Rick Nash Part II

[offdacrossbar]

great players lead their teams in big games.

playoffs = big games

rick nash and playoffs = no goals scored (inc more than just rick nash)

goal scoring = wins

we are down 3-1 and have scored very few goals and that is an indictment of more than just rick nash.

i though nash was effective early but as the game wore on he seemed to wilt. by games end, he was tentative and looked gassed. his butt move has returned and he is showing exactly zero signs of the rick nash we saw during the regular season.

some of the shots he took last night were beyond bad. like i said before, like he is using the wrong stick or shooting righty. that kinda bad. ill advised shots at the wrong time delivered at half speed. and wide.

hes a shell of what he was.

 

[Waivers]

Again, ~$8,000,000 a year and he scores 40+ goals in the regular season.

Don't you guys understand that if someone scores that much throughout the regular season, you expect them to also produce in the playoffs?

Yes, top scoring players on a team get shut down through playoffs, I understand that.

But, when it's crunch time man, and your team can't score, Nash has to find the back of the net - there's no excuse for that.

Also, Caps Secondary Scoring > Rangers Secondary Scoring throughout this series.

 

[Kel Varnsen]

5 goals in 46 playoff games as a Ranger. 8 goal pace pro-rated to 82 games. At what point does he just have to start putting up the numbers? If during the regular season he scored only 5 times in 46 games would people really be giving him a pass or lauding him for the defensive play? What if at the end of a reg season he only had 8 goals. Would that be okay because he made some nice plays on the PK?

I think the Nash-apologists don't truly comprehend how bad his playoff goal-scoring has been. It's almost hard for anyone to comprehend. It's almost entirely incomprehensible, it's that bad.

 

[Marcus AKA Kluivert]

5 goals in 46 playoff games as a Ranger. 8 goal pace pro-rated to 82 games. At what point does he just have to start putting up the numbers? If during the regular season he scored only 5 times in 46 games would people really be giving him a pass or lauding him for the defensive play? What if at the end of a reg season he only had 8 goals. Would that be okay because he made some nice plays on the PK?

I think the Nash-apologists don't truly comprehend how bad his playoff goal-scoring has been. It's almost hard for anyone to comprehend. It's almost entirely incomprehensible, it's that bad.

It is extremely terrible and very sad because I do think he has been one of our better forwards during the playoffs.

 

[Captain Monglobster]

I don't care if he broke Gretzkys points record during the regular season, he gets paid to produce in the playoffs. His effort is there, he's playing good hockey, and hes not scoring.

Why was Danny Briere a playoff beast and not Nash? Some guys are big game players. Nash plays on the perimeter and cannot own the middle of the ice.

For his paycheck you could have two very solid 20 goal scorers and greater depth which this team obviously is lacking.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

5 goals in 46 playoff games as a Ranger. 8 goal pace pro-rated to 82 games. At what point does he just have to start putting up the numbers? If during the regular season he scored only 5 times in 46 games would people really be giving him a pass or lauding him for the defensive play? What if at the end of a reg season he only had 8 goals. Would that be okay because he made some nice plays on the PK?

I think the Nash-apologists don't truly comprehend how bad his playoff goal-scoring has been. It's almost hard for anyone to comprehend. It's almost entirely incomprehensible, it's that bad.

He leads the league in moral victories though.

Has our fan base become so uneducated that incessantly bashing Tanner Glass is a higher priority over calling out our leading goal scorer for not scoring playoff goals?

 

[Cliffy1814]

He leads the league in moral victories though.

Has our fan base become so uneducated that incessantly bashing Tanner Glass is a higher priority over calling out our leading goal scorer for not scoring playoff goals?

Agree with you on Glass. Since about the 50 game mark he has played as well as he can play (insert joke here)> Seriously, I have been happy with his play.

It's kind of sad what is happening to Nash with the fanbase. His salary and unbelievable physical gifst have sort of clouded the player he is. He is not a true sniper. He is a guy who gets the puck and shoots it. He doesn't pick corners like elite goal scorers do. That is a talent he never possessed in my opinion so to critique him for not brining it to the playoffs is kind of off base.

Stepan at $4m is getting no heat for being somewhat invisible (this has also has become an annual rite of Spring for him). Nash at $8m is getting lambasted.

Maybe that is correct to attach the players contract to your opinion of their play in a salary cap world. It just seems unfair to not assign blame (if that is what you are into) evenly.

You also cannot convince me that Nash is not snakebitten. So much luck involved in a hockey game which is why the top seeds often get knocked off. I could give you 10-12 shots/plays that should/could have been goals for Nash. Early this year all 10 of those go in. Here in the playoffs, none. I would have hoped he'd get a couple of bounces.

 

[KingStian]

At his point I'm done with Nash. I have no faith in the guy. I don't care if he has some assists, he is paid to score goals and the guy couldn't score in a free ***** house.

 

[True Blue]

Nash has been on-ice for half of our goals in the playoffs...yet people seem to be implying that he is the reason we are losing this series. We have scored 8 goals without him on the ice....in 8 games. 1 Goal per game is our complete output in regards to goals when Nash is not on the ice. 1 goal per game is our output when he is on the ice.

Are the Nash excuses still continuing? Really? I do not care how many goals he was on the ice for. He is not paid to be merely on the ice when goals are scored. He is paid to actually score them. Not score them hypothetically.

C'mon. Don't the other 3 lines have any responsibility here? Again.....Nash line = 1 goal per game. Other 3 lines = Combined total of 1 goal per game.

The all bear responsibility. However, NONE bear it more than Nash.

Nash's line is a combined +9. The next best line is ZERO in that department.

How many goals has Nash scored? What is the status of the series?

What the heck? Seems everyone needs a whipping boy right now and has settled on Nash...when in fact all but 1 line (Nash's line) has been relatively unproductive throughout the entire playoffs.

Your implications are simplistic and typical for those that are running out off excuses. Fact: Sather traded for Nash for him to score goals. Fact: Nash is a wonderful regular season performer. Fact: Nash bears responsibility for offensive ability. Fact; Nash has been an abysmal failure when it comes to his primary responsibility.

I suppose because Nash makes $7.8 mil he is responsible for the other $60+ mil?

No, but at roughly 13% of total salary, he has to face the music and live up to his responsibility.

If Henke was letting in 5 goals per game, would you not put any responsibility on him? Would you just blame everyone else?

 

[Beer League Sniper]

After have a little more than a goal every other game in the regular season, he has 1 in 9 games in the playoffs.

He's putting in the effort, but at some point you need the guy to score, especially when you're starving for offense.

I said it in an earlier post that there's no aggression in his offensive game. He's the biggest guy out there, yet every shot if from the perimeter.

This is a results driven league. Moral victories are for scrub teams.

 

[Inferno]

his line has scored most of our goals. the problem here is the other lines arent doing JACK. secondary scoring ALWAYS wins in the playoffs. we just arent getting it. JT Miller, Hayes, Hagelin, Stepan, Kreider, Fasth...those guys arent putting the puck in the net.

and our 4th line is a joke.

 

[Raspewtin]

He leads the league in moral victories though.

Has our fan base become so uneducated that incessantly bashing Tanner Glass is a higher priority over calling out our leading goal scorer for not scoring playoff goals?

Ah nice, it's the HF police complaining about complaining again.

 

[Kel Varnsen]

5 goals in 46 playoff games as a Ranger. 8 goal pace pro-rated to 82 games. At what point does he just have to start putting up the numbers? If during the regular season he scored only 5 times in 46 games would people really be giving him a pass or lauding him for the defensive play? What if at the end of a reg season he only had 8 goals. Would that be okay because he made some nice plays on the PK?

I think the Nash-apologists don't truly comprehend how bad his playoff goal-scoring has been. It's almost hard for anyone to comprehend. It's almost entirely incomprehensible, it's that bad.

These questions weren't rhetorical. I'd love to hear some Nash-apologist answers to them.

 

[Sirius Vivace]

Are the Nash excuses still continuing? Really? I do not care how many goals he was on the ice for. He is not paid to be merely on the ice when goals are scored. He is paid to actually score them. Not score them hypothetically.

He assists on the goals he is merely on the ice for. He actually helps make goals happen.

But as you've stated, you don't care cuz Goals.

The all bear responsibility. However, NONE bear it more than Nash.

Nash does bear some, I will admit that. But he is their top point getter in the playoffs, has a solid +/-, is their best 2-way forward, and an excellent PKer. You seriously can't find anyone else to whip on, though...right?

How many goals has Nash scored? What is the status of the series?

The Goalz argument again. Everything else be damned cuz you're frustrated. See above.

Your implications are simplistic and typical for those that are running out off excuses. Fact: Sather traded for Nash for him to score goals. Fact: Nash is a wonderful regular season performer. Fact: Nash bears responsibility for offensive ability. Fact; Nash has been an abysmal failure when it comes to his primary responsibility.

My implications are simplistic? You've come to the Nash thread to bash one of the better performers in our 2015 Playoffs thus far and are laying the blame almost exclusively on him. What is more simplistic...to throw your hands up and blame one guy cuz Goalz...or to admit that the majority of the 19 players we iced have not been up to par.

I'm not running out of anything. I repeatedly supply the same reasons for my defense of Nash. You simply have a different (I would argue more "simplistic") perspective and refuse to budge. I admire you for sticking to your guns, but it will not change my mind. Without Nash during this Playofff season, we may well be eliminated by now ...and there wouldn't be so many 1 goal losses...and the losses would be more severe.

No, but at roughly 13% of total salary, he has to face the music and live up to his responsibility.

If you watch the post-game talks, he has not avoided those who question the team's lack of offensive production and has told the media that he needs to do more. He seems to blame himself for the team's ills with regularity. I'd say he understands full well what people are thinking and is facing the music that has come his way so far....and I guarantee he will publicly blame himself if/when we lose this series. Your hyperbole suggests that maybe he should be strung up @ the nearest tree for his 6 pt +3 Playoff performance.

If Henke was letting in 5 goals per game, would you not put any responsibility on him? Would you just blame everyone else?

I'm not blaming everyone else entirely and do wish that Nash would net a few...but if you take away what he has done this Playoffs, we'd already be eliminated. Probably by the Penguins!

Once again, too much blame is being heaped upon one player.....a player that has performed.....but not in a Goalz way.

I feel your pain about what's happening right now with the Rangers, but don't agree with you that the majority of blame be placed on Nash.

 

[Whiplash27]

I think Nash just cannot be a #1 offensive guy. He needs to be the #2 guy rather than having all of the pressure on him. I feel like that's the only way he'll ever succeed in high pressure situations.

 

[Kel Varnsen]

It's astounding that we're actually seeing the Nash-apologists mocking the very concept of goal scoring now to try to apologize for the guy. Writing "Goalz" doesn't minimize the importance of goals, but it sure does minimize how intelligent the poster writing it looks.

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

He leads the league in moral victories though.

Has our fan base become so uneducated that incessantly bashing Tanner Glass is a higher priority over calling out our leading goal scorer for not scoring playoff goals?

Nash not scoring goals doesn't magically make Tanner Glass a viable NHLer.

 

[Ail]

It's astounding that we're actually seeing the Nash-apologists mocking the very concept of goal scoring now to try to apologize for the guy. Writing "Goalz" doesn't minimize the importance of goals, but it sure does minimize how intelligent the poster writing it looks.

Intelligent is giving Nash's set up guy a pass on not setting him up because he is finishing the goals Nash set him up for, but killing Nash for setting up his set up man and not creating goals for himself on top of it.

Nash pls carry the ****** offense yourself, if you don't agree with this ur dumb.

K.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

its' sad...same old story though. Nash not scoring goals and another season not ending in a parade (unless a miracle occurs, and not entirely because of Nash, obviously).

unless the story takes a drastic unexpected turn, his legacy to me will be that guy who scored highlight reel goals in the regular season but simply disappeared in the playoffs (not necessarily true he's played 'pretty' good especially defensively but he's payed to be an offensive superstar and gamebreaker) and he won't win a ******* thing in this league because of that. He obviously has the physical tools and skillset to be that guy though and has been in the regular season, simply can't replicate that in the second season when it really counts and where the men are separated from the boys.

perhaps im being a bit of a pissant(pun intended) because our season is hanging by a thread but i just feel his legacy as a loser is pretty much now cemented.

 

[Raspewtin]

It's astounding that we're actually seeing the Nash-apologists mocking the very concept of goal scoring now to try to apologize for the guy. Writing "Goalz" doesn't minimize the importance of goals, but it sure does minimize how intelligent the poster writing it looks.

This is so ironic coming from you.

And you wonder why none of us want to discuss anything with you.

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

I wouldn't say Nash has disappeared. He's just incapable of scoring goals in the playoffs. He does LITERALLY everything else well except that. It's a shame he's paid what he is, because if he was making closer to $6M we'd probably all love him.

He does deserve criticism for sure, though. Enough is enough at this point. We brought this guy in to score goals when we need them, and he hasn't done that so far. He needs to score. Period.

 

[Beacon]

Obviously not in a vacuum.

But, he's still making things happen, driving offense, the team just DOESN'T SCORE without him on the ice. What difference would it make if Nash scored the 5 goals instead of Brassard?

Nash should be "driving offense" as well as scoring. Driving offense is wonderful for a $4 player. It's terrible for a guy getting twice that much. For the amount of the cap that he takes up, Nash should both score himself and drive enough offense that Brassard also has 5 goals.

 

[Kel Varnsen]

This is so ironic coming from you.

And you wonder why none of us want to discuss anything with you.

Don't take your ball and run home crying about it. Just stop floating the inane language (goalz) as if it was a real argument and you'll have a much better time here.

 

[Section 409]

In your cherry picked first 2 rounds you are right a .06 decline....... but let's add the other rounds and amazingly Nash has increased Brassard PPG production.

Because the Stanley cup finals against the Kings is definitely as challenging as the Capitals or the Penguins. What a joke to even try to draw that conclusion. Round for round.

Regardless of any of that the fact is you said Brassard is the beneficiary of Nash, Brassard scored regardless of who he plays with. He gets points regardless of that. It has nothing to do with Nash he as results without him. Do you get that?

"He's feeding off Brassard scoring. Brassard scored last year without Nash and the year before.

Regardless of that, he has to score. End of story."

This is you saying Brassard scored last 2 years.... 8 goals in 35 games... This year with Nash 5 goals in 9 games.

So now that we proved that wrong let's check your next quote....

"Is this really that difficult?

Brassard scored for three post seasons now. Nash has not, he is clearly the beneficiary of Brass, not the other way around. Brass finds ways to score, her buried Nash's rebound in that circumstance, but he scores every year. These defense are pathetic."

So again I pointed out how his Goals per game went from 23% to now 55% with Nash.

Now lets check your next post. Looks like you are trying to deflect being wrong.

"Wow. Nash is great and the reason for Brassard's successes.

No wait, Brassard's production has declined playing with him in the first two rounds. Brass has always gotten big goals for them, always. It's common sense, Nash doesn't. Really, how you attribute his success to Nash is absolutely asinine."

Then you wanted to cherry pick your stats

"Points per game over the first two rounds, or are assists only applicable to Nash?"

So in your cherry picked stats to make it look like Nash has not helped Brass, his production went down .06ppg in the first 2 rounds and that is your reasoning for saying Nash is productive because of brass.

See, its really not difficult, the first two rounds are different from the last two, competition is even tighter, you can't compare round 1 to round 4, it's absolutely crazy to think so.

Brass has show results every season, regardless of Nash. YOu're trying to paint a picture that's not there. Brass is consistently strong for the Rangers. Are you saying he is not? Is this your argument? Brass has not been good the two seasons before this, he has not shown production until this year with Nash? I'm not accusing that, I am simply asking.

 

[NYRKindms]

I wouldn't say Nash has disappeared. He's just incapable of scoring goals in the playoffs. He does LITERALLY everything else well except that. It's a shame he's paid what he is, because if he was making closer to $6M we'd probably all love him.

He does deserve criticism for sure, though. Enough is enough at this point. We brought this guy in to score goals when we need them, and he hasn't done that so far. He needs to score. Period.

perhaps we should go hard after Babcock. It was Babcock that decided his best role was that of shutdown forward etc for the Olympics. Marty doesn't get picked and Nash is a defensive forward. I'm starting to think Mike Babcock is Svengali