HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Notices

Henrik Lundqvist; will he stay or go?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-09-2013, 05:09 PM
  #601
mike14
Registered User
 
mike14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Melbourne
Country: Australia
Posts: 4,290
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MGF0723 View Post
You want to see this team really sink down to nothingness? Dump Lundqvist and everyone will be kicking themselves in the ass after.
we saw a Rangers team without Lundqvist achieve nothing for 7 seasons, yet not suck enough for a top 5 pick. We've seen a Rangers team with Lundqvist achieve 1 ECF appearance in 8 seasons, which, depending on your POV isn't all that much.

While losing Lundqvist would suck, as he's the best goalie in the league, it doesn't automatically equal the years of 'nothingness' that people keep alluding too. As has been mentioned, if his contract requests are too high/too long, losing him will be the right decision, even if we do end up spending a few years down the bottom of the conference

mike14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2013, 05:27 PM
  #602
Maineice11
Registered User
 
Maineice11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maine
Country: United States
Posts: 6,366
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to Maineice11
Quote:
Back in Sweden. Great to see family and friends. Even if New York is one of my favorite places in the world, home will always be home..
Henrik Lundqvist (twitter) @HLundqvist30

I started typing this hours ago and just noticed I never submitted it.

Maineice11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2013, 05:36 PM
  #603
broadwayblue
Registered User
 
broadwayblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 15,622
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike14 View Post
we saw a Rangers team without Lundqvist achieve nothing for 7 seasons, yet not suck enough for a top 5 pick. We've seen a Rangers team with Lundqvist achieve 1 ECF appearance in 8 seasons, which, depending on your POV isn't all that much.

While losing Lundqvist would suck, as he's the best goalie in the league, it doesn't automatically equal the years of 'nothingness' that people keep alluding too. As has been mentioned, if his contract requests are too high/too long, losing him will be the right decision, even if we do end up spending a few years down the bottom of the conference
He will get pretty much whatever he asks for. Whether that be a 2 year deal or an 8 year deal for any amount of money up to ~8M/season, the organization will do whatever it can to extend him. He is only going to be "lost" if he wants out of NY.

broadwayblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2013, 05:39 PM
  #604
That Stepan Guy
Jefferek Stepaninner
 
That Stepan Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 1,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by broadwayblue View Post
He will get pretty much whatever he asks for. Whether that be a 2 year deal or an 8 year deal for any amount of money up to ~8M/season, the organization will do whatever it can to extend him. He is only going to be "lost" if he wants out of NY.
I completely agree with this. The Rangers have no choice, but to extend Lundqvist at all costs. We have no one to replace him with and he's been the one carrying the team year after year. If we lost him, we'd be stuck in a pretty bad position and getting out of it could cost more than the extra dollars that would go towards paying Lundqvist.

That Stepan Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2013, 05:39 PM
  #605
Jonimaus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Lund
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,351
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maineice11 View Post
Henrik Lundqvist (twitter) @HLundqvist30

I started typing this hours ago and just noticed I never submitted it.
Lundqvist going back to play in Sweden next year confirmed.

Jonimaus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2013, 05:41 PM
  #606
mike14
Registered User
 
mike14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Melbourne
Country: Australia
Posts: 4,290
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by broadwayblue View Post
He will get pretty much whatever he asks for. Whether that be a 2 year deal or an 8 year deal for any amount of money up to ~8M/season, the organization will do whatever it can to extend him. He is only going to be "lost" if he wants out of NY.
I'm confused, you say he'll get whatever he asks for and then say "up to ~8m", which one is it? What if he wants 8.5+?

mike14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2013, 08:45 PM
  #607
Nac Mac Feegle
wee & free
 
Nac Mac Feegle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,847
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by That Stepan Guy View Post
I completely agree with this. The Rangers have no choice, but to extend Lundqvist at all costs. We have no one to replace him with and he's been the one carrying the team year after year. If we lost him, we'd be stuck in a pretty bad position and getting out of it could cost more than the extra dollars that would go towards paying Lundqvist.
I really don't like the idea of giving anyone in this league over the age of 30 an 8-year deal.

