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

[Bugg]

17 hours ago, Pete said:

Since paying their goalie top dollar, Tampa Bay Lightning have...

• Won a Cup (LTIR)
• Lost in final
• Lost in the first round 
• Lost in the first round
• Traded their best D for cap reasons 
• Didn't sign their 40g/PPG/heart and soul captain for Cap reasons 
• Let numerous players walk for Cap reasons

It's just a steady decline when you invest in goaltending and don't have a plethora of players who outperform their contracts. 

Giant step back; salary cap may be a reality. But it just sucks, nothing more than a  drag on player salaries. We're supposed to care that James Dolan or the Ilitich family or Jon Ledecky might spend a whole bunch more than Columbus and Winnipeg? Fact is there are always gonna be also rans. And based on most of Sather's tenure here, a big budget isn't everything. And really until the NHL rides herd on the LTIR nonsense, it's fig leaf pretending to encourage competitive balance. There's no such thing; bad management, bad drafting, bad coaching, bad trades. Instead the NHL loses a season for the "cost certainty" of keeping a team in Arizona pointlessly that 1. could have long ago moves to Vegas and printed $ and 2. now in fact did move to Utah.   

 

Cap does absolutely nothing to address the real advantage teams in markets with low or zero state taxes now have. It's no coincidence Vegas and the Florida teams are doing well. And in a homogenized North America, being a 'big market" isn't necessarily any advantage at all. 

 

Why is it teams assemble a good squad and then have to go about selling them off? McDonagh and Zuccarello should have been here forever, and it's bad for business that didn't happen. 

 

END OF RANT. FUCK BETTMAN FOREVER. 

Edited Friday at 02:19 PM by Bugg

[Pete]

7 minutes ago, Bugg said:

Giant step back; salary cap may be a reality. But it just sucks, nothing more than a  drag on player salaries. We're supposed to care that James Dolan or the Ilitich family or Jon Ledecky might spend a whole bunch more than Columbus and Winnipeg? Fact is there are always gonna be also rans. And based on most of Sather's tenure here, a big budget isn't everything. And really until the NHL rides herd on the LTIR nonsense, it's fig leaf pretending to encourage competitive balance. There's no such thing; bad management, bad drafting, bad coaching, bad trades. Instead the NHL loses a season for the "cost certainty" of keeping a team in Arizona pointlessly that 1. could have long ago moves to Vegas and printed $ and 2. now in fact did move to Utah.   

 

Cap does absolutely nothing to address the real advantage teams in markets with low or zero state taxes now have. It's no coincidence Vegas and the Florida teams are doing well. And in a homogenized North America, being a 'big market" isn't necessarily any advantage at all. 

 

Why is it teams assemble a good squad and then have to go about selling them off? McDonagh and Zuccarello should have been here forever, and it's bad for business that didn't happen. 

 

END OF RANT. FUCK BETTMAN FOREVER. 

The cap has nothing to do with competitive balance. It's about cost-certainty for the owners. They want to know that no matter what, they only have to pay 50% of hockey related revenue to player salaries.

[BrooksBurner]

3 hours ago, Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc said:

Two of the last four champions had a goalie make 9.5m and 10m but please go on about how it's not possible to win a Cup with a goalie making around 12% of the cap.

I actually could be sold on this. I think you need at least a couple of forwards who outperform their paycheck by a sizable margin though. I think Kreider is the only good value up front though (Lafreniere for certain this year too, but his numbers will look different next year). Trocheck too but by 2025-26 season prob not.

 

In fact, they have more bloated contracts than good value contracts. Zib’s is meh. Trouba’s is terrible. Even Panarin’s is a bloated contract once the going gets tough.

 

What they would need is for an Othmann or Perreault to just absolutely go ham.

Edited Friday at 05:02 PM by BrooksBurner

[Pete]

4 hours ago, Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc said:

Two of the last four champions had a goalie make 9.5m and 10m but please go on about how it's not possible to win a Cup with a goalie making around 12% of the cap.

This has been addressed a dozen times. 

 

LTIR, and 2-3 players on each team massively out producing their contracts. 

[Valriera]

4 hours ago, Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc said:

Two of the last four champions had a goalie make 9.5m and 10m but please go on about how it's not possible to win a Cup with a goalie making around 12% of the cap.

and also two of the last twenty but never mind those

[RangersIn7]

1 hour ago, Pete said:

This has been addressed a dozen times. 

 

LTIR, and 2-3 players on each team massively out producing their contracts. 

Are you in favor or trading him?

 

If so… what’s the return?

[Pete]

38 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

Are you in favor or trading him?

 

If so… what’s the return?

I've not in favor of paying him. It's not for me to figure out. 

 

I don't really care how they handle it as long as they don't invest in a top dollar 8 year contract at a position that doesn't warrant it. 

