BrooksBurner Posted September 24, 2020 Share Posted September 24, 2020 I don't believe it. What's the point? You're buying him out for space but you have 12m in space taken up by buyouts and you have to trade player to make room for it. Makes absolutely no sense. The amount of space taken up by other buyouts is a bit moot when discussing buying out Lundqvist. All that matters is cap space freed up in doing so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted September 24, 2020 Author Share Posted September 24, 2020 The cap space thing is moot itself. A Lundqvist buyout is basically eaten by what it's likely to cost to retain Georgiev. This is almost certainly about moving on and making a clean cut due to the timing of Shesterkin's arrival. It's Shesterkin-Georgiev. No third goalie. Hank has to go. If he won't retire and can't be traded, this is the only alternative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted September 24, 2020 Share Posted September 24, 2020 The cap space thing is moot itself. A Lundqvist buyout is basically eaten by what it's likely to cost to retain Georgiev. This is almost certainly about moving on and making a clean cut due to the timing of Shesterkin's arrival. It's Shesterkin-Georgiev. No third goalie. Hank has to go. If he won't retire and can't be traded, this is the only alternative. That's dependent on Georgiev's contract. If he comes in at 1.5M, that's 1.5M space freed up. When you are working with a shortened cap due to previous buyouts, compounded with a flat cap, 1.5M can be a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keirik Posted September 24, 2020 Share Posted September 24, 2020 If they go this route his cap hit for the 21/22 season is only 1.5m so lets not make it seem like its going to kill moves. We still will have about 30-35m in cap space next offseason unless they sign someone long term this offseason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted September 24, 2020 Share Posted September 24, 2020 Why would he retire and leave money on the table? I don't think he's that generous. Unless I don't know what I'm talking about regarding his contract. lol I thought a buyout would really be the only way to sever ties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsm7302 Posted September 24, 2020 Share Posted September 24, 2020 Maybe I'm in a boat by myself but I just don't think Georgiev is that good. Let Lundquist back up Shesty. This buyout stuff is garbage. Trade Georgiev with our late round pick to upgrade somewhere or move up in the draft. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted September 24, 2020 Author Share Posted September 24, 2020 That's dependent on Georgiev's contract. If he comes in at 1.5M, that's 1.5M space freed up. When you are working with a shortened cap due to previous buyouts, compounded with a flat cap, 1.5M can be a lot. That's not a realistic number, IMO. He has arbitration rights. He's 24. He's gone .918, .914, .910 in the last three seasons respectively with a growing workload, playing 30+ games both of the last two years. My guess is he's looking at $2.5-3.5 million per. Same signing age with arb rights: Hellebuyck, 2017: $2.25 million AAV, one year Mrazek, 2016: $4 million AAV, two years Allen, 2015: $2.35 million AAV, two years Merzlikins (26) just re-upped with CBJ at $4 million AAV for two years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keirik Posted September 24, 2020 Share Posted September 24, 2020 Yeah, Georgiev isn't going to be dirt cheap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NY Chief Posted September 24, 2020 Share Posted September 24, 2020 He's one of the greatest Rangers ever. How great? I don't know and I don't really care to rank him against players I wasn't alive to see play. He's a generational player. The actual face of the franchise. When he's gone, it'll feel like something's missing... You can't say that about any other player on the team or any other player who's played for the team in the last 15 years. If you wanna say Greatest Rangers never to have won a (NY) Cup you'd have to add Park, Gilbert, Ratelle, Hadfield, Giacomin, Tkcuz, Stemkowski, Vickers, Gartner, McD depending on how far back pre '94 fan you are....:-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrooksBurner Posted September 24, 2020 Share Posted September 24, 2020 That's not a realistic number, IMO. He has arbitration rights. He's 24. He's gone .918, .914, .910 in the last three seasons respectively with a growing workload, playing 30+ games both of the last two years. My guess is he's looking at $2.5-3.5 million per. Same signing age with arb rights: Hellebuyck, 2017: $2.25 million AAV, one year Mrazek, 2016: $4 million AAV, two years Allen, 2015: $2.35 million AAV, two years Merzlikins (26) just re-upped with CBJ at $4 million AAV for two years. I disagree. It may not be 1.5, but it won't be much more than that if so. Georgiev has played 34 and 33 games the last two years. With that in mind...here's how he stacks up with the other guys in the season before new contract: Georgiev: 34 games started, 3.04 gaa, .910 sv% Helleybuck: 53, 2.89, .907 Mrazek: 49, 2.33, .921 Allen: 32, 2.28, .913 Merzlikens: 31, 2.35, .923 Numbers wise, I don't really see a good comparable here. Closest is Hellybuck, but he was the team's starter and played many more games. He was more