Post-Game Talk: 2014-15 New York Rangers (53-22-7 [RS] // 11-8 [PO]) Warning #516

[Tawnos]

Maybe a healthy rangers lineup and we go all the way. I mean look at tampa and Anaheim. They have zero too 6 or top 4 injuries.

Story of the playoffs every year once you get deep. Final 4 teams are always good enough that the margin of error might be one or two injuries to important players.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

No team has ever won a Cup without getting elite goaltending in the playoffs. The better the goalie you have, the better chance you're going to get that kind of goaltending in the playoffs.

Frankly, this whole discussion is a waste of typing.

And since it's semi-random, I'd much rather spend the money elsewhere if I trusted Sather to properly do it.

 

[Bullseyes]

5.8M cap hit versus 8.5M.

Quick's contract is for 10 years, signed before the lockout.

Lundqvist's contract is for 7 years, signed after the lockout.

They aren't even comparable.

 

[Loff]

About Bishop last night...Pierre practically ******** him in the interview after the game but I cannot remember any difficult saves he had to make....maybe my memory is going?

He got a shoulder on a rising McD shot. That was the only quality chance he faced out of all the 22 lumps we "tested" him with.

Such a joke of a game. fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu**

 

[Filthy Dangles]

. . . and just on cue with the "generational goalie" insanity. Hank is not a generational talent.

Fine. Your strawmanning now. Let's get back to the cap space argument. What is your argument? If Hank was signed for a couple mil less he would have a couple cups? Should they have let him hit FA and signed a cheaper goalie depending on the market at the time...?

Not understanding...

 

[NYRangers84]

Fine. Your strawmanning now. Let's get back to the cap space argument. What is your argument? If Hank was signed for a couple mil less he would have a couple cups? Should they have let him hit FA and signed a cheaper goalie...?

Not understanding...

Yes. A much cheaper goalie and re-sign Stralman.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

Quick's contract is for 10 years, signed before the lockout.

Lundqvist's contract is for 7 years, signed after the lockout.

They aren't even comparable.

Quick signed his contract in June of 2012.

Hank signed his in December of 2013.

That six months sure made them NOT EVEN COMPARABLE.

 

[Steve Kournianos]

Lundqvist is basically Dan Marino or Don Mattingly. Hes a star who can carry a team but cant win a title by himself.

You have to credit Sather for at least trying to give him goal support. When they couldnt score a lick between 2007-2010, he went out and got the best available offensive players.

Gaborik
Richards
Nash
St. Louis
Yandle
Boyle

He gave Duclair a chance. He let Stepan skip the AHL. He gave Zuccarello a chance. He hired an offensive-minded coach.

So really, what else is there left to do? None of those veteran guys elevated their game in tne postseason when they were here give or take a series or two. None played like all stars who were being paid millions.

You have to get to the postseason to win the Cup. Those guys helped them get there; some even carried them there. But they all never lived up to expectations.

No more trades. No more expensive UFA. that needs to stop. Build around whats already there and draft players with skill and character to fit in

I'll bet when they win the Cup (and they will), it'll be because of the guys who grew up in tne system.

 

[Grifter3511]

I don't think we could move him. We are stuck with this type of team build until he retires. We have to pray he can actually play well enough to win a Cup. He certainly did not this series.

Not that I want to move him, but if there's one thing I've learned following the NHL all these years it's that no player/contract is untradable. There will always be some team with their own motive for taking what was thought to be an unmovable player off of a team's hands. Cap Floor, salary dumping of their own player, internal issues, etc.

 

[Tawnos]

And since it's semi-random, I'd much rather spend the money elsewhere if I trusted Sather to properly do it.

It isn't semi random. We have had two goalies that put in surprise performances in the last 6 years and everyone thinks it's a trend now. It isn't.

I'd rather guarantee that I'm going to get that kind of goaltending than hope for it.

 

[nevesis]

I'd actively try and trade him, which Sather didn't do, though.

You would have actively tried to trade Henrik Lundqvist.

There are no words.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

Fine. Your strawmanning now. Let's get back to the cap space argument. What is your argument? If Hank was signed for a couple mil less he would have a couple cups? Should they have let him hit FA and signed a cheaper goalie depending on the market at the time...?

Not understanding...

I'm not strawmanning at all. You're the one who brought up the generational nonsense.

One Vezina, one first all star team, three all star appearances. That's not generational talent hardware.

 

[kovazub94]

Geez, what a great gathering of armchair GMs with their hind sight "proving" how smart they are after the Rangers are eliminated. With the parity that is built into this league there's just a tiniest difference between winning the Cup or not. Everything had to fall right into place to win it in any given year. Even when you state before hand that the Rangers will not win the Cup in the way you "smartly" take a good bet that ANY other team will win it. Maybe if just one thing turned out differently - you'd be playing a different tune now or in two weeks - Zuke's concussion, McD injury(ies), MSL having something left in his tank, Klein avoiding a broken arm, KH contributing something in POs (his rookie wall finally caught up with him) etc.

Too many variables but IMHO what's for sure is that this team - the way it was built - had as good a chance to win it all this year as any other team. My salut and hats off to everyone in the organization! Looking forward to Sather's offseason moves and going for it again next season.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

It isn't semi random. We have had two goalies that put in surprise performances in the last 6 years and everyone thinks it's a trend now. It isn't.

I'd rather guarantee that I'm going to get that kind of goaltending than hope for it.

But he hasn't guaranteed anything. Especially with how dreadful he was at times against Tampa.

 

[Bullseyes]

Quick signed his contract in June of 2012.

Hank signed his in December of 2013.

That six months sure made them NOT EVEN COMPARABLE.

The year and a half difference, in which the NHL went into a lockout and changed how contracts could be given out, makes the two contracts not comparable.

