Rick Nash trade: one year later

[FANonymous]

And your entire case rests on Bluejackets staff being infallible. I think your team is improving quite a bit, but that doesn't change the fact that a Vezina performance from Bobrovsky still landed them 16th in the league in goals against this year, with the Rangers at 11th. Now that obviously isn't a direct result of either of these two players, but you're making the case that a team that missed the playoffs backed by a hot goalie all year is stronger defensively than a team that made the playoffs and finished better in goals against. Erixon had 5 points in 31 games last season and Moore had 7 points in 30 games. Both were +4. The math doesn't lie- Moore had a bigger impact. Moore wasn't put on waivers, he was traded for one of the elite goal scorers in the league, just like Erixon was. Being traded from a club is a sign of value, not a sign of a lack of value.

Because, CLEARLY, the Rangers aren't known for having a "hot goalie," 2 entire points is a DRASTIC difference between two players, and no Rangers fan would EVER pretend like their organization is infallible.

Right?

 

[candyman82]

And your entire case rests on Bluejackets staff being infallible. I think your team is improving quite a bit, but that doesn't change the fact that a Vezina performance from Bobrovsky still landed them 16th in the league in goals against this year, with the Rangers at 11th. Now that obviously isn't a direct result of either of these two players, but you're making the case that a team that missed the playoffs backed by a hot goalie all year is stronger defensively than a team that made the playoffs and finished better in goals against. Erixon had 5 points in 31 games last season and Moore had 7 points in 30 games. Both were +4. The math doesn't lie- Moore had a bigger impact. Moore wasn't put on waivers, he was traded for one of the elite goal scorers in the league, just like Erixon was. Being traded from a club is a sign of value, not a sign of a lack of value.

Wait, are you using plus-minus as evidence that one player is better than another?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

[Monk]

And your entire case rests on Bluejackets staff being infallible. I think your team is improving quite a bit, but that doesn't change the fact that a Vezina performance from Bobrovsky still landed them 16th in the league in goals against this year, with the Rangers at 11th. Now that obviously isn't a direct result of either of these two players, but you're making the case that a team that missed the playoffs backed by a hot goalie all year is stronger defensively than a team that made the playoffs and finished better in goals against. Erixon had 5 points in 31 games last season and Moore had 7 points in 30 games. Both were +4. The math doesn't lie- Moore had a bigger impact. Moore wasn't put on waivers, he was traded for one of the elite goal scorers in the league, just like Erixon was. Being traded from a club is a sign of value, not a sign of a lack of value.

So basically you've come to tell us that, after quite a small sample size, you've deduced that our coach isn't good at evaluating players' skill or value... because Moore had 2 more points? Is that all, or do you have more you'd like to say?

 

[FANonymous]

So basically you've come to tell us that, after quite a small sample size, you've deduced that our coach isn't good at evaluating players' skill or value... because Moore had 2 more points? Is that all, or do you have more you'd like to say?

It is interesting that the coach who didn't get fired is supposed to be the one who is worse at evaluating talent.

 

[Monk]

It is interesting that the coach who didn't get fired is supposed to be the one who is worse at evaluating talent.

It's really just a damn shame that our GM and senior adviser didn't have a say in the matter.

 

[Crede777]

And your entire case rests on Bluejackets staff being infallible. I think your team is improving quite a bit, but that doesn't change the fact that a Vezina performance from Bobrovsky still landed them 16th in the league in goals against this year, with the Rangers at 11th. Now that obviously isn't a direct result of either of these two players, but you're making the case that a team that missed the playoffs backed by a hot goalie all year is stronger defensively than a team that made the playoffs and finished better in goals against. Erixon had 5 points in 31 games last season and Moore had 7 points in 30 games. Both were +4. The math doesn't lie- Moore had a bigger impact. Moore wasn't put on waivers, he was traded for one of the elite goal scorers in the league, just like Erixon was. Being traded from a club is a sign of value, not a sign of a lack of value.

Again, the best situation you can hope for when comparing two variables is to keep all other variables the same.

The closest situation that one can come to when comparing two NHL players is for those players to be on the same team, with the same teammates, and battling for a spot on the same line/pairing. The player who performs better is then, objectively, the better of the two.

It is also worth noting that Todd Richards was an NHL defensemen himself. If he does have a forte, it is in identifying defensive ability and utilizing defensive systems play.

 

[Nanabijou]

At the end of the day, ranking Moore versus Erixon is splitting a pretty fine hair. They both have similar styles, similar potential and I don't know who I'd pick to have a better future career at this point.

Erixon had significant value and this was used to get the Nash trade done. Moore had significant value and was used to get the Gaborik trade done.

We weren't going to trade Erixon back (he ain't no Delisle!) so Moore was the one to go.

 

[db2011]

And your entire case rests on Bluejackets staff being infallible. I think your team is improving quite a bit, but that doesn't change the fact that a Vezina performance from Bobrovsky still landed them 16th in the league in goals against this year, with the Rangers at 11th. Now that obviously isn't a direct result of either of these two players, but you're making the case that a team that missed the playoffs backed by a hot goalie all year is stronger defensively than a team that made the playoffs and finished better in goals against. Erixon had 5 points in 31 games last season and Moore had 7 points in 30 games. Both were +4. The math doesn't lie- Moore had a bigger impact. Moore wasn't put on waivers, he was traded for one of the elite goal scorers in the league, just like Erixon was. Being traded from a club is a sign of value, not a sign of a lack of value.

Wow, way to launch into ad hominem dissing from a position of little knowledge on how last season went for this team. I was following right along with your points until this post. Crede777's entire case is not at all based on the Blue Jackets' staff being infallible.

You want to compare two players, Moore and Erixon, to determine which one is better. It's been done. Then the worse one was traded to your team.

 

[Crede777]

It's been done. Then the worse one was traded to your team.

This. Moore was made expendable and then traded BECAUSE of Erixon's play, not because Sather wanted him so much or something like that. Columbus traded you their 3rd best defensive prospect behind Erixon and Murray.

 

[PIM]

Because, CLEARLY, the Rangers aren't known for having a "hot goalie," 2 entire points is a DRASTIC difference between two players, and no Rangers fan would EVER pretend like their organization is infallible.

Right?

It's not a drastic difference, but it's not just two points. It's two additional points in one less game. It's the difference between .16 PPG and .23 PPG. Over a full season, it's the difference between 13 points and 19 points. It's not a huge difference, and it could be an aberration, but the hard numbers thus far favor Moore, especially when you consider the equal plus-minus. I don't think myself or any Rangers fans consider our organization to be infallible- most of us were pretty disgruntled with almost every personnel decision made last year.

Wait, are you using plus-minus as evidence that one player is better than another?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

First, plus-minus is arguably the most important basic stat for a defenseman. Second, the plus-minus comparison was equal, which indicates equal defensive value, but admittedly it also depends on matchups and ice time.

So basically you've come to tell us that, after quite a small sample size, you've deduced that our coach isn't good at evaluating players' skill or value... because Moore had 2 more points? Is that all, or do you have more you'd like to say?

I never said your coach wasn't good at evaluating player skill or value. Your GM would be the one making those personnel decisions, probably with some coach input, and I spent a huge portion of my first post indicating why I think Gabs is much more valuable than Nash in the here-and-now. So I'm by no means on a search-and-destroy mission to bash your organization.

It is interesting that the coach who didn't get fired is supposed to be the one who is worse at evaluating talent.

Let's try to keep some perspective on the Torts situation here. Torts was let go because he didn't win the cup. The Rangers organization puts much more pressure on personnel, including coaches, to get results. The expectations are much higher in New York, which should be pretty common knowledge to everyone, but that doesn't mean Torts is a bad coach because he didn't reach the organization's goal with a roster that was gutted by management. He's the same coach that was a win or two away from the President's trophy in 11-12, won the eastern conference and went to the ECF's. He also has a Stanley Cup, and he was picked up by one of the best teams in the West.

Again, the best situation you can hope for when comparing two variables is to keep all other variables the same.

The closest situation that one can come to when comparing two NHL players is for those players to be on the same team, with the same teammates, and battling for a spot on the same line/pairing. The player who performs better is then, objectively, the better of the two.

It is also worth noting that Todd Richards was an NHL defensemen himself. If he does have a forte, it is in identifying defensive ability and utilizing defensive systems play.

I understand your perspective completely, but I'd argue that different players thrive under different environments. There are things to be taken into account like team chemistry, comfort in the system, etc. that could easily skew the results one way or another. There's also the "bang for your buck" mentality that could have easily played a role on both sides- young defensive prospects of that caliber don't grow on trees, and even if they weren't the centerpiece, both players were acquired for elite goal scoring NHL superstars. Mentally it makes sense for organizations to want to inject them into the roster and give them a chance to play.

 

[Ilya Bryzastor]

Columbus absolutely won this deal in my opinion , at first I thought the Jackets were crazy but later I realized it was necessary. And look now , the Jackets are in better position than the Rangers at the moment , One of the key reasons the jackets came just a game short of the playoffs , was because of the additions and since then it has made Columbus a great city for players to want to come to , I think the Jackets are in good shape for the next 5-10 years , also the contract to Bobrovsky was a great deal , nice to see a team give out a short deal instead of a max contract like almost all the teams do for a guy who has 1 good year.

Also who do you guys think will be the Captain next year , Johnson?

 

[CBJWerenski8]

Columbus absolutely won this deal in my opinion , at first I thought the Jackets were crazy but later I realized it was necessary. And look now , the Jackets are in better position than the Rangers at the moment , One of the key reasons the jackets came just a game short of the playoffs , was because of the additions and since then it has made Columbus a great city for players to want to come to , I think the Jackets are in good shape for the next 5-10 years , also the contract to Bobrovsky was a great deal , nice to see a team give out a short deal instead of a max contract like almost all the teams do for a guy who has 1 good year.

Also who do you guys think will be the Captain next year , Johnson?

Likely, him or Dubi.

 

[Skraut]

It's as simple as this.

In the 2011-2012 season, one team finished with the most points in their conference. The other team finished dead last in the league.

Both teams took a look at the other one and decided that they wanted to become more like that other team. And so they did...

 

[Mayor Bee]

It's as simple as this.

In the 2011-2012 season, one team finished with the most points in their conference. The other team finished dead last in the league.

Both teams took a look at the other one and decided that they wanted to become more like that other team. And so they did...

 

[bizzz*]

First, plus-minus is arguably the most important basic stat for a defenseman. Second, the plus-minus comparison was equal, which indicates equal defensive value, but admittedly it also depends on matchups and ice time.

Playing on the same team, fighting for the same spot Moore was minus 5 in 17 games and Erixon was plus 4 in 31 games.
Then Moore had a privilege to improve his plus-minus playing with teams like Canes, Devils, Panthers, Buffalo and Philly. All of them had nothing to play for at the time. How Moore's plus 9 against those bottom feeders is relevant to the comparison to Erixon is beyond my understanding.

 

[blahblah]

Playing on the same team, fighting for the same spot Moore was minus 5 in 17 games and Erixon was plus 4 in 31 games.
Then Moore had a privilege to improve his plus-minus playing with teams like Canes, Devils, Panthers, Buffalo and Philly. All of them had nothing to play for at the time. How Moore's plus 9 against those bottom feeders is relevant to the comparison to Erixon is beyond my understanding.

Good grief... People providing context. How annoying. :p

Not sure the Erixon/Moore comparison is all that relevant at this point. We probably want to give them a couple of years before we start considering judgement.

Watching the two teams at the end of last year, I was amazed how bad the Rangers looked and how much Brass and Moore added to that team. They weren't quite Mild bad, but pretty close. At times they looked like they were in mud. That made we wonder how they were in a playoff spot and it made me wonder who on that team disappeared, as I really wasn't paying attention to individuals other than our old players to see how they were doing.

I'm not sure what that means for us next year and beyond, along with the context of this trade. Seems to me that they miss AA and Dubinsky more than we miss Nash. We really didn't miss a beat without Brass and Moore wasn't really playing at the time.

Maybe in the big picture, we'll miss Moore 5 years down the line. But at this moment in time there is not one player we moved that I miss. Even losing Dorse didn't bother me. Erixon seems a fine addition, I see no reason he can't be top 4 on this team for a long time.

 

[PIM]

Good grief... People providing context. How annoying. :p

Not sure the Erixon/Moore comparison is all that relevant at this point. We probably want to give them a couple of years before we start considering judgement.

Ultimately I agree with this, I think both sides are operating on hunches at this point and it's obviously going to be biased, I was just trying to provide at least some statistical evidence to support my hunch, even though it's a small sample size.

Watching the two teams at the end of last year, I was amazed how bad the Rangers looked and how much Brass and Moore added to that team. They weren't quite Mild bad, but pretty close. At times they looked like they were in mud. That made we wonder how they were in a playoff spot and it made me wonder who on that team disappeared, as I really wasn't paying attention to individuals other than our old players to see how they were doing.

In a playoff spot? Their names are Lundqvist, Stepan, Zuccarello, Brassard (PPG player for the Rangers) and McDonagh. Who on the team disappeared? Their names are Richards and Nash (Gaborik too, before he was traded, obviously.)

I'm not sure what that means for us next year and beyond, along with the context of this trade. Seems to me that they miss AA and Dubinsky more than we miss Nash. We really didn't miss a beat without Brass and Moore wasn't really playing at the time.

AA not so much, but Duby's grit in the middle of the lineup was missed, along with Prust and Rupp. We went from leading the league in blocked shots and fighting majors to being one of the softest teams in the league, because Sather had to have Rick Nash.

Maybe in the big picture, we'll miss Moore 5 years down the line. But at this moment in time there is not one player we moved that I miss. Even losing Dorse didn't bother me. Erixon seems a fine addition, I see no reason he can't be top 4 on this team for a long time.

That's a perfectly fine perspective for you guys to have, I'd be happy if I was a Bluejackets fan too. I would be more upset about losing Dorsett though, he's in the mold of some of the players that can make or break a team. Most Rangers fans weren't too upset when Sather let Prust walk, until they saw the huge void that was left because of it. I don't think Dorsett is as valuable of a player as Prust, but he definitely has his own unique attitude and skill set that can change the momentum and mood of a game.

 

[PIM]

Playing on the same team, fighting for the same spot Moore was minus 5 in 17 games and Erixon was plus 4 in 31 games.
Then Moore had a privilege to improve his plus-minus playing with teams like Canes, Devils, Panthers, Buffalo and Philly. All of them had nothing to play for at the time. How Moore's plus 9 against those bottom feeders is relevant to the comparison to Erixon is beyond my understanding.

Once again, this is going to come down to comfort in a system and a locker room, on ice chemistry, organizational handling, etc. The Moore you saw in Columbus is not the Moore we saw in New York. I've already tried to make this point, but different players thrive in different environments. Think Patrick Roy choking for the Habs and then putting the Av's on his shoulders for a cup the next year. It's not at all an uncommon phenomenon in hockey.

 

[Roadman]

Once again, this is going to come down to comfort in a system and a locker room, on ice chemistry, organizational handling, etc. The Moore you saw in Columbus is not the Moore we saw in New York. I've already tried to make this point, but different players thrive in different environments. Think Patrick Roy choking for the Habs and then putting the Av's on his shoulders for a cup the next year. It's not at all an uncommon phenomenon in hockey.

OK, we get it. You think Moore is a superior prospect, you are entitled to your opinion. Somehow though I don't think that is the singular tipping point in judging the relative value of the trades between the organizations.

Since we will be in the same division and conference, you will forgive me if I don't wish you well in the coming years.

 

[Ilya Bryzastor]

Plus/Minus is a terrible stat if you're using it for a single player , it is more of a team stat , if everybody is minus then you know the team is bad and vise versa. I'll use this as an example of why it is bad , say you're team is on the power play 5 times in a game and say somebody gets 5 points in the game all coming from the PP , later in the game that player could be out there and the goalie could give up a weak goal or another teammate turned the puck over which lead to a breakaway , the goal was not the players fault yet they get the minus. At the end of the game the that player ends up with 5 points yet is -1.

 

[Viqsi]

That's a perfectly fine perspective for you guys to have, I'd be happy if I was a Bluejackets fan too. I would be more upset about losing Dorsett though, he's in the mold of some of the players that can make or break a team. Most Rangers fans weren't too upset when Sather let Prust walk, until they saw the huge void that was left because of it. I don't think Dorsett is as valuable of a player as Prust, but he definitely has his own unique attitude and skill set that can change the momentum and mood of a game.

We feel like we've got that more or less handled between Dubinsky and JMFJ.

As for the Moore debate - we know what he was capable of. If he's getting there sooner, bully for y'all. We're happy with how it went down.

 

[We Want Ten]

I liked the Rick Nash trade. It was the second trade with the Rangers that I could've done without since the CBJ unfortunately made the Rangers a playoff team and thus making the 1st rd pick worse.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

Once again, this is going to come down to comfort in a system and a locker room, on ice chemistry, organizational handling, etc. The Moore you saw in Columbus is not the Moore we saw in New York.

OK, but you were trying to use this analysis in a way that supports your contention that Moore is a superior young defenseman to Erixon. It doesn't do that, though, so whatever.

Because this isn't some sort of "one org. did right by a kid" situation. Moore played nearly all of 2011-2012 with the CBJ, and looked pretty good. He didn't all of a sudden get good upon his arrival in NYC (that was Brassard). Most CBJ posters were of the "disappointed to see him go but you gotta do what you gotta do" mindset.

This all isn't even an issue if you hadn't suggested that Moore is "developing faster than Erixon" as though it's a definitive statement. Both were drafted in the same year, and both have pretty much secured jobs in the NHL. If I wanted, I could suggest that it was the CBJ's proper handling of Moore as opposed to the Rangers' mishandling of Erixon that has resulted in Moore seeing more NHL time thus far. But that would be skewed and unverifiable.

 

[blahblah]

In a playoff spot? Their names are Lundqvist, Stepan, Zuccarello, Brassard (PPG player for the Rangers) and McDonagh. Who on the team disappeared? Their names are Richards and Nash (Gaborik too, before he was traded, obviously.)

With all due respect, your problems ran deeper than that over simplistic nonsense. First off, Brassard had nothing to do with your team hanging around a playoff spot since he had been playing for the Jackets for most of the year.

That's a perfectly fine perspective for you guys to have,

Gee thanks. I was really looking for some Ranger fan to justify my "perspective". Thanks for legitimizing it.

I would be more upset about losing Dorsett though, he's in the mold of some of the players that can make or break a team.

With all due respect, I don't think you really know our team very well. I like Dorse, but his role will (and was) be filled internally. He left the lineup right as we started our run. To be honest he was better the previous season. Not that he was bad, he just dropped off a bit from his peak.

 

[thebus2288*]

AA not so much

What I don't understand is I really can't think of a single Ranger fan on here since the trade that's said something completely positive about Anisimov. Especially with everything that's being said about Brassard. Huge fan of Brass, don't think he deserved a fraction of the hate he got on here and was actually quite upset when he was traded for Gaborik. But its clear to me who the better player is right now. Size as a factor, I'd honestly say the only thing Brass has over Artem is speed and agility. BOTH I think will become top line centers for a while in this league very soon.

I'd have Moore over Erixon personally. While Erixon might be a little more "steady" right now I just don't know if its worth the overall potential I really think Moore has over Erixon. It's not like Erixon DOESN'T/DIDN'T make the same questionable decisions as Moore. Either way it was a complete disaster bringing in Adrian Aucoin. Rather have Nash's BFF.

As for Dorsett I don't even think Ranger fans know what they got yet. After coming back from that injury I thought he looked like ****. Some Jacket fans like to talk about all these "dumb" penalties he would take, but the role he plays on a team and just the way he plays the game(see video of the injury...how many players go to the net hard like that) is rough and he'll get called eventually for things either deserved or not. His reputation with refs in the league is already bad. But it all makes him the player he is, and any team is better off with him. I think people tend to forget how much of an impact Dorse made before the injury...even on the scoresheet.