Confirmed with Link: NYR have Signed Igor Shesterkin and Vitali Kravtsov to ELCs (Confirmed by NYR)

[alkurtz]

First there was Wayne Redden, then Chris Drury, then Brad Richards.

Then, Dan Girardi, then Marc Staal.

Now, Henrik Lundqvist has become the boards favorite whipping boy.

You know what? HL has four choices: he can retire, he can ask to be let out of his contract and end his career in Sweden, he can ask to be traded, or he can play out his contract here.

And, there is nothing any of you can do about it. The choice is totally his. Has he earned that right? Absolutely: legally, morally, personally, any way you want to put it.

Yes, he is not what he once was, but we are certainly going to miss him, in every way, when he is gone. I want to treasure what is left of his time here. There are no complaints from me, no matter what he opts to do.

 

[GAGLine]

Oh gotcha, still that's a lot of money to walk away from. And from Hank's comments, he doesn't strike me as a guy who's going to retire on his current deal. Every interview I've seen about this he always brings up he has 2 years left so he'll at least be here for that long. I think of this interview from the all-star break in particular @ 15:55:

That doesn't sound like a guy who's going to retire because he had a bad 6 weeks to end the season.

Remember when Marty St. Louis was going to sign another contract with us and not retire after we traded for him?

 

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

Jesus relax. I know you're nevesis-lite when it comes to Hank, doesn't mean you have to blow a gasket whenever someone has an opinion of Hank that doesn't make him out to be Jesus.

I'm not annoyed that you don't have the same opinion of him that I do, you're obviously entitled to have whatever opinion you want.

I'm annoyed that you keep saying the same thing over and over when it's irrelevant because he has a NMC.

 

[mrhockey193195]

So why do the Rangers owe him anything? It's part of his contract, fine. But people are making a case for loyalty, not that it's what's in their contract.

Rangers don't owe him anything, I didn't say that. I just don't think it's weird for some fans to not be pissed at Hank for not waiving his NTC.

(...that was a weird sentence)

 

[SnowblindNYR]

Rangers don't owe him anything, I didn't say that. I just don't think it's weird for some fans to not be pissed at Hank for not waiving his NTC.

(...that was a weird sentence)

Nah, I get why he wouldn't want to do that. I just think it's weird that the team should show him loyalty but he shouldn't show the team loyalty. And yes the team IS rewarding him for his play through his contract.

 

[romba]

Rangers don't owe him anything, I didn't say that. I just don't think it's weird for some fans to not be pissed at Hank for not waiving his NTC.

(...that was a weird sentence)

Yea, it's not befuddling to be like 'I'm willing to bite the bullet during a rebuild and accept my (former) superstar goalie refusing to waive his NMC'. I'd prefer if he did waive, but I get if others are happy he isn't too. Some people generally have more loyalty to the team's components (individual players, especially guys who have played their whole career with the team) than the sum of the parts, the team itself. I'm a sum of the parts guy, team first and always. If I could void Hank's contract myself due to some lame condition (Sather was drunk when he added the NMC! VOOOIIIIIIDDDDD) to the benefit of the team I would (sorry Hank I love ya but not THAT much) but I also (kind of) understand others who would extend him because of blind love and as a 'thank you'. Poor business mindset, but fans are fanatical at times.

As long as the guys running the show agree with me I'll be very open and understanding of other's opinions lol

 

[The Crypto Guy]

First there was Wayne Redden, then Chris Drury, then Brad Richards.

Then, Dan Girardi, then Marc Staal.

Now, Henrik Lundqvist has become the boards favorite whipping boy.

You know what? HL has four choices: he can retire, he can ask to be let out of his contract and end his career in Sweden, he can ask to be traded, or he can play out his contract here.

And, there is nothing any of you can do about it. The choice is totally his. Has he earned that right? Absolutely: legally, morally, personally, any way you want to put it.

Yes, he is not what he once was, but we are certainly going to miss him, in every way, when he is gone. I want to treasure what is left of his time here. There are no complaints from me, no matter what he opts to do.

Welcome to sports. Every fanbase of every sport of every team has them.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

First there was Wayne Redden, then Chris Drury, then Brad Richards.

Then, Dan Girardi, then Marc Staal.

Now, Henrik Lundqvist has become the boards favorite whipping boy.

You know what? HL has four choices: he can retire, he can ask to be let out of his contract and end his career in Sweden, he can ask to be traded, or he can play out his contract here.

And, there is nothing any of you can do about it. The choice is totally his. Has he earned that right? Absolutely: legally, morally, personally, any way you want to put it.

Yes, he is not what he once was, but we are certainly going to miss him, in every way, when he is gone. I want to treasure what is left of his time here. There are no complaints from me, no matter what he opts to do.

I thought everything was Tanner Glass' fault.....

 

[haveandare]

Remember when Marty St. Louis was going to sign another contract with us and not retire after we traded for him?

MSL also wasn't here for 14 years. I don't necessarily think Hank will keep playing after this deal, but he's in no way comparable to MSL in terms of dedication to this franchise.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

I'm not annoyed that you don't have the same opinion of him that I do, you're obviously entitled to have whatever opinion you want.

I'm annoyed that you keep saying the same thing over and over when it's irrelevant because he has a NMC.

I'm annoyed that there are people that would most likely be saying the same thing even if he didn't have the NMC since they're more loyal to him than the team.

 

[effen]

I'm annoyed that there are people that would most likely be saying the same thing even if he didn't have the NMC since they're more loyal to him than the team.

