article: Zuccarello: Handling of Lundqvist "Disrespectful"

[Keirik]

On of the biggest mistakes any organization in transition could make is to romanticize an aging veteran well past his prime. Save that shit for his HOF ceremony.

[Abe Froman]

On of the biggest mistakes any organization in transition could make is to romanticize an aging veteran well past his prime. Save that shit for his HOF ceremony.

 

Facts. :)

[Scott]

Honestly, why do we care what Zucc said? I know he was our favorite little hobbit but in the end he was a 50-60 point niche player. The fans version of a Torts Dubi love. He’s trying to defend his friend, even if he is wrong.

 

The Henrik retirement party has to end at some time.

 

Nailed it. Word for word exactly my thoughts as well.

[Albatrosss]

On of the biggest mistakes any organization in transition could make is to romanticize an aging veteran well past his prime. Save that shit for his HOF ceremony.

 

Preach on!

[The Dude]

Um, hometown discount? No, not even close.

Sour grapes? Yup.

Truth? Grossly inaccurate to throw shade on NYR by Zuuuuuuuuuuccccccc.

 

Still love Zucc's time on our squad but don't ruin the memory little one. NYR fans gonna' show you love until the day you die. Don't run your mouth and become a Potvin chant.

 

I think he was referring to himself with that comment. Lundqvist got paid, Zuccs last contract with the Rangers was considered team friendly.

[RangersIn7]

I think he was referring to himself with that comment. Lundqvist got paid, Zuccs last contract with the Rangers was considered team friendly.

 

It was team friendly given the couple of seasons he had preceding it.

 

But I’d say he’s more than making up for it now given the $30 million he’s currently stealing from Minnesota

[RangersIn7]

On of the biggest mistakes any organization in transition could make is to romanticize an aging veteran well past his prime. Save that shit for his HOF ceremony.

 

Facts. :)

 

Preach on!

 

They aren’t doing that

And I agree. They shouldn’t be sentimental with him.

However, I don’t see how keeping him through the final year of his deal is that.

I get where people are coming from, but it honestly doesn’t matter much.

 

He’s not blocking a starter.

He’s not hurting Georgiev’s value.

He’s not creating a situation wherein they’d lose someone they can’t replace.

He’s not blocking a trade that would bring back an excellent return they need to restock the cabinet.

He’s not publicly bitching on his own.

 

I agree that sentimentality is something organizations shouldn’t engage in. SF Giants blew it with Bumgarner last 2 years due to sentimentality. They needed the return and they kept him around when they shouldn’t have.

 

But I also think that an organization honoring the final year on a contract to a franchise icon (who they signed to this contract till age 39 knowing full well this might happen) isn’t quite same thing to the same degree. There’s no big return out there in dealing him. Georgiev is the backup regardless of Hank is here. Not the starter. In spite of what is obviously a frustrating situation for him, he’s handled himself pretty well. If he’s expressed frustration or put it out there through Zucc that he feels disrespected, I don’t like it, but it’s his right and he’s earned a little latitude.

 

I’d rather they just move Georgiev, get whatever return they can, and end the controversy.

[Sod16]

I’d rather they just move Georgiev, get whatever return they can, and end the controversy.

 

The controversy over Hank getting 25 starts while Shesty gets 55 will not represent much of an improvement over the controversy that would surround buying Hank out, although the latter would be over quickly while the former would fester.

[RangersIn7]

The controversy over Hank getting 25 starts while Shesty gets 55 will not represent much of an improvement over the controversy that would surround buying Hank out, although the latter would be over quickly while the former would fester.

 

I don’t see Hank getting 25-30 starts in a backup role as controversial. And to be honest, if he has issue with that at this point, then I think that’s on him and he’s in the wrong.

He can’t start HERE at this point. It’s Igor’s net to lose. And I don’t see that happening.

 

No issue with him staying on as the backup for another season. In fact, I’d rather have the veteran backup behind Igor.

But starting? He’d need to go elsewhere to do that. He should know that. And he had that opportunity. He said no. More than once.

 

Honestly, if it comes to pass where he is here and Georgiev isn’t while Igor is here and healthy, anyone who makes the argument that Hank should be starting unless there’s some catastrophic changes is clueless.

 

Though if amnesty buyout is an option, they have to highly consider it.

[Keirik]

They aren’t doing that

And I agree. They shouldn’t be sentimental with him.

However, I don’t see how keeping him through the final year of his deal is that.

I get where people are coming from, but it honestly doesn’t matter much.

 

He’s not blocking a starter.

He’s not hurting Georgiev’s value.

He’s not creating a situation wherein they’d lose someone they can’t replace.

He’s not blocking a trade that would bring back an excellent return they need to restock the cabinet.

He’s not publicly bitching on his own.

 

I agree that sentimentality is something organizations shouldn’t engage in. SF Giants blew it with Bumgarner last 2 years due to sentimentality. They needed the return and they kept him around when they shouldn’t have.

 

But I also think that an organization honoring the final year on a contract to a franchise icon (who they signed to this contract till age 39 knowing full well this might happen) isn’t quite same thing to the same degree. There’s no big return out there in dealing him. Georgiev is the backup regardless of Hank is here. Not the starter. In spite of what is obviously a frustrating situation for him, he’s handled himself pretty well. If he’s expressed frustration or put it out there through Zucc that he feels disrespected, I don’t like it, but it’s his right and he’s earned a little latitude.

 

I’d rather they just move Georgiev, get whatever return they can, and end the controversy.

If they keep Hank in favor of getting rid of Georgiev I think they most definitely are. How can anyone know Georgiev’s exact value and potential when he is only 24 years old with around 80 career games on a team in transition? This isn’t a defensive powerhouse that shelters goalies. They average the second highest shots against per game this season and the highest per game average over the last 3 seasons. Goalies usually develop a lot slower than position players.

 

 

It’s way too early to decide where a Georgie lands on his final potential but I’ll say this. The future of the organization is better off with a goalie tandem of two 24 year old NHL ready goalies than they are getting rid of one

[Pete]

If they keep Hank in favor of getting rid of Georgiev I think they most definitely are. How can anyone know Georgiev?s exact value and potential when he is only 24 years old with around 80 career games on a team in transition? This isn?t a defensive powerhouse that shelters goalies. They average the second highest shots against per game this season and the highest per game average over the last 3 seasons. Goalies usually develop a lot slower than position players.

 

 

It?s way too early to decide where a Georgie lands on his final potential but I?ll say this. The future of the organization is better off with a goalie tandem of two 24 year old NHL ready goalies than they are getting rid of one

The Rangers have plenty of goalies in the system. You could always find a young backup somewhere. That's how they found Georgiev in the first place.

 

They had a chance to trade him to fill a position of need, and they didn't pull the trigger.

 

there is really no tangible difference on the roster between Lundquist or Georgia backing up Shesty next year.

 

Going into the year after, they have goalies. Or find one cheap. It's not hard.

 

Goaltending depth is not an issue for this team. It never has been.

[RangersIn7]

If they keep Hank in favor of getting rid of Georgiev I think they most definitely are. How can anyone know Georgiev’s exact value and potential when he is only 24 years old with around 80 career games on a team in transition? This isn’t a defensive powerhouse that shelters goalies. They average the second highest shots against per game this season and the highest per game average over the last 3 seasons. Goalies usually develop a lot slower than position players.

 

 

It’s way too early to decide where a Georgie lands on his final potential but I’ll say this. The future of the organization is better off with a goalie tandem of two 24 year old NHL ready goalies than they are getting rid of one

 

Look, it’s a fair point you’re making. But even if Georgiev has a higher ceiling than what he’s shown, he’s still just your backup and he’s not going to get the reps here to prove it a point where everyone is confident that it’s real anyway. See Cam Talbot who got a lot of playing time when Hank got hurt, yet still didn’t unseat him nor fetch a great return.

 

Igor is a stud. You can’t view Igor as the normal 24 year old goalie with limited experience because of what he’s done in Russia. His success hasn’t been just success. It’s been dominance. Even with the small sample, I don’t think there are many out there who feel he isn’t the real deal.

 

I see your point in keeping Hank vs Igor. I guess I just view it a little differently. I think it’s the easier solution and it ends the talk with the most haste and least mess. I also think if Hank could settle into a routine as a regular backup, while he might not be content he’d be effective more so than he was this year.

And as stated, I’d rather the veteran backup behind young and inexperienced starter.

[RangersIn7]

The Rangers have plenty of goalies in the system. You could always find a young backup somewhere. That's how they found Georgiev in the first place.

 

They had a chance to trade him to fill a position of need, and they didn't pull the trigger.

 

there is really no tangible difference on the roster between Lundquist or Georgia backing up Shesty next year.

 

Going into the year after, they have goalies. Or find one cheap. It's not hard.

 

Goaltending depth is not an issue for this team. It never has been.

 

That’s the other aspect of it too

Even if they keep Georgiev now by moving in from Hank, they’re likely doing so on a bridge deal with Georgiev. And in 2 years, they’re paying Shesty and moving on from Georgiev at that point anyway.

