Toggle sidebar

Mats Zuccarello

  • Thread starter Thread starter Wolfy*
  • Start date Start date
  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
Idlerlee said:
3 goals the last 2 games, won rangers a point, pulls opposition penalties more or less every game, sets up Richards with barndoor shots, uses his body as a human shotstopper.

Aaaaand I could go on.

I'm not trying to make him out to be god, there are better players than Zucc on this team, but I find it staggering that you're able to label him as: Bad. And even a below average forward.. like, what.

So when even Corsi backs up everyones claim, and logical deduction and situation analysiz clearly state that yes, he makes crucial contributions.. You have to be able to explain better WHY he is so bad instead of just say "he's bad, this is my opinion"..

You are of course right to your opinion, but in this case it feels like you are speaking against the masses without actual evidence other than assumption
Click to expand...

Your Corsi usage after 9 games this season is truly bizarre, and a perfect example of selective stat surfing to prove some sort of point. Theres plenty of guys on that list that have played 5x the amount of games as Zuccarello with much tougher minutes.

Anyway, you see, I dont think Im saying anything bad about Zuccarello. Or, at least, I feel like most people with sane expectations of the NHL games wouldnt disagree that, outside of offensive creativity, the guy needs a lot of work to his game.

I am not saying he cant be a contributing member of this mediocre NY Rangers team. Expectations need to be scaled for an undrafted player who, through about 50 NHL games, has proven to be an incomplete player that can produce at 2nd/3rd line tweener levels. Im not sure he can be much more, and if he can be, I just think it'll be on a perpetually bad team. Thats not saying hes a bad player, but it is saying I dont think he could be a true difference maker on a competitor.

Not sure how that honest and blunt assessment of a player can be viewed as me saying "Mats Zuccarello sucks," unless of course you simply love the little guy and/or have draped yourself in the Norwegian flag.
 
I haven't found myself saying "man, Zuccarello had a terrible game, he was a big reason the team lost".

More often than not, I've been content and happy with the way he has played.

I really don't see the point of complaining about his 'weak defense' when he's been on the ice for, what, 3 goals in total since he came here? He might not have a ton of points thus far, but he's been creating offensive chances in each of the games he has played thus far.

I feel like people are nitpicking because they were wrong and are trying to justify what they said prior to him coming here. Myself, I'm happy I was wrong about his game. He's a different player than he was the first two times around, for the better.
 
I have no problem admitting that Zuccarello was the reason I started following this team. But I stayed around when he was sent down and I stayed around when he went to Russia. And I think most of my fellow countrymen that dosen't have a love for the team has pretty much vanished from this board by now.

On topic; I have a real problem with using the term "defensive liability". To label someone as that, there has to be a real danger for a goal against by a mistake every time the puck is in the defensive zone. That is not the case with Zucc. He will never make an impact on the PK in the NHL, but he has made alot more good defensive plays than bad since he returned.
 
Bleed Ranger Blue said:
Not sure how that honest and blunt assessment of a player can be viewed as me saying "Mats Zuccarello sucks," unless of course you simply love the little guy and/or have draped yourself in the Norwegian flag.
Click to expand...


I've been a rangers fan for 10 years so I try to keep my opinions slightly unbiased, but ofc its easy to feel a extra "need" to protect someone so close to home.. That being said I'd absolutely agree with you if he is as mediocre as you say.. but I simply disagree with you.. then again that's nature and I will just hope that he eventually proves you wrong.

I think it was you that called him a below average forward, which in my eyes would mean the same as "bad", sorry if that was some other guy and not you though.
 
Zenith said:
I haven't found myself saying "man, Zuccarello had a terrible game, he was a big reason the team lost".

More often than not, I've been content and happy with the way he has played.

I really don't see the point of complaining about his 'weak defense' when he's been on the ice for, what, 3 goals in total since he came here? He might not have a ton of points thus far, but he's been creating offensive chances in each of the games he has played thus far.

I feel like people are nitpicking because they were wrong and are trying to justify what they said prior to him coming here. Myself, I'm happy I was wrong about his game. He's a different player than he was the first two times around, for the better.
Click to expand...

So these are the standards now? So long as hes not a complete trainwreck?

And Im curious, what was said prior to him coming here? Because I was led to believe the little guy would be a definitive difference maker even back then and I still really havent seen it.
 
Zenith said:
I haven't found myself saying "man, Zuccarello had a terrible game, he was a big reason the team lost".

More often than not, I've been content and happy with the way he has played.

I really don't see the point of complaining about his 'weak defense' when he's been on the ice for, what, 3 goals in total since he came here? He might not have a ton of points thus far, but he's been creating offensive chances in each of the games he has played thus far.

I feel like people are nitpicking because they were wrong and are trying to justify what they said prior to him coming here. Myself, I'm happy I was wrong about his game. He's a different player than he was the first two times around, for the better.
Click to expand...


That is rare on the internet. I said a week ago I respect your honesty and open mind.
 
Bleed Ranger Blue said:
So these are the standards now? So long as hes not a complete trainwreck?

And Im curious, what was said prior to him coming here? Because I was led to believe the little guy would be a definitive difference maker even back then and I still really havent seen it.
Click to expand...

I think you should just be real. You bashed the kid repeatedly before we signed him. You continue to bash him no matter how he plays. You bashed him last night and today despite many people feeling he was one of the stars of the game. You are quick to jump on what you think is a mistake and do not get excited about his good plays. You focus on the bad and belittle the good. That is why I see you as a hater. If you want to call me a lover I will be real and say I'm a big fan that roots hard for the kid to do well. Just be real about things.
 
Bleed Ranger Blue said:
Your Corsi usage after 9 games this season is truly bizarre, and a perfect example of selective stat surfing to prove some sort of point. Theres plenty of guys on that list that have played 5x the amount of games as Zuccarello with much tougher minutes

Anyway, you see, I dont think Im saying anything bad about Zuccarello. Or, at least, I feel like most people with sane expectations of the NHL games wouldnt disagree that, outside of offensive creativity, the guy needs a lot of work to his game.

I am not saying he cant be a contributing member of this mediocre NY Rangers team. Expectations need to be scaled for an undrafted player who, through about 50 NHL games, has proven to be an incomplete player that can produce at 2nd/3rd line tweener levels. Im not sure he can be much more, and if he can be, I just think it'll be on a perpetually bad team. Thats not saying hes a bad player, but it is saying I dont think he could be a true difference maker on a competitor.

Not sure how that honest and blunt assessment of a player can be viewed as me saying "Mats Zuccarello sucks," unless of course you simply love the little guy and/or have draped yourself in the Norwegian flag.
Click to expand...

Discussing this with you is futile when you have a confirmation bias, too the extent you refuse to read anything of his adv stats, and will regard any and all other facts and arguments as flawed when they don't support your bias, and likewise, will latch on to everything supporting it.

Even your arguments starts with the equivalent of " I'm not racist, but..."
 
Bleed Ranger Blue said:
If Im making that up, which Im not, why in the heck does he have such a following? This is the question Im trying to get answered.
Click to expand...

He has a big following for several reasons.

1. He did some great things in the Olympics for Norway
2. He adds some creativity to a North South team
3. He shows a lot of heart and never quits
4. He is like a water bug on the ice that is fun to watch
5. He has had SD overtime game winners
6. He has won multiple shootouts for us.
7. He wants to be a Ranger
8. He is a small guy that doesn't take crap from huge guys
9. He is a funny and humble guy who is well liked by other Rangers

Saying you were led to believe that he would be a definitive difference maker is a joke since you have never stopped bashing him from long before he was signed. Zooks has made many good plays in his time here. Fans have said that. Players have said that. Torts has said that. Our announcers have said that. Others teams announcers have said that. So lets make a bet. I bet you I can find 20 of your posts criticizing Zooks before you can show me 5 of your posts stating Zooks made a good play (without also bashing him in the same post). Is it a bet?
 
Bleed Ranger Blue said:
If Im making that up, which Im not, why in the heck does he have such a following? This is the question Im trying to get answered.
Click to expand...

He's just likable...is that wrong? Seems like you are counting that against him and his play... He's as likable as you are unlikable when it comes to debating Zucc.

When it comes to his game I don't see how anyone can complain at this point...even after a potential raise and new contract the value sure seems to be there. You say we are saying he can be a defensive train wreck? I think of it as he isn't Toews, will never be Toews and luckily will never be paid like Toews. He isn't valued as a superstar so of course he's not going to be as well rounded as one. If he is creating offense, going to the net and finishing, and skating and grinding better than I think anyone predicted, then what is the complaint?
 
Rangers want to sign Zucc, his agent told Norwegian media today. Thats good news for him.
 
Zenith said:
I haven't found myself saying "man, Zuccarello had a terrible game, he was a big reason the team lost".

