Player Discussion Henrik Lundqvist: Part II

[aufheben]

Remember when Skjei had a bonkers good game, on top of scoring 2 goals, and AV benched him in favor of Staal-Holden? Good times.

No.

 

[Thirty One]

No.

Do you not remember when Skjei and Smith were our golden boys?!

 

[Kovalev27]

Hes bought out or he retires one or the other but his time here has come to an end

 

[Crease]

This thread makes me sad

It's almost like an obituary

More like a stoning.

 

[Leetch3]

I hate this conversation so much....retirement is the best case scenario for us from a cap stand point but this gets me in the feels so much. everyone knows that its time for him to move on now, but so many didn't appreciate what we had while it was here

 

[bleedblue94]

Do you not remember when Skjei and Smith were our golden boys?!

Montreal or Ottawa series? Sigh, AV would just drive you mad as a fan...

 

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

I'll remember that series for 2 things.
1. Peak Karlsson.
2. AV's insane love affair with the Staal - Holden pairing late in games.

Plus, I know Ottawa took Pitt to OT in Game 7 that year in the ECF, but I still maintain they would have done away with us in short order.

Yeah possibly. I still think it was one last shot from the hockey gods. Hank was otherworldly in that series vs Montreal. If we could’ve made it past Ottawa (I know he had a rough series but could’ve been one time his team bailed him out out ever) and he got back to the first round form being energized in the ECF again and another shot at the cup? Idk I think if we get past Ottawa that we had a legit shot at the Cup. Of course AV’s decision making hindered us more than anything that series. Idk it just felt like another what if scenario.

 

[DanielBrassard]

Buying him out would be really dumb, he's still good enough to play and adding more dead cap for 21-22 is not ideal with a flat cap.

 

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

Buying him out would be really dumb, he's still good enough to play and adding more dead cap for 21-22 is not ideal with a flat cap.

Agreed. I just don’t get this idea that we’re going to move ahead with an Igor and Georgie tandem. Igor is the guy. He’s significantly better than Georgiev and should be our workhorse, even in today’s age of less starts he should at least be getting 55 starts. He’s going to be our starter and our playoff goalie.

If Lundqvist wants to retire that’s one thing. But buying him out? Wouldn’t it be better to move Georgiev now when his value is most likely the highest? Is his value going to go up after another year as a backup? Wouldn’t the best move all around be to get assets for Georgiev now and keep Hank for another year for 25-30 starts and not have to deal with even more dead cap space considering we have two years of a flat cap coming up? I don’t see how dead cap and keeping Georgiev as a backup is better than getting assets for Georgiev + not having to take on more dead cap space AND not having to buy out a franchise icon? Is keeping Georgiev to be a backup really worth that? Igor is the guy. If Georgiev stays and is starting more than 30 games next year something went wrong.

We have a strong goalie pipeline. Huska and Wall plus Lindbolm. I really just don’t see losing Georgiev as a huge deal. Igor is the guy.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

He either retires or accepts a trade for me, I'm anti buyout unless its Staal.

 

[nyrleetch]

Was reading an article from 2018, which stats wise wouldn't change much, but

" Since the 2008 playoffs, Lundqvist leads all goalies who have played at least 35 playoff games with a stellar .835 high-danger save percentage (via Corsica Hockey)."

I mean, this dude bailed us out every single time. People can harp on 2012 ECF, but I can't remember a single game where Lundqvist was shaky and the Rangers won.

Dude deserved a cup, but ultimately it shouldn't define him. I get into these arguments over top athletes who never won a cup, but how many of them could you say performed at his absolute best in those moments.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

Was reading an article from 2018, which stats wise wouldn't change much, but

" Since the 2008 playoffs, Lundqvist leads all goalies who have played at least 35 playoff games with a stellar .835 high-danger save percentage (via Corsica Hockey)."

I mean, this dude bailed us out every single time. People can harp on 2012 ECF, but I can't remember a single game where Lundqvist was shaky and the Rangers won.

Dude deserved a cup, but ultimately it shouldn't define him. I get into these arguments over top athletes who never won a cup, but how many of them could you say performed at his absolute best in those moments.

He single handedly took us from being a joke of a franchise to a team nobody wanted to play. It sucks it has end like this. But to be fair his contract was always a year or two too long. I really feel he will take a trade if we can find one, I can't see him retiring.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

He's going to end up walking away on his own terms, be that now or a year from now.

Lets hope he takes #18 with him.