 

In the 15 years since Allaire came in as goalies coach, they’ve really only had 1 backup that was ineffective.

 

And I’m 100% sure that Allaire is involved in the scouting of goalies at some level.

They surely ask him for his assessment and input on any goalie they look at. As long as he’s around they’ll have goalie talent.

[Keirik]

Look, it’s a fair point you’re making. But even if Georgiev has a higher ceiling than what he’s shown, he’s still just your backup and he’s not going to get the reps here to prove it a point where everyone is confident that it’s real anyway. See Cam Talbot who got a lot of playing time when Hank got hurt, yet still didn’t unseat him nor fetch a great return.

 

Igor is a stud. You can’t view Igor as the normal 24 year old goalie with limited experience because of what he’s done in Russia. His success hasn’t been just success. It’s been dominance. Even with the small sample, I don’t think there are many out there who feel he isn’t the real deal.

 

I see your point in keeping Hank vs Igor. I guess I just view it a little differently. I think it’s the easier solution and it ends the talk with the most haste and least mess. I also think if Hank could settle into a routine as a regular backup, while he might not be content he’d be effective more so than he was this year.

And as stated, I’d rather the veteran backup behind young and inexperienced starter.

 

I’m not trying to suggest Georgie is better than Igor. We both know though that a million things can happen. Hell, imagine if his car accident went a different way? The most games Shesh has ever played in a pro league though is 39 games back in 16/17 and we know a good amount of younger European players tire a bit until they get more accustomed to a larger schedule. Still think a tandem of Shesh 65% / Georgie 35% is much much better than Hank being involved or any veteran backup especially with Allaire as their specific coach.

[Keirik]

The Rangers have plenty of goalies in the system. You could always find a young backup somewhere. That's how they found Georgiev in the first place.

 

They had a chance to trade him to fill a position of need, and they didn't pull the trigger.

 

there is really no tangible difference on the roster between Lundquist or Georgia backing up Shesty next year.

 

Going into the year after, they have goalies. Or find one cheap. It's not hard.

 

Goaltending depth is not an issue for this team. It never has been.

But how do we know at this point that Georgiev is a career backup? Even at a bridge 2-3 year deal for Georgie we are still in a better position than Hank for next year and then plugging a hole the following year with someone that either has zero experience or another veteran of diminished skill.

 

It’s not like Georgie is going to cost big money right now.

[RangersIn7]

But how do we know at this point that Georgiev is a career backup? Even at a bridge 2-3 year deal for Georgie we are still in a better position than Hank for next year and then plugging a hole the following year with someone that either has zero experience or another veteran of diminished skill.

 

It’s not like Georgie is going to cost big money right now.

 

We don’t know he’s a career backup. It’s possible he’s a starter. I’ll acknowledge that.

 

But he’s not starting here. Nor is he getting the reps here to prove he’s a starter or up his value.

And in 2 years, they’re going to have to pay Shesty and they won’t want to pay Georgiev as he’d be coming of that hypothetical bridge deal and will be looking for a raise.

 

Can’t say at this point that they’d be in a better position with Georgiev around vs another year of Lundqvist and needing a replacement for him next year. We have no idea who might develop or who might be available.

 

And as Pete mentioned, they’ve had no issue regarding finding effective backup goalies.

It shouldn’t be a point of concern.

 

This may be moot anyway.

If the amnesty buyout is there, and it seems a strong possibility, they are almost certainly using it in Hank.

[RangersIn7]

League may also go the route of some kind of “exceptional player” status for the cap vs an amnesty buyout. Teams could pick one player on their roster who wouldn’t count vs the cap or count less vs the cap while paying some sort of tax on a portion of that players salary that wouldn’t apply to the cap.

 

It was mentioned on a podcast and I think I read an article that mentioned it but I can’t seem to find it.

[RangersIn7]

Here it is

 

https://oilersnation.com/2020/04/28/the-exception-player-rule-a-creative-solution-to-altering-the-nhls-salary-cap/

[Flynn]

They way I read that is you make Panarin that guy, and buy out Hank at full freight. Much better flexibility over the next 5 years

[RangersIn7]

They way I read that is you make Panarin that guy, and buy out Hank at full freight. Much better flexibility over the next 5 years

 

You think they’d still buyout Hank under the above circumstances?

 

That’s an interesting prospect.

 

But I think they just go the route of the amnesty buyout. There’s precedent for it, they’ve done it before under similar circumstances and it’s neat and quick without having implications beyond one season.

 

It’s an interesting potential solution though

[Bugg]

You think they’d still buyout Hank under the above circumstances?

