Walker Shesterkin Aiming for Historic Contract; Rejects 8-Year/$88M Deal ($11M AAV)

[LindG1000]

I'm going to take a slightly different angle here:

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5815613/2024/10/10/nhl-contention-cycle-player-tiers/

The key takeaway here is this image:

 

and this statement:

Quote

 

The Rangers are close to slipping out of the ‘Window Open’ tier, but not quite. It all comes down to the team’s three foundational pieces.

While Fox’s projected steadiness as a franchise defender can keep the team’s window alive, the uncertainty around goalies in general means a lot will ride on Shesterkin’s trajectory (and his contract status).

 

 

I recognize this is going to sound kind of odd, but I think what I do is this:

 

Play out the season, and see what the answers are to these questions:

• Has Laf made enough progress to be considered a P/GP player?
• Has Miller become a top pairing D?
• Has Chytil shown enough and stayed healthy enough to be a 2c?
• Can Mancini and Schneider successfully replace Trouba?
• Are Berard and Othmann ready for third-line play at the NHL level?
• Is Gabe Perreault the real deal? 

If you can answer yes to the first three questions, you re-sign Shesterkin to a 4-5 year deal at around 12M a year. If you can answer yes to all six, you re-sign him but try to drive the price down with term. Else, you let him walk, because it's time to retool or rebuild.

[Phil]

22 minutes ago, Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc said:

Oh right, I missed Tuch. 5.5m if signed as UFA in 2026 (increased cap) seems very optimistic, but I guess it's good enough estimate.

 

And can we actually conclude that Hill is a reliable goalie? He's been a backup his entire career until he suddenly had a great 15 games stretch in the playoffs playing behind a great team that knows how to play defense in 2023. Last year he played 35 games and had 2.71 GAA and .909 save%. Not sure how that justifies 7.5m, especially when you consider the fact that he'll be 29 when signing and he'll demand 7 years on the FA (if he ever gets there).

 

Then go more. $6.5 million. Still fits. 91.75M on a 92.5 million cap.

 

My point is, by not paying an elite goalie $4 million more than any other competitor in his class, you keep enough money to more appropriately upgrade and not put undo pressure on rookies to fill holes for dirt cheap because all the money got sucked up by stars. That is the Toronto mold more than anything.

[BrooksBurner]

3 minutes ago, LindG1000 said:

I'm going to take a slightly different angle here:

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5815613/2024/10/10/nhl-contention-cycle-player-tiers/

The key takeaway here is this image:

 

and this statement:

 

I recognize this is going to sound kind of odd, but I think what I do is this:

 

Play out the season, and see what the answers are to these questions:

• Has Laf made enough progress to be considered a P/GP player?
• Has Miller become a top pairing D?
• Has Chytil shown enough and stayed healthy enough to be a 2c?
• Can Mancini and Schneider successfully replace Trouba?
• Are Berard and Othmann ready for third-line play at the NHL level?
• Is Gabe Perreault the real deal? 

If you can answer yes to the first three questions, you re-sign Shesterkin to a 4-5 year deal at around 12M a year. If you can answer yes to all six, you re-sign him but try to drive the price down with term. Else, you let him walk, because it's time to retool or rebuild.

 

 

Interesting diagram. 

 

 

I agree on the questions. They are the same ones I want answers to. I don't need answers to them to sign Shesterkin though, and I don't think he is signing with the Rangers for any term less than 8 years.

[jsm7302]

At the end of the day, the AAV and the term don't age well. The offer he rejected should be the best he gets. 88mil; next offer can be 12Mx6Y. Id be open to up the AAV for a lesser term but that probably caps at 12. I don't even wanna eclipse 10M for a goalie but this seems inevitable. Problem is if he signs for 8 years, we know what that means for the back half of that contract ....and it's not pretty.

[Phil]

1 minute ago, jsm7302 said:

At the end of the day, the AAV and the term don't age well. The offer he rejected should be the best he gets. 88mil; next offer can be 12Mx6Y. Id be open to up the AAV for a lesser term but that probably caps at 12. I don't even wanna eclipse 10M for a goalie but this seems inevitable. Problem is if he signs for 8 years, we know what that means for the back half of that contract ....and it's not pretty.

 

Nope. Hideous. Could quickly go from "market resetting elite goalie," to "worst contract in the NHL" if he follows the Athletic chart posted earlier.

[jsm7302]

1 minute ago, Phil said:

 

Nope. Hideous. Could quickly go from "market resetting elite goalie," to "worst contract in the NHL" if he follows the Athletic chart posted earlier.

The fact they offered him 8 years is mind blowing knowing he has only played about 55ish games per year and isn't exactly "hardy". This franchise never learns: Redden, Richards, Trouba.....STOP SIGNING THESE GUYS TO THESE LONG CONTRACTS.

[LindG1000]

4 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

 

Interesting diagram. 

 

 

I agree on the questions. They are the same ones I want answers to. I don't need answers to them to sign Shesterkin though, and I don't think he is signing with the Rangers for any term less than 8 years.

I'm basically making the argument that we're all thinking about this wrong. The question isn't so much "How much to pay Igor Shesterkin for and for how long?" as it is "How long do we feel we can be competitive under the current circumstances?" Shesterkin's contract will absolutely impact that, but the decision as to whether or not to give him that contract should hinge heavily on whether or not we think 2025-26 and 2026-27 are retool years or go years. 

 

If they're go years, you pay the guy and eat shit on some amount of the backend of the deal, thinking you've got the depth and talent to take a Cup on the way. If they're re-tool years, you let him go - a double-digit percent of the cap is too valuable to take up if you're not going to be winning.

 

It's all relative. If tomorrow afternoon, Igor signed for 15M a year through 2033, but we got a Cup or two and a few ECFs out of it, do any of us give a flying fuck how much he got paid?

[RJWantsTheCup]

20 minutes ago, LindG1000 said:

I'm basically making the argument that we're all thinking about this wrong. The question isn't so much "How much to pay Igor Shesterkin for and for how long?" as it is "How long do we feel we can be competitive under the current circumstances?" Shesterkin's contract will absolutely impact that, but the decision as to whether or not to give him that contract should hinge heavily on whether or not we think 2025-26 and 2026-27 are retool years or go years. 

 

If they're go years, you pay the guy and eat shit on some amount of the backend of the deal, thinking you've got the depth and talent to take a Cup on the way. If they're re-tool years, you let him go - a double-digit percent of the cap is too valuable to take up if you're not going to be winning.

 

It's all relative. If tomorrow afternoon, Igor signed for 15M a year through 2033, but we got a Cup or two and a few ECFs out of it, do any of us give a flying fuck how much he got paid?

I would think as long as Panarin, Trocheck, Kreider, Fox & Zibanejad are under contract the Rangers are going to look at the team as contenders which would be this season and next season.  

[Pete]

52 minutes ago, Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc said:

11.5m of 92.5m is 12.43% just a tad above Vasilevsky and Bobrovsky. This is in year 1 of the contract. At the end of the contract it'll be closer to 10%.

This is splitting hairs. The point is you don't even need to pay 10% to win.

 

Quote

And of course you'll find more examples on teams doing it that way, cause there's not often there's a generational goalie talent like Shesterkin around. Vasilevsky is the only comparable tbh and if Tampa decided to go for a 5-6m goalie instead of re-signing Vasi because they wanted to keep a few roster players I'm pretty sure they never win that 2nd cup.

Yes, there hasn't been a generational goalie and yet somehow teams have found ways to win without them...Which is why most GMs don't pay goalies!

 

Vasi won the 2nd Cup with Kuch on LTIR so that's not a point of reference unless you think the Rangers can make the playoffs while faking a Panarin injury...I don't think they can.

FWIW, folks need to stop using Bob and Vasi a their only data points. It's not applicable to the Rangers situation, at all.

[Pete]

55 minutes ago, LindG1000 said:

I'm going to take a slightly different angle here:

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5815613/2024/10/10/nhl-contention-cycle-player-tiers/

The key takeaway here is this image:

 

and this statement:

 

I recognize this is going to sound kind of odd, but I think what I do is this:

 

Play out the season, and see what the answers are to these questions:

• Has Laf made enough progress to be considered a P/GP player?
• Has Miller become a top pairing D?
• Has Chytil shown enough and stayed healthy enough to be a 2c?
• Can Mancini and Schneider successfully replace Trouba?
• Are Berard and Othmann ready for third-line play at the NHL level?
• Is Gabe Perreault the real deal? 

If you can answer yes to the first three questions, you re-sign Shesterkin to a 4-5 year deal at around 12M a year. If you can answer yes to all six, you re-sign him but try to drive the price down with term. Else, you let him walk, because it's time to retool or rebuild.

You're almost right...Let his test the market and realize no one is going to pay him what he wants.

[Ozzy]

I know this is going to be an ongoing topic with the media, but I'm already sick of hearing about this fucking deal on every broadcast.  I'm thanking God he rejected it.  Those rosters posted with him at $12 million make me wanna hurl. 

 

You know what it looks like?

 

It looks like the Rangers when Hank was our highest paid player...

[BrooksBurner]

57 minutes ago, LindG1000 said:

I'm basically making the argument that we're all thinking about this wrong. The question isn't so much "How much to pay Igor Shesterkin for and for how long?" as it is "How long do we feel we can be competitive under the current circumstances?" Shesterkin's contract will absolutely impact that, but the decision as to whether or not to give him that contract should hinge heavily on whether or not we think 2025-26 and 2026-27 are retool years or go years. 

 

If they're go years, you pay the guy and eat shit on some amount of the backend of the deal, thinking you've got the depth and talent to take a Cup on the way. If they're re-tool years, you let him go - a double-digit percent of the cap is too valuable to take up if you're not going to be winning.

 

It's all relative. If tomorrow afternoon, Igor signed for 15M a year through 2033, but we got a Cup or two and a few ECFs out of it, do any of us give a flying fuck how much he got paid?

 

This year is it.

 

I've said before in this thread. Next year is a step back year regardless of what you do with Shesterkin. Summer of 2026 as the real pivotal point.

 

The decision on Shesterkin is due before you get more clear answers to your questions, but here's how I see it:

 

- If the answer is yes to most of your questions, I think Shesterkin in between the pipes is more likely to cement a dynasty rather than costing you one.

- If the answer is no, the team is going to have to rebuild and it will take years. Shesterkin's cap won't matter. He might even get traded.

[BrooksBurner]

43 minutes ago, Pete said:

You're almost right...Let his test the market and realize no one is going to pay him what he wants.

 

Shesterkin will absolutely get paid. Ullmark is going to be 32 and just got 8.25 million until he's 36 years old. He's been awful every playoffs he's played, and is a sub.900 and 3.6 gaa in the playoffs. He had one oddball regular season where he played less than 50 games and won the Vezina on a historic team that set the points record. He's never started more than 50 games in his career. This is who you and Phil have been clamoring about to save $3 million from just keeping a perennial Vezina goalie.

[BrooksBurner]

6 minutes ago, Ozzy said:

I know this is going to be an ongoing topic with the media, but I'm already sick of hearing about this fucking deal on every broadcast.  I'm thanking God he rejected it.  Those rosters posted with him at $12 million make me wanna hurl. 

 

You know what it looks like?

 

It looks like the Rangers when Hank was our highest paid player...

 

I hear you Ozzy. Every time I watch Panarin in the playoffs costing $12 million I also want to hurl.

 

The Rangers with Hank as the highest paid player have made it as far into the playoffs as the current Rangers have made it with Panarin as the highest paid player. The difference is the Hank Rangers made it that far because of Hank. The current Rangers make it that far in spite of Panarin, and mostly because of Shesterkin. We should probably be OK with Igor earning that money like he already does, and stop doubling down on Panarin being a guy who can get it done! You can see through the regular season facade Ozzy! I believe in you

[Pete]

9 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

Shesterkin will absolutely get paid. Ullmark is going to be 32 and just got 8.25 million until he's 36 years old. He's been awful every playoffs he's played, and is a sub.900 and 3.6 gaa in the playoffs. He had one oddball regular season where he played less than 50 games and won the Vezina on a historic team that set the points record. He's never started more than 50 games in his career. This is who you and Phil have been clamoring about to save $3 million from just keeping a perennial Vezina goalie.

I haven't said a word about Ullmark other than there was a rumor on the internet about him, so don't lump me in there.

 

Shesterkin also averages 55 games per full season, so let's not go there. 

 

You can think he's going to get paid and that's fine, but Hellebuyck thought he was going to get paid last summer and that clearly wasn't the case. 

 

Igor would be lucky to get 10 on the open market, considering we already know that GMs don't like spending on goalies. 

 

The bright spot for him is that he clearly doesn't care about winning, Columbus has cap space so let them swing big. 

 

Edited October 10 by Pete

[BrooksBurner]

Just now, Pete said:

I haven't said a word about Ullmark other than there was a rumor on the internet about him, so don't let me in there.

 

Shesterkin also averages 55 games per full season, so let's not go there. 

 

You can think he's going to get paid and that's fine, but Hellebuyck thought he was going to get paid last summer and that clearly wasn't the case. 

 

Igor would be lucky to get 10 on the open market, considering we already know that GMs don't like spending on goalies. 

 

You've seen rosters from multiple people including myself now. Time for you to pony up a roster. Let's see your goalie choice and cap utilization that you think makes this team better.

[RJWantsTheCup]

We should take bets on how many pages this thread will be by the end of the season.  It's easily going to make triple digits.

[Pete]

5 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

You've seen rosters from multiple people including myself now. Time for you to pony up a roster. Let's see your goalie choice and cap utilization that you think makes this team better.

It doesn't matter because the roster is a secondary concern to investing double digits in a position that doesn't need it to win, as well as it being a contract for a 30-year-old goaltender when we know production dips massively at 33. 

 

The more this plays out the more I'm realizing that this is the last crack at it whether they pay him or not.

