HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Zuccarello Close to Signing 2 or 3 Year Contract

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-24-2013, 02:30 PM
  #76
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 17,557
vCash: 500
He's an effective 2nd/3rd line player right now. If he can maintain his .5PPG contribution for something under $1.5M, there's really nothing wrong with that at all. Is he a player to build around? No, but he's certainly more than adequate as a complimentary piece.

He left the team and came back having improved on two of his biggest weaknesses: defense and skating. He's earned a new deal without a doubt.

Trxjw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 02:31 PM
  #77
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 16,470
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
He's an effective 2nd/3rd line player right now. If he can maintain his .5PPG contribution for something under $1.5M, there's really nothing wrong with that at all. Is he a player to build around? No, but he's certainly more than adequate as a complimentary piece.

He left the team and came back having improved on two of his biggest weaknesses: defense and skating. He's earned a new deal without a doubt.
Not arguing that. I just think 3 years is a bit excessive. 1 or 2 is fine.

But apparently if you're against handing out 3 year deals like they're candy, thats ******** on Zuccarello.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 02:44 PM
  #78
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 17,557
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Not arguing that. I just think 3 years is a bit excessive. 1 or 2 is fine.

But apparently if you're against handing out 3 year deals like they're candy, thats ******** on Zuccarello.
I don't see the downside in the term, TBH. If it's a $3M per year deal, then yeah, I'd be pissed, but I imagine it's somewhere in the $1.3-$1.5M range per year. Below average number for a guy who gives you average middle-six production and still has some possible upside.

Trxjw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 02:46 PM
  #79
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 29,977
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
I don't see the downside in the term, TBH. If it's a $3M per year deal, then yeah, I'd be pissed, but I imagine it's somewhere in the $1.3-$1.5M range per year. Below average number for a guy who gives you average middle-six production and still has some possible upside.
Yeah. 3 years for Rupp or Voros would piss me off. 3 years for a player like MZA, not so much.

I can see both sides.

NYR Viper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 03:00 PM
  #80
Amazing Kreiderman
Night-shift fan!
 
Amazing Kreiderman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Netherlands
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 8,976
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by -31- View Post
In before the inevitable mention of Tomas Kundratek.
Lauri Korpikoski... This game is fun

Amazing Kreiderman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 03:23 PM
  #81
nyranger61494
YNWA
 
nyranger61494's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New York, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 3,896
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Viper View Post
Yeah. 3 years for Rupp or Voros would piss me off. 3 years for a player like MZA, not so much.

I can see both sides.
Yea. MZA came back a better player this year than in previously, IMO. I was wrong in thinking he wasn't going to be the useful player he turned out to be. He has extremely good hockey sense and poise, particularly on PP. He is not going to win any Selkes anytime soon, but his play has improved on defensive side with room for growth. I think I feel more comfortable projecting a 40 point output than 50, but for the kind of money being rumored, that's a good deal. Agree with those who think it would be moveable in year 2 or 3 if necessary, too.

nyranger61494 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 03:44 PM
  #82
BrutuS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 74
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Its not so much about letting go of Parenteau, its the failure to acquire dynamic centers that make fringe type players (like Parenteau and Zuccarello) look much better than they are.
I agree. Now I just need to find the right face for maybe tongue in cheek, which is what I should have used the first time. Maybe

That being said I think that keeping MZA is a good low risk/high reward signing, provided that the numbers make sense.

BrutuS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 03:45 PM
  #83
3rdlineglory
Korsi Kevin
 
3rdlineglory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Mahopac, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 451
vCash: 500
I remember he would frequently skate into the zone and stop to look for that quality pass. We need more players that do that.

3rdlineglory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 06:24 AM
  #84
Dagh
Registered User
 
Dagh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 651
vCash: 500
Has there been any word on this since this thread died down?

Dagh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 08:28 AM
  #85
free0717
Registered User
 
free0717's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Old Bridge, NJ
Posts: 2,319
vCash: 500
I think Sather wants to get McD , Step and Hags done before doing this deal. He wants to make sure he has enough $$$ left. Unless a team throws out a ridiculous offer sheet to McD or Step, this will get done.

free0717 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 08:45 AM
  #86
Baby Punisher
Registered User
 
Baby Punisher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Staten Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 3,675
vCash: 500
Zuc should do well in Vig's new system open next year.

