In theory, that may have worked. But it comes down to what Torts wants his 3rd line to be. I think its pretty clear he relishes in putting out his 3rd line as a true checking line. Boyle got big minutes against the oppositions top forwards and did an admirable job there. Hagelin would fit in well with his speed and hockey sense. Zuccarello, unfortunately, would be useless there - as he usually was at even strength.
The PP should be better with Nash. Even if its not, I still wouldnt want Zuccarello wasting a roster spot just so he could step on the ice for a couple of PP's a game.
That is going to handicap this team a great deal.
When you have a line that cannot generate offence, I could care less how good they are defensively, you limit your own teams capabability.
I fail to see the rationale of having that line lean so heavily on the defensive side of the game.
I still see that mind-set as a reactionay vision from Torts as opposed to forcing teams to react to what the Rangers do.
Teams will have to react to the Richards/Nash line. They will have to react to the Stepan/Callahan line.
We should be looking for a 3rd line that team will have to react to as well. Not a line whose main focus is to defend.
I don't prefer seeing him back with the Rangers simply because it never made sense to me where he fitted into the team. He was far from a finisher and that was what we desperately needed. Maybe now with more finishers on the team, he can fit in nicely but at the same time, his overall game, size, mentality doesn't translate well to the NHL game, this team's game and so much more.
I think he had a lot of expectation coming into the NHL on our team with our crackable roster when he first played. Being the MVP of the GET-ligaen in the previous year and with his overall commitment to play in the NHL, I could understand how he felt "mistreated" because he wasn't given a prominent enough role/skillful line mates.
Having all that said, I for one has never been a fan of Zucc despite his popularity around here and in general among Rangers fans.
Since he's going to the KHL this season, can we toll his contract next season?
We qualified him. They have until December 1st, I believe, to get a deal done. No deal by that deadline means that he can not play in the NHL next season. He would become unrestricted next offseason free to sign with anyone whom he chooses in the event that he does not come up with a deal
When you have a line that cannot generate offence, I could care less how good they are defensively, you limit your own teams capabability.
I fail to see the rationale of having that line lean so heavily on the defensive side of the game.
I still see that mind-set as a reactionay vision from Torts as opposed to forcing teams to react to what the Rangers do.
Teams will have to react to the Richards/Nash line. They will have to react to the Stepan/Callahan line.
We should be looking for a 3rd line that team will have to react to as well. Not a line whose main focus is to defend.
that bothers me a great deal.
Yup. Exact words I was going to say. Pyatt isn't bad, but you have Hagelin, Boyle and Pyatt who all have hands of stones and are pretty mediocre players offensively. Zuccarello adds an element of much needed skill on the bottom 6. I'm not a believer of a skilled top 6, grinding bottom 6, that tires your team out pretty easily. I'd much prefer offense on the first 3 lines and one checking line.
Hagelin-Boyle-Zuccarello = great 3rd line. Maybe one of the best in the league.
Yup. Exact words I was going to say. Pyatt isn't bad, but you have Hagelin, Boyle and Pyatt who all have hands of stones and are pretty mediocre players offensively. Zuccarello adds an element of much needed skill on the bottom 6. I'm not a believer of a skilled top 6, grinding bottom 6, that tires your team out pretty easily. I'd much prefer offense on the first 3 lines and one checking line.
Hagelin-Boyle-Zuccarello = great 3rd line. Maybe one of the best in the league.
What league? The NHL? C'mon.
The argument of what kind of 3rd line you want to have is a legitimate one. What isnt legitimate is inserting Zuccarello into that argument as some sort of key cog.
The argument of what kind of 3rd line you want to have is a legitimate one. What isnt legitimate is inserting Zuccarello into that argument as some sort of key cog.
Why not? As pld said, it's better to have skill on every line.
Why not? As pld said, it's better to have skill on every line.
You're saying that as if its a foregone conclusion, and thats just not true.
This team (finally) has something close to a legitimate top 6. When that happens, theres a lot more options you can play with in the bottom 6, especially the 3rd line.
Its better to have players that know, accept, and excel in their roles in the bottom 6. Zuccarello would be a square peg in a round hole on the 3rd line. Hes not good enough to be a consistent top 6 contributor.
So, why are we talking about him incessantly? If Erik Christensen shrunk a few inches, and we gave him a different jersey, it'd be the exact same scenario. People hated him, people love Zuccarello. I dont get it.
When you have a line that cannot generate offence, I could care less how good they are defensively, you limit your own teams capabability.
I fail to see the rationale of having that line lean so heavily on the defensive side of the game.
I still see that mind-set as a reactionay vision from Torts as opposed to forcing teams to react to what the Rangers do.
Teams will have to react to the Richards/Nash line. They will have to react to the Stepan/Callahan line.
We should be looking for a 3rd line that team will have to react to as well. Not a line whose main focus is to defend.
that bothers me a great deal.
Agree 100%, I couldn't have said it better myself. By having 3rd and 4th lines that can never score, it puts more pressure on your top two lines. I'd rather the scoring be more balanced because even the most elite players in your top 6 are going to have off-nights, and those are the nights you need your bottom 6 to chip in.
Agree 100%, I couldn't have said it better myself. By having 3rd and 4th lines that can never score, it puts more pressure on your top two lines. I'd rather the scoring be more balanced because even the most elite players in your top 6 are going to have off-nights, and those are the nights you need your bottom 6 to chip in.
Sounds wonderful.
Im sure this perfect world scenario, where we have 4 lines that can score, won't effect the defensive side of the puck in the least.
Maybe some people prefer watching a track meet cause its fun. I think winning hockey games is more fun.
