Lundqvist is 29, and has put up 200+ wins on some borderline teams. he has 8-10 years to play, and looking forward, the team he will have around him the second half of his career will be better than the one he held up during his first half.
400 wins is looking very likely, and that should get him both a jersey hanging ceremony and a plaque in the HOF.
Interestingly enough Richter's 35 was retired the year before Lundqvist got here. Before Hank got here he wore 35, not 30. Weird to think about what could have been, and that the number that will always be associated with him isn't even the number he originally would have chosen. Although Gretzky didn't originally want 99, so I guess he's in good company
I pose this question to you all: If Henrik continues on his current pace but never wins a Stanley Cup does he have his number retired by the Rangers? Lets assume his stats remain constant with a gradual decline as he gets older and ultimately retires in his late 30s like most goalies. Annual playoff appearances and a couple of deep runs.
New York Ranger fans have had a love affair with their goaltenders pretty much for as long as I can remember (going back to the 1960s). Eddie Giacomin played the first ten years of of his NHL career with the Rangers--and was a big part in the improvement the team made after expansion, getting back into the playoffs and all the way to the finals--and didn't want to leave. The fans loved him and the team recognized that. He wasn't the greatest goaltender of his era and he's not the best goalie the Rangers ever had, but that didn't matter. And when a team has as long a drought as the Rangers had, that's enough to get your number retired.
Winning the Stanley Cup was probably enough to get Richter's number retired--even if he hadn't spent his whole career here. But, because he did stay his whole career, he will always have a special place in the hearts of fans who lived through the dark ages--I'm not talking about 1998-2005--but the original dark ages, where the Rangers were the laughing stock of a 6 team league and had to leave the Garden when they did make the playoffs because the Circus had the right to force them out and then got just good enough to break our hearts again by never being quite good enough to put it all together. Richter (and Leetch) formed the core of what got us past all the chants of 1940. That can never be underestimated.
As stands now, as long as Lundqvist stays in a Rangers' sweater, he will also have his number retired, regardless of whether he wins a Stanley Cup. The fact that he is as good as he is, is just icing on the cake--it's his loyality and his willingness (up to now) to stay the course that's the root of the love Ranger fans feel for him.
Kept tabs on Lundqvist via eliteprospects.com when he was drafted and was amazed at the numbers he was posting.
As a 20 year old, he forced Frolunda's former starters out of the way and took over.
He quickly became the best goalie in the league.
Knew he would be our next starter, just wasn't sure we would get better numbers from him than what he was posting in that league.
He's posted no less than 30 wins in any season he's played in the NHL.
In the last 6 years, he's posted no less than 35 wins in any year and he's on pace to do that yet again.
At 29/30 years old, he's actually in the middle of his prime years and we can expect this kind of play from him for the next 3-4 seasons AFTER this year. (another 115-140 wins).
For the young fans, it's going to be Lundqvist / Richter / Giacomin in terms of who was the best Rangers goalie of all time. For the older fans it's going to be Lundqvist / Giacomin / Richter. But the one thing we are all going to agree on is that Lundqvist will go down, without a shadow of a doubt as the Rangers best goalie of all time.
Hypothetical where he gets injured and must retire today (Spitting over my left shoulder 3x so it doesn't come to fruition); I don't think his number goes up to the rafters.
Hypothetical where he plays for us for another 8 years...oh yeah, he's going up there. On that night, even though I don't like monarchies, I will be honoring royalty!!
Because the Rangers aren't desperate to retire any more numbers. He needs to win a cup or play for many more years
When were they ever "desperate" to retire numbers? This is the one thing any team does that truly is all about honoring a players contribution to the team. Maybe he needs a cup win for you to feel he's deserving but somehow I think when the time comes the right thing will be done.
When were they ever "desperate" to retire numbers? This is the one thing any team does that truly is all about honoring a players contribution to the team. Maybe he needs a cup win for you to feel he's deserving but somehow I think when the time comes the right thing will be done.
Maybe you feel he should be in the Hall of Fame already, but like all things you need to be patient
Maybe you feel he should be in the Hall of Fame already, but like all things you need to be patient
No, I don't, but one has nothing to do with the other. You still haven't said why the Rangers retiring previous numbers without cup wins was "desperate". Guess we disagree. No big deal. Time will tell.
Winning a cup makes him a shoe-in, but if he's going to perform at this level and break Ranger records then a cup isn't necessary. It's obviously preferred though. Helps his case when people who would normally criticize him for not winning a cup now have nothing bad to say about the guy. He deserves respect and praise regardless, though, but I would love to see him hold that trophy up high at MSG. For me, that would seal the deal for him going down as arguably the greatest Rangers goalie ever, and definitely worthy of both a retired #30 and a HOF nod.
If he spends the majority of his career with the NYR (which, there is no doubt in my mind that he will) his name will go to the rafters with or without hardware. He will have more wins than any other NYR goaltender when he finishes his tenure. No doubt in my mind that he will finish with ~ 400. Also, I anticipate him to finish top-10 to top-20 all time in shutouts by the end of his career.
Regardless of hardware, his play on the ice speaks for itself. If he doesn't win a single award he'll still be considered for the Hall of Fame. Whether he'd get in or not is a different story.
No, I don't, but one has nothing to do with the other. You still haven't said why the Rangers retiring previous numbers without cup wins was "desperate". Guess we disagree. No big deal. Time will tell.
Andy Bathgate, Howell, were both questionable additions to the rafters. Their accomplishments, in a less competitive time period, with the NYR were not overwhelming. I'm not going to pretend that I saw them play, because I didn't, I wasn't even alive in the 50's, 60's and 70's. But I'd bet the large majority of people on this forum didn't watch them either. Based on what I read they were questionable additions.
Secondly, Adam Graves was fantastic for the NYR. His 93-94 season will live on in most of our hearts. That said, he didn't get retired because of his play on the ice, but because of the extra work he did off the ice. I thought his addition to the rafters was questionable.
I think the only players we recently retired that are sure fire locks for the rafters were Messier, Leetch and Richter.
Someone who had seen Daneyko, I can firmly say his addition to the rafters for the NJD was questionable.
I have extremely high standards for retiring a player to the rafters though. I think it should be reserved solely for the Messier / Leetch elite players, not anyone who was remotely border line.
Andy Bathgate, Howell, were both questionable additions to the rafters. Their accomplishments, in a less competitive time period, with the NYR were not overwhelming. I'm not going to pretend that I saw them play, because I didn't, I wasn't even alive in the 50's, 60's and 70's. But I'd bet the large majority of people on this forum didn't watch them either. Based on what I read they were questionable additions.
Secondly, Adam Graves was fantastic for the NYR. His 93-94 season will live on in most of our hearts. That said, he didn't get retired because of his play on the ice, but because of the extra work he did off the ice. I thought his addition to the rafters was questionable.
I think the only players we recently retired that are sure fire locks for the rafters were Messier, Leetch and Richter.
Someone who had seen Daneyko, I can firmly say his addition to the rafters for the NJD was questionable.
I have extremely high standards for retiring a player to the rafters though. I think it should be reserved solely for the Messier / Leetch elite players, not anyone who was remotely border line.
This is all fine You have a criteria. My only question was why the recent retiring of numbers was "desperate". Questionable? Sure. Desperate? I don't get it. It's not like they were mandated to retire numbers and had to scramble to pick a few.
This is all fine You have a criteria. My only question was why the recent retiring of numbers was "desperate". Questionable? Sure. Desperate? I don't get it. It's not like they were mandated to retire numbers and had to scramble to pick a few.
Okay, fair enough, perhaps not "desperate," I was merely putting into question the validity of each entry.
But retiring a player is a smart business move. Generally, higher ticket prices, boosted tv ratings, higher revenue, etc. I'm sure MSG made a pretty penny on each on of the retirees.
Okay, fair enough, perhaps not "desperate," I was merely putting into question the validity of each entry.
But retiring a player is a smart business move. Generally, higher ticket prices, boosted tv ratings, higher revenue, etc. I'm sure MSG made a pretty penny on each on of the retirees.
Agreed. Made some money, fostered some good will, and got everyone feeling nostalgic.
Remember when many Rangers fans were EXTREMELY offended and upset when Brodeur mentioned some of the goalies he thought were among the games best today a couple of months ago and he didn't mention Lundqvist?
1:55 in from an interview from past couple of days
