Rick Nash Part II

[Beacon]

Concussion? Lack of secondary option on offense to play off of? Possibly pressing. But I don't care if he scored 30 goals in last post season.

I care about these 9 games the Rangers have played THIS post-season and hopefully many more.

If I told you going in to this post season Rick Nash would

lead team in scoring
2nd best +/-
On ice of 50% of goals scored
Part of 38% of goals scored
Great on PK
One of our best back checkers.
Lead team in takeaways

Would you be happy with that? Likely will get a no answer just because of blind hate.

I would NOT be happy with it because I'd know you are giving me surrounding facts to avoid giving me what truly matters from a $7.8 forward: goalscoring. Hagelin also is great on the PK, terrific at back checking, taking the puck away from the other team, playing great defense, etc. and he does it at less than a third of the price. You'd think that for an extra $5.3 a year, Nash would produce a little more than Hagelin... or at least match his goal output.

 

[Section 409]

Based on what has Brassard been more valuable, all of his goals that Nash had a big hand in creating?

What are you trying to say? Chipping the puck to St. Louis last night was harder than actually finishing? That assists are now more valuable than goals? That on a team where virtually nobody can finish, the one player who is is not more valuable than a guy with 2 primary assists and 3 secondary?

 

[JaeTM]

The problem is not Nash. I'd much rather have a Nash that is responsible defensively then some guy that is floating and not helping out on defense and a liability if he's not scoring.

The problem is Stepan isn't scoring or setting anyone up, JTM hasn't buried any of his million chances, Fast is on our second line, the defense hasn't chipped in anything offensively, and our fourth line sucks.

He's looked good while being the only legitimate scoring threat on this team other than Brassard.

Another point is, even though I love Hank, our franchise player is in goal. I see Nash as a similar player to Hossa. An insane amount of skill, but not "the guy". Guess how many goals Hossa has? If you guessed anything more than 0, you're wrong. That's because they have Toews and Kane as well. We were able to survive with an injury in our bottom 6 (MSL is now a 3rd liner imo). Our depth is shot once one of our top 6 gets injured (Zucc)

The reason were down 3-1 is not Nashs fault.

 

[Section 409]

Because for the umpteenth time, this is the NASH thread. Wanna bash Stepan? Go ahead, in a separate Stepan thread.

Potting secondary assists is nice. But "creating" offense is a bit of a stretch. Did he "create" the Brassard goal last night? No. He got the puck to Marty who found a streaking Brassard. A nice play, but Nash needs to do much more than that. He needs to net a few goals to help boost this team's confidence. If Nash, the team's highest goal scorer in the regular season, can't score, what do you think the other players are thinking?

That play last night was basic. But apparently without Nash Brass would be lost.

 

[jniklast]

Based on what has Brassard been more valuable, all of his goals that Nash had a big hand in creating?

Now secondary assists are "a big hand" and "driving the offense".

If Brassard was "another Nash", Nash would have maybe one assist.

 

[Section 409]

Now secondary assists are "a big hand" and "driving the offense".

If Brassard was "another Nash", Nash would have maybe one assist.

And Brassard's goal would have been meaningless. Plus Brassard never did well in the playoffs without Nash.

 

[Beacon]

His salary and unbelievable physical gifst have sort of clouded the player he is. He is not a true sniper.

You need to be a true sniper to score more than 6 goals in 50 playoff games? That's roughly the pace at which Blair Betts was scoring at during the regular season throughout his career.

 

[Xref]

The problem is not Nash. I'd much rather have a Nash that is responsible defensively then some guy that is floating and not helping out on defense and a liability if he's not scoring.

The problem is Stepan isn't scoring or setting anyone up, JTM hasn't buried any of his million chances, Fast is on our second line, the defense hasn't chipped in anything offensively, and our fourth line sucks.

He's looked good while being the only legitimate scoring threat on this team other than Brassard.

Another point is, even though I love Hank, our franchise player is in goal. I see Nash as a similar player to Hossa. An insane amount of skill, but not "the guy". Guess how many goals Hossa has? If you guessed anything more than 0, you're wrong. That's because they have Toews and Kane as well. We were able to survive with an injury in our bottom 6 (MSL is now a 3rd liner imo). Our depth is shot once one of our top 6 gets injured (Zucc)

The reason were down 3-1 is not Nashs fault.

I don't think anyone is saying that. What we are saying is that Nash, our go-to goal scorer, needs to shed the goal-scoring cloak of invisibility, and start doing what he is supposed to do, and that is to score some timely goals.

 

[Raspewtin]

What are you trying to say? Chipping the puck to St. Louis last night was harder than actually finishing? That assists are now more valuable than goals?

I just find it ****ing hilarious that Nash is a choker who can't score but Brassard is some sort of offensive revelation when both of them have been great offensive contributors, and I have no doubt that everyone here would eviscerate someone else if Nash's statline was 5-1 and Brassard's was 1-5 instead.

What the **** does it matter who's assisting and who's scoring? Nash might have assists instead, but if he finished those plays off, we'd still have scored just that one goal.

The way people on this board discuss it, you'd think Nash's potential goals are worth more in the box score than the goal he assisted on.

That on a team where virtually nobody can finish, the one player who is is not more valuable than a guy with 2 primary assists and 3 secondary?

Imagine if Nash got the help from his linemates that Brassard has gotten?

Because Brassard, without question, has not done a good job at ALL of getting Nash the puck all playoffs. But you know what, he's still driving offense, so it's a minor complaint.

Now secondary assists are "a big hand" and "driving the offense".

If Brassard was "another Nash", Nash would have maybe one assist.

So according to you, Nash might as well have no points, because the efforts are replaceable and at the end inconsequential.

 

[Kel Varnsen]

If the team G/PG wasn't below 2, and Nash wasn't a factor on almost half the goals they have scored, then yeah, I might be inclined to say he needs to step it up. Last year people had more reason to be upset with Nash to be honest.

I'm not talking about his playoff record overall. I'm talking about right now, when the rest of the offense is non-existant.

5 in 46. Switch his assists to goals from this year, 10 in 46, that's still pretty awful from a number stand point, however if Nash had 5 goals right now you wouldn't be on here saying, "10 in 46 are you ****ing kidding me 8 million dollarz!!!!" because everyone would tell you to shut up since he's the only one scoring.

My point is, 5 in 46 is irrelevant to right now, that's his legacy and we can discuss that when he retires.

I'd be inclined to agree with you if we look at this year's run in a vacuum, but I think it's wrong to ignore his long playoff history when analyzing what to expect from him going forwards, or what we should have expected to this point. That history suggests he's incapable of scoring goals in the playoffs. So yeah, this year alone wouldn't strongly suggest he's absolutely incapable. But when you remember what he's done in the past, then look at what he's doing this year, then I think panic is appropriate. Because it's a continuation of a long trend. I don't see any compelling reason to discount or ignore completely that history, especially when that history suggested that exactly what has been happening (him not scoring goals), would happen.

 

[bl02]

And Brassard's goal would have been meaningless. Plus Brassard never did well in the playoffs without Nash.

yup! lets just face it. some guys score big goals and some guys who are PAID to score big goals just don't.
Brassard 13 goals, 30 assists, plus 9 in 44 games.
Nash 6 goals, 24 assists, plus 1 in 50 games. Not even close. proof is in the pudding who is a more clutch performer. Nash plays hard, is terrific defensively but when the chips are down he will never score a big goal but yet when Brassard does its all because of Nash...haha ok

 

[Kel Varnsen]

Okay so Nash needs all the goals and all the assists. And nothing else is good enough.

****ing infallible logic.



If he did nothing to contribute to offense, that's unacceptable.

I don't have the pathetically simplistic view of "HE NEEDS GOALS OR HE SUX AND IS OVERPAID", sorry.

So you really wouldn't be upset with him if he scored 8 goals in an 82 game regular season, as long as he was playing good D, and put up 28 assists? I'm getting the 28 number because you've always been happy with his playoffs while he's been here and he's put up 16 assists in 46 games, which is a 28 in 82 pace.

 

[jniklast]

So according to you, Nash might as well have no points, because the efforts are replaceable and at the end inconsequential.

No, but secondary assists like last night are not the same as scoring goals. We have many players on the team who can make a simple pass, but we don't have enough players who can score goals. And no matter how often you say it, Nash being 1-5 is not the same as 5-1.

 

[True Blue]

Probably but the fact that he his doing everything else great lowers the blow of him not scoring much right now.

If you have a pie chart, and the largest pie is not colored the same way that the smallest pies are, how exactly is it a success? Most business models would tell you that is a failure.

He's stopped QUALITY scoring chances that would have probably resulted in goals multiple times this postseason so far and even though he's not scoring goals, he still leads the team in points.

If his primary responsibility is a failure, then who cares what else he is doing?

We brought him in to be the best hockey player he can be and he is playing very well.

Was he brought in to score goals? Yes or no?

The lack of goals can get annoying and I understand why people might be frustrated with him, but you can't take away the fact that he is playing a very good overall game right now.

Ahem...pie chart

He should not be the topic of discussion right now

Your most important offensive player has scored 6 goals in 50 playoff games. You are loosing this series. Who should be the topic of discussion?

 

[Section 409]

I just find it ****ing hilarious that Nash is a choker who can't score but Brassard is some sort of offensive revelation when both of them have been great offensive contributors, and I have no doubt that everyone here would eviscerate someone else if Nash's statline was 5-1 and Brassard's was 1-5 instead.

What if Nash was 3-5 instead? It doesn't have to be one or the other.

What the **** does it matter who's assisting and who's scoring? Nash might have assists instead, but if he finished those plays off, we'd still have scored just that one goal.

The way people on this board discuss it, you'd think Nash's potential goals are worth more in the box score than the goal he assisted on.

Because you can score and get assists. Get it?You can do both, shockingly.

Imagine if Nash got the help from his linemates that Brassard has gotten?

Brassard has been a big player three years now, and that was without Nash. Cut this nonsense out, Nash isn't driving him. Brassard's lines are consistently strong in the playoffs. Stop pretending he has been some puny little cretin before Nash.

Because Brassard, without question, has not done a good job at ALL of getting Nash the puck all playoffs. But you know what, he's still driving offense, so it's a minor complaint.

As usual, nothing is Nash's fault, shocker. I have seen Nash with golden opportunities. No goals, he didn't finish. Do what Brassard did last night and take the perfect shot. 35 shots, 2.9% shooting. That's bad, really bad.

Amazing that Brassard had assists every year in the playoffs before he played with Nash this year. Isn't that curious?

Goal scorers are more coveted than playmakers (especially playmakers who get secondary assists more often), because scoring goals is more difficult. How you can possibly find that untrue is borderline hilarious.

 

[bl02]

No, but secondary assists like last night are not the same as scoring goals. We have many players on the team who can make a simple pass, but we don't have enough players who can score goals. And no matter how often you say it, Nash being 1-5 is not the same as 5-1.

haha. Playoff goals are beyond huge and guess what thats why we are losing to washington cause they are scoring more then we are!!! and yes 5-1 is not even remotely close to 1-5. Not even close!

 

[Kel Varnsen]

Finishing is a skill in and of itself. It's not simply the byproduct of offensive zone time, possession, shot totals or, "driving offense". Nash is an elite finisher in the regular season. He hasn't been able to finish in the playoffs. He needs to find ways to finish. It's not going to just happen on its own.

 

[Raspewtin]

Brassard has been a big player three years now, and that was without Nash. Cut this nonsense out, Nash isn't driving him. Brassard's lines are consistently strong in the playoffs. Stop pretending he has been some puny little cretin before Nash.

lol so Brassard scored every goal on individual efforts with absolutely no help from his linemates. Got it.

Brassard's lines are consistently strong because they've been made up of good players, including Brassard. And......believe it or not.....they're strong again this year. I'm not even trying to devalue Brassard here, it's just that half this board has a case of causality fail. Brassard scores the goals and Nash assists, Brassard is god and Nash is choking. If it were the other way around, we'd all be talking about how they're doing the jobs. And the score would be the ****ing same.

As usual, nothing is Nash's fault, shocker. I have seen Nash with golden opportunities. No goals, he didn't finish. Do what Brassard did last night and take the perfect shot. 35 shots, 2.9% shooting. That's bad, really bad.

Have you not watched the playoffs? When has Nash been wide open and Brassard got him the puck for a golden opportunity? Like, twice?

Amazing that Brassard had assists every year in the playoffs before he played with Nash this year. Isn't that curious?

Wait what happened to him being jesus christ incarnate because he's scoring goals?

Now there's a problem because his assists are down, and it's Nash's fault?

 

[KingStian]

No, but secondary assists like last night are not the same as scoring goals. We have many players on the team who can make a simple pass, but we don't have enough players who can score goals. And no matter how often you say it, Nash being 1-5 is not the same as 5-1.

Especially since he's paid to be 5-1 and not 1-5. Nobody should be arguing whether he has contributed offensively, that's not the issue. The issue is him not being the the guy he's paid to be come playoffs.

 

[Section 409]

Finishing is a skill in and of itself. It's not simply the byproduct of offensive zone time, possession, shot totals or, "driving offense". Nash is an elite finisher in the regular season. He hasn't been able to finish in the playoffs. He needs to find ways to finish. It's not going to just happen on its own.

Actually finishing is all puck luck and your line mates giving you wide open nets. It actually has nothing to do with the player. Look at Gretzky for example, he was really lucky.

 

[Section 409]

lol so Brassard scored every goal on individual efforts with absolutely no help from his linemates. Got it.

That's not even close to what I said, it's one of two things:

1) you just created a strawman, in which case stop engaging me.
2) You need to read that again

I'll assume the former considering you wouldn't criticize Nash if he pulled an Aaron Hernandez.

Brassard's lines are consistently strong because they've been made up of good players, including Brassard. And......believe it or not.....they're strong again this year. I'm not even trying to devalue Brassard here, it's just that half this board has a case of causality fail. Brassard scores the goals and Nash assists, Brassard is god and Nash is choking. If it were the other way around, we'd all be talking about how they're doing the jobs. And the score would be the ****ing same.

Yes you are, you're attempting to make the case that Nash has been more valuable than Brassard, that's how this started. It's unbelieveable how far some of you go for this guy.



Have you not watched the playoffs? When has Nash been wide open and Brassard got him the puck for a golden opportunity? Like, twice?



Wait what happened to him being jesus christ incarnate because he's scoring goals?

Now there's a problem because his assists are down, and it's Nash's fault?[/QUOTE]

 

[Section 409]

Great strawman, you've contributed so much to this discussion!

This is exactly what Nash defenders are saying. You absolve him of all responsibility from scoring. Is what I said not true? Is scoring not dependent upon puck luck and linemates?

 

[Machinehead]

First of all, stop baiting each other with the ****ing sarcasm.

Also, "Yes it is...no it isn't" is not a discussion, it's spam. Cut that out.

 

[Raspewtin]

This is exactly what Nash defenders are saying. You absolve him of all responsibility from scoring. Is what I said not true? Is scoring not dependent upon puck luck and linemates?

Luck and variance play a much larger hand in scoring than anyone would like to admit.

 

[Section 409]

Luck and variance play a much larger hand in scoring than anyone would like to admit.

Then why are the same players consistently scorers? Are they just lucky? Are all the goal scorers in the league lucky and some guys like Brassard are lucky in May?