Player Discussion Henrik Lundqvist: Part III

[NYSPORTS]

He let up a "soft" goal vs. Carolina after not playing for six months. That's why. Try to keep up.

Wasn’t six months and it was two “awful”goals per Valiquette in both of his playoff starts. Yaliquette apparently doesn’t know much as you discredited him too.

 

[GAGLine]

The Rangers aren't going to be making noise next season, so just bite the bullet and keep Hank for another season, and trade Georgiev since he's at peak trade value.

Which of Strome or ADA are we trading?

 

[NYSPORTS]

The Rangers aren't going to be making noise next season, so just bite the bullet and keep Hank for another season, and trade Georgiev since he's at peak trade value.

that’s right. Shatty’s dead money and three on the current roster with only their contracts keeping them here before this rebuild closes the door on yesteryear and opens the future for real in 21-22 and beyond.

 

[Irishguy42]

Which of Strome or ADA are we trading?

Whichever gets us the best return. Preferably Strome.

 

[NYSPORTS]

Which of Strome or ADA are we trading?

Both get one year QO unless something else develops in this market. Can always move them at the deadline or extend. We no idea what this market is today nor which prospects will develop.

 

[Chimpradamus]

I was no fan of moving Miller and was no fan of the returns for both a what i perceived to be a solid player and the team Captain. I had no issue however moving McD b/c he was not playing very well here. In fact, he’s not the go to defenseman in Tampa. Hedman is.

As of this statement I have no problems. McD is still a core player for Tampa. That still doesn't justify giving him away in a deal that even included J.T. Miller, which in itself even shouldn't have included him. It was a trading robbery of epic panic incompetence.

Stralman, yeah another dumb Sather move.

I cannot have disagreements with obvious conclusions.

I have no issue moving out Zuccarello and did you forget the return on Hayes?

It's possible I forgot the return on Hayes which may cloud my hatred.

Regarding Hank, he’s not close to being the same goalie he was. Advaced stats for a short time doesn’t tell the whole story. Tells me he can’t shoulder the big load based on his age.

Of course he isn't the same as in his prime, but that premise that he's done is ridiculous. On a respectable team he could be very solid. Still playing for the NYR circus, sure, he's done for. He cannot perform miracles anymore. He cannot carry a whole team by himself for an entire season + playoffs. That much is granted.

Put McD, Zucs, Hayes, Miller, Stralman and Hank on this team and they aren’t going too far regardless of coaching.

We understand there are some fans which can’t let go. The rebuild was the best thing the Rangers could have ever done.

The team wouldn't have been swept by Carolina, that much is for sure. As for the future? It still bums me when you give out quality players like free candy. That's my problem. The return was a joke. The rebuild was a joke. The simple task of firing the clown Vigneault shouldn't have been this dramatic. Just hire a somewhat competent coach and get on with it.

It was a classic fire sale. That the team is still bouncing around in the premise of a playoff spot is actually incredible. It hasn't even been a pure rebuild yet. The depth is still terrible. The defense is still a joke. It's not even remotely a contender yet.

 

[Synergy27]

It really isn't. Because if you buy him out, you're paying him 5.5M to be on someone else's team, paying another player to be the backup (likely Georgiev on an RFA arbitration contract = 1.5M per) and then you're paying another 1.5 the following year again for NOTHING. What does that add up to? Yup, 8.5M.

Either way you're paying 8.5M. The question is if you want to get the pain out of the way this year or spread it out over 2.

I'm not advocating a buyout here.

Question though, not sure if you or anyone else knows, but is there anything preventing the Rangers from bringing Henrik back into the front office somewhere and paying him whatever he wants? Could he just retire and re-sign for the same exact dollar amount and serve in some nominal front office or player development role? Is that considered cap circumvention?

I understand that in this situation, that's unlikely to happen because Henrik still wants to play, but if this is possible and being discussed, I fail to see how the organization is the clear bad guy here.

 

[broadwayblue]

It hasn't even been a pure rebuild yet. The depth is still terrible. The defense is still a joke. It's not even remotely a contender yet.

After adding Kakko and Lafreniere, which almost certainly doesn't happen if we don't go through the rebuild, the team is pretty solid in the top 6. The D needs work, but we have some excellent prospects on they way so I don't expect it will be a joke for long. Depth can be added by dealing from areas of strength. Not sure who thinks this team is a contender yet, but in a year or so the window to compete will be opening. I'm very excited about the future of this team.

 

[PuckLuck3043]

As of this statement I have no problems. McD is still a core player for Tampa. That still doesn't justify giving him away in a deal that even included J.T. Miller, which in itself even shouldn't have included him. It was a trading robbery of epic panic incompetence.