Baby Punisher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 09:32 AM
  #87
HockeyBasedNYC
Registered User
 
HockeyBasedNYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Here
Country: United States
Posts: 13,214
vCash: 500
I'm not completely sold on Zucc.

I love his work-ethic, i love his passion. Hes a very good playmaker with good vision when he has space. I thought he really showed up in the playoffs and at times was one of the best skaters on the ice on the puck. His shootout prowess might be worth this contract alone because hes good for getting this team 2-3-4 more points with that move.

I'd like to see more of sample size from him though, especially in AV's system. But his size concerns me, especially over the course of a full 82 game season and hopefully beyond. He's good depth i just dont know if you want to put that much trust in him as a top 6 player, even strength. On the PP fine, he should be on one of the units for sure. . I'm fine with this signing because the Rangers need skill and IQ on the ice, but I'm just critiquing the player here. He definitely can prove me wrong, I just need to see it happen....

HockeyBasedNYC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 09:42 AM
  #88
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,230
vCash: 500
Brooks speculates 1.25 per.

That's 500k less than his cap hit from 11-12.

1.25 per for 3 years is a bargain for a player who may score 40+ points per season.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 09:43 AM
  #89
LetterJ
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Atlantic Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 917
vCash: 500
4 million for 3 years is my guess...1.33 million cap hit.

LetterJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 09:48 AM
  #90
slipknottin
Registered User
 
slipknottin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: CT
Posts: 3,046
vCash: 500
Sign, hope he plays well for a year, trade for someone with size.

slipknottin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 09:48 AM
  #91
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 14,199
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by puckrush View Post
Brooks speculates 1.25 per.

That's 500k less than his cap hit from 11-12.

1.25 per for 3 years is a bargain for a player who may score 40+ points per season.
It's 350k more than his salary from 11-12. His ELC had $850k in bonuses. $1.25m would represent a 40% raise over a full season in guaranteed NHL money from his ELC and an 80% raise in his full-season money from last year. Plus, the contract would be one-way.

Tawnos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 10:02 AM
  #92
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,230
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
It's 350k more than his salary from 11-12. His ELC had $850k in bonuses. $1.25m would represent a 40% raise over a full season in guaranteed NHL money from his ELC and an 80% raise in his full-season money from last year. Plus, the contract would be one-way.
I was speaking strictly about his cap hit. Unless capgeek is lying, his cap hit in 10-11 & 11-12 was 1.75. In 2013 it was 700k.

Brooks speculates a 1.25 cap hit moving forward. That is 500k less than his cap hit from 11-12.

Again, strictly speaking about cap hit.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 10:11 AM
  #93
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 14,199
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by puckrush View Post
I was speaking strictly about his cap hit. Unless capgeek is lying, his cap hit in 10-11 & 11-12 was 1.75. In 2013 it was 700k.

Brooks speculates a 1.25 cap hit moving forward. That is 500k less than his cap hit from 11-12.

Again, strictly speaking about cap hit.
His total cap hit from his ELC is irrelevant though. Especially as compared to this year's potential salary.

Zuccarello never actually had a hit of $1.75m. It was $900,000 plus $850k in bonuses. CapGeek just includes the bonuses under the assumption that a player will hit them. That's so team's don't potentially go over the Cap in the course of the year. They can account for the bonuses and if they hit it, it won't matter. With Zuccarello, it was further irrelevant. According to Cap Geek, his actual cap cost in 2010-11 was $940,860 and in 11-12 was $359,459, but those numbers are simply his total hit, including bonuses, multiplied by the percentage of days he spent on the roster. I'm not sure if he attained his bonuses in either year (hard to imagine he did in 11-12, playing in as few NHL games as he did), so the numbers might not be accurate.

Tawnos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 10:14 AM
  #94
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 32,944
vCash: 500
The $1.25M would be one-way. $300,000 above the AHL threshold. Anything above $925,000 counts against the cap if the player is playing in the AHL on a one way. Zuccarello was never in position to cash in on his bonuses. Having them in his contract didn't mean much for him.

RangerBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 10:21 AM
  #95
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 11,047
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyBasedNYC View Post
I'm not completely sold on Zucc.

I love his work-ethic, i love his passion. Hes a very good playmaker with good vision when he has space. I thought he really showed up in the playoffs and at times was one of the best skaters on the ice on the puck. His shootout prowess might be worth this contract alone because hes good for getting this team 2-3-4 more points with that move.

I'd like to see more of sample size from him though, especially in AV's system. But his size concerns me, especially over the course of a full 82 game season and hopefully beyond. He's good depth i just dont know if you want to put that much trust in him as a top 6 player, even strength. On the PP fine, he should be on one of the units for sure. . I'm fine with this signing because the Rangers need skill and IQ on the ice, but I'm just critiquing the player here. He definitely can prove me wrong, I just need to see it happen....
I think this is how we all (those of us not from Norway) feel. I admit that I was completely down on him prior to last year, but he definitely showed me something when he came back this past year. There's no question his offensive creativity really helped the team and he was able to have an impact in the offensive zone - and at the end of the day, that's what you're looking for, guys who can have an impact.

Unfortunately, I still worry that he also has a negative impact in the defensive zone. It's not that the effort isn't there or that he's all that bad tactically, but too many players are able to brush him off; if he misses with the stick check, his guy's automatically got position on him. That's not a trait you typically have in a guy who plays a major role on a winning team, especially if that guy doesn't bring PPG scoring.

If he stays, I hope he proves me wrong, either by somehow improving his physical play or upping his scoring to the point that the deficiency becomes acceptable. And if Slats can get some value for him, needless to say I'd be all over that.

BrooklynRangersFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 10:27 AM
  #96
HockeyBasedNYC
Registered User
 
HockeyBasedNYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Here
Country: United States
Posts: 13,214
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynRangersFan View Post
I think this is how we all (those of us not from Norway) feel. I admit that I was completely down on him prior to last year, but he definitely showed me something when he came back this past year. There's no question his offensive creativity really helped the team and he was able to have an impact in the offensive zone - and at the end of the day, that's what you're looking for, guys who can have an impact.

Unfortunately, I still worry that he also has a negative impact in the defensive zone. It's not that the effort isn't there or that he's all that bad tactically, but too many players are able to brush him off; if he misses with the stick check, his guy's automatically got position on him. That's not a trait you typically have in a guy who plays a major role on a winning team, especially if that guy doesn't bring PPG scoring.

If he stays, I hope he proves me wrong, either by somehow improving his physical play or upping his scoring to the point that the deficiency becomes acceptable. And if Slats can get some value for him, needless to say I'd be all over that.
Yep, same thoughts about him on defense. The one good thing going for him is he uses a very long stick so that helps him cover a little more room, but youre right its tough for him to get position on players and if he misses hes out of the play. I gotta admit he tries to get in there and finish checks though when he has the chance. I think its towards the middle of the ice where his reads have to be better, and I dont know if a guy his size can really force the play to one side or knock off a potential chance quickly enough because of his limitations both in size and awareness. Your points about the major role trait and upping his scoring are spot on.

HockeyBasedNYC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 10:32 AM
  #97
slipknottin
Registered User
 
slipknottin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: CT
Posts: 3,046
vCash: 500
What makes Marchand a much better two way player than Zucc? They are nearly the same size. Is it skating ability?

slipknottin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 10:38 AM
  #98
Rangers Fail
free james sheppard
 
Rangers Fail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 24,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by slipknottin View Post
What makes Marchand a much better two way player than Zucc? They are nearly the same size. Is it skating ability?
Skating, physicality, hands.

Edit: forgot the nose.


Last edited by Rangers Fail: 07-04-2013 at 10:46 AM.
Rangers Fail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 10:44 AM
  #99
OverTheCap
Registered User
 
OverTheCap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 10,041
vCash: 500
Marchand must have at least 2-3 inches on Zuccarello, he was able to shake Zuke off rather easily during his OT goal in the playoffs.

Also, Zuccarello has been playing on a larger ice surface for most of his career. He's not as good as Marchand when it comes to playing tight and physical, board play, etc.

OverTheCap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2013, 10:48 AM
  #100
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 21,149
vCash: 500
Marchands a much better player.

He's FAR more physical, and a better skater. IMHO i think MZA has better hands and vision, but hes too small to get into the areas to use it, and not quick enough to peel away from guys like Hagelin.

MZAs problems are his height and his feet. if he had those, he'd be an all-star caliber player because his IQ and hands are off the charts.

Inferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:39 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.