Henrik Lundqvist; will he stay or go?

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

I dont think its cap restrictions that have prevented the Rangers from fielding teams with quality depth. I think its more about poor personnel decisions and a bad track record of developing role players.

Lundqvist at $7M per year or $9M per year won't change that.

 

[Crease]

It's not a question of whether Hank deserves $7M or $9M in two years, or even the next three or four years. It's a question of whether it's prudent to commit that much money to him six, seven, or eight years from now. When a goalies shelf life expires, you can't drop him in the lineup. He becomes absolute cap dead-weight.

If he's willing to take a four year deal, sure throw money at him. But if he wants the security of a retirement contract, he better be willing to take a discount.

 

[KreidertheGlider]

It's not a question of whether Hank deserves $7M or $9M in two years, or even the next three or four years. It's a question of whether it's prudent to commit that much money to him six, seven, or eight years from now. When a goalies shelf life expires, you can't drop him in the lineup. He becomes absolute cap dead-weight.

If he's willing to take a four year deal, sure throw money at him. But if he wants the security of a retirement contract, he better be willing to take a discount.

I agree 100% with this. This organization has issues with throwing crazy contracts around though.

In 8 years, I guarantee Hank wont be Nearly as good anymore. And the thought of that player making 7-8+ million dollars is absurd.

 

[Brooklyn Ranger]

I wouldn't be surprised if Lundqvist would be willing to take a few less years simply because he may want to leave open the possibility of playing a few years back in Sweden.

However, I think Henke's focus is less about the money and more about winning a Stanley Cup.

 

[Jersey Girl]

However, I think Henke's focus is less about the money and more about winning a Stanley Cup.

We're going to find out if there is any truth in this statement.

 

[Baby Punisher]

THe best goalie in the world is worth whatever he asks for, period. They have full ability (and right) to haggle with him, but I am doubtful the Rangers play hardball with Hank...

/Discussion

I hope he get's very penny of what he thinks he is worth by another team. I don't want to be in cap hell forthe duration of his contract or ths last 3-4 years of his contract when he may not be the "best" goalie in the world anymore.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

We're going to find out if there is any truth in this statement.

As of right now, the opposite seems true. We shall see.

 

[Jabroni]

As of right now, the opposite seems true. We shall see.

I don't see that.

 

[stan the caddy]

Look at the Weber contract, look at the Suter contract, look at the Parise contract, even look at the Brad Richards contract, these guys want to get paid and they do. Brad wasn't even "overpaid". There were reports that other teams offered him even more. Sather paid what he had to just to get him to put on a Rangers uniform.

Lundqvist is my favorite Ranger of all time but the window is going to close and I don't think we're going to surround him with enough talent to win a cup. I certainly don't want to see him walk in after next season. I'd like to see the Rangers put something together for Malkin. Might be a pipe dream but at the very least I think we need to find out what we can get for him.

 

[Crease]

Look at the Weber contract, look at the Suter contract, look at the Parise contract, even look at the Brad Richards contract, these guys want to get paid and they do. Brad wasn't even "overpaid". There were reports that other teams offered him even more. Sather paid what he had to just to get him to put on a Rangers uniform.

It's not the dollar amount people have a problem with, it's the number of years. I'm fine with paying Hank 8M at the age of 33. I'm not fine with paying him 8M at the age of 39.

Weber, Suter, Parise, and Richards signed deals that circumvented the cap. The teams paid a ton of money upfront, while tacking on dummy years at the end that artificially lower the player's cap hit. These loopholes have been closed by the new CBA. You can't use contracts signed prior to the new CBA as a benchmark. Lundqvist's next deal will expire before this CBA does. The Rangers won't be able to rely on the next CBA bailing them out.

Who is the oldest starting goalie in the league this year? Marty Brodeur is the exception, not the rule. I'm not saying Lundqvist won't be good in his late 30's. I'm saying the Rangers shouldn't gamble that he will be.

 

[Reaganomics]

With the way Sather has thrown around contracts to FA's nowhere near Hank's level, how can you expect him to take a discount? He will want to be paid what he's worth, which is a damn LOT. On a different team with management that's proven in recent memory that it can ice a SC-winning team I'm sure Hank would be more willing to leave money on the table. As it is I dont think he trusts managements ability to use the extra cap-room wisely. Anything under 8x8 would surprise me.

Personally I think the Rangers should try to trade Hank and rebuild.

 

[stan the caddy]

It's not the dollar amount people have a problem with, it's the number of years. I'm fine with paying Hank 8M at the age of 33. I'm not fine with paying him 8M at the age of 39.

Weber, Suter, Parise, and Richards signed deals that circumvented the cap. The teams paid a ton of money upfront, while tacking on dummy years at the end that artificially lower the player's cap hit. These loopholes have been closed by the new CBA. Lundqvist's next deal will expire before this CBA does. The Rangers won't be able to rely on the next CBA bailing them out.

Who is the oldest starting goalie in the league this year? Marty Brodeur is the exception, not the rule. I'm not saying Lundqvist won't be good in his late 30's. I'm saying the Rangers shouldn't gamble that he will be.

I know I said this a few pages back:

And I'm sure he'll ask for 8 years which might be worse than any cap hit. Cripple us on the tail end.

If he does get an 8 year contract, which is something that I'm sure his agent will ask for initially, he's going to turn into Arod 2.0. That's assuming we actually sign him. He might realize that the Rangers aren't winning anything a month or two into next season and decide to move on.

I'm not one of the fans that thinks this team is good enough to challenge for a cup unless some drastic moves are made in the offseason. Shop him.

 

[KingWantsCup]

Lundqvist is going to get a 7-8 year contract extension for $7M-$8M AAV if he signs one this summer. For all the crap teams we've iced in front of him, wasting years of a true competitor's prime, he isn't going to want to hear the word "discount." All those years of the team counting on Lundqvist so much will build up to a well deserved pay day for Hank. No team depends on one player more than the Rangers. Is such a contract healthy for the Rangers long term? Probably not. I'm slightly more optimistic about Lundqvist's shelf life than most others, but still we don't have a choice on this one.

 

[Chimpradamus]

Honestly, Lundqvist should probably be traded when the new contract is coming up. The team isn't good enough to win a cup, nor will it be in the near future. Which means it's pointless for Hank to give a discount, which means the Rangers will probably be handcuffed to an expensive long term deal.

Which is not in the interest of the franchise, since the best team it can ice will probably be behind Hank's prime, when his contract might be a burden. I don't know how long Hank plans on staying elite though, he's a hardass when it comes to training regime and those are the guys that stay good the longest long.

This might be the biggest decision for this franchise in a long time.

 

[nevesis]

Honestly, Lundqvist should probably be traded when the new contract is coming up.

 

[PlamsUnlimited]

Lundqvist is going to get a 7-8 year contract extension for $7M-$8M AAV if he signs one this summer. For all the crap teams we've iced in front of him, wasting years of a true competitor's prime, he isn't going to want to hear the word "discount." All those years of the team counting on Lundqvist so much will build up to a well deserved pay day for Hank. No team depends on one player more than the Rangers. Is such a contract healthy for the Rangers long term? Probably not. I'm slightly more optimistic about Lundqvist's shelf life than most others, but still we don't have a choice on this one.

Yeah I feel like he's gonna want close to the max out in both years and money or else he goes unless this team's brass actively shows him that this team is going to start helping

 

[ItsthatSimple]

No way

I agree 100% with this. This organization has issues with throwing crazy contracts around though.

In 8 years, I guarantee Hank wont be Nearly as good anymore. And the thought of that player making 7-8+ million dollars is absurd.

Lunqvist will get his retirement plan, its called representative security... Just ask Dipietro.

 

[KreiMeARiver*]

I'm not sure if it's been pointed out here, or not, and I guess it's somewhat obvious, but:

Next year, barring injuries, Hank should become the all-time Rangers leader in wins.

Richter- 666 games- 301 wins

Henke- 511 games- 276 wins

pretty damn impressive..... I hope he makes a serious run at fat boy.

 

[Blue Blooded]

Honestly, Lundqvist should probably be traded when the new contract is coming up. The team isn't good enough to win a cup, nor will it be in the near future. Which means it's pointless for Hank to give a discount, which means the Rangers will probably be handcuffed to an expensive long term deal.

