Toggle sidebar

Player Discussion Rick Nash

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
  • We are currently aware of "log in/security error" issues that are affecting some users. We apologize and ask for your patience as we try to get these issues fixed.
Status
Not open for further replies.
True Blue said:
A bounce here or a bounce there does not account for the team's best and most important forward disappearing for long stretches of time. Or not being at all visible when the team needs him the most.
Click to expand...

Agreed, that's why I said it was part of the issue. Nash's ineffectiveness was also one of the issues.
 
True Blue said:
Hmmmm....what if it was a coma? ;)

Nash was certainly not THE reason that they lost. But I will say that he was a rather large piece, IMO.
Click to expand...

they had leads in every game they lost right?

they turtled away lead after lead after lead.

they lost because of AVs idiotic game plan.

Would nash scoring in the finals have helped...well of course...so would plenty of other guys scoring some more.

BUT THEY HAD LEADS. They scored enough goals to go up in all those games.
 
Inferno said:
they lost because of AVs idiotic game plan.
Click to expand...
They lost for a myriad of reasons. AV's game plan was a big part. Nash's invisibility was another big part.
Would nash scoring in the finals have helped...well of course...so would plenty of other guys scoring some more.
Click to expand...
Sure, but the Rangers rely more on Nash to do that than they to with the other guys.
 
True Blue said:
They lost for a myriad of reasons. AV's game plan was a big part. Nash's invisibility was another big part.

Sure, but the Rangers rely more on Nash to do that than they to with the other guys.
Click to expand...

Id say if the Rangers relied more on Nash to score goals he wouldnt have been the 70th!!!! ranked forward in TOI/GP

You dont play a guy you rely on to score goals 17 mins a night. The Rangers dont play a "Rely on this guy to score" they play a 4 line game...they spread the ice time out...therefore they DONT rely on any 1 guy to score their goals.

Its not all on Nash...should he have scored more? Sure. Could he have? Sure. Was he a "big" reason we lost...no..id put the single overriding biggest reason we lost on the Turtle. Everything else is just noise.
 
Nash was a huge reason they didn't win. possibly even the biggest one.

He was the teams best forward and was a non factor. There is really no way around that fact.

But he was a non factor because of injury; the concept of him being too mentally weak for the playoffs is a fantasy that needs to die.
 
McRanger said:
Nash was a huge reason they didn't win. possibly even the biggest one.

He was the teams best forward and was a non factor. There is really no way around that fact.

But he was a non factor because of injury; the concept of him being too mentally weak for the playoffs is a fantasy that needs to die.
Click to expand...

He was also snake-bit to a certain degree. I remember in OT of Game 5 his shot was headed for an open net but it hit the shaft of the Kings defenseman's stick.
 
Nash played well in 2014. It is better to say that a couple of more bounces in favor of the Rangers (certainly quite a few off of Nash's stick) would have led to SC.
 
Inferno said:
Id say if the Rangers relied more on Nash to score goals he wouldnt have been the 70th!!!! ranked forward in TOI/GP

You dont play a guy you rely on to score goals 17 mins a night. The Rangers dont play a "Rely on this guy to score" they play a 4 line game...they spread the ice time out...therefore they DONT rely on any 1 guy to score their goals.

Its not all on Nash...should he have scored more? Sure. Could he have? Sure. Was he a "big" reason we lost...no..id put the single overriding biggest reason we lost on the Turtle. Everything else is just noise.
Click to expand...

Nash was/is regarded as one of the best players on the team, and one of the biggest offensive threats throughout his entire tenure here. The common saying is that your best players need to be your best players, and Nash was very nearly a non-factor in the runs we came closest to the Cup. He did do better in the year Tampa bounced us though. That's definitely a pretty big reason why they didn't win. Is it the only reason? No. Is it still a reason? Yes. Are there other players on the team that could have done more? Sure. Still wraps back around to "Your best players need to be your best players."
 
Overcast said:
Nash was/is regarded as one of the best players on the team, and one of the biggest offensive threats throughout his entire tenure here. The common saying is that your best players need to be your best players, and Nash was very nearly a non-factor in the runs we came closest to the Cup. He did do better in the year Tampa bounced us though. That's definitely a pretty big reason why they didn't win. Is it the only reason? No. Is it still a reason? Yes. Are there other players on the team that could have done more? Sure. Still wraps back around to "Your best players need to be your best players."
Click to expand...

and id counter that with..your best players need to play.