How many times have the Rangers done this? How many times has it worked out? Why keep doing it?

The Rangers have to hold the line at a 4 year deal (or less) for guys this age. It doesn't matter who it is.

Nac Mac Feegle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2013, 08:49 PM
  #608
Rangers Fail
4 8 15 16 23 42
 
Rangers Fail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 17,487
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nac Mac Feegle View Post
I really don't like the idea of giving anyone in this league over the age of 30 an 8-year deal.

How many times have the Rangers done this? How many times has it worked out? Why keep doing it?

The Rangers have to hold the line at a 4 year deal (or less) for guys this age. It doesn't matter who it is.
Unlike Richards, Gomez, or Redden, Lundqvist is the best at his position. And he has proven he can be the best in NY.

Rangers Fail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2013, 09:08 PM
  #609
Nac Mac Feegle
wee & free
 
Nac Mac Feegle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,847
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grind Jam Grind View Post
Unlike Richards, Gomez, or Redden, Lundqvist is the best at his position. And he has proven he can be the best in NY.
He is the best right now. But, he's not going to be the best goalie in the league 5, 6, 7, 8 years from now...but the Rangers will still be paying that monster contract.

That is the problem.

Four year deal, yes.
Eight year deal, no!

Nac Mac Feegle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2013, 09:25 PM
  #610
broadwayblue
Registered User
 
broadwayblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 15,622
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike14 View Post
I'm confused, you say he'll get whatever he asks for and then say "up to ~8m", which one is it? What if he wants 8.5+?
I'm saying Hank is in the position of being able to (within reason) get whatever deal he wants. If he prefers a short term deal to see what direction a new coach brings them...or a long term deal to make him a lifetime Ranger, he's in control. As for money, yes, there comes a point at which you can't do it. We can't give him an 8 year deal at $10M per. But up to 8M a year for as many years as he wants is a deal the team won't say no to.

broadwayblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2013, 10:18 PM
  #611
bigbuffalo313
Registered User
 
bigbuffalo313's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 2,424
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nac Mac Feegle View Post
I really don't like the idea of giving anyone in this league over the age of 30 an 8-year deal.

How many times have the Rangers done this? How many times has it worked out? Why keep doing it?

The Rangers have to hold the line at a 4 year deal (or less) for guys this age. It doesn't matter who it is.
Except those players have either been injured, already declining, not as good as the contract suggests, or Brad Richards.

bigbuffalo313 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2013, 02:20 AM
  #612
tomcatNYR
Rookie User
 
tomcatNYR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 382
vCash: 500
I don't think Lundqvist will want $10 million, but even if he did, I bet Sather would say yes.

tomcatNYR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2013, 09:32 AM
  #613
nevesis
#30
 
nevesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NY
Posts: 8,423
vCash: 500

nevesis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2013, 10:32 AM
  #614
Jersey Girl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,904
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grind Jam Grind View Post
Unlike Richards, Gomez, or Redden, Lundqvist is the best at his position. And he has proven he can be the best in NY.
He's right...no matter how good he is right now, it would be insanity to give him a large contract that takes a huge cap hit into his late 30's. At some point Sather has to draw the line.

Jersey Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2013, 10:34 AM
  #615
haveandare
Registered User
 
haveandare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 5,752
vCash: 500
Obviously, I love the guy as a player and think he's the best goalie in the game right now. Having said that if he asks for a HUGE contract (8+m over 5+ years) I don't ever, EVER want to hear about him being unhappy with the team around him again. This is the cap NHL. You can't make 10 million dollars and then stomp your feet about the team around you not being good enough.

haveandare is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2013, 11:13 AM
  #616
Jonimaus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Lund
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,351
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haveandare View Post
Obviously, I love the guy as a player and think he's the best goalie in the game right now. Having said that if he asks for a HUGE contract (8+m over 5+ years) I don't ever, EVER want to hear about him being unhappy with the team around him again. This is the cap NHL. You can't make 10 million dollars and then stomp your feet about the team around you not being good enough.
8mil for 5 years is fine, that's not a huge contract, that's a decent/good contract.

Jonimaus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2013, 02:20 PM
  #617
haveandare
Registered User
 
haveandare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 5,752
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonimaus View Post
8mil for 5 years is fine, that's not a huge contract, that's a decent/good contract.
I agree. Going over that in $ or years starts to get crippling for the rest of the team though IMO.

haveandare is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2013, 02:46 PM
  #618
Jersey Girl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,904
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonimaus View Post
8mil for 5 years is fine, that's not a huge contract, that's a decent/good contract.
What if he wants $8 million per for eight years?

Jersey Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2013, 03:17 PM
  #619
Jonimaus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Lund
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,351
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jersey Girl View Post
What if he wants $8 million per for eight years?
I dunno, I don't think anyone would be happy to give him that. I've said it before, if we end up letting Lundqvist walk or trade him, what do we do with the spare cash? We obviously need a LOT of help if we're downgrading from Lundqvist to an average goaltender. I don't see anyone availible worth getting. Do we wait? Do we rebuild? Do we throw money around hoping for the best?

Jonimaus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2013, 03:21 PM
  #620
Jersey Girl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,904
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonimaus View Post
I dunno, I don't think anyone would be happy to give him that. I've said it before, if we end up letting Lundqvist walk or trade him, what do we do with the spare cash? We obviously need a LOT of help if we're downgrading from Lundqvist to an average goaltender.
We need a lot of help WITH Lundqvist in goal...

Jersey Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2013, 03:24 PM
  #621
Jonimaus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Lund
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,351
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jersey Girl View Post
We need a lot of help WITH Lundqvist in goal...
We do. But at this given time Lundqvist is by far the best player to throw 8 mil at. In 5 or 6 years, that's probably not true anymore. If we'd have a shot at getting a player like Malkin, I'd be all for testing that out, but the players of his caliber are not availible.

Jonimaus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2013, 03:26 PM
  #622
Jersey Girl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,904
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonimaus View Post
We do. But at this given time Lundqvist is by far the best player to throw 8 mil at. In 5 or 6 years, that's probably not true anymore. If we'd have a shot at getting a player like Malkin, I'd be all for testing that out, but the players of his caliber are not availible.
I'm starting to believe when your team is average like the Rangers, even the best goalie in the league does not make you a contender.

Jersey Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2013, 03:29 PM
  #623
Jonimaus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Lund
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,351
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jersey Girl View Post
I'm starting to believe when your team is average like the Rangers, even the best goalie in the league does not make you a contender.
We're not a legit contender. We have an "easier time overachieving(spelling?)" than some teams, but we're still fairly far away from teams like Boston, LA, Chicago and Penguins when they play like they can (in my opinion). But unless we get absolute top tier player that does very well in the playoffs, we're right now far better off with Lundqvist. It's all about if we're willing to possibly (remember, it's all speculations), sacrifice a big cap hit for 2-3 years.

Jonimaus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2013, 03:32 PM
  #624
Jersey Girl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,904
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonimaus View Post
We're not a legit contender. We have an "easier time overachieving(spelling?)" than some teams, but we're still fairly far away from teams like Boston, LA, Chicago and Penguins when they play like they can (in my opinion). But unless we get absolute top tier player that does very well in the playoffs, we're right now far better off with Lundqvist. It's all about if we're willing to possibly (remember, it's all speculations), sacrifice a big cap hit for 2-3 years.
More like eight years

Jersey Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-10-2013, 03:32 PM
  #625
stan the caddy
Registered User
 
stan the caddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jersey Girl View Post
I'm starting to believe when your team is average like the Rangers, even the best goalie in the league does not make you a contender.
http://qkme.me/3uss6r

stan the caddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:51 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.