Which is not in the interest of the franchise, since the best team it can ice will probably be behind Hank's prime, when his contract might be a burden. I don't know how long Hank plans on staying elite though, he's a hardass when it comes to training regime and those are the guys that stay good the longest long.

This might be the biggest decision for this franchise in a long time.

1. You rarely get good value for superstars.

2. You rarely get good value for goaltenders.

Combine these two and it is quite obvious that we shouldn't trade Hank. If we were to trade him, we'd be handcuffed to a select few teams with the need and assets to acquire him, and would be unlikely to get good value for him.

What would be an acceptable return for Lundqvist? Halak + Pietrangelo? Markström + Huberdeau/MacKinnon? Varlamov + Jones? Would any of those teams do a deal like that?

 

[Jonimaus]

1. You rarely get good value for superstars.

2. You rarely get good value for goaltenders.

Combine these two and it is quite obvious that we shouldn't trade Hank. If we were to trade him, we'd be handcuffed to a select few teams with the need and assets to acquire him, and would be unlikely to get good value for him.

What would be an acceptable return for Lundqvist? Halak + Pietrangelo? Markström + Huberdeau/MacKinnon? Varlamov + Jones? Would any of those teams do a deal like that?

I'd probably consider the 2 bolded trades, but there is no way any of those teams would do them.

 

[Problematique]

I'm not sure if it's been pointed out here, or not, and I guess it's somewhat obvious, but:

Next year, barring injuries, Hank should become the all-time Rangers leader in wins.

Richter- 666 games- 301 wins

Henke- 511 games- 276 wins

pretty damn impressive..... I hope he makes a serious run at fat boy.

No hating on Lundqvist as he's my favorite and showing my age/lack of hockey knowledge here... but I think I read something saying back in the Richter era they didn't count shutout wins which makes that stat a bit contradictory.

 

[Green Blob*]

I'm not sure if it's been pointed out here, or not, and I guess it's somewhat obvious, but:

Next year, barring injuries, Hank should become the all-time Rangers leader in wins.

Richter- 666 games- 301 wins

Henke- 511 games- 276 wins

pretty damn impressive..... I hope he makes a serious run at fat boy.

I always feel like those results arent really accurate when comparing older goalies since the shootout was added and no more ties.

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

I'd probably consider the 2 bolded trades, but there is no way any of those teams would do them.

You wouldn't consider Halak and Pietrangelo?

Frankly, I'd do it. Pietrangelo is going to challenge for the Norris on a regular basis. I'd only do it if Hank weren't intent on re-signing, though.

St. Louis wouldn't make that deal, however, with that being said.

 

[BroadwayStorm]

Sign him for whatever he wants. For all your talk about winning cups I guarantee we won't win it without him any time soon. And I mean decades soon. This fanbase is just ridiculous. It's become a chore in here.

 

[Chimpradamus]

Sign him for whatever he wants. For all your talk about winning cups I guarantee we won't win it without him any time soon. And I mean decades soon. This fanbase is just ridiculous. It's become a chore in here.

That's the problem, NYR won't win a Cup without Lundqvist and they won't win a Cup if Lundqvist doesn't give a discount either. The team is too flawed for that with too many bad contracts, every year. Too many players who never perform what they've been paid for.

Since Sather has consistently screwed up UFAs at epic levels and have built several joke teams around him, there's no reason for Hank to give a discount either. Had their been a better team built with legit Cup chances, an argument could've been given to Hank to give that discount to win a Cup, but now there is none. Hence, the Rangers won't win a Cup anytime soon and management has a ton to do with that, yet always get the free pass from the equally inactive team owner. They get a world class goaltender in their laps and still can't form a competitive team.

The only chance the Rangers have to win a Cup in the next decades is Lundqvist gives a big discount, Sather becomes a good GM all of a sudden, a great coach appears behind the bench and some players on the roster develops beyond expectations. All this before Hank's prime is over. Let's just say the chances are slim.

We desperately need a defenseman who can handle the breakout and start a transition rush, because basically none of ours can.