Proposal: Lundqvist (and Kreider?) to Canes/Avs

[kinger8998]

As a Rangers fan this hurts to propose but here goes nothing. The clock is ticking for HL and Kreider, two of the very last remaining members of the old guard. This is especially painful to consider Lundqvist gone so soon.

But, similar to the Miller & Ott deal which saw Halak, Stewart, Carrier, 2015 1st and a conditional 2016 3rd go to Buffalo, could the Rangers see a similar return for Hank + Kreids.

Kreider is a far superior player to Ott, but is a rental so that has to be taken into account. Despite the pending UFA status I still give a substantial advantage to Kreider.

Henrik Lundqvist is older than Miller, but his underlying stats still say he's capable of elite things at his age. Rangers would be willing to retain 50% and he still has another year, which gives either team acquiring 2 kicks at the can with a motivated HL.

Colorado Avalanche
To COL: Henrik Lundqvist (50% ret.), Chris Kreider
To NYR: 2020 1st, 2021 3rd*, Tyson Jost, Philipp Grubauer, Shane Bowers
* becomes 2021 2nd if Kreider re-signs or COL win Cup in '20 or '21, 2021 1st if both happen.
- 1st + cond. 3rd + young roster player (Stewart/Jost) + goalie (Halak/Grubauer) + younger prospect (Carrier/Bowers) looks similar to return for Ott + Miller. Bowers is better than Carrier, but Kreider was better than Ott and Lundqvist has term and is not a pending UFA.
- This may be too steep a price for the Avs to pay, since Jost is much younger than Stewart was, but I don't think the Rangers would accept much less. Maybe Bowers gets downgraded to Kaut (idk how COL values him considering heart issues) or Kamenev, to compensate for Jost youth.

Carolina Hurricanes
To CAR: Henrik Lundqvist (50% ret.), Chris Kreider
To NYR: 2020 1st (TOR), 2021 3rd*, Brock McGinn, Petr Mrazek, Dominik Bokk
* becomes 2021 2nd if Kreider re-signs or COL win Cup in '20 or '21, 2021 1st if both happen.
- Once again similarily matches Miller/Ott trade. McGinn seems close to Stewart, while the Canes would elect to give us Mrazek, because they can let Reimer walk and run with Hank/Nedeljkovic next season. Bokk could also be Gauthier or Suzuki, although I'd assume Suzuki would not be available.

The Miller trade didn't work out well for St. Louis, so COL and CAR could very easily believe that they should err on the side of caution and wait for the offseason. There is also the potential Kreider stays and it's juts Hank, which alters the deal drastically. CAR and COL could beleive their duos (both backups are outperforming starters) can get it done through internal competition and they may see no desire to pay a steep price for Hank + Kreider.

Either way, justa thought based on one of the only recent trades involving an aging elite netminder. There have been rumors lately of both teams being interested in Hank.

Click to read more...

 

[Just Linda]

When you say Lundqvist, you mean Nils right? I'd do those deals if it was the non late 30s goalie.

 

[BlueBaron]

I think the King has a NTC and says no.

 

[blankall]

Adding Lundqvist to the deal doesn't add a whole lot.

Backup goalies get very little use on playoff runs. Lundvist is also turning 38 and hasn't been solid for a couple of years now.

You've also got Colorado sending the superior and much younger goalie in Philipp Grubauer back to the NYR. That would be a pretty baffling move for a contending team to abandon their starting goalie before a playoff run.

It would also be very balsy for the Canes to go all in like that, given their current standings.

 

[Mrfenn92]

Doubt henrik says yes to a move.
Value is somewhat reasonable going back to new york. But I'll say both Colorado and Carolina say no.

 

[kinger8998]

I think the King has a NTC and says no.

Lundqvist recently said in an interview if the team approached him he would obviously have to consider it, he won't make himself bigger than the team. Ryan Callahan recently said (he played with Hank for many years) he believes Lundqvist will ultimately waive for a chance at the Cup as a starter, he's too competitive to be a 1B or even a backup to Shesterkin.

I'm not one of those Lundqvist haters or even neutral. I absolutely love Hank, but at this point the writing is on the wall. I want him to win a Cup as a starter, and depsite his SV% and GAA not looking great, the underlying statistics not only explain why they aren't, but they also tell a completely different story, that he would be an upgrade for COL or CAR. I want nothing more than for him to win the Cup as a starter and these two places make the most sense.

I personally think he would waive for either of these teams if the Rangers asked. If COL or CAR will pony up is another question though. Admittedly it's a steep price to pay for a 38-year old goalie that you'll have for 2 playoff runs and a rental. But it's in line with the Miller/Ott deal and it's slightly above the price paid becaus efrankly Kreider > Ott and Lundqvist > Miller

 

[kinger8998]

Adding Lundqvist to the deal doesn't add a whole lot.