 

[The S5]

Hank will go to the HOF. He will be remembered as the Rangers greatest goaltender. He will be loved by his adoring fans. But, his time is over.
Don't shed any tears. Hank leaves the Rangers a rich man. Time to move on to the next era.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

Buying him out would be really dumb, he's still good enough to play and adding more dead cap for 21-22 is not ideal with a flat cap.

You do realize that his cap hit in 21-22 for a buyout is only $1.5M, right?

A buyout is an absolute no-brainer if he doesn't retire. $3M cap savings next season and only a $1.5M hit in 21-22.

 

[DaBadGuy7]

You do realize that his cap hit in 21-22 for a buyout is only $1.5M, right?

A buyout is an absolute no-brainer if he doesn't retire. $3M cap savings next season and only a $1.5M hit in 21-22.

Makes no sense to buy him out based on these numbers. Retirement or trade are the only options for Hank to leave.

 

[Tawnos]

Makes no sense to buy him out based on these numbers. Retirement or trade are the only options for Hank to leave.

I don't understand this point of view. A buyout would mean that they'd essentially have the same cap space to spend, but would need to fill one less roster spot. That's huge.

 

[NYRFAN218]

I don't understand this point of view. A buyout would mean that they'd essentially have the same cap space to spend, but would need to fill one less roster spot. That's huge.

Why would it be one less roster spot? If they’re not buying him out and he doesn’t retire then that means he’s backing up so that spot is already filled. A buyout adds a small amount of cap space when factoring in Georgiev being re-signed but whatever savings there is is basically eroded the following season with the 1.5 in dead cap. A buyout is basically borrowing from the following seasons cap space. Plus, you’ll get whatever assets by trading Georgiev.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

I don't understand this point of view. A buyout would mean that they'd essentially have the same cap space to spend, but would need to fill one less roster spot. That's huge.

Well, we’d have $3M in extra space.
Retirement or trade (at 50% retained) are the top two options.

But a buyout is basically required if we can’t get one of those.

 

[Tawnos]

Why would it be one less roster spot? If they’re not buying him out and he doesn’t retire then that means he’s backing up so that spot is already filled. A buyout adds a small amount of cap space when factoring in Georgiev being re-signed but whatever savings there is is basically eroded the following season with the 1.5 in dead cap. A buyout is basically borrowing from the following seasons cap space. Plus, you’ll get whatever assets by trading Georgiev in a trade.

The default position is doing nothing, which indicates both Hank and Georgiev on the team next year. Starting from that position, the buyout gives you the space to keep Georgiev without having to allocate any of the cap they currently have for him. And I'm honestly not all that worried about the $1.5m in space with exactly $15m coming off the books between Staal, Smith, Shattenkirk's buyout, and Spooner's buyout.

Well, we’d have $3M in extra space.
Retirement or trade (at 50% retained) are the top two options.

But a buyout is basically required if we can’t get one of those.

Agreed that retirement or retained salary trade are the best options.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

Yeah, the idea that $1.5M in space is something we need to avoid is laughable at best.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

Well, we’d have $3M in extra space.
Retirement or trade (at 50% retained) are the top two options.

But a buyout is basically required if we can’t get one of those.

It's always bittersweet to see an icon at the end of his career.

Hank is going to need to look deep and really look at the landscape. Is there really a team he could agree to go to a be a starter? Is that team a contender? Is there a team he can agree to go to and be a backup and can push the existing starter? Is that team a contender?

 

[patnyrnyg]

Why would it be one less roster spot? If they’re not buying him out and he doesn’t retire then that means he’s backing up so that spot is already filled. A buyout adds a small amount of cap space when factoring in Georgiev being re-signed but whatever savings there is is basically eroded the following season with the 1.5 in dead cap. A buyout is basically borrowing from the following seasons cap space. Plus, you’ll get whatever assets by trading Georgiev.

If they trade Georgiev, I think most will be disappointed in the return.

 

[haohmaru]

Buying out Lundqvist saves you nothing.

8.5M 2021
0 2022

Buyout:
5.5M 2021 + 1.5M (Georgiev)
1.5M (buyout). 2022

8.5M

It’s the same thing. At least if you trade Georgiev you’ll get a pick back and no dead cap in year 2. We’re not winning a Cup next year either and Lundqvist is a good option as a 2 and mentor. Short of retiring I’m not buying him out if I’m the GM.

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

You’re all gonna look like clowns when Henrik ends up backing up Igor all of next season and plays out his contract.