Like someone said before CJ will get traded way before hank does lol.....and i hope CJ keeps dominating when he plays so we can trade him for a good package deal down the line....Like someone said earlier why trade away 4+ years of proven NHL elite talent....and 94now if del zotto hasnt impressed you at all as a 19 year old straight from juniors then you def havent been taking your meds
If CJ proves he can do what he can consistently, Hank will be gone by his contract end. Not that i am looking forward to it, I am not Lundqvist hater as accused, just saying...
Lundqvist is playing great at the moment and he is indispensable. Yet he cannot play any better. His best, in other words, is not good for top 10 in the league average. He is in the second dozen. Sweden ain't going anywhere in Olympics, mark my words. Nor will Rangers any time soon. Yet, thanks to him there is a reason to watch this team. No more than that.
I called Chad a Prince for a reason. No prince takes over the kingdom with current ruler in place. This is not Hamlet by Shakespeare, chill out everyone.
No one in his right mind would trade an elite goaltender Lundqvist is. I am not crazy (clarification). But I am not crazy about Lundqvist either. Suppose I am right and CJ is a real deal, what is wrong with keeping Hanks feet to the fire? Since when Lundqvist slump stopped? That was precisely when Valiquette was shown the door. When your beloved Torts mentioned that Rangers are too cute with some of their players whom do you think he had in mind?
If this board got so POed with my suggestion that CJ may be next starter (although I failed to mentioned that time could be 5 to 7 years) imagine what Hank thinking process was like. That process worked. Just, please don't bother to tell me that team has improved its defense. It is the same. It is the goaltending that propelled Rangers from terrible to an okay and little above. I have to give credit to Torts here. Hats off for Vali-CJ swap. It worked out brilliantly.
Well I hope we really get a great draft pick or decent player in exchange for CJ.
About Tortorella's cute comment... I remember hearing Tortorella on TSN saying Lundqvist is the best goalie in the world. Twice. I doubt he's talking about Hank.
If CJ proves he can do what he can consistently, Hank will be gone by his contract end. Not that i am looking forward to it, I am not Lundqvist hater as accused, just saying...
Lundqvist is playing great at the moment and he is indispensable. Yet he cannot play any better. His best, in other words, is not good for top 10 in the league average. He is in the second dozen. Sweden ain't going anywhere in Olympics, mark my words. Nor will Rangers any time soon. Yet, thanks to him there is a reason to watch this team. No more than that.
Three Vezina nominations while not being a top 10 goalie?
[QUOTE=BrianLeetch2;23135727]Like someone said before CJ will get traded way before hank does lol.....and i hope CJ keeps dominating when he plays so we can trade him for a good package deal down the line....QUOTE]
That's what it's about. We have Hank. We're set there. Let's give away our valuable prospects that we DON'T NEED in order to build a solid team in front of him.
If CJ proves he can do what he can consistently, Hank will be gone by his contract end. Not that i am looking forward to it, I am not Lundqvist hater as accused, just saying...
Lundqvist is playing great at the moment and he is indispensable. Yet he cannot play any better. His best, in other words, is not good for top 10 in the league average. He is in the second dozen. Sweden ain't going anywhere in Olympics, mark my words. Nor will Rangers any time soon. Yet, thanks to him there is a reason to watch this team. No more than that.
And that's including part time goalies, like Rask and Varlamov, who have played less than half of Lundqvist's games. Take them out, and he's 3-6 spots higher each year.
So he finds himself top 10 on a pretty regular basis.
EDIT: Numbers in parentheses represent where he'd rank among goalies with 50+ starts. I don't think it's statistically relevant to compare starting goaltenders to guys that play 15-30 games per season.
If CJ proves he can do what he can consistently, Hank will be gone by his contract end. Not that i am looking forward to it, I am not Lundqvist hater as accused, just saying...
Lundqvist is playing great at the moment and he is indispensable. Yet he cannot play any better. His best, in other words, is not good for top 10 in the league average. He is in the second dozen. Sweden ain't going anywhere in Olympics, mark my words. Nor will Rangers any time soon. Yet, thanks to him there is a reason to watch this team. No more than that.
Please go ahead and humor us all....name 12 current NHL goaltenders better than Lundqvist.
