Ima Say it... Trade Shesterkin?

[Sharpshooter]

16 minutes ago, Ozzy said:

 

As much as I'm going to hate the day he ends up going, this is pretty much dead on the money, Phil.

 

This is the same path we went down with Hank, and I think Drury being a part of that, would kinda remember it very well.  At least we have some time left with him, and the window to win is open.  We have 2 kicks at the can with him, and hopefully we can notch a Cup.  That would make it a little easier to say goodbye for me, when that time comes.

The difference with Hank was that when they signed him, he didn't have too many great years left. Shesterkin is still well in his prime. I'm not saying I would do it, but something to consider at least. Depending what bigger team needs are next offseason, it probably won't happen anyway.

 

Edit: Although maybe I'm not remembering correctly when exactly they re-signed Hank, but pretty sure he was a bit older than Shesterkin will be next season.

Edited December 18, 2023 by Sharpshooter

[JHS]

This thread is unreal-  the guy has a few bad games and people actually think he should be traded...please.  This team is trying to win the cup now, not get a bunch of young guys for a vezena winning goalie.

[BrooksBurner]

Drury as a player was familiar with having elite goaltending on his teams. Roy, Ryan Miller, Lundqvist. Multiple deep runs. Cup win with Roy. His experiences as a player on competitive playoff teams says he will keep Shesterkin.

[Phil]

2 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

Drury as a player was familiar with having elite goaltending on his teams. Roy, Ryan Miller, Lundqvist. Multiple deep runs. Cup win with Roy. His experiences as a player on competitive playoff teams says he will keep Shesterkin.

 

Maybe, yes, but none of those teams signed those goalies to crippling AAVs (when the cap mattered). The one that came closest was Lundqvist, and that coincided with the end of Drury's career anyway.

 

Again, the issue isn't "do we keep him?" it's "what is he actually worth?" or "what can they actually afford to a pay him?"

Sorokin (28) and Hellebuyck (30) set the market here. It's a minimum of $8.25 million or $8.5 million per.

[Phil]

1 hour ago, Sharpshooter said:

The difference with Hank was that when they signed him, he didn't have too many great years left. Shesterkin is still well in his prime. I'm not saying I would do it, but something to consider at least. Depending what bigger team needs are next offseason, it probably won't happen anyway.

 

Edit: Although maybe I'm not remembering correctly when exactly they re-signed Hank, but pretty sure he was a bit older than Shesterkin will be next season.

 

Hank re-signed at age 31/32.

[The Dude]

3 hours ago, Phil said:

 

They have a top-six center. Two, in fact. Trocheck is on a PDO-fueled bender this season, but even at his career average, he's a quality enough second-line center who is guaranteed to play with high-end level players who will likely inflate his totals (like Strome). What they need is a dependable third line center, because I agree, they can't rely on Chytil. Four concussions, at least, before the age of 25 is extremely worrying.

 

 

 

Because it imbalances any team who tries it. What team is sitting around in desperate need of a 1G who also has an NHL-level second-line center that they can afford to trade for that goalie that wouldn't immediately screw up the balance of their team? Look at almost any goalie trade in history, especially one for a star-level starter — they never happen in-season and they almost never happen for players:

 

Hasek went for another goalie and a prospect.

Roy went for a goalie (Thibault), Martin Ručinský and Andrei Kovalenko

Rask was traded at the draft for a goalie (Raycroft).

Schneider was traded at the draft for the ninth overall pick.

Luongo went for a goalie (Alex Auld) and Bryan Allen.

 

Noticing the trend? Any Shesterkin trade is goalie-for-goalie, salted and peppered to taste. Which is why it's so unlikely to happen. What's far more likely is they ride his deal out and maybe trade his rights at the draft to a team looking to sign him long-term ahead of free agency.

 

I don't want to rely on Trocheck to be this good throughout his contract. I like the initial plan of him being a really really good 3C. 

 

I can think of a few scenarios where a trade for a 2C type actually works,  makes sense and doesn't destroy the other team. 

 

Toronto- trade for Nylander.  Now. Toronto likely can't afford his next contract. If the cap goes up, I'd think the Rangers could with another move or 2. If the want to keep him, Marner can't stay in Toronto. I'd take Marner off their hands. Toronto can afford Shesterkin this year and next with such a move. Past that? IDK. 

 

Edmonton- here they'd be in the scenario of having to take a goalie back. RNH, Skinner and a pick is just about enough a return for me. 

 

I'm simply going by the thought that these 2 teams are super desperate for a top goalie. Its been their needs for 5+ years now. One of them has to make a big splash for a goalie. Their trade chips aren't good goalies and the cap comes into play in this day and age. It didn't really effect the deals you brought up. If the Rangers were to deal Shesterkin its going to have to be for a well paid player or a package. 

 

But since neither of the teams that Im suggesting (as having the most interest).jumped on Raanta being on waivers, I guess I'm wrong. 

 

I guess your last point is pretty much what we should expect (trade his rights whennext seasonisover). I just hate losing an asset like that. 

[The Dude]

15 hours ago, 4EverRangerFrank said:

Maybe we’re barking up the wrong tree. How can we want to rid ourselves of what is arguably a very enviable situation - we have an elite goalie - who has come down to earth harder and more often than we are used to but still expect another dance partner to look past the obvious and give us a huge return? What? Seriously?

 

Are you willing to watch Igor soar elsewhere? Stone us when we play against him? You know he will! Have him beat us in a Cup final?

 

So, the money part. Cap going up helps. Does he want to play his best years in EDM or TOR? I’m only guessing but I think we can get him to stay a Ranger at just under market rate. If he needs every cent then by all means GTFO. 
 

I’m in the lonesome camp of wanting him here. Because I think he’ll return to form. The glove is a problem. Benoit Balls has a job to do with that. I’m not eager to see him help another team beat us. If getting Igor shows McDavid that ‘they’re committed to winning’ then by trading him, WTF did we just do to ourselves?
 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't want to trade him because he's struggling.  Not at all. I've been saying I don't want to pay him his next contract for years now. It killed the Rangers with Lundqvist. Shesterkin is older and will command a bigger portion of the cap. I think the negatives outweigh the positives. 

 

I'd absolutely keep him at 8 mill until he's 34. He's going to get paid at least 10 mill till he's like 38.  

[The Dude]

1 hour ago, JHS said:

This thread is unreal-  the guy has a few bad games and people actually think he should be traded...please.  This team is trying to win the cup now, not get a bunch of young guys for a vezena winning goalie.

Maybe re-read the OP. 

 

Cool. Thanks. 

[BreakawayMachine]

Shesty for Jack and Luke Hughes.

[Sharpshooter]

2 hours ago, Phil said:

 

Hank re-signed at age 31/32.

OK. Big difference, though. Henrik was on his way down when he re-signed. Igor will only be 28, so I think that matters. I know what you're saying, though. I have a feeling they'll extend him, but we'll see.

[Phil]

8 minutes ago, Sharpshooter said:

OK. Big difference, though. Henrik was on his way down when he re-signed. Igor will only be 28, so I think that matters. I know what you're saying, though. I have a feeling they'll extend him, but we'll see.

 

He wasn't. Career .918, 2.43 GAA goalie. His "decline" started age 36:

 

Age 31: .920, 2.36 GAA, 5 SO
Age 32: .922, 2.25 GAA, 5 SO

Age 33: .920, 2.48 GAA, 4 SO

Age 34: .910, 2.74 GAA, 2 SO

Age 35: .915, 2.98 GAA, 2 SO

Age 36: .907, 3.07 GAA, 0 SO

Age 37: .905, 3.16 GAA, 1 SO

 

I think they're re-signing Shesterkin, too, I just want to be clear and on the record that I hate the idea of giving any starter $8, $9 million+ per year.

