Speculation: Roster Building Thread XXXIX

[Shesterkybomb]

All I get from Zuc and anyone else that leaves is that they didn't want to leave money on the table to stay. While Zuc did it before it also kept him here where he might have been moved on because of it. This is the problem I have with this market, everyone wants to be here but they aren't willing to take a pay cut to play here. So make your decision as a player, you either want the money and term or you want what's best for the team and want to be a part of it but don't pretend the team did you wrong because you didn't fit into their longterm cap plans and weren't willing to accommodate that. I have no doubt if Zuc had offered to extent his previous contract for 4 more years he would still be here and we would have moved someone else to make room. It's obvious he still wants to be here, it's obvious Hank wants to still be here but both those players financial requirements led them both to where they are now. Love both players but I don't think the organization did anything wrong to either of them.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Zuccarello criticizes the front office, not the club. For instance, he mentions that one of the major reasons sticking in the west is to avoid meeting rangers more than necessary. “Too emotional”..

and; one of the major reasons Zuccarello was so beloved was the willingness to stick up for his teammates and friends, even though it was David against Goliath. Surprised to see so many against him now just because Zucc being Zucc

Stuck up for his teammates? Because he shoved a few people between the whistles? Jesus this is a myth that has almost become fact on these boards. People are against him because he has done nothing but whine about the Rangers and his relationship with them for the last 2+ years.

Zucc can be Zucc all he wants, but he can and should also be roasted for acting like a jilted lover. He was paid very well while he was here and the opportunity that he was granted in NY led to him landing the absurd contract that he got in Minnesota, which will ensure that he'll never have to worry about money even after his playing days are over.

The Rangers made the RIGHT choice by moving on from him.

 

[Avery16]

Stuck up for his teammates? Because he shoved a few people between the whistles? Jesus this is a myth that has almost become fact on these boards. People are against him because he has done nothing but whine about the Rangers and his relationship with them for the last 2+ years.

Zucc can be Zucc all he wants, but he can and should also be roasted for acting like a jilted lover. He was paid very well while he was here and the opportunity that he was granted in NY led to him landing the absurd contract that he got in Minnesota, which will ensure that he'll never have to worry about money even after his playing days are over.

The Rangers made the RIGHT choice by moving on from him.

Just a historical reminder:

In 2013-2014 on a 1 year at age 26, Zucc led the team in scoring with 59 pts/77 GP, while getting paid 1.5 million.
He got another one-year contract after that for 3.5 million, and then a four-year contract for 4.5 per.
He again led the team in scoring in three of those four years, all while making less than Brassard and millions less than Stepan and Nash.

Its obviously your right to not like him and to be mad that he underperformed for part of one season. But the fact of the matter is that he overdelivered and was underpaid most of the time he was here. At the very least he owns the right to complain about it.

 

[FIRE DRURY]

Its obviously your right to not like him and to be mad that he underperformed for part of one season. But the fact of the matter is that he overdelivered and was underpaid most of the time he was here. At the very least he owns the right to complain about it.

I don’t think anyone had an issue with Zucc until he started pouting his last season here. Most of us understand these guys aren’t robots with no emotion. But letting a contract drastically affect your game is child’s play.

Look at how Kreider handled himself last year compared to Zucc. One acted like a complete pro. The other acted like a little bitch.

And even now, he’s still acting like a whiny little bitch. I don’t want to hear a professional athlete who made about 25M here complain about taking pay cuts.

The more he talks, the more he taints his career as a Ranger. Better players have left NY and instead of taking shots at management, they took the high road and spoke wonderfully about their experience here.

 

[pld459666]

According to the article it is this: He thought Lundquist should have played the matches were Shestjerkin was rested. So no, he has no problem with Lundquist being the back up. Also he think he noticed before the Corona break that Shestjerkin and Georgiev got favorable matches. Lundquist was not playing for long spells and then sent out rusty to face top teams.

I fail to see the problem here.

 

[Avery16]

The next thread should be pretty XL

 

[ETTER DE]

I fail to see the problem here.

Tell Zuccarello, not me I just explained what was in the news article.

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

Just a historical reminder:

In 2013-2014 on a 1 year at age 26, Zucc led the team in scoring with 59 pts/77 GP, while getting paid 1.5 million.
He got another one-year contract after that for 3.5 million, and then a four-year contract for 4.5 per.
He again led the team in scoring in three of those four years, all while making less than Brassard and millions less than Stepan and Nash.

Its obviously your right to not like him and to be mad that he underperformed for part of one season. But the fact of the matter is that he overdelivered and was underpaid most of the time he was here. At the very least he owns the right to complain about it.

Well this is the whole argument about the trade offs of having the security of a multi year work contract, you could undervalue yourself in the long run. Maybe he should have signed 1 yr agreements if he wanted a continual evaluation of his contributions?

that being said, he over performed and was a great competitor and team mate for us. His recent comments don’t change that, they just come across as a bit ignorant on how pro sports businesses operate. This is why doctors have office managers I guess.

 

[Avery16]

previously was Rykov's defensive partner

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

previously was Rykov's defensive partner

"Those aren't boos you here, Joe. Those are Zubs"

 

[eco's bones]

All I get from Zuc and anyone else that leaves is that they didn't want to leave money on the table to stay. While Zuc did it before it also kept him here where he might have been moved on because of it. This is the problem I have with this market, everyone wants to be here but they aren't willing to take a pay cut to play here. So make your decision as a player, you either want the money and term or you want what's best for the team and want to be a part of it but don't pretend the team did you wrong because you didn't fit into their longterm cap plans and weren't willing to accommodate that. I have no doubt if Zuc had offered to extent his previous contract for 4 more years he would still be here and we would have moved someone else to make room. It's obvious he still wants to be here, it's obvious Hank wants to still be here but both those players financial requirements led them both to where they are now. Love both players but I don't think the organization did anything wrong to either of them.

The thing is money doesn't necessarily buy happiness but most people in professional sports don't learn that one until after it burns them somehow. The idea of leaving money on the table is a rule that some don't think they can break. I don't know if we were going to keep Zucc anyway but if there was a ticket for him to stay that was what he was going to have to do. My value system I think is a little bit different than most others. I think if I were a player once I banked a few million the money wouldn't matter much at all if I wanted to be somewhere in particular.

 

[eco's bones]

According to the article it is this: He thought Lundquist should have played the matches were Shestjerkin was rested. So no, he has no problem with Lundquist being the back up. Also he think he noticed before the Corona break that Shestjerkin and Georgiev got favorable matches. Lundquist was not playing for long spells and then sent out rusty to face top teams.

Zucc needs to worry about the team he's playing for now. Georgiev outplayed Henrik the second half of 18-19 and he outplayed him this year and then Igor came in and outplayed both of them--which means that when Igor rests then Alex merits the starts more than Henrik does.....and the thing is after Igor came up Henrik usually was the backup.

Another thing I think Alex has what it takes to be an NHL starter. With Igor he might not get the chance here but Alex is really really good--he needs a bit more consistency in his starts but he's still a pretty young goalie. To be fair to Henrik he can still play--he's just the Rangers third best goalie and we really shouldn't be giving our third best goalie a lot of game time. There are teams though that he might be the best goaltender--San Jose for instance.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Would Zucc be whining like this if he was in the middle of a strong season?

 

[Avery16]

Zucc needs to worry about the team he's playing for now. Georgiev outplayed Henrik the second half of 18-19 and he outplayed him this year and then Igor came in and outplayed both of them--which means that when Igor rests then Alex merits the starts more than Henrik does.....and the thing is after Igor came up Henrik usually was the backup.

Another thing I think Alex has what it takes to be an NHL starter. With Igor he might not get the chance here but Alex is really really good--he needs a bit more consistency in his starts but he's still a pretty young goalie. To be fair to Henrik he can still play--he's just the Rangers third best goalie and we really shouldn't be giving our third best goalie a lot of game time. There are teams though that he might be the best goaltender--San Jose for instance.

how do you get outplayed when you aren't playing?

 

[eco's bones]

how do you get outplayed when you aren't playing?

Is this a serious question?

For goaltenders it's all about starts. Henrik entered the season as the Rangers starter. Over the course of the first half of the season the Rangers were doing better with Alex in net. They couldn't break above 4 games above .500 until Igor came up. Quinn started going with Igor pretty much until the car accident--between Alex and Henrik Alex was better--so Henrik got to backup a lot. Henrik's game has dropped. He's old and he's got a huge contract. The younger goalies are better than he is--are we trying to win games or are we on this nostalgia feel goody trip?

It's not disrespect which Zucc seems to be insinuating. And to be honest with you if I'm the Minnesota GM I'm not pleased that this guy I shelled out a large contract for and gave me a so-so first season is so concerned about what his former team is doing. Is Zuccarello committed to playing for the Wild? or is he pining to be back on the Rangers. But that aside--ice time is merit based. The goalie who wins is the goalie who plays. Shesterkin was winning and Alex was winning more often than Henrik.

Henrik was the Rangers best player for well over a decade but he is on the decline and his days on our team in a player capacity are about spent. He is going to the Hall of Fame one day but he has no future with our team and bitter as it may be to let go he is going to have to face that prospect very soon. A team isn't or shouldn't be about one f***ing hero--it's about what's best for all. And what's best for all right now is Igor and Alex--they both do have future and even if Alex is traded we'll find someone else. Henrik in a backup role making $8.5 mil is bullshit anyway.

 

[Avery16]

Is this a serious question?

For goaltenders it's all about starts. Henrik entered the season as the Rangers starter. Over the course of the first half of the season the Rangers were doing better with Alex in net. They couldn't break above 4 games above .500 until Igor came up. Quinn started going with Igor pretty much until the car accident--between Alex and Henrik Alex was better--so Henrik got to backup a lot. Henrik's game has dropped. He's old and he's got a huge contract. The younger goalies are better than he is--are we trying to win games or are we on this nostalgia feel goody trip?