Im not so sure you'll ever see him as a full-time NHL player because, personally, I just dont feel hes good enough to play at this level. Best case, I can see him hooking on with a bad team; a bottom feeder that specializes in taking on inferior players. Thats why I compared him to PA Parenteau earlier. Both are players that have some offensive skills (that would need a great center to be fully capitalized upon), and little to no attributes when it comes to any other part of the game.
Not only was Zuccarello not good enough, but he apparently wasnt smart enough either - yapping to the media and needing guaranteed NHL time to make a deal. If he thought some offensive skills made him good enough to be an NHL regular, well, he got a rude awakening pretty quickly. Where he got this sense of entitlement is beyond me. It also makes me wonder how so many people root for him and/or think he got a raw deal.
he's not a bad player. he just never played with guys who brought out his strengths
- similar to stepan, zucc is a playmaker first and foremost. he needs other talent to bring out his strengths and never really spent much time with other talent outside of his most recent call-up---specifically the power-play. we saw a significant decline in stepan's play when he was removed from gaborik
honestly i think he would've had a permanent spot next season if he didn't decide to go to the ahl
he didn't fit into the top 6
- our top six was always pretty set when zucc got call-ups, but he could fit in a top six role on a lotttt of teams in this league. with gaborik out we could reallyyy benefit somebody like him to some extent if there is no lockout
he never quite meshed here
- we play a system that doesn't support his offensive style that much(lots of board battles, physical games)
he works hard
- he basically doubled his body mass and generally improved every facet of his game in an attempt to crack the lineup. i thought he earned a spot in camp (dat christensen too good). improved his game more than anybody on the team.
he was overlooked for most of our call-ups despite the team hurting offensively
- passed over multiple times by avery, christensen, deveaux, newbury, and mitchell for a call-up despite the work he made in the off-season on the back end and strength and being one of our more talented offensive skaters
as far as the comments go...i'm sure it's completely opinion here, but imo all he really said is that he understood that the team was stacked right now hurting his chances of breaking the lineup. he said he liked playing here and in this league, but he was exploring his other options to make sure he got to play at a top tier level(THE NERVE!).
he wasn't even disrespectful about it. he didn't put down management or the staff. he just wanted to play hockey at a high and the AHL wasn't cutting it for him. he wanted to prove himself on a team that had room while he was in his prime.
you make it sound as though he intentionally violated dress code to avoid playing in the ahl or something classless like that.
Always thought he'd be a good fit in Phoenix, still do. Other teams could use him too.
Though much like Jarkko Immonen, he's a step behind, he will enjoy a successful career overseas, we'll never see him in the NHL again, and we'll talk about him each time we see him succeed in the WC or Olympics.
The thought that the Rangers could use more offense out of their third line is legitimate but I'm not sure that MZA necessarily was ever going to be a catalyst for that. In terms of skill he's not better than a Wolski and arguably not more skilled than EC or even John Mitchell. And there was something lacking in all of those players.
The season before when Boyle hit 20+ goals and Prust had almost 30 points wasn't quite as successful as last season when both those players (along with Fedotenko's) numbers declined. The most identifiable stat for success remains wins/losses/ties not individual scoring stats. The Rangers had a great regular season and went deep into the playoffs. Torts decision making obviously had a lot to do with that. Some are assuming that MZA could have made some extra kind of positive impact on how our season went and really I don't see how.
I remember in Stockholm last season when MZA stepped on the ice to take the penalty against the Ducks. The whole Globen was buzzing, but then he didn't score
Anyway, I think it's tough for Tortorella to find a suitable role for the guy. He's not quite a top-line winger and doesn't fit in well with Torts' ideology of what the 3rd and 4th lines should be.
It's a shame, because the guy got skills. I think he could break through somewhere else where more offensive orientated hockey is encouraged.
(btw, my first post here. Have been around on other Rangers boards for 10+ years)
We qualified him. They have until December 1st, I believe, to get a deal done. No deal by that deadline means that he can not play in the NHL next season. He would become unrestricted next offseason free to sign with anyone whom he chooses in the event that he does not come up with a deal
I thought we had another year on his contract? No?
It seems the discussion about him never ends. half is against, half is in favor.
I love the guy and think it is a shame that we do not have him, he has offense and with him the team will generate more offense because he has the intelligence of a top player.
When he was playing on the team, during his shifts, it felt like the rangers always where more dangerous.
Not sure what's his khl/new club stats are so far though..
He say he is still suffering from the broken wrist,and have a way to go before he is in top playing shape.
My guess is that he never will be back in Rangers. I believe he wait out to be a UFA or traded to another team. If he become successful in KHL, then maybe he stays there and earn some good money.
OT: Linus Omark from Edmonton,who was in a similar situation and a comparable player to Zucc,has also left The NHL for Zug in Switzerland.
Last edited by fredrikstad: 08-29-2012 at 11:08 AM.
I personally would feel much more confident about the 3rd line and 2nd PP unit if Zuccarello was on the roster. Right now Hagelin and Boyle I am fine with but I really dont know what Pyatt will bring and the 4th line is exactly that a 4th line.
JT Miller could be up at some point this yr but they should of kept Zuke around this yr. I think he's back next yr
I personally would feel much more confident about the 3rd line and 2nd PP unit if Zuccarello was on the roster. Right now Hagelin and Boyle I am fine with but I really dont know what Pyatt will bring and the 4th line is exactly that a 4th line.
JT Miller could be up at some point this yr but they should of kept Zuke around this yr. I think he's back next yr
You're not sure what a legit NHLer will bring but you have no doubt about a guy who spent more time in the AHL than the NHL?
