Player Discussion Henrik Lundqvist: Part III

[TominNC]

I agree with all of this, and will add that my most likely scenario is:

1) Hank leaves – whether by retirement, buyout, or trade, I don't know (though I'd rank them in that order in terms of probability).
2) Georgiev gets traded to a team that could use a potential starter (who will also be on a low-AAV contract with 3 RFA years remaining).
3) The Rangers sign one of the many older journeyman-ish vets available to a cheap 2-year deal to be the backup for '20-'21 and expose to expansion.

Don't they already have a vet stashed at Hartford for expansion? That's not a current concern

 

[Shesterkybomb]

Not being able to sign all the RFA they want to keep?

Which ones do they want to keep?

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

Don't they already have a vet stashed at Hartford for expansion? That's not a current concern

Nope.

Huska and Wall are exempt and Berube is an UFA as of this offseason.

 

[Leetch3]

Nope.

Huska and Wall are exempt and Berube is an UFA as of this offseason.

i expected Berube to be resigned for this. It’s basically a guarantee now with huska being loaned

 

[TominNC]

Which ones do they want to keep?

I don't sit in on meetings with JD and Gorton

 

[NYSPORTS]

I just asked a question and you're being an ass about it now. NYSPOV.

Lol, you read the im

 

[NYSPORTS]

I'm totally kidding around, but don't we want to win games??

I feel like we either trade AG and let Hank be the backup for his final season in NY, or we keep AG and work with Hank on retirement/trade @ 50% retention.

I'd think the ball is in Hank's court... you can be the backup for 2020-21, you can explore a trade to another team, or you can retire a Ranger.

I think it’s time for the Rangers to move on w/o Hank.

 

[eco's bones]

The bold is what I take issue with. This isn't losing Shesterkin to let Lundqvist end on his own terms. It's Georgiev. He's going to be 25 this year, and has never really shown himself to be anything more than the lower end of league average. He could be a starter on a bad team or a decent team with an amazing defense, but I just don't see the superstar goalie any of you are seeing. He was as likely to get shellacked as he was to make the big saves. I also don't see him staying on this team for long even if we DON'T trade him. He'd be easy fodder for the expansion draft, and I'd be surprised if he didn't want an opportunity to start at some point, which he won't get here with Shesterkin in his way. I also don't put as much stock into W/L as you seem to (you brought it up in several posts). The level of competition faced by a backup is usually lower, and you frequently see backups with better stats than the starter as a result. Also, it wouldn't be a much cheaper contract. The dead cap from a buyout added to the raise for Georgiev pretty much negates any cap savings. So it's not about money, and if it IS about a difference in performance, that difference is microscopic.

This isn't a Zucc situation. The team screwed this up once before with Leetch. When a player is as important to the team as Lundqvist has been he earns the right to determine his own fate in the twilight of his career (see Bourque, Ray).

The other thing I take issue with is the italicized. There is literally nothing on the line this year. There may not even be a real season this year. Shesterkin will be the starter from day 1. There are questions about how ready Miller and Laf and Barron will be. There are questions about whether or not Zib and Panarin and Strome can replicate what they did this year. There are questions about potential sophomore slumps or progression for Fox, Kakko, and Lindgren. Questions about whether Chytil can take that next step. All of those questions will factor into whether or not they make the playoffs FAR more than who plays backup goalie: the old guy or the young guy with stats that aren't far off from each other.



Full disclosure--I've not seen either play. Mainly just read reports on them. The most recent thing I saw on Lindbom was the link below, that indicated that the Rangers were very invested in his development, and that one of the top SHL teams was very impressed with him and got him on loan for their post-season run that ultimately never happened (I pulled that quote and pasted it below):

Exclusive: Rangers prospect Olof Lindbom eyeing new opportunities in the SHL and Liiga - Forever Blueshirts: A site for New York Rangers fanatics

"Lindbom spent a few weeks with SHL powerhouse Färjestad near the end of last season. “Färjestad was one of the favorites to win SHL last year and they thought I played good with Mora so they called me and wanted me to be a part of their playoff run”. It was a situation I personally have not seen happen before, but Lindbom was approached by them and he was sent there on loan in preparation for the SHL playoffs."

My main point there is that there are options--both highly regarded--for backup goalie that may well be ready in a year or two (Wall was drafted one year after Huska and Lindbom one year after Wall). And even if they aren't, FA backup goalies aren't exactly expensive.

I just do not see any logical point if crapping on a team legend solely in order to keep a mediocre backup goalie who--even if we DO keep him--will likely be off the team in the next year or two anyway (due to expansion draft, his desire to be a starter somewhere, or getting supplanted by one of the guys in the pipeline).

Actually think that Georgiev has for the most part played very well for us. I don't see him as a superstar though. Henrik was elite at one time not any more.

On Lindbom--that's Amazing Kreiderman writing that article--we drafted him in June 2018--he was hurt most of 2018-19 and only played 11 games. Last year he was hurt again for a good half the season anyway and only played 16---so 27 games in the last two seasons. Most here weren't happy when we drafted him in the 2nd round. He hasn't played much in two seasons. One would think he's at least 3 years away and he needs to play. He's a project right now and not a contender for an NHL job anytime soon. You can't help bad luck and getting injured---it's just the way it is.

 

[NYSPORTS]

Actually think that Georgiev has for the most part played very well for us. I don't see him as a superstar though. Henrik was elite at one time not any more.

On Lindbom--that's Amazing Kreiderman writing that article--we drafted him in June 2018--he was hurt most of 2018-19 and only played 11 games. Last year he was hurt again for a good half the season anyway and only played 16---so 27 games in the last two seasons. Most here weren't happy when we drafted him in the 2nd round. He hasn't played much in two seasons. One would think he's at least 3 years away and he needs to play. He's a project right now and not a contender for an NHL job anytime soon. You can't help bad luck and getting injured---it's just the way it is.

Lindbom was a head scratching reach

 

[smoneil]

Actually think that Georgiev has for the most part played very well for us. I don't see him as a superstar though. Henrik was elite at one time not any more.

I think Georgiev has alternated between playing well and playing like a tire fire. I know the kind of consistency we had with Henrik in his prime is not the norm for goalkeepers, but it just seems to be night and day which Georgiev we get. To be fair, that was the case with Lundqvist this year as well. I just think he's earned the right based on his body of work and what he's been to this team, and I don't see Georgiev as anything special enough to tarnish the end of HL's career as a Ranger. I've given several reasons--I just don't think we're likely to agree.

On Lindbom--that's Amazing Kreiderman writing that article--we drafted him in June 2018--he was hurt most of 2018-19 and only played 11 games. Last year he was hurt again for a good half the season anyway and only played 16---so 27 games in the last two seasons. Most here weren't happy when we drafted him in the 2nd round. He hasn't played much in two seasons. One would think he's at least 3 years away and he needs to play. He's a project right now and not a contender for an NHL job anytime soon. You can't help bad luck and getting injured---it's just the way it is.

I was mainly commenting not on the article/blog aspects, but on the two direct quotes from Lindbom--the ones about how the Rangers are very involved in his development and the one about how the SEL team picked him up on loan for the playoff run. Yeah, he's had injuries, but the right kinds of people seem excited about his potential (and I was one of the ones less than thrilled with picking a G in the 2nd round that year, but if it makes Allaire happy, I'll gladly sacrifice a 2nd rounder every few years.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

I don't sit in on meetings with JD and Gorton

Exactly so how do you know they need Hanks cap space?

 

[eco's bones]

I think Georgiev has alternated between playing well and playing like a tire fire. I know the kind of consistency we had with Henrik in his prime is not the norm for goalkeepers, but it just seems to be night and day which Georgiev we get. To be fair, that was the case with Lundqvist this year as well. I just think he's earned the right based on his body of work and what he's been to this team, and I don't see Georgiev as anything special enough to tarnish the end of HL's career as a Ranger. I've given several reasons--I just don't think we're likely to agree.




I was mainly commenting not on the article/blog aspects, but on the two direct quotes from Lindbom--the ones about how the Rangers are very involved in his development and the one about how the SEL team picked him up on loan for the playoff run. Yeah, he's had injuries, but the right kinds of people seem excited about his potential (and I was one of the ones less than thrilled with picking a G in the 2nd round that year, but if it makes Allaire happy, I'll gladly sacrifice a 2nd rounder every few years.

Just to be clear though--when we talk about 'earning the right' there is weight that comes with that. What you've done in the past doesn't really matter to the 2020-21 Rangers. You still have to be able to carry your own weight....and one of my fears with Henrik is he's not going to be able to. We'll see what happens. Personally if he didn't retire and I were Rangers GM I would be buying him out whether I moved Georgiev or not.

Lindbom needs to play games plain and simple. He's not close at this point. He's a project prospect and that 2nd right now isn't looking to me as well spent. Hopefully he turns it around.

 

[haohmaru]

Exactly so how do you know they need Hanks cap space?

Duh. The Rangers ALWAYS need cap space.

 

[TominNC]

Exactly so how do you know they need Hanks cap space?

They have to fill a roster. They’ll need some combo of they’re RFA’s or players from elsewhere. None will play for free. You don’t need specifics to know that a few million will come in handy.

 

[Siddi]

They have to fill a roster. They’ll need some combo of they’re RFA’s or players from elsewhere. None will play for free. You don’t need specifics to know that a few million will come in handy.

So basically you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[smoneil]

Just to be clear though--when we talk about 'earning the right' there is weight that comes with that. What you've done in the past doesn't really matter to the 2020-21 Rangers. You still have to be able to carry your own weight....and one of my fears with Henrik is he's not going to be able to. We'll see what happens. Personally if he didn't retire and I were Rangers GM I would be buying him out whether I moved Georgiev or not.

Lindbom needs to play games plain and simple. He's not close at this point. He's a project prospect and that 2nd right now isn't looking to me as well spent. Hopefully he turns it around.

Henrik played league average for the most part. He'd be fine as a backup for one year, and again, it's not like the team has ANY shot at the Cup this year. Frankly, it'd be nice to have him in the room as a guy who has made some deep playoff runs. They need those voices, and there aren't many of them on the roster or on the bench. I just keep hearing a rotating list of reasons for buying out the best player the team has had in the last 30 years, from "he's not good enough" or "he'll make us lose Georgiev" or "he'll cost us a playoff spot" etc etc. None of them hold up to scrutiny. If we buy him out to keep Georgiev, the cap savings are nil. He and Georgiev had similar stat lines. And while you're talking about him like he's that zamboni driver that called into a game, he played more than solid enough for one year of backup duty. I see no logical reason to dump a team legend, as there is no benefit to the team. At least with Leetch, we thought we were getting some solid picks/prospects.

As for Lindbom, while I agree that he needs games, I disagree with the characterization that he needs to "turn it around." If one of the top teams in the SHL picked him up on loan for a playoff run, it sounds to me like he's doing more than fine. He just needs more games to develop a longer track record of such performances.

 

[eco's bones]

Henrik played league average for the most part. He'd be fine as a backup for one year, and again, it's not like the team has ANY shot at the Cup this year. Frankly, it'd be nice to have him in the room as a guy who has made some deep playoff runs. They need those voices, and there aren't many of them on the roster or on the bench. I just keep hearing a rotating list of reasons for buying out the best player the team has had in the last 30 years, from "he's not good enough" or "he'll make us lose Georgiev" or "he'll cost us a playoff spot" etc etc. None of them hold up to scrutiny. If we buy him out to keep Georgiev, the cap savings are nil. He and Georgiev had similar stat lines. And while you're talking about him like he's that zamboni driver that called into a game, he played more than solid enough for one year of backup duty. I see no logical reason to dump a team legend, as there is no benefit to the team. At least with Leetch, we thought we were getting some solid picks/prospects.

As for Lindbom, while I agree that he needs games, I disagree with the characterization that he needs to "turn it around." If one of the top teams in the SHL picked him up on loan for a playoff run, it sounds to me like he's doing more than fine. He just needs more games to develop a longer track record of such performances.

To be blunt whether Georgiev gets moved or not I don't think Henrik will be good enough to handle 30 games and really help us get to the playoffs next year.....so we're just going to have to disagree on that. You can call the things you don't like here 'a rotating list of reasons' all you like that doesn't mean they won't turn out to be true. Between Alex and Henrik I'd choose Alex. If Alex gets moved anyway I choose getting another backup altogether and if Henrik doesn't retire....buying him out. It's turn the page time for me.

As far as Lindbom he's had pretty much two lost seasons. The same thing kind of happened to Dylan McIlrath. You don't improve if you don't play--most players tend to regress.

 

[haohmaru]

To be blunt whether Georgiev gets moved or not I don't think Henrik will be good enough to handle 30 games and really help us get to the playoffs next year.....

As far as Lindbom he's had pretty much two lost seasons. The same thing kind of happened to Dylan McIlrath. You don't improve if you don't play--most players tend to regress.

Funny how you don't apply that to Lundqvist...

I'll agree to disagree as well. Lundqvist would be just fine, or better than that considering the high regard and respect Shesterkin has for him, as a backup.

Playoffs might be a lofty goal depending on what happens with our RFA's and cap space, or lack thereof.

 

[TominNC]

So basically you have no idea what you are talking about.

No more or less than most here. Only the team management KNOWS what they are planning to do. This here is all speculation.
I do KNOW that with less cash you can pay fewer players.

 

[TominNC]

Duh. The Rangers ALWAYS need cap space.

Thank you. It's a flat cap. Of course they can use every couple hundred thousand. To use 8.5M on a backup goalie is
absurd.

 

[haohmaru]

Thank you. It's a flat cap. Of course they can use every couple hundred thousand. To use 8.5M on a backup goalie is
absurd.

Well, you're either paying 8.5M now, or paying 7M (5.5 HL 1.5 AG) now and 1.5M next year, which is the same thing. One way or another, the Rangers are paying, unless Lundqvist decides to retire which seems highly unlikely. Part of the price of long term contracts.

 

[eco's bones]

Funny how you don't apply that to Lundqvist...

I'll agree to disagree as well. Lundqvist would be just fine, or better than that considering the high regard and respect Shesterkin has for him, as a backup.

Playoffs might be a lofty goal depending on what happens with our RFA's and cap space, or lack thereof.

Lindbom is a developing player--Lundqvist's a declining one. There's a difference.

Rangers should be absolutely shooting for the playoffs. Zibanejad, Panarin, Lafreniere coming in, Kakko and Fox improving, Shesterkin. Are problem is depth more than anything and more cap money would help.

 

[haohmaru]

Lindbom is a developing player--Lundqvist's a declining one. There's a difference.

Rangers should be absolutely shooting for the playoffs. Zibanejad, Panarin, Lafreniere coming in, Kakko and Fox improving, Shesterkin. Are problem is depth more than anything and more cap money would help.

There's no difference - players that don't play usually play worse than they do if they are playing consistently. True for nearly every player and true for every sport.

Doesn't mean that Hank would be a Vezina candidate if he played consistently but he's certainly good enough to be an NHL backup for 30 games/yr - but we agree to disagree on that so I'll digress.

And, yes, every team should be shooting for the playoffs, no doubt. If the Rangers do make it, it would be a very successful season considering how thin they are up the middle and on the left side of the D and the issues they are apparently going to have keeping this young developing group together.

 

[eco's bones]

There's no difference - players that don't play usually play worse than they do if they are playing consistently. True for nearly every player and true for every sport.

Doesn't mean that Hank would be a Vezina candidate if he played consistently but he's certainly good enough to be an NHL backup for 30 games/yr - but we agree to disagree on that so I'll digress.

And, yes, every team should be shooting for the playoffs, no doubt. If the Rangers do make it, it would be a very successful season considering how thin they are up the middle and on the left side of the D and the issues they are apparently going to have keeping this young developing group together.

So when Henrik was playing 60-65 games a year and Valiquette and Talbot were getting in occasionally they weren't affected and that was alright? Our goaltending plan use to be scheduled all around how he felt. I don't know what you're solution is but I can tell you Henrik would want to play 55 games in 20-21 anyway and Shesterkin could have whatever's left and if Henrik was still the goaltender he use to be he wouldn't have lost those starts first to Alex and then to Igor in the first place. Part of the issue for some is they can't let go of the past.

A young goaltender needs games to develop. Lindbom unfortunately has been injured much of the last two seasons. He needs to play. Henrik Lundqvist was developed a long time ago. His game is simply eroding with age. None of this is rocket science for anyone who has watched competitive sports for any length of time. With age comes diminishing returns.

 

[haohmaru]

So when Henrik was playing 60-65 games a year and Valiquette and Talbot were getting in occasionally they weren't affected and that was alright? Our goaltending plan use to be scheduled all around how he felt. I don't know what you're solution is but I can tell you Henrik would want to play 55 games in 20-21 anyway and Shesterkin could have whatever's left and if Henrik was still the goaltender he use to be he wouldn't have lost those starts first to Alex and then to Igor in the first place. Part of the issue for some is they can't let go of the past.

Except Lundqvist started 4 of the Rangers last 30 games, which, if you do the math, translates to about 10 starts in a season. The league trend seems to be aiming at 50-55 starts for a starter and the balance going to the backup.

I can't speak to viable solutions. There really aren't any. And, regardless of what Henrik "wants" it's been made painfully and obviously clear that Shesterkin is the number one, someone will be the number two and there won't be a number three.

My conversation with you isn't about what should/could happen but the notion that Lundqvist would be a detriment as a 2 doesn't pass the smell test. If Henrik really wants to be a starter elsewhere (I can't come up with a single team to fit that bill) then he's likely WANTING a buyout.

A young goaltender needs games to develop. Lindbom unfortunately has been injured much of the last two seasons. He needs to play. Henrik Lundqvist was developed a long time ago. His game is simply eroding with age. None of this is rocket science for anyone who has watched competitive sports for any length of time. With age comes diminishing returns.

I'm not disputing that Henrik is declining. He is. I'm disputing that playing time is somehow more important to maintain the level of your game for a younger goalie than an older one. I don't believe that. Expecting Hank to ride in and save the day with 4 starts in 6+ months is just ludicrous. It's equally not "rocket science" to correlate that more playing time leads to better results - particularly among a starter who routinely played 55-65 games per year and was notorious for needing starts to "find a groove".