PDA

View Full Version : King Henrik Re-signs with the Rangers (7 years, 8.5 million a season)



metswon69
12-04-2013, 11:01 AM
Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun 28s

As per @DarrenDreger, Henrik Lundqvist has reached agreement on an extension with the New York Rangers

Darren Dreger ‏@DarrenDreger 5m

Vague details. Hearing 7 years and $8+ mil per for Lundqvist.

Ugh with the cap space. I mean it's great to have him back but jeez.

nyr2002nyr
12-04-2013, 11:03 AM
Jesus H

Redfish
12-04-2013, 11:10 AM
Um....yeah?

Very mixed emotions to this re-signing.

On one hand, how can any fan be dissatisfied with re-signing what many say is the best goaltender in the world?

On the other, what if Halak can be signed as a free-agent for $6mm/yr, and the Oilers were willing to offer what is shaping up to be the #1 overall pick and, let's say, Justin Schultz and a #2 pick?

I suppose I can "sleep at night" knowing Hank is our goalie the next five+ years.

bsi
12-04-2013, 11:17 AM
It's what the market commands. After the Rogers deal here in Canada I'm less concerned about it really, there was predictions of the cap being 90 million in 4 years because of the extra winter classic style games and tv revenue. I guess the only problem now is how do we get better? As Vigneault said we're a .500 team, we can't be a .500 team and we need to be better, more physical and tougher.

nyr2002nyr
12-04-2013, 11:23 AM
It's what the market commands. After the Rogers deal here in Canada I'm less concerned about it really, there was predictions of the cap being 90 million in 4 years because of the extra winter classic style games and tv revenue. I guess the only problem now is how do we get better? As Vigneault said we're a .500 team, we can't be a .500 team and we need to be better, more physical and tougher.

more physical and tougher


^ that is the truth!!!!!!


Whos turn is it to get beat up by John Scott tomorrow?

nyr2002nyr
12-04-2013, 11:31 AM
The deal is worth an average of $8.5 million per season and will make Lundqvist the highest-paid goaltender in the NHL ahead of both Boston's Tuukka Rask and Nashville's Pekka Rinne, who each have a cap hit of $7 million next season.

nyr2002nyr
12-04-2013, 11:34 AM
Glen Sather is a bafoon

BranWingss
12-04-2013, 11:35 AM
The deal is worth an average of $8.5 million per season and will make Lundqvist the highest-paid goaltender in the NHL ahead of both Boston's Tuukka Rask and Nashville's Pekka Rinne, who each have a cap hit of $7 million next season.

At the same time Jonas Hiller and Corey Crawford are both at 6M. Mike Smith is aroudn there too I believe.

metswon69
12-04-2013, 11:36 AM
The deal is worth an average of $8.5 million per season and will make Lundqvist the highest-paid goaltender in the NHL ahead of both Boston's Tuukka Rask and Nashville's Pekka Rinne, who each have a cap hit of $7 million next season.

They were stuck between a rock and a hard place although i do find the timing of this odd after 1 bad start from Talbot. I just don't see Sather thinking outside the box enough at this point in his career to even entertain the idea of trading Lundqvist.

It's one of those things I am ambivalent about right now.

nyr2002nyr
12-04-2013, 11:44 AM
You cant pay him 1.5 more then Rask or Rinne. They are younger and have all the primes years left UGH

bsi
12-04-2013, 11:45 AM
If he plays like the highest played goalie in the league I have no problem with it, if he continues the way he started I'm not very happy about it, but as I've said many times before there's no other goalie in the league outside of Brodeur that has been as consistant as Hank since he got here.

Sandman
12-04-2013, 11:58 AM
If he plays like the highest played goalie in the league I have no problem with it, if he continues the way he started I'm not very happy about it, but as I've said many times before there's no other goalie in the league outside of Brodeur that has been as consistant as Hank since he got here.

something else too, guys like Brodeur and Thomas recently have shown that a good goaltender can still compete at a high level at 39

bsi
12-04-2013, 12:24 PM
If he plays like the highest played goalie in the league I have no problem with it, if he continues the way he started I'm not very happy about it, but as I've said many times before there's no other goalie in the league outside of Brodeur that has been as consistant as Hank since he got here.

something else too, guys like Brodeur and Thomas recently have shown that a good goaltender can still compete at a high level at 39

For sure...but right now I am worried about him doing it at 32 haha

fingerbang
12-04-2013, 01:22 PM
The Rangers can't pay Hank 8.5 and make the additions needed to win the Cup. And of course our douchebag GM caves the second Talbot has 1 bad game.