integral to the team. We'll see. I think your estimate is very high. He's not as deserving as these other guys, and the flat cap effect needs to be accounted for. Max 2M, but I think there's a good chance it's less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keirik Posted September 24, 2020 Share Posted September 24, 2020 I disagree. It may not be 1.5, but it won't be much more than that if so. Georgiev has played 34 and 33 games the last two years. With that in mind...here's what the other guys did the season before those deals: Helleybuck: 53 games started, 2.89 gaa, .907 sv% Mrazek: 49, 2.33, .921 Allen: 32, 2.28, .913 Merzlikens: 31, 2.35, .923 Numbers wise, I don't really see a good comparable here. Closest is Hellybuck, but he was the team's starter and played many more games. He was more integral to the team. We'll see. I think your estimate is very high. He's not as deserving as these other guys, and the flat cap effect needs to be accounted for. Max 2M, but I think there's a good chance it's less. For what it's worth, in rfa negotiations, an arbiter is not supposed to factor in any cap related implications whether for team or league when making his determination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sod16 Posted September 24, 2020 Share Posted September 24, 2020 Hank Buyout + Georgiev = Hank Without Buyout. (Give or take pocket change). Given that there is no clear financial-cap advantage to either keeping or buying Hank out, the decision is solely whether you want to have Hank as a backup or Georgiev. The latter makes sense, particularly given that his trade value will rise if he does a decent job. If you trade Georgiev now, you are not really going to get anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThirtyONE Posted September 24, 2020 Share Posted September 24, 2020 Hank has made over 100 million dollars. He's a legend. It seems bizarre he'd rather end his career on a buyout rather than just walk away. He's only owed 5m. Does he really need that at this point? I dunno. I have a hard time seeing him end it all on a buyout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted September 24, 2020 Author Share Posted September 24, 2020 I disagree. It may not be 1.5, but it won't be much more than that if so. Georgiev has played 34 and 33 games the last two years. With that in mind...here's how he stacks up with the other guys in the season before new contract: Georgiev: 34 games started, 3.04 gaa, .910 sv% Helleybuck: 53, 2.89, .907 Mrazek: 49, 2.33, .921 Allen: 32, 2.28, .913 Merzlikens: 31, 2.35, .923 Numbers wise, I don't really see a good comparable here. Closest is Hellybuck, but he was the team's starter and played many more games. He was more integral to the team. We'll see. I think your estimate is very high. He's not as deserving as these other guys, and the flat cap effect needs to be accounted for. Max 2M, but I think there's a good chance it's less. Forget the straight dollar value, then. Look at the percentage of cap. Hellebuyck: 3.00% Mrazek: 5.48% Allen: 3.22% Merzlikins: 2.32% Average: 3.50% With an $81.5 million cap, that's an AAV of $2.852 million. Dead in line with my $2.5-3.5 million range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted September 24, 2020 Author Share Posted September 24, 2020 Hank Buyout + Georgiev = Hank Without Buyout. (Give or take pocket change). Given that there is no clear financial-cap advantage to either keeping or buying Hank out, the decision is solely whether you want to have Hank as a backup or Georgiev. The latter makes sense, particularly given that his trade value will rise if he does a decent job. If you trade Georgiev now, you are not really going to get anything. Right. And, if you opt for Hank, it means trading Georgiev, which itself presents a problem next year when you don't have a capable backup under contract. I'm not sure Geo will ever have more value to the market than he does the Rangers ? goalie markets are always weird ? but I know that it's pretty useless jumping through hoops to keep a 38-year-old who is on the edge of retirement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThirtyONE Posted September 24, 2020 Share Posted September 24, 2020 Not to mention the goalie market is completely flooded. Georgiev is maybe 10-12th on the list if he were made available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted September 24, 2020 Author Share Posted September 24, 2020 Yeah, and markets are always awkward. All kinds of freak incidents — injuries, unanticipated drops in play, etc — tend to dictate when teams acquire goalies and when they don't. It's a Sophie's Choice given Hank's name value to the franchise, but no matter how you cut it up, the fundamentals never change. Trading a young goalie in a soft market to cushion the retirement landing for the league's most expensive backup, who is reportedly not happy playing backup, is poor asset management. Just rip the band-aid off and let's move on with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugg Posted September 24, 2020 Share Posted September 24, 2020 Hank has made over 100 million dollars. He's a legend. It seems bizarre he'd rather end his career on a buyout rather than just walk away. He's only owed 5m. Does he really need that at this point? I dunno. I have a hard time seeing him end it all on a buyout. Houses in 2 