Proposal: Zuccarello To Calgary

[Shootertooter]

Dude seriously if you think Zuccarello is so much better than Kane, how would you feel if Gorton signed him to a 7x7?

He currently is trying to move the guy for assets to rebuild with.....why would a 31yr old player be signed to a 7X7 by a team that doesn't project to be a playoff team for a few seasons?

 

[Meeqs]

Because you don’t agree with someone doesn’t mean they’re being unreasonable or that there’s too much ground to cover. There are a few who are, but lumping fans together as “unreasonable” because you disagree with their point of view is a misguided and ill-informed approach as well.

Let’s talk, I’m curious to hear what you have to say. At this point, I don’t care about what ends up being right, I know that none of us have any bearing on it.

The only things I’ve cared to argue in this thread are Zuccarello’s grit, as one poster assumed that no one would catch him with his foot in his mouth, correlating size with grit and paying the price of a player with term for a rental, which are both indeed factually wrong.

So I’m curious as to a few things...

1. What is unreasonable and if so, can you show some examples? Because I’m sure you’re probably talking about Bern and some of his ridiculous ideas, which have been well documented throughout this site as part of the unreasonable clamor.

2. What top-6 rental players have gone for such little in return? Because at least then, we mught have some guidelines as to what to look for in a deal and THAT in the end, will save us a lot of time and energy. That we can agree on, no?

You just really aren't hearing what I'm saying man.

If you feel you're right, then own it and lets come back and see after the trade happens.

 

[One Winged Angel]

Dude seriously if you think Zuccarello is so much better than Kane, how would you feel if Gorton signed him to a 7x7?

If they weren’t in a rebuild and Zuccarello was 2 years younger, he wouldn’t be available because he probably would have re-signed already for 5-6 years and about 6 million per, as he gave the team a huge discount on his last deal.

 

[One Winged Angel]

You just really aren't hearing what I'm saying man.

If you feel you're right, then own it and lets come back and see after the trade happens.

No, you’re not reading what I’m saying. I’m not talking about being right or wrong, I stated that in the post you mentioned.

I just want to know what is “unreasonable” and what your examples were, that's all.

 

[Webster]

I think the Rangers will keep Zuccarello if they can't get at least a 1st.

Based on Larry Brooks' article, one of the most trusted reporters in NY, there's no point in trading Zucc for a 2nd+. According to Brooks there's a very real possibility that the Rangers will sign him as a UFA, and even award him the captaincy.

 

[WilsonNY14]

I think the Rangers will keep Zuccarello if they can't get at least a 1st.

Based on Larry Brooks' article, one of the most trusted reporters in NY, there's no point in trading Zucc for a 2nd+. According to Brooks there's a very real possibility that the Rangers will sign him as a UFA, and even award him the captaincy.

If he's just gonna sign with NYR in the off-season, then it makes perfect sense to trade him and get whatever you can. It's literally free picks/prospects for 2+ months of services on another team.

 

[Big Daddy Cane]

2. What top-6 rental players have gone for such little in return? Because at least then, we mught have some guidelines as to what to look for in a deal and THAT in the end, will save us a lot of time and energy. That we can agree on, no?

I’ll step in and provide some examples:

Year	Player	Return	Extrapolated Production
2013	Roy	2nd + Connauton	~60
2014	Gaborik	2nd + Conditional 3rd + Fratton	~52
2016	Boedker	Bleackley (Compensatory 2nd) + Wood + Tanguay	~52
2016	Hudler	2nd + 4th	~54
2017	Vanek (II)	3rd + McIlrath	~65

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

I don't think this is the right way to look at it, though. Using the value of player Y as a test for player X ignores the market at the time of the trade. Supply and demand is relevant.

This is shaping up to be one of the best rental forward groups that I can remember. It’s dare I say, generational. Panarin, Stone, Duchene, Hayes, Staal, Silfverberg, Ferland, Simmonds, Zuccarello, Nyquist and Dzingel aren’t all returning 1st round picks. Nash was the 2nd most valuable forward available last deadline, depending on how you feel about Kane. Zuccarello might not be Top 5 this year even after the supply contracts with re-signings and teams holding on to their players for a playoff run, given how GMs have prioritized centers, defensemen and power wingers for those premium picks.

