Long term deal for Zucker the right thing to do?

[4Check]

22 minutes ago, IllaZilla said:

 

With missing good chunks of regular season games, I'm with you.

 

But actually, Parise has been a pretty effective Wild player in the past three seasons Playoffs, even after missing one seasons Playoffs (2015-2016).

 

Name	Games	Goals	Assists	Shots	Plus/Minus
Parise	8	5	1	24	-4
Koivu	16	4	7	33	-3
Coyle	16	3	1	37	-8
Granlund	16	2	6	38	-3
Niederreitter	16	1	6	35	-7
Zucker	16	1	2	31	-9
Staal	10	1	2	26	-4

 

If you extrapolate that out for three season, Parise potentially could have had 10 goals and 2 assists. And Yes I realize extrapolation is unrealistic. But even this last Playoffs against Winnipeg he had 3 goals in 3 games before he was knocked out. Besides Granlund, he's probably the only player that does show up for the Playoffs...

Coyle and Zucker's numbers are staggering!

[CreaseAndAssist]

4 minutes ago, 4Check said:

Coyle and Zucker's numbers are staggering!

 

But hey, some guy named dirt said we're going to do better this year?!?!  Just looking at that graphic should clearly illustrate how fundamentally flawed this team really is.  

[sweetshot]

10 hours ago, Confrontational said:

Except he missed half of the past two seasons - and is nonexistent in playoffs, when he's healthy enough to actually participate...

He is far from non-existent when he plays in the playoffs. Actually, his worst year in the playoffs was his first with the Wild--1 goal in 5 games. His goals per game and assists per game are virtually the same in the playoffs as the regular season. Most players suffer a dropoff come playoff time. Complain about his injuries if you like, but his numbers in the playoffs, when he plays, are the best on this team.

[sweetshot]

On ‎7‎/‎27‎/‎2018 at 10:19 AM, IllaZilla said:

 

But you're banking that the Wild will have the cap space in 2019 to sign him to a $6+M contract OR that Zucker will want to deal with the Wild at all. Especially after the Wild tripped all over themselves signing Dumba to a big fat contract after one good season. And then to turn around to Zucker and say "Do it again and we'll talk"? Boy, talk about a lack of respect from the team...

 

Zucker would complete his arbitration contract and then walk. And I guarantee you Vegas would be backing a dump truck full of money up to his front door, and there's nothing the Wild could do about it. Then the Wild would have to overpay some over-the-hill UFA to try and make up for the goals they lost.

Maybe. Just throwing it out there. The way they're doing things now, signing players to long term deals who haven't up to this point done anything in the postseason(and have had more than a couple of chances to do so before signing long-term), isn't working.

[IllaZilla]

7 hours ago, sweetshot said:

Maybe. Just throwing it out there. The way they're doing things now, signing players to long term deals who haven't up to this point done anything in the postseason(and have had more than a couple of chances to do so before signing long-term), isn't working.

 

Part of the equation is that the NHLPA publishes what each player makes. So players can look at their contemporaries and say to the Wild "Those guys put up similar points to me and got paid $X for Y years, and I have similar numbers, so I should get the similar compensation." So teams have to justify why they are only giving Player A a three year deal when Player B, who put up similar stats, got a five year deal. Usually the only way that works is if the $ increase or the team adds a NTC or some other bonus or perk. $15M for three years ($5M per year) or $15 for five years ($3M per year). Seems simple. Same amount of $, one way it's concentrated, the other it's spread out. But now the Cap comes into play. All of a sudden you don't have room for that $5M salary because you overspent on a UFA three years ago. You really want to sign the current player, but the only way you can do it is to decrease his yearly compensation. So you add years to the contract so the player is getting the same amount of $, just over a longer period of time. Players like that, because they are getting their desired compensation, and they are getting the added bonus of stability.

 

The Wild certainly can certainly try to negotiate shorter contracts. That doesn't mean the players are going to accept it. You potentially could end up insulting a player and have him leave for nothing. 

 

I think the Wild's Playoff woes go beyond any individual player. It's a team philosophy of not wanting to get physical, to skate around the perimeter and take shots from the outside rather than crash the net and get those garbage goals. Until that mentality changes, this team is going to continue to spin it's wheels. They'll have a good regular season, get into the Playoffs, and flame out.

[sweetshot]

2 minutes ago, IllaZilla said:

 

Part of the equation is that the NHLPA publishes what each player makes. So players can look at their contemporaries and say to the Wild "Those guys put up similar points to me and got paid $X for Y years, and I have similar numbers, so I should get the similar compensation." So teams have to justify why they are only giving Player A a three year deal when Player B, who put up similar stats, got a five year deal. Usually the only way that works is if the $ increase or the team adds a NTC or some other bonus or perk. $15M for three years ($5M per year) or $15 for five years ($3M per year). Seems simple. Same amount of $, one way it's concentrated, the other it's spread out. But now the Cap comes into play. All of a sudden you don't have room for that $5M salary because you overspent on a UFA three years ago. You really want to sign the current player, but the only way you can do it is to decrease his yearly compensation. So you add years to the contract so the player is getting the same amount of $, just over a longer period of time. Players like that, because they are getting their desired compensation, and they are getting the added bonus of stability.

 

The Wild certainly can certainly try to negotiate shorter contracts. That doesn't mean the players are going to accept it. You potentially could end up insulting a player and have him leave for nothing. 

