McSauer
Defense Wins Games
3rd string, over the hill goalie who only plays well when he has consistent work (which he won't get.)
Guess buyout is the only option...
Player Discussion Henrik Lundqvist: Part III
- Thread starter Krams
- Start date
-
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
- Status
3rd string, over the hill goalie who only plays well when he has consistent work (which he won't get.)
Guess buyout is the only option...
JCProdigy
Registered User
eco's bones
Registered User
He's made over $99 million with the Rangers over the course of his career + more from gigs that parlayed off his stardom. Also I think he'd actually be making less than his cap hit this year. At this point I think he would have to ask himself if squeezing out that last few million is really worth it. He's not leaving the Rangers as a Stanley Cup winner. That ain't happening. He's not going out on top or on his own terms as the quote unquote 'starting goaltender'. Let's cut to the chase though and say Henrik Lundqvist has been very, very good for the Rangers over the years but also that the Rangers have been very, very good to Henrik Lundqvist. He's had an exciting life and he's a very wealthy man. There's no really good reason for him to complain. He's pretty much been to the top of the mountain and very few people actually get there. However a buyout or a retirement looks what happens between the player and the team should be amicable.
Let's also consider now that Bettman has said the NHL season will start in January that there is very good likelihood that the season starts in a bubble and some chance it will end in a bubble too. A month of that is one thing--the possibility of several months of that another. An older player like Henrik is going to have to have the mindset that his life is going to be mainly shuttling back and forth between a hotel room and the hockey rink and that family, friends etc. are somewhere else and that he's not going to be the starting goalie anymore.
OrlandK
Registered User
As much as the King has been a hero to me if he insists on a buyout (only 4.5 million left to be paid) vs. retirement it will leave a bit of a sour taste. It is his right of course but it will hurt the team and I really don't think he needs to squeeze out a few more million and hamper the Rangers in the upcoming season. Stay classy Hank.
Hopefully Henrik does the magnanimous thing and retires.
Hopefully Henrik does the magnanimous thing and retires.
mrhockey193195
Registered User
Re: the first paragraph, I don't disagree with anything you wrote. I'll just say that even if you've made $150MM in your career, an additional $5MM to $10MM is not a trivial amount. I hope people don't begrudge him if he doesn't retire and the Rangers end up buying him out - he's earned that right.
To your second paragraph, I agree - the situation with Covid and the 2020-21 season will likely be a huge factor in his ultimate decision. But again, if the Rangers are going to buy him out anyway, I don't see why he would retire first. He doesn't owe the Rangers anything, just like they don't owe him anything.
mrhockey193195
Registered User
Again, I just don't understand this mindset. If you work at a company you love, would you turn down a "free" $10k to not "hurt the company"?
It is pretty easy to make decisions with someone else's money
OrlandK
Registered User
I am in a somewhat analogous situation (smaller scale of course) and I am considering taking less to help my long term employer that has been so good to me, especially in these trying times. That you can't imagine anyone doing that says more about you than anything else.
It is certainly Hank's right to max out dollar he can. Doesn't mean we have to like it or not hold him in somewhat lower esteem if he chooses to do so if it the result is some pain to the Rangers going forward. If he wants to be held as the ultimate icon he should retire. If he wants every last dollar that is his right and he can absorb some shade that will go along with it. His call.
eco's bones
Registered User
My hope is that it's amicable. You get to a place in life when it's diminishing returns and I think Henrik is pretty much there. To me though in Henrik's case several more million more dollars or not is probably not all that big of a deal. He's set up for life and his family at least into the next several generations should be as well. He can do most anything he wants and go wherever he wants and whenever he wants. He has the fame to bring in all kinds of endorsements or even branch off into something like Sean Avery did. He is a recognizable face.
If he were to play with the Rangers this year I don't think it's going to be a whole lot of fun for him. Shesterkin flat out is a better goalie than he is right now. Henrik has personality--he is proud and he can get angry and if things are in a bubble and he's not playing a lot and/or he's not winning very much it could turn into a problem. This argument that he needs to play regularly to keep his game together----well he's not going to be the Rangers best goaltender so he'll have to deal with that somehow or other but if it turns out playing less is impossible for him the team is going to suffer for it. If Alex is gone and the Rangers end up looking for another goalie to do a job that Henrik isn't up to that's going to be a disaster.
eco's bones
Registered User
These are very tough times. I hope things work out for you and your employer.
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
Depends on how much I made previously and the situation of my own finances. If I had been getting paid 50k per year and saw that 10k at the end of a 20 year run, it’d be hard to turn down. But that calculation becomes a lot different for me as the numbers get bigger. By the time we’re talking about $100m in earnings and $5m at the end, where my dignity was at stake as well, it’d be a very different calculation. Not everyone is concerned with squeezing every possible dime out of their employer. I’ve had several situations where I could get money from an employer who was good to me, but I was also in a position to save them money, so I saved them the money. I’m not any worse off for it.
By the way, as has been pointed out, his take home from his salary is going to be less than $2m. Including his bonus, it’ll be less than $3m. That’s a lot of money to us, but I don’t see it having a major impact on someone with his earning history and potential one way or the other.
At the end of this, I will also say that I’d never begrudge him for getting the money he signed the contract for. That’s his right, and there will be no judgment from me. I just don’t think it’s as cut and dry as people think it is.
Brooklyn Rangers Fan
Change is good.
I think you covered it all here, @Tawnos. Not much more to be said. It'll play out as it plays out, and no blame or guilt to be cast however it does.
If he forces a buyout and then retires he most certainly deserves as someone put it shade from the fan base and the organization
the Rangers made him a very wealthy man and paid him well into his late 30s when they shouldn’t have to give him that stability.
the Rangers made him a very wealthy man and paid him well into his late 30s when they shouldn’t have to give him that stability.
Crease
Chief Justice of the HFNYR Court
- Jul 12, 2004
- 24,767
- 27,709
Who here would resign from their job if their company said, "we'd like to fire you but we don't want to pay you severance."
to be fair if I had already made $100 mil I would have told my company to shove it and retired long before they had that thought LOL
smoneil
Registered User
It's interesting how there are so many people insisting that Lundqvist retire--giving up a few million dollars in the process--out of love/sentiment/loyalty etc. Wasn't it just a few pages ago that this was "a business" and people weren't "sentimental"? I'll say it again for the people in the back--expecting management to "treat it like a business" and players to sacrifice for sentiment and loyalty isn't going to happen. You want to cut a team legend loose in his final year because you MIGHT save a million dollars in cap? Fine, but be prepared for RFA's to refuse bridge deals and for UFA's to expect top dollar to resign. You only "bleed the colors" if you think there's a chance that you mean something as a player AND a person.
JCProdigy
Registered User
It's the right thing to do. It'll preserve his legacy. The NYR have been so good to him....
...are those really the reasons that most fans want Lundqvist to retire?
I won't be intellectually dishonest. I hope he retires solely because it would save the Rangers money which they could then use on players to better their future which would likely result in me being a happier fan as they are set up to be more successful.
...are those really the reasons that most fans want Lundqvist to retire?
I won't be intellectually dishonest. I hope he retires solely because it would save the Rangers money which they could then use on players to better their future which would likely result in me being a happier fan as they are set up to be more successful.
smoneil
Registered User
It won't save that much money though, particularly once you factor in Georgiev's raise. I'd rather have another 2nd rounder (for Georgiev) and do a "retirement year" for Henrik. The team isn't winning anything this season anyway, and even if it were, the backup goalie isn't going to be the difference. Let Shesterkin learn from his idol for one more year. Let the kids see the organization send a legend out the right way, so they can aspire to the same level of play and the same privilege.
egelband
Registered User
- Sep 6, 2008
- 16,199
- 15,058
This isn’t for-sure is it? There’s no indication they have to or want to buy out either, is there?
egelband
Registered User
- Sep 6, 2008
- 16,199
- 15,058
Or the Rangers can cash in nicely on Georgiev and Henrik can be the backup for another year. But I do agree that if that doesn’t happen, retiring may not be such a crazy idea even if it does mean leaving big money on the table.
egelband
Registered User
- Sep 6, 2008
- 16,199
- 15,058
Not really the same thing, though. Company isn’t dealing with a salary cap and the relationship between Henrik and the Rangers doesn’t really end with this contract. I’m not saying it’s cut-and-dried. I actually appears to be a fairly messy and fluid situation (without knowing all the finances). But I think that’s why everyone in-the-know is saying this will not be resolved quickly. Lots of moving parts and I don’t think either side has their position decided.
NYRFANMANI
Department of Rempe Safety Management
Correct, not for sure. I haven't seen any indication in any direction either. BUT I think someone posted a link or something, that there will be no trio of goalies. And between trading Geo so we can have a 8.5m back-up and just buying him out and be done with it, the choice is obvious imo.
Hank can retire or gets bought out, that's the two possibilities.
NYSPORTS
back afta dis. . .
- Jun 17, 2019
- 7,993
- 4,459
keep the contract yet be prepared for Shes and Georgiev to dress as both starter and backup. No more dressing around Hank.
eco's bones
Registered User
Someone like DeAngelo was always going to want term on his next contract and after the year he just had it's very understandable but the Rangers aren't in a situation where they can give him term so that conflict is going to happen one way or the other. Strome--a year away from UFA probably doesn't care as much--he just wants to score as big a contract as possible whether it's this year or next. Lemieux hasn't earned much of a raise plain and simple. He takes what he gets. Georgiev I imagine would take a bridge deal and anywhere between $1.5 and $2. Fast is a UFA--would he like to come back?--probably--would he like to explore a bit?--good chance of that too. He's earned the right. I don't see what the issue is.
The cap is flat for the next 3 years and one of the things that means is money for free agent deals is going to be tight and players looking for employment are going to end up knocking on the doors of those teams that still have cap space. If the Rangers are one of those teams they'll end up with opportunities 'if 'they want to take them and whatever happens as far as Henrik isn't going to matter a bit. You need a job you go to where the money is.
- Status
