Player Discussion Henrik Lundqvist

[Kupo]

 

[TheTakedown]

Also, don't under estimate Hank's ability to steal a series or even two. Not to mention, anything can happen in the playoffs, especially a best of 7 series.

Goalies do not steal series nowadays.... Individual games, yes, but it's nearly impossible for a goalie to steal 4 out of 7 games

 

[TheTakedown]

Look at all the Cup winners the last few years. They were won with cheap goaltenders.

If the Cup is the team's final goal, you can't be paying that much for goaltending.

They were not...

Chicago had/has Crawford who is making $6M/year
Pittsburgh went with a tandem of Fluery and Murray. Murray happened to be on an ELC when he won his two cups, but the pens had a combined $6.8M spent on goaltending... Murray is off his ELC but is still a cost controlled asset, hence his $4M cap hit. Crawford is a better comparable
LA has Quick, who has a contract that was formulated during the last CBA with THREE dummy years at the end of it which brings the average salary down substantially.... If you tried to make Quicks $58M contract legal with todays CBA, Quick is a $7.25M/year goalie. Not far off from Hank's $8.5M
Nashville has Pekke Rinne who is currently paid $7M/year. I'd argue he is the worst of this bunch of goalies I've mentioned.
The only outlier would be Martin Jones, but again, he was taken only several years into his career by Boston who traded him to SJS hence why he cost $3M... He just got a FAT extension of $5.75M and I would not put him anywhere higher than an above average goalie...

Then there's the fact that Hank is consistently better than these goalies, and has faced thousands (literally) of additional shots compared to these other goalies.

Lastly, there's the fact that the Rangers have only had elite talent in net, so they chose to build around him, hence why they sunk that much $ into him. These other teams mentioned had elite talents in their forward and D corps, which is why they were able to (or forced to) spend less on goaltending...
LA has Doughty, Kopitar, Muzzin, Brown...
CHI has Kane, Toews, Keith (also on a cheater contract)
NSH has Johansson, and 4 top pairing defensemen
SJS has Pavelski, Thornton, Burns, and they had Marleau when they first picked up Jones

NYR had..... McDonagh.... that's basically it. The team was constructed completely differently in terms of salary distribution compared to the teams above. Whether or not that's right or wrong is not necessarily relevant (though I'll say that my opinion is that goalies do not win championships in today's NHL)

Long and short, Hank is not overpaid... no, he's not on a discount, but he's not overpaid... I won't say that you are wrong that cheap goalies do not win championships, because yes sometimes they do, but when you make a statement like that you have to put the salary cap into the context you are speaking of, and in the cases I mentioned, the goalies that were less than $4M were used early in their RFA years.

 

[TheTakedown]

It's already a bad contract. Hank has had a very average year overall. He had some really awful hockey in the beginning. Then he went on one of the most insane runs I have ever seen from any goalie ever for a bit of a stretch. And then he started trending towards good-but-not-great again.

We need to move on from paying past performances. At least Gorton is showing us that's his game. Trading McD was evidence of that. It's a positive step forward.

You *do* realize how bad this team is, right?

Hank's putting up average career numbers on a team that has been giving up 35+ shots for more than half of the season, and 40+ shots in half of those games

 

[Hunter Gathers]

You *do* realize how bad this team is, right?

Hank's putting up average career numbers on a team that has been giving up 35+ shots for more than half of the season, and 40+ shots in half of those games

Why would my opinion on his play depend on the team’s play? Are you suggesting that someone can’t evaluate the play of a player on a bad team? Do you realize how silly that sounds?

 

[Hunter Gathers]

They were not...

Chicago had/has Crawford who is making $6M/year
Pittsburgh went with a tandem of Fluery and Murray. Murray happened to be on an ELC when he won his two cups, but the pens had a combined $6.8M spent on goaltending... Murray is off his ELC but is still a cost controlled asset, hence his $4M cap hit. Crawford is a better comparable
LA has Quick, who has a contract that was formulated during the last CBA with THREE dummy years at the end of it which brings the average salary down substantially.... If you tried to make Quicks $58M contract legal with todays CBA, Quick is a $7.25M/year goalie. Not far off from Hank's $8.5M
Nashville has Pekke Rinne who is currently paid $7M/year. I'd argue he is the worst of this bunch of goalies I've mentioned.
The only outlier would be Martin Jones, but again, he was taken only several years into his career by Boston who traded him to SJS hence why he cost $3M... He just got a FAT extension of $5.75M and I would not put him anywhere higher than an above average goalie...

Then there's the fact that Hank is consistently better than these goalies, and has faced thousands (literally) of additional shots compared to these other goalies.

Lastly, there's the fact that the Rangers have only had elite talent in net, so they chose to build around him, hence why they sunk that much $ into him. These other teams mentioned had elite talents in their forward and D corps, which is why they were able to (or forced to) spend less on goaltending...
LA has Doughty, Kopitar, Muzzin, Brown...
CHI has Kane, Toews, Keith (also on a cheater contract)
NSH has Johansson, and 4 top pairing defensemen
SJS has Pavelski, Thornton, Burns, and they had Marleau when they first picked up Jones

NYR had..... McDonagh.... that's basically it. The team was constructed completely differently in terms of salary distribution compared to the teams above. Whether or not that's right or wrong is not necessarily relevant (though I'll say that my opinion is that goalies do not win championships in today's NHL)

Long and short, Hank is not overpaid... no, he's not on a discount, but he's not overpaid... I won't say that you are wrong that cheap goalies do not win championships, because yes sometimes they do, but when you make a statement like that you have to put the salary cap into the context you are speaking of, and in the cases I mentioned, the goalies that were less than $4M were used early in their RFA years.

Lol, I like the attempt to change Quick’s numbers. Quick wouldn’t be signed for 7.25 today. The only reason that was done was because it could be done. At the end of the day, Quick has a 5.8M cap hit. Not a mythical 7.25 cap hit.

The fact that you need to massage the numbers to fit your point speaks volumes about goalie contracts.

The top end AAV for a goalie should be around 6M. Perhaps slightly more on a shorter term contract.

 

[Siddi]

Goalies do not steal series nowadays.... Individual games, yes, but it's nearly impossible for a goalie to steal 4 out of 7 games

Unless you are Hank. He literaly stole the series against Montreal not even 1 year ago.

 

[Siddi]

I love Hank but his contract pisses me off. He makes way too much money for a goaltender I don't care how many great saves he makes.
You cannot have that much money tied up in net. It makes it hard to build the rest of the team with all that salary.
Who ever gave him a no movement clause should be fired. Sather has to go yesterday.

I know posting anything remotely critical of the "King" is sacrilegious in here but I can't help it.

Critic is fine. Uninformed hot takes, for example, your posts regarding Lundqvist salary are what people will call you out on. I mean, at this point given what you have posted about his salary in this thread and others the question has to be asked, are you against his cap hit or him making millions period.

Also, liking a post claiming this will not help your cause.

"-Rangers will never win the cup with him. He is average at best and it specially showed in the playoffs. A few years ago, the cup could have been ours at least 2 times, but he got out played by the opposition goalie every time."

 

[NYRFANMANI]

Why would my opinion on his play depend on the team’s play? Are you suggesting that someone can’t evaluate the play of a player on a bad team? Do you realize how silly that sounds?

It's not at all silly, because the two factors are correlated.

One can evaluate the play of a player on a bad team, but one must take into account the bad team play.

Can't have the striker, pick the ball up himself, rush the field, dribble through everybody and score. This is not the CHL. He needs playmakers and assist-men.

Same goes with the goalie. If there is a rebound and there is no defenseman to clear the crease, it's Hank's fault?! Goalies will give-up rebounds, can't do much about it. But you can have better defense to clear the puck when it happens. And we know that psychology is important. I'm sure playing with a collapsing team really helps your confidence and drive.

 

[Mac n Gs]

I would prefer the bold. Or even give Costanza 10 of them. Or we can just keep riding Hank into the ground for no reason.

I don't see why this idea is being treated like it's criminal. Resting Hank and mitigating injury risk, getting Georgiev some more games, and increasing your likelihood to get a better spot in the draft lottery are all beneficial to the franchise. Hank's fierce, competitive nature is exactly why I'd want to rest him a bit more. I mean the dude almost broke his hand in a meaningless game in March making a ridiculous cross-crease save with his unprotected hand. He'll do whatever it takes to help this franchise win, and that mentality is more useful to have in October than it is right now.