 

I think the Wild's Playoff woes go beyond any individual player. It's a team philosophy of not wanting to get physical, to skate around the perimeter and take shots from the outside rather than crash the net and get those garbage goals. Until that mentality changes, this team is going to continue to spin it's wheels. They'll have a good regular season, get into the Playoffs, and flame out.

I think you nailed it in the last paragraph. That mentality comes from the top down IMO. Sad to say it, because I don't see him changing, and I've said this before, ownership needs to change or we will continue to see the same results. Maybe that's good enough for most of us, and I'm just howling at the moon. 

[IllaZilla]

13 minutes ago, sweetshot said:

I think you nailed it in the last paragraph. That mentality comes from the top down IMO. Sad to say it, because I don't see him changing, and I've said this before, ownership needs to change or we will continue to see the same results. Maybe that's good enough for most of us, and I'm just howling at the moon. 

 

No, I don't think you're howling at the moon. There are enough of us here that see what other successful Playoff teams are doing and then see what the Wild are doing. And the Wild aren't doing what those teams are doing.

 

I'm still convinced that the Wild are constructed like a Moneyball team: competitive over a long season, but not for a short series against top teams.

[Fargocase]

On ‎8‎/‎2‎/‎2018 at 1:53 PM, CreaseAndAssist said:

 

But hey, some guy named dirt said we're going to do better this year?!?!  Just looking at that graphic should clearly illustrate how fundamentally flawed this team really is.  

 

Past performance doesn't guarantee future results.   Zucker or Coyle could easily have a break-out Playoff series and rack up decent point totals.  Staal absolutely sucked against the Peggers last year.  So did MiG.  So obviously they should be jettisoned.   In fact the whole team except Parise and Cullen need to be dumped, because they're the only two guys who showed up.

 

Going by a sterile games played number is a poor measure anyway.  How many minutes did a guy play?

 

IMO opinion silly to look at Zucker's previous Playoff numbers and draw some absurd conclusion that he'll never perform in the Playoffs so he doesn't deserve a long term contract.  

[Fargocase]

On ‎8‎/‎3‎/‎2018 at 7:48 AM, IllaZilla said:

I'm still convinced that the Wild are constructed like a Moneyball team: competitive over a long season, but not for a short series against top teams.

 

I generally agree with this, but I don't agree that's it's impossible for the team to change, that it's impossible for a couple younger guys to step up and make it happen.  Last year obviously it didn't.  IMO without Suter there was no chance to beat the Ppggers anyway,

 

As far as blaming the owner...  SERIOUSLY?!?!  No one wants this team to win the Cup more.  But just because a team has whiney, entitled fans doesn't mean it's going to happen.

[CreaseAndAssist]

1 hour ago, Fargocase said:

 

Past performance doesn't guarantee future results.   Zucker or Coyle could easily have a break-out Playoff series and rack up decent point totals.  Staal absolutely sucked against the Peggers last year.  So did MiG.  So obviously they should be jettisoned.   In fact the whole team except Parise and Cullen need to be dumped, because they're the only two guys who showed up.

 

Going by a sterile games played number is a poor measure anyway.  How many minutes did a guy play?

 

IMO opinion silly to look at Zucker's previous Playoff numbers and draw some absurd conclusion that he'll never perform in the Playoffs so he doesn't deserve a long term contract.  

 

Could easily?  But they just haven't done so...the last 6 seasons.  I said I was fine with a 5-year deal.  I'm glad it wasn't longer.  

[Fargocase]

That wasn't a rant against you.  That was just in general.  And Yes, I do believe Zucker or Coyle or Nino could become en fuego and thrill us all! I am looking for big time improvement from EEk, too.  Easy to look back simplistically and wail and gnash teeth, pizz and moan, but where's the fun in that?

[Lonkkis]

1 hour ago, Fargocase said:

 

Past performance doesn't guarantee future results.   Zucker or Coyle could easily have a break-out Playoff series and rack up decent point totals.  Staal absolutely sucked against the Peggers last year.  So did MiG.  So obviously they should be jettisoned.   In fact the whole team except Parise and Cullen need to be dumped, because they're the only two guys who showed up.

 

Going by a sterile games played number is a poor measure anyway.  How many minutes did a guy play?

 

IMO opinion silly to look at Zucker's previous Playoff numbers and draw some absurd conclusion that he'll never perform in the Playoffs so he doesn't deserve a long term contract.  

 

Just linking this here.

 

https://www.hockeyforums.net/topic/71284-zucker-signs/?do=findComment&comment=375949

 

Has a breakdown on points/minutes played during playoffs since 2012.

[sweetshot]

2 hours ago, Fargocase said:

 

Past performance doesn't guarantee future results.   Zucker or Coyle could easily have a break-out Playoff series and rack up decent point totals.  Staal absolutely sucked against the Peggers last year.  So did MiG.  So obviously they should be jettisoned.   In fact the whole team except Parise and Cullen need to be dumped, because they're the only two guys who showed up.

 

Going by a sterile games played number is a poor measure anyway.  How many minutes did a guy play?

 

IMO opinion silly to look at Zucker's previous Playoff numbers and draw some absurd conclusion that he'll never perform in the Playoffs so he doesn't deserve a long term contract.  

Neiderrieter has shown he can be pretty good in the playoffs, especially his first 3 years, where his PPG was higher in the playoffs than the regular season.

As far as Coyle, Zucker and Granlund are concerned, IMO its their style of play that holds them back from playoff success. And from my perspective that hasn't changed over time--so why would any of them all of a sudden have a breakout series in the playoffs?