Brooks Rangers' Relationship With Georgiev 'Probably Coming to an End'

[Phil]

Quote

Any one of Georgiev’s upcoming starts might be his last as a Ranger. Given that the club will not be able to qualify him this summer when his contract expires, he will be on track to become a free agent. The upcoming March 21 trade deadline represents the Rangers’ last opportunity to get something in return for the NHL’s first Bulgarian-born player. 

 

The Blueshirts would have to obtain a backup to replace Georgiev, with either Thomas Greiss — who played so well for the Red Wings in their 3-2 shootout victory at the Garden on Thursday — or Jaro Halak — currently on injured reserve for the Canucks — as potential targets. 

 

But the Rangers’ relationship with Georgiev, who has felt suppressed in his role, is probably coming to an end as the lone casualty of the handoff from Lundqvist to Shesterkin.

 

https://nypost.com/2022/02/18/alex-georgiev-wont-get-out-of-igor-shersterkins-rangers-shadow/

[BrooksBurner]

A 3rd or 4th round pick in value, tops. Guy was fools gold and caused the org to torpedo Hank’s last year in order to hold onto him. The irony is they probably could have gotten more for him in a trade back then. Now he sucks in half his starts and the Rangers can’t even qualify him so everyone knows he’s going, going gone. 

[Pete]

Don't care about Geo, but Shesty too fragile to not have a 1A type backup. 

[josh]

Lone casualty? Wasn’t Lundqvist a casualty? 

[josh]

1 minute ago, Pete said:

Don't care about Geo, but Shesty too fragile to not have a 1A type backup. 

That’s not Georgiev. Has never been. 

[RangersIn7]

This is hardly news. They’ve been shopping him for what, the better part of 3+ seasons?

 

And they knew several seasons ago he was never going to be a Ranger long-term for 1 reason or another. Had deals in place previously to flip him for a fair return. Foolishly insisted on a 1st round pick for him which no backup or platoon goalie ever brings. 
 

Still don’t understand why they wanted to keep him. Finding/developing backup goaltending has never been an issue for them as long as Benoit Alaire has been here. Don’t understand why they gave him 2yrs and nearly $5 million. 

[RangersIn7]

8 minutes ago, rmc51 said:

A 3rd or 4th round pick in value, tops. Guy was fools gold and caused the org to torpedo Hank’s last year in order to hold onto him. The irony is they probably could have gotten more for him in a trade back then. Now he sucks in half his starts and the Rangers can’t even qualify him so everyone knows he’s going, going gone. 

Exactly. Missed the window to get back whatever Georgiev’s top value to them was. His value has only decreased as he doesn’t play much so hasn’t been able to show he’s anymore than a backup basically and he hasn’t been any better than league average.

 

The clear path a few years back when they were carrying 3 goalies was to trade Georgiev, keep Hank and Igor for 1 year, then go find another backup when Hank’s contract expired and he either retired or went elsewhere. It was so evident. Just one that baffles me

[Pete]

6 minutes ago, josh said:

That’s not Georgiev. Has never been. 

It is over an extended stretch. We just saw it. 

 

Geo needs to play and he's good enough. He's not gonna play here. It's just a bad fit. Send him somewhere to be a starter if you want to see what he really is. It's not even like this team defends well enough. We're really spoiled with Igor. 

[RangersIn7]

12 minutes ago, Pete said:

It is over an extended stretch. We just saw it. 

 

Geo needs to play and he's good enough. He's not gonna play here. It's just a bad fit. Send him somewhere to be a starter if you want to see what he really is. It's not even like this team defends well enough. We're really spoiled with Igor. 

And this is correct too.

Regardless of anything else, you knew that:

A) if he was here, it was highly unlikely he would get significant playing time with Igor here unless something huge and completely unforeseen happened, and

B) given those circumstances, he’d likely want the opportunity to go elsewhere and get a chance to play.

 

So at best if you kept him, which they did, they’d get no more than 2 seasons as a backup out of him, probably decrease his value and certainly have no shot at increasing it, and have no shot at qualifying him and lose him for little to nothing.

 

And here we are. 

[Pete]

21 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

And this is correct too.

Regardless of anything else, you knew that:

A) if he was here, it was highly unlikely he would get significant playing time with Igor here unless something huge and completely unforeseen happened, and

B) given those circumstances, he’d likely want the opportunity to go elsewhere and get a chance to play.

 

So at best if you kept him, which they did, they’d get no more than 2 seasons as a backup out of him, probably decrease his value and certainly have no shot at increasing it, and have no shot at qualifying him and lose him for little to nothing.

 

And here we are. 

Sure, but I don't really see it as poor asset Management. They got him for nothing, we have a ton of assets, came in and served his purpose and if we trade him for a fifth rounder who cares?

[RangersIn7]

34 minutes ago, Pete said:

Sure, but I don't really see it as poor asset Management. They got him for nothing, we have a ton of assets, came in and served his purpose and if we trade him for a fifth rounder who cares?

No. I don’t think it’s outright poor asset management. I honestly think that term only applies to either significant assets or just a ridiculous blunder (see Buchnevich, Pavel). It just doesn’t make sense on any level to me. 
 

I just haven’t been able to wrap my head around why it was important to keep both Igor and Georgiev a few years back, and why they bought out Hank to do it, and why they did so knowing Georgiev was here only temporarily, nor why they thought they’d somehow get a 1st round pick or top prospect back for him, nor why they felt it necessary to spend what they spent on Georgiev to keep him for 2 seasons when they could’ve likely found an alternative who’d have given them similar production for less money.

 

The whole thing didn’t make tons of sense. 

 

 

[Pete]

22 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

No. I don’t think it’s outright poor asset management. I honestly think that term only applies to either significant assets or just a ridiculous blunder (see Buchnevich, Pavel). It just doesn’t make sense on any level to me. 
 

I just haven’t been able to wrap my head around why it was important to keep both Igor and Georgiev a few years back, and why they bought out Hank to do it, and why they did so knowing Georgiev was here only temporarily, nor why they thought they’d somehow get a 1st round pick or top prospect back for him, nor why they felt it necessary to spend what they spent on Georgiev to keep him for 2 seasons when they could’ve likely found an alternative who’d have given them similar production for less money.

 

The whole thing didn’t make tons of sense. 

 

 

Probably just because they knew they wanted Igor to start and not be in Hank's shadow.

 

For as good as Igor is, he doesn't strike me as "mentally tough". Probably wanted to remove the distraction.

[RangersIn7]

21 minutes ago, Pete said:

Probably just because they knew they wanted Igor to start and not be in Hank's shadow.

 

For as good as Igor is, he doesn't strike me as "mentally tough". Probably wanted to remove the distraction.

And I’m sure there were other reasons or factors that were involved in the decisions they made regarding the goaltending, but the end result was still a set of circumstances that made no sense to the fandom based on the information that’s public knowledge.

 

They got equal production out of Lundqvist. No reason to think he wouldn’t have given them so for another season, nor any reason to think he’d have been anything but a good teammate and a pro regarding Igor 

Edited February 19, 2022 by RangersIn7

[fletch]

https://www.nhl.com/news/top-storylines-to-keep-watch-of-before-nhl-trade-deadline/c-331027258?tid=277548856

'Goalies: Market could be hot in addition to Fleury

Fleury is the headliner, but the goalie market is expected to be interesting ahead of the deadline with the possibility of the Capitals, Oilers, Penguins, Avalanche, Wild and Vegas Golden Knights looking for help at that position. In addition to Fleury, pending UFA goalies that could be available are Braden Holtby (Dallas Stars), Thomas Greiss (Detroit Red Wings), Joonas Korpisalo (Columbus Blue Jackets), Pavel Francouz (Avalanche) and Martin Jones (Flyers).'

 

 

So teams can try and make a deal for one of the above... or Georgiev.  Can't help his market value.

 

 

[-ERIK-]

Greiss to be Igor's backup? guy owns us.

[Phil]

I think the writing is on the wall here:

 

1. They're not going to trade him without a replacement, and Kinkaid isn't an option.

 

2. They also can't afford to qualify him.

 

3. He's going to go unqualified and become a free agent this summer.

[Valriera]

Which is a shame but we should consider it a self-rental really and a cheap one so, fine. 

[Sharpshooter]

Whether it was just lack of playing or him just being a mental case (or both?) it's really too bad he wants to get shipped out of here because I thought he had potential to be a really good number two here behind Igor for a long time. Finding another backup isn't a huge deal, but it would have been nice to have had an in-house, long-term solution.

[Phil]

How many teams have long-term backups? Not sure the concept even exists in reality.

[Sharpshooter]

Not many, but initially I thought him being here a bit longer wasn't an unreasonable outlook. But again, it's water under the bridge at this point anyway.

[jsm7302]

Where is Cam Talbot? He was an awesome backup. I liked that guy.

[Pete]

5 minutes ago, jsm7302 said:

Where is Cam Talbot? He was an awesome backup. I liked that guy.

He's the starting goalie in Minnesota. 

[Kick save and a beauty]

He has not helped either us or himself to find a trade partner with his indifferent play.  Given this and the fact that we do still need a backup this year I think it unlikely that anything is done at the trade deadline.

 

I liked Georgie but he needed to show a little more.

[Kevin]

52 minutes ago, Kick save and a beauty said:

He has not helped either us or himself to find a trade partner with his indifferent play.  Given this and the fact that we do still need a backup this year I think it unlikely that anything is done at the trade deadline.

 

I liked Georgie but he needed to show a little more.

I actually thought he showed well when Shesty was hurt and he got an extended look.  The piecemeal, back-up, playing time is where he struggled.  Looking at some of the goaltending situations in the league, I would imagine at least one team will look at how he did when he was the starting goalie and want to take a flyer on him.  

[siddious]

Yea but always going to be a piece meal backup here because of Shesty.