Speculation: Can Nash be like Brassard?

[coolbean04]

Can the Rangers do a similar deal with Nash like they did with OTT?

Trade Nash for a younger winger with potential and a 2nd round pick.

Click to read more...

 

[JT Kreider]

I think Zuccarello or Klein is more realistic.

Keep Nash, let him bounce back. Trade him at the TDL, assuming we're not well positioned in a playoff spot. If so, trade him next offseason.

 

[McFlyingV]

Can the Rangers do a similar deal with Nash like they did with OTT?

Trade Nash for a younger winger with potential and a 2nd round pick.

At his age and money, doubtful. Unless they retain a few million, then maybe.

 

[bfaust30]

Agreed. At this point I assume Nash will be dealt at thr tdl and deapite being a righty. Klein is dealt later in the summer. Kreider gets a long term deal in the next few days which will set the money to see who they go after.

 

[Ace]

I can think of 7.8 million reasons why not.

 

[Boud]

If Nash was making 3M for the next 3 years, yes. Nash is making 8M and 8.2M in the next 2 seasons. Good luck with that.

Unless Rangers retain or take on a salary dump they'll have a very hard time moving him and get a Zibanejad type value player.

 

[Kelly]

How do Rangers fans value Klein? Would be interested in him as a Toronto fan. He's a right shot too -- purrrfect.

 

[Ducks in a row]

Can the Rangers do a similar deal with Nash like they did with OTT?

Trade Nash for a younger winger with potential and a 2nd round pick.

Nash is older has a higher cap hit signed for 1 less year missed more games over the last few years and isn't as good in the playoffs not to mention Nash is a winger not a center. If Nash gets a return like Brassard then the team trading for Nash are idiots. That Senators and Rangers trade I don't even think was good for the Senators they traded away a younger player and a better pick.

 

[Vitto79]

If Nash was making 3M for the next 3 years, yes. Nash is making 8M and 8.2M in the next 2 seasons. Good luck with that.

Unless Rangers retain or take on a salary dump they'll have a very hard time moving him and get a Zibanejad type value player.

I'd rather keep Nash , have him pop 30 then move him when value is higher

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

I'd rather keep Nash , have him pop 30 then move him when value is higher

They've already reserved a suite for him at the Bellagio...

 

[HawkeyTalkMan]

Can the Rangers do a similar deal with Nash like they did with OTT?

Trade Nash for a younger winger with potential and a 2nd round pick.

Honestly, Nash should have gone long before Brassard.

Brassard was younger, coming off a more productive year (as well as career high in goal scoring), was well worth his contract, and was one of the few very reliable playoff performers on the Rangers.

Nash is pretty much the polar opposite. 4 years olders, even with the injury just a real bad production year and never looked very threatening on the ice except on the PK, well below his contract value at this point, and is pretty much a playoff ghost (dont give me the "he had 4 pts in 5 playoff games last year" as if its some reliable sample size compared to his career playoff body of work)

but I get it, Brassard, for all those reasons, was the much more tradeable and bigger yield asset. But still, I know analysts were lauding the Rangers side today for getting younger and saving cap, but its not like Brassard was part of the problem or any issue whatsoever. He was a guy who earned his pay and isnt even 30 yet. Swapping out the sub 30 guys on the team is shuffling deck chairs on the titanic. Where NYR really need to make hay on getting younger are the guys like Girardi, Staal (more for contract than age), Nash, and Lundqvist (depending on how you view his career arc will trend moving forward)

I think if NYR ate ~$2.3 mil on Nash, they could have gotten a similar return or better as Brassard but I think honestly there is too much of an ego/hubris work in play with Nash that they dont want to concede he just didnt quite deliver what they wanted, especially the big gamble and trade they made to get him (giving up two very good 2nd line players, a 1st, and a good prospect at the time). I will also parlay it with the fact they are really banking on/hoping he will rebound with a full offseason of healthy/recovery/training. At the same time, he is entering an age window where power forwards start to slip. I dont think anyone would have blamed NYR this summer though for trying to cut bait early and get as good of a return now for him as they could in his penultimate contract season because if he regresses further, Nash with 1 season left isnt returning very much

 

[HawkeyTalkMan]

I'd rather keep Nash , have him pop 30 then move him when value is higher

Problem is you are betting against the house there.

He is more than capable of potting 30 again, but his health and confidence issues, paired with his evolution of focusing more on defense are factors that could affect his goal scoring output. If he goes the other way (looks like he is a shell of his former self) then you are left holding coal instead of diamond on christmas morning

 

[Djp]

Can the Rangers do a similar deal with Nash like they did with OTT?

Trade Nash for a younger winger with potential and a 2nd round pick.

l

Can you sleep with a swimsuit model"??


Nash is older and makes too much money.

 

[Boud]

I'd rather keep Nash , have him pop 30 then move him when value is higher

Move him where? What type of team that could use Nash (cup contender) has the cap space to take on 7.8M and pay over 8M in salary? Rangers will have to either retain or take on a cap dump regardless of Nash's value.

 

[Positive Vibes]

Sounds like something bergevin will do

 

[n8]

can we trade him to Vegas next summer for 2 1st round picks?

 

[Hally BlackWood]

too old to much money

 

[CanadienShark]

Doubt it. Brassard is younger and not overpaid like Nash.

 

[RangerBlues]

Nash is almost untradeable unless the Rangers ate a large portion of his remaining contract.
And even then the return would be menial.

 

[Halla]

Can the Rangers do a similar deal with Nash like they did with OTT?

Trade Nash for a younger winger with potential and a 2nd round pick.

lol no. brassard has immensely more value than nash

retain half and they might get a decent young roster player

 

[Halla]

I'd rather keep Nash , have him pop 30 then move him when value is higher

so he has to double his output to have any value?

 

[Riptide]

Can the Rangers do a similar deal with Nash like they did with OTT?

Trade Nash for a younger winger with potential and a 2nd round pick.

Given his cap hit and actual dollars and the season he just had, I think that will be doubtful - unless NYR is retaining something...

 

[Machinehead]

Let Nash like, not score 15 goals, which probably won't happen again, and then trade him.

 

[WesMcCauley]

Honestly, Nash should have gone long before Brassard.

Brassard was younger, coming off a more productive year (as well as career high in goal scoring), was well worth his contract, and was one of the few very reliable playoff performers on the Rangers.

Nash is pretty much the polar opposite. 4 years olders, even with the injury just a real bad production year and never looked very threatening on the ice except on the PK, well below his contract value at this point, and is pretty much a playoff ghost (dont give me the "he had 4 pts in 5 playoff games last year" as if its some reliable sample size compared to his career playoff body of work)

but I get it, Brassard, for all those reasons, was the much more tradeable and bigger yield asset. But still, I know analysts were lauding the Rangers side today for getting younger and saving cap, but its not like Brassard was part of the problem or any issue whatsoever. He was a guy who earned his pay and isnt even 30 yet. Swapping out the sub 30 guys on the team is shuffling deck chairs on the titanic. Where NYR really need to make hay on getting younger are the guys like Girardi, Staal (more for contract than age), Nash, and Lundqvist (depending on how you view his career arc will trend moving forward)

I think if NYR ate ~$2.3 mil on Nash, they could have gotten a similar return or better as Brassard but I think honestly there is too much of an ego/hubris work in play with Nash that they dont want to concede he just didnt quite deliver what they wanted, especially the big gamble and trade they made to get him (giving up two very good 2nd line players, a 1st, and a good prospect at the time). I will also parlay it with the fact they are really banking on/hoping he will rebound with a full offseason of healthy/recovery/training. At the same time, he is entering an age window where power forwards start to slip. I dont think anyone would have blamed NYR this summer though for trying to cut bait early and get as good of a return now for him as they could in his penultimate contract season because if he regresses further, Nash with 1 season left isnt returning very much

He has 18 points in his list 24 playoff games and is by far NYR best twoway forward. He scored 42 goals 2 seasons ago. He had a season like he had this season before the 42 goal season aswell because of injuries. I agree he should have gone before Brass, but Brass is younger and his contract is longer and better and he hasnt had the same injury problems the last 3-4 years as Nash.

Girardi is unpossible to move. He sucks. Staal is movable but would have to retain a good amount. I would love for us to trade Nash, Staal, Lundquist and Zuccarello but only if we trade all of them. If Zucc and Nash goes, Hank should go aswell because we will never be close to a contender without Zucc and Nash.

 

[Riptide]

Girardi is unpossible to move. He sucks. Staal is movable but would have to retain a good amount. I would love for us to trade Nash, Staal, Lundquist and Zuccarello but only if we trade all of them. If Zucc and Nash goes, Hank should go aswell because we will never be close to a contender without Zucc and Nash.

No need to go that far. Move Staal and Girardi (yeah I know) and use that money towards other top 4D, and that team will be significantly better. Nash, Zucc and Hank are all part of the puzzle - at least in the short term. That said, (and I said this when he signed his extension) I question how good Hank will be over the final 3 seasons of his contract (he has 5 years left). I think he'll be fine in the short term, but meh over the final few seasons of that deal.