Like I said..him not scoring is A reason they didnt win..for sure. but his ice time was at least A reason that he didn't score as much. The Rangers arent going to ever have a PPG player in a deep playoff push with their ice time distribution among their forwards..its just never going to happen. Not a single Rangers forward in that run played over 20 minutes a night...

Sidney Crosby had by far the most minutes/game last year on his team with 20:26...it dropped down to 17 mins after that.

The spread between Crosby and a 4th liner like Fehr was 9 minutes per game.

The spread between Rick Nash and Dominic Moore was about 4 minutes...over the course of 25 games..it adds up.

Again im 100% not absolving Nash of the criticism...its deserved. He had a below average offensive performance. But I still refuse to believe that his below average performance was why we lost, or even the biggest reason we lost.

Brad Richards kinda fell off the planet. St. Louis was good, but he wasnt what he was in Tampa...Dan Girardi was like..oh here, please beat us in this Overtime..i'm too tired...and the rangers pissed away lead after lead after lead doing this same crap that theyve done before and after that by turtling to teams...its happened in these playoffs..it happened in that cup final..and it absolutely crushed us. You cant frigging turtle for 1/2 a game and expect to win.
 
LeetchisGod said:
I disagree. 3 goals in 25 games doesn't cut it for $8 million a year. Not even close.
Click to expand...

Lundqvist didn't score a single goal. Even worse!

Nash did more than score goals. 2014 was not a good post-season for him though, but if you judge him solely on goals, you are missing other important elements to his game
 
Chief Ranger said:
He was also snake-bit to a certain degree. I remember in OT of Game 5 his shot was headed for an open net but it hit the shaft of the Kings defenseman's stick.
Click to expand...

No doubt. But he also looked like a player that suffered a couple of concussions and was experiencing some serious conditioning after effects.

Nash spent the entire '14 post season looking like he would have badly lost a foot race with Nik Antropov.

Which is why when people point to the years he was hurt as proof he can't hack it in the playoff I want to throw my computer out the window.
 
Amazing Kreiderman said:
Lundqvist didn't score a single goal. Even worse!

Nash did more than score goals. 2014 was not a good post-season for him though, but if you judge him solely on goals, you are missing other important elements to his game
Click to expand...

I'm not denying that there are other elements to Nash's game. You can find guys with those elements who don't take up such a large chunk of your salary cap. $8 million a year forwards need to produce offensively to be worth that price tag.
 
LeetchisGod said:
I'm not denying that there are other elements to Nash's game. You can find guys with those elements who don't take up such a large chunk of your salary cap. $8 million a year forwards need to produce offensively to be worth that price tag.
Click to expand...

Yes. He has had 1 bad post-season.
 
kovazub94 said:
Nash played well in 2014. It is better to say that a couple of more bounces in favor of the Rangers (certainly quite a few off of Nash's stick) would have led to SC.
Click to expand...

Sure. End of day, the 13-14 LA Kings were a vastly superior team to us. That's why we lost. Not because of Rick Nash.
 
Made Dan said:
Sure. End of day, the 13-14 LA Kings were a vastly superior team to us. That's why we lost. Not because of Rick Nash.
Click to expand...

3 of the 4 losses were decided in overtime, with a couple being in double overtime. That series was a lot more balanced than people realize.
 
Chief Ranger said:
3 of the 4 losses were decided in overtime, with a couple being in double overtime. That series was a lot more balanced than people realize.
Click to expand...

In my opinion, our finals vs LA was more balanced than the 2011 final that went to 7 games. As far as I remember, every game Vancouver won, was a nailbiter, while Boston had some easy wins.
 
Amazing Kreiderman said:
In my opinion, our finals vs LA was more balanced than the 2011 final that went to 7 games. As far as I remember, every game Vancouver won, was a nailbiter, while Boston had some easy wins.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

That was the most lopsided final I've seen. Don't let the series score tell you that.

Even last year's final, San Jose was clearly outmatched.
 
Inferno said:
Id say if the Rangers relied more on Nash to score goals he wouldnt have been the 70th!!!! ranked forward in TOI/GP

You dont play a guy you rely on to score goals 17 mins a night. The Rangers dont play a "Rely on this guy to score" they play a 4 line game...they spread the ice time out...therefore they DONT rely on any 1 guy to score their goals.

Its not all on Nash...should he have scored more? Sure. Could he have? Sure. Was he a "big" reason we lost...no..id put the single overriding biggest reason we lost on the Turtle. Everything else is just noise.
Click to expand...

This is all well and good, but I think when a forward is getting paid 7.8 million you would expect the team leans on him to score a little
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom