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

[RangersIn7]

8 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

Goalies rarely bring back "a lot." Especially not ones on the edge of UFA.

 

Markstrom with two years left got Kevin Bahl and a 1st. Logan Thomposon went for two thirds. Schmid went for Paul Cotter and a third. All this year.

 

Prior to this, some of the "bigger" goalie trades include Kuemper for Connor Timmins, a first, and a third, and Freddie Andersen for a 1st and 2nd.

 

Basically, if you're dealing Shesterkin, you're getting a first and a lower-end roster player. Maybe another pick. That's about it.

All fair.

Which I’ve 100% acknowledged 

 

I also said Drury should shoot for more, because it’s this goalie… not the other guys whom you’ve mentioned, who aren’t in his class. 
And I’ve also pointed out that he’s unlikely to be traded and that I think they’ll extend him. 
Furthermore, I’ve stated that it’s dependent upon other factors.
 

Im saying that dealing him is potentially a deal which could bring back a bigger return than you would normally see with a goalie trade. That would equate to “a lot” relative to the nature of this type of trade.

 

And for the 3rd time I’ve said and presented it as a purely hypothetical and dream kind of trade. 

 

Also…. Inclinations aside, you don’t trade players for historical returns, you trade for actual returns. In his case, the actual return should be more.

 

The best goalie in the world doesn’t typically get traded at 28. 
 

None of what you’re saying in refute is lost on me. 
 

Some of the people refuting what I’ve said under purely speculative and hypothetical terms also think that Drury leaked the Trouba stuff, we are trading for Brady Tkachuk and that Matt Rempe is the answer.

 

So please stop. 
Attempting to make me wrong doesn’t make anyone right

[Cash or Czech]

49 minutes ago, Phil said:

Great. The return is still gonna be a first, mediocre roster player, and maybe an extra pick. There's no king's ransom to be had here (or for any goalie).

 

The highest return for a goalie I can think of was 9th overall (Bo Horvat) for Cory Schneider years ago.

 

I agree. I'm more commenting on potential landing spots than trying to move him in the first place.

[Phil]

38 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

All fair.

Which I’ve 100% acknowledged 

 

I also said Drury should shoot for more, because it’s this goalie… not the other guys whom you’ve mentioned, who aren’t in his class. 
And I’ve also pointed out that he’s unlikely to be traded and that I think they’ll extend him. 
Furthermore, I’ve stated that it’s dependent upon other factors.
 

Im saying that dealing him is potentially a deal which could bring back a bigger return than you would normally see with a goalie trade. That would equate to “a lot” relative to the nature of this type of trade.

 

And for the 3rd time I’ve said and presented it as a purely hypothetical and dream kind of trade. 

 

Also…. Inclinations aside, you don’t trade players for historical returns, you trade for actual returns. In his case, the actual return should be more.

 

The best goalie in the world doesn’t typically get traded at 28. 
 

None of what you’re saying in refute is lost on me. 
 

Some of the people refuting what I’ve said under purely speculative and hypothetical terms also think that Drury leaked the Trouba stuff, we are trading for Brady Tkachuk and that Matt Rempe is the answer.

 

So please stop. 
Attempting to make me wrong doesn’t make anyone right

 

I'm not out to make you wrong. I'm just refuting a very specific point you were trying to make by illustrating that it's basically never happened. I agree that almost all use cases don't compare to the player Shesterkin is, so they're imperfect. I just still don't really see a path through which they get a kings ransom no matter how good he is, and that's entirely because he's a goalie. This is a unique to position issue.

 

9 minutes ago, Cash or Czech said:

 

I agree. I'm more commenting on potential landing spots than trying to move him in the first place.

 

Sure, but to be honest, if Shesterkin is getting traded, we need to dramatically open the window to potential landing spots well beyond "who has cap." Teams will make cap, and odds are, he'll prefer to go to a market where he can win, not spear head an accelerated rebuild. I can't say for sure because I sure as shit don't know it as fact, but as an operating position, I'd count out Buffalo, Anaheim, and San Jose for this very specific reason.

