Zuccarello: Being Loyal Is Nonsense

[NYRantLftyC19]

Most importantly our management put this core in the best position possible to win a Stanley Cup. Not many teams can say they gave one core 6 playoff runs and obliterated our prospect pool and draft picks and still couldn't get the job done.

How long did Zucc really think they could keep that going? At some point the jig is up. It actually was up in 2016 when we got WAXED by the Penguins in round 1. Entering that postseason we didnt even have a 1st or 2nd round pick. The worst prospect pool in hockey, and an aging core locked into expensive contracts. Staring into the deep abyss of cap hell and mediocrity where we were no longer good enough to be a legit contender but not bad enough to bottom out for top draft picks to infuse the franchise with high end young talent that was desperately needed.

And yet they got another kick at the can the next year, gave up more picks to bring in Smith... and yet they choked again in Ottawa in a series they had no business losing. Like an actual atrocity that we lost that series.

And yet they signed Shattenkirk a few months later.

I'm amazed Zuccarello or any Ranger from that era has anything to complain about. Really only Dubinsky, he was the one who got screwed. He was there from the ground up during the early Torts years and deserved to see it through.

And then everyone went on to get paid very handsomely.

Prust, Stralman, Boyle, Callahan, Zucc, Staal, Girardi, Brassard, Pouliot, Talbot, Stepan, McDonagh, Miller, Hayes, Yandle, Moore, Hagelin.

They all made out like bandits solely on the backs of what they accomplished with the Rangers.

I'm no math wizard but if you added up all those guys salaries we would be way above the cap with like half a roster still to full out.

C'mon Zucc

Completely agree with everything here and great post. Most fans saw the writing on the wall after 2016, and as much as I love Zucc (and Hank), it was naive to not see where things were headed for this team. Management saw it later than most of the fans on this site because it seems we're into prospects more than the professional teams themselves sometimes haha.

And yes, most of the players on those teams that went consistently deep in the playoffs cashed out. Zucc is wearing his heart on his sleeve here, as he did on the ice for the NYR, but he got his payday too.

Would staying and making the team worst been a greater legacy?

 

[Sol]

Completely agree with everything here and great post. Most fans saw the writing on the wall after 2016, and as much as I love Zucc (and Hank), it was naive to not see where things were headed for this team. Management saw it later than most of the fans on this site because it seems we're into prospects more than the professional teams themselves sometimes haha.

And yes, most of the players on those teams that went consistently deep in the playoffs cashed out. Zucc is wearing his heart on his sleeve here, as he did on the ice for the NYR, but he got his payday too.

Would staying and making the team worst been a greater legacy?

I agree. He's coming off as entitled. You're entitled to your money and you got paid. There's a reason why emotions and business don't work too well together.

 

[JT Kreider]

Would staying and making the team worst been a greater legacy?

This is something Lundqvist is going to have to consider himself. What happens if we have to trade Georgiev for a mediocre return and he goes on to become one of the best goalies in the league? All to accommodate Lundqvist so he can come back for one more (most likely) pointless season where he gets 20 at most starts for a team that will still not be ready to compete for a Stanley Cup? And if keeping his $8.5 million on the cap prices us out of keeping Strome and/or Fast, our franchise players linemates? And it has an impact on Panarin's play?

All the good Lundqvist did in a Ranger jersey will be forgotten and the fans will turn on him something fierce and his legacy will go up in flames. (Maybe a bit of an exaggeration but this is NY and players have been turned on for far less).

He has nothing left to prove except to win a Stanley Cup and that is not happening in NY in 2020-21.

 

[glovesave_35]

I said earlier in this thread that I think players should do what's best for them and get paid as much as they can.

I also think that teams should do exactly what is best for their team and organization. Don't pay players for what they did in the past. Don't hold on to fan favorites unless they serve a specific and valuable role on the field of play. Everyone just do what's best for them and it all works out.

 

[glovesave_35]

This is something Lundqvist is going to have to consider himself. What happens if we have to trade Georgiev for a mediocre return and he goes on to become one of the best goalies in the league? All to accommodate Lundqvist so he can come back for one more (most likely) pointless season where he gets 20 at most starts for a team that will still not be ready to compete for a Stanley Cup? And if keeping his $8.5 million on the cap prices us out of keeping Strome and/or Fast, our franchise players linemates? And it has an impact on Panarin's play?

