Confirmed with Link: Rangers re-sign Henrik Lundqvist [7 years, $59.5M, $8.5M AAV, Full NMC]

[Pastafazul*]

what do we give staal when his contract comes up..... 10 year 90mill and 10% of the proceeds from consessions

 

[Machinehead]

We weren't crippled because of Lundqvist's contract! How can you be so misinformed to the facts?...to reality?

We're not crippled because of his contract, we're crippled because of the way Sather manages the team entirely around one player. Sather isn't going anywhere, so the only other way out was that player going elsewhere.

How did you get that message?

Giving a goalie that term and that money pretty much says that management doesn't think we're gonna win a damn game without him. Goalies don't get paid like that unless a team is desperate.

 

[Chief]

If it has been mentioned elsewhere, I apologize, but, I was listening to XM and Scott Laughlin made mention that Nick Kypreos had stated that he was told that if Henke had actually hit free agency, the Flyers were more than ready to offer him more than $9 million per. Yeah, it would been lots of fun as a Ranger fan this off-season watching a bidding war take place for Henke.

That Kypreos quote is borderline ridiculous. The Flyers are not sitting around on Dec. 4th with any concrete plans as to what they'll spend on anyone in the coming offseason.

The Lundqvist signing was a foregone conclusion and that meant he was going to get paid big-time. I'll admit some people seem to be taking the negativity to an extreme but I think it's fair for people to question whether this is what's best for the team. It's silly to act like this doesn't impact the ability to spend elsewhere and I don't know that there's a Cup winner in the last 10 years that has been put together with so much cap dedicated to a goalie.

 

[Machinehead]

what do we give staal when his contract comes up..... 10 year 90mill and 10% of the proceeds from consessions

How about a "So you're moving to Carolina...." handbook?

 

[Puckface NYR*]

Well I don;'t think the right moves are gonna happen. To me, Sather sent a message today -with that term and that amount of money- that he's going to keep throwing Hank against the wall until it sticks. That's why I'm upset, not because Hank is a Ranger.

Throwing Hank against the wall? He's not the problem. It's the other **** he's throwing against the wall that NEVER sticks.

 

[Machinehead]

Throwing Hank against the wall? He's not the problem. It's the other **** he's throwing against the wall that NEVER sticks.

Well of course but the idea seems to be "lol we have Lundqvist we don't need a team. He'll just get hot in the playoffs"

He's been hot in the playoffs. It's still not working.

 

[Baby Punisher]

what do we give staal when his contract comes up..... 10 year 90mill and 10% of the proceeds from consessions

It's going to get to the point where when we go to games when we get our tickets scanned we will have to throw a $20 bill in a sack with a dollar sign on it that will just go the players payroll other wise you aren't allowed in. NO EXECPTIONS!

 

[nevesis]

We're not crippled because of his contract, we're crippled because of the way Sather manages the team entirely around one player. Sather isn't going anywhere, so the only other way out was that player going elsewhere.

Do you have a serious problem with simple math? How can you say Sather manages the team entirely around ONE player.

12.1%....to ONE player. (Henrik)

87.9%....to TWENTY-TWO other players.

Tell me more how Sather has crippled the team's cap situation around ONE player.

You pay your best players the most, and spread out the rest. It's the way it is in every sport.

 

[Machinehead]

Do you have a serious problem with simple math? How can you say Sather manages the team entirely around ONE player.

12.1%....to ONE player. (Henrik)

87.9%....to TWENTY-TWO other players.

Tell me more how Sather has crippled the team's cap situation around ONE player.

You keep bringing up simple math. I'm not talking about math, I'm not talking about numbers, I'm not talking about money.

It's the fact that the roster largely needs an overhaul but because Hank's play skews the results of each season, Sather continually thinks we're a contending team and manages us like a contending team.

 

[DelZottoHitTheNetJK]

I understand what Machinehead is saying. Look at the cup winning teams from the first lockout on

Ward
Giguere
Osgood
Fleury
Niemi
Thomas
Quick
Crawford

Out of those, Quick/Niemi/Ward kind of just came out of nowhere. ALL of those guys had ridiculously stacked teams in front of them. The point here is that the winning blueprint since the first lockout tends to be offensive firepower as the main focus while also getting good goaltending. Not the other way around. Boston sort of challenges that but they can still score albeit not in the same way as CHI or the 07 ANA team

 

[nevesis]

You keep bringing up simple math. I'm not talking about math, I'm not talking about numbers, I'm not talking about money.

It's the fact that the roster largely needs an overhaul but because Hank's play skews the results of each season, Sather continually thinks we're a contending team and manages us like a contending team.

This is a different conversation entirely. I am not a big fan of Glen Sather by any means, and he has made a TON of mistakes. But this thread is about Henrik's contract, and you're trying to argue that his current contract cripples the entire team, and it absolutely does not.

 

[Hire Sather]

You guys can say all you want how it would be better to have players like Toews or Kane or Crosby.

Where do you expect to get these guys from?

Its not like we can take the cap space this offseason and bring in a generational forward...

 

[Machinehead]

I understand what Machinehead is saying. Look at the cup winning teams from the first lockout on

Ward
Giguere
Osgood
Fleury
Niemi
Thomas
Quick
Crawford

Out of those, Quick/Niemi/Ward kind of just came out of nowhere. ALL of those guys had ridiculously stacked teams in front of them. The point here is that the winning blueprint since the first lockout tends to be offensive firepower as the main focus while also getting good goaltending. Not the other way around. Boston sort of challenges that but they can still score albeit not in the same way as CHI or the 07 ANA team

Perhaps Boston challenges that, but I think the fact that they changed goalies and went ot the finals with both is a testament to how good the rest of the team is.

This is a different conversation entirely. I am not a big fan of Glen Sather by any means, and he has made a TON of mistakes. But this thread is about Henrik's contract, and you're trying to argue that his current contract cripples the entire team, and it absolutely does not.

No I'm not.

I don't like the money or the term but it's not crippling.

 

[Puckface NYR*]

Well of course but the idea seems to be "lol we have Lundqvist we don't need a team. He'll just get hot in the playoffs"

He's been hot in the playoffs. It's still not working.

So your idea is to what...not sign any elite players that way they don't have ANYONE to build around and can try to build a plethora of mediocre A-, B level talent?

You're providing half an idea and not giving the other half. If we're going to be giving out fat contracts, I'd rather it be to guys who have earned them, especially in front of us, then to the Gomez's, Drury's, Holiks of the world.

It's funny, with all the bad MASSIVE contracts we've had, it's clear fans have been so scarred they can't even accept one that is OK. Crosby could sign with us for 9 million and people would scream on here.

 

[Hi ImHFNYR]

You keep bringing up simple math. I'm not talking about math, I'm not talking about numbers, I'm not talking about money.

It's the fact that the roster largely needs an overhaul but because Hank's play skews the results of each season, Sather continually thinks we're a contending team and manages us like a contending team.

But this entirely ignores
A) What the rangers were like before 05 (and what they were supposed to be going into Lundqvist's rookie year when jagr also took off)
B) How horrendous the big 4 FA signings were. Maybe if we hadn't tried to plug a hole in the bottom of the ship with a 6 mil dollar wad of tissue paper in Redden, a 7 mil wad of sponge with Drury, a 7 mil wad of chewing gum in Gomez and a nearly 7 mil wad of sh** with richards then the damn team WOULD have floundered even with henrik.

Hell take out Redden and drury and stick in Kovalchuk. right there prob nets a cup. Those were THREE critical errors in my eyes. Keep in mind all these mistakes with cap were made when Hank took up a greater percentage of the cap. Now that he takes up less of a percentage of the cap it stands to reason the team has a better chance to sign talent than it did when it frivolously pissed away money on the big 4 AND a host of bottom 6 failures

 

[Machinehead]

So your idea is to what...not sign any elite players that way they don't have ANYONE to build around and can try to build a plethora of mediocre A-, B level talent?

You're providing half an idea and not giving the other half. If we're going to be giving out fat contracts, I'd rather it be to guys who have earned them, especially in front of us, then to the Gomez's, Drury's, Holiks of the world.

It's funny, with all the bad MASSIVE contracts we've had, it's clear fans have been so scarred they can't even accept one that is OK. Crosby could sign with us for 9 million and people would scream on here.

