2023-24 NHL Season Thread.

[BicycleMafioso]

Also, not taking Domi kind of was a puzzler. I know he's not big at all, but his kind of game is perfect for international play. Being in Sweden, I assume the rinks will be international size and not NHL? Anyone know?

I live 10 minutes from the arena, and they only have International ice there.

[VanillaO]

Oh man.. lucky.. You going to pop over to see any of the round robin stuff that won't be selling for crazy amounts?

[Zeoni]

When they were in Calgary they weren't too expensive. Even that legendary Canada v Russia game decent tickets were THAT crazy. Flames won't release Monahan for the tournament either officially. I don't know how I feel about that, it doesn't matter much to our team if he isn't playing since we're not going to make the playoffs or anything this year and the experience of playing in the World Juniors would be great for his development.

[VanillaO]

So the Rangers extended Lundqvist for 7 years at 8.5M per? I don't mean to criticize yet another Glen Sather move... but what are they thinking?

I realize he is, without doubt, one of the greatest NHL goalies of the last 10 years, with career #s of 284-182-104/2.26/.920 (spookily, his playoff GAA and SV% are almost identical). It's impressive, it really is. But he's going to be 38 when this deal runs out, and if history has shown, most goalies drop off substantially around 35. Locking him up long term is obviously the right thing to do, but at that price? I guess if most teams pay their best players 7-9, it makes sense, and he really is their best player, but with Cam Talbot playing out of this world in his first month with the team, I would have thought they would wait until after the Olympics maybe and try to get him on board for less than 8.5 a year.

It's a good signing, obviously better for the player than the team, but it just seems like a lot to be paying a guy when you have big problems at other areas on your team.

[Greeney]

So the Rangers extended Lundqvist for 7 years at 8.5M per? I don't mean to criticize yet another Glen Sather move... but what are they thinking?

I realize he is, without doubt, one of the greatest NHL goalies of the last 10 years, with career #s of 284-182-104/2.26/.920 (spookily, his playoff GAA and SV% are almost identical). It's impressive, it really is. But he's going to be 38 when this deal runs out, and if history has shown, most goalies drop off substantially around 35. Locking him up long term is obviously the right thing to do, but at that price? I guess if most teams pay their best players 7-9, it makes sense, and he really is their best player, but with Cam Talbot playing out of this world in his first month with the team, I would have thought they would wait until after the Olympics maybe and try to get him on board for less than 8.5 a year.

It's a good signing, obviously better for the player than the team, but it just seems like a lot to be paying a guy when you have big problems at other areas on your team.

Pretty much said the same thing on Reddit earlier today. Rangers fans did not like my comment.
It's not terrible, especially compared to some of our recent contracts, but I really don't think much of these high cost long term contracts.

[Rennadrel]

7 years at what is arguably the start of the decline of a goalies career is a bit excessive methinks. He has looked rather average under Vigneault to be honest, I think the way Torts coached inflated his numbers a bit because the team was good defensively in front of him. I dunno, 8.5 million a year is an insane amount for a guy who is 31 and will be 39 when the contract expires. And if the cap doesn't go up significantly in the next couple of years, they are going to regret that contract.

[Rosh]

Rangers gave him the deal because Henke has actually looked to switch teams. And the horrible start almost cost rangers their main goalie.
Henke IS Rangers, he is the face of the team and they are desperate to keep him so ofc they are going to give him that contract.
For any other team than rangers that salary would be ALOT but they gain alot back from Henke with that price.
Minus side is ofcourse the salary cap.
But tbh the salary cap the next few years, especially now with the new TV deal will increase the Cap by alot. They were saying that it wouldnt be surprising to see the cap cross 100 mill in the next 4 years or so which is an incredible 40% increase.

You cant blame Lundqvist for the piss poor performance Rangers had in the beginning.
And you need to look more into it, you have a team thats been running one defensive style where they all got pretty much brainwashed into learning from Torts.
Then Vigneault comes in and he changes the team completely.
Biggest change was the defense, they had no idea what to do when they went to a totally opposite defensive tactic they were used to and it the person getting the blame for that was Henrik Lundqvist.

Also Lundqvist were one of the victims of the pad changes in NHL, he's always used big pads. Yes everyone was affected, but not too many goalies actually used tall pads like Lundqvist. But after the reduction rule came into play he only had 2 weeks before the season to change from his pads to shorter ones and that takes time to get used to.
Most goalies struggeled the first month ++ due to it.

Have a look at him now and the defense, its starting to get together.
For now the contract is worth every penny. But it wont be if the salary cap doesent go up due to the new TV deal.

[VanillaO]

Who is 'they' who are saying they wouldn't be surprised to see the cap cross 100 million in 4 years? That's an 8M a year increase from right now. I could see the cap maybe rising to 90-95, but not in 4 years.. maybe by the end of the current CBA.

[Elgefar]

Even as a Rangers fan I think the contract is a bit too much, but considering how he has virtually single handedly carried the franchise for the last 8 years he certainly deserves it. Time will tell in 5-6 years if it was a bad deal or not, but for now it's one that is needed for the Rangers. They couldn't afford to let him go. And frankly let's be realistic here, he could probably get more if he hit the free agent market.

[Deleted]

Jersey bandwagan fans much? 10 people present watching them play.

[Zeoni]

That contract is fucking retarded. I get they sort of had to do it but my god, tying up that much money in a goaltender just seems like a risk to me. Granted he's probably the best (top 2 if not) goalie in the league. Just reduces their ability to get a bunch of other really good players because their goalie makes elite forward player money.

[BicycleMafioso]

Just reduces their ability to get a bunch of other really good players because their goalie makes elite forward player money.

I would argue that a good goaltender is just as, if not more, important than a Malkin/Crosby (but not as important as 2 of course :P).

[Zeoni]

I would argue that a good goaltender is just as, if not more, important than a Malkin/Crosby (but not as important as 2 of course :P).

I'm not saying it isn't, but I don't think paying a goaltender elite forward money is worth it.

[Elgefar]

Mr. Couturier has an excellent night with his first 3 and 4 point game. Congratz to him!

[Rosh]

Who is 'they' who are saying they wouldn't be surprised to see the cap cross 100 million in 4 years? That's an 8M a year increase from right now. I could see the cap maybe rising to 90-95, but not in 4 years.. maybe by the end of the current CBA.

Sportsnight in canada is one of those who sat down and had a discussion about it, same on ESPN.

In all fairness when that gigantic billion dollar deal came through its clear that the salary cap will go up significantly

- - - Updated - - -

I'm not saying it isn't, but I don't think paying a goaltender elite forward money is worth it.

Then you dont understand how much a goalie is worth in a team.
No team, no matter how good they are will get to the playoffs without a solid goaltender.
Lundqvist has earned that contract tbh after all these years of carrying rangers. And yes he carried that team to the playoffs several times.

[Greeney]

No team, no matter how good they are will get to the playoffs without a solid goaltender.
Lundqvist has earned that contract tbh after all these years of carrying rangers. And yes he carried that team to the playoffs several times.

I don't know if you can make the argument that he carried the team. I'm not saying he's not one of the best in the league, or that he doesn't deserve the contract based on his performance, but Torts had the team diving in front of any shot to help him out plenty. I'm just saying I think it was more of a team performance than a goalie performance.

[Elgefar]

And what would the Rangers be without him? Bottom feeders collecting first overall picks like Edmonton. He managed with an extraordinary average team to get 7 consecutive 30+ win seasons, and you really think he has not carried the franchise? He took a rebuilding Rangers and posted numbers that was good enough for him to be nominated for the Vezina three years in a row. This was also before the Torts' shotblocking era.

He was voted the Rangers' player of the decade for a reason.

[Stommped]

Long term goalie contracts are dumb. There are dozens of goalies who are good enough to win a cup for a team on this planet. i.e. MAF and Corey Crawford, who I think most would agree are nowhere near world class goalies, but the 18 assembled in front of them were really good, and they got it done.

That money is much better spent elsewhere on skaters, then make a deal for a solid #2 somewhere to be your starter, Bernier/Reimer or Backstrom/Harding, etc.

[Rosh]

The biggest fcukup of any Goalie contract is Dipietro with his 67.5-million dollar contract with the Islanders.
Henke is going to be around for a good while and he is most likely not going to slow down until the contract runs out. He uses a butterfly that is not putting that much strain on his Knee area like most goalies around NHL is having with their new butterfly.

I don't know if you can make the argument that he carried the team. I'm not saying he's not one of the best in the league, or that he doesn't deserve the contract based on his performance, but Torts had the team diving in front of any shot to help him out plenty. I'm just saying I think it was more of a team performance than a goalie performance.

Torts Defense helped Henke out yes. but without Henke in the net Rangers would be nothing. And i mean Nothing.
The only reason they managed to produce anything with the team was because they had so much faith in Lundqvist that they didnt have to worry too much about defense when they went offensive. As in they could include their defense in plays.
Yes Rangers has always been one of the leading Defensive teams, but the offensive was significantly different when Biron for example was in the net, they barely produced anything because they couldnt rely on him back there like they did with Lundqvist.

[Reg]

I am still on the fence about the Lundqvist contract, but I do know I wanted him to remain a Ranger, and this ensures it. It's a lot of money, but this team would be no where without him. The one thing I really don\t like is this means that Talbot is pretty much going to be traded. As much as I like him, he isn't going to be a backup for long and could be a starting goalie for many teams right now. Perhaps Talbot and MDZ for a young goal scorer? Hmm....