 

The team who I think would want him most is Toronto.

[Cash or Czech]

4 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

I'm not out to make you wrong. I'm just refuting a very specific point you were trying to make by illustrating that it's basically never happened. I agree that almost all use cases don't compare to the player Shesterkin is, so they're imperfect. I just still don't really see a path through which they get a kings ransom no matter how good he is, and that's entirely because he's a goalie. This is a unique to position issue.

 

 

Sure, but to be honest, if Shesterkin is getting traded, we need to dramatically open the window to potential landing spots well beyond "who has cap." Teams will make cap, and odds are, he'll prefer to go to a market where he can win, not spear head an accelerated rebuild. I can't say for sure because I sure as shit don't know it as fact, but as an operating position, I'd count out Buffalo, Anaheim, and San Jose for this very specific reason.

 

The team who I think would want him most is Toronto.

 

I can't believe Twitter insider Fill Kosher doesn't have the scoop yet.

[Phil]

1 minute ago, Cash or Czech said:

 

I can't believe Twitter insider Fill Kosher doesn't have the scoop yet.

 

Guy's a fraud.

[Br4d]

I think I agree with BrooksBurner that the most smoke is around Detroit.  They still have a suspiciously low cap total for a team that is trying to contend next season.

 

Return possibilities?  1st round pick, Patrick Kane and Ville Husso?

[Phil]

Detroit makes some sense, too, but they feel on the same plane as Buffalo — perennial non-playoff team looking to make the playoffs, not championship-level roster in need of final piece.

 

As to a return, based on historical precedent, I'd guess Husso + 1st + 2nd.

[Br4d]

2 minutes ago, Phil said:

Detroit makes some sense, too, but they feel on the same plane as Buffalo — perennial non-playoff team looking to make the playoffs, not championship-level roster in need of final piece.

 

As to a return, based on historical precedent, I'd guess Husso + 1st + 2nd.

 

I think the Rangers need to get at least one piece that on paper makes them better next season.  Kane qualifies.

[Phil]

1 minute ago, Br4d said:

I think the Rangers need to get at least one piece that on paper makes them better next season.  Kane qualifies.

 

Why does that piece have to come through the trade? They'll sign whoever they need to because they won't be $12M+ in the hole on a goalie. Husso is due a new deal as a UFA, so odds are they re-sign him to like $5.5 million and instantly have like $7 million extra to spend on a difference-maker.

[RangersIn7]

14 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

I'm not out to make you wrong. I'm just refuting a very specific point you were trying to make by illustrating that it's basically never happened. I agree that almost all use cases don't compare to the player Shesterkin is, so they're imperfect. I just still don't really see a path through which they get a kings ransom no matter how good he is, and that's entirely because he's a goalie. This is a unique to position issue.

 

 

Sure, but to be honest, if Shesterkin is getting traded, we need to dramatically open the window to potential landing spots well beyond "who has cap." Teams will make cap, and odds are, he'll prefer to go to a market where he can win, not spear head an accelerated rebuild. I can't say for sure because I sure as shit don't know it as fact, but as an operating position, I'd count out Buffalo, Anaheim, and San Jose for this very specific reason.

 

The team who I think would want him most is Toronto.

Sorry if I lashed out slightly Phil. It’s not personal.

 

The point I’m making is I think in line with what you said to my direct response regarding the final line of that response..

 

You said it’s a unique to position issue. 
I agree.

 

But it’s also a unique situation regarding the player involved.

 

The best player in the world at that position hasn’t been traded before in recent, modern era memory.

 

People are going to maybe cite Patrick Roy in 95-96.

He wasn’t the best in the world then. Hasek was. Also there are several guys, like Brodeur, Belfour, perhaps Richter and a few other names who were at that specific time, would have probably been ranked in front of him.

He was also 30, going on 31. 
He was coming off a poor season, bury his standards, and in the midst of another. Also needing a new contract, and doing so in a time where he was though it and justifiably looked at as maybe being in decline.

 

Not the same.

 

Igor is 28.

