: Confirmed with Link:
Mats Zuccarello Re-signs (1 year, $1.15M)
View Single Post
07-12-2013, 07:13 PM
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Long Island, NY
Originally Posted by
it's a business, but you don't let go off your better players to make room for scrubs like Falk and Pouliot. If it indeed is down to the $$$$.
if indeed Sather decides not to re-sign zuccarello, his offseason is a failure considering he picked inferior players over him and decided to retain Richards' albatross contract. Big F.
Kershaw, I'm not going to get into another pissing match in yet another thread. I am not knocking Zucc. I think he adds value, I really do. But I think some of the statements being made here are getting a little out of hand in relation to how much Zucc impacts this team.
To the defense of BRB (I know BRB is getting into a heated argument here but I don't think he meant to get this in depth) and SBOB, is that we don't think Zucc is a bad hockey player. I think the consensus from the devil's advocate camp is that Zucc is still a fringe top 6 player, regardless of any of the x factors being he did not get a real chance, had to battle injuries, had to adjust to the NHL game; whatever. And management in a cap world is trying to squeeze the best deal out of Zucc and his agent. For a fringe top 6 player, I am perfectly ok with this. Zucc filed for arbitration. There has been mutual interest. This is the way some negotiations go. It was the same with Dubinsky and Staal. We ended up getting Staal on a great contract and Dubinsky on a not so great contract.
You make it seem like the rangers don't want him. You're better players list right now does not consists of Zucc. Like I said before his sample size is too small to put him in that category no matter what Sabremetric you want to use for puck possession. Great puck possession does not
lead to offensive production. There are other factors too. This is not just Sather running these negotiations. Gorton is involved too. Gorton has done very well thus far imo. You have to trust them with this. McDonagh was a bigger priority. Stepan IS a bigger priority. Maybe the rangers are more focused on Stepan. Who knows. But this whole discussion is getting blown out of proportion. I think Zucc impacts the offense but I don't think he changes the complete dynamic of it. I just don't see it. I don't see the production yet, or at least not enough of it to just fork over the money he wants.
Kershaw, you're getting the same devil's advocate that you gave in the Kreider discussion. You wanted to explain why Kreider should be viewed in certain ways, well people here are doing the same with Zucc in this debate, especially with contract negotiations going on. I figured you of all people would be understanding of criticism of a player since you had a lot to hand out to Kreider.
And the rangers retaind Richards because there was nothing better in free agency, or at least nothing that wouldn't be just as bad of a contract even if it wasn't for the same cap hit. They are banking on the cap going up next offseason, while still probably buying out richards during a better free agency class (though I will admit I haven't looked yet). It just made sense to give BR another chance imo.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by RGY