HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Is Henrik really in the driver's seat?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-29-2013, 11:51 AM
  #76
zuckera1
#35
 
zuckera1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 435
vCash: 500
I feel like you guys care a little too much about small differences in his cap-hit rather than the term. Listen to these scenarios...

Option #1: 8 years, 7.5/yr
Option #2: 6 years, 8.5/yr
Option #3: 5 years, 9/yr

Which would you all take? To me, options 2 and 3 carry significantly less risk than #1 only because of the term. Hank will be 32 at the end of the year, by the time he's over the age of 37/38, he won't be even close to being the same goalie we've seen over the many years. You won't want your goalie making 7.5 million at ages 38-40 when he's injured half the time and a shell of himself.

But, let's say you pay the extra 1-1.5 million for a shorter deal, in which the deal ends when he turns 37 or 38. In this case, you have one less million to buy another overpaid 3rd/4th liner, but you avoid having a 40 year old hank being paid like an elite netminder.

My offer to Hank is 6 years, 8-8.5 million, take it or leave it. What do you guys think?

zuckera1 is offline  
Old
11-29-2013, 12:25 PM
  #77
DudMan28
Registered User
 
DudMan28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,631
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by zuckera1 View Post
I feel like you guys care a little too much about small differences in his cap-hit rather than the term. Listen to these scenarios...

Option #1: 8 years, 7.5/yr
Option #2: 6 years, 8.5/yr
Option #3: 5 years, 9/yr

Which would you all take? To me, options 2 and 3 carry significantly less risk than #1 only because of the term. Hank will be 32 at the end of the year, by the time he's over the age of 37/38, he won't be even close to being the same goalie we've seen over the many years. You won't want your goalie making 7.5 million at ages 38-40 when he's injured half the time and a shell of himself.

But, let's say you pay the extra 1-1.5 million for a shorter deal, in which the deal ends when he turns 37 or 38. In this case, you have one less million to buy another overpaid 3rd/4th liner, but you avoid having a 40 year old hank being paid like an elite netminder.

My offer to Hank is 6 years, 8-8.5 million, take it or leave it. What do you guys think?
If those were the only three options I would be fine with it. The biggest problem is Sather will most likely combine those options and give Hank 8 years 8.5-9/yr .

DudMan28 is offline  
Old
11-29-2013, 12:40 PM
  #78
patnyrnyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 7,587
vCash: 500
If Sather was offering that, he would be signed already.

patnyrnyg is offline  
Old
11-29-2013, 12:41 PM
  #79
SKjEi o2
Registered User
 
SKjEi o2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Country: Nepal
Posts: 187
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DudMan28 View Post
If those were the only three options I would be fine with it. The biggest problem is Sather will most likely combine those options and give Hank 8 years 8.5-9/yr .
I can imagine Sather doing that exact thing. Another reason Hank will probably get resigned is the "star" aspect of it. He is one of the icons of NY and contributes a ton to marketing. If Hank leaves so does the revenue from his jerseys etc.

SKjEi o2 is offline  
Old
11-29-2013, 12:45 PM
  #80
DudMan28
Registered User
 
DudMan28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,631
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by patnyrnyg View Post
If Sather was offering that, he would be signed already.
Doesn't mean Sather wont offer it eventually.

DudMan28 is offline  
Old
11-29-2013, 04:03 PM
  #81
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 18,165
vCash: 500
I find the Lundqvist stuff both fascinating and hypocritical. First off, I will be the first to admit he is not at his best this season, but hes still been very good. But most importantly, the entire argument about a new coach/new system was how we'd score more goals and take the pressure off Lundqvist from having to carry this team ever single night.

Now that this team continues not to score (and its friggin horrible 5 on 5), the conversation reverts back to Lundqvist and how hes not superhuman, and how thats a major problem?

Lundqvist's play hasnt been as bad as the prediction that Vigneault and a new system could unlock that hidden offense.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline  
Old
11-29-2013, 04:09 PM
  #82
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 20,193
vCash: 500
I don't think Lundqvist could play bad enough to get this team to consider moving on from him. Until this season, he was the one piece on this roster who was at his best almost every single night. He almost singlehandedly kept this team relevant for years. They'll keep him. Even it means overpaying for him.

