Rangerland Forum Information

[jkman61494]

Per ESPN.com

OK, so we've talked about nearly every option the Philadelphia Flyers could explore regarding their goalie future. Most involve trading for a young goalie or signing one of the big free agents -- most notably Ilya Bryzgalov. However, is it possible they will trade for a top veteran goaltender?

The Courier Post's Chuck Gormley writes, "There are whispers that they may make a pitch for Buffalo's Ryan Miller, the Rangers' Henrik Lundqvist, Calgary's Miikka Kiprusoff, Minnesota's Niklas Backstrom or, yes, New Jersey's Martin Brodeur."

This is the first we're hearing of this and it sounds like pure speculation -- especially since the Flyers have strong options in Bryzgalov and Tomas Vokoun in free agency. In addition, trading for a high-priced veteran goalie makes little sense because the deal with not only cost the Flyers valuable assets, but it could also force them to cut payroll to get under the cap with their new goalie.

If some team such as Philly would give up the farm to acquire Hank would you ever consider it? As crazy as it may sound, my answer would be yes. While it's always awesome to have a franchise goalie,and I certainly don't yearn for the days of Mike Dunham, there are teams that have succeeded without elite goalies.

With that said, I'd only EVER consider it if we got something along the lines of Mike Richards, JVR and one of their three goalies in return.

[Hockey101]

I think we should trade Lundqvist for Kane and Sharp.

Ok........sorry, i was playing fantasy hockey there.

HELLO!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Such a trade would NEVER....EVER... happen, so why even debate about it in the first place. Let's debate about Christopher Walken becoming the next US president at this point.

You build a team from the back end and up. People whine about Lundqvist's inconsistencies. Yet at the end of each season the conclusion is that if it weren't for his stellar play the Rangers would not be in the playoffs. The Flyers had a great season this year, i understand that, but a total bust in the playoffs with such a "superb" offense. I think having such an offense would make you a great regular season team, but mediocre playoff team.

Besides, once you trade a top NHL goaltender by getting good offensive players, then guess what? You're in the market for a very good goaltender. How easy is it to get one? Not easy. I forgot which GM said this some years ago, but the quote was somewhere along the lines of "Lamoriello can go to sleep every night knowing he has Brodeur in net".

Unless you draft a very good goaltender, you will find yourself in the market for a goalie too frequently. You may trade for a goalie that gets you two..three good years. Then after that you have to trade for another goalie, or hope to sign one, maybe having to overpay that goalie, which means trading away good players to make room.

This is nonsense. When you get your franchise goalie, you keep him, period. Goalies are not plenty in the NHL. There are 60 goalies in the NHL. In theory, 30 of them are starters, the other 30 are backups. You eliminate the non-tradable goalies. You eliminate the goalies that are not worth trading for. How many do you really have left?

You never want to be in Philadelphia's situation where you have a strong team, but the uncertainty in goaltending to succeed will drive you nuts for years.

Lundqvist is not to be traded, period.

This post has been edited by Hockey101: May 19 2011, 11:33 AM

[jburns]

I think we should trade Lundqvist for Kane and Sharp.

Ok........sorry, i was playing fantasy hockey there.

HELLO!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Such a trade would NEVER....EVER... happen, so why even debate about it in the first place. Let's debate about Christopher Walken becoming the next US president at this point.

You build a team from the back end and up. People whine about Lundqvist's inconsistencies. Yet at the end of each season the conclusion is that if it weren't for his stellar play the Rangers would not be in the playoffs. The Flyers had a great season this year, i understand that, but a total bust in the playoffs with such a "superb" offense. I think having such an offense would make you a great regular season team, but mediocre playoff team.

Besides, once you trade a top NHL goaltender by getting good offensive players, then guess what? You're in the market for a very good goaltender. How easy is it to get one? Not easy. I forgot which GM said this some years ago, but the quote was somewhere along the lines of "Lamoriello can go to sleep every night knowing he has Brodeur in net".

Unless you draft a very good goaltender, you will find yourself in the market for a goalie too frequently. You may trade for a goalie that gets you two..three good years. Then after that you have to trade for another goalie, or hope to sign one, maybe having to overpay that goalie, which means trading away good players to make room.

This is nonsense. When you get your franchise goalie, you keep him, period. Goalies are not plenty in the NHL. There are 60 goalies in the NHL. In theory, 30 of them are starters, the other 30 are backups. You eliminate the non-tradable goalies. You eliminate the goalies that are not worth trading for. How many do you really have left?

You never want to be in Philadelphia's situation where you have a strong team, but the uncertainty in goaltending to succeed will drive you nuts for years.

Lundqvist is not to be traded, period.

Killjoy.