Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XLI

[usekakkorightquinn]

Have a lot of love for Hank and I wish it wouldn't end this way. However, he needs to remember that he took jobs from goalies when he broke in that weren't as good as him. Now, the roles are reversed and he needs to step aside.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

It all comes down to what Gorton can get for Georgiev. If it’s a reasonable offer, which I would think would be something like a 2nd + 3rd, then I’d keep Hank around for another season. Even with a compliance buyout available I’d probably use it on Staal IF that deal above was available for Georgiev.

That's fair.

 

[Irishguy42]

Is Lindbom a lost cause now? Is there a chance he becomes a decent goalie.

With all his health problems since being drafted, I have my doubts.

Also, the health issues since being drafted shouldn't be used in arguments against where he was drafted.

 

[SA16]

Lindbom as a 2nd is far better than Askarov around 13th overall. Not even remotely close in my book. Massive difference in opportunity cost.

 

[nyr2k2]

It all comes down to what Gorton can get for Georgiev. If it’s a reasonable offer, which I would think would be something like a 2nd + 3rd, then I’d keep Hank around for another season. Even with a compliance buyout available I’d probably use it on Staal IF that deal above was available for Georgiev.

This has been my logic as well.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

With all his health problems since being drafted, I have my doubts.

Also, the health issues since being drafted shouldn't be used in arguments against where he was drafted.

You can't win them all. Lindbom in the 2nd round was a bit high, and he has had some nasty injuries since. On the other hand, he's still young and things can change.

We have the goalie depth to take a hit here. I expect us to draft a goalie late this year (I hope Blomqvist) to restock the shelf after signing Wall and trading Georgiev soon.

 

[McSauer]

yeah what kind of organization picks a goalie 4OA, or even 1OA? bush league stuff.

Yeah because the years we drafted Blackburn and Montoya we had the goaltending situation we have now

BTW we drafted Montoya 6th overall not 4th. If you're going to be unnecessarily snarky, at least be accurate

 

[Leetch3]

Yeah because the years we drafted Blackburn and Montoya we had the goaltending situation we have now

BTW we drafted Montoya 6th overall not 4th. If you're going to be unnecessarily snarky, at least be accurate

I think that was a shot at the islanders (4OA = Luongo, 1OA = DiPietro)

 

[nyr2k2]

Problem with Lindbom is that he hasn't even been good when he's healthy. He was good at the U17 and U18 level in international tournaments, but has sucked otherwise. That interview Vince did the other day about Lindbom, of the course the scout or whoever he was talking to immediately mentions how they liked him because of his performance in the U18 WJC. And then, "he has improved his stick work." Plus a couple other more intangible things that haven't translated to good play.

I hate it when teams over-emphasize the short tournaments.

 

[Crease]

Problem with Lindbom is that he hasn't even been good when he's healthy. He was good at the U17 and U18 level in international tournaments, but has sucked otherwise. That interview Vince did the other day about Lindbom, of the course the scout or whoever he was talking to immediately mentions how they liked him because of his performance in the U18 WJC. And then, "he has improved his stick work." Plus a couple other more intangible things that haven't translated to good play.

I hate it when teams over-emphasize the short tournaments.

I threw my hands up when they picked Al Montoya for this reason.

 

[MysticLeviathan]

It's not about sentiment and nostalgia. It's about respecting a legend. We don't want the team to treat players like a math equation rather than a team. When that happens, teams draw players that approach the game the same way, and that's exactly the kind of player we had in spades in the early 2000s. You've got to have guys who would skate through a steel wall for the team and for each other. You don't get that by making EVERY decision in a cold, calculating manner.

Beyond that, it just makes sense to trade Georgiev. If he wants to be a starter in this league, it isn't going to happen here. He's rapidly going to be too expensive to be the backup. Get the value for him now, and have Henrik (Shesty's idol) backup/mentor the young buck.

I’m sorry but I cannot agree with this. No single player is greater than the team. Lundqvist just isn’t good enough anymore for what we’re paying him. Lundqvist knows this. It would be foolish arrogance to hurt the team’s future over him. This all is a math equation. We made it clear about our position to rebuild. If Lundqvist didn’t have a NMC and the Rangers were smart then they’d trade him even without his permission. This is all about making the team competitive and making the best moves to make that happen or keeping that the case.

Lundqvist was a legend for us, but he isn’t part of the longterm future. The team as a whole is greater than any individual player.

 

[Deleted member 23124]

It all comes down to what Gorton can get for Georgiev. If it’s a reasonable offer, which I would think would be something like a 2nd + 3rd, then I’d keep Hank around for another season. Even with a compliance buyout available I’d probably use it on Staal IF that deal above was available for Georgiev.

The problem with keeping Henrik as a backup is his need for a lot of work to be sharp....that's not going to happen with Shesty. I can't see him being sharp playing only 20-30 games.

