View Single Post
Old
08-01-2013, 10:38 PM
  #89
Kwayry
Registered User
 
Kwayry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Plano
Country: United States
Posts: 2,969
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crease View Post
Really not thrilled with the idea of having a 35, 36, 37-year-old goalie with a $9m cap hit. I know the the cap is expected to rise, but that's still a huge chunk of the team's cap space. The guy plays 65+ games a year. Plus playoffs. Plus Olympics and probably a future World Cup or two. He's putting a lot of miles on those knees. How many elite years does he have left in the tank?
Can you answer your own question? It seems to me the answer is important to the prior points you made. But you leave it hanging out there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crease View Post
Someone will pay Lundqvist that kind of money. I guess I'm just frustrated that the Rangers have put themselves in a position (read: zero goaltending depth) that they are going to have to make a 30-year-old goalie the highest paid at his position for 7+ years. I firmly believe Lundqvist's best days are behind him. In a vacuum, 7x9 is not a good contract considering his age, but the Rangers hands are tied here.
There is a long list of goalies that have performed at elite level well into their mid 30's or even their late 30's. what do you base the bolded on?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crease View Post
I'm not saying he absolutely won't be good in his mid-to-late 30s. I just don't think it's a good idea to commit that kind of money to him now for those years. If a goalie loses his game, you can't bury him in the lineup. I'd much rather give him a 4 year deal with a higher cap hit and then re-sign him again at 34 after re-evaluating where the franchise is and where he is health-wise. This is of course in a world where Lundqvist would be okay with a bridge contract.
If, as you say the Rangers "hands are tied", and if you think he is the Rangers best player currently, how do you think this "best player" feels when you are not showing him the respect he deserves? Hanks and his agents are not idiots, they'd like to get the best deal possible, if not from the Rangers, they can get it from someone else. Given the way he feels about the org and the city, he may give the team a home discount, but this is no way to get there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crease View Post
25 times. But 17 goalies had 30 wins in 2011-12. Should we be okay with committing one of the highest cap hits to a goalie doing what passes as average?
How do you know he will be average? All he has done so far is prove he is anything but average.

I infer from the above posts that you are firmly in the camp to trade hank and start over again. There is nothing wrong with it and has been discussed many times.
i am in the other camp, when you have the best goalie in the world, he has carried the team so far, and the team has no heir apparent, you lock him up for as long as you can.
I just hope the Rangers do not show this hesitation to commit to the best goalie in the world. There will be a long line of teams that will show the appropriate amount of respect to Hank when it's time.

Kwayry is offline