[Sharpshooter]

6 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

He wasn't. Career .918, 2.43 GAA goalie. His "decline" started age 36:

 

Age 31: .920, 2.36 GAA, 5 SO
Age 32: .922, 2.25 GAA, 5 SO

Age 33: .920, 2.48 GAA, 4 SO

Age 34: .910, 2.74 GAA, 2 SO

Age 35: .915, 2.98 GAA, 2 SO

Age 36: .907, 3.07 GAA, 0 SO

Age 37: .905, 3.16 GAA, 1 SO

 

I think they're re-signing Shesterkin, too, I just want to be clear and on the record that I hate the idea of giving any starter $8, $9 million+ per year.

Assuming he has a great season in a contract year, prepare to hate. lol

[Keirik]

4 hours ago, The Dude said:

I don't want to trade him because he's struggling.  Not at all. I've been saying I don't want to pay him his next contract for years now. It killed the Rangers with Lundqvist. Shesterkin is older and will command a bigger portion of the cap. I think the negatives outweigh the positives. 

 

I'd absolutely keep him at 8 mill until he's 34. He's going to get paid at least 10 mill till he's like 38.  

A few things. How did Lundqvists last contract kill the Rangers? He performed fabulously until the very end of it. 

 

   Also when Hank signed his largest 8.5m cap hit contract, it was for the 14/15 season when he was 32 years old. The cap was 69m. His contract took up 12.3% of the cap that season. By the time he was bought out, the cap was 81.5m and his contract took up 10.4% of the cap. 

 

   In contrast, Shesterkin is currently 27 years old (about to turn 28). When his next contract kicks in, he will be 29 years old going on 30 in December. That's 2 years younger than Hank was when he signed his big deal. Even if he signs a 10m cap hit for that contract, the cap next season is at a minimum 87.7m. That would mean his cap hit would take up 11.4%. If he signed at 11m, its 12.5% which is right around Hank. He would be younger than Hank was and take up less or the same approximately and likely less as the cap continues to increase as it has every season sans covid flat cap years.

 

  I think 12m is way high of an ask on his part. I'd think he settles under bread's contract on this team.  I'd personally be less worried about a return on our #1 when we are currently one of the best teams in the league. I'd even ride him next year if it gets us to the finals and let him walk if it comes down to a team offering 14% of the cap for him. Let that be there problem. I'm not ruining these two years of a potential cup however just because im worried on a return. 

[Valriera]

This is not complicated because the play is obviously you ride shesterkin out until his contract ends and then you either trade his rights or let him walk. There’s literally no scenario that makes sense to try to flip him at any deadline we’re in the playoffs for, and while I’d love to fantasize about trading him in the offseason for someone we all know that’s not happening. 
 

he’s been one of the best value contracts in the league for the duration, that is enough value right there. No need to try to milk something out of someone at the deadline while we’re in the playoffs. An 8m goalie at a 4/5m contract is the definition of self rental and it’s not going to get better.

 

his next 8m contract is so far out of the picture if something we should be doing that I’m not sure it’s worth discussing 

Edited December 19, 2023 by Valriera

[JHS]

8 hours ago, The Dude said:

Maybe re-read the OP. 

 

Cool. Thanks. 

You asked a series of hypothetical questions about getting top value for a premier NHL goalie, offered 0 replacement options, absolutely no context to why this trade would make any sense.  Let’s both be honest, this thread is never started if Igor did not give up over 5 goals in two of his most recent starts.  It’s not a real option to trade Igor- at best it’s absurd.

[Phil]

15 hours ago, Keirik said:

A few things. How did Lundqvists last contract kill the Rangers? He performed fabulously until the very end of it. 

 

   Also when Hank signed his largest 8.5m cap hit contract, it was for the 14/15 season when he was 32 years old. The cap was 69m. His contract took up 12.3% of the cap that season. By the time he was bought out, the cap was 81.5m and his contract took up 10.4% of the cap. 

