Friedman: Flames interested in Zuccarello

[Lunatik]

You used fights, something that’s been dying in the NHL for the better part of a decade to support an argument. Boy, you must be desperate.

As for the hits, there’s different types of physicality. Throwing hits is one of them. Battling for pucks along the boards is another. Zuccarello is ALWAYS battling along the boards and is always getting involved in scrums. You’d know that if you’ve EVER bothed to watch the guy. You could have watched the game against the Bruins and you would have known he was going at it with Brandon Carlo, a guy almost a foot taller than him.



I don’t care about someone disagreeing, as you can see by my responses to other posters disagreeing in this thread and others, I’m more than understanding.

However, when you throw stones in glass houses and act arrogant and call others petulant teenagers when don’t really have a clue of what you’re talking about only to turn around and play the victim when someone calls you out on your nonsense, then you’ve gotten your just deserves.

Maybe if you didn’t have the typical HF keyboard warrior I think my **** doesn’t stink and know more about someone else’s teams players than their own fans do mentality, I wouldn’t have bothered or cared. However, you’ve got some nerve to try to pin this on me. Then further more, you try to start again and AGAIN proceed to play the victim.

And I’m the petulant child? Take a good long look in the mirror, pal. I find it hard to believe you’d ever pull this nonsense with someone in a real life setting.

Again claiming I've never watched him, it's getting old dude. I literally stated he was gritty, but you ignore that because it doesn't fit your bullshit narrative that I have never seen him play. Everything Zucc does in the grit department, so does Kane, and then some. Like I said though, engaging with you is a mistake, because you always play that same stupid f***ing card when you've been proven wrong.

 

[TGWL]

You used fights, something that’s been dying in the NHL for the better part of a decade to support an argument. Boy, you must be desperate.

As for the hits, there’s different types of physicality. Throwing hits is one of them. Battling for pucks along the boards is another. Zuccarello is ALWAYS battling along the boards and is always getting involved in scrums. You’d know that if you’ve EVER bothed to watch the guy. You could have watched the game against the Bruins and you would have known he was going at it with Brandon Carlo, a guy almost a foot taller than him.

I think your definition is more of a fearless battler. He'll get in your face and won't back down, making it difficult to play against. When it comes to actual, physical grit, Kane play is much different than Zucc, as it should be. There's size and muscle difference.

 

[One Winged Angel]

Again claiming I've never watched him, it's getting old dude. I literally stated he was gritty, but you ignore that because it doesn't fit your bull**** narrative that I have never seen him play. Everything Zucc does in the grit department, so does Kane, and then some. Like I said though, engaging with you is a mistake, because you always play that same stupid ****ing card when you've been proven wrong.

Is that why you’re the one that scoffed at a statement to backtrack your scoffing? Hell, you had to go look up numbers on hits. If you were that damn sure about it, you could have cited a disparity right off the bat.

And if hits aren’t the be all end all, in your own words, why would you have scoffed at the statement I made? Clearly you’re acknowledging now that there are different forms of grit.

You haven’t proven me wrong in any such sort of way. You THINK you have and your arrogance and that fact that you truly believe everything that comes out of your mouth no matter how faulty it is allows you to help you believe this. If anything, you’ve proven that I caught you with your hand in the cookie jar, otherwise you wouldn’t have scoffed at what I said and then proceeded to backtrack it. You clearly made an open ended statement that could be left for interpretation because you knew that if you said Zuccarello is soft, you would have been blasted to the moon for it. Smart move on your part by doing so, I’ll give you credit there, but don’t think that no one can see that.

 

[One Winged Angel]

I think your definition is more of a fearless battler. He'll get in your face and won't back down, making it difficult to play against. When it comes to actual, physical grit, Kane play is much different than Zucc, as it should be. There's size and muscle difference.

That’s fine, it’s still a different form of grit. Those plays make differences in games, especially playoff games. We saw it during the 2014 run when his line with Brassard and Pouliot was driving play every night.

 

[One Winged Angel]

You're right, because a 2nd round pick and a prospect for Zuccarello is completely outlandish. How dare I.

A conditional* second. That’s pretty damn outlandish when Boyle just got a 2nd rounder straight up, but context isn’t important or anything.

 

[TGWL]

A conditional* second. That’s pretty damn outlandish when Boyle just got a 2nd rounder straight up, but context isn’t important or anything.

The condition is that it becomes a first. He's not saying you lose the 2nd round pick.

 

[One Winged Angel]

The condition is that it becomes a first. He's not saying you lose the 2nd round pick.

That’s a conditional first round pick. Condition being that it becomes a second. That’s the way it was announced in the McDonagh trade.

A conditional second would be a conditional that drops to a 3rd.

 

[One Winged Angel]

The condition is that it becomes a first. He's not saying you lose the 2nd round pick.

Just to play along, if that is the case, I have a very hard time believing that the difference between Boyle and Zuccarello is just a prospect and a condition when not only Nash got what he did, but Grabner got a 2nd and a prospect.

That means there’s the slightest of difference between Zuccarello and Grabner? I don’t buy it.

 

[TGWL]

That’s a conditional first round pick. Condition being that it becomes a second. That’s the way it was announced in the McDonagh trade.

A conditional second would be a conditional that drops to a 3rd.

We know what it is, but it was clear what the poster was saying. But I agree, unless it's a fantastic prospect, I want more than that.

 

[Waivers]

I would do a conditional 2nd + a prospect. The 1st will come if we re-sign him or make it to the Conference Finals.

I appreciate the candor, but I can’t imagine the Rangers doing that trade.

 

[Section32]

The Flames are at the beginning of their window. Throwing firsts at rentals doesn't make sense.

I'd rather see them acquire a player they plan to keep long-term if the 1st is on the table.[/QUOTE

Makes a lot of sense.

Thx for reply..

 

[WesMcCauley]

Zucc has been absolutely amazing since he came back fully healthy for the first time this season in late December.

 

[Anthony5967]

Zucc has been absolutely amazing since he came back fully healthy for the first time this season in late December.

Remember, he is only worth a 2nd+ a B or C prospect. LMAO.

 

[Lunatik]

Remember, he is only worth a 2nd+ a B or C prospect. LMAO.

I'm not going to argue value, but 4 weeks doesn't massive;ly change someones value, everyone knows what they'd be getting in Zucc

 

[Anthony5967]

I'm not going to argue value, but 4 weeks doesn't massive;ly change someones value, everyone knows what they'd be getting in Zucc

The guy has been a top-six winger for like half a decade now.

 

[Dr Pepper]

I swear, it's like Friedman is turning more and more into Eklund with each passing day.

I imagine he just takes two bowls, and fills one with scraps of paper for every team name, and the other with random player names.

He picks one out of each bowl, and starts a rumour.

I guess this time around it was Calgary + Zuccarello. I wonder who's next.

 

[Lunatik]

The guy has been a top-six winger for like half a decade now.

Where did I say he wasn't?

 

[Anthony5967]

Where did I say he wasn't?

You didn't, I am just talking about the people who scoff at the Rangers' asking price as if he is nothing but a bottom-six winger on a rental deal. He is on a rental deal but he's a dang good player.

 

[Lunatik]

You didn't, I am just talking about the people who scoff at the Rangers' asking price as if he is nothing but a bottom-six winger on a rental deal. He is on a rental deal but he's a dang good player.

I've never seen anyone call him that, but chances are if they did it's someone I already have on ignore. Although a bunch of your fans love to claim we know nothing about him and we've never seen him play.

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

I swear, it's like Friedman is turning more and more into Eklund with each passing day.

I imagine he just takes two bowls, and fills one with scraps of paper for every team name, and the other with random player names.

He picks one out of each bowl, and starts a rumour.

I guess this time around it was Calgary + Zuccarello. I wonder who's next.

except this is actually legit

Rangers board vetted folks have been telling us Calgary has been interested in Zucc for a bit now. So unless multiple people have bad information, seems like Friedman is not speculating

 

[Lunatik]

except this is actually legit

Rangers board vetted folks have been telling us Calgary has been interested in Zucc for a bit now. So unless multiple people have bad information, seems like Friedman is not speculating

This makes this rumor even more interesting, I'd never heard this before

 

[blankall]

except this is actually legit

Rangers board vetted folks have been telling us Calgary has been interested in Zucc for a bit now. So unless multiple people have bad information, seems like Friedman is not speculating

I think the Flames are kicking tires on Zucc, because he's a good player but not as valued as the other big upcoming UFAs out there. The Flames are trying to bring someone in that doesn't require losing their first or one of their big 3 defence prospects.

 

[Volica]

except this is actually legit

Rangers board vetted folks have been telling us Calgary has been interested in Zucc for a bit now. So unless multiple people have bad information, seems like Friedman is not speculating

I've come around on Zucc a bit over the past few days in terms of what he'd add for Calgary.
Would really bridge the gap in terms of the drop-off offensively between our 4th and 5th forward; right now the difference between Tkachuk and Backlund in terms of offensive production is huge. One guy's a PPG winger, and the other guy is trending to ~45ish points. It's not taking anything away from his Selke level defence abilities, Frolik after his torrid production post Agent twitter bitch session; has cooled off. He's a luxury to have on your bottom 6, but really a poor man's 2RW.

How do Rangers fans feel about:


2019 Conditional 1st round pick (condition being we either make the conference finals, OR Zucc resigns in Calgary before the draft), 2020 second round if not.
2020 3rd Round pick
Rangers pick of the following prospects: Curtis Lazar, Kerby Rychel, Spencer Foo, Rinat Valiev or Brett Pollock


Mats Zuccarello

I know the preference would be just to get a first, but we know Treliving is stingy in terms of using his firsts, he normally likes cost controlled age-appropriate players in those deals. And while Mats is a good player, he's a UFA on the wrong side of 30.

 

[bfaust30]

I've come around on Zucc a bit over the past few days in terms of what he'd add for Calgary.
Would really bridge the gap in terms of the drop-off offensively between our 4th and 5th forward; right now the difference between Tkachuk and Backlund in terms of offensive production is huge. One guy's a PPG winger, and the other guy is trending to ~45ish points. It's not taking anything away from his Selke level defence abilities, Frolik after his torrid production post Agent twitter ***** session; has cooled off. He's a luxury to have on your bottom 6, but really a poor man's 2RW.

How do Rangers fans feel about:


2019 Conditional 1st round pick (condition being we either make the conference finals, OR Zucc resigns in Calgary before the draft), 2020 second round if not.
2020 3rd Round pick
Rangers pick of the following prospects: Curtis Lazar, Kerby Rychel, Spencer Foo, Rinat Valiev or Brett Pollock


Mats Zuccarello

I know the preference would be just to get a first, but we know Treliving is stingy in terms of using his firsts, he normally likes cost controlled age-appropriate players in those deals. And while Mats is a good player, he's a UFA on the wrong side of 30.

Not a fan of any of those prospects and I think the flames dont have what the Rangers might want in particular. I think the Rangers do want Sam Bennet and the Flames won't give him up.

Look for the stars to make a move on zuc

 

[Volica]

Not a fan of any of those prospects and I think the flames dont have what the Rangers might want in particular. I think the Rangers do want Sam Bennet and the Flames won't give him up.

Look for the stars to make a move on zuc

You just don't move cost controlled young NHLers for rentals.