Backup goalies get very little use on playoff runs. Lundvist is also turning 38 and hasn't been solid for a couple of years now.

You've also got Colorado sending the superior and much younger goalie in Philipp Grubauer back to the NYR. That would be a pretty baffling move for a contending team to abandon their starting goalie before a playoff run.

Francouz has been outplaying Grubauer in COL. Lundqvist is not going to eithr of these teams to be a backup, he's supplanting either one of their goalie options as starters.

His stats suffer because of NYR, all other metric and underlying numbers prove he's still performing at an elite rate. Grubauer is not superior to Hank, it's laughable that you'd suggest that.

 

[kinger8998]

Doubt henrik says yes to a move.
Value is somewhat reasonable going back to new york. But I'll say both Colorado and Carolina say no.

I think we are nearing the point where he does. Callahan thinks so anyways. Henrik Lundqvist said it himself, he won't allow himself to become bigger than the team. I think if he's being put in either one of these positions (talented teams with a need for an elite goalie), he would at the very least consider.

 

[Papa Francouz]

No, thank you. Don’t want any Rangers players at bloated prices. Would much prefer Pageau + DeMelo at a lower cost than what’s in the OP.

 

[Pierce Hawthorne]

Colorado would have no interest in giving up actual value for Lundqvist. None whatsoever.

So essentially from our perspective we're paying a 1st + 3rd(That very easily could become another 1st), plus a good prospect in Bower, and a more valuable goalie, for a goalie we dont want or need and a Top 6 winger.

 

[Mrfenn92]

@kinger8998

The miller trade gives you a basis. But when miller was traded he was better then Hank is at this moment.
I mean the first plus a prospect fills the krieder trade. I say drop the conditional picks and your right on line in terms of value. The goalie going the other ways fills in for Hank trade value wise. You could flip grubauer or mrazek afterwards.

Either way I don't think Carolina or Colorado would have interest in a backup or a 1b making over $4.0 million.

 

[blankall]

Francouz has been outplaying Grubauer in COL. Lundqvist is not going to eithr of these teams to be a backup, he's supplanting either one of their goalie options as starters.

His stats suffer because of NYR, all other metric and underlying numbers prove he's still performing at an elite rate. Grubauer is not superior to Hank, it's laughable that you'd suggest that.

Francouz is great, but he's also older tha Grubauer and has 23 total games under his belt. The Avs aren't going to throw all their eggs into that basket. Also "laughable" that I suggest Grubauer is better than Lundqvist right now?

I'm sorry. Lundqvist is one of the GOAT goalies, however, he's old. No team is bringing him in as a starter.

 

[NYSPORTS]

seems the time to move Hank was last year. Smh

 

[Stickpucker]

Price seems too steep for the Canes. Basically 2 1sts +.

 

[JoeSakic13]

A solid no from Colorado on picking up Hank. You could have maybe made this argument last year, but I don't really see any point to breaking up what is turning into a pretty solid goaltending tandem with Gru/Francouz. As much as I'd love to see Hank have another shot to win a cup, this ain't it.

 

[Big Daddy Cane]

Carolina's primary need is on defense. The cap space and assets Kreider would require should go to addressing that area. The Canes won't be the team that wins that auction, imo.

If the reported interest in Lehner is legit, that's a signal to me that they're looking for a legit solution and potentially willing to pay the price for that. Lundqvist is another stop-gap. If there's any interest, it would be in the form of a soft deal. Mrazek and some trivial asset like a 3rd. No 1st. No Bokk. Nothing like that.

 

[BlueBaron]

Lundqvist recently said in an interview if the team approached him he would obviously have to consider it, he won't make himself bigger than the team. Ryan Callahan recently said (he played with Hank for many years) he believes Lundqvist will ultimately waive for a chance at the Cup as a starter, he's too competitive to be a 1B or even a backup to Shesterkin.

I'm not one of those Lundqvist haters or even neutral. I absolutely love Hank, but at this point the writing is on the wall. I want him to win a Cup as a starter, and depsite his SV% and GAA not looking great, the underlying statistics not only explain why they aren't, but they also tell a completely different story, that he would be an upgrade for COL or CAR. I want nothing more than for him to win the Cup as a starter and these two places make the most sense.

I personally think he would waive for either of these teams if the Rangers asked. If COL or CAR will pony up is another question though. Admittedly it's a steep price to pay for a 38-year old goalie that you'll have for 2 playoff runs and a rental. But it's in line with the Miller/Ott deal and it's slightly above the price paid becaus efrankly Kreider > Ott and Lundqvist > Miller

No disrespect but he's a backup on all the contenders that come to mind.

 

[kinger8998]

@kinger8998

The miller trade gives you a basis. But when miller was traded he was better then Hank is at this moment.
I mean the first plus a prospect fills the krieder trade. I say drop the conditional picks and your right on line in terms of value. The goalie going the other ways fills in for Hank trade value wise. You could flip grubauer or mrazek afterwards.