I'm bearish on the return for Ferland for the same reason, mind you.

 

[Sparky93]

I actually feel bad for Rangers fans, I think they’re probably going to get screwed on the Zuc return, for a few reasons. First, I think Zuc is probably the 4th most valuable forward available, but I could see teams placing a higher value on Simmonds, due to his intangibles. Second, he’s the oldest of the high end UFA’s and this could steer teams away from potentially resigning him. Third, he’s the smallest of the group, and while he may not play that way, teams covet size this time of year. Forth, he’s not an ideal fit for a bottom 6 role, heading into the playoffs. Basically, I think he’s probably the 3rd most desirable player, in a limited RW market. Personally, I hope we pony up the 1st and take Zuc home because I feel he’s the best fit for the Flames, but management has stated that it isn’t available for a rental.

 

[blankall]

Size isn’t as important in today’s NHL as you’re making it out to be

The sign and trade price was not what you stated, there was a condition to upgrade one pick IF he re-signed. If you don’t understand how different that is from a sign and trade I’m not going to bother explaining (look at the Kyle Turris or Max Pacioretty returns)

O’regan wasn’t a cap dump, he could be buried at zero cost. Didn’t affect Buffalo’s cap at all

The upgraded piece was a 1st, the largest piece in the trade going to Buffalo. Without the trade and then re-signing of Kane (not sure how that's not a trade and sign), the price drops from a 1st to a 2nd.

Size is no longer crucial in the NHL but remains an important factor and strong asset. All other things being equal, if you had 2 players that were exactly the same in every other way, the much larger player is going to be more valuable.

 

[Lunatik]

I'm 100% sure that every February, fans of teams that eventually do trade a 1st for a rental have said the same thing. You might be right and you might be wrong, but you have no real knowledge here.

The Flames have only traded their 1st for a rental a couple times in franchise history. While Treliving has shown a willingness to trade firsts more than any GM in franchise history, it's always been for a player who is signed or an RFA. We have no reason not to take him at his word.

 

[BigRangy]

Zuccarello is great and definitely a top 6er and worth a first in a vacuum, but there's no sense for the Flames or any team to spend a first on a forward that would play in their bottom six and/or 2nd power play unit.

He's a nice to have. You don't spend premium pieces on nice-to-have guys, imo.

 

[Tawnos]

The Flames have only traded their 1st for a rental a couple times in franchise history. While Treliving has shown a willingness to trade firsts more than any GM in franchise history, it's always been for a player who is signed or an RFA. We have no reason not to take him at his word.

That’s not his word. That’s a bunch of moments that have nothing to do with this one.

 

[Shootertooter]

I think the Rangers will keep Zuccarello if they can't get at least a 1st.

Based on Larry Brooks' article, one of the most trusted reporters in NY, there's no point in trading Zucc for a 2nd+. According to Brooks there's a very real possibility that the Rangers will sign him as a UFA, and even award him the captaincy.

If the Rangers intend to offer Zucc a contract as a UFA, it makes perfect sense to trade him now and get some type of return for him as they are not going to the post season. Also, if Brooks really believes this then could Kreider be on the move, he is the guy who should get the C. If they keep Zucc over Kreider long term......that would be a mistake.

 

[Alluckks]

That’s not his word. That’s a bunch of moments that have nothing to do with this one.

Dear Flames fans,

I give you my word that I will not trade this year's 1st round pick!

 

[Webster]

If the Rangers intend to offer Zucc a contract as a UFA, it makes perfect sense to trade him now and get some type of return for him as they are not going to the post season. Also, if Brooks really believes this then could Kreider be on the move, he is the guy who should get the C. If they keep Zucc over Kreider long term......that would be a mistake.

To put it this way, I think the team wants Zuccarello as their captain...

