confirmed: Rangers Buyout Final Year of Henrik Lundqvist's Contract

correct, its not a distraction.

 

Glad you understand,now.

Thought we were talking about Hank?

An $8.5 million in salary cap hit that could be better applied to other holes says otherwise. This is Willie Mays in a Mets uniform, Johnny Unitas in Chargers blue, Namath with the Rams, Gordie Howe with the Whalers. Difference being none of those bad endings involved a salary cap(also all of the above won a championship at least, but who's counting, I digress). He isn't that good any more. Any kind of "farewell" nonsense is just that. Farewell, and get out. Lundqvist has been one of the 2 highest paid goalies in the NHL for the length of this final contract. He has ridiculously underperformed for most of that contract. He will still be here the night they retire his jersey.

 

Cap changes EVERYTHING. You cannot decry the lack of depth on lines 3 and 4 and then say having Lundqvist come back at the price for a farewell tour is not a big deal. It's the same problem.

 

My hope; he retires to play for Frolunda. We'll see.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Guys we can disagree but I don't think we need to resort to turning it into condescension. Like I said, there is no way to quantify a truth to this. Some think there isn't. I personally think there are some truths to both. I just look at interviews hours after we just get the 1st overall pick and JD already answering questions about Hank of all people as a sign there might be something to this. They look like completely different teams when he is in met in my opinion and that goes way before this play in of theirs.

If you don't think there is a potential for a problem here I odnt know what to tell ya. We can all have our own opinions.

I really don't think Hank wants to be a backup at all. I also don't think he wants to walk away from that last check. We shouldn't rule out that he may actually be the one to request a buy out. He would get paid and have a chance to see if anyone would pick him up as a starter.

The Rangers forcing a backup role on him rather than buying him out may actually be against his wishes...just a thought.

Thought we were talking about Hank?

You just said successful goalies with a history of winning were not distractions, even when their skill declined.

I have a question. If Hank gets bought out and goes to the Swedish League, does he still get his buy out money or is it treated as if he voluntarily retired?

If he gets bought out he’s bought out and owed what he’s owed. What he does afterwards doesn’t reverse a buy out.

If he gets bought out he’s bought out and owed what he’s owed. What he does afterwards doesn’t reverse a buy out.

If it did, I want that Girarid and Shattenkirk cap space back pronto.

It has already been established that any cap savings you get from a Hank buy-out is going to Georgiev, so you're paying your back-up gialie, one way or the other. This is not going to solve your cap problems.

 

Sent from my SM-G970U using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

As to a buyout, admittedly, the relief is minimal. Every little bit helps though. As to retirement, it would be fantastic.

As to a buyout, admittedly, the relief is minimal. Every little bit helps though. As to retirement, it would be fantastic.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

It has already been established that any cap savings you get from a Hank buy-out is going to Georgiev, so you're paying your back-up gialie, one way or the other. This is not going to solve your cap problems.

 

Sent from my SM-G970U using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

That's highly debateable because it depends on how much you think Georgiev would get. I don't think Georgiev gets anywhere near the cap savings of 3M on a 1-2 yr deal. Probably more in the 1.5-2M range, which saves 1-1.5M against the cap and is nothing to sneeze at.

You are not ?speculating? and ?fabricating a storyline?? Your clumsy comparisons took so many twists and turns when you got called on them. You are speculating about Sid and he is still in his prime.

 

At season ending presser Mgt usually has a bunch of vanilla ?no comments?. They forcefully came out an said 3 goalies will not be back. We can call it a distraction, a detraction, but it obviously was not good for the team and Hank was the guy overstaying his welcome. If we get a nice package for Georgie, then Hank can be a back up. If not Hank goes one way or the other.

That's highly debateable because it depends on how much you think Georgiev would get. I don't think Georgiev gets anywhere near the cap savings of 3M on a 1-2 yr deal. Probably more in the 1.5-2M range, which saves 1-1.5M against the cap and is nothing to sneeze at.

A million to a million and a half does not help us at all. Period.

Sure it does. Might mean you can cover Fast's raise or not, as an example.

Sure it does. Might mean you can cover Fast's raise or not, as an example.

I didn't realize one adjustment in my comparison was too many twists and turns for you.

Only took you 7 posts to clear up that ‘one adjustment’.

My second paragraph was the meat of my point anyway. Mgt has already addressed that it won’t be a problem again next year.

Losing McKegg does that.

No. McKegg made 750k and that's cheaper than an ELC. It'll likely cost more to replace him.

Only took you 7 posts to clear up that ?one adjustment?.

 

My second paragraph was the meat of my point anyway. Mgt has already addressed that it won?t be a problem again next year.

I forgot the part where one post replacing Crosby with Thornton amounts to seven.

No. McKegg made 750k and that's cheaper than an ELC. It'll likely cost more to replace him.

Either way you're really splitting hairs at this point. That's not what's going to make a break fast coming back.

I forgot the part where one post replacing Crosby with Thornton amounts to seven.

No, you remembered that one just fine. It was the three before and three right after that you are forgetting. You eventually landed on Thornton, but as was explained to you that was another bad example since he was playing under a 1 year deal for $2m. Year before was 1 year for $5m. Hardly a similar situation to Hank. Don?t worry about it, everybody makes mistakes.

Its the weekend and we got the #1 pick!

On Up In The Blueseats Podcast, Larry Brooks was mentioning how Henrik could go back to Sweden to play with his brother one last time. If he retires and does this, this is the best case scenario.

I would honestly be surprised it it would be anything different, that is the right thing for all parties.

No, you remembered that one just fine. It was the three before and three right after that you are forgetting. You eventually landed on Thornton, but as was explained to you that was another bad example since he was playing under a 1 year deal for $2m. Year before was 1 year for $5m. Hardly a similar situation to Hank. Don?t worry about it, everybody makes mistakes.

 

Its the weekend and we got the #1 pick!

For some reason I thought he made more.

 

Either way you're really splitting hairs at this point. That's not what's going to make a break fast coming back.

1-1.5M is not chump change when you'll be up against the cap. Ask Tampa. If Fast needs a matching offer at 3M to stay and we can only go to 2.5M because of the cap, well, it needs to come from somewhere.

Agreed. Retirement and return of the whole $8.5m hit would be the preferred option.

 

Sent from my SM-G970U using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

So if he can simply retire or go to Sweden and get the buy out money, why would he ever retire without getting the buy out?