I just don't see it at all. Patches is the best player in the deal by a mile. Suzuki will never be as good as him and Tatar is overpaid and kinda....good I guess.That MaxPac trade on first glance is on the underwhelming side of a ‘fair’ deal IMO
Tatar at 5.3m for 3 more years is a dump for me. Not a big fan at all.
We'll see what they do with Patches though. If they give a 29 yr old a monster 6-7 year deal, it might all be moot.
If Vegas regresses and sucks, they could potentially even flip him at the TDL and recoup some of that.
I mean, when you’re trading a star player, 99% of the time you’re only going to get a package of lesser assets in return, so I understand it from that angle. The problem I have is that while Suzuki’s a fine prospect, Tatar and the 2nd aren’t really good enough to fill out the rest of the trade to make it fair. But I’m also not really surprised that the team that spends months tanking the value of their most valuable players that they decide they need to trade keeps getting underwhelming returns for themI just don't see it at all. Patches is the best player in the deal by a mile. Suzuki will never be as good as him and Tatar is overpaid and kinda....good I guess.
I'd call it a bergevin typical trade...he lost...by a lot.
I think that’s a very good return for Montreal.
Suzuki is a coup IMO. If we got back that level of prospect for Zucc, I’d be stoked. Not to mention the second and getting back a guy who could give you 60-70% of Patches’ production.
Agree in general.We won't get that kind of prospect back for Zucc.
Not only does he not have the pedigree/reputation of Patches, teams will also be paying for a few months+playoffs vs a whole season.
Plus theres the risk of him declining even further.
Have to agree here. Was last year the beginning of the end for Zuccarello, or was it just an off year? He just didn't look right this past year. Was he nursing an injury that wasn't made public? Regardless, I'd deal him this year for what you can get and explore bringing him back in July depending on how he looks this year.We won't get that kind of prospect back for Zucc.
Not only does he not have the pedigree/reputation of Patches, teams will also be paying for a few months+playoffs vs a whole season.
Plus theres the risk of him declining even further.
Pacc, primarily a goal scorer, didn't break 40 points or 20 goals last year. How is that not doubly true for him?We won't get that kind of prospect back for Zucc.
Not only does he not have the pedigree/reputation of Patches, teams will also be paying for a few months+playoffs vs a whole season.
Plus theres the risk of him declining even further.
Pacc, primarily a goal scorer, didn't break 40 points or 20 goals last year. How is that not doubly true for him?
I don't think we'll get that kind of prospect back for Zucc because Vegas made a terrible deal. Not sure Pacc has all that much more value though.
The risk would be no more 30 goal seasons and no compliance buyout. Not super likely, but both are possible.There is no risk for Vegas on a Pacioretty contract. They sign him, squeeze a couple more 30 goal seasons out of him, and if he falls off a cliff, you use the inevitable compliance buyout coming after the lockout
I guess it's hard for me to gauge the larger thoughts on Zucc, but I'd think his brand would be pretty valuable. He's always appeared to be very highly regarded around the league.It is true for Patches but it's no longer a factor since he's been traded. Zucc is still here.
He does have more value than Zucc though, it just works that way with brand names. We've seen it work in our favor as recently as a few months ago (Nash.)
I don't really have a problem with the deal value wise, I'm just not sure what Montreal is trying to accomplish. They've said that they want to win and that makes sense with them going into the first year of Price's extension but they're actions make it look like they want to tear it down, they've looked like they're more committed to rebuilding than the Rangers are.
I guess it's hard for me to gauge the larger thoughts on Zucc, but I'd think his brand would be pretty valuable. He's always appeared to be very highly regarded around the league.
I think Pacc returning what he did after a really poor year and with it being public that they absolutely intend to trade him is pretty bad value for Vegas to give up. I think people saw their run and thought McPhee was actually a genius, but it's look more like he's the same horrible trading GM as before, but he managed to catch lightning in a bottle in the expansion draft. Then again I was 100% wrong about Vegas this time last year so what do I know.
I've found that this kind of thing generally has no effect on trade value.