Speculation: Roster building thread XXIII: Heading into doldrum days and All Star break

[ETTER DE]

A lot of people would be willing to Re-Sign guys if they’re willing to take millions less.

Zucc, McDonagh, and Hayes might still be if we could sign them on our terms instead of fair market value.

What terms would that be? Do you have the numbers?

 

[egelband]

I would prefer that Henrik call his own shot. That said, the three goalie rotation and the crescendo of rave reviews for Georgiev and Sherstykin may push him along to making that decision sooner rather than later.

Yep. Sometimes life isn’t neat and tidy. It’s just reality. Though I do continue to believe Henrik would make a great backup and mentor. If that becomes impossible...well...so be it.

 

[egelband]

So if we were offered Crouse and a pick for Trouba, are you a no?

The Rangers for sure would say 'no'.

 

[Avery16]

Got Doug Lidster for VBK.

Yes and no.
We traded Vanbiesbrouck to Vancouver for “future considerations” knowing that we would lose him in the expansion draft for nothing. We were ineligible to collect the compensatory pick, but vancouver was not, so it was our way to get something instead of nothing. Lidster (himself exposed in the draft, but not claimed) was dealt to us to complete the deal, and he played 34 games with us before we traded him away. We didn’t lose Beezer for nothing, but we did trade him for future considerations, which back then meant next to nothing. We were not able to shop him for his actual value, which was my point.

 

[Good Intentions]

As I have said...

the correct move is no move. Allow this to ride out - so much can change between now and then. Fully trust JD, we are in good hands - the ideal individual for the difficult decisions to come.

If Georgiev continues this caliber of play - and he will - he will be staying. I don’t believe this is wishful thinking on my part. In JD, I trust.

 

[egelband]

Yes and no.
We traded Vanbiesbrouck to Vancouver for “future considerations” knowing that we would lose him in the expansion draft for nothing. We were ineligible to collect the compensatory pick, but vancouver was not, so it was our way to get something instead of nothing. Lidster was dealt to us to complete the deal, and he played 34 games with us before we traded him away. We didn’t lose Beezer for nothing, but we did trade him for future considerations, which back then meant next to nothing. We were not able to shop him for his actual value, which was my point.

Lidster has choice hockey hair. Or, at least he did back then.

 

[haohmaru]

Got me thinking...

Georgiev is a restricted free agent. Someone could sign him To an offer sheet on July 1 for a contract in the $4MM+ range, something we probably wouldn’t have much stomach for. That gets us a 2nd in 2021 as compensation. At that price the Rangers would be very vulnerable.

May be part of the thinking behind making a move sooner than later.

Nobody is going to offer sheet Georgiev at that number, IMHO. Offer sheets are as common as Bigfoot sightings.

Georgiev is a tough one - I don't think a player like Kapanen is coming the other way as Mirtle seemed to agree with. Personally, I'd like to see Georgiev, Staal w/retained salary (assuming he wants to go to a contender) traded for a near NHL prospect + vet with contract that expires this year.

 

[kovazub94]

Yep. Sometimes life isn’t neat and tidy. It’s just reality. Though I do continue to believe Henrik would make a great backup and mentor. If that becomes impossible...well...so be it.
View attachment 309553

But would it be worth losing Georgiev - Shesterkin tandem over?

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

I saw a couple people bring this up on twitter yesterday and it’s not something I had thought of, but eventually one of Shestyorkin/Georgiev are going to have to be traded

If Hank retires, at some point in the near future it’s going to cost to much to keep both Georgiev and Igor. So the tandem thing, not even sure how long it would be sustainable

 

[Good Intentions]

It's really, really simple - you do not hand off a 23 year old 1A who happens to be the quintessential mature professional, overachiever, chemistry piece to this decade puzzle. Love Henrik to death but I'm not trading Georgiev. End of conversation. Henrik can be inactive, get paid, not get paid, have a parade, all of the above. We'll have a decade to celebrate Henrik, and during this decade, Georgiev and Shesterkin are the solution, together.

 

[haohmaru]

It's really, really simple - you do not hand off a 23 year old 1A who happens to be the quintessential mature professional, overachiever, chemistry piece to this decade puzzle. Love Henrik to death but I'm not trading Georgiev. End of conversation. Henrik can be inactive, get paid, not get paid, have a parade, all of the above. We'll have a decade to celebrate Henrik, and during this decade, Georgiev and Shesterkin are the solution, together.

Won't Georgiev be susceptible to the expansion draft being a 3rd year player?

 

[pld459666]

The Rangers for sure would say 'no'.

That pick better be two 1st rounders

 

[kovazub94]

I saw a couple people bring this up on twitter yesterday and it’s not something I had thought of, but eventually one of Shestyorkin/Georgiev are going to have to be traded

If Hank retires, at some point in the near future it’s going to cost to much to keep both Georgiev and Igor. So the tandem thing, not even sure how long it would be sustainable

Not near, and even longer into the future the cost should be very manageable especially relative to how much cap space Lundqvist was taking by himself.

 

[pld459666]

I saw a couple people bring this up on twitter yesterday and it’s not something I had thought of, but eventually one of Shestyorkin/Georgiev are going to have to be traded

If Hank retires, at some point in the near future it’s going to cost to much to keep both Georgiev and Igor. So the tandem thing, not even sure how long it would be sustainable

That cost for both is way down the line.

Georgiev next contract will be in the 4+ range.

Igors next contract will also be in the 4+ range.

That's about what Hank makes now.

I see no problems keeping both youngsters for another 5 years

 

[pld459666]

Won't Georgiev be susceptible to the expansion draft being a 3rd year player?

Hes protected

Igor is not eligible

Hank is a FA

Goalies situation for the expansion draft is or should not be an issue

 

[haohmaru]

Hes protected

Igor is not eligible

Hank is a FA

Goalies situation for the expansion draft is or should not be an issue

Yeah, that makes sense. He's the one we'd protect and Igor isn't elegible. 10-4

 

[kovazub94]

The Rangers had a perfect succession plan from Henrik to Igor and then Alexandar had to come along....

 

[pld459666]

As it pertains to Hank and a move/retirement

I have never believed that the player, doesn't matter who it is, should ever be left to call his shot.

I detest NMC for that reason.

However, I think the Rangers are handling this in the only way they can.

Bringing up Igor, playing him in important game that Hank would have gotten had it been a two goalie situation.

Basically sending the message that his end is near regardless of if hes ready for that or not.

The Rangers have to much respect to ask hank to waive his NTC, and while I believe that Hank truly wanted to be a part of the resurgence here, hes a smart man and can read the writing on the wall.

If he doesn't, on the down low, let Rangers brass know hes open to a move, then I expect that as @Edge mentioned in a previous iteration of one of these threads, I could also see Hank calling it a career in the NHL to go back to Sweden with some gas left in the tank to play a year or two there. (The last part was my little twist)

The Rangers for all of their ineptitude at drafting and developing forwards have not been nearly as bad in goal. We will be fine there.

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

Not near, and even longer into the future the cost should be very manageable especially relative to how much cap space Lundqvist was taking by himself.

I think it would be sooner than later

That cost for both is way down the line.

Georgiev next contract will be in the 4+ range.

Igors next contract will also be in the 4+ range.

That's about what Hank makes now.

I see no problems keeping both youngsters for another 5 years

I think it’s less than 5 years. I’d say 3 years at most. If Shestyorkin and Georgiev continue to play well they’re going to want to be paid like it

 

[wafflepadsave]

Probably reading way too much into it, but I do wonder if the Rangers have a Lundqvist retirement in their pocket and are using it to drive up the price. Hank agrees to retire at the end of this year so Georgie and Shesty can take over, or the Rangers get a price they simply can't refuse and he plays out his contract to mentor Shesty. Idk. I'm three beers deep already.

Really like your thinking here but would be interested in a follow up at the 9 beer mark!

 

[pld459666]

I think it would be sooner than later

I think it’s less than 5 years. I’d say 3 years at most. If Shestyorkin and Georgiev continue to play well they’re going to want to be paid like it

We'll agree to disagree on timeline

 

[Off Sides]

Multiple teams want Geo and he can only play for one. He won't get to the point where an offer sheet will even be an option, its a non-issue.

Plus he is arbitration eligible, if he elects, which most players do if they can, no offer sheet can be made.

 

[HFsNumber1Heel]

Lidster has choice hockey hair. Or, at least he did back then.

He was Seinfeld's twin. In the early days of ethernets when my school was wired up in like 1997, I printed out a picture of him and Seinfeld an showed it to my Spanish teacher with all my friends. She was very quirky. I asked her which one was Seinfeld and which wasn't she threw up her hands "They're both Seinfeld to me!"

 

[HFsNumber1Heel]

There's not a gun to the Rangers saying they have to trade Georgiev. If the return isn't phenomenal, hold onto him. In fact unless they can get a core forward, I keep him.

I don't get this notion the Rangers benching Lundqvist or buying him out is disrespectful. What's the invisible "moral standard?" Where does it come from and what human needs an explanation?

Every team at some point says goodbye to their star. The Yankees did it with Mattingly, Iginla in Calgary, Lou Lamariello didn't re-up how many guys? Even Shaq was let go by teams. I don't understand this "New York Standard" or "it's not the Rangers way." Please show me this doctrine.

 

[Emptyvoid]

FWIW, Hank's salary drops to its lowest point next year. 1 mil bonus + 4.5 mil base salary.