Rick Nash

[Tawnos]

It's extremely difficult to hit the short side of the net moving at that speed, from that angle and on a one-timer. That's why velocity is more important than placement on that particular play.

 

[Overcast]

Wasn't top shelf. I'm not killing the guy, but as nice a setup as Kreider gave him many NHL goalies make that save. Their scrub goalie almost made the save.

Maybe I just think Nash is a better player than some of you. I'm not going to get excited about soft goals from him. I think he's capable of a lot more, and I'd still like to see it.

Lots of "almosts" and "coulda woulda shoulda" and "luck luck luck" in your statements. Nash got the goal (and game winner) and that's all that matters.

 

[Ola]

I don't think price gives up that goal yesterday. I don't want to exaggerate how much "he's baaaack" but he played noticeably better in a few games, got slightly reduced ice time and I think he has legitamately collected his thoughts. He is playing at a level that is at least acceptable even though I agree it could still be better

Yeah I don't want to exaggerate the he's baaaaack part either, but on the other side of the spectrum I don't at all understand what people are talking about when they say like he has been better the last few games. I wouldn't even put his game last night in the top 10 during the POs this year.

He got an opening pass that he converted on.

I would love to see anyone be able to point out 2 more passes like that made to him during the previous 15 games, I can think of 1 only.

 

[tjs252]

I agree that Stepan playing better had a trickle down to Nash playing well.

BUT

We chose him over Gaborik because Nash should be able to create his own chances.

Either way I'm happy he's playing well, we need him.

 

[Kel Varnsen]

Lots of "almosts" and "coulda woulda shoulda" and "luck luck luck" in your statements. Nash got the goal (and game winner) and that's all that matters.

There was 1 "almost" used, 0 "could"s, 0 "would"s, 0 "should"s, and 0 "luck"s in there.

And again, I guess nuance isn't fun for people to talk about, but I've made this point a number of times already, my criticism of his recent play is very, very limited. I'm generally happy with him, however, I still think he has another gear. I think when he's clicking on all cylinders he make that goal a no doubter, he puts it to the right side of the net.

It's absolutely nit-picking, I've said that the whole time. But there is a real nit there, so I'm not just going to leave it there. I'm going to mention it, but I've called it a nit the whole time.

 

[Doctyl]

Lots of "almosts" and "coulda woulda shoulda" and "luck luck luck" in your statements. Nash got the goal (and game winner) and that's all that matters.

Not really a game winner though. We scored 3 so Nash's second goal was really irrelevant in he end. Nash ****ing sucks

 

[Jersey Girl]

Not really a game winner though. We scored 3 so Nash's second goal was really irrelevant in he end. Nash ****ing sucks

Nash scored the second goal in a 3-1 game, it's the game winning goal.

 

[Callagraves]

He's played well the past 2 games. Particularly well yesterday.

He'd have to either win this series with a goal a game, or play a major part in bringing this team a cup for this post-season to be anything other than an atrocity for him.

 

[Callagraves]

Nash scored the second goal in a 3-1 game, it's the game winning goal.

That's Dactyl. He's fairly intrepid Nash fan. I'm inclined to think that was sarcasm

 

[trilobyte]

Nash is warming up. Good to see.
The fact that he has played very well defensively is a plus for him, but he has more work to do. More goals to score. I hope his offensive game continues to grow (he is not there yet) and does not fade into the background again.

And yes. I too am a Nash fan. As a fan I expect him to play to his capabilites.
Go Rick.

 

[Blue Blooded]

James Mirtle with a good article on Nash.

Let’s put it this way: The Rangers have outscored the opposition 2-to-1 at even strength with Nash on the ice in these playoffs. He has some of the best possession numbers in the league relative to his teammates, which means when he’s on the ice, New York has been in the offensive zone more than the defensive one.

And, playing primarily with Derek Stepan on a “top” line, Nash has posted those stats while getting the toughest checking assignments on the team.

I wrote earlier in these playoffs about how the biggest difference between the NHL playoff and the regular season is the fact save percentages rise dramatically, in large part to the fact there are no more backups and/or poor starters. That means that even the best shooters are going to see their percentages decline, and even the most “clutch” players out there are going to have longer droughts than during the year.

Take Jonathan Toews as one example. He’s being (rightly) hailed as a repeat Conn Smythe candidate for his performance in these playoffs, but we really aren’t all that far removed from talking about his own goal drought.

And it was longer than the one Nash is in now.

Going back to the 2010 playoffs when he won his first Cup, Toews at one point had only four goals in a 41-game stretch in the postseason, something he managed despite playing on better teams and with better linemates.

Everyone wanted to know what was wrong with Toews.

Less than a year later, he’s scoring again and some are saying he’s better than Sidney Crosby, who will win the Hart Trophy in a landslide next month.

 

[tjs252]

James Mirtle with a good article on Nash.

Respectfully, line mates aren't the problem.

He's been with St. Louis or Kreider and Stepan. We may not have the top-to-bottom talent Chicago does/did, but that's a fairly specious argument.

 

[acapps10]

James Mirtle with a good article on Nash.

Came here to post this. Interesting piece.

 

[Blue Blooded]

Respectfully, line mates aren't the problem.

He's been with St. Louis or Kreider and Stepan. We may not have the top-to-bottom talent Chicago does/did, but that's a fairly specious argument.

When did he infer that linemates were "the" problem?

The point of the article is that you see all sorts of anomalies in the playoffs due to better goaltending and small sample sizes, and that Nash has by all accounts been playing very well despite his lack of production.

 

[Kel Varnsen]

James Mirtle with a good article on Nash.

I've pointed out already why the Toews comparison is a bad one.

1) Nash is more of a goal scorer than Toews even when Toews is at his best. Nash has two 40 goal seasons, Toews has 0. Nash has five 30 goal seasons, Toews has 2.

2) Toews is more of a playmaker than Nash. Toews has 3 seasons of 40 assists, Nash has 0. Toews has 30+ assists every year except for the lockout shortened year and the year prior where he logged only 59 games, Nash has had less than 30 assists in 6 years. Nash has 44 more goals than assists on his career, Toews has 50 more assists than goals on his career.

3) Toews is discussed as an elite defensive forward, Nash, for all the strides he's made, is not.

 

[NYR Viper]

I've pointed out already why the Toews comparison is a bad one.

1) Nash is more of a goal scorer than Toews even when Toews is at his best. Nash has two 40 goal seasons, Toews has 0. Nash has five 30 goal seasons, Toews has 2.

2) Toews is more of a playmaker than Nash. Toews has 3 seasons of 40 assists, Nash has 0. Toews has 30+ assists every year except for the lockout shortened year and the year prior where he logged only 59 games, Nash has had less than 30 assists in 6 years. Nash has 44 more goals than assists on his career, Toews has 50 more assists than goals on his career.

3) Toews is discussed as an elite defensive forward, Nash, for all the strides he's made, is not.

Nash is a good defensive player. It is one of the main reasons he was chosen for Team Canada not once, but twice.

 

[Ola]

Respectfully, line mates aren't the problem.

He's been with St. Louis or Kreider and Stepan. We may not have the top-to-bottom talent Chicago does/did, but that's a fairly specious argument.

Don't think of it in terms of "line mates". That line, as a line, our top line, has besides short periods not been able to achive what must be achived to score a lot of goals in this league. And they have often been far from achiving that.

Stepan has like set up Kreider for a goal 6 time during the entire regular season. Stepan has not been able to set up Nash either. Kreider has not been able to set up Nash on a regular basis, and neither has Nash been able to set up Kreids nor Stepan. That line has not caused turn overs. That line has not been able to transit fast enough to be a threat on the rush. I usually have a good memory for this, but I have an extremely hard time recollecting one single time that Marc Staal or Anton Strålman has made any kind of high caliber offensive play to open things up for one of the forwards.

I am sorry tjs, but that line has in terms of aching that last 5% that it takes to score a goal, been nothing short of dysfunctional all season. Nash is part of that. Stepan is part of that. Kreider is part of that. And probably more than anything else, Staal and Strålman is part of that. Our top line is playing infront of a D pairing that has 25 points -- combined -- over a full regular season. Combined, 12 and 13 pts each.

Meanwhile, our other lines has been working real well. Our top line has been very valuble for us playing the toughest match-ups while winning the momentum battle. Often a team with a star that isn't scoring shake things up to get him going, increases the amount of play that goes through him, until the star get going. Because those teams must get that. For us it has been the opposite, we have faired well without shaking up our top line, and I definitely think it would have been contraproductive to do so. To split Brass and Zucc to play with Nash. To play Richards with Nash to try to get more feeds to him, while loosing the 2-way precense of Stepan on that line. And so forth.

I am not saying that Nash is perfect and that he shouldn't be critizised. But many people around this team has taken it to litterary absurd proportions from:

1. Looking way to much at his stats.

2. From not having a clue what takes place on the ice (the player leading the POs in shots that is our best advanced stat player, that all the teams we play against choose to focus on primerily, could supposedly by the experts at this place be replacced with any 3rd line player in the league yada yada yada).

 

[Levitate]

I've pointed out already why the Toews comparison is a bad one.

1) Nash is more of a goal scorer than Toews even when Toews is at his best. Nash has two 40 goal seasons, Toews has 0. Nash has five 30 goal seasons, Toews has 2.

2) Toews is more of a playmaker than Nash. Toews has 3 seasons of 40 assists, Nash has 0. Toews has 30+ assists every year except for the lockout shortened year and the year prior where he logged only 59 games, Nash has had less than 30 assists in 6 years. Nash has 44 more goals than assists on his career, Toews has 50 more assists than goals on his career.

3) Toews is discussed as an elite defensive forward, Nash, for all the strides he's made, is not.

All your reasons are just reasons why not to compare them as players, and that's not relevant at all to the reason the article was comparing them

 

[Kel Varnsen]

Nash is a good defensive player. It is one of the main reasons he was chosen for Team Canada not once, but twice.

I said he's not an elite defensive player, the way Toews is. Do you want to dispute that?

 

[Kel Varnsen]

All your reasons are just reasons why not to compare them as players, and that's not relevant at all to the reason the article was comparing them

The article was comparing them as players in the playoffs, they shouldn't be compared to each other in any context because they're totally different kinds of players.

 

[Ola]

Also, I don't think it makes much sense to even talk about offense or defense nowadays.

The game is about momentum. Spend time in the attacking zone, and you will do well. Spend time in your end, and you won't. Sometimes, you just also need to play off a game, then you need to step into the line and play "that" game.

Nash has been picked for Team Canada because they knew he would step in line and play the momentum game. Play it simple when it needed to be played simple. Get the puck deep. Get a circle going. Play a 0-0 game when you need a 0-0 shift. Some players, especially younger players, often are just too ambitious to play a smaller role for a National team.

That line is good for us because they get the job done on the ice. It scores more than it is scored upon -- despite getting the toughest match-ups. The team we play against has to match D pairings against them, get their best D's out on the ice to handle them. It has also been a very loyal line, look at how many times they have hit the ice in 3rd periods and just played to get the puck deep and make the clock tick instead of looking to boost stats.

Has it been dysfunctional defensively, most defenitely. Is that the fault of Rick Nash? Not to a big extent, it just isn't clicking.

 

[NYR Viper]

I said he's not an elite defensive player, the way Toews is. Do you want to dispute that?

Toews is a center and Nash is a winger. Of course Toews has to be a better defensive player. Apples and Oranges.

 

[Tawnos]

I've pointed out already why the Toews comparison is a bad one.

It's a good thing Mirtle wasn't comparing the players to each other then.

 

[Blue Blooded]

BTW this is a list of 5v5 goal scoring per 60 minutes over the past two seasons, i.e. Nash's regular season Ranger career. Guess where he is.

I genuinely believe, completely idiotic UFA signings notwithstanding, that the biggest mistake the Rangers can make this off season is to trade Nash. His value is likely at an all-time low, and just last season he was a top-10 forward for us in the reg. season.

 

[Kel Varnsen]

It's a good thing Mirtle wasn't comparing the players to each other then.

I wrote earlier in these playoffs about how the biggest difference between the NHL playoff and the regular season is the fact save percentages rise dramatically, in large part to the fact there are no more backups and/or poor starters. That means that even the best shooters are going to see their percentages decline, and even the most “clutch†players out there are going to have longer droughts than during the year.

Take Jonathan Toews as one example. He’s being (rightly) hailed as a repeat Conn Smythe candidate for his performance in these playoffs, but we really aren’t all that far removed from talking about his own goal drought.

And it was longer than the one Nash is in now.

Going back to the 2010 playoffs when he won his first Cup, Toews at one point had only four goals in a 41-game stretch in the postseason, something he managed despite playing on better teams and with better linemates.

Everyone wanted to know what was wrong with Toews.

Less than a year later, he’s scoring again and some are saying he’s better than Sidney Crosby, who will win the Hart Trophy in a landslide next month.

That’s not to say Nash is Toews. But what it does highlight is that we’re really not judging him on a whole lot, especially for a guy that generates offence somewhat randomly by firing four-plus pucks on net a game.





How the **** is that not a comparison? It's a ****ing comparison. Read a book.