He'll probably get 8.5-9+ considering the contract Malkin signed recently.
The best player at their respective position controls the market.
Lundqvists contract will be the barometer when cap continues to rise.
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
He'll probably get 8.5-9+ considering the contract Malkin signed recently.
The best player at their respective position controls the market.
Lundqvists contract will be the barometer when cap continues to rise.
Blue Blooded
Most people rejected his message
Goalies are different, they have a much smaller market. I think it could be anything between 7-8M depending on term.
Blueblood9
Registered User
i think its gonna be a longer term lower money contract im hoping 8yrs in the 6.75 to 7 mil range. that gives him a raise and the highest aav as a goalie which might be important to him who knows.
FATCHAMALA11
Kneel Before Zod
Kel Varnsen
Below: Nash's Heart
- Sep 27, 2009
- 3,554
- 0
Big surprise, he was just still pissed about LOSING days after LOSING and the idiots in the media and the fanbase read way too much into it and assumed it was anger with the coach. Because everything always is the coach.
stan the caddy
Registered User
- Sep 27, 2011
- 2,360
- 281
Does this negate the "It was Torts or Lundqvist" bs? I really want to know who "made the decision" for Glen.
Kel Varnsen
Below: Nash's Heart
- Sep 27, 2009
- 3,554
- 0
stan the caddy
Registered User
- Sep 27, 2011
- 2,360
- 281
They'll tell you that his "I had a great time here" comment clearly meant that he wouldn't return because of the coach and that his most recent e-mails are blatent lies.
JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK
Twenty f*ckin years
- Oct 8, 2010
- 80,067
- 17,706
stan the caddy
Registered User
- Sep 27, 2011
- 2,360
- 281
Hey, I never spun the "I had a great time here comment" into "Lundqvist was clearly angry with Torts and wanted him gone". Those people are the best at putting words into people's mouths. I call them the press.
JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK
Twenty f*ckin years
- Oct 8, 2010
- 80,067
- 17,706
I don't think that was Elliot Friedman's intentions when he said that "Lundqvist's comments changed everything" I.E, Torts being fired.
Might not have ben Hank's intention, but who knows how Sather and co. read into it?
haveandare
Registered User
It's like people blaming Torts for Sather's personnel decisions. Even if Hank DID say something to Sather, which I'm not sure he did, it's Sathers job to fire/hire coaches. Sather has to pick up the phone and make the move. For a forum that hates on the guy so hard, people are often pretty quick to weasel him away from the decisions that are part of his job. Playres that come and go are on him. Coaches that come and go are on him. He's the boss. He makes the call.
stan the caddy
Registered User
- Sep 27, 2011
- 2,360
- 281
According to the media "some" players came forward and voiced their displeasure with the coach. Of course, we have absolutely no idea who they are and according to Lundqvist, he wasn't one of them.
stan the caddy
Registered User
- Sep 27, 2011
- 2,360
- 281
I understand that he's the boss and it's his call but he's 100% hidden behind the players on this one. He stated that he had no intention of firing Tortorella and he made the decision because of the players. He's also placed a good chunk of the AV hiring on the players as well. Teflon GM.
Lundqvist knew what he was doing when he made those comments. It may have not been the outcome he wanted, but that's what happened.
Nac Mac Feegle
wee & free
- Jun 10, 2011
- 35,819
- 10,363
Yep.
It's what I was trying to say a week or so ago. We still haven't seen any quotes from (current) players pointing the finger at Torts.
Sounds to me like it's another case of media and bloggers turning a molehill into a mountain yet again.
*sigh* remember the days when society actually had journalistic standards and integrity? Seems so long ago now (not just regarding hockey, but all news media).
I don't think the players directly complained to Sather--he's old school and wouldn't listen to it. But, Sather does talk to agents and no doubt they had a lot to say to say on the subject to him.
stan the caddy
Registered User
- Sep 27, 2011
- 2,360
- 281
It's all just speculation at this point. It's amazing. Evryone is convinced that something happened and there's no real proof to any of it.
Well, SOMETHING definitely happened...Tortorella got fired. If someone (or more than one) did convince Sather that had to happen, there will NEVER be proof...there never is in these type of situations.
Hank is a top five goalie which can't be argued. However, I think torts system definitely helped pad his stats. Biron has impressive numbers as well. Point being when and if we open things up he won't be quite so god like and we might regret a 9 m per contract. Given the opportunities for him to cash in on advertising and etc I think 8 m should be the max the rangers go. Rather see him get 8 yrs @ 7.5 then 5 at 9. We need that cap space and i think Hank knows it and won't hamstring the team.
As far as his comments go IMO Hank knew exactly how his statement would be perceived. Why else would he choose those words? He is a calculated man in his interviews and he is a straight shooter. He should be the captain and I think regardless of the fallout torts had to go. If Hank ran torts out of town then I say hells yeah!
As far as his comments go IMO Hank knew exactly how his statement would be perceived. Why else would he choose those words? He is a calculated man in his interviews and he is a straight shooter. He should be the captain and I think regardless of the fallout torts had to go. If Hank ran torts out of town then I say hells yeah!
nyranger61494
YNWA
http://www.csnne.com/blog/bruins-talk/rask-starting-point-6-years-39-million
Will be interesting to see how much Rask actually gets. I would expect that Lundqvist and Meehan would want richer. Hank and Rangers would probably look to do 8 years, too one would think.
The Bruins have some leverage with Rask. It doesn't help his cause that he imploded in the final seconds of game 6. It wouldn't shock me if he only get's a 3-4 deal at $5 million py.
As far as Lundqvist goes, i've said it before I will say it again if he is going to want a max deal or even somthing close to a max deal than Sather has to deal him. It wouldn't be the first time Sather has traded away a star play (Gretzky anyone). One player can not handcuff the franchise for years to come in a cap era & expect to have a winning team built around him & expect to compete for a Cup every year.
bigbuffalo313
Registered User
As much as I would agree with the last statement, Sather would probably give the money to some ufa who will decline within two years.
I don't think Sather will trade Lundqvist, he'll find a deal that both sides can live with--even if some posters find it outrageous. Lundqvist is the basis of whatever success Sather has had as Ranger GM.