I cannot have disagreements with obvious conclusions.

It's possible I forgot the return on Hayes which may cloud my hatred.

Of course he isn't the same as in his prime, but that premise that he's done is ridiculous. On a respectable team he could be very solid. Still playing for the NYR circus, sure, he's done for. He cannot perform miracles anymore. He cannot carry a whole team by himself for an entire season + playoffs. That much is granted.

The team wouldn't have been swept by Carolina, that much is for sure. As for the future? It still bums me when you give out quality players like free candy. That's my problem. The return was a joke. The rebuild was a joke. The simple task of firing the clown Vigneault shouldn't have been this dramatic. Just hire a somewhat competent coach and get on with it.

It was a classic fire sale. That the team is still bouncing around in the premise of a playoff spot is actually incredible. It hasn't even been a pure rebuild yet. The depth is still terrible. The defense is still a joke. It's not even remotely a contender yet.

Talk to me in 2 years. That team with that core would have never won the cup. The rebuild was absolutely the right thing to do. This team has more high end talent than they have ever had in year 3 of rebuild. They also have a great prospect pool as well. Panarin, Mika, Shesty, TDA, Fox, Kakko, LAF(soon to be), Kreider, Cytil, Kravtsov, Trouba + Lundkvist, Miller, Barron, Jones, Robertson, Henriksson in the pipeline + 22nd pick in this draft means this team is well on their way to being a serious stanley cup contender. In JG and JD we trust. Like I said, talk to me in 2 years.

 

[TominNC]

It really isn't. Because if you buy him out, you're paying him 5.5M to be on someone else's team, paying another player to be the backup (likely Georgiev on an RFA arbitration contract = 1.5M per) and then you're paying another 1.5 the following year again for NOTHING. What does that add up to? Yup, 8.5M.

Either way you're paying 8.5M. The question is if you want to get the pain out of the way this year or spread it out over 2.

Spread over two years. It gives you 1.5 to spend this year and then more to spend the net. Also letting you use the two young goalies.

 

[THE JAM]

Honestly, if I was Lundqvist at this point, I would just do everything that hurts the NYR the most. And when they start asking for a jersey ceremony, I would just decline and tell them to f*** off.
--- NYR will never be a successful hockey franchise.
--- I can 100% guarantee the NYR won't win a cup for another 50 years. .

I'll bet against you.
Getting rid of humongous cost of paying goalie1 too much will help alot and along with some lottery luck recently - I bet that NYR will win a Cup within the next 15 years.

 

[TominNC]

I'm not advocating a buyout here.

Question though, not sure if you or anyone else knows, but is there anything preventing the Rangers from bringing Henrik back into the front office somewhere and paying him whatever he wants? Could he just retire and re-sign for the same exact dollar amount and serve in some nominal front office or player development role? Is that considered cap circumvention?

I understand that in this situation, that's unlikely to happen because Henrik still wants to play, but if this is possible and being discussed, I fail to see how the organization is the clear bad guy here.

No doubt a cap circumvention

 

[THE JAM]

Chimp said: --- I can 100% guarantee the NYR won't win a cup for another 50 years. .

THE JAM says: NYR will win 2 or more Cups 2021-2070

 

[Jauffre]

Honestly, if I was Lundqvist at this point...

 

[PuckLuck3043]

Chimp said: --- I can 100% guarantee the NYR won't win a cup for another 50 years. .

THE JAM says: NYR will win 2 or more Cups 2021-2070

I say they win it within 5 years.

 

[haohmaru]

Wasn’t six months and it was two “awful”goals per Valiquette in both of his playoff starts. Yaliquette apparently doesn’t know much as you discredited him too.

I'd like to hear that Valiquette analysis instead of taking your word for it. Yeah, it was 5 months, not 6. Talk about semantics...

Yet, he had pretty much the same playoff stats that the #1 had in the playoffs. The sample size is ridiculously small but they are pretty much the same and the Rangers played their best game of the series in front of Igor. 4 goals in 3 games isn't going to get it done no matter who the goalie is. Who had the QS in the playoffs? It wasn't Igor.

He's not "done" unless he wants to be. He's not where he used to be but he's still a solid 1B/2 on just about any team in the league. The question is if that's good enough for him.

 

[haohmaru]

Just for shits and giggles:

@csahockey Scoring Chances for each game in the Carolina series:

Game 1 NYR 18 Carolina 28
Game 2 NYR 24 Carolina 30
Game 3 NYR 34 Carolina 23

 

[NYSPORTS]

I'd like to hear that Valiquette analysis instead of taking your word for it. Yeah, it was 5 months, not 6. Talk about semantics...

