Hyperfocus on NYR Goalies

Over the years, the Rangers have been fortunate to have great goaltending. In my years as fan, Lundqvist, Richter, and Vanbiesbrouck top the list.

 

Appreciation for the Rangers goalies reached a crescendo during peak Lundqvist years, where he was an important component in deep playoff runs.

 

IMO, fan focus on Lundqvist's play overshadowed the contributions of the skaters during these runs. The closest equivalent I can think of is the Canadien fan fixation on Carey Price, given the long history of great Montreal goaltenders (Roy, Dryden, Plante, etc.). Montreal fans are perpetually in wait for the next savior in goal to bring a cup back to Montreal, last with Roy in 1993.

https://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/MTL/1993.html

 

IMO, the largest problems for the Rangers are the play of our defensemen in our defensive zone, and the year-long tendency to give up too many quality offensive scoring chances and shots on goal. That should be management and coaches first concern. In the offseason, the next priority is forward lines. It would be great to add another quality offensive threat for the top two lines.

 

Hyperfocus on Shesterkin/Lundqvist/Georgiev is taking away from attention to the fundamental flaws in this roster. Sure, goaltenders can 'steal' games by facing absurd shot totals and making highlight reel saves. A goalie can keep a team in a game when they are vastly outplayed by the opposition. But ultimately, we need upgraded play from our skaters - both defensemen and forwards - before the Rangers become a team capable of a deep playoff run.

I assure you nobody is looking past the fact that our d zone play is abysmal

Over the years, the Rangers have been fortunate to have great goaltending. In my years as fan, Lundqvist, Richter, and Vanbiesbrouck top the list.

 

Appreciation for the Rangers goalies reached a crescendo during peak Lundqvist years, where he was an important component in deep playoff runs.

 

IMO, fan focus on Lundqvist's play overshadowed the contributions of the skaters during these runs. The closest equivalent I can think of is the Canadien fan fixation on Carey Price, given the long history of great Montreal goaltenders (Roy, Dryden, Plante, etc.). Montreal fans are perpetually in wait for the next savior in goal to bring a cup back to Montreal, last with Roy in 1993.

https://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/MTL/1993.html

 

IMO, the largest problems for the Rangers are the play of our defensemen in our defensive zone, and the year-long tendency to give up too many quality offensive scoring chances and shots on goal. That should be management and coaches first concern. In the offseason, the next priority is forward lines. It would be great to add another quality offensive threat for the top two lines.

 

Hyperfocus on Shesterkin/Lundqvist/Georgiev is taking away from attention to the fundamental flaws in this roster. Sure, goaltenders can 'steal' games by facing absurd shot totals and making highlight reel saves. A goalie can keep a team in a game when they are vastly outplayed by the opposition. But ultimately, we need upgraded play from our skaters - both defensemen and forwards - before the Rangers become a team capable of a deep playoff run.

You're 100% correct. And some have acknowledged that it doesn't matter who's in net because when this team eats it, they eat it hard like they did vs Philly twice and last night. When the offense shows up, you still get Caps game.

 

On top of that, you know people have lost their minds when Lundqvist sits for a month and the team has a stinker and he gets the blame... And then Shesty sits for injury, comes back and the team has the stinker but Shesty gets a pass completely.

 

Let's have some perspective and judge the goalies as individuals in their own situations.

Soooo... Who should start in goal for the game vs. Dallas?

The Rangers have had the good fortune to have a long series of goalies who were No. 1 for close to or exceeding 10 years: Worsley, Giacomin, Richter, Hank, and probably can add Beezer in there. The periods between these guys, post Giacomin pre Beezer-Richter and post Richter pre Hank, tended to be lame.

 

I wouldn't mind a Hank start at the moment while Sheshty has several days of intensive workouts.

The Rangers have had the good fortune to have a long series of goalies who were No. 1 for close to or exceeding 10 years: Worsley, Giacomin, Richter, Hank, and probably can add Beezer in there. The periods between these guys, post Giacomin pre Beezer-Richter and post Richter pre Hank, tended to be lame.

 

I wouldn't mind a Hank start at the moment while Sheshty has several days of intensive workouts.

