What Is Ryan Lindgren's Future as a Ranger?

[RJWantsTheCup]

Quote

In a recent mailbag for The Athletic, Arthur Staple wrote that the Rangers would likely prefer to sign Lindgren to a seven- or eight-year contract extension in the upper $3 or lower $4 million range. Staple also wrote that the Rangers could look to trade him if they are not close to an extension

 

https://thehockeywriters.com/rangers-news-rumors-lindgren-lafreniere-pto-targets/

[Sharpshooter]

Even though he gets hurt a lot, I would totally give him those years. He's the most valuable guy on the blueline they have from a defensive standpoint.

[RJWantsTheCup]

1 minute ago, Sharpshooter said:

Even though he gets hurt a lot, I would totally give him those years. He's the most valuable guy on the blueline they have from a defensive standpoint.

Anything under 4M a year for Lindgren has to be seen as a bargain.

[Sharpshooter]

Just now, RJWantsTheCup said:

Anything under 4M a year for Lindgren has to be seen as a bargain.

No doubt. It'll probably in the high three million range if I had to guess. Great deal.

[siddious]

19 minutes ago, RJWantsTheCup said:

In a recent mailbag for The Athletic, Arthur Staple wrote that the Rangers would likely prefer to sign Lindgren to a seven- or eight-year contract extension in the upper $3 or lower $4 million range. Staple also wrote that the Rangers could look to trade him if they are not close to an extension

Can’t remember where I wrote it but a while back I said this is the ideal deal for him. Low aav, long term. Keep him with fox, it works.

[Sharpshooter]

Lindgren is the best thing that came out of Rick Nash playing for the Rangers.

[Ozzy]

Lindgren should absolutely stay, and a few hundred K shouldn't make a difference.  High $3M, or low $4M....kinda reminds me of the Jesper fast situation.  I think Drury knows better!

[RangersIn7]

Keeping Lindgren around is an essential thing. 

[RangersIn7]

Only concern I have with Lindgren is his health and how he will age based on his style of play.

 

He’s 25 now. 26 in February, so he’ll be 26, going on 27 when his new contract were to kick in, whenever he might specifically sign it. 
More than 5-6 seasons with him is risky. I can’t say with confidence, based on how he plays, that he’d be healthy and effective past, say, age 31, maybe 32. Guys like him who play the way he does, don’t age well. 

He’s a guy who will hit age 31-32, and be very beaten up and be in decline. 
He’s in the mold of past Rangers like Callahan, and Girardi, and going back somewhat further, Graves and Beukeboom.

Those guys got to be that age, were all banged up, higher mileage, had a hard time staying healthy, were always playing through something or on the shelf, and were much less effective.

Obviously some of the risk is mitigated if they can keep the AAV and total dollars down and front loaded. That makes him much more easy to manage, be it trade or buyout if it were to come to that. 

6 years is probably all I’d go on him.

$4.5-5 million or a bit over is my max too.

I totally think they should keep him. They just need to be smart about how they do it.

Edited August 10, 2023 by RangersIn7

[Phil]

2 hours ago, RJWantsTheCup said:

 

https://thehockeywriters.com/rangers-news-rumors-lindgren-lafreniere-pto-targets/

 

I'm adding the article this came from because the way it's written is kind of a disingenuous interpretation of what Staple actually said:

 

Quote

I could see, if the Rangers decide they agree with you, this being a long-term/lower-AAV deal. Something like 7-8 years in the upper 3/low 4-million range, the type of deal you see Lightning players sign to keep the cap flexibility. It would certainly be a deal that won’t age well by year 4 or 5, but that’s the price of retaining your young free agents.

 

Or the initial talks could become a stalemate quickly and the Rangers would look elsewhere for a top-four LHD next summer.

 

https://theathletic.com/4757037/2023/08/08/rangers-filip-chytil-jacob-trouba-contract-buyout-panarin-lindgren/

 

This was a direct response to a question that was sent in. "I could see, if the Rangers decide they agree with you" is a far cry from "likely prefer to," and "could become a stalemate quickly and the Rangers would look elsewhere" doesn't even remotely comport to "the Rangers could look to trade him if they are not close to an extension."