 

The reality is you can win without paying top dollar for a goalie, but if you pay top dollar for a goalie it gets much harder to win. 

Edited Friday at 08:00 PM by Pete

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

17 hours ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

In fact, they have more bloated contracts than good value contracts. Zib’s is meh. Trouba’s is terrible. Even Panarin’s is a bloated contract once the going gets tough

So the real problem is their contracts, not (a potential) Shesterkin’s contract.

 

15 hours ago, Valriera said:

and also two of the last twenty but never mind those

I do think Fleury, Holtby, Crawford and Quick were close to 10-12% of the cap at the time, but I won’t do the math lol. Anyway I think the most recent are the most relevant. Saying something doesn’t work when it’s worked twice the last few years makes no sense.

 

I don’t buy the argument that you need others to outperform their contracts either. You need that even if you have a goalie making much money. That’s how a hard cap league works.

 

I just don’t see how this team is better with a Georgiev-type goalie at 3-4m and an extra 6m in cap space. You don’t get a game-breaker for 6m - we do get the best goalie in the world for 10-11m.

[Pete]

2 hours ago, Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc said:

So the real problem is their contracts, not (a potential) Shesterkin’s contract.

 

I do think Fleury, Holtby, Crawford and Quick were close to 10-12% of the cap at the time, but I won’t do the math lol. Anyway I think the most recent are the most relevant. Saying something doesn’t work when it’s worked twice the last few years makes no sense.

 

I don’t buy the argument that you need others to outperform their contracts either. You need that even if you have a goalie making much money. That’s how a hard cap league works.

 

I just don’t see how this team is better with a Georgiev-type goalie at 3-4m and an extra 6m in cap space. You don’t get a game-breaker for 6m - we do get the best goalie in the world for 10-11m.

An approach that didn't work last year, but you expect it to work for the next eight? 

 

It also didn't work the 8 years for Lundqvist (remember having Nash at 50% retention?) 

 

It also only worked in Florida because Reinhardt, Verhaege, Forsling and Mountour were all criminally underpaid. 

 

It really doesn't matter if you "buy"  the reasoning, that's the reason. If you choose not to believe it it doesn't make it less true. 

[Albatrosss]

4 minutes ago, Pete said:

An approach that didn't work last year, but you expect it to work for the next eight? 

 

It also didn't work the 8 years for Lundqvist (remember having Nash at 50% retention?) 

 

It also only worked in Florida because Reinhardt, Verhaege, Forsling and Mountour were all criminally underpaid. 

 

It really doesn't matter if you "buy"  the reasoning, that's the reason. If you choose not to believe it it doesn't make it less true. 

Plus Tampa had to circumvent the cap in order to win. You take away that option and who knows where they end up. 

[Pete]

14 minutes ago, Albatrosss said:

Plus Tampa had to circumvent the cap in order to win. You take away that option and who knows where they end up. 

And Florida almost lost. That would have changed the narrative.

 

And they would have lost to a $3Mish goalie.

[Br4d]

2 hours ago, Pete said:

And Florida almost lost. That would have changed the narrative.

 

And they would have lost to a $3Mish goalie.

 

If you have Connor McDavid and Leon Draisatl you can win with a decent goalie.  However the Oilers did not win and have not won with exactly the approach you are advocating,

[RJWantsTheCup]

There’s no exact formula to building a cup winning team.  If they re-sign Shesterkin and they win a cup or two everybody will love the contract.   If they let him go and don’t win everyone will say they should’ve re-signed him.  

[Keirik]

On 9/12/2024 at 5:00 PM, Pete said:

Since paying their goalie top dollar, Tampa Bay Lightning have...

• Won a Cup (LTIR)
• Lost in final
• Lost in the first round 
• Lost in the first round
• Traded their best D for cap reasons 
• Didn't sign their 40g/PPG/heart and soul captain for Cap reasons 
• Let numerous players walk for Cap reasons

It's just a steady decline when you invest in goaltending and don't have a plethora of players who outperform their contracts. 

Some of that is true in terms of results, but I think you're misrepresenting a couple of things. They let Stamkos go and signed Guentzel to a 9m per year contract. Letting Stamkos go was a smart decision to give 9m to a younger more well rounded player instead of 8m to a 34 year old. 
 

Tampa also brought back McD after trading Sergache. I think the length of his contract was their biggest issue. 

[Pete]

47 minutes ago, Keirik said:

Some of that is true in terms of results, but I think you're misrepresenting a couple of things. They let Stamkos go and signed Guentzel to a 9m per year contract. Letting Stamkos go was a smart decision to give 9m to a younger more well rounded player instead of 8m to a 34 year old. 
 

Tampa also brought back McD after trading Sergache. I think the length of his contract was their biggest issue. 

Nah, I'm not misinterpreting anything.

