though I would guess his return would be more of the "futures" variety.

What I find interesting is that he refuses any alternatives. If I knew I weren't wanted, I'd like to think I'd be a little more graceful. It's not as if he's worried about feeding his family, after all. I think he'd rather maintain his social status than go to some backwater and play a potentially meaningful role.

All hail the goalie with one Vezina, a single finals appearance, a penchant for letting in back breaking goals in from behind the goal line, who handles the puck like a pee wee house league D man, and who hasn't been good since getting embarrassed by Pittsburgh 4 years ago. He must never be dictated to. He's The King of the tri-state area and Sweden. Nobody giving a shit about him elsewhere.

Yup. He stunk. Could have done better without him.

This team wasn't going to climb out of the cellar and into a 10+ year of being a cup contender WITHOUT the guy.

I don't see it that way. It's frustrating having him here, because he's both cap punishing and redundant, but his contract is his contract. He can stay here and play 20 games next year. That's fine. He'd probably even do a good job. We can trade Georgiev for something, though I would guess his return would be more of the "futures" variety.

 

What I find interesting is that he refuses any alternatives. If I knew I weren't wanted, I'd like to think I'd be a little more graceful. It's not as if he's worried about feeding his family, after all. I think he'd rather maintain his social status than go to some backwater and play a potentially meaningful role.

I can't imagine a competitor like Hank is OK with what's currently going on, or getting 20 games and a backup role next year behind Shesterkin. He's still an NHL quality starting goalie in my opinion.

I understand he wants to stay and be loyal, and the team wants to be loyal to him by not forcing his hand. It's all admirable stuff, but it's reaching a point where I would start questioning Hank's desire to even play anymore if he's good with a severely limited role. I think he still wants to play (start) and compete.

I don't see it that way. It's frustrating having him here, because he's both cap punishing and redundant, but his contract is his contract. He can stay here and play 20 games next year. That's fine. He'd probably even do a good job. We can trade Georgiev for something, though I would guess his return would be more of the "futures" variety.

 

What I find interesting is that he refuses any alternatives. If I knew I weren't wanted, I'd like to think I'd be a little more graceful. It's not as if he's worried about feeding his family, after all. I think he'd rather maintain his social status than go to some backwater and play a potentially meaningful role.

Why would he only play 20 games? Let's ease off the gas on pinning Shestyorkin as the man just yet.

Seems like everyone is jumping the gun with the goalie situation here. A month ago people were thinking Georgiev was aces. Kinda seems like everyone is on board with trading him, with or without Lundqvist here..

Let's not appoint Shestyorkin as a guy that is automatically going to play 60 + games next year.

Didn't I just read that Lundqvist IS open to ideas and that he knows the situation?

https://nypost.com/2020/02/06/henrik-lundqvists-rangers-prophecy-is-on-the-brink-of-coming-true/

I don't see it that way. It's frustrating having him here, because he's both cap punishing and redundant, but his contract is his contract. He can stay here and play 20 games next year. That's fine. He'd probably even do a good job. We can trade Georgiev for something, though I would guess his return would be more of the "futures" variety.

 

What I find interesting is that he refuses any alternatives. If I knew I weren't wanted, I'd like to think I'd be a little more graceful. It's not as if he's worried about feeding his family, after all. I think he'd rather maintain his social status than go to some backwater and play a potentially meaningful role.

When they asked him about waiving, that was for him, not them.

A vocal minority of fans are the ones who don't want him. If the team didn't want him, he wouldn't be here.

 

When they asked him about waiving, that was for him, not them.

I'm sure they'd prefer he wanted to move on. They have cap issues, his departure would solve one of their questions.

A vocal minority of fans are the ones who don't want him. If the team didn't want him, he wouldn't be here.

 

When they asked him about waiving, that was for him, not them.

Don't think management loves this status quo. But there aren't any teams clamoring to pay him for this kind of average to poor production.Isn't an alternative right now,a t least that we know of.

Similarly think Marc Staal gets a jersey most nights for much the same reasons.

Don't think management loves this status quo. But there aren't any teams clamoring to pay him for this kind of average to poor production.Isn't an alternative right now,a t least that we know of.

 

Similarly think Marc Staal gets a jersey most nights for much the same reasons.

Future is here. Henrik is the past. So is Staal for that matter.

Fans have no skin in the game, only sentiment for not parting with him. The organization meanwhile took really good care of Henrik for many years and paid him close to $100 million.

As far as im concerned, no one owes him anything, especially since he didnt win shit for us

Let's see these names. How many HOF worthy guys are there?

 

I get what people are saying. I just think there's this indescribable bond between the organization and Lundqvist. Tons of respect and adoration. If there's a way to cut that umbilical cord and have a mutual agreement, sure I can maybe see that. But the way I'm reading it is it's a "fuck you, get out or we will push you out" mentality.

 

Lundqvist has said all the right things. Let's hope the Rangers can find a trade partner that gives him that Bourque send off.

Here's the names. In recent history, Patrick Marleau is a future HOF that was bought out.

https://www.capfriendly.com/buyout-history

We could have let Messier suit up for another few years to continue the nostalgia. Maybe the lockout ended his career a year or two too early. We weren't really Stanley Cup contenders anymore. But if we did, that's one less roster spot available.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_New_York_Rangers_seasons

There's no 'fuck you'. There's a we're grateful for your many years of outstanding hockey. You've been well-compensated and given proper accolades. We are rebuilding toward our next run as a playoff contender, and need to given the next young goalie(s) NHL experience, gauge their ability to lead the next playoff campaign.

You could also say that he helped end Tortorella's time with the Rangers. Maybe Torts had lost the locker room, and Lundqvist was one of the messengers to management.

He's also hell on defensemen when he feels like they've screened him and the Rangers give up a goal, showing them up on the ice. So let's not pretend he's a saint.

Here's the names. In recent history, Patrick Marleau is a future HOF that was bought out.

https://www.capfriendly.com/buyout-history

 

We could have let Messier suit up for another few years to continue the nostalgia. Maybe the lockout ended his career a year or two too early. We weren't really Stanley Cup contenders anymore. But if we did, that's one less roster spot available.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_New_York_Rangers_seasons

 

There's no 'fuck you'. There's a we're grateful for your many years of outstanding hockey. You've been well-compensated and given proper accolades. We are rebuilding toward our next run as a playoff contender, and need to given the next young goalie(s) NHL experience, gauge their ability to lead the next playoff campaign.

 

You could also say that he helped end Tortorella's time with the Rangers. Maybe Torts had lost the locker room, and Lundqvist was one of the messengers to management.

 

He's also hell on defensemen when he feels like they've screened him and the Rangers give up a goal, showing them up on the ice. So let's not pretend he's a saint.

Marleau isn't comparable. He left on his own terms for Toronto, who traded him and was bought out by a team that owed him nothing.

Agree they aren't comparable because Lundqvist has had a better career.But it does clarify the NYR owe Lundqvist nothing more than the balance of his contract. Recall Sather gave him this contract in the middle of the SCF.

Problem is in part MSG LOVES selling nostalgia, even when it's almost always misplaced. Are 1994 celebrations an annual thing now? And Lundqvist and his agent know that. Whether that extends to Gorton and Davidson is anyone's guess. But know they don't like overpaying precious cap $ for a #2/3 goalie for the next season plus.

Agree they aren't comparable because Lundqvist has had a better career.But it does clarify the NYR owe Lundqvist nothing more than the balance of his contract. Recall Sather gave him this contract in the middle of the SCF.

 

Problem is in part MSG LOVES selling nostalgia, even when it's almost always misplaced. Are 1994 celebrations an annual thing now? And Lundqvist and his agent know that. Whether that extends to Gorton and Davidson is anyone's guess. But know they don't like overpaying precious cap $ for a #2/3 goalie for the next season plus.

Here's the names. In recent history, Patrick Marleau is a future HOF that was bought out.

https://www.capfriendly.com/buyout-history

 

We could have let Messier suit up for another few years to continue the nostalgia. Maybe the lockout ended his career a year or two too early. We weren't really Stanley Cup contenders anymore. But if we did, that's one less roster spot available.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_New_York_Rangers_seasons

 

There's no 'fuck you'. There's a we're grateful for your many years of outstanding hockey. You've been well-compensated and given proper accolades. We are rebuilding toward our next run as a playoff contender, and need to given the next young goalie(s) NHL experience, gauge their ability to lead the next playoff campaign.

 

You could also say that he helped end Tortorella's time with the Rangers. Maybe Torts had lost the locker room, and Lundqvist was one of the messengers to management.

 

He's also hell on defensemen when he feels like they've screened him and the Rangers give up a goal, showing them up on the ice. So let's not pretend he's a saint.

? That list has one player on it that fits your argument. Corey Perry. Maybe he's a HOFer. Marleau was bought out by the Canes after a trade from Toronto. 2 teams he had no ties to. Had SJ bought him out, you'd have a leg to stand on.

Not sure what your Messier angle is..

Brad Richards Rick Nash and Dan Girardi were likely the spearheads for getting rid of Torts. It was the right move. Not sure what your angle is here either. Guy lost the entire locker room. I'd think Hank was last to complain as the D was set up for tons of shot blocking under Torts.

"Forceful decision" doesn't scream, they should have a nice sit down.

To me, it’s time right now, not at the end of the season, to tell Hank he is in fact being bought out and we are not trading Georgie. Put it in his camp that he can get bought out, traded, or retire

Sounds pretty much like a "fuck you, get out or we will push you out" strategy to me.

? That list has one player on it that fits your argument. Corey Perry. Maybe he's a HOFer. Marleau was bought out by the Canes after a trade from Toronto. 2 teams he had no ties to. Had SJ bought him out, you'd have a leg to stand on.

 

Not sure what your Messier angle is..

 

Brad Richards Rick Nash and Dan Girardi were likely the spearheads for getting rid of Torts. It was the right move. Not sure what your angle is here either. Guy lost the entire locker room. I'd think Hank was last to complain as the D was set up for tons of shot blocking under Torts.

 

"Forceful decision" doesn't scream, they should have a nice sit down.

 

 

 

Sounds pretty much like a "fuck you, get out or we will push you out" strategy to me.

Ok so what? The team is better without his contract next year. It’s just that simple. It’s very unfortunate that the cards all folded this way

"I don't know if I'll stay with the Rangers my entire career," said the 37-year-old goalie, who has two seasons remaining on a seven-year contract he signed Dec. 4, 2013. "I have two years left on my deal and it has always been my goal to stay with the Rangers, but once you get up there in age you never know. I know what I want, but if the club has other ideas I know I'll have to listen. You can't just do your own thing.

 

"Sometimes the dream might not work out in the end … we'll see what happens. Right now all my focus is on the upcoming World Championships."

 

https://sportsbetforum.net/2019/05/07/henrik-lundqvist-unsure-if-hell-finish-career-with-rangers/

https://sportsbetforum.net/2019/05/07/henrik-lundqvist-unsure-if-hell-finish-career-with-rangers/

Yeah he back treaded a bit but he sort of understands this. Gretzky, Messier, Sundin, Leetch, et al were traded, not tenured contracts, etc.

You really think there won’t be any hard feelings if Hank after next season says he wants to keep playing and the Rangers say sorry no, not even reaching out to him? Remaining on the team next year hurts us. Fine, he’s as good as Georgiev. He’s also carrying a hell of a lot more cap and his cap space, even the 4m bought out, means there is a lot better chance to keep Strome AND ADA rather than just one.

Yes he back peddled that staetement too but he gets it.

Ok so what? The team is better without his contract next year. It’s just that simple. It’s very unfortunate that the cards all folded this way

 

 

 

https://sportsbetforum.net/2019/05/07/henrik-lundqvist-unsure-if-hell-finish-career-with-rangers/

 

https://sportsbetforum.net/2019/05/07/henrik-lundqvist-unsure-if-hell-finish-career-with-rangers/

 

Yeah he back treaded a bit but he sort of understands this. Gretzky, Messier, Sundin, Leetch, et al were traded, not tenured contracts, etc.

 

You really think there won’t be any hard feelings if Hank after next season says he wants to keep playing and the Rangers say sorry no, not even reaching out to him? Remaining on the team next year hurts us. Fine, he’s as good as Georgiev. He’s also carrying a hell of a lot more cap and his cap space, even the 4m bought out, means there is a lot better chance to keep Strome AND ADA rather than just one.

 

Yes he back peddled that staetement too but he gets it.

Nobody is denying that they are better off without the contract. The marriage between the player and the organization is the issue. Both sides want a clean break and to walk away with no hard feelings. I feel like you just want to argue. My point is that they aren't going to push him out the door. They aren't going to make him play so little that he demands out. They aren't going to threaten him with a buy out if he doesn't agree to a trade.. not sure how your missing that exact point.

Your examples of players who were traded bears no weight at all in a totally different situation and era. Gretzky asked to be traded. Messier HAD to be traded. Sundin wanted to retire. Leetch was traded and played what? One more season? The team was tearing it all down. He didn't have a no trade clause. There was no salary cap..

This is totally different.

Hes as good as Georgiev??? I can't take you seriously if that's what you think. If Lundqvist wants to play here after next year and accepts a back up role at back up pay.. I sign him without a NTC. This attitude that he's washed up and can't play at an above average level is something I disagree with incredibly.

Nobody is denying that they are better off without the contract. The marriage between the player and the organization is the issue. Both sides want a clean break and to walk away with no hard feelings. I feel like you just want to argue. My point is that they aren't going to push him out the door. They aren't going to make him play so little that he demands out. They aren't going to threaten him with a buy out if he doesn't agree to a trade.. not sure how your missing that exact point.

 

Your examples of players who were traded bears no weight at all in a totally different situation and era. Gretzky asked to be traded. Messier HAD to be traded. Sundin wanted to retire. Leetch was traded and played what? One more season? The team was tearing it all down. He didn't have a no trade clause. There was no salary cap..

 

This is totally different.

 

Hes as good as Georgiev??? I can't take you seriously if that's what you think. If Lundqvist wants to play here after next year and accepts a back up role at back up pay.. I sign him without a NTC. This attitude that he's washed up and can't play at an above average level is something I disagree with incredibly.

Wait, you quote me from like 120 messages ago and I’m the one that wants to argue? I f you never take me seriously that’s fine. Who cares? Lol. It’s a message board. We discuss things. Otherwise what’s the point of the board?

Their stats are nearly identical this year. Would I start Henrik in a big playoff game over Georgiev today? Of course. They don’t have to worry about that though. The difference is, one player has a chance to trend upwards. One does not on this team. I’ve never said Hank is washed up. He’s just not an 8m goalie and his career is almost over. Having him on the roster next year just isn’t in our best interests , especially with two young goalies on a team with a top notch goalie coach.

If the Rangers were poised for a cup run next year this would be a different conversation. I just think it’s ridiculous to have to say goodbye to another young player, be it goalie or 24/26 year old rfa because we have to instead go through a Hank goodbye tour and distraction next year all season.

And yeah. Messier HAD to be traded. So does Henrik but it seems the only way that would happen is if he’s basically approached in a different way than previously. The Rangers really don’t owe him any more than they’ve already done.

He’s played 4 games in 2020. I’m sure a part of this is to see if Hank changes his mind. Bringing up players that have left their team in various situations might not mean anything to YOU but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t mean anything to the fans of an organization. Trading a player like Leetch or not signing Messier are two example with THIS organization that guys not asking to leave have left yet the fan base goes on. Why is it different when Leetch gets traded and only plays one more year? Hank is going to play.....about 1 more year or possibly 2.

There. That was Leetch. He got over it. Hank would too. Era doesn’t matter one iota in my mind. Hell, being bought out allows you to negotiate on your own with every other team rather than the team trying to find a trade fit.

Exploring a hypothetical trade - so what if we eat 50%?

 

He's objectively better than five goalies on that list at this very moment (Jones, Quick, Schneider, Crawford, Bob), and frankly, I'd argue he's on still par with Fleury. Complicate that with the monster deal someone's gonna give Holtby and add Vasilievsky to that list since he's gonna hop over all but Bob and Price, and you're still looking at a pretty decent deal at 4.25M. Doubly so if he just decides to hang em up at the end of the year post-trade.

 

Carolina, Edmonton, Calgary, Colorado, and Arizona could all use a steady goalie capable of making high-danger saves with regularity. Most of those teams are playoff bound, have the space, and have significant goaltending questions that need answering.

 

I'm not saying we should make the deal - and I'll be sad if and when we do - but there's almost assuredly one to be had.

There's a lot of moving parts that would have to fall into place for a trade to work.

1. Lundqvist would have to decide he was willing to leave the Rangers.

2. A playoff contender would have to decide Lundqvist was the missing piece for a deep playoff run.

3. Rangers and team would have to come up with a trade that made sense. How many quality years would the acquiring team be looking to get from Lundqvist?

You came up with an interesting list of teams. Colorado, Carolina, and Arizona lack a clear no. 1, but have been good enough in goal. Other than St Louis, the Western Conference doesn't have much separation.

Of your list, I'd say with Edmonton's lineup, they are most capable of a deep playoff run with an upgrade in goal. Is Lundqvist willing to accept a trade to Edmonton at this point of his career?

I still think the most likely scenario is that Lundqvist plays the next year and a half in New York. Maybe during the summer there's more time to figure something out. But I'd bet a month's paycheck that he's with the Rangers through the end of next season.