Confirmed with Link: Zuccarello Re-Signs (1 year/3.5 AAV)

[Nyrvana]

You don't seem to grasp this, but the real risk is him having another good season and then completely walking. The fact you keep mentioning Zuccarello and Brassard in the same wavelength further indicates you don't get it. Zuccarello's 40 assists last seasons are 7 points shy of Brassard's career best points in a season. Add in that Zucc is the better checker, the harder worker, the superior defensive player, and these two aren't too close.

If Zucc puts up similar numbers to last season, he isn't getting the $4.5 you mentioned, it's more like $5.5. But the real risk isn't the funds, it's him having a good season, which he likely will, and then walking altogether.

All I'm saying is let's see him do it again before we give him a long term contract. If Zucc scores 70+ points and gets a ridiculous contract, I'll eat crow. My point is that the likelihood of that is low.

 

[Idlerlee]

You should be surprised, because this sort of stuff almost never happens.

This debate aside, Im curious how you can possibly assume to know that unless you are actually present in the hearings. This is just wild conjecture on both sides of the debate

 

[Fletch]

one thing I may have missed in all these posts is, do we know what Zucc's asking price on a four year deal would have been? Ask and acceptance are two different things, but just curious.

 

[BBKers]

one thing I may have missed in all these posts is, do we know what Zucc's asking price on a four year deal would have been? Ask and acceptance are two different things, but just curious.

4,5 for 4
Heard from a bird with a sweet voice
So next contract will be around an AAV of 4,75

 

[Wolfy*]

one thing I may have missed in all these posts is, do we know what Zucc's asking price on a four year deal would have been? Ask and acceptance are two different things, but just curious.

Yes, they are going for four years, 5M per. That's what his agent told the media a while ago.

 

[Off Sides]

So just to get the speculation correct,

Zucc and the Rangers have some sort of handshake deal where he is going to sign an extension, and they already know the terms of that deal even without knowing how Zucc does, if he becomes injured, or even if the Rangers change their minds and decide to allocate that future cap space differently by that time?

I guess I just don't see how either party agrees to any of that ahead of time.

 

[Wolfy*]

So just to get the speculation correct,

Zucc and the Rangers have some sort of handshake deal where he is going to sign an extension, and they already know the terms of that deal even without knowing how Zucc does, if he becomes injured, or even if the Rangers change their minds and decide to allocate that future cap space differently by that time?

I guess I just don't see how either party agrees to any of that ahead of time.

I'll tell you the correct version.

Nobody on this board knows **** about that. But it's okay to discuss the options.

 

[Fletch]

So just to get the speculation correct,

Zucc and the Rangers have some sort of handshake deal where he is going to sign an extension, and they already know the terms of that deal even without knowing how Zucc does, if he becomes injured, or even if the Rangers change their minds and decide to allocate that future cap space differently by that time?

I guess I just don't see how either party agrees to any of that ahead of time.

if both parties agreed to that, I would think that both are not good at bargaining. If I were to guess, and I know zero about negotiating a hockey contract in 2014, they could not agree on something long term, and perhaps that's because of cap space or because the Rangers weren't willing to shell-out $4-5MM over 4 years on a guy who completed his first NHL season in year one and they said, let's see what can get done on a one-year term and we can look at extending that in the new year, but for now the important thing is to get you signed and into camp on time. Enjoy your Summer.

 

[Zuccarello Awesome*]

Apparently most of you can't read.

I said "a handshake deal THAT they would extend him in January" not that they already have the numbers and years decided. Of course it depends how he does this season, but the understanding would be that if he plays well, both parties want him in NY and he'll get a fair deal with term.

Telling me stuff like that never happens also shows how naive you are.

You didn't hear about it doesn't = it didn't happen.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Apparently most of you can't read.

I said "a handshake deal THAT they would extend him in January" not that they already have the numbers and years decided. Of course it depends how he does this season, but the understanding would be that if he plays well, both parties want him in NY and he'll get a fair deal with term.