Again it has little to do with contracts. There's just a disconnect between where this team is and where ownership and management think this team is. And I'm not trying to blame Lundqvist -afterall, all he did was show up and be the best goalie in the world- but he's a big cause of it.

It's not all Lundqvist either. If Jagr doesn't have a generational season in 2006 this team would likely have hit rock bottom that year.

 

[Hi ImHFNYR]

Again it has little to do with contracts. There's just a disconnect between where this team is and where ownership and management think this team is. And I'm not trying to blame Lundqvist -afterall, all he did was show up and be the best goalie in the world- but he's a big cause of it.

I believe you are erroneously identifying this as the cause of our woes. It is simple incompetence and failure without a cause other than we have a bad Gm and bad NHL scouting dept

 

[Machinehead]

I believe you are erroneously identifying this as the cause of our woes. It is simple incompetence and failure without a cause other than we have a bad Gm and bad NHL scouting dept

Sure, Sather sucks either way. But it would still be nice to have a direction. Either you're a good team or a bad team trying to become good. What are the Rangers? A mediocre team right where they are every year: barely in a playoff spot. There's no opportunity there.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

There's just a disconnect between where this team is and where ownership and management think this team is.

I don't think ownership has a clue. I agree with your comment about management (although Sather of all people should know better). I have no idea what any of this has to do within Lundqvist or this contract extension.

 

[Hi ImHFNYR]

Sure, Sather sucks either way. But it would still be nice to have a direction. Either you're a good team or a bad team trying to become good. What are the Rangers? A mediocre team right where they are every year: barely in a playoff spot. There's no opportunity there.

Right but you are saying that Sather misidentifies this team bc of henrik. But even if this is true it doesn't have anything to do with poor NHL scouting and terrible FA signings. You can identify the team as mediocre and in need of talent but separately come to the conclusion that Redden was a player on the decline, Gomez was never a scorer and Drury had a career year he would never repeat. Therefore avoid signing all 3 and get Kovalchuk when he became available. Or sign guys to fit an identity and build a core like we did eventually in 11 by default

 

[Machinehead]

I don't ownership has a clue. I agree with your comment about management (although Sather of all people should know better). I have no idea what any of this has to do within Lundqvist or this contract extension.

Like I said, management doesn't really have the pulse of where this team is. The fact that they still make the playoffs just about every year, mostly because of the guy between the pipes, is the only reason it's not obvious. That's where Lundqvist comes into this thing.

Perhaps I knew it all along deep down, but when news broke, I realized that for the next 7 years Lundqvist would continue making this team look better than it is and I just don't think it's a good thing to have a team look better than it is.

Who knows though: maybe Sather would still miss the boat even if this team was down there with Buffalo in the standings.

 

[Puckface NYR*]

Again it has little to do with contracts. There's just a disconnect between where this team is and where ownership and management think this team is. And I'm not trying to blame Lundqvist -afterall, all he did was show up and be the best goalie in the world- but he's a big cause of it.

It's not all Lundqvist either. If Jagr doesn't have a generational season in 2006 this team would likely have hit rock bottom that year.

What's your point. Any fan with a brain knows our management sucks. How is that relative to a hank contract. Would you prefer we skate a pee wee team out there?

The one thing management has done remotely right is find a way to keep hank a blueshirt for life.

 

[Puckface NYR*]

He would miss the boat, because Sather has been at the helm with teams just as bad. Do you not remember those days?

 

[Machinehead]

I do remember those years, and I believe we were headed straight for a rebuild when Jagr and Lundqvist pleasantly blew a hole into that plan. It was nice at the time but I can't help but think whether things would have better now if we had crashed and burned.

 

[Puckface NYR*]

I do remember those years, and I believe we were headed straight for a rebuild when Jagr and Lundqvist pleasantly blew a hole into that plan. It was nice at the time but I can't help but think whether things would have better now if we had crashed and burned.

Are you aware a rebuild was never part of the plan. You aren't headed for a rebuild then trade for Jaromir Jagr. They fooled us by trading what was essentially dead weight for younger guys, then bringing in one of the top 5 players in the NHL.....

The Rangers are never going to rebuild. And signing Henrik at least assures we'll see a competative team until he loses it. Regardless of the **** in front of him.

It's time you faced reality and understood. The New York Rangers (along with almost all other NY teams) will never ever ever ever rebuild.