Let Gorton reset the team a bit and add an impact player near the top of the draft. Let Henke rest and be ready for October. Seems pretty logical to me. Playoffs just ain't happening.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

I don't see why this idea is being treated like it's criminal. Resting Hank and mitigating injury risk, getting Georgiev some more games, and increasing your likelihood to get a better spot in the draft lottery are all beneficial to the franchise. Hank's fierce, competitive nature is exactly why I'd want to rest him a bit more. I mean the dude almost broke his hand in a meaningless game in March making a ridiculous cross-crease save with his unprotected hand. He'll do whatever it takes to help this franchise win, and that mentality is more useful to have in October than it is right now.

Let Gorton reset the team a bit and add an impact player near the top of the draft. Let Henke rest and be ready for October. Seems pretty logical to me. Playoffs just ain't happening.

Because you have fanboys. And, like we saw with Eli Manning, fanboys are going to bitch and moan when the boy they fan over is somehow slighted in their eyes. They care less about the franchise, as they can't see past the name on the back of the jersey.

The idea of preserving Hank for the future would be a good thing, you'd think. They can enjoy him for a longer period of time. But they are too shortsighted to even see that.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

It's not at all silly, because the two factors are correlated.

One can evaluate the play of a player on a bad team, but one must take into account the bad team play.

Yeah, but for anyone who has watched the game more than casually, this isn't that difficult to do. @TheTakedown acts as if it's impossible, which is weird.

Re: puck clearing - I don't get on Hank for not clearing a puck. I get on Hank when his attempt at a clear ends up being a pass right to the opposing team (which is due to his career garbage puck handling).

It's incredibly simple to separate the play of an individual from that of a team. Especially at the goaltending position.

 

[NYRFANMANI]

I get on Hank when his attempt at a clear ends up being a pass right to the opposing team (which is due to his career garbage puck handling).

Oh, we agree on that. Hank should never leave his crease unless it's to field 6 players.

 

[Mac n Gs]

Because you have fanboys. And, like we saw with Eli Manning, fanboys are going to ***** and moan when the boy they fan over is somehow slighted in their eyes. They care less about the franchise, as they can't see past the name on the back of the jersey.

The idea of preserving Hank for the future would be a good thing, you'd think. They can enjoy him for a longer period of time. But they are too shortsighted to even see that.

I mean I’m one of those people, but I care more about Hank not breaking down. That would hurt more to me than seeing him be pissed for 16 games. Like I said, he almost broke his hand because he competes so hard in a meaningless game in March.

A top pick + a healthy, rested Hank is exactly how we’ll be able to turn this ship around in the next year or two

 

[kovazub94]

Because you have fanboys. And, like we saw with Eli Manning, fanboys are going to ***** and moan when the boy they fan over is somehow slighted in their eyes. They care less about the franchise, as they can't see past the name on the back of the jersey.

The idea of preserving Hank for the future would be a good thing, you'd think. They can enjoy him for a longer period of time. But they are too shortsighted to even see that.

So you felt slighted by my use of "lottery enthusiast" but then you feel perfectly fine posting this? What a joker.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

I mean I’m one of those people, but I care more about Hank not breaking down. That would hurt more to me than seeing him be pissed for 16 games. Like I said, he almost broke his hand because he competes so hard in a meaningless game in March.

A top pick + a healthy, rested Hank is exactly how we’ll be able to turn this ship around in the next year or two

Heck, the best thing for the team going forward is the guy being healthy. I don't know how this is not taken into account by some of these folks. It's bewildering to me. Chasing individual marks seems completely pointless in a season like this. If we are going to be paying the dude $8.5M going forward, he needs to be healthy.

So you felt slighted by my use of "lottery enthusiast" but then you feel perfectly fine posting this? What a joker.

Yes. I do. Or are you really going to complain about me calling you out after you posted your initial little dig?

 

[kovazub94]

Yes. I do. Or are you really going to complain about me calling you out after you posted your initial little dig?

I don't really care about what you write about me. Just find it laughable how easily you get offended by a "little dig" and then turn around to post snub-ass posts which has been your trademark way before this thing. I've met people like you.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

Oh, we agree on that. Hank should never leave his crease unless it's to field 6 players.

Anyways, now that we can move on to a real conversation with rationality behind it, I would agree with you. It's odd that this hasn't been cut down on, though.

 

[NYRFANMANI]

Anyways, now that we can move on to a real conversation with rationality behind it, I would agree with you. It's odd that this hasn't been cut down on, though.

AV is the only constant within our different debates here. A proper coach sees the problem and adresses it. Sure Hank can sometimes brain-fart and basically get greedy. Touch the puck, play the puck, pass the puck, maybe a nice saucer around the boards, a tape to tape lob pass from the crease. The consistency of it happening and failing, points to AV.

 

[haveandare]

Because you have fanboys. And, like we saw with Eli Manning, fanboys are going to ***** and moan when the boy they fan over is somehow slighted in their eyes. They care less about the franchise, as they can't see past the name on the back of the jersey.

The idea of preserving Hank for the future would be a good thing, you'd think. They can enjoy him for a longer period of time. But they are too shortsighted to even see that.

I absolutely love Hank as a player but we should play George more for the end of the year solely to see what we have in him if nothing else.

 

[silverfish]

Not to rock the boat, but is there any legitimate argument that Hank is overpaid outside of 'look at the goalies who have won cups?'

How much better is this team with a $4 - $5m AAV goalie and an extra $3-$4m AAV player?

*only including goalies with UFA expiry.

I'm all for dissent. And while I agree that paying a goalie $8.5m AAV is probably not an ideal way to construct a roster, I also realize that:
A) Hank is worth that. He's not a typical goalie
B) Like this team knows how to correctly spend $3-$4m on a roster player, anyway
C) There were way, way, way bigger atrocities on this team's cap besides Hank that no one gave two shits about until it slapped them in the face

Henrik Lundqvist at $8.5m/year is a bargain for the New York Rangers' bottom line. For building a team? Maybe not, I'm open to that dissent, assuming arguments are better than "cheap goalies win cups!" You know what else happens? A lot of teams with "cheap goalies" don't even sniff the playoffs.

There's no silver bullet.

Stay woke.

 

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

At least Hank was the most consistently elite goalie in the league and deserved his contract. Also had no injury history.

Look at Price. 10m cap hit, 8 year contract (Hank's was a 7 year term) and he had history of knee injuries, worst for a goalie. Add in the fact that outside of 1 elite season and 2 very good seasons, he's basically been an average to slightly above average goalie. Price should be donating large sums of his deal to the Canadian media.

 

[silverfish]

At least Hank was the most consistently elite goalie in the league and deserved his contract. Also had no injury history.

Look at Price. 10m cap hit, 8 year contract (Hank's was a 7 year term) and he had history of knee injuries, worst for a goalie. Add in the fact that outside of 1 elite season and 2 very good seasons, he's basically been an average to slightly above average goalie. Price should be donating large sums of his deal to the Canadian media.

Yes. There are some definitively shit goalie contracts out there. Price's is absolutely one of them.

I don't think you can correctly classify Hank's as definitively bad. I think that'd be a hard argument to make.

 

[gorangers0525]

No goalie is worth 8.5 million. If you have to rely on elite goaltending to win games, there are probably some other areas you’d be better off spending cap hit on.

Hank is one of my favorite Rangers of all time. He’s still a top ten goalie IMO. His last contract was still irresponsible.

 

[nevesis]

Not to rock the boat, but is there any legitimate argument that Hank is overpaid outside of 'look at the goalies who have won cups?'

How much better is this team with a $4 - $5m AAV goalie and an extra $3-$4m AAV player?

*only including goalies with UFA expiry.

I'm all for dissent. And while I agree that paying a goalie $8.5m AAV is probably not an ideal way to construct a roster, I also realize that:
A) Hank is worth that. He's not a typical goalie
B) Like this team knows how to correctly spend $3-$4m on a roster player, anyway
C) There were way, way, way bigger atrocities on this team's cap besides Hank that no one gave two ****s about until it slapped them in the face

Henrik Lundqvist at $8.5m/year is a bargain for the New York Rangers' bottom line. For building a team? Maybe not, I'm open to that dissent, assuming arguments are better than "cheap goalies win cups!" You know what else happens? A lot of teams with "cheap goalies" don't even sniff the playoffs.

There's no silver bullet.

Stay woke.

Also, if you look at all goalies who have played 3500+ 5v5 minutes since July 1, 2014 (when Hank's new contract started), he is 3rd in GSAA/hr behind only Crawford & Bobrovsky.

That's out of 53 different goalies who have played that much the last 4 seasons.