Sandman
12-04-2013, 01:29 PM
The Rangers can't pay Hank 8.5 and make the additions needed to win the Cup. And of course our douchebag GM caves the second Talbot has 1 bad game.
Look at all the money they have wasted chasing those additions over the past 10-15 years. How many misfit forwards and overrated defensemen?

How hard has it been for them to make their dollar go far?

This will be the best 8.5 million they have ever spent.

Somebody mentioned spending 6m on another Goalie, that's basically a 2.5m premium for Henrik

JdKing7
12-04-2013, 01:32 PM
Damn..must be something in the air in New york with the ellsbury signing and now henrik.

J4KOP99
12-04-2013, 01:33 PM
Too much for a guy on the wrong side of 30

KingsnQueens7
12-04-2013, 01:37 PM
This is gonna drive the rest of the market for goalies through the roof and it's gonna put the Rangers in a hard stop next season. King Henrik is the best goalie in the world, and that's what u gotta pay unfortunately.

fingerbang
12-04-2013, 01:39 PM
Look at all the money they have wasted chasing those additions over the past 10-15 years. How many misfit forwards and overrated defensemen?

How hard has it been for them to make their dollar go far?

This will be the best 8.5 million they have ever spent.

Somebody mentioned spending 6m on another Goalie, that's basically a 2.5m premium for Henrik

Regardless of past free agent busts, the Rangers still likely have to go make additions to win. Not to mention all the players that get raises after this year. Whoever they don't bring back has to be replaced.

I'm officially on the trade Rick Nash bandwagon. The Rangers need depth to compete with Boston and Pitt.

NYR_NYJ
12-04-2013, 01:40 PM
It's high but finding a Vezina Winning goalie isn't an easy feat and he has been solid for 8 years now. I will admit hes been outplayed this year but I alos think and hope this will help get him in the right state of mind.

Goalies can play into there mid to upper 30's and play well.

J4KOP99
12-04-2013, 01:41 PM
Hank may be the best goalie in the league (either way it's not by a wide margin) but were not winning **** as is...

You don't necessarily need the beat goalie in the league to win.

NYR_NYJ
12-04-2013, 01:41 PM
Regardless of past free agent busts, the Rangers still likely have to go make additions to win. Not to mention all the players that get raises after this year. Whoever they don't bring back has to be replaced.

I'm officially on the trade Rick Nash bandwagon. The Rangers need depth to compete with Boston and Pitt.

I can get on that bandwagon too

Sandman
12-04-2013, 01:41 PM
Too much for a guy on the wrong side of 30

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/b/brodema01.html
http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/t/thomati01.html
http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/h/hasekdo01.html

NHL goalies, especially guys of Henrik's caliber, don't play by the same rules of time as other pro athletes. I'd say they are more similar to NFL QBs and still last a few years longer.

Sandman
12-04-2013, 01:46 PM
Regardless of past free agent busts, the Rangers still likely have to go make additions to win. Not to mention all the players that get raises after this year. Whoever they don't bring back has to be replaced.

I'm officially on the trade Rick Nash bandwagon. The Rangers need depth to compete with Boston and Pitt.
Well there's needs to be a balance struck there, we don't need to both replace & re-sign these guys. I think Richards is a lame duck.

They can trade Nash but he's another one that isn't producing. Thats 7.8 mil that hasn't been doing a lot for us.

beast023
12-04-2013, 03:53 PM
Im not ready to throw in the towel on Nash just yet. The guy has 9 points in 11 games coming off a concussion that kept him out more than half the season so far. He is one of the few guys if not the only guy on the team that can be a game breaker and he's looked pretty good on a line with Stepan and Kreider. It's really the other 9 forwards that need to get it going. And come to think about it I'd give the Brassard line a pass too because Puliot is useless. It's as if they're playing a man down every shift.

imbetterthanyou
12-04-2013, 04:01 PM
Wait so were unhappy with signing the best goaltender alive, and we want to trade our only offensive weapon on an offensively challenged team when we can just amnesty richards when the cap goes up next year?

fingerbang
12-04-2013, 04:25 PM
Im not ready to throw in the towel on Nash just yet. The guy has 9 points in 11 games coming off a concussion that kept him out more than half the season so far. He is one of the few guys if not the only guy on the team that can be a game breaker and he's looked pretty good on a line with Stepan and Kreider. It's really the other 9 forwards that need to get it going. And come to think about it I'd give the Brassard line a pass too because Puliot is useless. It's as if they're playing a man down every shift.

I think Nash has been fine. He was great last year. It's just hard when you're paying 16+ million to two players.

metswon69
12-04-2013, 04:29 PM
Wait so were unhappy with signing the best goaltender alive, and we want to trade our only offensive weapon on an offensively challenged team when we can just amnesty richards when the cap goes up next year?

It's not about re-signing the best goaltender alive, it's his cap implications in relation to how many UFA and RFA we have in the next couple of seasons. I think it's 17 next year. This almost guarantees they amnesty Richards (not that it wasn't almost a guarantee anyway) and they have to find an equitable offensive talent or depth offensively to compensate for his loss. I love Nash and I wouldn't deal him either but they now have 1/4th of their budget next year tied into 2 guys (would have been 1/3 if they keep Richards) and they need salary cap room to address some of their issues (mainly offense, depth, and some more physicality).

imbetterthanyou
12-04-2013, 04:36 PM
It's not about re-signing the best goaltender alive, it's his cap implications in relation to how many UFA and RFA we have in the next couple of seasons. I think it's 17 next year. This almost guarantees they amnesty Richards (not that it wasn't almost a guarantee anyway) and they have to find an equitable offensive talent or depth offensively to compensate for his loss. I love Nash and I wouldn't deal him either but they now have 1/4th of their budget next year tied into 2 guys (would have been 1/3 if they keep Richards) and they need salary cap room to address some of their issues (mainly offense, depth, and some more physicality).

But are you all really surprised by the number? I expected at least north of 8 million. Hes on the cap for 6.8 expecting a small raise when hes outplayed his value is pretty dumb if you ask me. We all knew what we were getting into with Nash as well. Hes played great when hes on the ice, he changes the team dynamic ten fold. Richards was gone anyway. I dont think this signing is really surprising one bit. We should be happy we re-signed lundqvist...if its 1 or .5 million more than expected can we really say he doesnt deserve it?

bsi
12-04-2013, 04:52 PM
Look at all the money they have wasted chasing those additions over the past 10-15 years. How many misfit forwards and overrated defensemen?

How hard has it been for them to make their dollar go far?

This will be the best 8.5 million they have ever spent.

Somebody mentioned spending 6m on another Goalie, that's basically a 2.5m premium for Henrik

Regardless of past free agent busts, the Rangers still likely have to go make additions to win. Not to mention all the players that get raises after this year. Whoever they don't bring back has to be replaced.

I'm officially on the trade Rick Nash bandwagon. The Rangers need depth to compete with Boston and Pitt.

Rick Nash is nearly the only forward capable of playing against boston really. We need more skilled sizeable players really, atleast one. I said it before that we cant play against Boston type teams when we have both Hagelin and Zuccarello holding down big roles in our top 9. We need more bite. God love the two of them they are our best workers but just too light to have two of them without bigger players around them. Add a couple bigger players capable of banging with Boston and we are a better team.

fingerbang
12-04-2013, 05:10 PM
Rick Nash is nearly the only forward capable of playing against boston really. We need more skilled sizeable players really, atleast one. I said it before that we cant play against Boston type teams when we have both Hagelin and Zuccarello holding down big roles in our top 9. We need more bite. God love the two of them they are our best workers but just too light to have two of them without bigger players around them. Add a couple bigger players capable of banging with Boston and we are a better team.

I don't disagree but big guys cost a lot of money and we probably won't have it.

metswon69
12-04-2013, 05:10 PM
But are you all really surprised by the number? I expected at least north of 8 million. Hes on the cap for 6.8 expecting a small raise when hes outplayed his value is pretty dumb if you ask me. We all knew what we were getting into with Nash as well. Hes played great when hes on the ice, he changes the team dynamic ten fold. Richards was gone anyway. I dont think this signing is really surprising one bit. We should be happy we re-signed lundqvist...if its 1 or .5 million more than expected can we really say he doesnt deserve it?

I'm not surprised. When the negotiations came up earlier in the year, I expected him to be the highest paid goaltender in the league whether that was him re-signing in season or him leaving in FA and signing elsewhere. There is no denying how great he has been or is for sure. The thing is if he wanted a Stanley Cup contender around him, he hurt some of those chances by taking the money he did. I know he's earned it but in a capped league with minimal flexibility, it's tough to say "I want to win a Stanley Cup here" and then subsequently preclude the team from making other moves by signing for so many years at such a hefty cap price.