Yes, I also believe Kreider is on the block.

 

[Lunatik]

That’s not his word. That’s a bunch of moments that have nothing to do with this one.

He's never once said he wouldn't do something,then did it.

 

[CraigsList]

I'm 100% sure that every February, fans of teams that eventually do trade a 1st for a rental have said the same thing. You might be right and you might be wrong, but you have no real knowledge here.

Let's review over the last 1st round picks the Flames have moved in the last 5 years:

2015 - Part of a trade for RFA Hamilton
2017 - For Hamonic, with term

Zuccarello isn't an RFA and does not have term. The only way I see Treliving trading a 1st is if it's conditional, and the condition being whether or not the player either re-signs with us or if we make it far in the playoffs. Sorry if it sounds completely outrageous that we Flames fans don't want to move our 1st for a pending UFA.

 

[One Winged Angel]

I’ll step in and provide some examples:

Year	Player	Return	Extrapolated Production
2013	Roy	2nd + Connauton	~60
2014	Gaborik	2nd + Conditional 3rd + Fratton	~52
2016	Boedker	Bleackley (Compensatory 2nd) + Wood + Tanguay	~52
2016	Hudler	2nd + 4th	~54
2017	Vanek (II)	3rd + McIlrath	~65

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

I don't think this is the right way to look at it, though. Using the value of player Y as a test for player X ignores the market at the time of the trade. Supply and demand is relevant.

Roy was removed from a major injury that basically ended up helping derail his career. He was more of a top-9 player at that point. Not on Zuccarello’s level at that point.

Gaborik was past his prime and had been playing like crap since the 2012 season ended. He was a shell of himself at that point and rebounded in the playoffs playing on Kopitar’s wing and in 2015, fell off after. He was 32 with a lot of mileage and injuries on him. Definitely not even close to Zuccarello at the time of that trade.

Boedker was never the player Zuccarello was. He had 2 50 point seasons in his career and has put up bottom 6 numbers otherwise. A borderline top-6 forward.

Hudler had just turned 32 and was in the midst of a horrible season, not even scoring half of the amount of points from the season before. Another one on the decline.

This is shaping up to be one of the best rental forward groups that I can remember. It’s dare I say, generational. Panarin, Stone, Duchene, Hayes, Staal, Silfverberg, Ferland, Simmonds, Zuccarello, Nyquist and Dzingel aren’t all returning 1st round picks. Nash was the 2nd most valuable forward available last deadline, depending on how you feel about Kane. Zuccarello might not be Top 5 this year even after the supply contracts with re-signings and teams holding on to their players for a playoff run, given how GMs have prioritized centers, defensemen and power wingers for those premium picks.

I'm bearish on the return for Ferland for the same reason, mind you.

I can agree with that.

 

[Tawnos]

Let's review over the last 1st round picks the Flames have moved in the last 5 years:

2015 - Part of a trade for RFA Hamilton
2017 - For Hamonic, with term

Zuccarello isn't an RFA and does not have term. The only way I see Treliving trading a 1st is if it's conditional, and the condition being whether or not the player either re-signs with us or if we make it far in the playoffs. Sorry if it sounds completely outrageous that we Flames fans don't want to move our 1st for a pending UFA.

I honestly don’t care what Flames fans want. Nor do I care what Rangers fans want. I generally try to stay away from things that don’t matter, like what fans want. What I’m looking at is what the teams need and what the typical prices for those type of players tends to be.

I know that Treliving doesn’t like rentals in general, but I don’t think any GM is as monolithic as fans portray them. They tend to be opportunistic. So it really depends on where his head is at in 3 weeks.

The Rangers need as many shots at talent as they can get, whether they’re picks or solid prospects. Zuccarello is a valuable commodity. Among top-6 rentals, he’s got far more playoff experience than anyone, including a Finals run. There are GMs out there who value that highly enough that the Rangers should be able to get their price for him.

I’m not convinced that Calgary is the answer, but it just wouldn’t surprise me.