He’s almost universally considered the best goalie in the world. And he’ll likely be in that realm for the next 4-5 seasons, and he’s likely to be at least good for the 7-8 years you’ll sign him for under his next contract. Goalies age better than other positions. Especially the HOF goalies. 
 

Hank was very similar, and while I’ll say that he wasn’t worth the money at the back end of that deal, it’s not like he was dreadful in those years. Plus, Hank was older than Igor is now and when that contract would kick in vs Hank and that contract. 

 

That’s my point.

 

Maybe it’s not clearly enumerated, but I assure you, that’s what I meant. 

[Phil]

1 minute ago, RangersIn7 said:

Sorry if I lashed out slightly Phil. It’s not personal.

 

The point I’m making is I think in line with what you said to my direct response regarding the final line of that response..

 

You said it’s a unique to position issue. 
I agree.

 

But it’s also a unique situation regarding the player involved.

 

The best player in the world at that position hasn’t been traded before in recent, modern era memory.

 

People are going to maybe cite Patrick Roy in 95-96.

He wasn’t the best in the world then. Hasek was. Also there are several guys, like Brodeur, Belfour, perhaps Richter and a few other names who were at that specific time, would have probably been ranked in front of him.

He was also 30, going on 31. 
He was coming off a poor season, bury his standards, and in the midst of another. Also needing a new contract, and doing so in a time where he was though it and justifiably looked at as maybe being in decline.

 

Not the same.

 

Igor is 28.

He’s almost universally considered the best goalie in the world. And he’ll likely be in that realm for the next 4-5 seasons, and he’s likely to be at least good for the 7-8 years you’ll sign him for under his next contract. Goalies age better than other positions. Especially the HOF goalies. 
 

Hank was very similar, and while I’ll say that he wasn’t worth the money at the back end of that deal, it’s not like he was dreadful in those years. Plus, Hank was older than Igor is now and when that contract would kick in vs Hank and that contract. 

 

That’s my point.

 

Maybe it’s not clearly enumerated, but I assure you, that’s what I meant. 

 

I agree with all of this, and that's why I think, despite not personally wanting to sign a goalie to what he's going to get, they're going to re-sign him.

[RangersIn7]

If you trade Igor, you have to get a premium, established, and young roster player back.

 

And Igor is the kind of goalie, at his age, that could fetch that.

 

Thats what I’m saying

[RangersIn7]

Just now, Phil said:

 

I agree with all of this, and that's why I think, despite not personally wanting to sign a goalie to what he's going to get, they're going to re-sign him.

There’s 2 things in hockey that cover flaws and keep you in every game and winning more than you lose.

 

1) Goaltending

2) Goal scoring

[RangersIn7]

Just ask this one question….

 

When was the last time that the almost undisputed, best goalie in the world got traded, at age 28?

[Pete]

3 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

Just ask this one question….

 

When was the last time that the almost undisputed, best goalie in the world got traded, at age 28?

Can we really keep saying he's the best goalie in the world? And what does that even mean?

 

He was rather ordinary and even bad for long stretches this season and last.

 

Goaltending is finnicky, you can win a Vezina one year and lose your job the next. You can lose your job at the end of the season and entering the playoffs, then lead your team to a Cup final.

 

That's why their value is so hard to gauge, and it's why a lot of teams don't make their goalie the highest paid player.

[BrooksBurner]

19 minutes ago, Br4d said:

I think I agree with BrooksBurner that the most smoke is around Detroit.  They still have a suspiciously low cap total for a team that is trying to contend next season.

 

Return possibilities?  1st round pick, Patrick Kane and Ville Husso?

I don’t really think that anymore. Detroit has 20 million in space but 80% of that is very likely to be used to lock up Raymond and Seider long term. They used their space on Kane and Tarasenko.

 

Given the way the market has changed, and the goalie market saturated, I would imagine maybe Seattle as a fit for Igor if he were somehow traded. Grubauer, a 1st, and Wright. It makes the team considerably worse next year, and there’s no guarantees on the 1st or Wright panning out. Total dice roll.

[RangersIn7]

Spoiler

6 minutes ago, Pete said:

Can we really keep saying he's the best goalie in the world? And what does that even mean?

 

He was rather ordinary and even bad for long stretches this season and last.

 

Goaltending is finnicky, you can win a Vezina one year and lose your job the next. You can lose your job at the end of the season and entering the playoffs, then lead your team to a Cup final.

 

That's why their value is so hard to gauge, and it's why a lot of teams don't make their goalie the highest paid player.

 

This is all fair Pete.

 

But who would you put in front of him, and putting money and contracts aside, who in today’s NHL, would you rather have… both now and for the next 4-5 years?

 

 

[RangersIn7]

1 minute ago, BrooksBurner said:

I don’t really think that anymore. Detroit has 20 million in space but 80% of that is very likely to be used to lock up Raymond and Seider long term. They used their space on Kane and Tarasenko.

 

Given the way the market has changed, and the goalie market saturated, I would imagine maybe Seattle as a fit for Igor if he were somehow traded. Grubauer, a 1st, and Wright. It makes the team considerably worse next year, and there’s no guarantees on the 1st or Wright panning out. Total dice roll.

I think Shane Wright will be a stud and there’s not a huge dice roll there.

 

I know people have soured some on him based on the fact that he was supposed to go 1st OVA and fell to 5th. And also that he has played only 16 NHL games and less than 25 total games as a pro since he was drafted.

 

But if they could get him… that’s a potential franchise player. And it’s not a high-risk, dice roll type of acquisition, IMO

[RangersIn7]

BTW… I’ll state again…

 

This is all purely hypothetical spitballing that’s unlikely to happen.

 

We’re all likely to be proven to be just pissing up a tree even discussing it. 

[Pete]

16 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

  Hide contents

 

This is all fair Pete.

 

But who would you put in front of him, and putting money and contracts aside, who in today’s NHL, would you rather have… both now and for the next 4-5 years?

 

 

Why would we do that? It's impossible not to. I want Igor over eveyone, but I don't want Igor (or any other goalie) at $12M at all.

Edited July 8 by Pete

[Albatrosss]

i dont see a world were Drury or Dolan have the balls to trade Shesty.  It's going to be Lundqvist era all over again and then they'll retire Shesty's number.  That's like an equivalent of the cup for us

[BrooksBurner]

16 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

I think Shane Wright will be a stud and there’s not a huge dice roll there.

 

I know people have soured some on him based on the fact that he was supposed to go 1st OVA and fell to 5th. And also that he has played only 16 NHL games and less than 25 total games as a pro since he was drafted.

 

But if they could get him… that’s a potential franchise player. And it’s not a high-risk, dice roll type of acquisition, IMO

I’m not as sold on Wright, but in any event, this is the type of package at this juncture that I would expect Igor to get. A middling goalie, a 1st, and a pretty good prospect. Before free agency, I thought he could potentially get a more significant NOW piece. That ship has sailed.

[Blue Heaven]

2 hours ago, Phil said:

Detroit makes some sense, too, but they feel on the same plane as Buffalo — perennial non-playoff team looking to make the playoffs, not championship-level roster in need of final piece.

 

As to a return, based on historical precedent, I'd guess Husso + 1st + 2nd.

IMO, Utah would be a spot, "new" franchise, that wants to make a statement and try and win off the bat.  

[Sod16]

Here's an idea no one seems to consider: keep him, don't sign him, and go for the cup next year.  In a trade, the return will be what Sheshty is worth for a year.  Maybe you just keep him and use what he's worth for a year.  That's what is happening every time a contender does not sign a pending free agent and does not trade him.  You don't get a return from a trade, but you get a big chunk of cap to work with next year.

[RangersIn7]

2 hours ago, Pete said:

Why would we do that? It's impossible not to. I want Igor over eveyone, but I don't want Igor (or any other goalie) at $12M at all.

I don’t either at that money.

Thats why I said put it aside.

And understanding that in practical terms you can’t… hence the talk of a trade.