Yet, he had pretty much the same playoff stats that the #1 had in the playoffs. The sample size is ridiculously small but they are pretty much the same and the Rangers played their best game of the series in front of Igor. 4 goals in 3 games isn't going to get it done no matter who the goalie is. Who had the QS in the playoffs? It wasn't Igor.

He's not "done" unless he wants to be. He's not where he used to be but he's still a solid 1B/2 on just about any team in the league. The question is if that's good enough for him.

if you follow the NY Rangers you would have heard it on the pregame. I can pull up the posts in which you discredited Valiquette but what’s the point in repeating when your narrative is what it is.

 

[NYSPORTS]

Just for shits and giggles:

@csahockey Scoring Chances for each game in the Carolina series:

Game 1 NYR 18 Carolina 28
Game 2 NYR 24 Carolina 30
Game 3 NYR 34 Carolina 23

Which has nothing to do with the deflating 0-1 deficit Hank put them in my letting in two softies. Oh, wait, savable.

 

[haohmaru]

Which has nothing to do with the deflating 0-1 deficit Hank put them in my letting in two softies. Oh, wait, savable.

Judging by those stats, the game we really should've won is game 3 - where Lundqvist was sitting on the bench.

 

[haohmaru]

if you follow the NY Rangers you would have heard it on the pregame. I can pull up the posts in which you discredited Valiquette but what’s the point in repeating when your narrative is what it is.

"Discredit"? No. Disagree if he called the goal "awful"? Yes.

I've watched every NYR game, every year, for I don't know how many years. Being that I live in Florida, however, I don't get the pregame shows with NHL Center Ice. But, nice try at a veiled dig indicating I might not be a "real" fan. I've been one since 1978, closed circuit TV, had season tickets for years and was at the 1993-94 playoffs for every home game.

SI: "New York legend Henrik Lundqvist was the back-up for the Rangers, who still couldn't beat the Canes, even with Igor Shesterkin in net. But goaltending wasn't the problem for a Rangers team that wasn't quite ready for primetime.

Henrik Lundqvist was not the reason New York lost this series. But he was the second-best goaltender to Hurricanes stopper Petr Mrazek in the first two games. The future instead belongs to Igor Shesterkin - and don't read too much into the fact he himself was the second-best goaltender on the ice in Game 3, behind Carolina's James Reimer, who played exceptionally well for the Hurricanes in the sweeping clincher."

 

[NYSPORTS]

"Discredit"? No. Disagree if he called the goal "awful"? Yes.

I've watched every NYR game, every year, for I don't know how many years. Being that I live in Florida, however, I don't get the pregame shows with NHL Center Ice. But, nice try at a veiled dig indicating I might not be a "real" fan. I've been one since 1978, closed circuit TV, had season tickets for years and was at the 1993-94 playoffs for every home game.

SI: "New York legend Henrik Lundqvist was the back-up for the Rangers, who still couldn't beat the Canes, even with Igor Shesterkin in net. But goaltending wasn't the problem for a Rangers team that wasn't quite ready for primetime.

Henrik Lundqvist was not the reason New York lost this series. But he was the second-best goaltender to Hurricanes stopper Petr Mrazek in the first two games. The future instead belongs to Igor Shesterkin - and don't read too much into the fact he himself was the second-best goaltender on the ice in Game 3, behind Carolina's James Reimer, who played exceptionally well for the Hurricanes in the sweeping clincher."

It was the post game. As if you or any Rangers fan needed a post game to alert you Hank put the Rangers behind the 8-ball in both his starts by giving up (awful, soft, savable or lousy goals). Put whatever lipstick you like, he needs to make the save

 

[NYSPORTS]

Judging by those stats, the game we really should've won is game 3 - where Lundqvist was sitting on the bench.

yeah, b/c those stats tell the story. Maybe Shes, the starter, wasn’t fully recovered from a groin pull yet was forced into action due to Hank’s mediocre play.

 

[haohmaru]

It was the post game. As if you or any Rangers fan needed a post game to alert you Hank put the Rangers behind the 8-ball in both his starts by giving up (awful, soft, savable or lousy goals). Put whatever lipstick you like, he needs to make the save

And, like I've said a thousand times, I've seen every starting goalie in the playoffs give up that exact same goal. Will Lundqvist tell you he should've had it? Of course. 4 goals in 3 games and you're looking at the goalie as why we lost. That "analysis" makes everything crystal clear. 1.33 GF/Game is not going to get anything done in the playoffs.

 

[haohmaru]

yeah, b/c those stats tell the story. Maybe Shes, the starter, wasn’t fully recovered from a groin pull yet was forced into action due to Hank’s mediocre play.

The whole team wasn't ready, goalies included.