Walker Rangers' Igor Shesterkin Could Aim for Historic Contract After Dominant Playoff Run

[Sharpshooter]

2 minutes ago, Albatrosss said:

Shesty actually deserved his Vezina when he won.  Lundqvist was third in the running the year he won out of pity

Lundqvist deserved it too. He was insane that year, and put up ridiculous numbers. In general, he should have won at least one more Vezina in his career.

[RichieNextel305]

3 minutes ago, Albatrosss said:

Shesty actually deserved his Vezina when he won.  Lundqvist was third in the running the year he won out of pity

The year Lundqvist won the Vezina he ran away with it. He had a GAA under 2, was an MVP finalist. It was a slam dunk he was winning the Vezina. How can he be nominated for MVP and then be beat for the Vezina? He was a man possessed in 2011-12.

[Albatrosss]

9 minutes ago, RichieNextel305 said:

The year Lundqvist won the Vezina he ran away with it. He had a GAA under 2, was an MVP finalist. It was a slam dunk he was winning the Vezina. How can he be nominated for MVP and then be beat for the Vezina? He was a man possessed in 2011-12.

Pretty sure Quick and Smith had better numbers that year.  In no way Lundqvist ran away with it.  

I'm beginning to doubt your memory abilities

[Albatrosss]

11 minutes ago, Sharpshooter said:

Lundqvist deserved it too. He was insane that year, and put up ridiculous numbers. In general, he should have won at least one more Vezina in his career.

his number were never top of the league tho.  He was very good and nominated 4 times, i believe.  

[Pete]

7 minutes ago, Albatrosss said:

Pretty sure Quick and Smith had better numbers that year.  In no way Lundqvist ran away with it.  

I'm beginning to doubt your memory abilities

You're right, but the question is who cares? Ullmark won it last year. 

 

Jim Carey won one.

 

It's a great single season individual accomplishment, but I'm not paying extra for it. 

[RichieNextel305]

12 minutes ago, Albatrosss said:

Pretty sure Quick and Smith had better numbers that year.  In no way Lundqvist ran away with it.  

I'm beginning to doubt your memory abilities

Lundqvist had more wins and a lower GAA than Smith. Lundqvist had more wins than Quick, who had a 1.95 to Henriks 1.97 GAA.

 

Lundqvist was a finalist for league MVP, nevermind being up for the Vezina. Smith wasn’t even up for the award. It was Hank, Quick and Rinne I believe. In the end, Lundqvist won it pretty handily.

 

Edited June 26 by RichieNextel305

[Albatrosss]

5 minutes ago, Pete said:

You're right, but the question is who cares? Ullmark won it last year. 

 

Jim Carey won one.

 

It's a great single season individual accomplishment, but I'm not paying extra for it. 

neither am I.  I dont want Shesty with whatever cap hit he's going to command.  History shows us plenty 

[Sharpshooter]

I know you don't need to spend a ton on a goalie to win, although Florida just did with Bob. If not Igor, then whom? It could be interesting. Anyone good going to be a UFA after next season?

[Albatrosss]

11 minutes ago, RichieNextel305 said:

Lundqvist had more wins and a lower GAA than Smith. Lundqvist had more wins than Quick, who had a 1.95 to Henriks 1.97 GAA.

 

Lundqvist was a finalist for league MVP, nevermind being up for the Vezina. Smith wasn’t even up for the award. It was Hank, Quick and Rinne I believe. In the end, Lundqvist won it pretty handily.

 

Quick had better numbers than Lundqvist, so did Smith.  Rinne had worse numbers than Smith but somehow got the nomination.  it was pretty much a consensus among everyone and their mothers that Quick was going to win that year.  

and how cares about the league MVP? one award has nothing to do with the other. 

[RichieNextel305]

6 minutes ago, Albatrosss said:

Quick had better numbers than Lundqvist, so did Smith.  Rinne had worse numbers than Smith but somehow got the nomination.  it was pretty much a consensus among everyone and their mothers that Quick was going to win that year.  

and how cares about the league MVP? one award has nothing to do with the other. 

Smith wasn’t even nominated. And no, the consensus was that Lundqvist was the runaway winner. Which he was. He got 17 first place votes to Quicks 6.

 

Again, Lundqvist, as a goalie, was nominated for league MVP. How can you justify naming him a finalist there, the only goalie, then not have him win the Vezina?

 

I don’t know where you’re coming from with Smith. Lundqvist had more wins, a better GAA and they had the same save percentage. 

[Albatrosss]

3 minutes ago, RichieNextel305 said:

Smith wasn’t even nominated. And no, the consensus was that Lundqvist was the runaway winner. Which he was. He got 17 first place votes to Quicks 6.

 

Again, Lundqvist, as a goalie, was nominated for league MVP. How can you justify naming him a finalist there, the only goalie, then not have him win the Vezina?

 

I don’t know where you’re coming from with Smith. Lundqvist had more wins, a better GAA and they had the same save percentage. 

he did get more votes but like i said, out of pity IMO. His numbers were not better than Quick's.  

 

so you're saying he won the Vezina because he was nominated for MVP?  

[RichieNextel305]

3 minutes ago, Albatrosss said:

he did get more votes but like i said, out of pity IMO. His numbers were not better than Quick's.  

 

so you're saying he won the Vezina because he was nominated for MVP?  

Out of pity? What?

 

I’m not saying he won the Vezina because of that. But how can you justify him being the only goaltender nominated for league MVP and then have another goalie beat him for the Vezina? Just makes zero sense.

[Pete]

Yea I don't get the whole "pity" thing. Does a writer in Pittsburgh pity Lundqvist? for what?

[SaveByRichter35]

On 6/26/2024 at 2:54 PM, Pete said:

Yea I don't get the whole "pity" thing. Does a writer in Pittsburgh pity Lundqvist? for what?

A writer in Pittsburgh can pity Hank as much as he wants.  He isn't voting for him.  GMs vote on the Vezina, not writers.

[Pete]

21 minutes ago, SaveByRichter35 said:

A writer in Pittsburgh can pity Hank as much as he wants.  He isn't voting for him.  GMs vote on the Vezina, not writers.

Oh really? That makes it even better. What GM pities Lundquist? He stole points/series from every single one of them. 

[VegasRanger]

On 6/26/2024 at 10:47 AM, Sharpshooter said:

I know you don't need to spend a ton on a goalie to win, although Florida just did with Bob. If not Igor, then whom? It could be interesting. Anyone good going to be a UFA after next season?

Pitt is open to trading Jarry.  Possibility?

 

[Rangers1994]

Good article about Shesterkin --

 

https://nypost.com/2024/06/29/sports/expected-jacob-trouba-trade-could-have-patrick-kane-effects/

[Rangers1994]

Assuming that the Rangers can't re-sign him, in all seriousness, what would an ideal package for  Shesterkin be?

[BrooksBurner]

30 minutes ago, Rangers1994 said:

Assuming that the Rangers can't re-sign him, in all seriousness, what would an ideal package for  Shesterkin be?

McDavid

[Rangers1994]

3 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

McDavid

 

McDavid will stay with the Oilers for the foreseeable future. Next?

[Scott]

11 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

McDavid

The one, the only Julien Gauthier?

[siddious]

Forget who you get for shesterkin…. Who do you REPLACE shesterkin with!?

 

that’s the real question. 

 

Quick, if he can some how replicate last

season is still a 1 season goalie at best. There’s no one in the system who even seems like a possibly replacement.

 

youre not getting a starter in a trade. I’m not interested in grubauer or Campbell or someone who isn’t good enough to be worth talking about. Do we remember the Mike Dunham years??!! Fuck off. Anyone who’s ever played hockey knows your best and most important player is always your goalie.

 

this whole teams strategy right now is basically “rely on good goaltending”. So you see them changing that any time soon? Let me know when they do and then we’ll talk about getting a plug.

 

id love to be in the “don’t pay a goalie” camp but for this team that is absolute nonsense.

stfu, negotioate in good conscience with him

and hope he’s not a complete asswipe.

[Rangers1994]

10 minutes ago, siddious said:

Forget who you get for shesterkin…. Who do you REPLACE shesterkin with!?

 

that’s the real question. 

 

Quick, if he can some how replicate last

season is still a 1 season goalie at best. There’s no one in the system who even seems like a possibly replacement.

 

youre not getting a starter in a trade. I’m not interested in grubauer or Campbell or someone who isn’t good enough to be worth talking about. Do we remember the Mike Dunham years??!! Fuck off. Anyone who’s ever played hockey knows your best and most important player is always your goalie.

 

this whole teams strategy right now is basically “rely on good goaltending”. So you see them changing that any time soon? Let me know when they do and then we’ll talk about getting a plug.

 

id love to be in the “don’t pay a goalie” camp but for this team that is absolute nonsense.

stfu, negotioate in good conscience with him

and hope he’s not a complete asswipe.

 

Ulmark comes to mind as a replacement.  I say not one penny over $9.3 million per year for Shesterkin.

[Pete]

44 minutes ago, siddious said:

Forget who you get for shesterkin…. Who do you REPLACE shesterkin with!?

 

that’s the real question. 

 

Quick, if he can some how replicate last

season is still a 1 season goalie at best. There’s no one in the system who even seems like a possibly replacement.

 

youre not getting a starter in a trade. I’m not interested in grubauer or Campbell or someone who isn’t good enough to be worth talking about. Do we remember the Mike Dunham years??!! Fuck off. Anyone who’s ever played hockey knows your best and most important player is always your goalie.

 

this whole teams strategy right now is basically “rely on good goaltending”. So you see them changing that any time soon? Let me know when they do and then we’ll talk about getting a plug.

 

id love to be in the “don’t pay a goalie” camp but for this team that is absolute nonsense.

stfu, negotioate in good conscience with him

and hope he’s not a complete asswipe.

I think there are some parts of this that makes sense however would it keeps coming back to for me is that the team strategy has not been "rely on a good goalie", But in some instances that has been the way it's played out... And it hasn't gotten them over the hump so why should they pour more money into that position when we've already seen that it's not fruitful even with highly paid forwards? 

 

If you don't like the idea of having to rely on a goalie to win games why would you dedicate that much cap to a goalie and put yourself in a position where you have to rely on him to win games because you can't pay for goals? 

 

"If not him then who?" Is a horrible place to negotiate from 

[BrooksBurner]

1 hour ago, siddious said:

Forget who you get for shesterkin…. Who do you REPLACE shesterkin with!?

 

that’s the real question. 

 

Quick, if he can some how replicate last

season is still a 1 season goalie at best. There’s no one in the system who even seems like a possibly replacement.

 

youre not getting a starter in a trade. I’m not interested in grubauer or Campbell or someone who isn’t good enough to be worth talking about. Do we remember the Mike Dunham years??!! Fuck off. Anyone who’s ever played hockey knows your best and most important player is always your goalie.

 

this whole teams strategy right now is basically “rely on good goaltending”. So you see them changing that any time soon? Let me know when they do and then we’ll talk about getting a plug.

 

id love to be in the “don’t pay a goalie” camp but for this team that is absolute nonsense.

stfu, negotioate in good conscience with him

and hope he’s not a complete asswipe.

 

The team depends on their goaltending so much, that trading him would almost certainly be a step back regardless of the return. They would essentially be committing to a refactor of the roster, so they would have time to find a replacement.