Telling me stuff like that never happens also shows how naive you are.

You didn't hear about it doesn't = it didn't happen.

Why would they need a handshake deal for that? Thats just the way it is.

 

[Off Sides]

Why would they need a handshake deal for that? Thats just the way it is.

Right, normally NHL teams talk new contract with those who need them, whether or not they come to terms or not is a different story.

The onus of the handshake agreement idea appears to be on the "my team" thing and not so much on the "makes me a free agent next year" parts of the Zucc quote.

Neither party has any reason to make any promises, it is what it is.

 

[Fletch]

Apparently most of you can't read.

I said "a handshake deal THAT they would extend him in January" not that they already have the numbers and years decided. Of course it depends how he does this season, but the understanding would be that if he plays well, both parties want him in NY and he'll get a fair deal with term.

Telling me stuff like that never happens also shows how naive you are.

You didn't hear about it doesn't = it didn't happen.

a handshake deal usually involves terms. Saying we will speak about this again in the new year is, well, something other than any kind of "deal". I believe they said we will talk again in the New Year about something long term. I'm sure very little was said about it because it is a negotiation and when you negotiate you try to say very little and be un-excited and let the other person do the talking and get excited.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Right, normally NHL teams talk new contract with those who need them, whether or not they come to terms or not is a different story.

The onus of the handshake agreement idea appears to be on the "my team" thing and not so much on the "makes me a free agent next year" parts of the Zucc quote.

Neither party has any reason to make any promises, it is what it is.

I agree.

I think this push to create a fantasy that the Rangers and Zucc have a wink/wink long-term deal already planned in January is pretty strange.

 

[Tawnos]

Apparently most of you can't read.

I said "a handshake deal THAT they would extend him in January" not that they already have the numbers and years decided. Of course it depends how he does this season, but the understanding would be that if he plays well, both parties want him in NY and he'll get a fair deal with term.

Telling me stuff like that never happens also shows how naive you are.

You didn't hear about it doesn't = it didn't happen.

Any kind of promise is a violation of the CBA. Just remember that.

 

[Off Sides]

if both parties agreed to that, I would think that both are not good at bargaining. If I were to guess, and I know zero about negotiating a hockey contract in 2014, they could not agree on something long term, and perhaps that's because of cap space or because the Rangers weren't willing to shell-out $4-5MM over 4 years on a guy who completed his first NHL season in year one and they said, let's see what can get done on a one-year term and we can look at extending that in the new year, but for now the important thing is to get you signed and into camp on time. Enjoy your Summer.

That is my take on it as well, nothing to do with Zucc cutting the Rangers a deal on this one year contract contrary to what Brooks speculated about what his award would have been. He just did not have the NHL games played to make a compelling arbitration argument in favor of more than what he received.

I think they came to terms based on what his award would have likely been anyway for this one year, said good luck see you soon and they will let it play out.

If Zucc does well, I'm thinking they'll offer him a nice deal to stay with the Rangers, but it will have to still be more inline with whatever he was seeking originally for those UFA years.

If by that point things have changed, like they trade for Thornton and no longer have the same amount of expected cap space, or if Zucc now has new larger demands for those years, or really any number of things "anything can happen" between now and then, both the Rangers and Zucc will have to re-evaluate their positions.

I do believe Zucc would prefer to stay with the Rangers, and I do think the Rangers would sign him should they think they are getting a "good" deal to do so, but beyond that the situation is just too dynamic for any promises to have been made.

 

[Cake or Death]

All I'm saying is let's see him do it again before we give him a long term contract. If Zucc scores 70+ points and gets a ridiculous contract, I'll eat crow. My point is that the likelihood of that is low.

I understand your angle, but your point doesn't really address the concern I stated, because he honestly does not need to score 70+ pts to get a stupid offer as a UFA.