Trxjw is offline  
Old
11-29-2013, 04:15 PM
  #83
NikC
Registered User
 
NikC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 4,047
vCash: 500
Tortoretart proved he couldn't coach offensive talent by the way he handled Gaborik and Nash on last year's roster. Any acquisition of talent would have been forced play his @ssbackwards system.

It's too early to tell what AV can bring, as he's still assessing his team.

NikC is offline  
Old
11-29-2013, 04:42 PM
  #84
Deric
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Orlando, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 149
vCash: 500
I just don't want them to outbid themselves here.

Deric is offline  
Old
11-29-2013, 06:14 PM
  #85
Baby Punisher
Registered User
 
Baby Punisher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Staten Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,673
vCash: 500
After the loss to Boston I have to ask myself is this a team that Lundqvist thinks he can win with. I would have to say right now TODAY the answer is a resounding NO.

Granted I think we are a while away from making a final decision about this team. BUT, I have to imagine if we are a .500 team give or take a couple of games in either direction on say January 15th with Lundqvist as a starter & Talbot still playing well a serious conversation has to be had about Moving Lundqvist & risk losing him for nothing or really over paying to the point that it won't matter because we will be handcuffed for 3-5 years.

Baby Punisher is offline  
Old
11-29-2013, 06:29 PM
  #86
Pastafazul*
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 357
vCash: 500
hank is an elite goalie, yet his record, save % is below the average goalie in the league,

HELP ME

Pastafazul* is offline  
Old
11-29-2013, 06:48 PM
  #87
Crease
Registered User
 
Crease's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,376
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastafazul View Post
hank is an elite goalie, yet his record, save % is below the average goalie in the league,

HELP ME
Sure, I can help. He may be having a down year. Or might just be in a prolonged slump.

Edit: I'm not taking a position on this. I'm just saying it is just as probable that he's just having a down year than that this is the beginning of the downside of his career. The guy was top-five in sv% last season. Now he's average...forever? Sorry, I need a larger sample size. Like two years. Too bad this is his contract year. Rangers need to make a decision.

Crease is offline  
Old
11-29-2013, 07:35 PM
  #88
trueblue35
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 175
vCash: 500
Or he is working on his game now that he is forced to challenge further out. Many of the little things can be affected by this change including reading the play, reaction time, angles, primary and secondary save selection, goalie skating movements etc.

Many people forget that prior to the 11-12 season, Lundqvist was always trying to make some type of improvement to his game. This usually meant that his game was a little off until he was fully comfortable with whatever it was he was working on. Once the change was fully implemented he was able to go into "godmode".

trueblue35 is offline  
Old
11-29-2013, 07:38 PM
  #89
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,507
vCash: 500
On a personal level, I wish Lundqvist would milk Dolan and Sather for every penny he can get, since he's the only reason that they both haven't continued looking like the clueless buffoons they are for the last 8 years. Not to mention the money he's absolutely put in their pockets.

But I don't think he will. He cares too much about winning to hold the cap situation hostage. Then again, I thought the same thing about Kobe Bryant, and I was wrong about that one . . .

NYR Sting is offline  
Old
11-29-2013, 08:09 PM
  #90
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 20,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Sting View Post
On a personal level, I wish Lundqvist would milk Dolan and Sather for every penny he can get, since he's the only reason that they both haven't continued looking like the clueless buffoons they are for the last 8 years. Not to mention the money he's absolutely put in their pockets.

But I don't think he will. He cares too much about winning to hold the cap situation hostage. Then again, I thought the same thing about Kobe Bryant, and I was wrong about that one . . .
Agreed. Wait... who are you exactly?

Trxjw is offline  
Old
11-29-2013, 08:32 PM
  #91
JaeTM
Registered User
 
JaeTM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 1,525
vCash: 500
Sather will just spend the money not spent on Hank on some overpriced UFA like David Clarkson got this year. No thanks. Give me the best goalie in the world.

This team is missing that 75-90 point player. I thought Nash could have been that guy, but he's like Marian Hossa. Excellent role piece that is vital, but not THE guy. We need a Getzlaf, Thornton, Toews, Datsyuk/Zetterberg.

Having Stepan as our number 2 would be ideal. This team needs a superstar center.

Henrik need not to be blamed for the Rangers not drafting and developing one of these kind of guys.

JaeTM is offline  
Old
11-29-2013, 08:40 PM
  #92
SML
Registered User
 
SML's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 3,862
vCash: 500
The point of the thread was missed by most responders. I love Lundqvist. It would make me ill to see him in another sweater.

I just think we should analyze who exactly it is that we are bidding against before we open the check book and hand him the pen.

There's not really anyone out there who is a serious threat to sign him for the rumored numbers. If they did, they will not be able to ice a very deep roster.

So are we really just bidding against ourselves?

If we call his bluff, and someone does step up and sign him, it will go down as one of the darkest days in team history.

If we resign him to inflated numbers for inflated term, it's a move that will cripple this teams chance to win or contend not only for the duration of the contract, but longer. This is a deal that could back this team into a corner and impact their ability to resign every other RFA who's contract comes up. It's a deal that removes flexibility from the roster, and virtually keeps them out of the UFA market for a long time to come.

It's a big boy decision to make.

Don't get blinded by emotion. You have to analyze the numbers and the facts. If they tell you it's not going to work, you have to move on.

But if you get it wrong, you're probably going to get run out of town.

It must be nice to be a GM.

SML is offline  
Old
11-29-2013, 08:42 PM
  #93
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SML View Post
The point of the thread was missed by most responders. I love Lundqvist. It would make me ill to see him in another sweater.

I just think we should analyze who exactly it is that we are bidding against before we open the check book and hand him the pen.

There's not really anyone out there who is a serious threat to sign him for the rumored numbers. If they did, they will not be able to ice a very deep roster.

So are we really just bidding against ourselves?

If we call his bluff, and someone does step up and sign him, it will go down as one of the darkest days in team history.

If we resign him to inflated numbers for inflated term, it's a move that will cripple this teams chance to win or contend not only for the duration of the contract, but longer. This is a deal that could back this team into a corner and impact their ability to resign every other RFA who's contract comes up. It's a deal that removes flexibility from the roster, and virtually keeps them out of the UFA market for a long time to come.

It's a big boy decision to make.

Don't get blinded by emotion. You have to analyze the numbers and the facts. If they tell you it's not going to work, you have to move on.

But if you get it wrong, you're probably going to get run out of town.

It must be nice to be a GM.
Not this town.

NYR Sting is offline  
Old
11-29-2013, 08:52 PM
  #94
StepansLabyrinth
Rational Police
 
StepansLabyrinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 1,838
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaeTM View Post
Having Stepan as our number 2 would be ideal. This team needs a superstar center.

Henrik need not to be blamed for the Rangers not drafting and developing one of these kind of guys.
Those guys are usually drafted in the top 5, which we don't, and they're usually locked up long term. Teams also don't trade those types of guys. Just looking at upcoming free agent classes:

2014: Joe Thornton (Sharks aren't trading him this year, will be 35 as a free agent), Paul Stastny (Actually could be had in a trade but not a "superstar center"), David Legwand (Could be had in a trade but also not a star, and not young), Derek Roy (not a star, St. Louis won't be moving him this season)

2015: Jason Spezza (Probably our best target but definitely has issues), Jonathan Toews (he will not reach free agency), David Krejci (probably won't reach free agency, great but not premier player)

2016: Eric Staal, Steven Stamkos, Anze Kopitar, David Backes, Ryan Kesler, Tomas Plekanec.... Now we're pretty far away and I'm sure most of these guys will be locked up. In order to acquire the stars of this class, you'd have to probably give something over the top like a McDonagh.


I really don't know if acquiring a star center is a real possibility for this season. Stastny/Spezza might be available, they might not be. Either way, I agree that we could use at least a 2nd line center so we could move Richards back to wing. Stastny/Stepan or Spezza/Stepan would be great center depth but I'd be fine with Stepan/Legwand for this season.

StepansLabyrinth is offline  
Old
11-29-2013, 09:16 PM
  #95
DarthSather99
Registered User
 
DarthSather99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,284
vCash: 500
I really love Henrik and all he has done for the Rangers. In reality, the Rangers will never win a Cup with Henrik. They'll never have the Offensive firepower and Henrik just can not carry the team on his back.

Henrik is not having a great year statistically because we are not playing a defensive shut down system, it's more wide open.

Saying that, I'd look to see what kind of assets we could get back in a trade before committing to him long term. We obviously have had the best Henrik can play(and not won), he will only regress as he gets older/slower.

Having a cap killer contract will not be good for us in building a Championship team.

I'm sure I'll get attacked for mentioning this but it is my opinion and what I see.

DarthSather99 is offline  
Old
11-29-2013, 09:19 PM
  #96
Crease
Registered User
 
Crease's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,376
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthSather99 View Post
I really love Henrik and all he has done for the Rangers. In reality, the Rangers will never win a Cup with Henrik. They'll never have the Offensive firepower and Henrik just can not carry the team on his back.

Henrik is not having a great year statistically because we are not playing a defensive shut down system, it's more wide open.

Saying that, I'd look to see what kind of assets we could get back in a trade before committing to him long term. We obviously have had the best Henrik can play(and not won), he will only regress as he gets older/slower.

Having a cap killer contract will not be good for us in building a Championship team.

I'm sure I'll get attacked for mentioning this but it is my opinion and what I see.
You shouldn't. I love Hank. My favorite Ranger since Richter. I wish him to be a career Ranger. But the other part of me is in the business of winning. You can win with Lundqvist. You just can't win with Lundqvist making $8-9M a year unless you got a couple of high draft picks on ELCs scoring 70-90 points for ya. And the latter ain't happening. This is what the Jets went through with Darelle Revis.

Crease is offline  
Old
11-29-2013, 09:25 PM
  #97
Kovalev27
BEST IN THE WORLD
 
Kovalev27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 4,201
vCash: 500
System has nothing to do with the ridiculous softies he's let up this season that have cost us games like he did today. That was a tough 2-2 battle hank lets up a goal most beer leaguers kick aside. Unscreened shot from the point 6 inches off the ice right at his left knee and he turns for a glove save? Why are u guessing there u square up

It's all mental with him stupid goals all year off dumb mental mistakes where he's not focused.

We should not have lost that game in regulation.

Kovalev27 is offline  
Old
11-29-2013, 09:26 PM
  #98
Bullseyes
Registered User
 
Bullseyes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 4,449
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthSather99 View Post
I really love Henrik and all he has done for the Rangers. In reality, the Rangers will never win a Cup with Henrik. They'll never have the Offensive firepower and Henrik just can not carry the team on his back.

Henrik is not having a great year statistically because we are not playing a defensive shut down system, it's more wide open.

Saying that, I'd look to see what kind of assets we could get back in a trade before committing to him long term. We obviously have had the best Henrik can play(and not won), he will only regress as he gets older/slower.

Having a cap killer contract will not be good for us in building a Championship team.

I'm sure I'll get attacked for mentioning this but it is my opinion and what I see.
I actually agree.

Lundqvist is my favorite Ranger player, but I don't think it's wise committing that high of a cap-hit to a goalie. I also think that way with Callahan, although for different reasons.

The problem is that the elite offensive players aren't easy to come by. They either cost an arm and a leg, are older and hitting free agency, or you draft them. Drafting them usually requires high picks and we know that the Rangers will be good enough not to get those.

Bullseyes is offline  
Old
11-29-2013, 11:26 PM
  #99
SML
Registered User
 
SML's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 3,862
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Sting View Post
Not this town.
True. Which could turn out to be a plus in this scenario actually. Most GM's would be worried about their position if they made the wrong call. Sather is old. He can take the heat and truly not worry about it. He traded Leetch. Never worried about it. But with this one, he could take the hit, and just retire. He's going to have to do it sometime anyway. And if he doesn't want to, the fanbase here thinks he's an old kook anyway.

SML is offline  
Old
11-29-2013, 11:57 PM
  #100
gmerger37
Registered User
 
gmerger37's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: North Jersey
Posts: 796
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crease View Post
You shouldn't. I love Hank. My favorite Ranger since Richter. I wish him to be a career Ranger. But the other part of me is in the business of winning. You can win with Lundqvist. You just can't win with Lundqvist making $8-9M a year unless you got a couple of high draft picks on ELCs scoring 70-90 points for ya. And the latter ain't happening. This is what the Jets went through with Darelle Revis.
Thank you, this is the point I was trying to make earlier. I love hank has much as the next guy, and I truly love what hes done for us the past 8 years but I don't see us winning a cup with him making 8-9 million a year till he is in his late thirties.

The hank defenders seem to take this opinion as an attack on the man when its just a reality we have to live with with the cap.

gmerger37 is offline  
Closed Thread

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 01:09 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2016 All Rights Reserved.