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

[Jdog99]

Dont see how this could've leaked from Drury and his camp...he wouldn't risk pissing off shesty (unless he has already resolved to move on).

 

Perhaps Shesty's camp leaked as a way to set his own market for next year.

 

Or perhaps Drury let another GM know that Shesty is available for a haul, and the GM wanted to know what Shesty was looking for.

 

In any case, how the hell can noone keep a secret at this level.

 

 

Better idea: Shesty turns down the offer and realizes he could be trade bait (even if its a small chance). So he leaks that he turned down 11mil so teams would be turned off from making the rangers a significant enough offer.

Edited October 10 by Jdog99

[Br4d]

I'm coming around to the idea that this is the last Rodeo with Igor.

 

It's not that I don't think he's worth being the highest paid goalie.  It's more that it's likely that he sees this as the only NHL contract he will ever sign again and I think he takes somebody for $14M or so in free agency. 

 

It won't be a good team though.  He'll soak up cap space on a low talent team and they'll still do better than they would have spending that $14M on anything else.  He's going to be a .910+ goalie for another 5 years or so and to a bottom feeder that is going to look incredible.  So Igor goes to Anaheim for 8/$112M and they instantly become respectable again.

 

The Rangers have no dog in that type of free agent madness. 

[RangersIn7]

19 minutes ago, Br4d said:

I'm coming around to the idea that this is the last Rodeo with Igor.

 

It's not that I don't think he's worth being the highest paid goalie.  It's more that it's likely that he sees this as the only NHL contract he will ever sign again and I think he takes somebody for $14M or so in free agency. 

 

It won't be a good team though.  He'll soak up cap space on a low talent team and they'll still do better than they would have spending that $14M on anything else.  He's going to be a .910+ goalie for another 5 years or so and to a bottom feeder that is going to look incredible.  So Igor goes to Anaheim for 8/$112M and they instantly become respectable again.

 

The Rangers have no dog in that type of free agent madness. 

The bottom line is that Igor wants something very specific….

 

It’s very obvious.

 

He wants $100 million. 
With a work stoppage proof deal that is built around huge bonuses. Plus a full NMC.

And with 8 years of guaranteed paydays.
 

That’s his number.

Those are his terms. 

 

Period.

 

There will be no real and meaningful “hometown discount.”

 

That is to say… maybe you could get him at 93-95 million dollars over 8 years.

But that’s it.

And that isn’t a meaningful discount. 

And it’s stupid.

A “discount” like that doesn’t carry any impact that lets you improve elsewhere on the roster. 

 

Funny thing is this….

They could actually reload for the next 2-3 seasons if they did it properly, and keep him, if he were willing to take, say a 4-5 year deal worth $50 million.

Id do that if I could position some other things. 
Over the next 4-5 seasons hes probably great. 
Beyond that he’s probably pretty good, but not elite.And then he declines. 

If he wanted to help all parties be their best, he would take it. 
 

But he won’t.

 

He wants that gigantic deal.

Really… he wants what I said.

100 million bucks.

8 years of guaranteed money.

Full NMC

And a bonus heavy contract so that he gets the bulk of his money no matter what.

 

I can’t blame him.

But it’s too much and it’s an overpay that doesn’t do it for the team. 
 

It’s also hard for them though cause they basically need great goaltending to be a great team. 

 

Edited October 10 by RangersIn7

[BrooksBurner]

4 hours ago, Pete said:

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.

You are incapable of showing a roster

[Pete]

21 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

You are incapable of showing a roster

No, I just don't need (or care) to show one because of all the data showing what a bad idea it is to sign a goalie for that much money, for that long, at 30, regardless of anything else. 

 

This deal could conceivably put them in limbo, where they'll never be good enough to win but never be bad enough to get good draft picks. 

 

Edited October 11 by Pete

[BrooksBurner]

9 minutes ago, Pete said:

No, I just don't need (or care) to show one because of all the data showing what a bad idea it is to sign a goalie for that much money, for that long, at 30, regardless of anything else. 

 

This deal could conceivably put them in limbo, where they'll never be good enough to win but never be bad enough to get good draft picks. 

 

Most of the data you have is inapplicable to the Rangers situation.

[Pete]

3 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

Most of the data you have is inapplicable to the Rangers situation.

Correct. Because it applies to Shesterkin being 30 when the deal kicks in.

 

(By the way, it's not my data. It's data from various sources presented by Mirtle.)

[BrooksBurner]

7 minutes ago, Pete said:

Correct. Because it applies to Shesterkin being 30 when the deal kicks in.

 

(By the way, it's not my data. It's data from various sources presented by Mirtle.)

 

I know why you don't want to show a roster. Because you've already looked and seen the alternative goalie choices. Once Adin Hill's off the market, and he will be, you've got nothing. On top of the free agent class in general trending towards being weak. Is it a cop out? Yup, but I get the reluctance on your part. Your idea doesn't work.

Edited October 11 by BrooksBurner

[Pete]

5 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

I know why you don't want to show a roster. Because you've already looked and seen the alternative goalie choices. Once Adin Hill's off the market, and he will be, you've got nothing. On top of the free agent class in general trending towards being weak. Is it a cop out? Yup, but I get the reluctance on your part. Your idea doesn't work.

My idea is not to make a 30-year-old goalie the highest paid player on your team. That absolutely works lol.

 

Why would I waste my time on a roster? We know exactly what's going to happen, I'll post a perfectly legitimate roster and you'll try to delegitimize it, and then we'll just repeat ourselves for 3 days like we've done this whole time. Let's just save everybody the trouble and skip that part. 

 

Why do you keep changing the subject? If you want to talk about how the data doesn't apply to this situation, then let's talk about it. 

 

Goalies are often inconsistent year to year, they break down severely after 33, you can't hide a bad goalie contract the way you can a skater. 

 

Which one of those don't apply to the 30-year-old goaltender entering the first year of an 8-year deal?

 

[Albatrosss]

My memory is shitty, does anyone remember at what age Lundqvist started to trend down? 

[Keirik]

7 hours ago, RJWantsTheCup said:

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.

12.5m 

[Pete]

15 minutes ago, Albatrosss said:

My memory is shitty, does anyone remember at what age Lundqvist started to trend down? 

 

But why make it just about Lundqvist when there's a ton of data showing where goalies start going south. 

 

[BrooksBurner]

46 minutes ago, Pete said:

My idea is not to make a 30-year-old goalie the highest paid player on your team. That absolutely works lol.

 

Why would I waste my time on a roster? We know exactly what's going to happen, I'll post a perfectly legitimate roster and you'll try to delegitimize it, and then we'll just repeat ourselves for 3 days like we've done this whole time. Let's just save everybody the trouble and skip that part. 

 

Why do you keep changing the subject? If you want to talk about how the data doesn't apply to this situation, then let's talk about it. 

 

Goalies are often inconsistent year to year, they break down severely after 33, you can't hide a bad goalie contract the way you can a skater. 

 

Which one of those don't apply to the 30-year-old goaltender entering the first year of an 8-year deal?

 

 

Listen, you don't have to keep posting your made up excuses. All good. I'm gonna take that W and file it away with all the other ones I have from you.

[Sharpshooter]

This is the new legacy thread, there with the Rick Nash and Trade Panarin ones. This will be going until the summer unless they actually get something done. That is not likely.

[Albatrosss]

The more i think about the more i get convinced that there’s no way Drury doesn’t sign Shesty to whatever contract. Lets just prepare ourselves that its going to be the biggest goalie contract ever. For Drury its damned if he doesnt re-sign him and damned if he does. 

[Albatrosss]

34 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

Listen, you don't have to keep posting your made up excuses. All good. I'm gonna take that W and file it away with all the other ones I have from you.

Winner winner chicken dinner?

[Sharpshooter]

56 minutes ago, Albatrosss said:

The more i think about the more i get convinced that there’s no way Drury doesn’t sign Shesty to whatever contract. Lets just prepare ourselves that its going to be the biggest goalie contract ever. For Drury its damned if he doesnt re-sign him and damned if he does. 

This is pretty much it right here. Too bad they couldn't get it done early, so it's probably an offseason thing now. I do think it ultimately gets worked out.

[BrooksBurner]

1 hour ago, Albatrosss said:

Winner winner chicken dinner?

 

My next username will be Colonel Sanders at this rate

[Pete]

7 hours ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

Listen, you don't have to keep posting your made up excuses. All good. I'm gonna take that W and file it away with all the other ones I have from you.

Why do you keep changing the subject? If you want to talk about how the data doesn't apply to this situation, then let's talk about it. 

 

Goalies are often inconsistent year to year, they break down severely after 33, you can't hide a bad goalie contract the way you can a skater. 

 

Which one of those don't apply to the 30-year-old goaltender entering the first year of an 8-year deal?

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

12 minutes ago, Pete said:

Why do you keep changing the subject? If you want to talk about how the data doesn't apply to this situation, then let's talk about it. 

 

Goalies are often inconsistent year to year, they break down severely after 33, you can't hide a bad goalie contract the way you can a skater. 

 

Which one of those don't apply to the 30-year-old goaltender entering the first year of an 8-year deal?

First of all the inconsistency. Igor has shown all the way back to his junior days that he's as consistent as it gets. He had a bad period to start last season, but he still ended that season with better numbers than Hill's best season. In the playoffs he's a beast as always.

 

Most goalies tend to break down around 33 yes, but that doesn't mean it's the same for everyone. The better the player, the longer they usually lasts. Elite goalies usually lasts longer, Quick as a recent example. It should also be said that Shesterkin hasn't had a big workload so far in his career. In Russia he split the starts and in the NHL he's averaging around 55 games/season so far, which might help in the long run.