 

[Hire Sather]

I understand your angle, but your point doesn't really address the concern I stated, because he honestly does not need to score 70+ pts to get a stupid offer as a UFA.

This is what people aren't understanding.

He puts up 55-60 points like he did last season and he will RAISE his value. All he has to do is earn a long term deal of $5.5 million a year and we are proven correct. Its not worth it to save 1 mill this season and pay 1 million extra the next 4 years.

He could've been had at 4 years $4.5 mill AT MOST according to reports. Maybe he'd take 5 years. He was asking 4.5 so maybe he even takes say $4.2 for 4.

But yet again we go short term on a player and risk not being able to retain him down the road.

 

[Fitzy]

Any potential "handshake deal" is hardly relevant... if Zuccarello is at a point per game by January, he isn't going to sign some 5 year, 5 million deal he agreed to after only one good season.

When he realizes he could make 6+ mil per on a long term deal, the allure to piss off Sather and break an unofficial accord is going to be very damn strong.

 

[Nyrvana]

This is what people aren't understanding.

He puts up 55-60 points like he did last season and he will RAISE his value. All he has to do is earn a long term deal of $5.5 million a year and we are proven correct. Its not worth it to save 1 mill this season and pay 1 million extra the next 4 years.

He could've been had at 4 years $4.5 mill AT MOST according to reports. Maybe he'd take 5 years. He was asking 4.5 so maybe he even takes say $4.2 for 4.

But yet again we go short term on a player and risk not being able to retain him down the road.

Are you referring to Stralman? He earned his new contract this year. Instead of Stralman, we signed arguably a better defenseman and a better player for this team to roughly the same cap hit. The same will happen if MZA performs.

 

[Hire Sather]

Are you referring to Stralman? He earned his new contract this year. Instead of Stralman, we signed arguably a better defenseman and a better player for this team to roughly the same cap hit. The same will happen if MZA performs.

I'm talking about Zuccarello.

The team really blew it not getting him locked up.

 

[Nyrvana]

I'm talking about Zuccarello.

The team really blew it not getting him locked up.

I don't mind having the extra spending room this year. Hopefully we can lock him up longer January 1. We'll see how it plays out.

 

[Cake or Death]

This is what people aren't understanding.

He puts up 55-60 points like he did last season and he will RAISE his value. All he has to do is earn a long term deal of $5.5 million a year and we are proven correct. Its not worth it to save 1 mill this season and pay 1 million extra the next 4 years.

He could've been had at 4 years $4.5 mill AT MOST according to reports. Maybe he'd take 5 years. He was asking 4.5 so maybe he even takes say $4.2 for 4.

But yet again we go short term on a player and risk not being able to retain him down the road.

I know, there are insane signings every summer. And if Benoit "I've never scored 20 goals or 40 points" Pouliot can snag $4mil per, I really don't want to see any of our good players hitting the open market.

 

[Mikos87]

I know, there are insane signings every summer. And if Benoit "I've never scored 20 goals or 40 points" Pouliot can snag $4mil per, I really don't want to see any of our good players hitting the open market.

Don't know which team it was, but apparently EDM offered Poo 5 years because another team offered 6, albeit at a much lower cap hit.

UFA day is where GMs go crazy.

 

[Wolfy*]

Not sure if this has been posted, but it's a very good article about the Zuccarello contract.

No need to worry, I believe this is spot on.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...uccarellos-new-contract-with-new-york-rangers

 

[Ilovemymum]

Good read. Think it was the best they could do, given the cap? Everything looks like he's gonna be a Ranger for the future too, but it will more expensive than his demand now. If he clicks with Lombardi / Stempniak & Brassard from the start I am willing to bet he will reach 70 points + season, and his agents if not him will demand some money to compansate the previous deals? Can they start talking now, and then sign the deal 1st, or must they wait with the negotiation too? Prefer the former from a Rangers point of view. Sooner rather than later.