Toggle sidebar

Speculation: Is Henrik really in the driver's seat?

  • 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
Status
Not open for further replies.
nyr2k2 said:
I love that we're disappointed with Lundqvist, that he's been mediocre, etc, and still has a .918 SV%. We're so spoiled. Talbot has just made it worse. I think some people are in for a rude awakening if Lundqvist were to walk. Fortunately for us, I don't think that happens.

Do fans of other teams take their goalies for granted the way we do?
Click to expand...

It's not disappointment with Lundqvist, it's realizing that allocating 12%+ of the cap to a goalie makes it very hard to ice a balanced lineup. Goalies in general are so damn good these days; the difference between Lundqvist and a guy like Reimer is minimal. Of course Lundqvist is better, but he's certainly not 400% better which is what he'd have to be in order for the math to work out.

The bottom line as I see it is that given the quality of current NHL goaltending, the luxury of having the absolute best goalie available no longer warrants the associated cost. I'd love to find the time to support this with a real statistical analysis, probably not going to happen though.
 
Talbot gives the Rangers options. I think that the Rangers telling everyone in training camp that Talbot was NHL ready was part of a bigger strategy to let Lundqvist know that he can be replaced, & he could be replaced if push comes to shove. I would like to see Lundqvist back with the Rangers but not at the price of crippling this franchise for years to come. Lundqvist needs to understand this as well.
 
nyr2k2 said:
I love that we're disappointed with Lundqvist, that he's been mediocre, etc, and still has a .918 SV%. We're so spoiled. Talbot has just made it worse. I think some people are in for a rude awakening if Lundqvist were to walk. Fortunately for us, I don't think that happens.

Do fans of other teams take their goalies for granted the way we do?
Click to expand...

Best post I've read in a while. It's incredible what 7 games can do. Sometimes I think people just want change - ANY change. Talbot is about 93 starts away being even considered a viable starter.

Pay the man what he wants. He won't hold the Rangers for ransom as he loves it in NYA.
 
Bleed Ranger Blue said:
Because giving Glen Sather more cap space is all that stands in the way of this team and a championship. Get real.

Id be on board with committing to a quasi-rebuild that involved trading Callahan, Girardi, and Lundqvist for solid assets, but that takes the type of commitment that this organization will never show
Click to expand...

Ok lets pay our goalie $8million a year and then we can spend the next 8 years complaining about having no top end talent, no depth, no scorers, etc.

Sounds fun.

I've had enough of watching us struggle to score the past few years. We've all seen how bad glen can be with cap room, but frankly he's here to stay until he dies. I love hank as much as the next guy, but I want this team to win a cup, and I think that becomes difficult when your goalie is making that much $ and taking up that much cap space into his late thirties.

FWIW sather is going to have a **** ton of cap space this off-season no matter what, don't we have like 15 guys up for contract renewals? Factor in the inevitable richards buyout and uncle glen is going to have a lot of room to sign FA's for better or (more likely) worse.
 
I say the Rangers trade their franchise goalie and sign the new goalie to a fifteen year contract. While they are at it why not trade their best defenseman and a first round lottery pick to overpay for a washed up player and sign him to a 10 year deal.
This sounds familiar:laugh:
 
We should be happy that Talbot is here, we shouldnt be saying let Hank go. Lets be happy we have 2 good goalies. Is Hank elite? Who cares? Score goals and worry about the elite talk later. Score goals.
 
Chimp said:
While I agree Hank would cripple the team financially if he demanded 8-9 mil a season, I have to point out that while Hank has been the best player on the team and MVP since forever, which other guys has he seen on the team, which have been paid more than him? Scott Gomez. Chris Drury. Wade Redden was paid about the same. Marian Gaborik. Brad Richards. Rick Nash. All overpaid except for Gaborik perhaps, Nash hopefully somewhat worth it, at least he's not in the trainwreck party with the others.

Hank should be paid about what he is paid right now. But it's a little bit ridiculous the guy that was drafted and has stayed loyal with these trainwrecks of teams the whole way, instead of going somewhere to try to win a Cup, can't be rewarded for it while all from overpaid to overpaid and downright mediocre mercenaries rob the franchise blind. No, one more error doesn't set things right. Just pointing it out.
Click to expand...

This thought drives me crazy. He signed a killer deal, what does that have to do with loyalty? Also, what teams that were shoe-ins for a Cup were searching for a goalie last time his contract was up? how many of those could've or would've spent the money that he got at the time?

I just don't think you can give a goalie 8m+ in the modern NHL and consistently ice a superior product.
 
You guys all might be right with the goalie comments, but where exactly are we going to find our Crosby, Malkin, Toews, Kane, etc??

We have no choice but to try and win with our model of a franchise goalie, good top 6 and average forwards.

We could free up all the cap space we want, those players aren't available.

Pay Hank.
 
Talbot is not, and never will be, near Lundqvist's level.

I am very pleased that he turned into what I hoped he could be at the NHL level, which is a new-age butterfly goaltender who can turn in a sold performance and do the basic work if the team in front of him plays well.

But Talbot won't be the guy you want facing down Alexander Ovechkin on a breakaway in playoff overtime.

Would we open up millions by letting Henrik go? Sure. But lets think about this. The cap is projected to rise and keep rising. The talent in this league isn't about to explode for no reason, so just about every team is going to be able to afford to keep their talented players. Only mediocre guys who think they are worth a ton will make it to UFA, and they will be guys like Leino who score 20 one season and score a massive contract.

NYR should hold onto the assets that they have. An extra 5 million in cap space does not land you a star, nor does it mean the difference between a good and bad offense.

I'll take Henrik with 5-7 less in cap space than a team without Hank and maybe one more Brad Richards on it.
 
I think people are missing the OP's original point.

Where are his possible destinations?? He's going to want to win RIGHT NOW if he goes some where else and he's also going to want to be paid and the team would need a goalie.

Detroit used to be the place people would goto win, but that team has issues and they are locked into howard for a while.

The Penguins? Barley have the cap space they would probably have to Dump Malkin to do it and you could argue that would be a solid move for them.

The only team that would concern me are the Avalanche. A HOF goalie head coach, cap space, team on the upswing with tremendous talent. A current Goalkeeper with Major legal issues.

Really Where else is Hank going???

The only team that would
 
I'd like to hope that Hank will take a smaller contract for the greater good of the team, similar to the way a few of the LA Kings players did.
 
Xref said:
The game has changed. When your goalie is your best player, you are in trouble. You need top end talent to put pucks in the net. When you have players that can break a game with goals, an average NHL goaltender is enough to be successful. I'd rather go in that direction. Trading Hank, Callahan, Girardi for top draft picks/stud prospects is the way I'd go. Goalies are easier to obtain.
Click to expand...


I'd agree.


Beardacus said:
I'd like to hope that Hank will take a smaller contract for the greater good of the team, similar to the way a few of the LA Kings players did.
Click to expand...

This would be the dream scenario.
 
People are spoiled and take for granted just how good hank is year in and year out. Other goalies might be better in a single year but the next year they stink. Hank does it every year

People also overrate the team in front of him. Without hank the last 9 years we'd be lucky to have made the playoffs 3 times. We'd be a lottery team with our offense
 
It's nine years already, man time flies by guys ...


True, he is one of the best goalie. Let's hope he even wants to resign at the end of the seaon.
 
Xref said:
The game has changed. When your goalie is your best player, you are in trouble. You need top end talent to put pucks in the net. When you have players that can break a game with goals, an average NHL goaltender is enough to be successful. I'd rather go in that direction. Trading Hank, Callahan, Girardi for top draft picks/stud prospects is the way I'd go. Goalies are easier to obtain.
Click to expand...

I agree.

The Rangers will never do it though and those players are hard to find.

I don't like the amount of money that Lundqvist will take up when/if he re-signs. But the Rangers will have to pay him if they want to keep him because there are other places he could go.
 
CM PUNK said:
People are spoiled and take for granted just how good hank is year in and year out. Other goalies might be better in a single year but the next year they stink. Hank does it every year

People also overrate the team in front of him. Without hank the last 9 years we'd be lucky to have made the playoffs 3 times. We'd be a lottery team with our offense
Click to expand...

Hat offense will never improve if we pay our goalie 8M/year. Trade him now for a solid starter on a cheap contract and a young offensive threat.
 
SKjEi o2 said:
Hat offense will never improve if we pay our goalie 8M/year. Trade him now for a solid starter on a cheap contract and a young offensive threat.
Click to expand...

Or invest less in Ds. In other means is trading Del Zotto which they seams to do just struggling in find a good partner.
 
You have to pay Henrik because the alternative is not paying him and all the Rangers get for that is cap space.

Is anyone here seriously going to advocate giving Sather MORE capspace with a straight face?

I don't think so.
 
Fire Sather said:
You guys all might be right with the goalie comments, but where exactly are we going to find our Crosby, Malkin, Toews, Kane, etc??

We have no choice but to try and win with our model of a franchise goalie, good top 6 and average forwards.

We could free up all the cap space we want, those players aren't available.

Pay Hank.
Click to expand...

This is really the only valid argument for paying Hank in my opinion. We won't be able to field a balanced lineup with that much cash tied up in net, but we might not be able to do it anyway if the right players aren't available when the cap space opens up. It's a ****** situation, as usual, for us.
 
Ailurophile said:
You have to pay Henrik because the alternative is not paying him and all the Rangers get for that is cap space.

Is anyone here seriously going to advocate giving Sather MORE capspace with a straight face?

I don't think so.
Click to expand...



Agreed. Will we magically become a powerhouse with more capspace? Sather has cap space, he used it wrong though
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom