Take Nash off of Brassards line and i guarantee you Brassard will score many many more goals then Nash. Put Nash on another line and I am very confident he wouldn't score more than a goal per series (and I'm being generous with a goal per series)
Rick Nash Part II
- Thread starter Swept In Seven
- Start date
- Status
Machinehead
The Olli react should add points!
Not exactly.
Take Perry for example, he's good for 30 every year. That's not luck, that's how good he is. But some years it's 30, some it's 35, some it's 40, some it's 50. That's the variance.
Nash goes way beyond variance and way beyond a standard deviation.
Three years in a row now. That's not an anomaly.
JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK
I AM him
I wouldn't be opposed to that at all. Vigneault is souring on me quickly. That being said, I do think it'd be a knee jerk to just get rid of AV.
Main thing that needs to be done: ditch MSL and Boyle. I've defended Boyle a ton, but the guy doesn't have it anymore. Unreal that we picked this guy over Stralman.
Kel Varnsen
Below: Nash's Heart
- Sep 27, 2009
- 3,554
- 0
To a certain extent, but you don't get to 40 unless you're potting those that anyone would, plus a lot that most wouldn't be able to. We need Nash to in the playoffs start scoring those goals that only he's capable of scoring. And that's where the frustration with Nash comes from. The difference between Nash's goal total and his potential goal total is significantly larger than anyone else's on this team.
Inferno
Registered User
rick nashs biggest responsibility is to drive offense. to score goals by either putting the puck in the net, or helping his linemates do it. if crosby had 1 goal and 100 assists..would anyone care he only scored 1 goal?
how many goals is nash on the ice for? how many goals are scored directly because of something he either started, or helped to finish? how many goals is he on against? how many boneheaded plays has he had that have caused missed scoring chances for? how many bone headed plays caused scoring chances against? how many plays was he directly responsible for a goal but gets no points out of it (Screens). How many plays away from the puck does he make that help to score a goal (pulling opposing defenseman to him) or help avoid a goal (good defensive plays).
Thats how you judge a player. its completely idiotic to say omg goalz or nothing.
Kreider has had NUMEROUS games where he impacted the game...generated a forecheck, hit, caused mayhem in the crease, got scoring chances, etc.
but didnt score.
all ppl talk about afterwards are...wow, what a game, wish he played more like that, etc.
Nash does the same thing GAME IN AND GAME OUT, and all I have to do is come to this board, and ill know immediately this thread will be at the top with countless people crying about OMGZ NO GOALZ!
The double standard is amazing.
I look at the entire body of the game, in all 3 zones, and then i judge a player. Nash has been one of if not our best forward the entire playoffs.
The reason we are losing this year is because NOBODY is scoring when Nash isnt on the ice. Thats the problem. Nash doesnt play 55 minutes..if he did, we'd probably win more. nobody can play that many mins. We are losing because JT Miller isnt finishing. We are losing because Hayes isnt generating enough. We are losing because Stepan isnt doing much, etc, etc.
Scoring OMGZ A BIG GOALZ! every once in a while does not completely negate mediocre play for the previous 55 minutes.
Kevin Hayes has scored a big goal in these playoffs, but nobody wants to hear crap about him being more or less one of our worst players all playoffs because all people can remember is the "big goal".
regardless. im done. another thread goes on my ignore list. all i see here are many more reasons...EDIT...you know what...nevermind...
how many goals is nash on the ice for? how many goals are scored directly because of something he either started, or helped to finish? how many goals is he on against? how many boneheaded plays has he had that have caused missed scoring chances for? how many bone headed plays caused scoring chances against? how many plays was he directly responsible for a goal but gets no points out of it (Screens). How many plays away from the puck does he make that help to score a goal (pulling opposing defenseman to him) or help avoid a goal (good defensive plays).
Thats how you judge a player. its completely idiotic to say omg goalz or nothing.
Kreider has had NUMEROUS games where he impacted the game...generated a forecheck, hit, caused mayhem in the crease, got scoring chances, etc.
but didnt score.
all ppl talk about afterwards are...wow, what a game, wish he played more like that, etc.
Nash does the same thing GAME IN AND GAME OUT, and all I have to do is come to this board, and ill know immediately this thread will be at the top with countless people crying about OMGZ NO GOALZ!
The double standard is amazing.
I look at the entire body of the game, in all 3 zones, and then i judge a player. Nash has been one of if not our best forward the entire playoffs.
The reason we are losing this year is because NOBODY is scoring when Nash isnt on the ice. Thats the problem. Nash doesnt play 55 minutes..if he did, we'd probably win more. nobody can play that many mins. We are losing because JT Miller isnt finishing. We are losing because Hayes isnt generating enough. We are losing because Stepan isnt doing much, etc, etc.
Scoring OMGZ A BIG GOALZ! every once in a while does not completely negate mediocre play for the previous 55 minutes.
Kevin Hayes has scored a big goal in these playoffs, but nobody wants to hear crap about him being more or less one of our worst players all playoffs because all people can remember is the "big goal".
regardless. im done. another thread goes on my ignore list. all i see here are many more reasons...EDIT...you know what...nevermind...
get it done Glen the savior
Xref
Registered User
- Oct 16, 2010
- 1,690
- 85
For everyone's sake and sanity, I will be sacrificing a John Tortorella and Lou Lamiorello doll and burying the ashes in the hopes that we've seen the end of our low scoring, and the end of Washington's shot blocking crapola. Nash will net a hatty tomorrow book it.
LieutenantLackluster
welp
Beacon
Embrace the tank
- May 28, 2007
- 13,676
- 1,454
Like I said, Nash-apologists have run out of argument and now degenerated to personal assaults: "You are dumb if you disagree with me."
Nash should score the number of goals commensurate with his salary cap hit. Or at least more than 9.84 goals per 82 games in the playoffs in his whole career. But yeah, scoring more than 6 goals per 50 games is the same as saying he should score all the goals. Do you see how dumb you are making yourself look while trying to insult others' intelligence?
Beacon
Embrace the tank
- May 28, 2007
- 13,676
- 1,454
If we were averaging 6 goals per game and he scored the same, we would all be happier with the team, but only his fanboys would not complain about him. I don't want to hear how the rest of the team isn't scoring. Fast isn't paid to lead the team. Miller isn't paid to lead the team. Hagelin isn't paid to lead the team. Hell, even Brassard isn't paid to lead the team. Nash is. The reason a player gets $7.8 is to lead the team, to put it on his bad when Sheppard or Kreider aren't putting the puck in the net.
If Nash wants to sign a $2 million contract, I'll be perfectly happy with his performance, but only because that would clear enough cap space for us to sign a very, very good UFA who'll help the team when Nash isn't scoring. If Nash will get paid 3.5 times more than Hagelin, he should not be held to the same standard.
Beacon
Embrace the tank
- May 28, 2007
- 13,676
- 1,454
Nash gets paid not to be a passenger, but the driver. When the rest of the vehicle is asleep, the driver's job is to stay away and lead the way to the final destination. As a driver, you can't fall asleep at the wheel and then complain that others are also sleeping when he crashed the car. If you don't want to drive the car, don't be the driver. If you don't want to put the team on your back and score when others cannot, then don't be the highest paid guy on the team. WTF is he lining up his pockets for?
I'm a lawyer. Imagine you came to me and I didn't know what all the lawyers know and messed up your case. Then I'd respond, "but paralegals also don't know this!" What would be your response? "You are a lawyer. You represent yourself as one when it's time for you to get paid like a lawyer, not like a paralegal. Now I'll sue you for malpractice where I would not do the same with a paralegal." Same with Nash. He represented himself as a superstar in contract negotiations. He deposits checks like a superstar. Yet we have to hear about freakin' Glass not scoring?
I'm a lawyer. Imagine you came to me and I didn't know what all the lawyers know and messed up your case. Then I'd respond, "but paralegals also don't know this!" What would be your response? "You are a lawyer. You represent yourself as one when it's time for you to get paid like a lawyer, not like a paralegal. Now I'll sue you for malpractice where I would not do the same with a paralegal." Same with Nash. He represented himself as a superstar in contract negotiations. He deposits checks like a superstar. Yet we have to hear about freakin' Glass not scoring?
Beacon
Embrace the tank
- May 28, 2007
- 13,676
- 1,454
Seriously, why are you lying? Not only are you lying, but you are actually quoting me saying something totally different, then you LIE about what I said. How does that make sense? You are hoping people won't read what I wrote and only read your lie? What's the plan here?
Did you see the word "all" anywhere before you chose to lie about it? Show me where it says "all the goals"? So expecting him a guy who gets paid like a superstar to score more than a non-bluechip rookie is expecting "all the goals"? Why are you lying?
Beacon
Embrace the tank
- May 28, 2007
- 13,676
- 1,454
Between my last set of posts here and the current one, I spent an hour on the phone with the DA. My client's offer went from 3.5 years in prison given to the previous attorney to 6 months, which is better than what my client told me he'd accept. Do you think my client cares how hard I or the previous lawyer worked? Do you think he cares what else I did well or poorly? About the quality of my tie? How old my socks are? Where I went to law school? No, nothing matters, only results do. This is true for every job. I've fired people on the spot for telling me, "I tried, but..." because I find that annoying. I didn't ask you to try to draft a motion, I asked you to draft a motion which you told me you were capable of doing when I hired you.
Same with Nash. I don't care about his hard work. I don't care about his effort. I don't care how he looks out there. I want results based on what he represented he was capable of doing when he signed his contracts. Not as compared to Glass or Moore. I want a similar number of goals to what others getting paid in the $8 range.
Same with Nash. I don't care about his hard work. I don't care about his effort. I don't care how he looks out there. I want results based on what he represented he was capable of doing when he signed his contracts. Not as compared to Glass or Moore. I want a similar number of goals to what others getting paid in the $8 range.
Kreider probably has the most scoring chances on the team..the difference is one is still a young player who is still working on his shot vs Nash who should score on his opportunities (more often, obviously not every chance). That being said Kreider definitely needs to be finishing more of his chances.
Seems to be his defense mechanism when on the poor side of an argument, which seems to be happening a lot lately.
NYR94
Registered User
He's not performed up to expectations, and for some, there seems to be no end to how much they'll lower the bar to make excuses for him. If the Rangers aren't winning the games, then no, an assist isn't enough. Just being on the ice isn't enough. Does Patrick Kane tell his teammates, "Hey, I got my point in the first period, I'm done for the night"?
Nash is a superstar goal scorer during the regular season who was the team's MVP this year and the expectation is that he translates that success into the playoffs. Not necessarily to the same degree, but he's still counted on to be a leader on offense and come through at key points in games to help the Rangers win enough of these close games they've been in to advance to the next round.
As for the focus on goals over other aspects of his game that Nash brings (and he deserves credit for working hard in those other areas), it's because that's what the Rangers need at this point right now. Well, they need some more faceoff wins as well but I don't think he can help in that area. But great players rise to the occasion and can deliver what their team needs in a big spot. Maybe a team needs a key save, so that's obviously up to the goalie. Or a crucial shot block late in the game while killing a penalty, or a devastating body check against the opponent's top scorer. But in all of these losses what the Rangers really needed was a goal. Maybe they'll find their offense again as a team and they'll need something else, but right now they're desperate for goals and the onus falls on Nash's shoulders before anyone else's because he's their best goal scorer. And who knows, maybe if his teammates see him come alive on the score sheet the confidence will spread to them and it could change the team's scoring woes really fast. But it has to start with a guy who is supposed to be the leader in that department.
The Rangers have had so few strong offensive performers in the playoffs after Gretzky retired. I feel like it's been Jagr and....Jagr.
Nash is a superstar goal scorer during the regular season who was the team's MVP this year and the expectation is that he translates that success into the playoffs. Not necessarily to the same degree, but he's still counted on to be a leader on offense and come through at key points in games to help the Rangers win enough of these close games they've been in to advance to the next round.
As for the focus on goals over other aspects of his game that Nash brings (and he deserves credit for working hard in those other areas), it's because that's what the Rangers need at this point right now. Well, they need some more faceoff wins as well but I don't think he can help in that area. But great players rise to the occasion and can deliver what their team needs in a big spot. Maybe a team needs a key save, so that's obviously up to the goalie. Or a crucial shot block late in the game while killing a penalty, or a devastating body check against the opponent's top scorer. But in all of these losses what the Rangers really needed was a goal. Maybe they'll find their offense again as a team and they'll need something else, but right now they're desperate for goals and the onus falls on Nash's shoulders before anyone else's because he's their best goal scorer. And who knows, maybe if his teammates see him come alive on the score sheet the confidence will spread to them and it could change the team's scoring woes really fast. But it has to start with a guy who is supposed to be the leader in that department.
The Rangers have had so few strong offensive performers in the playoffs after Gretzky retired. I feel like it's been Jagr and....Jagr.
Glen Sathers Cigar
Sather 4 Ever
I have a hard time using accrued playoff games over 4 playoff seasons in the same way I would a full season, even if the games played add up.
So much changes year to year.
Beacon
Embrace the tank
- May 28, 2007
- 13,676
- 1,454
And no matter what changes, we see the same thing every spring: days get longer, trees get greener and Nash can't score.
I think the those who appreciate Nash and those who demand more from Nash are at an impasse, lol. We'll just have to agree to disagree at this point, unless we want to go on for another 10 pages rehashing the same arguments...which I'm sure some of you will. Just remember, we may not even advance beyond the Pitt series w/o Nash. That is how much this team has underperformed.
Beacon
Embrace the tank
- May 28, 2007
- 13,676
- 1,454
Those who defend Nash want to pretend to be smarter than than who oppose him because they understand something more than stats and those who think he's not delivering are just dumb idiots who can only see the goalz stats. This is why they are LYING to pretend that those who disagree with them said things they did not say in order to embarrass them and to make themselves feel intellectually superior. This is why they misspell "goals" as "goalz" and otherwise refuse to engage real arguments, preferring to employ public humiliation as their only response.
It's the "I know advanced stats" and "I knew Tarasenko was better than McIlrath back in 2010" all over again. The arguments are seemingly not connected, but they are because it's all a case of people trying to prove their intellectual superiority and put down those who disagree with them.
No matter how often it's asked if they would pay almost $8 for a guy who scores like a 4th liner just because he plays a good all-around game, they refuse to answer. The answer to this is obvious. A good all-around guy who consistently can't score plays on the bottom-6 for $1-2 a year, he doesn't get $8 and plays on the first line.
This is so obvious that it can't even be addressed, instead words are placed in people's mouths that if Nash doesn't score ALL the goals, people will not be happy. They have to do this because as soon as they address the actual anti-Nash arguments, they will have to admit that an $8 player must score more than a 4th liner and then their claims to intellectual superiority disappears. And isn't the real goal here to prove that you are smarter than others?
This is as terrible an analogy as one could get. Nash is getting results. Plenty of them. That you choose to ignore them and keep pointing at his lack of goals as the only result that matters goes against everything that makes up a team sport.
As for the bolded. All I can say is you must not care about winning.
This is just so blatantly misrepresenting reality it's sad. Of course you wouldn't pay 8 million for that.
Now if you asked me (and this is actually going to correspond with reality) whether I'd be upset paying for a winger who has produced at a 60 point pace, played outstanding two-way hockey, and is consistently leaving it all on the ice, but isn't scoring goals, all while playing on a team that is worse offensively than the 2014-15 BUFFALO SABRES. You'd have a different answer.
For a person who spends so much time deconstructing the ways people have lied and used speech to print empty argument, you do an awful lot of it. But, yes, everyone else is missing YOUR points.
- Status
