-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
- Status
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,357
haveandare
Registered User
Because 14 games is 14 games no matter what time of the season.
Who hasn't looked bad for a streak of games? Even just on this team? Even just this year?
We've seen so many slumps this year. So many. These things happen, and every single time, without fail, some people somewhere assume that this isn't a slump but player X is losing his skills forever because his last dozen games haven't been as good as his previous hundred.
Scott Gomez, for all of his warts, was a far better playoff performer with the Rangers than Nash has been.
We got extremely lucky with that deal. It's the exception, not the rule.
A very special situation. A once in a lifetime miscalculation that worked in our favor...still point well taken.
From your lips to Gods ears.
I'd love the guy to just bust loose and have a monster run the rest of the way, but it's not gonna happen.
The way he's playing. How tentative he is. Something is very wrong with Rick Nash. Physical. Mental. Who knows? My feeling is that his future as a Ranger is being discussed by the folks in the brain trust. I mean wouldn't you be discussing it? Weighing the options?
I think they'll at least seriously discuss the possibility of buying Nash out. Pretty much impossible because we only have one buyout left and Richards absolutely has to be bought out - but a Nash buyout has to at least be on the table.
This is not what Sather thought he was getting.
Last edited:
Ian
Mike York fan club
14 playoff games is kind of a big deal.
As the folks in Pittsburgh are feeling right now, the regular season don't mean squat if you can't perform when it really counts. Nash has almost never performed when it really counts. I'm not talking about him losing his skill. As far as the playoffs have gone, he's never displayed his skills.
But what ever. You guys keep hoping for the best. I'll keep pointing out the obvious and maybe, just maybe the guy will bust out.
Then you can all laugh at me and we'll all be happy I hope.
Kel Varnsen
Below: Nash's Heart
- Sep 27, 2009
- 3,554
- 0
The fact that Richards has basically become this team's captain doesn't help Nash's chances at avoiding the buyout either.
Crazy to think next year we might have bought out Nash and named Richards captain. Who would have picked that going into this season?
JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK
Twenty f*ckin years
- Oct 8, 2010
- 80,070
- 17,710
It's not just 14 playoff games at this point. It's the other 12 games he played last year where he had one goal.
That's all a bit too "unlucky" for me.
That's all a bit too "unlucky" for me.
I'm going to read this, but just wanted to make the observation that at least from where I sit a lot of his 52 shots were not good scoring chances.
I mean some were really good. Not nearly enough though obviously. It's amazing he has not even put one in. Hopefully he'll get the one and go on frigging rampage.
But I'm not counting on it.
It is pretty crazy.
I still think they have to buy Richards out, though, regardless of Nash. In the last three years of Richards' contract, he'll actually be getting paid $1 million/year, at ages 38-40. If he retires (which has to be considered a good possibility) the cap recapture will hurt us badly.
Without Rick Nash scoring, IMO ... the run stops here.
I'm not real confident that the PP will surge. Nor do I believe the Zucc line and the fourth line will score enough goals to get the team past Montreal. Will Richards and St LOuis carry the offense?
Again, IMO Lundy could stand on his head in goal but without any production from Nash
I'm looking at Montreal in 6.
Corey Price isn't chopped liver. I'm not sure the Rangers will score much over 2 goals a game without Nash. Will that be enough?
I'm not real confident that the PP will surge. Nor do I believe the Zucc line and the fourth line will score enough goals to get the team past Montreal. Will Richards and St LOuis carry the offense?
Again, IMO Lundy could stand on his head in goal but without any production from Nash
I'm looking at Montreal in 6.
Corey Price isn't chopped liver. I'm not sure the Rangers will score much over 2 goals a game without Nash. Will that be enough?
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,357
At least in terms of distance, there's not a whole lot of difference in the shots he's getting now as opposed to the regular season, as I addressed.
Is it possible you don't consider them good scoring chances because your mind has already decided that Nash is bad so you view his shots differently?
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,357
Marian Gaborik's first 13 playoff games: 9 goals, 8 assists, 17 points
Marian Gaborik's next 28 playoff games: 5 goals, 5 assists, 10 points
Marian Gaborik's last 26 playoff games: 12 goals, 9 assists, 21 points
Some funny patterns can emerge when you reduce data into small samples.
(In before the injury narratives)
Marian Gaborik's next 28 playoff games: 5 goals, 5 assists, 10 points
Marian Gaborik's last 26 playoff games: 12 goals, 9 assists, 21 points
Some funny patterns can emerge when you reduce data into small samples.
(In before the injury narratives)
It's also possible so many of us have seen so many flicks of the puck to the goalie in the playoffs while Nash was within spitting distance of either the blue line or the boards, that we don't take his shot total seriously.
Now the argument can be made that it's not a horrible hockey play to force a faceoff in the other team's zone, which I agree with to some extent. But let's not equate those flicks to anything like an actual scoring chance.
Kel Varnsen
Below: Nash's Heart
- Sep 27, 2009
- 3,554
- 0
You should have included the injury narrative yourself since you seem to be aware of it.
JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK
Twenty f*ckin years
- Oct 8, 2010
- 80,070
- 17,710
5 goals is a decent amount more than ONE. And that was after Gaborik had already performed well in the playoffs.
Seriously. ONE goal. How can you conceivably defend this guy?
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,357
OK.
In 2010-11, Ranger fans are convinced that Gaborik dog-****ing the playoffs was due to an injury. He went and played in the World Championships after the series was over.
In 2012, Gaborik injured his shoulder some time in the Ottawa series. Most of the games after that point are included in his last 26 playoff games.
Nash's wrist and back injuries from last season are given no credence by the fans.
/Injury narrative
HatTrick Swayze
Just Be Nice
I honestly don't know how anyone can argue that Nash has generated enough high quality chances with a straight face. We all know what the man is capable of. He hasn't brough that.
JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK
Twenty f*ckin years
- Oct 8, 2010
- 80,070
- 17,710
Apparently defending him is not that difficult!
I mean, I'll say he hasn't been a liability, but he's been a massive disappointment. There is just no way of getting around 2 goals in 30 career playoff games.
haveandare
Registered User
Look at 31's link.
Crosby had 1 goal. Krecji had 0 goals. Nash has tons of shots, and they aren't from as far out as people seem to think. The odds of shooting at 0% for that many shots or more are extremely slim.
Also, Datsyuk played almost 50 playoff games before he got the hold of how to score in the post season.
Nash has played 30 playoff games combined in his entire career. 30 games is not a completely ridiculous amount of time for a player to slump or struggle. The fact that the games are playoff games doesn't make slumps stop happening.
You say he's never displayed his skills. So, what exactly do you think is happening? The slight change in play style from regular season to playoffs makes a 30 goal scorer a 0 goal scorer?
I'm not hoping for the best. I'm counting on regression towards the mean.
Amazing Kreiderman
Registered User
- Apr 11, 2011
- 45,070
- 40,920
I still cannot get over the fact that we traded for him when all we needed was a guy who performs in the play offs. The guy had 4 play off games in 10 seasons before joining the Rangers.
- Status
