Proposal: Zuccarello To Calgary

[blankall]

I know the pick was conditional but the point I’m trying to make is that Kane didn’t have more value because he was younger and had more potential.

A pending UFA is a pending UFA, unless it’s a sign and trade you’re paying for 20 games + playoffs. A condition just lets the acquiring team save a bit of value if they don’t want to/can’t re-sign

No it's still apples and oranges.

A 31 year old player has less value than a 26 year old. It was also clear from the structure of the trade and the talk surrounding the trade/re-signing, that the idea always was to keep Kane long-term. He was clearly not just a rental.

Would you trade Zuccarello to Calgary for a 2nd +4th and a conditional 1st if he re-signs? I'm all about that deal.

 

[crackdown44]

No it's still apples and oranges.

A 31 year old player has less value than a 26 year old. It was also clear from the structure of the trade and the talk surrounding the trade/re-signing, that the idea always was to keep Kane long-term. He was clearly not just a rental.

Would you trade Zuccarello to Calgary for a 2nd +4th and a conditional 1st if he re-signs? I'm all about that deal.

I’m a Flames fan man. I’m just saying that a UFA is a UFA lol. You could counter argue your whole age point by pointing to a guy like Rick Nash or other older vets that got big hauls at the deadline

I’m not really sure why Kane’s value was nerfed so much because I think he’s a good player. Probably an attitude thing

 

[jessemadnote]

Matt Zuccarello vs Evander Kane:
Depends what you value. Zucc definitely has more points but there are some strong arguments that Kane is better.

Kane has over 0.3 goals per game 6 times in his career.
Zucc has over 0.3 goals per game once in his career.

Kane has over 100 hits every year since 2010.
Zucc has done it twice.

Kane was 25 at the time of the trade and resigning him at 7x7 made sense. There is no way any team will sign a 31 year old Zucc to a 7x7 and people will look at that as a good deal.

For NYR to get the same deal for Zucc as BUF got for Evander Kane would be more than fair and make tons of sense.

 

[Tawnos]

I'd be good with a 1st+Mangiapane, honestly.

The Flames lack of 2nd rounders in the last 2 drafts makes their farm system difficult to work with. Just using the Nash trade as a basis, which essentially boiled down to a 1st plus Lindgren (2016 2nd rounder), that's the kind of thing the Rangers will be looking for.

 

[Double Dion]

If you let us dump Neal on you I'd give up a Nash-like return. Dumping Belesky was why the price was so high.

 

[Trxjw]

If you let us dump Neal on you I'd give up a Nash-like return. Dumping Belesky was why the price was so high.

$1.9m for a little over two years vs $5.75m at over 4. There's a dead on comparison if I've ever seen one.

 

[One Winged Angel]

I have no horse in the race here, but this is also a false narrative in terms of overall picture.
Zucc has been on those good Rangers teams for his entire career, until only recently when they moved to the dog **** realm. Kane has bounced around from: ATL, ****hole. Winnipeg, ****hole while he was there. Buffalo, ****hole.

Zuccarello from 2014-2018 has scored more points than any Ranger. It’s not a false narrative. His line was also the driving line in 2014, they were the best line in the playoffs for the Rangers that year on a night to night basis. The next year he played with Nash and Brassard. They had their best years as Rangers. He came back from that nasty injury the next season and had a 60 point year.

Kane's an ex top 5 pick, who has scored 30 goals, and is always good for 20+; and has had that 'if we could get him in the right spot' vibe (which he got in SJ). That also doesn't include him being a tough, tough dude. His value will always be higher than Zuccarello, and it's not taking away from Zucc who is one heckuva player; it's just there are guys in this league who will always have value and others not. I look at Zucc as an upgraded Lee Stempniak type player. Stempy would give you 30-50 points a year, great two-way winger, yet he was traded several times for kind of mediocre returns. And while I see Mats worth a tonne more than someone like Stempy, I really can't see anyone backing up the truck to be like 'this is the guy who puts us over'.

