I hear you. I remember there being talk of it from several outlets and quite a few on here were hoping for it. Couldn't remember if there was anything concrete? In those situations you usually find out when it happens. My point is it doesnt seem so outlandish that someone speculated it could have happened. I dont think anyone would have been overly shocked at the time?
- Cptmjl

there never was any doubt it would be Richards. The cap-recapture penalties were so extreme for Richards contract and those didn't exist on Nash deal.

Bozak, interesting... I wouldn't trade Zucc for Bozak but I would entertain the idea of Hagelin for Bozak. Shift Hayes to wing. Hayes can also PK where Hags was, he has shown good defensive instinct and has a huge reach. He may not immediately be as good as Hags but his puck handling and shifty possession ability could translate into great forced turnovers on the PK. Then keep Zucc and give him 4 years 18M.
- xcheckmajor

That's less than 4 million a year, after the Rangers just traded for Bozak who holds a AAV of 4.2 million. Don't think Zucc would be thrilled with that.

I do remember a few people mentioning the possibility of using it on Nash over Richards during the regular season when Nash was rock bottom. Don't think it was any regular and no one really mentioned it seriously.
- RAGSareDANGERus

Gotcha. Guess im remembering it wrong?

there never was any doubt it would be Richards. The cap-recapture penalties were so extreme for Richards contract and those didn't exist on Nash deal.
- jimbro83

Yeah. Thats right. Coming back to me now.

Just a question. Let's say that it's a choice between Hagelin and Zucc, and the Rangers decide to go with Zucc. What do you think the return would be for Hagelin in a trade this summer?

Just a question. Let's say that it's a choice between Hagelin and Zucc, and the Rangers decide to go with Zucc. What do you think the return would be for Hagelin in a trade this summer?
- Pete V

Pittsburgh gave up 2 draft picks for Marcel Goc. Gotta think something along those lines.

That's less than 4 million a year, after the Rangers just traded for Bozak who holds a AAV of 4.2 million. Don't think Zucc would be thrilled with that.
- tomburton99

4 years at 18M is 4.5M per year

Just a question. Let's say that it's a choice between Hagelin and Zucc, and the Rangers decide to go with Zucc. What do you think the return would be for Hagelin in a trade this summer?
- Pete V

maybe at the draft for one of Buffalo's later first rounders

Just a question. Let's say that it's a choice between Hagelin and Zucc, and the Rangers decide to go with Zucc. What do you think the return would be for Hagelin in a trade this summer?
- Pete V

2nd or third round pick in exchange. Hagelin is a solid third line player and a great penalty killer. Nothing more.

2nd or third round pick in exchange. Hagelin is a solid third line player and a great penalty killer. Nothing more.
- MidnightMarauder

I think the Rangers would do better than that. Dorsett brought back a third round pick. I think at least a second, and a low first, like Jimbo suggested, wouldn't surprise me.

I'd rather try a deal for Vermette centered around Miller and/or Mcilrath
- HankdaTank

really you'd give up Miller for a rental at this point? We have maybe three current prospects with top 6 ceilings (Miller, Duclair, Buchnevich), the rest seem to be major projects. I would much rather a move for someone like Hanzel who would cost much less and fill the bottom 6 need.

really you'd give up Miller for a rental at this point? We have maybe three current prospects with top 6 ceilings (Miller, Duclair, Buchnevich), the rest seem to be major projects. I would much rather a move for someone like Hanzel who would cost much less and fill the bottom 6 need.
- MatzCT

I don't think it's Sather style at all to give up on a young player to acquire a rental

4 years at 18M is 4.5M per year
- xcheckmajor

Sorry. on my part.

just found this on YouTube, never saw this before:

I'd rather try a deal for Vermette centered around Miller and/or Mcilrath
- HankdaTank

Isn't Vermette on the decline? Maybe I haven't watch him enough this year. IMO if you are trading Miller you better get back something more then a rental. I think Miller helps the Rangers more then Vermette would.

really you'd give up Miller for a rental at this point? We have maybe three current prospects with top 6 ceilings (Miller, Duclair, Buchnevich), the rest seem to be major projects. I would much rather a move for someone like Hanzel who would cost much less and fill the bottom 6 need.
- MatzCT

I'd entertain it, AV isn't a Miller guy Nd we desperately need help in the dots

I'd entertain it, AV isn't a Miller guy Nd we desperately need help in the dots
- HankdaTank

I agree the need there. For me someone like Hanzel would be the better fit on the third line and should come way cheaper. Giving up Miller for rental just doesn't make sense, I think AV is finally coming around on Miller.

He wasn't playing on terrible team for the Blues from 2011-12 to 2013-14. He had seasons of 30, 36 and 26 points. In that same span 38, 24 and 33 for Hagelin.. Chris Stewart's play had regressed before Buffalo even thought of him. Thank you.
- tomburton99

He had 36 pts in 48 games during the lockout season.
The following year he was on pace for 22 goals before being traded to buffalo playing 10 minutes or less a night before the trade.
This year he's on a terrible buffalo team.

Coyotes' Mikkel Boedker has spleen removed after game, out 4-6 weeks http://cbsprt.co/1J4kWeU

yikes

I agree the need there. For me someone like Hanzel would be the better fit on the third line and should come way cheaper. Giving up Miller for rental just doesn't make sense, I think AV is finally coming around on Miller.
- MatzCT

Me too and he's a big big dude

I understand everyone is worried or concerned about the Zuccs situation but moving him at the deadline I really feel would be horrible in that dressing room. A lot of this teams success if you want to believe it or not is how closely they are to one another. Zuccs is very well liked in that lockerroom and I really think that just because he isn't producigf like he did last season doesn't mean he isn't going to stay here. I think they will find a common ground where zuccs will get the security he wants in years and we will get $ amount that we want. I could very well see a deal where Zuccs gets 3.5 million for 5 years. Would anyone be against that?

I understand everyone is worried or concerned about the Zuccs situation but moving him at the deadline I really feel would be horrible in that dressing room. A lot of this teams success if you want to believe it or not is how closely they are to one another. Zuccs is very well liked in that lockerroom and I really think that just because he isn't producigf like he did last season doesn't mean he isn't going to stay here. I think they will find a common ground where zuccs will get the security he wants in years and we will get $ amount that we want. I could very well see a deal where Zuccs gets 3.5 million for 5 years. Would anyone be against that?
- adwolf130

That would be awesome, but isnt that what he is making this year? I have to believe there will be a slight raise, to at least 4. Its why I hope Sather offers something now, instead of waiting and Zucc pricing himself off the Rangers with a great 2nd half, and great playoffs.

I understand everyone is worried or concerned about the Zuccs situation but moving him at the deadline I really feel would be horrible in that dressing room. A lot of this teams success if you want to believe it or not is how closely they are to one another. Zuccs is very well liked in that lockerroom and I really think that just because he isn't producigf like he did last season doesn't mean he isn't going to stay here. I think they will find a common ground where zuccs will get the security he wants in years and we will get $ amount that we want. I could very well see a deal where Zuccs gets 3.5 million for 5 years. Would anyone be against that?
- adwolf130

I definitely agree with the lockeroom stuff and I don't think they'll trade him. But 3.5 million annually for him would be a paycut, not likely he would take that.

I agree, 3.5 is dreaming. Zucc pretty much has reached the production of 50pts a season, more if he's having a really great year. 50pt guys in this league who play top line or 2nd line minutes typically get 4.5 - 5.5M If Zucc takes a slight cut for term so he can stay stable, then maybe he takes 4. But I think we would need to go 5+ years to make him take that.

I definitely agree with the lockeroom stuff and I don't think they'll trade him. But 3.5 million annually for him would be a paycut, not likely he would take that.
- jimbro83

To me it isn't the worst thing to play it out this season with Zucc, and just let him walk in free agency. Go for the cup, he gives us the best chance.