They'd basically be giving away 1 st overall and give us Duchene with RFA, for a possible 1 year rental of Lundqvist?
Henrik Lundqvist; will he stay or go?
- Thread starter broadwayblue
- 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
They'd basically be giving away 1 st overall and give us Duchene with RFA, for a possible 1 year rental of Lundqvist?
haohmaru
boomshakalaka
I think this is pure fantasy but if that were really an offer and if I were Glen Sather, I'd approach Lundqvist and give him my first, best, last offer and wax poetic about his legacy, importance to the organization and the future, etc... and give him a week to think about it. Otherwise, I make that deal if he's non-commital rather than losing him at the trade deadline for whatever's available or for nothing as a UFA.
I think, though, I'd ask for more than the above if I were the NYR - especially if it's a deal being made now or this summer before the season starts.
Oh I'd definitely consider it if I was Sather, if we could get some average+ goaltender somewhere signed to a good contract I'd probably do it. I just don't think Colorado would do it. I don't see Lundqvist re-signing in Colorado.
Why would Devils fans want a guy who is only good because of his big pads or 6 goalie system?
Well ... figure the pads come with him
If Colorado offered the 1st overall and Duchene for Lundqvist, I'd carry Hank on my back to Denver. The Avs would never even consider doing that.
Interesting scenario with the Avs now that Roy is the coach and controls their roster. I'm sure he knows the importance of elite goaltending, but I'm not so sure the difference between Semyon and Henrik is that of the 1st overall and Duchene. Avs pass.
I just can't really get hold of thinking of Henrik not a Ranger. Not just wearing blinders here, but he strikes me as a guy who has a lot of loyalty and would like to take the journey with the team he is on.
I hope this team goes in the direction of where you would like a team to go, back to the old style Rangers -- fast attack, but with good goaltending and some seriously good defence. Emphasis on the fast attack, but never ever forget defence. Done right, the two feed and support each other.
I hope this team goes in the direction of where you would like a team to go, back to the old style Rangers -- fast attack, but with good goaltending and some seriously good defence. Emphasis on the fast attack, but never ever forget defence. Done right, the two feed and support each other.
darko
Registered User
- Feb 16, 2009
- 70,272
- 7,803
Colorado would have to be crazy to offer that for a player who would become UFA after next season. I don't think there is a single person in the organization, including Lundqvist, who wouldn't take that deal. One year without Lundqvist (I bet he'd keep his apartment in NY) and then 14/15 with Lundqvist, Duchene and Seth Jones.
Well, with Tortorella being laid off, I think it's clear to say Sather is making efforts to convince Lundqvist to stay. Great stuff.
The Gloaming
23
I guess I just don't understand why firing Tortorella means Lundqvist obviously will sign here. Tortorella plays a defensive system that lends itself to the great stats/trophies Henrik has the last few years.
I don't think Lundqvist cares about trophies, that is, any trophy besides the Stanley Cup.
Secondly, this "defense" system of Tortorella gave up A LOT of chances. Lundqvist earned his stats this season. The teams defense was downright terrible at points. Thirdly, a lot of times the shot block system lead to goals that would deflect in off a Ranger, what would have normally been a routine save for Lundqvist.
BBKers
Registered User
You now have it. I called this yesterday! Either Hank or Torts will go. Could not have happened soon enough!
Homebrew76
Registered User
Larry Brooks has been an entertaining read mainly because of how Torts have hated him over the past few years. But his statement that HL will easily get 80 Million over 8 years is plain nuts. I have to wonder if HL's agent paid him off to make such an assertion in terms that are so concrete.
HL will be 32 when his current contract expires. Any team willing to pay 10 million a year for 8 years is asking to be completely screwed long term.
HL, as good as he is, is probably getting paid pretty much just the right amount right now for a top end goalie. GMs have to realize that once he hits 35 or so he will very likely start to decline. Certianly the odds are against him being a vezina candidate beyond that.
If HL wants an 8 year deal, I could see 50 million being the top end of what I would offer. (start at 7.5, and gradually drop down to 4.5 near the end to total around 50 Million). That would certianly be fair for a goalie like HL.
HL will be 32 when his current contract expires. Any team willing to pay 10 million a year for 8 years is asking to be completely screwed long term.
HL, as good as he is, is probably getting paid pretty much just the right amount right now for a top end goalie. GMs have to realize that once he hits 35 or so he will very likely start to decline. Certianly the odds are against him being a vezina candidate beyond that.
If HL wants an 8 year deal, I could see 50 million being the top end of what I would offer. (start at 7.5, and gradually drop down to 4.5 near the end to total around 50 Million). That would certianly be fair for a goalie like HL.
Most of what you just said also applied to Brad Richards last year. And that did not stop us from signing him to a LONG term contract.
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
The worry is that Lundqvist would leave because the organization wasn't trying to change things in order to improve. Things like this are a signal that they are. That's what you want out of an organization if you're looking at signing with them long term.
I don't disagree at all, but that part still comes back to what we were discussing yesterday...the less Hank eats up in salary cap with his next contract, the better chance for the team to improve.
The point is, Lundqvist is more likely to re-sign at a team friendly cap hit IF he truly believes Sather and company are making a concerted effort to achieve the ultimate goal; win the Stanley Cup.
To me, it looked like Lundqvist wasn't convinced that this team would achieve that goal in his tenure, he wasn't content with status quo, and he wanted to see some changes made.
If the rumored $10M/cap hit was legitimate, it would have been because he was not legitimately considering staying with the NYR.
The organization made a big change, Lundqvist can be hopeful that this team makes a true go at it during his prime years, and again, because of that, he will put more credence in in Sather's ambition and contract offers.
Homebrew76
Registered User
Exactly. The Richards contract should never have been signed to the amount or length that it was. Every team that was in the Richards sweepstakes and bailed out because of the Ranger's offer made the right decision. Same thing will go with HL if what he's demanding is 10 years and 80 million!
Hockey Team
Hunger Force
I don't understand why people are saying things like the rangers don't compete.
The front office is willing to spend to the cap, and spend money on good coaching and other staff.
This and we finished top 4 last season, top 8 in the league this season.
Anyone who's saying this team's management does not have a winning attitude needs to get their head checked.
The front office is willing to spend to the cap, and spend money on good coaching and other staff.
This and we finished top 4 last season, top 8 in the league this season.
Anyone who's saying this team's management does not have a winning attitude needs to get their head checked.
Latest posts
-
Waived: [UTA] D Juuso Valimaki waived by the Utah Hockey Club- Latest: Gaylord Q Tinkledink
-
-