That's why I am ambivalent. I love that he is back and I know he can be great for a long time (although butterfly goalies don't tend to last as long) but in the same vein, are they going to be able to keep the necessary talent around him and sign the guys necessary to win a Stanley Cup? It comes down to how the cap changes in the next few years.

imbetterthanyou
12-04-2013, 05:12 PM
I'm not surprised. When the negotiations came up earlier in the year, I expected him to be the highest paid goaltender in the league whether that was him re-signing in season or leaving in FA and there is no denying how great he has been or is. The thing is if he wanted a Stanley Cup contender around him, he hurt some of those chances by taking the money he did. I know he's earned it but in a capped league with minimal flexibility, it's tough to say "I want to win a Stanley Cup here" and then subsequently preclude the team from making other moves by signing for so long at such a hefty cap price.

That's why I am ambivalent. I love that he is back and I know he can be great for a long time (although butterfly goalies don't tend to last as long) but in the same vein, are they going to be able to keep the necessary talent around him and sign the guys necessary to win a Stanley Cup? It comes down to how the cap changes in the next few years.

The cap should go up and Richards imminent release should help. I understand your sentiment about taking less but stars always talk about doing that and then rarely take less. If you've earned the contract I cant hate the player for taking the negotiated amount and he is the epitome of a deserving player

teddygreen17
12-04-2013, 05:20 PM
Yeah, I agree with the whole Boston thing...I wanna get the King a ring but until we get bigger players (Hags and Zuc, ie) I don't know how we can compete with Boston or Pitts for that matter. We're just not physical enough..

I was thinking to myself, looking at the personnell, why is Boston better than us. We have as much talent as they do. Difference, they are much bigger.

fingerbang
12-04-2013, 05:22 PM
Yeah, I agree with the whole Boston thing...I wanna get the King a ring but until we get bigger players (Hags and Zuc, ie) I don't know how we can compete with Boston or Pitts for that matter. We're just not physical enough..

I was thinking to myself, looking at the personnell, why is Boston better than us. We have as much talent as they do. Difference, they are much bigger.

It's not even just size. They roll four competitive lines much like what the Rangers did prior to the Nash trade.

bsi
12-04-2013, 05:57 PM
Yeah, I agree with the whole Boston thing...I wanna get the King a ring but until we get bigger players (Hags and Zuc, ie) I don't know how we can compete with Boston or Pitts for that matter. We're just not physical enough..

I was thinking to myself, looking at the personnell, why is Boston better than us. We have as much talent as they do. Difference, they are much bigger.

It's not even just size. They roll four competitive lines much like what the Rangers did prior to the Nash trade.

The Rangers had more physical players a couple years ago, Prust, Rupp, Dubinsky etc. I personally would like to keep Nash, Stepan, Callahan, Brassard, Kreider and Hagelin as part of our top 9 but I want 3 players with grit to be a part of that too, Dorsett can be one, just need two more. I know a lot of people dont like Dubinskys contract but I would take him back in a heartbeat, maybe add a Zenon Konopka or a Chris Neil too. Our star players get more room when we have hitters on this team. Player for player skill wise we are as skilled as boston but we just arent strong enough, but thats just my opinion. Ofcourse we would have to move some contracts to do that this year.

nyr2002nyr
12-04-2013, 05:59 PM
Wait so were unhappy with signing the best goaltender alive, and we want to trade our only offensive weapon on an offensively challenged team when we can just amnesty richards when the cap goes up next year?

They signed Jonathan Quick?

bsi
12-04-2013, 06:10 PM
Wait so were unhappy with signing the best goaltender alive, and we want to trade our only offensive weapon on an offensively challenged team when we can just amnesty richards when the cap goes up next year?

They signed Jonathan Quick?

Hank has been the most consistant goalie in the league since he arrived maybe outside of Brodeur. Quick has a pretty darn good hockey team ahead of him, they have been making Scrivens look like a superstar in quicks absense.

Sandman
12-04-2013, 06:15 PM
They signed Jonathan Quick?

I hope Ogie Oglethorpe haunts your dreams until the end of time

fingerbang
12-04-2013, 07:01 PM
The Rangers had more physical players a couple years ago, Prust, Rupp, Dubinsky etc. I personally would like to keep Nash, Stepan, Callahan, Brassard, Kreider and Hagelin as part of our top 9 but I want 3 players with grit to be a part of that too, Dorsett can be one, just need two more. I know a lot of people dont like Dubinskys contract but I would take him back in a heartbeat, maybe add a Zenon Konopka or a Chris Neil too. Our star players get more room when we have hitters on this team. Player for player skill wise we are as skilled as boston but we just arent strong enough, but thats just my opinion. Ofcourse we would have to move some contracts to do that this year.

They can let Girardi walk and trade Mdz to open space but they really only have Mcilrath to maybe replace those two. Im not on my computer, is Stralman due for a raise? Then there's a few other players that are due for a raise. They can amnesty Richards but they have to replace him.

nyr2002nyr
12-04-2013, 07:21 PM
I hope Ogie Oglethorpe haunts your dreams until the end of time

Ok all bs aside that ^ comment is effing funny as ****.

bsi
12-04-2013, 09:51 PM
They can let Girardi walk and trade Mdz to open space but they really only have Mcilrath to maybe replace those two. Im not on my computer, is Stralman due for a raise? Then there's a few other players that are due for a raise. They can amnesty Richards but they have to replace him.

Stralman and Girardi are due at years end. But I really expect both of those guys to be retained. I know Girardi hasn't been as good as maybe he was last year but if we used him as a 2nd pair d there's nothing wrong with him, and really I have no problem using Staal and McDonagh as our top pair. With the cap going up and the possibility of letting Richards go I think cap wise we are in ok shape, it's just a matter of plugging the holes that will be left when Pyatt, Pouliot and Richards are out of the lineup.

nyr1980
12-05-2013, 01:26 AM
[QUOTE=fingerbang;27534927]I don't disagree but big guys cost a lot of money and we probably won't have it.[/QUO

And they don't exactly grow on trees either.

Boston actually got smaller, losing Seguin and Horton.

IAmARanger18
12-05-2013, 11:18 AM
Now Hank will be more focused on his game, fully believe this contract **** was a distraction to him. Even Biron said it. He will now get back to his winning ways and I love the deal honestly. Glad we locked him up.

Redfish
12-05-2013, 12:35 PM
Stralman and Girardi are due at years end. But I really expect both of those guys to be retained. I know Girardi hasn't been as good as maybe he was last year but if we used him as a 2nd pair d there's nothing wrong with him, and really I have no problem using Staal and McDonagh as our top pair. With the cap going up and the possibility of letting Richards go I think cap wise we are in ok shape, it's just a matter of plugging the holes that will be left when Pyatt, Pouliot and Richards are out of the lineup.

I would like to see both Girardi and Stralman return to the team. However, due to the lack of quality right-handed defensemen available as free-agents, both players can likely obtain very big contracts in a free-agent bidding situation.

If this is the situation, which of these two defensemen do the Rangers offer a big contract and resign? Is Stralman at $3.5mm better value than Girardi at $5mm?

Perhaps both are resigned but, considering the investments in Henrik, McDonagh, Staal and then add Girardi and Stralman, the Rangers ought to be top 4 in the league defensively with that projected payroll.

I think Sather excels in the area of trades and resigning players to fair or favorable (to Rangers) contracts, so I am optomistic he can make it all work; yet, we sorely lack size and scoring up front --- something has to give.

QUBobcats550
12-05-2013, 12:41 PM
You cant pay him 1.5 more then Rask or Rinne. They are younger and have all the primes years left UGH


Glen Sather is a bafoon

You're seriously upset about this?

nyr2002nyr
12-05-2013, 12:52 PM
You're seriously upset about this?

Did i want hank to stay? Yes

Did it want it to be a little less? Yes

Glen Sather is a bafoon

QUBobcats550
12-05-2013, 12:59 PM
Did i want hank to stay? Yes

Did it want it to be a little less? Yes

Glen Sather is a bafoon

The main thing is, Hank will be a Ranger for life and ultimately go down as the greatest Ranger goalie of all-time. He's our best player and arguably the best goaltender in the league, so the price tag shouldn't be an issue or a concern.

Redfish
12-05-2013, 02:01 PM
Resigning Hank was the safest thing to do. Only time will tell if it was the right thing.

I cannot help but be curious as to what assets a trade would bring back to the team. It's been a long, long time (if ever) since we drafted an elite, goal scoring forward that performed at a high level for many years.

QUBobcats550
12-05-2013, 02:10 PM
Resigning Hank was the safest thing to do. Only time will tell if it was the right thing.

I cannot help but be curious as to what assets a trade would bring back to the team. It's been a long, long time (if ever) since we drafted an elite, goal scoring forward that performed at a high level for many years.

well... the Hugh Jessiman pick kinda screwed us out of that.

bsi
12-05-2013, 04:46 PM
With regards to Glen Sather, I really want him and the next GM to not trade away our 1st draft picks anymore. I was and still am all for the Rick Nash trade but trading high picks away takes it's toll on the minor system, something that is sorely needed especially with the cap, you need young players to offset the high contract players. Detroit has made that part of their franchise and it's worked pretty well for them.

puckhead54
12-05-2013, 04:47 PM
You're seriously upset about this?

Rinne in 31, Sorry this was info for NYR2002NYR