Either way I don't think Carolina or Colorado would have interest in a backup or a 1b making over $4.0 million.

Lundqvist is going to be a starter in either place he goes...any of Francouz/Mrazek/Grubauer/Reimer is better than Hank. Rangers bleed shots from close to the net, and concede the blueline on purpose. Shesterkin has somehow managed to survive that (very small sample), but Henrik has dealt with it for the last 2 years. He's had 7 game stints of brilliance within this system too, but he would be much better out of it. I would argue his stats would ressemble Millers .923 at the time of trade instead of his .907 is the team had more defensive structure.

That Buffalo team was awful, but it was because of their offense (44 points highest scorer), not their defense and goaltending. The Rangers are bad for the opposite reaosns, and that is what effects Hank's stats.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

A solid no from Colorado on picking up Hank. You could have maybe made this argument last year, but I don't really see any point to breaking up what is turning into a pretty solid goaltending tandem with Gru/Francouz. As much as I'd love to see Hank have another shot to win a cup, this ain't it.

On top of this, I don't see Kreider's next contract being a great fit for the Avs, regardless of how much cap space we currently have. I think giving him $7m+ with term is only going to cause issues with our long term cap situation. I'd much rather have that extra $7m to pay Makar/MacKinnon/Landeskog and eventually Byram/Newhook, than be tied to an overpaid guy in his 30s.

 

[Mooserton]

From a Colorado perspective: Trading a 1st + Jost and a later conditional pick for Kreider seems fair but the Lundqvist side of things is just ugly and wishful thinking on your part.

Grubauer is better than Lundqvist, younger and cheaper even with Hank @ 50% and you expect to get a prospect like Bowers on top of a trade that's already bad? Yeah no.

 

[Mrfenn92]

@kinger8998

You'll have a tough time getting other fans to agree that Hank is better then their guys in net right now. That's all, I could be completely wrong. Just don't see that much of a appetite from others involving Hank.

 

[kinger8998]

No disrespect but he's a backup on all the contenders that come to mind.

From a Colorado perspective: Trading a 1st + Jost and a later conditional pick for Kreider seems fair but the Lundqvist side of things is just ugly and wishful thinking on your part.

Grubauer is better than Lundqvist, younger and cheaper even with Hank @ 50% and you expect to get a prospect like Bowers on top of a trade that's already bad? Yeah no.

I find it absolutely astonishing how the Rangers being a tire fire defensively has torpedoed everyone's view of Hank. The guy is quite literally still an elite goaltender. He saves top-5 goals above expected, while having one of the hardest workloads in the league. The Rangers bleed shots from the slot. They give up the blueline by design.

The fact that youguys literally think Grubauer/Francouz/Mrazek/Reimer > Hank fascinates me. I can't even be mad because youguys only see his boxcar stats, which suffer bc of the Rangers. I'm going to assume NHL Gm's see my side of the story more so thatn yours, because they have access to more of these statistics/have scouts that watch games and take account for these types of things.

It's actually a bit sad to me that the way fans of other teams will remember Hank as if he went out over the hill and part of the problem for the Rangers. Sure, he's declined with age, everyone does, but he's literally still elite in the definition of the word. I really hope it doesn't tarnish his legacy.

 

[kinger8998]

@kinger8998

You'll have a tough time getting other fans to agree that Hank is better then their guys in net right now. That's all, I could be completely wrong. Just don't see that much of a appetite from others involving Hank.

Yeah, I've come to realize this. Really bothersome that this is the view of Hank outside of NY. I'm just glad NHL GM's have more access through video/stats/scouts of Hank because they likely see closer to my side even if it's more centered. I can't blame people for not knowing, his boxcar stats do suck, but they truly don't tell the whole story.

 

[McClelland]

We know what a Lundy can do in the playoffs, had taken him in a heartbeat at 50% retained if it dont kill us to much!

But Rangers need to take back Smith on a outgoing contract! Lundy aging, but im pretty sure he could cream out a stellar performance in a playoff run, and that leadership he brings is gold !

Intrested in kreider too, but dont think Holland will gamble with the first this season.

Or Georgiev, we are stucked with Koski 2 seasons more, Smith is streaky and in my mind not a goalie you go far with in a eventual playoff!

With that said, The King will not waive for Oilers!

 

[kinger8998]

On top of this, I don't see Kreider's next contract being a great fit for the Avs, regardless of how much cap space we currently have. I think giving him $7m+ with term is only going to cause issues with our long term cap situation. I'd much rather have that extra $7m to pay Makar/MacKinnon/Landeskog and eventually Byram/Newhook, than be tied to an overpaid guy in his 30s.

This is why the pick going up from a 3rd is conditional on is Kreider re-signs, if he doesn't nothing changes. Bowers inclusion may have been expensive, but downgrade him to Kamenev and that's likely closer to a deal considering Kreider not LT fit in COL.