 

[Avery16]

To me, it all depends on what Hank is thinking about in terms of his next contract. If he would be into staying on specifically as a backup and a mentor to Igor, and getting paid appropriately as such, say 2.5 x 2 or 3, then I feel like that is pretty close to an ideal.

 

[Leetch3]

To me, it all depends on what Hank is thinking about in terms of his next contract. If he would be into staying on specifically as a backup and a mentor to Igor, and getting paid appropriately as such, say 2.5 x 2 or 3, then I feel like that is pretty close to an ideal.

assuming you can get thru next years cap situation....turning georgiev into a middle 6 forward for depth and having hank on a cheap deal as a backup wouldn't be a bad plan. its getting thru next years cap that is the struggle...after that so many options open.

 

[Avery16]

assuming you can get thru next years cap situation....turning georgiev into a middle 6 forward for depth and having hank on a cheap deal as a backup wouldn't be a bad plan. its getting thru next years cap that is the struggle...after that so many options open.

Of course, if Hank isn’t ready or into being a backup or taking such a steep pay cut, no reason to prolong the divorce. We probably aren’t winning a Cup next season.

if we’re getting a roster forward for Georgiev, I think it should at least be a B prospect on an ELC, of course with middle-six projection.

 

[HFsNumber1Heel]

It's not about sentiment and nostalgia. It's about respecting a legend. We don't want the team to treat players like a math equation rather than a team. When that happens, teams draw players that approach the game the same way, and that's exactly the kind of player we had in spades in the early 2000s. You've got to have guys who would skate through a steel wall for the team and for each other. You don't get that by making EVERY decision in a cold, calculating manner.

Beyond that, it just makes sense to trade Georgiev. If he wants to be a starter in this league, it isn't going to happen here. He's rapidly going to be too expensive to be the backup. Get the value for him now, and have Henrik (Shesty's idol) backup/mentor the young buck.

I get the respect thing. But why is it ok for the Ducks to buy out Perry, for the Flames to say goodbye to Iginla, and for Lou Lamariello to even not sign Brodeur in the final years of his career? What makes this situation different? The "New York Way"? That's not a logical answer.

A handful of players get to go out on their own terms.

The Rangers aren't the same franchise they were 20 years ago. They've been one of the better run franchises in the league the last 15 years. The data shows that. I feel like sometimes we're all so beaten up from Neil Smith's post-94/Sather pre-Cap Era that we seek validation from other fanbases "hey we play young guys too!" or we're so concerned with "doing the right thing" to make up for a very ugly seven year period.

Well "doing the right" thing in this case is having $8.5 million from a compliance buyout to lock up your best offensive D-Man since Zubov to a longterm deal, to sign the Robin (Strome) to your Batman (Panarin) to a reasonable short term deal, AND have money to add a veteran depth piece to the bottom six (hopefully a Cup winner) to help in the growth process for a very young team.

Doing the wrong thing is having $8.5 million tied up to a third string goalie who will play maybe 20 games at most because it feels right or so a handful of fans who don't look at data won't have a negative emotional reaction.

It's a little cold, I get that BUT do y'all want to progress as much as possible next year?

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

Buying out Hank would leave such a bad taste in my mouth.

I agree.

I also think it may be the right thing to do, unfortunately. Being a good GM is all about the tough decisions.

 

[SA16]

I get the respect thing. But why is it ok for the Ducks to buy out Perry, for the Flames to say goodbye to Iginla, and for Lou Lamariello to even not sign Brodeur in the final years of his career? What makes this situation different? The "New York Way"? That's not a logical answer.

In addition to this there are also posts above regarding compliance buy outs for Getzlaf too. There's no difference.

That being said I think there is roughly zero percent chance there will be compliance buyouts since they are bad for both the owners and the players.

 

[McSauer]

I think that was a shot at the islanders (4OA = Luongo, 1OA = DiPietro)

Ah well if so, then carry on @FultonReed

 

[nyr2k2]

I get the respect thing. But why is it ok for the Ducks to buy out Perry, for the Flames to say goodbye to Iginla, and for Lou Lamariello to even not sign Brodeur in the final years of his career? What makes this situation different? The "New York Way"? That's not a logical answer.

A handful of players get to go out on their own terms.

The Rangers aren't the same franchise they were 20 years ago. They've been one of the better run franchises in the league the last 15 years. The data shows that. I feel like sometimes we're all so beaten up from Neil Smith's post-94/Sather pre-Cap Era that we seek validation from other fanbases "hey we play young guys too!" or we're so concerned with "doing the right thing" to make up for a very ugly seven year period.

Well "doing the right" thing in this case is having $8.5 million from a compliance buyout to lock up your best offensive D-Man since Zubov to a longterm deal, to sign the Robin (Strome) to your Batman (Panarin) to a reasonable short term deal, AND have money to add a veteran depth piece to the bottom six (hopefully a Cup winner) to help in the growth process for a very young team.

Doing the wrong thing is having $8.5 million tied up to a third string goalie who will play maybe 20 games at most because it feels right or so a handful of fans who don't look at data won't have a negative emotional reaction.

It's a little cold, I get that BUT do y'all want to progress as much as possible next year?

My logic has always been this:

Marc Staal is f***ing terrible. He is one of the worst handful of regular players in the game. He's just awful. If you buy him out, you save his cap hit to use on other needs, AND you significantly improve the team even if you just sign some stop gap for $2M-$3M. He's that bad that basically any remotely competent NHL defender is an upgrade.

Then, in goal. The different between Georgiev and Lundqvist, to me, it's not much at this point. Of course Georgiev has more upside and is probably more capable of putting on a clinic on a given night, but he has his fair share of absolute clunkers. If you trade Georgiev and use Lundqvist as the backup, whatever possible downgrade exists there is more than offset by the upgrade of replacing Staal with a burned out Lincoln Continental.

So for next year, I think you're better with no Staal but Lundqvist than you'd be with Staal but no Lundqvist. And then it becomes a becomes a wash the following season.

It's somewhat predicated on what you could get for Georgiev--if the best offer is like a fourth round pick, then it's probably not something to want to do. But if you get a good offer, take it and get rid of Staal and improve yourself immediately.

Also, I do have reservations about dumping Lundqvist like that. It has nothing to do with "New York being different" or whatever you've said, I just don't like it when teams dump their franchise players like that. It's one thing if the guy's contract ends and you don't re-sign him and he goes elsewhere, but I think it's different to cut him or whatever. Just my opinion. Obviously the team comes first, but I actually think it's better for the team to keep him another year and buy out Staal, so it works in my mind. I won't be pissed if we buy out Lundqvist, but I'll never feel good about it.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

I get the respect thing. But why is it ok for the Ducks to buy out Perry, for the Flames to say goodbye to Iginla, and for Lou Lamariello to even not sign Brodeur in the final years of his career? What makes this situation different? The "New York Way"? That's not a logical answer.

We traded Leetch, lost Giacomin on waivers. I am sure buying out 1 year of Lundqvist's contract is going to be fine. It's not going to hurt his legacy. Then again, a lot of fans still cry over the Zuccarello trade, acting as if we traded away Ovechlin.

 

[nyr2k2]

We traded Leetch, lost Giacomin on waivers. I am sure buying out 1 year of Lundqvist's contract is going to be fine. It's not going to hurt his legacy. Then again, a lot of fans still cry over the Zuccarello trade, acting as if we traded away Ovechlin.

Some people believe that you treat a guy who is one of the greatest ever to play the position and certainly one of the greatest to wear your sweater differently than your average player. Particularly when you can make an argument that keeping him and getting rid of someone else is the better move.

I don't know why this opinion needs to be mocked or derided. It's not like people are advocating for making a move/not making a move that sets the team back a decade.

 

[TheBloodyNine]

If there is a round of compliance buyouts I’m curious who teams would use them on. Perhaps the Rangers could find a nice depth center out of that group or maybe a nice LD?

I wonder who Florida would buyout. There were rumors that they wanted to cut ties with Mathewson and his 7 years left on his deal. Would they use a compliance buyout on him? He’d be a nice addition on the left side on a shorter deal.

Our old friend John Moore in Boston has 3 years left on his deal @$2.75m. For the most part he’s been in and out of their lineup. Would Boston compliance buyout him to create flexibility? He may be an option as a 5/6.

Detroit probably uses there’s on Frans Nielson.

Would Nashville compliance buyout Turris? That would intrigue me as a 3C option on a short deal.

Would Anaheim use it on Getzlaf or Backes? Getzlaf gives them the larger cap relief. If so, I’d be interested as a 2/3C

Minnesota probably uses it on Parise. This may be sacrilegious but I’d be interested in Parise as a depth veteran scorer on a short deal.

Columbus probably buys out Wennberg. He’d be an interesting 3C option.

None of those, please.

 

[NYR Viper]

The problem with keeping Henrik as a backup is his need for a lot of work to be sharp....that's not going to happen with Shesty. I can't see him being sharp playing only 20-30 games.

And that’s fine. He’d be a backup at that point

 

[Avery16]

I get the respect thing. But why is it ok for the Ducks to buy out Perry, for the Flames to say goodbye to Iginla, and for Lou Lamariello to even not sign Brodeur in the final years of his career? What makes this situation different? The "New York Way"? That's not a logical answer.

I’m sorry- are you trying to evoke empathy for Brodeur on a Rangers board?