You're confused people can be loyal to a person they can have a connection with over the nebulous concept of an organization?

 

[effen]

"Thanks for being a great boss all those years Bob, and understanding when my kid was sick with leukemia, but I'm gonna have to side with Target on this one. Clean out your desk."

 

[mrhockey193195]

Yea, it's not befuddling to be like 'I'm willing to bite the bullet during a rebuild and accept my (former) superstar goalie refusing to waive his NMC'. I'd prefer if he did waive, but I get if others are happy he isn't too. Some people generally have more loyalty to the team's components (individual players, especially guys who have played their whole career with the team) than the sum of the parts, the team itself. I'm a sum of the parts guy, team first and always. If I could void Hank's contract myself due to some lame condition (Sather was drunk when he added the NMC! VOOOIIIIIIDDDDD) to the benefit of the team I would (sorry Hank I love ya but not THAT much) but I also (kind of) understand others who would extend him because of blind love and as a 'thank you'. Poor business mindset, but fans are fanatical at times.

As long as the guys running the show agree with me I'll be very open and understanding of other's opinions lol

I'm very sentimental towards players, and even root for certain players over what's in the best interest for the team. But I'm just a fan and don't run the team...which is probably a good thing.

 

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

I'm annoyed that there are people that would most likely be saying the same thing even if he didn't have the NMC since they're more loyal to him than the team.

I love Hank but even I’m not more loyal to him than the team.

I guess the fundamental difference here that we disagree on is that I don’t think we’re at the point where “what’s best for the team” differs from where Hank is at. I still think he’s an above average level goalie but I think the best number of starts for him is going to be around 45 so just around half. I don’t think we’re at the point where we would have to decide between Hank or the team. I guess if his performance slips even more next season and he looks cooked and both igor and Alex progress even further, then yeah maybe we’re at that point next summer.

And whether you wanna acknowledge it or not, certain players do build up more of a earned loyalty than others. It’s rare, reserved basically for legends. Nobody is above the team but a guy like Hank is justifiably going to be given more respect from the fans and organization than a random player.

 

[Kupo]

I thought everything was Tanner Glass' fault.....

WWII was Tanners fault...

Let’s not forget about the culprit who’s responsible for WWI.....

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

WWII was Tanners fault...

Let’s not forget about the culprit who’s responsible for WWI.....

Ah yes, Archduke Mich Roszival

 

[DelZottoHitTheNetJK]

The problem with Hank is not his age but his mileage. He's endured year after year of carrying terrible teams on his back to deep playoff runs while facing an unbelievable amount of grade A scoring chances. Which I can guarantee is the main reason for his decline. I'll never forgive Sather for giving Torts Stu f***ing Bickel as the best option for #6 D when we made that deep run

 

[Hunter Gathers]

lol

so cruel

A farewell tour is meaningless in comparison to developing our team for the future. Hank can enjoy his millions from the press box.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

A farewell tour is meaningless in comparison to developing our team for the future. Hank can enjoy his millions from the press box.

Either of the young goalies can start in Hartford

 

[SnowblindNYR]

I love Hank but even I’m not more loyal to him than the team.

I guess the fundamental difference here that we disagree on is that I don’t think we’re at the point where “what’s best for the team” differs from where Hank is at. I still think he’s an above average level goalie but I think the best number of starts for him is going to be around 45 so just around half. I don’t think we’re at the point where we would have to decide between Hank or the team. I guess if his performance slips even more next season and he looks cooked and both igor and Alex progress even further, then yeah maybe we’re at that point next summer.

And whether you wanna acknowledge it or not, certain players do build up more of a earned loyalty than others. It’s rare, reserved basically for legends. Nobody is above the team but a guy like Hank is justifiably going to be given more respect from the fans and organization than a random player.

That's fair but this isn't about Hank's current abilities, it's about his age and the fact that we're not competing now even for the playoffs, so even if he still has it what good does it do when there are two promising much younger goalies available to play?

 

[SnowblindNYR]

You're confused people can be loyal to a person they can have a connection with over the nebulous concept of an organization?

Yes, because winning is the goal in sports and the reason those people developed that connection to that person is presumably because he helped the team win.

 

[LORDE]

Either of the young goalies can start in Hartford

Shesty has a no AHL clause in his contract.

 

[JohnC]

Shesty has a no AHL clause in his contract.

This seems like a very simplistic and misleading way to a describe a European out clause.

 

[Thirty One]

Shesty has a no AHL clause in his contract.

Well, it's not a no-AHL clause. He has the option of going to Europe if he's assigned to the AHL, but the Rangers don't expect he'll use it if he's assigned there this fall.

 

[One Winged Angel]

You're confused people can be loyal to a person they can have a connection with over the nebulous concept of an organization?

Those are Lundqvist fans then and shouldn’t be criticizing Ranger fans for wanting what’s best for the Rangers.

Hank has earned the right and no one should argue that, but as fans, we do have the right to want what’s best for the team and not what’s best for Lundqvist.

Although he won’t ever come out and say it, he loves the city more than anything. When you say for years that the most important thing is to win a cup and then when the team sends a letter out to the public stating that they’re rebuilding and you don’t want to waive your NTC, that signifies that winning isn’t the primary focus anymore for him.

With that said, that’s fine. If he doesn’t care about winning anymore, that’s his prerogative and he’s earned the right to stay or go. However, there shouldn’t be backlash at anyone who wants to criticize him. He’s not beyond reproach.