Rangers are taking Lundqvist to arbitration

63

So much for those Henrik Lundqvist-is-close-to-signing rumors.

The Rangers indeed elected to take Henrik Lundqvist to salary arbitration. No word on a hearing date yet, but there is still the hope the two parties will reach a settlement beforehand.

If the case does reach a hearing, it would be for terms of a one-year deal. Either way, this ensures Lundqvist will be a Ranger next season.

More in a bit…

About Author

63 Comments

  1. Dont worry about it….we need him as much as he needs us. he is a great goalie and he is the future but he had one great season and salaries are nuts. look at the Vanek scenario. This is what we missed a season for? Remember a guy called Montoya?

  2. Well,at least we know he’ll be here at least for the next year,and it gives them a ton of time to negotiate a deal,assuming one doesn’t get done before his hearing. Calm down,folks,no more talk of offer sheets,at least.

  3. Dr. Ogrodnick on

    Yeah, but if it gets to arbitration it will be a short term deal which could pave the way for Lundy to go elswhere in a few seasons. Not to mention, arbitration hearings usually end in hurt feelings and bad blood. Hopefully they can work out a deal before the hearing.

  4. according to john dellapina, part of the reason for the rangers doing this is that by filing for arbitration lundqvist is now locked in with the rangers and is not eligible to receive an offer sheet from another team. in light of the insane offer kevin lowe made to vanek, we are now protected against someone trying that with lundqvist and now no one can drive up his price with an offer sheet.

  5. imo there is next to no chance that this goes to arbitration. they will work out a long term deal before it gets to that point.

  6. Let’s not worry about what would happen in a few seasons. Look at it this way,if it is a shorter term deal(I doubt Sather would do that anyway),he’ll get the chance to establish himself further. The only caveat to that is that the price might go higher by then. Let’s just focus on getting a deal done before the hearing. Sather just bought himself more time.

  7. I still think they will get a long term deal done. Lundqvist is a known great goalie – Montoya is a could be.

  8. Per that last post, yes, I was kidding about Gomez and Drury. Sorry if that wasn’t clear. But thanks for giving me the info, just in case.

    In re: Henrik. This sounds like Sather staving off Lowe while buying himself time to negotiate with Meehan and probably some others. Henrik will be a Ranger for a long time.

    And if Slats somehow, against all possible wisdom of anyone in or around hockey, manages to blow that, well, at least we will have final proof that he is a complete and utter idiot and even Dolan might be moved to do something about it. Not that losing Henrik would be worth it, but, hey, silver linings…

  9. Gomez 7 years 50 million….
    Lundy 1 year deal……

    that is all i have to say…makes ZERO sense.

  10. Stop being so dense some of you, and shortsighted …

    Look what the Oilers did … The Rangers were not going to take Henrik to arbitration and a deal was looming but the Oilers go ahead and give Vanek a 50 million 7 year deal and he signs and now the Sabres have to match or will lose him and the Rangers cannot afford for that to happen to Henrik while they are still negotiating with him … remember that our long term success rests on Henrik’s shoulders … doesn’t matter who we have … we could have Crosby, Pronger, all the Staal brothers ect and it wouldn’t matter if Henrik isn’t 100% … he will get a long term deal either now or some time during the season(methinks now so as not leave it to chance) but the team had to protect themselves from another GM losing his mind like Kevin Lowe and trying to take Henrik away from us … this guarantees that Henrik is ours to exclusively negotiate with for the next year

  11. the thing everyone here is missing is that a club can only take a player to club-elected arbitration once in the player’s career.

    as arbitrations fall into one-year contracts, this screws the rangers past next season… if lundquist has another great year, the rangers with their current salary cap and the long term contracts they just dished out will be in a REALLY tight place next year when lundquist goes for another raise – it actually increases the chances that next year someone else will steal him away from the rags.

    they have almost guaranteed that next year lundquist will be able to hold them for ransom for whatever deal he wants (which at this point could be well above their cap space after the drury/gomez deals, and they havent even dealt with avery yetm who is also going to be in arbitration) or force them to trade his rights before the deadline to avoid losing him for nothing.

  12. If this doesn’t actually go to arbitration, do the Rangers still lose the one shot club arbitration ability?

  13. oh and by the way….

    for those of you that think the rangers did this because they werent going to take lundquist to arbitration and felt they should protect him from an offer sheet….

    thats bull. LUNDQUIST was taking THEM to arbitration. they might have taken the club-elected route to protect from an offer sheet…. but it was already evident in the contract negotiations they were having that what they wanted to offer was not what lundquist felt he should be getting…. it wasnt the club electing arbitration, it was the goalie that wanted it…. the club-elected arbitration only proves that the rest of the league felt that lundquist was steal-able because the rangers are having a hard time getting him signed under their current cap restrictions….

    first rule of free agency… make sure you have the stars you already have on your team locked down to contracts before spending the farm on UFAs…..

    lol

  14. Will Montoya be backing up next year? Weekes was signed by the Devs… I think perhaps Sather is recognizing the bind in which he will find himself if and when Montoya proves his chops in the NHL. The fact is that one of them will have to be traded, probably within the next two years or so. Signing Lundy to a long term deal ties Sather’s (or Messier’s or Graves’ or whoever is the GM in a couple years) hands. The signings of Gomez and Drury are both front-loaded, according to TSN, which allow for flexibility in the latter parts of their respective contracts (if one or both needs to be moved, they will be making less than the per-year average towards the end of the contract). Considering the inevitable Montoya/Lundy issue, Sather would be wise to structure a similar contract w/Lundy but that would create a veritable salary bottleneck and could compromise their salary cap flexibility. By going to arbitration, he can forestall Lundy’s long term deal and have another year to observe Montoya. Just the thoughts that have been bouncing ’round my head….

  15. Levitate, yes I believe so. the rule is you can only *file* for arbitration once in a players carreer.

  16. levitate….

    yes they do lose the opportunity in the future. they have already requested it…. its on file with the league. settling prior to the hearing doesnt change the fact that they took the player to club-elected arbitration.

  17. JD, it does make some sense, the rangers can sign hank to a regular contract if its agreed upon before the hearing and he will still be a restricted free agent next year if the hearing goes through.

  18. goalbyPrucha on

    rangersuck, why are you in here with that name? You have nothing constructive to contribute.

  19. The Rangers probably WERE going to take Hank to arbitration all along. I think that’s their way of making sure he’s at least locked up for next year and then when Straka, Shanahan, and Malik all leave they’ll have the cap space to lock him up for more longer term. And frankly, Hank should go for that deal anyway. It would ultimately mean more for him down the road while it would give his team a much better shot at winning this year. Additionally, it would appear he loves NY and wants to stay here. Sure, he might be able to command another million bucks somewhere else, but does Henrik Lundqvist at this point seem like a guy who wants to go play for Florida or Tampa Bay? And I also don’t think that Sather could piss the guy off enough to leave NY. He completely loves it here, and as long as a good offer is ultimately on the table next year, he’ll be locked up long term.

  20. Why all the gloom and doom? Henrik’s now signed for next year. We don’t have to worry about some GM coming in and poaching him. And, I’d be shocked if we didn’t lock him up for 7 years or so in the coming weeks anyway. Don’t sweat it…85 days to opening day and we only need to sign 2 or 3 more guys!

  21. ORR Kicks Yin Yang on

    GOALBYPRUCHA

    Dont listen to rangersuck….He’s the same loser named Ivana / Anus / Yenner

    Anyone who doesnt realize that …im suprised…given his name…and his moronic complanits…its a little obvious…

    Everyone ignore the loser…

  22. *****BREAKING NEWS*****

    The New York Rangers have agreed to terms with goaltender Henrik Lundqvist on a multi-year contract just hours after the team elected to take the restricted free agent to arbitration.

    Details to follow…..

  23. I can’t believe I’m responding but:

    rangersuck

    The deadline for player-filed arbitration was Thursday. Lundqvist did not elect to take the Rangers to arbitration by then, so your statement is not valid.

  24. At this point all “breaking news” is rumors and scandals until I see it on the NHL homepage or in a post by Sam.

    I think a 1yr deal benefits both sides. Rangers squeeze under the cap this year, still have Lundqvist, and than sign him long term next year. It helps Lundqvist because Shannahan and others will be gone next year freeing up more money for more contract. Assuming Lundqvist stays healthy all is well.

  25. guys guys.. the rangers will match any value for Henrik… and then they can dumnp some cap after free agency

  26. How much are we assuming Lundqvist is getting? I have to figure $5M at a minimum.

    Hope someone finds some money for a defenseman or two.

    Slightly off-topic, but: With salaries soaring, don’t you wish Rangers could do something like Isles did with DiPietro (maybe 10 years instead of 15, though)? That contract already looks like a bargain; the two are both excellent young goalies, but one is locked into a long-term, below-market deal.

  27. Robby Bonfire on

    How in the hell has NHL ownership put itself in the position that young players with one good season to show for their career, get multi-year, megabucks contracts, or they can walk? Christ, as bad as baseball has been shafted by the players union, at least a team gets to hold onto a player for six years major league experience, before free agency kicks in.

    No one wants to lose a star players early in his career. Who the hell perpetrated this madness, that we fans have to worry about salary caps and contracts from a GM’s perspective? I thought being a sports fan was supposed to be fun. Well this part definitely is a pain in the ass. Why must we concern ourselves about a bunch of whining mercenaries getting their way 100% of the time, and NEVER feeling even a tinge of LOYALTY to the organization which gave nurtured and trained them through the minor league growing pains, and then gave them their big shot at a highly-paid NHL career? I see that Souray is serious about walking over the difference between 5 1/2 million and 6 million. Time was when being a Montreal Canadien meant something beyond immediate selfishness to those wearing the uniform. Who wants a disloyal jerk like that here or anywhere?

    All I hear is talk about how if this player or that player is taken to arbitration, the player will feel “resentment” and harbor a grudge against the organization and surely want out sooner rather than later. Maybe if we stop idolizing these prima donnas and find some damn leverage, somewhere, to take the wind out of their (and their agents) sails, some of us could get back to actually talking HOCKEY, not compensation packages.

    Now, go ahead and tell me if I don’t like it I can go watch golf or something, on TV. Actually, not a bad idea, because I have about had it with this selfish player’s union negotiations garbage. Lock them out again, if need be. This CANNOT go on EVERY damn off-season. without permanently damaging the game, and motivating some of us to find better things to do and think about. I’m a New York Rangers fan, but some of these guys are not New York Rangers, they play for their agents, and themselves, before they play for the team and the fans.

  28. I agree with Robby that alot of this is garbage. It is a business, but alot of it is garbage. Vanek has been in the league 2 years, as has Hank. It’s a little ridiculous that some other team can sign them away to a ludicrous contract that quickly at the expecnse of draft picks taht usually do not pan out anyway.

    By the same token, no GM should be leaving himself in a position where he’s going to gamble away 5 first rounders for one guy with only 2 years of experience in the league. Unfortunately, its the bad GM’s that do it. Lowe is in this position completely of his own doing. He had his franchise player, the guy who loved Edmonton more than anything else, who would ultimately have stayed for far less than the $7 million offer he tendered Vanek. But he blew it. And if he still had Smyth, that would have attracted several other UFA’s. Instead, he has nothing, he gets desparate and screw it up for everybody. And on top of that, the cap then handcuffs everyvbody – it’s not even an issue of how much someone is willing to pay, its how much they can do under the cap.

  29. Robby Bonfire:
    Grow Up!

    Sports, including hockey, is a business. Always has been, always will be. Owners want to make money. Players, who have a limited career span, want to make money. They do so by getting us to watch games, buy tickets, jerseys, etc.

    Don’t think that any team, at any time, wouldn’t ditch a player to save money — or that a player wouldn’t be willing to switch teams for more money, even if it’s not in his best interests (see: Fleury, Theo).

    Players play for themselves and their teammates. If that also means they play for you, great. But don’t, for a minute, think that playing for the fans is a player’s No. 1 consideration.

    Would you like another lockout? Why, so NHL hockey in the United States can die? That’s what will happen. The 1994 lockout killed growth prospects, the 2004 lockout nearly killed the league in the U.S. The owners got their cap; what they didn’t bank on was the soaring Canadian dollar, which is keeping revenues afloat and keeping salaries up.

    BTW: Since this is a post on Lundqvist — the Rangers didn’t “nurture” Lundqvist; if anything, his Swedish team did. Maybe you should be upset for them that he’s going to get a big payday.

  30. ORR Kicks Yin Yang on

    Im getting sick of the assholes on this blog “reporting” this crap..

    If hank was close to signing Sam would find out…

    Is pathetic that morons start ridiculous rumors…whats the point…

    Forsberg is a ranger….Lundqvist is a shark…Jags retired…Avery back to the kings…Hank signs a muti year deal….

    Go out and make some friends and start rumors about how you sleeping with your best friends gf….

  31. ORR Kicks Yin Yang on

    “Scott is an experienced professional goaltender, who will provide depth in the organization at that position” says Leafs GM John Ferguson..

    I hope Leafs start him in one of the games….he sucks…hes good at sitting on his a$$ watching from the bench…

  32. Yeah, Lundy was a Swedish star. Don’t forget it. He didn’t actually come out of nowhere — only North American pundits and fans would argue that.

    Also, you don’t “have to worry” about this from a GM’s perspective. If you don’t want to know, get off the internet and off this blog and just wait til October and watch. It’ll be fun, Henrik will be there and everything will be mellow…and I don’t mean that harshly. Really, that would probably be more fun.

  33. Angel24 … this person was just trying to stir things up by talking out of his ass … seriously … that’s why Hossa and Avery filed for arbitration yesterday as it was the deadline, Henrik told newspapers weeks ago that he would refuse to file for arbitration as he felt that a deal would be reached and he had no desire to leave the team … he even said that he wouldn’t sign an offer sheet if another team filed one but the with the numbers some teams are throwing out there then you know the Rangers had to protect themselves from having another team swoop in and try to cripple them by signing him to something that would force them to gut the team in order to keep him

  34. imagination on

    ROBBY how convient of you to leave the owners and buttman out of the equation. Sather has said “”But you still have to work under your team cap and sooner or later, you’re going to have six or seven players making most of the money on a team. Also, eventually, it’s going to be more difficult to sign your own players (to comparable salaries).”…. Who insisted on the cap and why? Because buttman overexpanded to fill the pockets of the existing owners and then came up with a cap to increase franchise values of his new small market teams on top of the existing ones. So out of 690 players about 210 will make the big salaries. How much does Sather make a year? And I’m not giving the players a pass & certainly not their agents. It’s the sports entertainment business, and they’ll keep increasing ticket prices to increase revenue, until big market teams can’t get 90% + of capacity to be in the seats. If you were a player, you’d see it differently. If you were an owner, you’d see it differently. The other major and minor sports are not that much different. As a fan you can go to games or not, your choice.

  35. Montoya is garbage, he doesnt have the mental makeup to be an NHL goalie.. one soft or early goal against and he’s worthless the rest of the game. He’s too easily rattled

  36. That’s great, enjoy Lundvist next year because after that there will be a team with plenty of money to spend under the cap and there goes lundvist.

  37. ORR Kicks Yin Yang on

    MARCUS

    How do you know this….Are you psychic….Do you know how many goals Tom Poti will score next season…and do you know how many goals Malik will socre on Hank…Please tell

    No one knows anything about Montoya until he PLAYS A GAME IN THE NHL….Until then theres no point in saying he’s “garbage” or what ever…

    Some one once said Jagr would not amount to anything…..600 goals and 2 stanley cups later……he amounted to something…

    Monty may blow…or he could be out backup savior….until then….we know jack

  38. ORR Kicks Yin Yang on

    TOMG

    If Hank gets a one year deal…who cares….probably during the season…He’ll get a multi year deal….I dont know why everyone is so paranoid and bent outta shape over this…

    Hank will be a ranger for the next few years baring an unforseen incedent…

    I cant see him screwing over this organazation…He knows…here in NY…this team wants him to be there future…and he knows that he’ll be playiing 60 to 70 games a year…

    Dont panic….

  39. I do think it’s a little ridiculous that after 2 seasons in the league, a guy can already be a RFA.

    Baseball does it right. A guy cannot be a FA, UFA or RFA, until he’s been in the league for 5-6 years, something like that. It’s a priviledge to get to free agency. In hockey, you are fair game pretty much immediately. It certainly doesn’t seem fair to the team that trained you and got you into the bigs.