 

The last one I'll agree on, but again, we don't know if Shesterkin breaks down in year 5 or year 7. It's a risk worth taking for having guaranteed the best goalie in the league for at least 3-4 more years.

[Pete]

7 hours ago, Albatrosss said:

The more i think about the more i get convinced that there’s no way Drury doesn’t sign Shesty to whatever contract. Lets just prepare ourselves that its going to be the biggest goalie contract ever. For Drury its damned if he doesnt re-sign him and damned if he does. 

 

6 hours ago, Sharpshooter said:

This is pretty much it right here. Too bad they couldn't get it done early, so it's probably an offseason thing now. I do think it ultimately gets worked out.

Of course that's what's going to happen. He already showed his cards offering $11M. I don't envy his position. 

 

I'm thinking he signs for $12ish and they ice a roster close to @RJWantsTheCup suggested. If there's no monster move up their sleeves, when Panarin leaves they will probably struggle to make the playoffs until Perrault develops. Bad part is, Shesterkin will be 33-34 by that time and likely starting to trend down.

[Pete]

11 minutes ago, Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc said:

First of all the inconsistency. Igor has shown all the way back to his junior days that he's as consistent as it gets. He had a bad period to start last season, but he still ended that season with better numbers than Hill's best season. In the playoffs he's a beast as always.

 

Most goalies tend to break down around 33 yes, but that doesn't mean it's the same for everyone. The better the player, the longer they usually lasts. Elite goalies usually lasts longer, Quick as a recent example. It should also be said that Shesterkin hasn't had a big workload so far in his career. In Russia he split the starts and in the NHL he's averaging around 55 games/season so far, which might help in the long run.

 

The last one I'll agree on, but again, we don't know if Shesterkin breaks down in year 5 or year 7. It's a risk worth taking for having guaranteed the best goalie in the league for at least 3-4 more years.

Yes, hoping Igor bucks all the goalie data is certainly a choice. If they sign him to what he wants, it'll be their only choice. 

 

We'll just ignore that you have no data at all supporting claims like "elite goalies usually last longer" (Lundqvist didn't, Price didn't, and Igor already has injury history), and Quick actually went through 4-5 seasons of being terrible before having good numbers here. Even a guy like Fleury who is still playing at a decent level had many seasons where he struggled. 

 

Yes, we can ignore that. 

 

And I didn't ask you, I asked him because he's the one who said none of this applied...and it clearly does. 

 

Edited October 11 by Pete

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

7 minutes ago, Pete said:

We'll just ignore that you have no data at all supporting claims like "elite goalies usually last longer" (Lundqvist didn't, Price didn't, and Igor already has injury history), and Quick actually went through 4-5 seasons of being terrible before having good numbers here. Even a guy like Fleury who is still playing at a decent level had many seasons where he struggled. 

Lundqvist had a .915 save% the year he was 35 and a couple decent seasons after that. Luongo had a 

2.35 GAA .922 save% as 37y old followed by a great playoff and two more good seasons in a tandem after that. Brodeur had a 77 games 2.24 GAA .916 save% in 2010 when he was 38.

 

[Pete]

19 minutes ago, Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc said:

Lundqvist had a .915 save% the year he was 35 and a couple decent seasons after that. Luongo had a 

2.35 GAA .922 save% as 37y old followed by a great playoff and two more good seasons in a tandem after that. Brodeur had a 77 games 2.24 GAA .916 save% in 2010 when he was 38.

 

Brodeur?! My lord what a reach.

 

And wasn't Luongo in a presser complaining about his contract sucked because he wanted a trade and no one wanted his contract?

 

BTW, .915 is just above league average and GAA is a team stat.

 

So you think we should pay 13M for league average goaltending?

 

Like I said, "Maybe it won't happen to him" is definitely a choice. Not one I'm willing to make, but...sure. 

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

9 minutes ago, Pete said:

Brodeur?! My lord what a reach.

 

And wasn't Luongo in a presser complaining about his contract sucked because he wanted a trade and no one wanted his contract?

 

BTW, .915 is just above league average and GAA is a team stat.

 

So you think we should pay 13M for league average goaltending?

 

Like I said, "Maybe it won't happen to him" is definitely a choice. Not one I'm willing to make, but...sure. 

Brodeur wasn't an elite goalie?

 

And what has Luongo's contract got to do with what we were discussing? We're talking about elite goalies and how they maintain their play longer than other good goalies.

 

.915 was above average in 2017-18 btw, and if Shesterkin plays above average the season he turns 36 we're fine, cause then he has only 1 year left on his deal. It's the first 4-5 years he'll be the best goalie in the league and give us a great chance to win a Cup. The last couple years will be a problem to some extent, i'm not denying that, but I won't jeopardize the foreseeable future because it might hurt 6 years down the road.

 

And please just stop with the hyperbole. No one has said 13M and it obviously won't be. He's asking for 12m so the deal will be somewhere between 11 and 12.