countries, a wife and kids used to high end cars and the good life...nobody walks away from this kind of money, even if he's managed the $100 million well. And once being a player stops that money and lifestyle goes away. Heard Glenn Healey talk about this; one day everyone else is going to practice, and what you've been doing since you were a kid is over. And a friend who worked for MSG mentioned a lot of retired players don't know what to do with themselves and don't really know how to downsize their lifestyle. It's gotta be a shock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThirtyONE Posted September 24, 2020 Share Posted September 24, 2020 Houses in 2 countries, a wife and kids used to high end cars and the good life...nobody walks away from this kind of money, even if he's managed the $100 million well. And once being a player stops that money and lifestyle goes away. Heard Glenn Healey talk about this; one day everyone else is going to practice, and what you've been doing since you were a kid is over. And a friend who worked for MSG mentioned a lot of retired players don't know what to do with themselves and don't really know how to downsize their lifestyle. It's gotta be a shock. Of course. I mean NFL players are famous for going broke years after their retirement. But like I said elsewhere, I think Hank could moving into the front office if he wanted to. I think it's possible he made more from endorsements than the Rangers. I get 5m isn't anything to sneeze at but we're not talking about Dan Boyle, we're talking about the greatest Ranger goalie of all time. It feels gross to see it end on a buyout and at this stage of Hanks career it's possible he's thinking about legacy more than money. That money is already in the bank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keirik Posted September 24, 2020 Share Posted September 24, 2020 Of course. I mean NFL players are famous for going broke years after their retirement. But like I said elsewhere, I think Hank could moving into the front office if he wanted to. I think it's possible he made more from endorsements than the Rangers. I get 5m isn't anything to sneeze at but we're not talking about Dan Boyle, we're talking about the greatest Ranger goalie of all time. It feels gross to see it end on a lock out and at this stage of Hanks career it's possible he's thinking about legacy more than money. That money is already in the bank. Probably literally just comes down to one thing. He believes he can still play and doesn’t want to retire earlier. I get that. His legacy here is important but sometimes athletes believe their legacy of themselves equals or surpasses a sweater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted September 24, 2020 Share Posted September 24, 2020 He didn't make more money on endorsement than hockey. He also still owns some restaurants that probably lost a shit ton in COVID. It's probably not about the money for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThirtyONE Posted September 25, 2020 Share Posted September 25, 2020 He didn't make more money on endorsement than hockey. He also still owns some restaurants that probably lost a shit ton in COVID. It's probably not about the money for him. So if it's not money, what is it? If he goes down the road of letting the Rangers buy him out, what is his reasoning if it's not money? He's gonna play somewhere else? He already spent two years turning down trades to other teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keirik Posted September 25, 2020 Share Posted September 25, 2020 So if it's not money, what is it? If he goes down the road of letting the Rangers buy him out, what is his reasoning if it's not money? He's gonna play somewhere else? He already spent two years turning down trades to other teams. Two years ago he likely thought he could still help this team and was hoping for a faster rebuild. They still had some guys. It wasn’t a bare bone roster. Last year they bring in Panarin and draft Kakko. Sheshty still wasn’t exactly in the picture yet....now it’s clear as day And he likely knows he won’t play here and feels he can still play elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted September 25, 2020 Share Posted September 25, 2020 So if it's not money, what is it? If he goes down the road of letting the Rangers buy him out, what is his reasoning if it's not money? He's gonna play somewhere else? He already spent two years turning down trades to other teams.Two years ago he likely thought he could still help this team and was hoping for a faster rebuild. They still had some guys. It wasn?t a bare bone roster. Last year they bring in Panarin and draft Kakko. Sheshty still wasn?t exactly in the picture yet....now it?s clear as day And he likely knows he won?t play here and feels he can still play elsewhere.This. When I say it's not about the money I mean it's because he still thinks he can play so he's not going to retire. They can't trade him. If they won't keep him, buyout is the only path. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sod16 Posted September 25, 2020 Share Posted September 25, 2020 Yes, the buyout is going to happen. No one wants dead cap space, but having him on the roster but barely playing with a $8.5m cap hit has the same effect as dead cap space, anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now