  40. ORR Kicks Yin Yang on

    Excuse the spelling….Its the heat…it bothers me just as much as looking at Brandon Witts face

  41. ORR Kicks Yin Yang on

    Speaking of the Isles….Is there any chance of them locking up Marc Andre Bergeron….I wouldnt mind stealing him from them….Im kinda enjoying the whole rivals stealing rivals scenario…..Cause in the end were winning….We get Gomez…We lose Racky and Weeks to the devs….We lose Poti to the isles…they lose Poti and a crap load of other guys…This is getting kinda fun…..

    But Bergeron misses the net alot…but he moves the puck good on the PP….Any thoughts????

  42. @Seth, I suppose it’s our fault for only signing him to a 2 year ELC.. I guess nobody anticipated this.

  43. Robby Bonfire on

    NO ONE has been tougher on Buttman, than I. I have referred to him as an NBA mole/saboteur, and I still think he has an NBA-loyalty – insider’s agenda to severly cripple and damage the NHL. Why the NHL hired a basketball guy to run its store is just half of the mystery? The other half is the question as to why the NHL RETAINS this moron at best, or saboteur, at the very worst. The NHL going along with Buttman re planting a multitude of expansion franchises in minor league, non-hockey region venues (in other words, established basketball territory) just shows how mentally feeble the league Board of Governors really is.

    Enjoy the salary cap and arbitration dialogue while you can, and don’t fret too much when they actually start to play hockey. I know I won’t.

  44. It’s the system’s fault. You know why salaries are so sky high? It’s because a kid this young, who’s so good, is going to get a massive salary and a massivve amount of years, only because of how young and good they are.

    It should be… you can’t sign with any other team until you are 28 or 6 years in the league, whichever comes first. when you’re a RFA. Then, at 31 or 9, you can be a UFA.

    Make being a free agent a priviledge that is awarded upon players that have become long-time performers in the league. Henrik, after 2 years in the league, should not be a RFA.

  45. People – salaries are not that high. There is a cap in place. Every team must spend in that range, not over and not under. For every dollar you spend for player X, player Y gets less. So on average, the salaries are set.

  46. This is what MLB has and makes a lot more sense than hockeys rule. A player can become a free agent with six or more years of Major League service who has not executed a contract for the next season is eligible to become a free agent

  47. “Levitate
    July 6th, 2007 at 6:35 pm
    If this doesn’t actually go to arbitration, do the Rangers still lose the one shot club arbitration ability?”

    the cba states that a player can only be subject to one club elected salary arbitration regardless of whether or not that hearing actually takes place so that means that we can’t pull this off again…

    however you can only take a RFA to arbitration, if they work out a deal before going to arbitration it will be a long term deal that takes him beyond the age for UFA status so this would then be the last year he’s arbitration eligible anyway.

  48. :) 5:48pm – more in a bit…
    I haven’t seen other sources confirm arbitration for King Henrik…

  49. DanTheRangerFan on

    Im sick of all this ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh Between the assholes who put fake stuff up here, the guys who think they know everything,and the blind following throught these fragile times. Ive had enough…..IT WILL WORK OUT THOUGH—-So im going to be a hypocrit and say lets all just take breathe in and say it will be fine in the end…………sleep well true Ranger Fans

  50. Seth says:

    >You know why salaries are so sky high?It’s because a kid this young, who’s so good, is going to get a massive salary and a massivve amount of years, only because of how young and good they are.

    Seth thinks that’s the problem. I think that’s the solution and that’s what we’ll be seeing more and more of.

    Why shouldn’t a kid who is young and very good get paid for his talent, skill and potential? I’d rather see that then paying guys who are over the hill for their past performance. I think it’s possible that the long term effect of this CBA is that players will make very good money in their primes and then have to settle for considerably less when they are beyond their prime playing days.

    That’s a rational system both economically and in terms of quality of play.

    We can see it starting to happen now. GMs will not be throwing big money at over the hill players any more. It also can be seen in the long term contracts that are front loaded so that players are making a lot in their primes and less as they age and lose skill.

    I think, in the long run, should the league manage to somehow survive Bettman, this may well be a very good turn of events for fans, creating a much better product.

  51. the league will survive although we will continue to see franchises moving around and the owners/bettman getting richer. the sport will not become more popular and the intent is not necessarily to drive that facet home. the owners want to continue to get a good ROI and get “spoiler” dollars from new franchises/dumb prospective owners. the lockout was ridiculous and the players union is a joke.

Leave A Reply