[Cash or Czech]

2 hours ago, RJWantsTheCup said:

 

https://thehockeywriters.com/rangers-news-rumors-lindgren-lafreniere-pto-targets/

 

Fuck it, I take that in a heartbeat. I don't know if he'd sign that.

[Phil]

So would I. I'm just adding really critical context. Staple didn't say what that THN article says/implies he did. All of this is pure speculation based on a user-submitted question.

[RangersIn7]

9 minutes ago, Phil said:

So would I. I'm just adding really critical context. Staple didn't say what that THN article says/implies he did. All of this is pure speculation based on a user-submitted question.

I wouldn’t sign for less than $4.5 per if I were him. He’s worth that. And he knows it too.

If they wanted to duke him an extra year or two in paydays, then yeah, he can go under that. 
 

5-6 seasons, $4.5 AAV, in the $25-30 million total value, with bonus and salary front loaded, is ideal for him. 
 

You get into 7 or 8, it’s problems.

I love the guy and you have to keep him around but you can’t go above certain limits with him, cause as much as we all love him, he’s going to hit age 31-32 and be a shell.

Now listen, if you keep the AAV low, you can live with him being a shell and having him on a bottom pair and not get killed by what you’re paying him. 
But if it’s beyond 5-6 seasons, it’s a risk. 
One that you can limit, but still a risk.

[Cash or Czech]

28 minutes ago, Phil said:

So would I. I'm just adding really critical context. Staple didn't say what that THN article says/implies he did. All of this is pure speculation based on a user-submitted question.

 

It's August. Go quote yourself on Xwitter or something and stop bringing my vibe down  

[Phil]

8 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

I wouldn’t sign for less than $4.5 per if I were him. He’s worth that. And he knows it too.

If they wanted to duke him an extra year or two in paydays, then yeah, he can go under that. 
 

5-6 seasons, $4.5 AAV, in the $25-30 million total value, with bonus and salary front loaded, is ideal for him. 
 

You get into 7 or 8, it’s problems.

I love the guy and you have to keep him around but you can’t go above certain limits with him, cause as much as we all love him, he’s going to hit age 31-32 and be a shell.

Now listen, if you keep the AAV low, you can live with him being a shell and having him on a bottom pair and not get killed by what you’re paying him. 
But if it’s beyond 5-6 seasons, it’s a risk. 
One that you can limit, but still a risk.

 

Honestly, even $4.5 million is low and a borderline pipe dream. Under $4 million is fantasy.

 

He turns 26 shortly after the new year (February), so by my eye, the comparable deals to look at here are:

 

Cernak, $5.2m x 8, signed at 26, 6.3 CH% (Cap Hit Percentage)

Pelech, $5.75m x 8, signed at 26, 7.06 CH%

Lindell, $5.8m x 8, signed at 25, 7.3 CH%

In other words, $5 million is the benchmark.

 

 

[Phil]

3 minutes ago, Cash or Czech said:

 

It's August. Go quote yourself on Xwitter or something and stop bringing my vibe down  

 

Listen here, fake news — you want the same rate limit as @siddious?

[Cash or Czech]

1 minute ago, Phil said:

 

Listen here, fake news — you want the same rate limit as @siddious?

 

Oh god hope I can still post my puckdoku score with a rate limit

[RangersIn7]

1 hour ago, Phil said:

 

Honestly, even $4.5 million is low and a borderline pipe dream. Under $4 million is fantasy.

 

He turns 26 shortly after the new year (February), so by my eye, the comparable deals to look at here are:

 

Cernak, $5.2m x 8, signed at 26, 6.3 CH% (Cap Hit Percentage)

Pelech, $5.75m x 8, signed at 26, 7.06 CH%

Lindell, $5.8m x 8, signed at 25, 7.3 CH%

In other words, $5 million is the benchmark.

 

 

I agree Phil.

Thats why I said what I said in the way that I said it.

And also why I said ALL the things I said.