 

Either way they'll end up a bubble playoff team (especially after Panarin contract expires) that struggles to score goals and needs Igor to bail them out every night. 

 

 

Edited October 10 by Pete

[BrooksBurner]

4 minutes ago, Pete said:

It doesn't matter because the roster is a secondary concern to investing double digits in a position that doesn't need it to win, as well as it being a contract for a 30-year-old goaltender when we know production dips massively at 33. 

 

The more this plays out the more I'm realizing that this is the last crack at it whether they pay him or not.

 

Either way they'll end up a bubble playoff team (especially after Panarin contract expires) that struggles to score goals and needs Igor to bail them out every night. 

 

 

 

This gave me a good laugh. Thank you for proving me right on multiple facets. 

[Blue Heaven]

Let him test the market b/c when it comes down to it, a team may offer him $1M more on the AAV but being in NYC offers him more than enough $$$ in marketing deals to make up that $$$.  This is a foolish game he's trying to play.  

[jsm7302]

10 minutes ago, Blue Heaven said:

Let him test the market b/c when it comes down to it, a team may offer him $1M more on the AAV but being in NYC offers him more than enough $$$ in marketing deals to make up that $$$.  This is a foolish game he's trying to play.  

I'm with you. I don't want to see him handcuff this franchise due to his greed. Now that the salary # has been leaked, I can't imagine Drury offering much more because he will be looked upon as a poor negotiator.

[Ozzy]

39 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

I hear you Ozzy. Every time I watch Panarin in the playoffs costing $12 million I also want to hurl.

 

The Rangers with Hank as the highest paid player have made it as far into the playoffs as the current Rangers have made it with Panarin as the highest paid player. The difference is the Hank Rangers made it that far because of Hank. The current Rangers make it that far in spite of Panarin, and mostly because of Shesterkin. We should probably be OK with Igor earning that money like he already does, and stop doubling down on Panarin being a guy who can get it done! You can see through the regular season facade Ozzy! I believe in you

 

I simply don't think Igor is even as good as Hank was.  Maybe that's just me, but the thing I keep seeing is that if we pay all that dough to our goalie, how are we going to be able to roster some powerhouse scorers.  Ok, maybe Panarin hasn't been tremendous in the playoffs, but I don't think we'll be able to afford that superstar who is, if we're shelling out 13 balloons for goaltending per year.

 

Also I keep thinking that Lavvy won a Stanley Cup with Cam Ward as his goalie.  The system that Lavvy employs can make it sleepy for a goalie for minutes on end.  Look at last night (Ok, Pittsburgh sucks, but...) we had 16 consecutive shots on goal in a 17 minute span where Igor didn't even face a shot. 

 

My take is that we can employ a "shell" of players that keeps possession of the puck, and keep it out of our zone for spells on end, limiting Grade A chances.

 

I'd be perfectly fine with a guy like Ottenger or Hellybuyck.

 

Once we unload both Trouba and Igor, that would be a $20 million boon to go buy up some UFA talent that no one else could probably get. Who knows, if McDavid becomes available....or maybe someone else.  But keeping our options open is the way to go.  Pissing it all away on one player, especially a goalie I just feel is financial ruin.

 

Edited October 10 by Ozzy

[BreakawayMachine]

I'll be blunt here.

 

Fuck Shesterkin.

 

The Devil's are about to go on cup run with friggin Markstrom and Jake Allen in net. You dont need to destroy your cap for a goalie.

 

Unload the contracts of Igor, Panarin, Mika and Trouba. Start the rebuild.

[RangersIn7]

If they wanted to remake the roster this passed summer, than perhaps the plan shouldn’t have been moving on from Trouba, which could’ve happened soon enough anyway, but rather moving on from Igor.

 

I don’t love paying a goalie big money.

I’ll admit though that this team is talented enough to win PROVIDED they get elite goaltending… and he’s the league's best provider of that. 
But that’s done with this core after this year.

Trouba is gone.

1 year left of Panarin.

1 year left of Lindgren

New contracts for Laf and Miller.

And moving into last 2 years of Kreider.

Have to reshuffle the deck

Best way to do that is move Igor and Kreider.

Ideally you keep Igor through the season and find a team in the summer that’s willing to pay him and find a sign and trade.

And you move Kreider afterwards 

[Pete]

1 hour ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

This gave me a good laugh. Thank you for proving me right on multiple facets. 

I'm sure you think that's what happened, but then again that's how you spin everything, and then try to back out of the debate. 

 

At any rate I'm done repeating myself over and over, my points have been made. You have some points as well, but at the end of the day the fact remains that paying a 30-year-old goalie for 8 years the amount that he wants remains bad business.

Edited October 10 by Pete