 

[Ail]

Jonathan Quick. He might not be a top 5 goalie every year, but he was last year. The problem when you say "elite goaltender" is that Lundqvist is the only one you can put in that conversation every single season. Some years Price is there. Others Bobrovsky. Others Tim Thomas (who was the last "elite" goalie before Quick to win one). The last goalie who was consistently in that conversation was Roberto Luongo. And he's not anymore.

This is my feeling on it. Elite to me is a guy who is tops in the league EVERY year. Not one year, or two, or every couple of seasons. Thomas was a flash in the pan. Quick is probably the closest to Lundqvist, but still not on his level. Rinne maybe. Rask could be if he continues his play every year. He's never won anything as a starter either.

Playing elite in the playoffs and winning the 'Cup does not make an elite goaltender. It makes a hot goaltender who had an elite run. Quick is the only arguably elite starting goaltender to win a 'Cup in a long time and he wasn't eating up as much of the cap. He also had a much better team in front of him that benefited from lottery picks.

Lundqvist may not be a generational talent ala Crosby, but he is a franchise player and is paid accordingly. No other goaltender in the league is.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

You would have actively tried to trade Henrik Lundqvist.

There are no words.

Yes. I would have. Considering I thought it was a bad decision to pay a goaltender that high of a salary when teams around the NHL are not? I would have absolutely shopped him.

I've maintained the same point from the beginning, nev. I do not like paying a goaltender that kind of money when time and time again, lower priced goaltenders win the Cup. It's simply not a sound decision and it's becoming more and more obvious every season. But continue to think the opposite. Continue to think we should just pay a goalie whatever he wants. I get that you're a goalie and are insanely biased towards the position, but the positional value just is not there.

 

[Steve Kournianos]

Jonathan has a valid point. You dont need the reputation of an elite goalie to get to or win a Stanley Cup. You just need to be elite for 60 pct of your playoff games for two months.

The two SCF goalies are going to be Ben Bishop and one of Crawford/Andersen. Niemi won a Cup in 2010 and beat the combo of Michael Leighton and Brian Boucher. Brodeur was far from elite in 2012. Fleury and Osgood went back to back in 2008-2009. Ray Emery took the Sens there. Cam Ward wasnt even the starter when the 2006 playoffs began. Khabibulin in 2004.

 

[Ail]

Lundqvist is basically Dan Marino or Don Mattingly. Hes a star who can carry a team but cant win a title by himself.

You have to credit Sather for at least trying to give him goal support. When they couldnt score a lick between 2007-2010, he went out and got the best available offensive players.

Gaborik
Richards
Nash
St. Louis
Yandle
Boyle

He gave Duclair a chance. He let Stepan skip the AHL. He gave Zuccarello a chance. He hired an offensive-minded coach.

So really, what else is there left to do? None of those veteran guys elevated their game in tne postseason when they were here give or take a series or two. None played like all stars who were being paid millions.

You have to get to the postseason to win the Cup. Those guys helped them get there; some even carried them there. But they all never lived up to expectations.

No more trades. No more expensive UFA. that needs to stop. Build around whats already there and draft players with skill and character to fit in

I'll bet when they win the Cup (and they will), it'll be because of the guys who grew up in tne system.

Yes, Sather has acknowledged he has a franchise goaltender and has done everything in his power to get him the support he needs to win a 'Cup once he realized a franchise goaltender cannot score goals on top of preventing them. The bottom line is the support for Lundqvist has not been there when it needed to be most of the time. Lundqvist has lost games himself but the amount of games he has lost on his own accord are significantly less than the ones he's lost because his support failed him.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

The year and a half difference, in which the NHL went into a lockout and changed how contracts could be given out, makes the two contracts not comparable.

Oh, I was wrong on the dates. That's a mea culpa. However, I couldn't care less about it since a year and a half makes little difference in the scheme of things. Quick is roughly 4 years younger than Hank. His contract takes him to 36. Hank's contract takes him to 38 or so (give or take, I believe?).

Quick's contract is not only better since he's a younger goalie and will be younger when it ends, but it's also at a much lower salary.

They are eminently comparable. Quick's wasn't some cap circumvention deal like Luongo's.

 

[Doctor King Schultz]

5.8M cap hit versus 8.5M.

This is one place Lundqvist gets no sympathy from me. If he is so concerned with winning, why try to take up such a large part of the team's payroll? It's not like he doesn't make a ton of money on the side. Even Lundqvist cares more about money, but he's only human.

 

[kovazub94]

It isn't semi random. We have had two goalies that put in surprise performances in the last 6 years and everyone thinks it's a trend now. It isn't.

I'd rather guarantee that I'm going to get that kind of goaltending than hope for it.

This. The whole Henrik's discussion (or his salary hit) is ridiculous. He is one of 2-3 (maybe that many) elite player who plays up to his level in play offs EVERY SINGLE YEAR!

 

[Hunter Gathers]

This. The whole Henrik's discussion (or his salary hit) is ridiculous. He is one of 2-3 (maybe that many) elite player who plays up to his level in play offs EVERY SINGLE YEAR!

Then why didn't he do it against Tampa? Such a great guarantee.

 

[LieutenantLackluster]

Yeah the whole "build around the goalie" approach is starting to sour on me.

 

[Steve Kournianos]

Yes, Sather has acknowledged he has a franchise goaltender and has done everything in his power to get him the support he needs to win a 'Cup once he realized a franchise goaltender cannot score goals on top of preventing them. The bottom line is the support for Lundqvist has not been there when it needed to be most of the time. Lundqvist has lost games himself but the amount of games he has lost on his own accord are significantly less than the ones he's lost because his support failed him.

Bolded is part of why they're not going to the Cup this year.