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

I don't believe it. What's the point? You're buying him out for space but you have 12m in space taken up by buyouts and you have to trade player to make room for it. Makes absolutely no sense.

The amount of space taken up by other buyouts is a bit moot when discussing buying out Lundqvist. All that matters is cap space freed up in doing so.

The cap space thing is moot itself. A Lundqvist buyout is basically eaten by what it's likely to cost to retain Georgiev. This is almost certainly about moving on and making a clean cut due to the timing of Shesterkin's arrival. It's Shesterkin-Georgiev. No third goalie. Hank has to go. If he won't retire and can't be traded, this is the only alternative.

That's dependent on Georgiev's contract. If he comes in at 1.5M, that's 1.5M space freed up. When you are working with a shortened cap due to previous buyouts, compounded with a flat cap, 1.5M can be a lot.

That's dependent on Georgiev's contract. If he comes in at 1.5M, that's 1.5M space freed up. When you are working with a shortened cap due to previous buyouts, compounded with a flat cap, 1.5M can be a lot.

That's not a realistic number, IMO. He has arbitration rights. He's 24. He's gone .918, .914, .910 in the last three seasons respectively with a growing workload, playing 30+ games both of the last two years. My guess is he's looking at $2.5-3.5 million per.

Same signing age with arb rights:

Hellebuyck, 2017: $2.25 million AAV, one year

Mrazek, 2016: $4 million AAV, two years

Allen, 2015: $2.35 million AAV, two years

Merzlikins (26) just re-upped with CBJ at $4 million AAV for two years.

He's one of the greatest Rangers ever. How great? I don't know and I don't really care to rank him against players I wasn't alive to see play. He's a generational player. The actual face of the franchise.

 

When he's gone, it'll feel like something's missing... You can't say that about any other player on the team or any other player who's played for the team in the last 15 years.

If you wanna say Greatest Rangers never to have won a (NY) Cup you'd have to add Park, Gilbert, Ratelle, Hadfield, Giacomin, Tkcuz, Stemkowski, Vickers, Gartner, McD depending on how far back pre '94 fan you are....:-(

That's not a realistic number, IMO. He has arbitration rights. He's 24. He's gone .918, .914, .910 in the last three seasons respectively with a growing workload, playing 30+ games both of the last two years. My guess is he's looking at $2.5-3.5 million per.

 

Same signing age with arb rights:

 

Hellebuyck, 2017: $2.25 million AAV, one year

Mrazek, 2016: $4 million AAV, two years

Allen, 2015: $2.35 million AAV, two years

 

Merzlikins (26) just re-upped with CBJ at $4 million AAV for two years.

I disagree. It may not be 1.5, but it won't be much more than that if so. Georgiev has played 34 and 33 games the last two years. With that in mind...here's how he stacks up with the other guys in the season before new contract:

Georgiev: 34 games started, 3.04 gaa, .910 sv%

Helleybuck: 53, 2.89, .907

Mrazek: 49, 2.33, .921

Allen: 32, 2.28, .913

Merzlikens: 31, 2.35, .923

Numbers wise, I don't really see a good comparable here. Closest is Hellybuck, but he was the team's starter and played many more games. He was more integral to the team.

We'll see. I think your estimate is very high. He's not as deserving as these other guys, and the flat cap effect needs to be accounted for. Max 2M, but I think there's a good chance it's less.

I disagree. It may not be 1.5, but it won't be much more than that if so. Georgiev has played 34 and 33 games the last two years. With that in mind...here's what the other guys did the season before those deals:

 

Helleybuck: 53 games started, 2.89 gaa, .907 sv%

Mrazek: 49, 2.33, .921

Allen: 32, 2.28, .913

Merzlikens: 31, 2.35, .923

 

Numbers wise, I don't really see a good comparable here. Closest is Hellybuck, but he was the team's starter and played many more games. He was more integral to the team.

 

We'll see. I think your estimate is very high. He's not as deserving as these other guys, and the flat cap effect needs to be accounted for. Max 2M, but I think there's a good chance it's less.

For what it's worth, in rfa negotiations, an arbiter is not supposed to factor in any cap related implications whether for team or league when making his determination.

Hank has made over 100 million dollars. He's a legend. It seems bizarre he'd rather end his career on a buyout rather than just walk away. He's only owed 5m. Does he really need that at this point?

I dunno. I have a hard time seeing him end it all on a buyout.

I disagree. It may not be 1.5, but it won't be much more than that if so. Georgiev has played 34 and 33 games the last two years. With that in mind...here's how he stacks up with the other guys in the season before new contract:

 

Georgiev: 34 games started, 3.04 gaa, .910 sv%

Helleybuck: 53, 2.89, .907

Mrazek: 49, 2.33, .921

Allen: 32, 2.28, .913

Merzlikens: 31, 2.35, .923

 

Numbers wise, I don't really see a good comparable here. Closest is Hellybuck, but he was the team's starter and played many more games. He was more integral to the team.