All the good Lundqvist did in a Ranger jersey will be forgotten and the fans will turn on him something fierce and his legacy will go up in flames. (Maybe a bit of an exaggeration but this is NY and players have been turned on for far less).

He has nothing left to prove except to win a Stanley Cup and that is not happening in NY in 2020-21.

Why would they trade a young goalie because the old starter wants to stay one more year?

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Why would they trade a young goalie because the old starter wants to stay one more year?

Because there might be more at play than how you frame it.

 

[Chimpradamus]

Maybe if Lundqvist didnt completely lose us the Ottawa series.. we could have had a decent chance against Pittsburgh and then Nashville.

I mean what more did Hank want? He gave up a crap goal from behind the net to lose Game 1, blew multiple 2 goal late leads in Games 2 and 5 giving up a combined 11 goals.

That was the end of the line right there, that core got like 6 kicks at the can while completely pillaging all future assets and just couldn't get it done.

And the contract that Zuccarello signed in 2015 was not really that much of a "sweetheart deal", it was completely fair for the player Zucc was at that time. If anything was a player friendly deal with the term that brought him to UFA young enough to cash in on another contract.

Way to piss on something in a thread you shouldn't have, in a way that just shows your own pettiness. Things didn't happen at all as you depict them, but whatever floats your boat. I bet you feel unique blaming a team failure on the goalie. Never happened before as a fan in the history of the NHL, nope. Because oh man, how those NYR teams were dominating despite their goaltending. LOL! What a joke. You blame the failure on the only piece of the puzzle that had a chance of working and was expected to work, compared to the shitty defense, abysmal offense and the terrible special teams. Yeah, let's start there. Great analysis. Don't quit your day job.

---
At the actual matter of hand, yes, the sooner NHL players understand they are money cattle to their franchices, the better. That's why William Nylander held out from the advice of his father, he was himself taught this lesson the hard way. Never treat your cynical, borderline psychopathic, greedy employer as an ally. They are just as much of an opponent as the players on other teams in a hockey game.

That's the standard the NHL franchises have set and its the mutual treatment they have grown to earn. They have no rights to complain players aren't being buddies, as they have repeatedly shown they never will be themselves, the second they're in a headwind. They have nothing to show as an argument why players - cattle - should show any friendly leverage of being nice to NHL franchices. They as players were drafted - yes, drafted like a cattle auction or going into war - in the draft from the start. It all starts from the beginning. The intentions shown are VERY obvious.

A "capitalist" league that is one of the most communistic leagues in the world, bar none, as all Murican "sports" leagues (more like entertainment industries who focus on "sports"). They're only capitalist towards their own money cattle - sorry, employees - and the imperialistic extortion and exploitation of other leagues, but extremely friendly towards eachother within. Just like a Soviet government. There's not an ounce of capitalism in the NHL, nor the NBA, nor the NFL. How ironic.

If I was Lundqvist, I would just straight up retire and decline any retirement ceremony and never return. But as the soft, loyal fashion dog he is to New York, I imagine he will just suck it up and play the smile game, while deeply suffering within.

Alternatively, I would just retire and then shame the entire NYR organization, talking shit about them - and the NHL in particular - on retirement night, take a piss on center ice and leave. And then enjoy the extreme awkwardness to follow. "Ehm, should we continue to haul the jersey or pull it down?"

 

[Fataldogg]

Georgiev is not being traded and becoming the best goalie in the NHL. He is not as good as Talbot or Raanta was for the team. Secondly, Georgiev, if he re-signed with the team, is accepting the back up role. Again, if he true desire is to be a starter, he should ask for a trade. Because he is not going to be starting over Shesterkin.

 

[Merrrlin]

Belichick would agree, just from the opposite stand point.

It's easy for everyone to be loyal when you are okay with mediocrity. It's easy to be loyal when times are good (enough).

I think the real cut throat champions out there could give 0 fricks about the crest on their jersey, or their relationship with the GM/player.

We all look at the Bruins (myself included) as a team...a group that's all in it for themselves. Look at their core...

Marchand's contract was player friendly until he broke out and the cap also went up.
Chara took the highest dollar when he signed as a UFA.
Rask got what many thought was a pretty revolutionary contract for a goalie.
Krecji has been one of the highest paid players in the NHL for many years.
Pastrnak signed before he broke out and before the inflation of RFA deals.
McAvoy signed a nice bridge, but it's still just that - a bridge to a retirement contract.
Krug broke out after his deal and is looking for a significant raise.

We, as fans, like to think our players are more loyal and have higher character than others but I just don't think it's reality. I don't doubt Pastrnak or Hedman would leave their team's in a second if it meant 3-5 million after tax addition to their yearly salary, especially if the team had a shred of a chance to be winners.

 

[Jersey Fresh]

"Imperialistic" lol

 

[Quid Pro Clowe]

Being loyal isn't nonsensical in general, but you shouldn't ever be more loyal to your employer than they are to you. You're setting yourself up for disappointment otherwise.

 

[Quid Pro Clowe]

Bergie in Mtl once said “if you want loyalty get a dog” when he was negotiating with Markov and then he went and spent big money on Alzner lol

Dude has always been niche. Going back to throwing the puck in his own net.

 

[glovesave_35]

Because there might be more at play than how you frame it.

As a non-Rangers fan I would love a bit more information. Let's pretend for a minute that not everyone knows your team's depth chart and build/rebuild situation and go from there.

 

[Absolut]

Because there might be more at play than how you frame it.

There always might be more at play. We don't know. Or it can be simple. Exactly how glovesave_35 framed it.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

As a non-Rangers fan I would love a bit more information. Let's pretend for a minute that not everyone knows your team's depth chart and build/rebuild situation and go from there.

Georgiyev being a lot younger than Lundqvist doesn't mean he's more than marginally better. Since Georgiyev has entered the league, he's had a .913 and Lundqvist has had a .908. The team also allows less shots per game behind Georigyev, so like with most teams, they play better behind the back up than the starter. Hank has gotten the harder games and harder workload. Even since Shestyorkin has joined the team, Hank's appearances have been very sporadic, and he's been able to get into no rhythm. Georgiyev's starts have not been sporadic.

Georgiyev 's numbers have also went down every season of his career as he's gotten a bigger workload. He's proven himself to be a league average goalie who is extremely inconsistent. Even if we acknowledge that Lundqvist isn't that good anymore, his play isn't bad for a back up. The team wouldn't be suffering compared to the league average back up with Lundqvist as our back up.

Georgiyev's going to ask for a big number in his RFA contract. He has a .913 SV% through 77 games, he's pretty young for a goalie, his GM seems to value him at a 1st round pick or more in a trade, and he has the media and fans constantly putting a narrative out there that he's even better than his stats because the defense is so bad. Merzlikins got 4M after only one season and 33 games. I'd be surprised if Georgiyev didn't get 4M+.

I suspect that contract will become a big problem. The Rangers in the past have struggled to get rid of bad RFA contracts like Vesey and Namestnikov. Those two players were both paid for statistics earlier in their careers that they clearly weren't going to be able to replicate for future seasons with the team. Thats exactly what looks likely with Georgiyev. His stats have declined every season of his career, and his role with the Rangers will be decreasing because Shestyorkin's the clear #1 of the three. We will be paying a very big salary to a back up goalie, and this is a team that will need the cap space in 2-3 years.

What we don't want is to have a 25 game per season .905 back up taking up 4M of the cap, and causing us to have to get rid of our best complimentary players like DeAngelo, Buchnevich, Chytil, Lindgren because we don't have that extra 3M of cap space that we might have with a 1M per season back up. Especially with the upcoming cap problems for teams that were not originally forecasted, teams are going to be less willing to take on high-priced salaries from other teams in a trade. There might be no getting rid of Georgiyev for a 5th or 6th round pick as a cap dump. There will always be a mechanism to get rid of that contract number, but you'd rather get a 2nd+ for Georgiyev now than get nothing for him, and have dead money on the cap with no assets coming back because you had to buy him out.

It's completely needless to treat Lundqvist how we are treating him, and it's not because I think we need to preserve his legacy. You make the best decision for the team, but that decision involves keeping Lundqvist because Georgiyev isn't that good. Keep Hank, trade Georgiyev, tell Hank that past this season he needs to play for the veteran minimum, otherwise he won't be re-signed. He'll probably take the contract because he wants to remain in NY. He retires a Ranger in the next few years playing less games per season as his game has declined, and everyone's happy.

Fans around the league have this warped view of Georgiyev's game that doesn't align with his play. Rangers fans feed some of it. They are getting greedy trying to extract all possible value out him in a trade that they can. They have no problem getting rid of him because they know he's not that good, but they along with the media pump this guy up because they want to get a first round pick for him. The media also likes him more than the other Russians on the team. He was undrafted, he speaks excellent English, he always speaks to the media and in English with no translator, and he gives pretty good answers to questions they ask.

For all these people that pretend to like Georgiyev's play a lot more than they actually do, I think we should put it to the test. If they like his play so much, why don't the Rangers trade Shestyorkin and see how they like it? Wouldn't that solve the problem in goal? You'll see that they won't even consider that option, and that should tell you all you need to know about how they actually view Georgiyev. He's being pumped up by the fans and media to extract more value in a trade.

 

[glovesave_35]

Georgiyev being a lot younger than Lundqvist doesn't mean he's more than marginally better. Since Georgiyev has entered the league, he's had a .913 and Lundqvist has had a .908. The team also allows less shots per game behind Georigyev, so like with most teams, they play better behind the back up than the starter. Hank has gotten the harder games and harder workload. Even since Shestyorkin has joined the team, Hank's appearances have been very sporadic, and he's been able to get into no rhythm. Georgiyev's starts have not been sporadic.

Georgiyev 's numbers have also went down every season of his career as he's gotten a bigger workload. He's proven himself to be a league average goalie who is extremely inconsistent. Even if we acknowledge that Lundqvist isn't that good anymore, his play isn't bad for a back up. The team wouldn't be suffering compared to the league average back up with Lundqvist as our back up.

Georgiyev's going to ask for a big number in his RFA contract. He has a .913 SV% through 77 games, he's pretty young for a goalie, his GM seems to value him at a 1st round pick or more in a trade, and he has the media and fans constantly putting a narrative out there that he's even better than his stats because the defense is so bad. Merzlikins got 4M after only one season and 33 games. I'd be surprised if Georgiyev didn't get 4M+.

I suspect that contract will become a big problem. The Rangers in the past have struggled to get rid of bad RFA contracts like Vesey and Namestnikov. Those two players were both paid for statistics earlier in their careers that they clearly weren't going to be able to replicate for future seasons with the team. Thats exactly what looks likely with Georgiyev. His stats have declined every season of his career, and his role with the Rangers will be decreasing because Shestyorkin's the clear #1 of the three. We will be paying a very big salary to a back up goalie, and this is a team that will need the cap space in 2-3 years.

What we don't want is to have a 25 game per season .905 back up taking up 4M of the cap, and causing us to have to get rid of our best complimentary players like DeAngelo, Buchnevich, Chytil, Lindgren because we don't have that extra 3M of cap space that we might have with a 1M per season back up. Especially with the upcoming cap problems for teams that were not originally forecasted, teams are going to be less willing to take on high-priced salaries from other teams in a trade. There might be no getting rid of Georgiyev for a 5th or 6th round pick as a cap dump. There will always be a mechanism to get rid of that contract number, but you'd rather get a 2nd+ for Georgiyev now than get nothing for him, and have dead money on the cap with no assets coming back because you had to buy him out.

It's completely needless to treat Lundqvist how we are treating him, and it's not because I think we need to preserve his legacy. You make the best decision for the team, but that decision involves keeping Lundqvist because Georgiyev isn't that good. Keep Hank, trade Georgiyev, tell Hank that past this season he needs to play for the veteran minimum, otherwise he won't be re-signed. He'll probably take the contract because he wants to remain in NY. He retires a Ranger in the next few years playing less games per season as his game has declined, and everyone's happy.

Fans around the league have this warped view of Georgiyev's game that doesn't align with his play. Rangers fans feed some of it. They are getting greedy trying to extract all possible value out him in a trade that they can. They have no problem getting rid of him because they know he's not that good, but they along with the media pump this guy up because they want to get a first round pick for him. The media also likes him more than the other Russians on the team. He was undrafted, he speaks excellent English, he always speaks to the media and in English with no translator, and he gives pretty good answers to questions they ask.

For all these people that pretend to like Georgiyev's play a lot more than they actually do, I think we should put it to the test. If they like his play so much, why don't the Rangers trade Shestyorkin and see how they like it? Wouldn't that solve the problem in goal? You'll see that they won't even consider that option, and that should tell you all you need to know about how they actually view Georgiyev. He's being pumped up by the fans and media to extract more value in a trade.

Thanks for the reply.

I think Lundqvist's legacy is safe, almost no matter what. If he stays or goes, I hope Rangers fans keep the big picture in mind.

 

[57special]

Zuccarello: Signing Him Was Nonsense

By

Wild fans

 

[The S5]

Way to piss on something in a thread you shouldn't have, in a way that just shows your own pettiness. Things didn't happen at all as you depict them, but whatever floats your boat. I bet you feel unique blaming a team failure on the goalie. Never happened before as a fan in the history of the NHL, nope. Because oh man, how those NYR teams were dominating despite their goaltending. LOL! What a joke. You blame the failure on the only piece of the puzzle that had a chance of working and was expected to work, compared to the shitty defense, abysmal offense and the terrible special teams. Yeah, let's start there. Great analysis. Don't quit your day job.

---
At the actual matter of hand, yes, the sooner NHL players understand they are money cattle to their franchices, the better. That's why William Nylander held out from the advice of his father, he was himself taught this lesson the hard way. Never treat your cynical, borderline psychopathic, greedy employer as an ally. They are just as much of an opponent as the players on other teams in a hockey game.

That's the standard the NHL franchises have set and its the mutual treatment they have grown to earn. They have no rights to complain players aren't being buddies, as they have repeatedly shown they never will be themselves, the second they're in a headwind. They have nothing to show as an argument why players - cattle - should show any friendly leverage of being nice to NHL franchices. They as players were drafted - yes, drafted like a cattle auction or going into war - in the draft from the start. It all starts from the beginning. The intentions shown are VERY obvious.

A "capitalist" league that is one of the most communistic leagues in the world, bar none, as all Murican "sports" leagues (more like entertainment industries who focus on "sports"). They're only capitalist towards their own money cattle - sorry, employees - and the imperialistic extortion and exploitation of other leagues, but extremely friendly towards eachother within. Just like a Soviet government. There's not an ounce of capitalism in the NHL, nor the NBA, nor the NFL. How ironic.

If I was Lundqvist, I would just straight up retire and decline any retirement ceremony and never return. But as the soft, loyal fashion dog he is to New York, I imagine he will just suck it up and play the smile game, while deeply suffering within.

Alternatively, I would just retire and then shame the entire NYR organization, talking shit about them - and the NHL in particular - on retirement night, take a piss on center ice and leave. And then enjoy the extreme awkwardness to follow. "Ehm, should we continue to haul the jersey or pull it down?"

Wow, there is a ton to unpack here.
So, are you a malcontent anarchist in all areas of your life?

 

[The S5]

Thanks for the reply.

I think Lundqvist's legacy is safe, almost no matter what. If he stays or goes, I hope Rangers fans keep the big picture in mind.

His legacy will be that he was generally a top 3-5 goalie during his prime and won 1 Vezina. That's it.
It really doesn't matter what peoples opinions are, that fact that he doesn't have a Cup and that he was considered the best goalie in the league once, will define his legacy.

 

[Absolut]

His legacy will be that he was generally a top 3-5 goalie during his prime and won 1 Vezina. That's it.
It really doesn't matter what peoples opinions are, that fact that he doesn't have a Cup and that he was considered the best goalie in the league once, will define his legacy.

You forgot the obvious. Hank's fabulous hair.

 

[North Cole]

Dallas traded assets to acquire Zucc and were even willing to part with the conditional 1st to extend him...Zucc signs with the Wild. Loyalty

TIL loyalty is easily earned after a short three month window... Sounds like mail order bride. "What do you mean the marriage didnt work out after you met three months ago?? Damn unloyal people. You paid a company didnt you?!"

 

[Oddbob]

Not really...Dallas gave up a good amount to acquire him and were willing to give up a ton more to keep him, he took the best contract offered to him.

Player did what's best for player while doing a good amount of bitching that his former team did what's best for team.

WHY WOULD HE HAVE ANY LOYALTY TO DALLAS? He was there for a cup of coffee, and he didn't ask to go to Dallas.

 

[PatrikBerglund]

You should respect your icons, even at the end of their careers.

 

[57special]

Why should a coach play someone who gives them less of a chance to win? Isn't that being disloyal to the team?

 

[Fataldogg]

WHY WOULD HE HAVE ANY LOYALTY TO DALLAS? He was there for a cup of coffee, and he didn't ask to go to Dallas.

I dont understand it either. What loyalty did he owe to the franchise? It was their decision to give up assets to acquire him for a short term run at the Cup. And, he performed pretty well for them from what I remember.