 

   In contrast, Shesterkin is currently 27 years old (about to turn 28). When his next contract kicks in, he will be 29 years old going on 30 in December. That's 2 years younger than Hank was when he signed his big deal. Even if he signs a 10m cap hit for that contract, the cap next season is at a minimum 87.7m. That would mean his cap hit would take up 11.4%. If he signed at 11m, its 12.5% which is right around Hank. He would be younger than Hank was and take up less or the same approximately and likely less as the cap continues to increase as it has every season sans covid flat cap years.

 

  I think 12m is way high of an ask on his part. I'd think he settles under bread's contract on this team.  I'd personally be less worried about a return on our #1 when we are currently one of the best teams in the league. I'd even ride him next year if it gets us to the finals and let him walk if it comes down to a team offering 14% of the cap for him. Let that be there problem. I'm not ruining these two years of a potential cup however just because im worried on a return. 

 

If the Rangers sign Shesterkin to a new deal worth $11 or $12 million annually, they're fucking stupid, and the get what they deserve. Hellebuyck ($8.5M signed at 30) and Sorokin ($8.25M signed at 28) set the market. Giving Shesterkin, with worse numbers than Sorokin, $3M+ more per season is certifiable insanity.

 

The absolute maximum he should be asking for (or settle for) is $9 million based on having won a Vezina.

[Keirik]

Just now, Phil said:

 

If the Rangers sign Shesterkin to a new deal worth $11 or $12 million annually, they're fucking stupid, and the get what they deserve. Hellebuyck ($8.5M signed at 30) and Sorokin ($8.25M signed at 28) set the market. Giving Shesterkin, with worse numbers than Sorokin, $3M+ more per season is certifiable insanity.

 

The absolute maximum he should be asking for (or settle for) is $9 million based on having won a Vezina.

I'm thinking 9m range as the tax for winning a Vezina but absolutely agree.  I'll throw some comparables for the last 3 seasons between Shesty and the two you listed. I'd imagine it matches nearly identical between Sorokin and Shesty with the possible tax added for a trophy. 

 

 

Rk	Player	Age	From	To	GP	GS	W	L	T/O	GA	SV%	GAA	SV	Shots	GA%-	GSAA	SO	PIM	MIN	QS	QS%	RBS	G	A	PTS
1	Igor Shesterkin	26-28	2021-22	2023-24	129	128	84	33	12	301	.922	2.37	3570	3871	82.2	65.4	9	6	7612:37	84	.656	13	0	2	2
2	Ilya Sorokin	26-28	2021-22	2023-24	133	131	65	44	22	324	.922	2.49	3852	4176	82.0	71.3	15	0	7822:38	90	.687	16	0	1	1

 

Rk	Player	Age	From	To	GP	GS	W	L	T/O	GA	SV%	GAA	SV	Shots	GA%-	GSAA	SO	PIM	MIN	QS	QS%	RBS	G	A	PTS
1	Connor Hellebuyck	28-30	2021-22	2023-24	153	153	81	58	14	406	.915	2.69	4379	4785	89.6	46.9	9	0	9064:33	98	.641	19	0	2	2
2	Igor Shesterkin	26-28	2021-22	2023-24	129	128	84	33	12	301	.922	2.37	3570	3871	82.2	65.4	9	6	7612:37	84	.656	13	0	2	2

 

 

 

[The Dude]

22 hours ago, JHS said:

You asked a series of hypothetical questions about getting top value for a premier NHL goalie, offered 0 replacement options, absolutely no context to why this trade would make any sense.  Let’s both be honest, this thread is never started if Igor did not give up over 5 goals in two of his most recent starts.  It’s not a real option to trade Igor- at best it’s absurd.

This thread has been thought about for atleast 2 years now, by many of us. It was hypothetical,  but you wanted every option on the opening talking point? The title has a question mark in it. Kinda suggesting that I was asking for opinions.

 

All of this was subject to opinion, with the solid fact that a bunch of us don't want to give him his next contract, as the backbone for the conversation. 

 

I offer replacements later in the thread. Not sure why you're so butt hurt about the thread. I mean, didn't I say this is just for conversation in the OP? And that it's unlikely that they can get by without him?  Hence why I said to re-read the OP. 

 

It's absurd to think about getting value for a top goalie whom is likely not signing his next contract here in a year?

 

Nah. 

[JHS]

Good to see Igor is back to playing great again as tonight’s game vs the Leafs suggests he’s still capable of paying strong minutes against good offensive teams.

 

I don’t believe anyone should worry about the next contract now as it’s just speculative.  If the Rangers win a cup this season or before the contract is up then he’s a Ranger legend and will get a contract no doubt.  
 

The reason I say it’s absurd is, by trading him you are shifting the timeline of the “win now window” even further and completely miss-aligning it with the development of the core talent in the team.  There is no way they can keep all these guys together a few years from now so their window is at most the next 3 seasons.  Trading Igor to “rebuild” or bring in another star player would make absolutely no sense because it would leave a massive hole in net right at the time they need their best option playing goalie.  If you can’t see that and are so hell bent on constantly looking ahead, I want to tell you that you’re destined for a Ranger fandom plagued by never enjoying the now!  This is a hell of a good hockey team that’s anchored by a vezenia caliber goalie that can steal wins better than almost any goalie in the league and maybe is only surpassed by Hank in Ranger history.  He’s earned this contract and probably one more but there will be time to sort this out.

Edited December 20, 2023 by JHS

[The Dude]

 

On 12/18/2023 at 6:45 PM, Keirik said:

A few things. How did Lundqvists last contract kill the Rangers? He performed fabulously until the very end of it. 

 

   Also when Hank signed his largest 8.5m cap hit contract, it was for the 14/15 season when he was 32 years old. The cap was 69m. His contract took up 12.3% of the cap that season. By the time he was bought out, the cap was 81.5m and his contract took up 10.4% of the cap. 

 

   In contrast, Shesterkin is currently 27 years old (about to turn 28). When his next contract kicks in, he will be 29 years old going on 30 in December. That's 2 years younger than Hank was when he signed his big deal. Even if he signs a 10m cap hit for that contract, the cap next season is at a minimum 87.7m. That would mean his cap hit would take up 11.4%. If he signed at 11m, its 12.5% which is right around Hank. He would be younger than Hank was and take up less or the same approximately and likely less as the cap continues to increase as it has every season sans covid flat cap years.

 

  I think 12m is way high of an ask on his part. I'd think he settles under bread's contract on this team.  I'd personally be less worried about a return on our #1 when we are currently one of the best teams in the league. I'd even ride him next year if it gets us to the finals and let him walk if it comes down to a team offering 14% of the cap for him. Let that be there problem. I'm not ruining these two years of a potential cup however just because im worried on a return. 

Meh. Lundqvist was in slow decline in his last 2 maybe 3 years. I mean,  they bought him out man. It affected their cap situation.  

 

I think 10 mill is way too high. The notion that 11% of the cap dedicated to the goalie seems to have been proven to be way too much and a majority of the cup winners don't spend that much. 

 

In the end like Phil said, it's likely they probably just ride it out and only get assets for his rights before he hits free agency. 

 

Many have made good cases and shown enough proof that star goalies don't seem to get traded in season if at all. 

[The Dude]

18 minutes ago, JHS said:

Good to see Igor is back to playing great again as tonight’s game vs the Leafs suggests he’s still capable of paying strong minutes against good offensive teams.

 

I don’t believe anyone should worry about the next contract now as it’s just speculative.  If the Rangers win a cup this season or before the contract is up then he’s a Ranger legend and will get a contract no doubt.  
 