 

That’s an interesting prospect.

 

But I think they just go the route of the amnesty buyout. There’s precedent for it, they’ve done it before under similar circumstances and it’s neat and quick without having implications beyond one season.

 

It’s an interesting potential solution though

 

Yes. Others have pointed out figuring you need to resign Georgiev, still an better idea. There isn't enough work for 3 goalies. Not clear though small market clubs, who Bettman caters to will go for buyouts and a "Larry Bird" exception. NBA for a time had such a cap rule, basically one big contract per club doesn't count or doesn't count in full on your cap numbers.

Article points out main reason the Cup will almost certainly be awarded this summer; $1 billion in TV revenues. Crtainly not going to get much regular season TV money, but that's not the big bucks, and they got most of that already anyway. NBC and the Canadian broadcasters pay what amounts to pennies for regular season games to have the right to broadcast the playoffs. Will hurt the NHL teams if there's no gate revenue but no TV revenues KILLS. If there is no playoffs, you can never get that TV money back.

[RangersIn7]

Yes. Others have pointed out figuring you need to resign Georgiev, still an better idea. There isn't enough work for 3 goalies. Not clear though small market clubs, who Bettman caters to will go for buyouts and a "Larry Bird" exception. NBA for a time had such a cap rule, basically one big contract per club doesn't count or doesn't count in full on your cap numbers.

Article points out main reason the Cup will almost certainly be awarded this summer; $1 billion in TV revenues. Crtainly not going to get much regular season TV money, but that's not the big bucks, and they got most of that already anyway. NBC and the Canadian broadcasters pay what amounts to pennies for regular season games to have the right to broadcast the playoffs. Will hurt the NHL teams if there's no gate revenue but no TV revenues KILLS. If there is no playoffs, you can never get that TV money back.

 

No way they ride with 3 goalies going into a season. Agree there.

 

Would they not have to put some kind of a “Bird rule” into the new CBA via normal process though?

I’m just not sure of the mechanics of it.

 

I’m still not sold on Georgiev being the better backup option next year. I could certainly be wrong, but I think they wind up performing to about the same levels.

The numbers from this season thus far are very close in nearly every category, and Hank’s numbers undoubtedly suffered from the very sporadic work load in last 2 1/2 months of play.

 

Their numbers through December are very close. Nearly the same based on stats I’ve looked at.

If I’m messing something please feel feee to point it out. That could totally be the case.

I’ve seen few advanced stats between the 2 for this season

[Pete]

But how do we know at this point that Georgiev is a career backup? Even at a bridge 2-3 year deal for Georgie we are still in a better position than Hank for next year and then plugging a hole the following year with someone that either has zero experience or another veteran of diminished skill.

 

It?s not like Georgie is going to cost big money right now.

Speaking about next year specifically, If you're buying out Hank and signing Geo, there's not a whole lot of cap relief there. Maybe a million or 2?

 

Down the line, let's say gio is a starter. You're still running into a long jam and goalie.

[Keirik]

Speaking about next year specifically, If you're buying out Hank and signing Geo, there's not a whole lot of cap relief there. Maybe a million or 2?

 

Down the line, let's say gio is a starter. You're still running into a long jam and goalie.

 

Well it's not just about saving cap space. It's also about what's best for the teams future. The fact there is also some cap space, albeit small amount extra, is a nice by product.

Down the line if Gio is a starter, let's say in year 2 of a 3 year contract or even at an expiring year, then he is also a much more valuable trade option for us and probably for a piece that might make the difference of a cup run. Having two young talented starting goalies would be a problem I'll sign up for any day of the week especially since I really don't think Georgie is breaking bank on this rfa contract coming up.

Georgie is much more tradeable the more time he has under his belt playing.

[Pete]

Well it's not just about saving cap space. It's also about what's best for the teams future. The fact there is also some cap space, albeit small amount extra, is a nice by product.

Down the line if Gio is a starter, let's say in year 2 of a 3 year contract or even at an expiring year, then he is also a much more valuable trade option for us and probably for a piece that might make the difference of a cup run. Having two young talented starting goalies would be a problem I'll sign up for any day of the week especially since I really don't think Georgie is breaking bank on this rfa contract coming up.

Georgie is much more tradeable the more time he has under his belt playing.

Right, and that goes back to my point. We have plenty of good young goalies. next year is the only year Hank is a problem.

 

The year after, next goalie up becomes the backup, or you sign one cheap If the ones we have in the system still need to develop.

 

Goaltending is not an issue for this team. There is zero reason to let Geo marinate. He's not part of the long-term plan no matter what.