Please go ahead and humor us all....name 12 current NHL goaltenders better than Lundqvist.
somebody's gonna say Marc Andre Fleury b/c "he has a cup". Despite his .906 save % this year and only .908 in the playoffs last season, he'll be considered "better" to many because of the cup. (ignoring that i think there's no doubt Lundqvist wins the cup with that stacked Pens team from last year)
somebody's gonna say Marc Andre Fleury b/c "he has a cup". Despite his .906 save % this year and only .908 in the playoffs last season, he'll be considered "better" to many because of the cup. (ignoring that i think there's no doubt Lundqvist wins the cup with that stacked Pens team from last year)
Oh God... Not only would they have won the Cup, but they would have done it in 16 games.
And that's including part time goalies, like Rask and Varlamov, who have played less than half of Lundqvist's games. Take them out, and he's 3-6 spots higher each year.
So he finds himself top 10 on a pretty regular basis.
EDIT: Numbers in parentheses represent where he'd rank among goalies with 50+ starts. I don't think it's statistically relevant to compare starting goaltenders to guys that play 15-30 games per season.
And we also know that in front defenses count for a large part, and that GAA and wins are virtually not a goalie stat but a team-whole stat.
Lundqvist's numbers would look a lot better if he didn't have his 1-2 month slumps every season.
Three Vezina nominations while not being a top 10 goalie?
You're living in the past. His numbers are consistent in one respect: decline. Year after year. If defense is to blame for his numbers, it would have had no room to get any worse. I will be the happiest fan on the face of the earth should he continue to play like he does now. I doubt it, though.
Can we win SC with Lundqvist? Absolutely. But we are not building contender due to lack of true interest from the ownership. The best we can do is 2005-06 Rangers. That is why I want his old back. It won't happen.
You're living in the past. His numbers are consistent in one respect: decline. Year after year. If defense is to blame for his numbers, it would have had no room to get any worse. I will be the happiest fan on the face of the earth should he continue to play like he does now. I doubt it, though.
Can we win SC with Lundqvist? Absolutely. But we are not building contender due to lack of true interest from the ownership. The best we can do is 2005-06 Rangers. That is why I want his old back. It won't happen.
He was better last season than the previous season. How is that a decline? And this season he's been better than any season since his rookie season.
As to the bold part, yeah, we know you doubt it. During a stretch where he struggled earlier this season you said his slide would continue. That was right around when he caught fire.
He was better last season than the previous season. How is that a decline? And this season he's been better than any season since his rookie season.
The numbers are not. I can agree with the idea that Torts "system" hurts his numbers and once Torts return Rangers back to Renney model Hank got back to life. May be. But numbers are numbers. Gaborik is a great player and so are his numbers. Lundqvist numbers are not equal to Gaborik's, if you know what I mean.
The numbers are not. I can agree with the idea that Torts "system" hurts his numbers and once Torts return Rangers back to Renney model Hank got back to life. May be. But numbers are numbers. Gaborik is a great player and so his numbers. Lundqvist numbers are not equal to Gaborik's, if you know what I mean.
This season: .920, 2.37
Last season: .916, 2.43
The season before: .912, 2.23
I'm not seeing a pattern of decline. The opposite in fact.
During a stretch where he struggled earlier this season you said his slide would continue. That was right around when he caught fire.
And during the solid start we had this season I attributed that to his strong play. You see, we are the crappy team. Because of that we live and die by our goalie. That is why I rant about him, nothing else.
I think it's not a bad idea to give Chad some more shots, hope he impresses and trade him for some big stuff. He won't be our starting goalie as long as Hank's in town and we don't need to be scared of our backup situation when he's gone. CJ is just not necessarily needed here so try to get the most out of and for him, that's my opinion.
I think it's not a bad idea to give Chad some more shots, hope he impresses and trade him for some big stuff. He won't be our starting goalie as long as Hank's in town and we don't need to be scared of our backup situation when he's gone. CJ is just not necessarily needed here so try to get the most out of and for him, that's my opinion.
Whatever the reason, goalies fetch almost nothing in trades so everyone should let go of this notion.
If Chad had played against the Devils, the Rangers would have won 6-0. Hank sucks.
Hank played great. Hank played great. Hank played great. Hank played great. Hank played great. Hank played great. Hank played great. Hank played great.
Yet allowed another highglover at the end.
Me going to DUUUUCK.
Seriously, excellent performance by wonderful goaltender.
Hopefully Chad Johnson plays great so we can trade him for some assets. This team is having elite goaltending for the next 10 years with Lundqvist so it'll be great if we could trade away Chad.
I don't know why anyone would want to trade CJ. He's young and cheap and under our control. Goalies seem to be traded for pennies on the dollar, so we're not likely to get a substantial return. If the kid is legit, great..now we have a cheap backup for as long as we retain his rights.