 

They wouldn't have either issue if they weren't paying their goalie what they are.

[Pete]

1 hour ago, Br4d said:

 

If you have Connor McDavid and Leon Draisatl you can win with a decent goalie.  However the Oilers did not win and have not won with exactly the approach you are advocating,

The Golden Knights didn't have McDavid and Draisaitl. Neither did Colorado. 

 

Nor could those teams afford the players they have if they were paying goalies 10 to 11 million a year. 

 

The point is everybody points to Florida when they are really the only team to pay their goalie top dollar and win a Stanley Cup, and once again it was because they had three or four guys contributing well above their pay rate. 

 

If anybody else can point to another team with a goalie being the highest paid player who won a cup (and don't say Tampa because I'm tired of typing LTIR), please do so. 

Edited Saturday at 04:59 PM by Pete

[RangersIn7]

17 minutes ago, Pete said:

The Golden Knights didn't have McDavid and Draisaitl. Neither did Colorado. 

 

Nor could those teams afford the players they have if they were paying goalies 10 to 11 million a year. 

 

The point is everybody points to Florida when they are really the only team to pay their goalie top dollar and win a Stanley Cup, and once again it was because they had three or four guys contributing well above their pay rate. 

 

If anybody else can point to another team with a goalie being the highest paid player who won a cup (and don't say Tampa because I'm tired of typing LTIR), please do so. 

Reinhart, Forsling, and Lundell were making much less money and all just got huge raises.

Montour was a cap casualty.

 

Bennet and Verhaege are about to get paid or will go elsewhere. 

 

They likely move on from Ekblad.

The party is over soon.

 

 

 

 

[BrooksBurner]

7 hours ago, Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc said:

So the real problem is their contracts, not (a potential) Shesterkin’s contract.

Yeah I could buy that

[Keirik]

8 hours ago, Pete said:

Nah, I'm not misinterpreting anything.

 

They wouldn't have either issue if they weren't paying their goalie what they are.

Yeah that's not even remotely true. They didn't want to pay a 34 year old 8 million. They had the space to do so. They chose not to. It had nothing to do with their goalie. 
 

even the Sergachev issue is a misrepresentation. He missed half of the seasons and was underperforming prior to his injury. Two years ago he was one of their best. Last year not so much. 
 

Vasilevsky has the most regular season and playoff wins in the NHL from the 16/17 season onwards and won a cup (2 in total) and Conn Smythe since signing his 9.5m cap hit extension. 
 

if you look at since his extension kicked in, he is tied with Bobrovsky ( guy that won the last cup) for most playoff wins with 33, has a .921 playoff save %, and has played the second most playoff games over that time while winning that second cup and first Conn Smythe.  He's not even remotely overpaid nor is his presence on the team hindering their success in my opinion. 

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

13 hours ago, Pete said:

It really doesn't matter if you "buy"  the reasoning, that's the reason. If you choose not to believe it it doesn't make it less true. 

And you saying it’s true doesn’t make it true.

 

You can win with a goalie making 12% of the cap, it’s been proven twice the last 4 years. With two different teams.

[Pete]

9 minutes ago, Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc said:

And you saying it’s true doesn’t make it true.

 

You can win with a goalie making 12% of the cap, it’s been proven twice the last 4 years. With two different teams.

That's reductive but whatever you say. 

[Pete]

22 minutes ago, Keirik said:

Yeah that's not even remotely true. They didn't want to pay a 34 year old 8 million. They had the space to do so. They chose not to. It had nothing to do with their goalie. 
 

even the Sergachev issue is a misrepresentation. He missed half of the seasons and was underperforming prior to his injury. Two years ago he was one of their best. Last year not so much. 
 

Vasilevsky has the most regular season and playoff wins in the NHL from the 16/17 season onwards and won a cup (2 in total) and Conn Smythe since signing his 9.5m cap hit extension. 
 

if you look at since his extension kicked in, he is tied with Bobrovsky ( guy that won the last cup) for most playoff wins with 33, has a .921 playoff save %, and has played the second most playoff games over that time while winning that second cup and first Conn Smythe.  He's not even remotely overpaid nor is his presence on the team hindering their success in my opinion. 

[RangersIn7]

On 9/13/2024 at 4:00 PM, Pete said:

I've not in favor of paying him. It's not for me to figure out. 

 

I don't really care how they handle it as long as they don't invest in a top dollar 8 year contract at a position that doesn't warrant it. 

 

The reality is you can win without paying top dollar for a goalie, but if you pay top dollar for a goalie it gets much harder to win. 

You didn’t answer the question.

[Pete]

7 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

You didn’t answer the question.

Sure I did.

Edited Monday at 12:47 AM by Pete

[RangersIn7]

6 minutes ago, Pete said:

Sure I did.

Not in any meaningful or substantive way.