The reason I say it’s absurd is, by trading him you are shifting the timeline of the “win now window” even further and completely miss-aligning it with the development of the core talent in the team.  There is no way they can keep all these guys together a few years from now so their window is at most the next 3 seasons.  Trading Igor to “rebuild” or bring in another star player would make absolutely no sense because it would leave a massive hole in net right at the time they need their best option playing goalie.  If you can’t see that and are so hell bent on constantly looking ahead, I want to tell you that you’re destined for a Ranger fandom plagued by never enjoying the now!  This is a hell of a good hockey team that’s anchored by a vezenia caliber goalie that can steal wins better than almost any goalie in the league and maybe is only surpassed by Hank in Ranger history.  He’s earned this contract and probably one more but there will be time to sort this out.

Agree with most except for the line that he's still the anchor.

 

He's their best option. He's one of the leagues best. But it's been proven that teams don't require that caliber of a goalie to win a cup. Do I want to ride or die with Shesterkin? Yes. Do I think they have to? No. 

 

I can see all the other points made by you and some others though. Again.  It was just for conversation.  We had a "Trade Panarin" thread that lasted 3 years and people were down right serious about it. I thought asking peoples thoughts on the hypotheticals of the notion would be good fodder. 

 

[Keirik]

51 minutes ago, The Dude said:

 

Meh. Lundqvist was in slow decline in his last 2 maybe 3 years. I mean,  they bought him out man. It affected their cap situation.  

 

I think 10 mill is way too high. The notion that 11% of the cap dedicated to the goalie seems to have been proven to be way too much and a majority of the cup winners don't spend that much. 

 

In the end like Phil said, it's likely they probably just ride it out and only get assets for his rights before he hits free agency. 

 

Many have made good cases and shown enough proof that star goalies don't seem to get traded in season if at all. 

They bought Lundqvist it the last year of his contract after a couple of years of publicly tearing down the team. That's a far fetch between his contract hurting the team. And it was more to do with wanting to just give a young Shesty the job without a HOF legend staring him down at the bench. The contracts of guys like .Shattenkirk,  keeping both Staal and Girardi, Brendan Smith being overpaid and even later ADA hurt the Rangers a heck of a lot more than Hanks contract ever did. 
 

Vasilevskiy takes up 11.4% of the Lightnings cap. They went to two straight finals recently with that occurring (3 but the first cup win was before his big contract kicked in). That's 3 out of the 4 most recent years.  Quick took up 9% of the cap when they squared off against us in the finals. There hasn't been anything "proven" about how much of a cap hit should be taken up by goalies. It's fine to have a different opinion on building a team, but you can't say something is a proven notion. There just are different ways to build a team.
 

   Some teams have 2-3 HOFers on their roster like the Pens did with Sid and Geno, Kane and Toews on Chicago, or Ovi, Carlson, Backstorm. Some dont. Plenty of teams still win though because of goalies. I'm not discounting that because sometimes you strike lightning in a bottle and get elite goaltending out of non elite goalies. 

 

just wanted to throw in an edit so there is no confusion, I'm not saying you're 100% wrong, I just think there is more than one way to win a championship. I also look at it in terms of for every team that wins with a journey man / unexpected goalie rising / one last kick at the an goalie, there are dozens of stacked teams like the Leafs, Oilers, et Al that specifically don't win because they try to do so with subpar goaltending or are afraid to have a legit star at the position.

 

if the argument is that Igor isn't a star now because of a couple of bad weeks then I do also think this is a bit crazy of a thread. Still makes fun conversation I guess. 
 

 

[Br4d]

Igor's trade value skyrocketing!

[jsm7302]

Goaltending should take up around 10% of the cap. 8ish for the starter 1-1.5 for the backup.

 

Imagine a scenario where we make it to the SCF, Igor goes down and Quick brings the SC home to NY.......WOW.....What a narrative.....perfectly fitting for NY.

[siddious]

21 minutes ago, jsm7302 said:

Goaltending should take up around 10% of the cap. 8ish for the starter 1-1.5 for the backup.

 

Imagine a scenario where we make it to the SCF, Igor goes down and Quick brings the SC home to NY.......WOW.....What a narrative.....perfectly fitting for NY.

That would be incredible..

 

But also… Fuck the Kings