It’s all there buddy. 

 

Personally, I don’t think there’s any prayer of locking him up long-term without at least a 50% pay raise, and a minimum of 5-6 years of guaranteed employment, money, paydays.

 

So listen, to be more specific, I’d do this.

 

Give him 6 seasons.

Give him as much as you can in lockout proof, non-escrow, bonus money.

While also giving him as much as you can in salary in the first 3-4seasons. 
Limit his trade protection as much as you can, especially later on. And move forward.

 

If they gave him say, 6 years.

That runs through age 32. 
I could totally live with an AAV of say, $5.35 million. $32 million or so, total. But you give him a big bonus, and pay it out in the first 3 seasons.

Low salary in years 1&2, Bigger salaries in years 3&4. 
You pay him 70%+ of his money through years 3-4, give him NMC first 4 seasons, NTC in 5&6. 
He’s flexible and has value under those terms.

It’s a deal that works out for everyone.

 

 

Edited August 10, 2023 by RangersIn7

[Br4d]

Depending on how things go this season I give it a slightly higher probability that Lindgren is traded at the deadline to a playoff bound team needing an LD than that he is resigned to a long-term deal.

 

The cap is still the cap and the Rangers are still up against it.  They will likely be looking to recoup some of the draft space they have traded away in recent seasons.

[RangersIn7]

11 minutes ago, Br4d said:

Depending on how things go this season I give it a slightly higher probability that Lindgren is traded at the deadline to a playoff bound team needing an LD than that he is resigned to a long-term deal.

 

The cap is still the cap and the Rangers are still up against it.  They will likely be looking to recoup some of the draft space they have traded away in recent seasons.

That’s alarmist. And they have no suitable replacement. Certainly not above his quality at his money. 

 

Theyll be fine.

Theyll have the space and means to keep him. 

[Br4d]

4 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

That’s alarmist. And they have no suitable replacement. Certainly not above his quality at his money. 

 

Theyll be fine.

Theyll have the space and means to keep him. 

 

Continually stretching out to maintain the same player base is a mistake and my guess is the Rangers know that by now.

 

Lindgren is a gutty solid defenseman who is often injured or playing hurt.  He's easily replaceable albeit not as Fox's high school buddy.  I think the Rangers are going to see push come to shove this season and I think Lindgren is one of the most likely guys to go during that process.

[RangersIn7]

2 minutes ago, Br4d said:

 

Continually stretching out to maintain the same player base is a mistake and my guess is the Rangers know that by now.

 

Lindgren is a gutty solid defenseman who is often injured or playing hurt.  He's easily replaceable albeit not as Fox's high school buddy.  I think the Rangers are going to see push come to shove this season and I think Lindgren is one of the most likely guys to go during that process.

I don’t think Lindgren is an issue for them to keep now, nor have over the next 4 seasons.

As long as there a some flex.

 

The deal I was talking about gives them that and takes good care of him. 

Edited August 10, 2023 by RangersIn7

[siddious]

2 hours ago, Phil said:

 

Listen here, fake news — you want the same rate limit as @siddious?

Such I shame I can’t comment in all the various new threads every day on this super happening forum 

 

[Phil]

1 minute ago, siddious said:

Such I shame I can’t comment in all the various new threads every day on this super happening forum 

 

 

Be the change you want to see in the world, bro. I'll even consider lifting your rate limit to help you achieve it.

[Br4d]

4 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

I don’t think Lindgren is an issue for them to keep now, nor have over the next 4 seasons.

As long as there a some flex.

 

The deal I was talking about gives them that and takes good care of him. 

 

The easiest way to tell the players that the gravy train is over and things are changing is to send somebody who actually wants to be here out of town for futures.

 

Lindgren makes a textbook sacrifice example.  He's not a core player and he doesn't have one of the NMC's.

 

Obviously it would be even more effective from a cap standpoint to send one of the big guns out of town and get a present return, but other than Fox and Igor there are NMC's standing in the way and I don't think the Rangers will trade either of those two unless they get overwhelmed by an offer.