It's not disrespect which Zucc seems to be insinuating. And to be honest with you if I'm the Minnesota GM I'm not pleased that this guy I shelled out a large contract for and gave me a so-so first season is so concerned about what his former team is doing. Is Zuccarello committed to playing for the Wild? or is he pining to be back on the Rangers. But that aside--ice time is merit based. The goalie who wins is the goalie who plays. Shesterkin was winning and Alex was winning more often than Henrik.

Henrik was the Rangers best player for well over a decade but he is on the decline and his days on our team in a player capacity are about spent. He is going to the Hall of Fame one day but he has no future with our team and bitter as it may be to let go he is going to have to face that prospect very soon. A team isn't or shouldn't be about one f***ing hero--it's about what's best for all. And what's best for all right now is Igor and Alex--they both do have future and even if Alex is traded we'll find someone else. Henrik in a backup role making $8.5 mil is bullshit anyway.

You say starts are merit-based. Well, Igor and Alex had their share of stinkers too. In a merit based system, Hank would have gotten a start. But he did not. He wasn't getting starts, so he couldn't have been outplayed.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

You say starts are merit-based. Well, Igor and Alex had their share of stinkers too. In a merit based system, Hank would have gotten a start. But he did not. He wasn't getting starts, so he couldn't have been outplayed.

Maybe Georgiev beat out Lundqvist in practice? The same way people suggested Howden won his spot in practice?

 

[Avery16]

Maybe Georgiev beat out Lundqvist in practice? The same way people suggested Howden won his spot in practice?

Alex hustled more in the bag skates so he got the start? I dont see that. And if true, dumb decision by Quinn. We left some wins on the table late in the season with Alex getting the back-to-backs despite his not-strong play at that time.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Alex hustled more in the bag skates so he got the start? I dont see that. And if true, dumb decision by Quinn. We left some wins on the table late in the season with Alex getting the back-to-backs despite his not-strong play at that time.

So practice doesn't matter for goalies?

 

[eco's bones]

Alex hustled more in the bag skates so he got the start? I dont see that. And if true, dumb decision by Quinn. We left some wins on the table late in the season with Alex getting the back-to-backs despite his not-strong play at that time.

Lundqvist carried more load in the first half of the season. It's not like he didn't get a chance. He ended with a 10-12-3 record--had the highest GAA and the worst save % of our goalies and was pulled a few times. He's 38. Late season the Rangers were making a run for a playoff spot. You don't make playoff runs when your record is sub .500. Simply put and in respect to his contract Henrik is in the way of our team making the next step forward. We don't need him--we certainly don't need his contract--we have two better goaltenders. That's not to say we shouldn't respect his contract--you sign something you should live up to the terms but if he really wanted to do something positive for us he'd retire.

As far as Zucc he's not a Ranger anymore and should quit acting like he is and f*** off.

 

[Avery16]

So practice doesn't matter for goalies?

Is it possible that Hank was so bad in practice that Alex, who wasn't playing well, got the back-to-backs? Ok. You've twisted me around. It is possible. I think if Hank were doing so poorly in practices as to merit that, it would've been written about. I think youre assuming a lot here.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Is it possible that Hank was so bad in practice that Alex, who wasn't playing well, got the back-to-backs? Ok. You've twisted me around. It is possible. I think if Hank were doing so poorly in practices as to merit that, it would've been written about. I think youre assuming a lot here.

I think by the time Shestyorkin was called up, it wasn't Lundqvist's spot to lose anymore. He would have to outplay Georgiev to jump him on the depth chart, and he didn't really do that.

 

[Avery16]

Lundqvist carried more load in the first half of the season. It's not like he didn't get a chance. He ended with a 10-12-3 record--had the highest GAA and the worst save % of our goalies and was pulled a few times. He's 38. Late season the Rangers were making a run for a playoff spot. You don't make playoff runs when your record is sub .500. Simply put and in respect to his contract Henrik is in the way of our team making the next step forward. We don't need him--we certainly don't need his contract--we have two better goaltenders. That's not to say we shouldn't respect his contract--you sign something you should live up to the terms but if he really wanted to do something positive for us he'd retire.

As far as Zucc he's not a Ranger anymore and should quit acting like he is and f*** off.

Im sure you know as well as anyone that all goalies go through hot and cool stretches. Hank "carried more load" in the first half? He played 30 games on the season, total. That includes relief appearances. Thats the lowest total of his career, to include the lockout-shortened season. Even when Hank was on top of the league, he still had cool stretches. Having one in the first half of this season didnt mean that he cant be an elite goaltender anymore. He should have got at least a few more starts in the second half. It was notable that he did not.

 

[Avery16]

I think by the time Shestyorkin was called up, it wasn't Lundqvist's spot to lose anymore. He would have to outplay Georgiev to jump him on the depth chart, and he didn't really do that.

He couldn't outplay anyone without the starts. Alex had some stinkers. Hank should have got more starts at that time than he did.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

He couldn't outplay anyone without the starts. Alex had some stinkers. Hank should have got more starts at that time than he did.

Based on what though?