 

Crazy as it is, the intermittent periods weren't even that bad. We brought in the corpse of Sawchuk at one point, Gilles Villemure, John Davidson, Chuck Rayner, Jacques Plante, Jussi Markkanen, Mike Dunham....okay, those last two were rough, but it was like two seasons!

 

We've had this unreal streak of going from great goalie to great goalie since damn near the late 60s with few if any years of true uncertainty.

 

Heck, in an alternate reality, we open post lockout with a goalie controversy, as anointed #1 top pick Dan Blackburn faces off against some Swedish wunderkind with a q and a v in his last name.

Different situations. Villemure was part of the second half of the Giacomin era. JD, much as we love him, was part of a good playoff run one year but was injury prone and not an elite goalie otherwise. Sawchuk appear in six regular season games. Plante had two uncharacteristically weak seasons with the Rangers, got send to the minors, retired for four years, and then came back a played well for ages after that. Rayner was an HOF goalie who had a relatively short career due to bum knee. Mike Dunham, please, I'm trying to forget those years.

I used to see Gilles Villemure drive a sulky during the summer months when he raced trotters/pacers at Monticello Raceway. As a young Rangers fan I was psyched to see him but always wondered, ?Why is he doing that??

 

And when the time comes for retirement, Benoit Allaire?s jersey should hang from the rafters.

Traditionally the Rangers have almost always been very strong in goal. Yeah, there have been some transitional years where there weren't some great ones. Although, Mike Dunham was fantastic his first year here and almost got that team into the playoffs. But, we've been pretty fortunate to have had the goaltending we've had. Even going way back to the likes of Dave Kerr and Lorne Chabot who I think both should be in the Hall of Fame.

You're 100% correct. And some have acknowledged that it doesn't matter who's in net because when this team eats it, they eat it hard like they did vs Philly twice and last night. When the offense shows up, you still get Caps game.

 

On top of that, you know people have lost their minds when Lundqvist sits for a month and the team has a stinker and he gets the blame... And then Shesty sits for injury, comes back and the team has the stinker but Shesty gets a pass completely.

 

Let's have some perspective and judge the goalies as individuals in their own situations.

 

When you read game day threads or other sections of the forum enough, sometimes you see trends with users.

User x - Lundqvist loyalist

User y - Shesterkin next great NHL goalie

etc.

And you'll see consistent patterns with posting. Lundqvist loyalist will consistently praise Lundqvist, or say nothing when Lundqvist has a tough game. Shesterkin advocate will consistently praise Shesterkin, or say nothing when Shesterkin has a tough game. I understand that people take a stance, and want to stay consistent with a particular stance. Zucc was one of my favorite Rangers, but to be honest, I had to be able to admit when he had a rough game. It's being honest with all available data, instead of just selecting a subset of data to support your position.

^You're being too rational.

When you read game day threads or other sections of the forum enough, sometimes you see trends with users.

User x - Lundqvist loyalist

User y - Shesterkin next great NHL goalie

etc.

And you'll see consistent patterns with posting. Lundqvist loyalist will consistently praise Lundqvist, or say nothing when Lundqvist has a tough game. Shesterkin advocate will consistently praise Shesterkin, or say nothing when Shesterkin has a tough game. I understand that people take a stance, and want to stay consistent with a particular stance. Zucc was one of my favorite Rangers, but to be honest, I had to be able to admit when he had a rough game. It's being honest with all available data, instead of just selecting a subset of data to support your position.

I think you're right but also this forum doesn't allow 2 things to be true (opinion A and opinion B) or people to change their mind (oh, you're backtracking!)

 

So to have something good to say about Lundqvist means you hate Shesterkin.

 

My $.02 is that it's clear Lundqvist is the past but you don't have to shit, kick, piss and spit on him on the way out. Shesty is clearly the future and a stud in the making but he's not that, yet, and has a lot to prove. And that's OK when his career is a dozen games old.

Henrik Lundqvist has always been kryptonite to calm, reasoned debate.

My personal opinion is that a large section of the Rangers fanbase simply cannot compute how great he's been.

So I couldn't agree more Pete. I understand that the contract has become a sore point and an obvious issue, but at least have the fucking tact and grace to allow bonafide legend a decent send off.

The Lundqvist situation is awkward and hard to watch because of how many great years he had. By giving him few or no starts, the organization is hammering home that the Rangers want to go with Shesterkin or other options, and if he wants to play regularly it will be with a different team. Consistently sending this message because of the contract and declining play (compared to past years) has taken higher priority than giving Lundqvist the satisfaction of a few games down the stretch.

 

And when Georgiev has a bad start or there is question whether Shesterkin was rushed back or fully healthy leading to a bad start, it's natural to wonder why Lundqvist can't get a start or two. But organizations worry about backtracking as much as users do.

Who knew if Shesterkin was really even ready to go the other day, but that's just how much they don't want to start Lundqvist. He was relegated to mop up duty. Not making the playoffs isn't a failure by any stretch, but they do want to go get in, and they believe Lundqvist not playing is going to help. I will give him a ton of credit, though. Obviously he's not happy about it, but he's handled it like a pro. He hasn't made a scene and bitched and moaned to the media. He's still genuinely happy for Georgiev's and Shesterkin's success and wants to see them and the team do well. But, this is totally eating him up inside.

We all feel for Lundqvist in one way or another, but a little perspective is required. He has been given plenty of opportunity to control his destiny. Stay and realize youth is coming in...or leave. He chose to stay. That's understandable if he didn't want to uproot his family and go elsewhere for a few years, but people are forced to uproot and move for job opportunity all of the time and they don't have millions of dollars in the bank to boot. That's not disrespectful. That's life.

 

I've truly enjoyed watching Lundqvist throughout his career. My only jersey is a Lundqvist. My only Rangers autographed item is a framed Lundqvist picture. He represents an entire era of Rangers hockey I've been able to enjoy. Unfortunately there is a "but" attached in the fact that it resulted in no Cup win. Not his fault, but when there's no Cup to show for it, it makes it a whole lot harder from an organizational standpoint to stunt player and team development for the sake of appeasing a single player at the end of his career. Franchise Ranger or not.

 

I found it much harder to watch how Eli Manning was handled. The guy won two Super Bowls and was dragged through the mud much more than Lundqvist.

Who knew if Shesterkin was really even ready to go the other day, but that's just how much they don't want to start Lundqvist. He was relegated to mop up duty. Not making the playoffs isn't a failure by any stretch, but they do want to go get in, and they believe Lundqvist not playing is going to help. I will give him a ton of credit, though. Obviously he's not happy about it, but he's handled it like a pro. He hasn't made a scene and bitched and moaned to the media. He's still genuinely happy for Georgiev's and Shesterkin's success and wants to see them and the team do well. But, this is totally eating him up inside.

 

The guy's a class act, Sharpy. I think you hit on all cylinders with this statement. Well put, dude!! As much as I even say after next season we unload these contracts, the player behind them in most cases has given it his all, and simply just gotten past his prime. Staal for instance, has even damn near lost an eye giving himself up for our team.

 

Sometimes as a fan you get caught up in the moment and forget this stuff, but in the back of your mind, and probably after the fact, you do remember all those games Hank saved our asses and basically carried this franchise to a cup final with saves that would make Jesus jealous.

 

He is a pro and in a perfect world I would like to see the Rangers honor his deal for next season, deal off Georgiev at draft day to move up into the top 10 and let Hank mentor Igor, so he can learn and inherit his position in the most honorable way possible. I think Hank would be the perfect backup next season, and the Rangers can get every penny from that 8.5 million by having Hank bestow all that knowledge on to Igor.

As a fan, it's definitely not the story book send off we wanted. But, he still loves the organization and he still loves the fans through all of this and that's all that matters. If he hangs it up, or plays for another team, which will suck, he's going to have his day here where there's a banner with his name on it in the Garden ceiling.

The guy's a class act, Sharpy. I think you hit on all cylinders with this statement. Well put, dude!! As much as I even say after next season we unload these contracts, the player behind them in most cases has given it his all, and simply just gotten past his prime. Staal for instance, has even damn near lost an eye giving himself up for our team.

 

Sometimes as a fan you get caught up in the moment and forget this stuff, but in the back of your mind, and probably after the fact, you do remember all those games Hank saved our asses and basically carried this franchise to a cup final with saves that would make Jesus jealous.

 

He is a pro and in a perfect world I would like to see the Rangers honor his deal for next season, deal off Georgiev at draft day to move up into the top 10 and let Hank mentor Igor, so he can learn and inherit his position in the most honorable way possible. I think Hank would be the perfect backup next season, and the Rangers can get every penny from that 8.5 million by having Hank bestow all that knowledge on to Igor.

 

Yeah, I mean, he could still be back next season easily with a Georgiev trade and all this talk could be for nothing. lol We will have to wait and see. But, dealing with an aging superstar and franchise legend in any sport is not an easy thing to do. There can be bad blood about how things are handling and egos and can boil over. That has not happened thankfully, which again, is a testament to him.

Unfortunately a lot of people will criticize/hate Lundqvist for not winning a cup, meanwhile he?s the reason the Rangers were relevant for so long. His tour has come to an end, sad to see but glad Shetsterkin seems to have the potential to have a similar bright career. We should be happy and also give Benoit Allaire a lot of credit.

The Rangers have had the best goalie goalie coach in the league for a long time. It's obviously helped Lundqvist, but look at what it did for guys like Talbot and Raanta when they were here. Shesterkin does look like the real deal and the organization is lucky they can lose a guy like Lundqvist but transition right into a new era with someone who looks like he could be great too.

We all feel for Lundqvist in one way or another, but a little perspective is required. He has been given plenty of opportunity to control his destiny. Stay and realize youth is coming in...or leave. He chose to stay. That's understandable if he didn't want to uproot his family and go elsewhere for a few years, but people are forced to uproot and move for job opportunity all of the time and they don't have millions of dollars in the bank to boot. That's not disrespectful. That's life.

 

I've truly enjoyed watching Lundqvist throughout his career. My only jersey is a Lundqvist. My only Rangers autographed item is a framed Lundqvist picture. He represents an entire era of Rangers hockey I've been able to enjoy. Unfortunately there is a "but" attached in the fact that it resulted in no Cup win. Not his fault, but when there's no Cup to show for it, it makes it a whole lot harder from an organizational standpoint to stunt player and team development for the sake of appeasing a single player at the end of his career. Franchise Ranger or not.

 

I found it much harder to watch how Eli Manning was handled. The guy won two Super Bowls and was dragged through the mud much more than Lundqvist.

 

Sooo... Not winning the S.C. is surely not the " fault " of H.L. as you say. However, he is in the driver's seat at this point in his career. If the team had won, would it have been entirely because of H.L? The NY Giants won the Super Bowls because of the team and mucho luck in both victories. When the NYR last won the cup in '94, they clearly were given a stiff challenge by the #7 seed. It took 7 games and a dramatic victory that was a nail-biter. They have made the play-offs many times since, but have only advanced to play for the cup ONCE.

As a fan, it's definitely not the story book send off we wanted. But, he still loves the organization and he still loves the fans through all of this and that's all that matters. If he hangs it up, or plays for another team, which will suck, he's going to have his day here where there's a banner with his name on it in the Garden ceiling.

 

Yeah, I mean, he could still be back next season easily with a Georgiev trade and all this talk could be for nothing. lol We will have to wait and see. But, dealing with an aging superstar and franchise legend in any sport is not an easy thing to do. There can be bad blood about how things are handling and egos and can boil over. That has not happened thankfully, which again, is a testament to him.

Agreed with this. The fans telling him to go fuck himself and he should retire, and the team should push him out, and he's fucking everything up (when the TEAM gave him the NMC) is sickening and a little embarrassing for the fan base. Definitely not "classy".

 

Unfortunately a lot of people will criticize/hate Lundqvist for not winning a cup, meanwhile he’s the reason the Rangers were relevant for so long. His tour has come to an end, sad to see but glad Shetsterkin seems to have the potential to have a similar bright career. We should be happy and also give Benoit Allaire a lot of credit.

 

This.

It boggles my mind the negativity I've read thrown Lundqvist's way. I am happy as a pig in shit that we look like we have another franchise altering talent in net for us for the foreseeable future. That doesn't mean that the last franchise altering, borderline generational talent, that played in our net should be kicked out with such disrespect. How quickly people forget. That said, he has not played well. I will acknowledge that 100%. It wasn't as if Georgiev was lights out for every game he played as well.

this organization gave lots of "class" to lundqvist. no other team would've given him $8M per at the time. We owe him nothing.