Toggle sidebar

News Article: Hard for Lundqvist to "picture myself playing elsewhere"

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Brooklyn Ranger said:
Except more than half of the hockey fans in the NYC area would hate him. I think it's the one team Lundqvist wouldn't go near.
Click to expand...

You could make an argument about the Devils as well. Bottom line is that 2 out of the 3 local fan bases alreadly hate Lundqvist. Regardless of who he winds up playing for it will always be that way. Lundqvist will do what's best for him & him alone. The fan's opinion of him isn't even a distant 2nd or 3rd.

This can be said of every player playing a professional sport.If lockouts & work stopages have taught us anything the past 20 years is that sports is a business first & foremost now.
 
Baby Punisher said:
You could make an argument about the Devils as well. Bottom line is that 2 out of the 3 local fan bases alreadly hate Lundqvist. Regardless of who he winds up playing for it will always be that way. Lundqvist will do what's best for him & him alone. The fan's opinion of him isn't even a distant 2nd or 3rd.

This can be said of every player playing a professional sport.If lockouts & work stopages have taught us anything the past 20 years is that sports is a business first & foremost now.
Click to expand...

Except it can't, because these are human beings we're talking about not robots. Hank very well could care a lot about the fans opinion of him. Then again he might not care at all, in the end does it weigh in enough to become a deciding factor? Probably not.

Regardless, there are individuals out there who see more than just dollar signs. I understand the gut wrench reaction, we're all a little jaded from the lockouts, but I think in this case it's an unfair generalization.
 
Legacy, winning, money, quality of life. All of these things are potential factors for ANY player. Any statement about which factor is more important to Lundqvist is mere conjecture at this point.
 
Crease said:
Legacy, winning, money, quality of life. All of these things are potential factors for ANY player. Any statement about which factor is more important to Lundqvist is mere conjecture at this point.
Click to expand...

It serves as a buffer in the case he does leave, then people will remember the discussions we had and how it was suggested he was self centered and didn't care about the fans. People will then cling to that and we'll read it a gagillion times around here because it will make it easier for them to come to grasps with him leaving.

For the record, I don't see him leaving.
 
Baby Punisher said:
You could make an argument about the Devils as well. Bottom line is that 2 out of the 3 local fan bases alreadly hate Lundqvist. Regardless of who he winds up playing for it will always be that way. Lundqvist will do what's best for him & him alone. The fan's opinion of him isn't even a distant 2nd or 3rd.

This can be said of every player playing a professional sport.If lockouts & work stopages have taught us anything the past 20 years is that sports is a business first & foremost now.
Click to expand...

What I was saying is that Ranger fans (who are the majority of hockey fans in NYC) would hate Lundqvist if he signed as a free agent with the Isles.
 
Baby Punisher said:
Brooklyn is still considered NY. It could happen. Hank get;s everythig he wants. Money, power, young team with a bona fide superstar, access to Manhattan etc. He really could have his cake & eat it too.
Click to expand...

I don't think Hank cares about whether or not there's a "bona fide superstar" on a team, nor would I imagine he cares how old a team is. If anything, he wants a team that's close to winning. I don't think the Isles are closer than the Rangers in any way.
 
Baby Punisher said:
Brooklyn is still considered NY. It could happen. Hank get;s everythig he wants. Money, power, young team with a bona fide superstar, access to Manhattan etc. He really could have his cake & eat it too.
Click to expand...

Not only do big free agents not sign with the islanders, players who are traded there refuse to report. The only free agents that do sign there are players that really don't have other options. They may have a brighter future now that they have a long contract with an arena, but they're still at the bottom of the league financially.
 
Mr Atoz said:
Not only do big free agents not sign with the islanders, players who are traded there refuse to report. The only free agents that do sign there are players that really don't have other options. They may have a brighter future now that they have a long contract with an arena, but they're still at the bottom of the league financially.
Click to expand...

I agree, however things change. It just takes one big free agent signing with the Islanders to make them legit. They have been putting pieces together for a while now. I don't know if they can put it all together with what they have & i'm not concerned about that right Now. What I am concerned about is what it's going to take to keep Lundqvist here.
 
Crease said:
A six year extension takes Lundqvist to 38.
Click to expand...

And that's about what he should get. This talk of 7 or 8 year extensions seem silly to me...particularly when people are also expecting him to get 8M/year. If he's holding out for 9M it should be for a 4 or 5 year deal bringing him to UFA at age 36 or 37.
 
broadwayblue said:
And that's about what he should get. This talk of 7 or 8 year extensions seem silly to me...particularly when people are also expecting him to get 8M/year. If he's holding out for 9M it should be for a 4 or 5 year deal bringing him to UFA at age 36 or 37.
Click to expand...

Those #'s seem quite light to me.
 
broadwayblue said:
And that's about what he should get. This talk of 7 or 8 year extensions seem silly to me...particularly when people are also expecting him to get 8M/year. If he's holding out for 9M it should be for a 4 or 5 year deal bringing him to UFA at age 36 or 37.
Click to expand...

I'm hoping for a 5-year $42.5 million contract ($8.5/year). Then he will sign one more short term contract, and retire.

If I was Lundqvist, I wouldn't be signing for anything less than $8 million. That would be the bare minimum to peak my interest with goalies like Smith and Howard getting $5.2-5.6 million, Crawford getting $6 million, and goalies like Rask with no substantial sample size making $7 million.

Will he sign at a discount? Probably not. Look at Giroux, he didn't. Would the Flyers be more successful if he did? Yes, but he signed at $8.25m/year.

Lundqvist is going to sign at a minimum of $8 million and probably be closer to $9 million given these current deals. Based on the current market, his $8-9 million salary would be valid because he is far better and proven to carry a crap team to the post season than any goaltender who have received these ridiculous contracts.
 
Fataldogg said:
Lundqvist is going to sign at a minimum of $8 million and probably be closer to $9 million given these current deals. Based on the current market, his $8-9 million salary would be valid because he is far better and proven to carry a crap team to the post season than any goaltender who have received these ridiculous contracts.
Click to expand...

The Rangers are not a crap team, so Lundqvist hasn't been carrying a crap team to the postseason. Since the lockout the Rangers have varied from OK to pretty good.
 
Jersey Girl said:
The Rangers are not a crap team, so Lundqvist hasn't been carrying a crap team to the postseason. Since the lockout the Rangers have varied from OK to pretty good.
Click to expand...

We'll have to agree to disagree. The Rangers have had some okay teams, solid teams, and even GOOD teams (11-12 really was a solid team).

This season, I thought we were the definition of mediocrity. We had no business being in the post season. 08-09? That team was a pretty bad team. Players like Dubinsky and a declining Naslund were the top producers.
 
Fataldogg said:
Will he sign at a discount? Probably not. Look at Giroux, he didn't. Would the Flyers be more successful if he did? Yes, but he signed at $8.25m/year.
Click to expand...

I'm not suggesting that Lundqvist will take a discount, but Giroux is a poor comparison and not a good guy to use for your arguement. He really hasn't had his pay day yet and is only 25.
 
The whole point of much of this thread is...well...pointless. Henrik Lundqvist, as any UFA, will want a lot of money. Glen Sather is well-known throughout the NHL for overspending on UFA's.

Done.
 
Jersey Girl said:
The whole point of much of this thread is...well...pointless. Henrik Lundqvist, as any UFA, will want a lot of money. Glen Sather is well-known throughout the NHL for overspending on UFA's.

Done.
Click to expand...

I think Sather has been quite frugal with his internal free agents. He loves himself a shiny new toy.
 
RangerBoy said:
This Lundqvist is everywhere

http://www.esquire.com/blogs/mens-fashion/henrik-lundqvist-interview-barneys-0813

Yesterday

http://instagram.com/p/dz5Hv4r-YQ/

He was interviewed by Fran Healy

http://instagram.com/p/dzyAygL-ej/

http://instagram.com/p/dz2ChFL-UB/

Healy interviewed Henrik a few years ago.

Henrik will be on an ABC show called The Chew. Its a food show.

He did the Fox show with Regis last week.
Click to expand...
Lundqvist loves attention.

That's ok, Pittsburgh will give him the same thing.
 
Bleed Ranger Blue said:
I think Sather has been quite frugal with his internal free agents. He loves himself a shiny new toy.
Click to expand...

It's not about internal/external, it's about Sather being frugal with players he holds leverage over (internal RFA's, etc.), and overpaying for UFA's, whether internal or external. Michal Rozsival was in internal UFA, and the contract Sather gave him was horrible and hurt us in the long run.
 
Jersey Girl said:
It's not about internal/external, it's about Sather being frugal with players he holds leverage over (internal RFA's, etc.), and overpaying for UFA's, whether internal or external. Michal Rozsival was in internal UFA, and the contract Sather gave him was horrible and hurt us in the long run.
Click to expand...

Rozsival's contract wasn't that bad. He caught the fans' ire because he was soft, but he was a solid D-man. He was slightly overpaid, sure, but it hardly hurt us in the long run.

Which players did we lose because of Rozsival? It was the Drury/Redden contracts that hurt.

Hell, Sather found a way to sign Kotalik for $3M/year despite Rozi's contract. If you have the room to do that, overpaying a #3 defenceman isn't a problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom