Should the New York Rangers have kept Henrik Lundqvist?

During this past off season, the New York Rangers made a decision to move on from Henrik Lundqvist. By buying out the final year of Lundqvist’s contract, the team effectively ended the “Era of the King”. At that time, putting their faith in Alexandar Georgiev and letting Lundqvist move on to the next chapter of his career was the right move. It may not have been a popular decision, but it was the absolutely, one hundred percent, the correct hockey move.

Should the New York Rangers held onto the King?

That said, hindsight is 20/20 and with the current Rangers goaltending issues, it is starting to look like the decision may not be so correct now. Simply put, if Rangers management knew then what they know now, would they still make the same choice? Lundqvist’s heart condition not withstanding,  would they have chosen to keep the King if they knew Igor Shesterkin would fall to injury? Or that Georgiev’s game would regress so immediately? Or that Keith Kinkaid would provide more value to the team than just being expansion draft fodder?

To be fair to Rangers management, If Georgiev were living up to expectations this would not even be a thought. There is no way they could have known that Georgiev would have gotten off to such a horrific start. Last season, through 11 starts and one relief appearance the Bulgarian had a .918% save percentage (.837% on high danger shots) and a 2.98 goals against average. He had seven wins and had been pulled once. Anything even remotely close to this level of play and everyone would be happy.

This season has been a train wreck in comparison. So far, through the same totals of 11 starts and one relief appearance, Georgiev has a .887% save percentage (.705% on high danger shots) and a 3.33 goals against average. He has five wins and has been pulled four times (though once was due to concussion protocol). All this while facing 113 fewer shots and playing behind the league’s second best penalty kill. He has, at least for now, played himself into being the back-up’s back-up.

So, what if?

How would things look if New York Rangers management had a crystal ball?  First, Georgiev would have been traded for assets of either picks, prospects or players. Second, Lundqvist would still be out on the long term injured reserve (LTIR) due to his heart condition. But, by being on the LTIR, Lundqvist would have saved the Rangers the full amount of his $8.5 million salary cap hit. Conversely, between the values of the salary cap hits associated with Georgiev’s contract and Lundqvist’s buyout, the team is currently saving only $575 thousand.

Third, there is the possibility that without Georgiev on the team, Tony DeAngelo might still be in blue. It’s no secret that DeAngelo was on his last warning before the altercation between the defenseman and netminder, but the possibility exists. Fourth, from a strictly, on the ice hockey perspective, Keith Kinkaid would still be getting starts.

So, if the New York Rangers had kept Lundqvist:

• Assets gained in trade
• $7,925,000 in cap space
• Eliminates the $1,500,000 in dead cap next season
• Tony DeAngelo possibly still with the team
• An opportunity to see either Adam Huska or Tyler Wall in limited NHL action

Though this would’ve, could’ve, should’ve, in hindsight, what if?, exercise in academia is fun, it is also ultimately futile. In sports, management can only make the decisions they make in real time with the data they have in front of them at that time. The decision to buy out Lundqvist and retain Georgiev was the right one. Now, we must hope that Georgiev can rebound back into form.