More often than not, I've been content and happy with the way he has played.

I really don't see the point of complaining about his 'weak defense' when he's been on the ice for, what, 3 goals in total since he came here? He might not have a ton of points thus far, but he's been creating offensive chances in each of the games he has played thus far.

I feel like people are nitpicking because they were wrong and are trying to justify what they said prior to him coming here. Myself, I'm happy I was wrong about his game. He's a different player than he was the first two times around, for the better.
Click to expand...

Nailed it. Not to all the posters, but there is definitely a few this falls into.

And much respect to you. Its rare to find a poster admit they misjudged something, your one of the good guys Zenith ;)
 
NickyFotiu said:
He has a big following for several reasons.

1. He did some great things in the Olympics for Norway
2. He adds some creativity to a North South team
3. He shows a lot of heart and never quits
4. He is like a water bug on the ice that is fun to watch
5. He has had SD overtime game winners
6. He has won multiple shootouts for us.
7. He wants to be a Ranger
8. He is a small guy that doesn't take crap from huge guys
9. He is a funny and humble guy who is well liked by other Rangers

Saying you were led to believe that he would be a definitive difference maker is a joke since you have never stopped bashing him from long before he was signed. Zooks has made many good plays in his time here. Fans have said that. Players have said that. Torts has said that. Our announcers have said that. Others teams announcers have said that. So lets make a bet. I bet you I can find 20 of your posts criticizing Zooks before you can show me 5 of your posts stating Zooks made a good play (without also bashing him in the same post). Is it a bet?
Click to expand...

I'll make a bet with you. 10-1 odds what you said went in one ear and directly out the other. On this topic, he is the John Tortorella of posters. Logic escapes him.
 
RangerBoy said:
The little guy has played well. Good for him. Its a sad state of affairs for the Rangers they had to pluck Zuccarello back from the KHL and he is receiving top 9 minutes. The issue with Zuccarello is this. Why is it when someone criticizes Zuccarello,they are accused of hating him? Posters here always accusing anyone who says anything bad about Zuccarello as being a "hater". Players get bashed all the time. Only when someone says something about Mats are they accused of "hating" him. Torts didn't want Zuccarello on the team because of the media from Norway. There was this one female reporter who annoyed John. All she cared about was Zuccarello. Why isn't Mats playing more? Why isn't Mats dressed? It didn't matter what the team did when Mats was here. Its all about Mats. Its the same thing with the Zuccarello guys from Norway.
Click to expand...

Only thing annoying here is you. You really should be happy there is more supporters coming. You sound like you own the Rangers or its only for Americans. By the way, i walked around with a Rangers cap when Beatles still had hits. And if you cant deal with that you can eat the peanuts out of my.......... Have a nice day. :-)
 
Tonigh he played like he always seems to do..

Not his best game, but picked up an assist..

He really should shoot more though..

Not sure If one of the goals against is all on him though, Henke has to take most of the blame on that one..
 
He was alright, but nothing more.. one of his worst games but he was ok I guess.

Not sure about that goal, I'm sure he could have done better but things happens fast in Hockey and Hank should have gotten that one
 
His worst game being back. Wish he reacted quicker on the goal off the face off.
No big deal though obviously
 
Glennsoe said:
Tonigh he played like he always seems to do..

Not his best game, but picked up an assist..

He really should shoot more though..

Not sure If one of the goals against is all on him though, Henke has to take most of the blame on that one..
Click to expand...

I agree. And this is why we shouldnt get blinded by the points and production. In this game, which was far away from his best performance since he was back he gets a point. He has played multiple games where he has really been good, without getting points.....

But picking up points gives confidence i guess, but he needs to step up more and I totally agree that he has to shoot more.
 
All players tend to get sloppy if they are up by 6 goals. Sounds like the game isn't worth watching in its entirety though, so I'll stick to the highlights today.
 
Did you guys see how hard Mats worked before that 5-0 goal ? It was incredible. He played Moore free after winning the puck long the boards and then went on in the front of the net. He did not get an assist but he was certainly part of the attack
 
anofsti said:
Discussing this with you is futile when you have a confirmation bias, too the extent you refuse to read anything of his adv stats, and will regard any and all other facts and arguments as flawed when they don't support your bias, and likewise, will latch on to everything supporting it.

Even your arguments starts with the equivalent of " I'm not racist, but..."
Click to expand...

Being Norwegian is hardly a being a member of a distinct race... On the otherhand a blind patriotic Biggot might work instead... ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom