Nash nets 3rd of the season

[Canuck21t]

Likely, but I am not sure. But AO is unique to Russia: any other candidate (Semn, Korolyuk) would be appreciablly worse, while Nash is replacable for Canada: Shanny is the natural pick. I understand that the team needs new blood over the years, but not like this...

I understand that Ovechkin makes a lot more difference to Russia than Nash to Canada but still, I think you're underrating Nash within the Canadian context. In my view, Nash is right up there with Thornton, Heatley and Iginla, he is too special to put aside. I'm willing to risk and play Nash, I'm actually confident that he will perform quite well. If he had to be swapped, it should be Kariya, not Shanahan. You forgot how mediocre Shanahan plays on the big ice surface.

Right now, I am much more concerned over our defense. I was fine with Blake but adding Foote to the mix makes our defense much slower. Russians will skate around them like if they were slalom poles. That and Jovanovski is not that good of a defenseman, he must be one of the most overrated players in the NHL. I also am not over the fact that all three Doan, Draper and Smyth made the team. And then there's Burtuzzi; I don't like that such a guy is representing me. So yeah, Nash is the least of my concern.

 

[thomasincanada]

Yes, Nash has scored some goals since his return.

But in 2 Nashville vs. Columbus games since he came back, Kariya is beating him 4 points to 1.

Nash isn't the player Kariya is. Nor is he the player that Shanahan or Tanguay are.

Nash being on the Olympic Team is kind of stupid.

I'm just glad Gretzky is picking the team and not the armchair GM's on this forum.

 

[espo*]

I'm just glad Gretzky is picking the team and not the armchair GM's on this forum.

me too!! This guy can play.............................the debate should'nt be on.It's crazy,he's the size of a redwood,can skate and has a hellacious shot with sweet hands that deliver them.He's an impact player and is ready...................he goes!!!!

 

[wildone26*]

Yes, Nash has scored some goals since his return.

But in 2 Nashville vs. Columbus games since he came back, Kariya is beating him 4 points to 1.

Nash isn't the player Kariya is. Nor is he the player that Shanahan or Tanguay are.

Nash being on the Olympic Team is kind of stupid.

I did not see that game, but while seeing the highlights of it my thoughts were more or less the same.

I have already concluded Nash and Crosby are the two players that are going to pushed onto us for years to come, those two will probably only have to play decently for the next 20 years to make any Team Canada, while players like Staal and Spezza coming up will have to be extraordinary to even be considered. Atleast Crosby was a dominant junior player at 16 and 17 though, and has been part of a few "winning" teams at the junior level, and atleast Crosby I am projecting to be one of the best few players in the NHL some years down the road, Nash has not even done that, nor am I projecting the latter for him either.

 

[KariyaIsGod*]

This thread is idiotic.

You pick a guy based on his talent and skills, not what he's done so far this season.

THey know what Rick is capable of, hence why he is on the team.

 

[wildone26*]

Nash has failed to ever be part of a major winning team at any level, he stupidly turned down an offer to go to a World Championships at 18(atleast from reports I have heard he was offered and turned it down), he is injury prone and missed the Worlds at 19 with a freakish ailment, and of course had his spot on the Olympic team jeapordized(should have been evaporated)by an injury. Also by missing those 2004 Worlds with that ailment, he might have cost himself(considering how very overrated he is, and that he actually did do something of high merit, tieing for the NHL lead in goals at 19 that year, even if it overrated still considering it was only 56 total points, with only 15 assists)a spot on the World Cup team at 19, coming back to his injury/illness prone ways as well. He has been part of some teams that have lost big finals too. Lets look at his history:

London Knights-never came close to winning a Championship in the Ontario league with him there. One outstanding or special enough of a player can carry a team on its back at the junior level, it is not the calibre of adult hockey, just look at what Crosby did almost alone(a few other very good players, the rest below average team caliber)for Rimouski last year.

2002 World juniors-part of a team that lost a close final at Worlds. He was not one of the leaders of that team, in fact was its youngest player, but missed a couple key scoring chances in the 3rd period that could have won the game.

2003 Worlds-turned down going. I cant think of any other 18-year old that would do this. Bergeron did not at the same age, Crosby will not this year, I gaurantee it.

2004 Worlds-missed it with a throat ailment. Everybody gets injured and ill from time to time, but as I mentioned his career so far seems to be alot more injury/
illness prone than other players, it has hurt his career in some respects so far, and I dont see how it can be argued as a knock against him.

2005 Worlds-was outstanding, one of the best players. However in the final, as one of the leaders, was not able to be a difference-maker. Thornton and Smyth for example were not either in the final, but to not be the difference-maker or winner on each occasion is acceptable, competition is tough, it not easy to be a winner every time. My point on Nash is he NEVER has proven to be one.

Columbus now-ok weak team, but I have seen them play, and even when he is playing great hockey and getting points, he does not make the players around him better.


Tell me I am wrong on any of this when Nash:

1)is actually part of a "winning" team, and you can expect if Canada does not win in Turin, I will add it to Nash's list. Perhaps a team is incapable of winning with him on it then, at what point does it stop being coincidence?

2)shows he can stay healthy for extended stretches of time.

3)actually plays some two-way hockey, understands how to be defensively-conscious while still being an offensive player, uses the neutral zone better than he does, learns how to pass and set up plays for others, not just make them for himself(which I concede is one thing he is extremely good at).

4)scores far more than 56 points in a full season, he has a late start to this year so we shouldnt expect it, I understand that. However next year he will have another shot, and for a player who is only an offensive player he should have a much better
best-year points total than that. If he is injured yet again next year, I can go back to point number #2.

5)wins MVP of a significant tournament. The majority of the players on Team Canada have won tournament MVP at a significant tournament, and the ones who have not have made significant contributions over a large number of tournaments, something he is too young(and as pointed out before missed some key events anyway)to be argued to have done. People say he was the dominant player at Worlds last year, not a dominant player as I agree he was, but the dominant, I can post countless articles that have stated those very words. He was terrific at Worlds last year, I will concede that, but he did not even win the MVP, so how on earth could he have been the "dominant" player ? If you are the dominant player of the tournament the MVP would not even have a consideration.

 

[wildone26*]

Excellent point.

If they were going to take a young kid, they should have taken that one kid who dominated the Worlds, for Canada ...

He was outstanding at Worlds except the semis and finals when it mattered most. However he did not dominate the Worlds, he was not even the MVP, Thornton was, nor was he named best forward, Kovalev was. So the dominant player of Worlds did not either MVP or best forward you are saying? He was named to the all-star team, that is not domination. Like I said though everything with Nash is supersized, kind of like a Wendy's meal.

 

[jacketracket*]

So the dominant player of Worlds did not either MVP or best forward you are saying?

Yes, I am saying.

 

[jacketracket*]

Nash has failed to ever be part of a major winning team at any level, he stupidly turned down an offer to go to a World Championships at 18(atleast from reports I have heard he was offered and turned it down), he is injury prone and missed the Worlds at 19 with a freakish ailment, and of course had his spot on the Olympic team jeapordized(should have been evaporated)by an injury. Also by missing those 2004 Worlds with that ailment, he might have cost himself(considering how very overrated he is, and that he actually did do something of high merit, tieing for the NHL lead in goals at 19 that year, even if it overrated still considering it was only 56 total points, with only 15 assists)a spot on the World Cup team at 19, coming back to his injury/illness prone ways as well. He has been part of some teams that have lost big finals too. Lets look at his history:

London Knights-never came close to winning a Championship in the Ontario league with him there. One outstanding or special enough of a player can carry a team on its back at the junior level, it is not the calibre of adult hockey, just look at what Crosby did almost alone(a few other very good players, the rest below average team caliber)for Rimouski last year.

2002 World juniors-part of a team that lost a close final at Worlds. He was not one of the leaders of that team, in fact was its youngest player, but missed a couple key scoring chances in the 3rd period that could have won the game.

2003 Worlds-turned down going. I cant think of any other 18-year old that would do this. Bergeron did not at the same age, Crosby will not this year, I gaurantee it.

2004 Worlds-missed it with a throat ailment. Everybody gets injured and ill from time to time, but as I mentioned his career so far seems to be alot more injury/
illness prone than other players, it has hurt his career in some respects so far, and I dont see how it can be argued as a knock against him.

2005 Worlds-was outstanding, one of the best players. However in the final, as one of the leaders, was not able to be a difference-maker. Thornton and Smyth for example were not either in the final, but to not be the difference-maker or winner on each occasion is acceptable, competition is tough, it not easy to be a winner every time. My point on Nash is he NEVER has proven to be one.

Columbus now-ok weak team, but I have seen them play, and even when he is playing great hockey and getting points, he does not make the players around him better.


Tell me I am wrong on any of this when Nash:

1)is actually part of a "winning" team, and you can expect if Canada does not win in Turin, I will add it to Nash's list. Perhaps a team is incapable of winning with him on it then, at what point does it stop being coincidence?

2)shows he can stay healthy for extended stretches of time.

3)actually plays some two-way hockey, understands how to be defensively-conscious while still being an offensive player, uses the neutral zone better than he does, learns how to pass and set up plays for others, not just make them for himself(which I concede is one thing he is extremely good at).

4)scores far more than 56 points in a full season, he has a late start to this year so we shouldnt expect it, I understand that. However next year he will have another shot, and for a player who is only an offensive player he should have a much better
best-year points total than that. If he is injured yet again next year, I can go back to point number #2.

5)wins MVP of a significant tournament. The majority of the players on Team Canada have won tournament MVP at a significant tournament, and the ones who have not have made significant contributions over a large number of tournaments, something he is too young(and as pointed out before missed some key events anyway)to be argued to have done. People say he was the dominant player at Worlds last year, not a dominant player as I agree he was, but the dominant, I can post countless articles that have stated those very words. He was terrific at Worlds last year, I will concede that, but he did not even win the MVP, so how on earth could he have been the "dominant" player ? If you are the dominant player of the tournament the MVP would not even have a consideration.

So much envy ... truly stunning!

 

[wildone26*]

Yes, I am saying.

Then why did he not win either award. Are you saying he was robbed?

 

[jacketracket*]

Then why did he not win either award. Are you saying he was robbed?

You got the Nash itch bad, eh bub?

Translating "Nash was a dominant player (as in one of several)" into "Nash was the dominant player" says more about your mania than anything else.

 

[wildone26*]

So much envy ... truly stunning!

LOL! I actually like Nash, I enjoy watching his goal scoring ability, and
his combination of size and skating ability is impressive. I just get annoyed when players get their stripes before they earn them so to speak. I am still waiting to see him demonstrate he is capable of being part of a winning team, which he has never done, and almost every player considered for a Team Canada has done at some point, unless you count the Spengler Cup or under-18 Six nations significant enough events. If Canada does not win the Olympic Gold it will only reinforce that belief in my mind, regardless how minor a role he plays with the team. There is only so long one can rationalize it is a coincidence a player is never part of a winning team and can never be enough of a difference maker on teams that are close. He also needs to be a more well-rounded player, who can play 2-way hockey, and set up plays rather than make them on his own or finish them for others.

 

[wildone26*]

You got the Nash itch bad, eh bub?

Translating "Nash was a dominant player (as in one of several)" into "Nash was the dominant player" says more about your mania than anything else.

that one kid who dominated the Worlds. Those were the exact words I responded to, and they are yours to begin with. This phrasing does not imply "a dominant player" but "the dominant player".

 

[jacketracket*]

LOL! I actually like Nash, I enjoy watching his goal scoring ability, and
his combination of size and skating ability is impressive. I just get annoyed when players get their stripes before they earn them so to speak. I am still waiting to see him demonstrate he is capable of being part of a winning team, which he has never done, and almost every player considered for a Team Canada has done at some point, unless you count the Spengler Cup or under-18 Six nations significant enough events. If Canada does not win the Olympic Gold it will only reinforce that belief in my mind, regardless how minor a role he plays with the team. There is only so long one can rationalize it is a coincidence a player is never part of a winning team and can never be enough of a difference maker on teams that are close. He also needs to be a more well-rounded player, who can play 2-way hockey, and set up plays rather than make them on his own or finish them for others.

... they make an ointment for that Nash rash, you know.

 

[jacketracket*]

that one kid who dominated the Worlds.

He did ...

 

[wildone26*]

... they make an ointment for that Nash rash, you know.

Naw I enjoy my rants on players who I find very overrated, such as Crosby(current
version, not age-considering), Nash, Theodore, Fleury, Bertuzzi, among others too much for that.

 

[jacketracket*]

Naw I enjoy my rants on players who I find very overrated, such as Crosby(current
version, not age-considering), Nash, Theodore, Fleury, Bertuzzi, among others too much for that.

Fair enough. Admitting the problem is often the first step towards recovery.

 

[wildone26*]

If they were going to take a young kid, they should have taken that one kid who dominated the Worlds, for Canada ...

Translating "Nash was a dominant player (as in one of several)" into "Nash was the dominant player" says more about your mania than anything else.

Now that is a contradiction if I ever saw one.

 

[jacketracket*]

Now that is a contradiction if I ever saw one.

Only to an already-fevered mind ...

 

[Epsilon]

So much envy ... truly stunning!

And yet he's still right that Nash is a 56 point player until he proves otherwise.

 

[jacketracket*]

And yet he's still right that Nash is a 56 point player until he proves otherwise.

No, he isn't right.

Nash, on a team where he isn't the sole "shut down" target for the opposition, puts up points (as seen at the Worlds).

 

[CSKA]

No, he isn't right.

Nash, on a team where he isn't the sole "shut down" target for the opposition, puts up points (as seen at the Worlds).

A great player puts up points on EVERY team dont you think ? Or should i give you some examples

 

[jacketracket*]

A great player puts up points on EVERY team dont you think ? Or should i give you some examples

Yeah ... give me some examples.

Start with past Rocket Richard winners, and then work your way down the list.

 

[Epsilon]

No, he isn't right.

Nash, on a team where he isn't the sole "shut down" target for the opposition, puts up points (as seen at the Worlds).

I'm surprised Columbus fans haven't petitioned the NHL to add Nash's WC stats to his NHL totals, because most seem to have trouble separating the two. Guys like Ville Peltonen have put up big numbers at the WCs in the past and didn't reflect at all on their NHL totals. Short tournament results have little correlation with long-term NHL performances.

 

[jacketracket*]

I'm surprised Columbus fans haven't petitioned the NHL to add Nash's WC stats to his NHL totals, because most seem to have trouble separating the two. Guys like Ville Peltonen have put up big numbers at the WCs in the past and didn't reflect at all on their NHL totals. Short tournament results have little correlation with long-term NHL performances.

Actually, I think we get more mileage out of keeping the Ricard-winning thing seperate from the Worlds performance bit.

How many goals did Nash score in the tourney, and how many did the next-closest score? How old was Nash, when he won the Richard trophy?

I'm willing to bet that the folks who put together the Canadian team have more experience and knowledge about this sort of thing than your average, run-of-the-mill Nash-basher ...