 

We'll see. I think your estimate is very high. He's not as deserving as these other guys, and the flat cap effect needs to be accounted for. Max 2M, but I think there's a good chance it's less.

Forget the straight dollar value, then. Look at the percentage of cap.

Hellebuyck: 3.00%

Mrazek: 5.48%

Allen: 3.22%

Merzlikins: 2.32%

Average: 3.50%

With an $81.5 million cap, that's an AAV of $2.852 million. Dead in line with my $2.5-3.5 million range.

Hank Buyout + Georgiev = Hank Without Buyout. (Give or take pocket change). Given that there is no clear financial-cap advantage to either keeping or buying Hank out, the decision is solely whether you want to have Hank as a backup or Georgiev. The latter makes sense, particularly given that his trade value will rise if he does a decent job. If you trade Georgiev now, you are not really going to get anything.

Right. And, if you opt for Hank, it means trading Georgiev, which itself presents a problem next year when you don't have a capable backup under contract.

I'm not sure Geo will ever have more value to the market than he does the Rangers ? goalie markets are always weird ? but I know that it's pretty useless jumping through hoops to keep a 38-year-old who is on the edge of retirement.

Hank has made over 100 million dollars. He's a legend. It seems bizarre he'd rather end his career on a buyout rather than just walk away. He's only owed 5m. Does he really need that at this point?

 

I dunno. I have a hard time seeing him end it all on a buyout.

Houses in 2 countries, a wife and kids used to high end cars and the good life...nobody walks away from this kind of money, even if he's managed the $100 million well. And once being a player stops that money and lifestyle goes away.

Heard Glenn Healey talk about this; one day everyone else is going to practice, and what you've been doing since you were a kid is over. And a friend who worked for MSG mentioned a lot of retired players don't know what to do with themselves and don't really know how to downsize their lifestyle. It's gotta be a shock.

Houses in 2 countries, a wife and kids used to high end cars and the good life...nobody walks away from this kind of money, even if he's managed the $100 million well. And once being a player stops that money and lifestyle goes away.

 

Heard Glenn Healey talk about this; one day everyone else is going to practice, and what you've been doing since you were a kid is over. And a friend who worked for MSG mentioned a lot of retired players don't know what to do with themselves and don't really know how to downsize their lifestyle. It's gotta be a shock.

Of course. I mean NFL players are famous for going broke years after their retirement. But like I said elsewhere, I think Hank could moving into the front office if he wanted to. I think it's possible he made more from endorsements than the Rangers. I get 5m isn't anything to sneeze at but we're not talking about Dan Boyle, we're talking about the greatest Ranger goalie of all time. It feels gross to see it end on a buyout and at this stage of Hanks career it's possible he's thinking about legacy more than money. That money is already in the bank.

Of course. I mean NFL players are famous for going broke years after their retirement. But like I said elsewhere, I think Hank could moving into the front office if he wanted to. I think it's possible he made more from endorsements than the Rangers. I get 5m isn't anything to sneeze at but we're not talking about Dan Boyle, we're talking about the greatest Ranger goalie of all time. It feels gross to see it end on a lock out and at this stage of Hanks career it's possible he's thinking about legacy more than money. That money is already in the bank.

Probably literally just comes down to one thing. He believes he can still play and doesn’t want to retire earlier. I get that. His legacy here is important but sometimes athletes believe their legacy of themselves equals or surpasses a sweater.

He didn't make more money on endorsement than hockey.

He also still owns some restaurants that probably lost a shit ton in COVID.

It's probably not about the money for him.

He didn't make more money on endorsement than hockey.

 

He also still owns some restaurants that probably lost a shit ton in COVID.

 

It's probably not about the money for him.

So if it's not money, what is it? If he goes down the road of letting the Rangers buy him out, what is his reasoning if it's not money? He's gonna play somewhere else? He already spent two years turning down trades to other teams.

So if it's not money, what is it? If he goes down the road of letting the Rangers buy him out, what is his reasoning if it's not money? He's gonna play somewhere else? He already spent two years turning down trades to other teams.

Two years ago he likely thought he could still help this team and was hoping for a faster rebuild. They still had some guys. It wasn’t a bare bone roster. Last year they bring in Panarin and draft Kakko. Sheshty still wasn’t exactly in the picture yet....now it’s clear as day And he likely knows he won’t play here and feels he can still play elsewhere.

So if it's not money, what is it? If he goes down the road of letting the Rangers buy him out, what is his reasoning if it's not money? He's gonna play somewhere else? He already spent two years turning down trades to other teams.

Two years ago he likely thought he could still help this team and was hoping for a faster rebuild. They still had some guys. It wasn?t a bare bone roster. Last year they bring in Panarin and draft Kakko. Sheshty still wasn?t exactly in the picture yet....now it?s clear as day And he likely knows he won?t play here and feels he can still play elsewhere.

They can't trade him.

If they won't keep him, buyout is the only path.