Zuccarello is clearly a superior player, Kane is obviously the better goal scorer but that’s also because he shoots more. I can just as easily say Zuccarello is the superior playmaker and it’s not close. But the gap between the two goal scoring wise is a lot closer than the gap in playmaking and there’s literally no argument to that.

You just compared Mats Zuccarello to a guy who went 10 years between 50 point seasons and has only had 3 seasons of 40 or more points in his career. Zuccarello had 4 50+ seasons in the last 5, 1 of 60+ points and he had 2 seasons of 59 in which he missed games. Stempniak is the grinder that had a few good years. Zuccarello is the skilled player with a gritty side to him. Not a fair comparison at all.

 

[Tawnos]

If you let us dump Neal on you I'd give up a Nash-like return. Dumping Belesky was why the price was so high.

No, Spooner was the price of dumping Beleskey. But I don't have a problem with taking on a cap dump.

A cap dump on the level of Neal is going to cost a ton, though.

 

[One Winged Angel]

No it's not. SJ was intent on signing Kane right away. Kane came out and said that he wanted to sign in SJ too. Obviously some discussion had gone on before the trade. It actually increases Kane's value substantially.

It is an irrelevant point, as both players are impending UFA’s and both are at the point in their careers where you know what you’re getting. You’re creating a narrative that doesn’t exist to bolster an argument you don’t have.

At the time of the trade Kane had put up 28 points the season before and was on pace for 27 goals and 54 points. This was on a lottery level tire fire of a team.

Yes and he hadn’t scored at Zuccarello’s level since 2012, which was his career year.

My point is you're making the wrong comparison. You're comparing a player that is 31, and will be 32 before the start of the season to a player that was 25. Of course the much older player is going to have more 50 point seasons under his belt. The older player is worth less, because they are older. Obviously this is an extreme example, but maybe Buffalo should trade Calgary Dahlin for Brodie, because Brodie has more 40 point seasons? See how that works.

Kane was in the league before Zuccarello was. The age doesn’t matter for anything in this scenario. Not only that, but Zuccarello was sent down in 2012 and came back late from Russia in the 2013 season. Kane to that point spent a lot more time on NHL rosters than Zuccarello did. Age doesn’t play a factor by any means in this argument when Kane is the one that’s played over 120 more games DESPITE MISSING TIME in multiple seasons. This is the biggest stretch I’ve seen in this thread so far.

EDIT: Are we also forgetting that the 1st rounder in the Kane trade was conditional? If Kane did not re-sign it became a 2nd.

If he didn’t have the off-issues he had, maybe it could have been a first.

 

[One Winged Angel]

One year has nothing to do with the next.

One year, Paul Gaustad was worth a 1st round pick.

I have a very hard time believing the average return of bottom-6 players going up over the years has nothing to do with that deal.

 

[One Winged Angel]

Pfft, but stats!

I know, right? It’s like we’re ignoring the fact that Zuccarello is just as gritty of a player because he’s 5’6.

Pfft, but size!

 

[TGWL]

No, Spooner was the price of dumping Beleskey. But I don't have a problem with taking on a cap dump.

A cap dump on the level of Neal is going to cost a ton, though.

I do when that cap dump is 5.75 million for 4 more years after this.

 

[One Winged Angel]

And for the last time, Spooner was the compensation for taking Beleskey. Stop with the ridiculous nonsense that the first rounder was. Rick Nash was not going for Spooner and spare parts.

 

[Lunatik]

I know, right? It’s like we’re ignoring the fact that Zuccarello is just as gritty of a player because he’s 5’6.

Pfft, but size!

Just as gritty? Thanks for providing undisputable proof of your ridiculous bias

 

[Lunatik]

And for the last time, Spooner was the compensation for taking Beleskey. Stop with the ridiculous nonsense that the first rounder was. Rick Nash was not going for Spooner and spare parts.

Lmao, keep telling yourself that, maybe one day you might actually believe it yourself

 

[One Winged Angel]

Just as gritty? Thanks for providing undisputable proof of your ridiculous bias

Or you can stop commenting on a player you clearly have never watched play.

 

[One Winged Angel]

Lmao, keep telling yourself that, maybe one day you might actually believe it yourself

Just like one day you’ll actually watch Zuccarello play?

 

[Tawnos]

I do when that cap dump is 5.75 million for 4 more years after this.

Eh. The buyout is less than 2 million. If we could hold out 2 years, that's less than 2 million for 4 years.

 

[Lunatik]

Or you can stop commenting on a player you clearly have never watched play.

I'm wondering if you've ever seen either play.

 

[One Winged Angel]

I'm wondering if you've ever seen either play.

I’ve watched every game in Mats Zuccarello’s career. You clearly haven’t and I’ll put good money on the fact that I’ve watched more of Kane than you have of Zuccarello, because the number of games you’ve watched Zuccarello play is zero.

You’ve proven that. Stick to Calgary.

 

[Meeqs]

I don't personally seeing Zucc get a 1st but I'd be an interesting target. Always felt CGY wanted a bit more grit than more offense but he's a good player.

I think a 2nd and a mid prospect could be a possibility.

 

[blankall]

It is an irrelevant point, as both players are impending UFA’s and both are at the point in their careers where you know what you’re getting. You’re creating a narrative that doesn’t exist to bolster an argument you don’t have.



Yes and he hadn’t scored at Zuccarello’s level since 2012, which was his career year.



Kane was in the league before Zuccarello was. The age doesn’t matter for anything in this scenario. Not only that, but Zuccarello was sent down in 2012 and came back late from Russia in the 2013 season. Kane to that point spent a lot more time on NHL rosters than Zuccarello did. Age doesn’t play a factor by any means in this argument when Kane is the one that’s played over 120 more games DESPITE MISSING TIME in multiple seasons. This is the biggest stretch I’ve seen in this thread so far.



If he didn’t have the off-issues he had, maybe it could have been a first.

Of course age is a factor. It was deal based around a conditional 1st, depending on whether or not Kane re-signed. Players in the NHL also statistically drop off significantly in their 30s. Kane is power forward, who are notoriously slow developers.

And Kane didn't put up Zucarello like points....except for the year that the Sharks actually trade for him, where he had already put up 20/20 in 61 games, despite being on a lottery pick level team.

Comparing past stats with Kane makes now sense. This is particularly true, as Kane suffered from a number of, now resolved, injuries that held him back. Kane his his "career level" in 2012/13, but the season was shorterned. He hit it again in 2013/14, but his year was shortened due to injury. Most importantly, he was on pace again for those number through 60 games in 2017/18, the year the trade was made. Treating Kane like a flash in the pan is totally misleading.

The Kane deal was based around acquiring a long-term and young piece, which looks like it is paying off for the Sharks big time. Zucc is a pure rental and is 31.

 

[Tawnos]

I don't personally seeing Zucc get a 1st but I'd be an interesting target. Always felt CGY wanted a bit more grit than more offense but he's a good player.

I think a 2nd and a mid prospect could be a possibility.

The only time I can really recall a top-6 rental forward going for that little is Vanek, and that was just a bizarre one.

 

[Lunatik]

I’ve watched every game in Mats Zuccarello’s career. You clearly haven’t and I’ll put good money on the fact that I’ve watched more of Kane than you have of Zuccarello, because the number of games you’ve watched Zuccarello play is zero.

You’ve proven that. Stick to Calgary.

If you cannot take it, don't dish it out.

All I've proven is I'm not biased for a psrtipar player. I have no horse in this race, I'm not going to be heartbroken if Zucchini doesn't end up a Flame.

All you've proved is when you're proven wrong you jump to "you've never seen him play".

 

[Meeqs]

The only time I can really recall a top-6 rental forward going for that little is Vanek, and that was just a bizarre one.

You should recall better then haha.