As far as I know, yes, he still submits a list of 12 teams he's willing to be traded to
Player Discussion Rick Nash
- Thread starter Ori
- Start date
- Status
As far as I know, yes, he still submits a list of 12 teams he's willing to be traded to
Zats Muccarello
Grinder
Its definitely the smart decision to move Nash and recoup assets but I would love to keep him if he were willing to sign a cap-friendly deal. With all of the shit Nash gets, he has been one of the best forwards on the team since his arrival and still drives offensive play even with his limited finishing ability. He also truly loves being here and could be a great role model for younger developing players like Chytil. Not to mention his defensive play is really solid. If we could sign him to a cap-friendly deal and lessen his role a little bit I think it would really benefit the team and our depth.
Amazing Kreiderman
Registered User
- Apr 11, 2011
- 45,075
- 40,935
Player big P
no more striptease no more flashes
- Jul 20, 2005
- 4,927
- 2,347
Sort of but not really. They traded a few guys like Clowe and Handzus who were unproductive or liabilities and also brought in Torres for a pick.
They picked up some picks but also didn't lose much on the ice and they made the playoffs and the 2nd round anyway.
It would be a bit different than moving Nash this year. Nash already has 6x's the amount of goals all those players had combined when they were traded.
Matz03
Registered User
Nash is 8th on the team in points, I have a feeling both Hayes and Kreider will pass his sometime along
Lol yeah it's not fantasy Hockey, it's the obvious move for a retooling team. Don't lose good UFA's for nothing. Last time I checked this wasn't a playoff team. If they sneak into the 7-8 spot you think they shouldn't move their 8 or 9th scorer for a potential 1st? How about they replace him with a near NHL ready prospect that can take Nash's spot immediately. You can like Nash, I like Nash very much too, and try to resign him in the offseason but trade the deadline is a time so set yourself up for the future when teams overpay to put themselves over the top.
Just look at last year. Blues moved Shattenkirk, and they were very much in it. Tampa moved their starting G and Bryan Boyle, was a key player for them. Those teams made the hard decision and moved good players while in the race. Also interesting these teams are still good and know for having deep prospect pools.
Last edited:
ReggieDunlop68
hey hanrahan!
I've found my signature
I finally get it. He's been permanently snake bitten since conception.
Last edited:
He just wasn't that good lol.
I don't know about the media in the states, but Rick Nash was Canada's darling here for the first half of his career.
I never understood it. Was never a Nash fan. I guess it's similar to Big E with size, but even at his peak Big E was the most dominant player in the game. What exactly was Nash?
He's always has this connotation of playing well despite not really producing at an elite level. Or even at a top 6 level in truly meaningful games (Olympics, NHL playoffs)
Last edited:
ReggieDunlop68
hey hanrahan!
While moving Nash to recoup assets may be the right answer, if the Rangers are sniffing the playoffs (which they will be), he is not getting moved. I actually think that if a move was to be made, making it now as opposed to the deadline may garner more assets.
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
The skeptic in me agrees.
But I can see a scenario where they do move him, regardless of where they are in the standings. We've seen teams move assets at the deadline and still make the playoffs (St. Louis dealt Shattenkirk to the Caps last year). If the Rangers can recoup assets, coupled with the young talent the added this summer and what they already have, they should. And I think Gorton realizes that.
When a team signs a big contract, (well obviously the Rangers did not sign this one), I would think a GM would take regress and age into the contract. Do they expect him to be the same player he is in the 1st year of that contract and then the last couple of years of a contract? Yeah sure you look at the cap hit now and say yeah he is overpaid for his production. But if the contract is top heavy and paid its so called dividends in the first half of it, and is still an effective player in the last couple of years of it even if he is not hitting the same numbers, it still is considered a good contract I would think.
And here the skeptic in me disagrees. Maybe it is following this franchise for so many years. I would love for them to do a Shattenkirk type of deal, but do not believe that is realistic.
Not when you consider being the highest paid player and being paid to score goals in big spots.
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
I think it depends on what kind of year he's having. If he continues on this pace, I'm not sure the team will view him as essential. Then again, if he continues on this pace, what will his value really be?
Inferno
Registered User
the longer you wait with nash, imho, the better..hes got a huge contract..you wait, more teams can squeeze him in...especially if the rangers eat half the contract.
DanielBrassard
It's all so tiresome
Rick Nash up until 15-16 was one of the best ES scorers in the league, throughout his career. His lack of PP effectiveness hurt his raw point totals, but he was a beast ES and PK, I don't know what else could have been asked of him.
Amazing Kreiderman
Registered User
- Apr 11, 2011
- 45,075
- 40,935
offdacrossbar
misfit fanboy
he will be moved at the deadline. im pretty sure this is his last hurrah. until he returns as an ufa and we throw 4 mil at him. lol and ugh.
some team looking to make a move or feeling they are one player away, will certainly look to add him irrespective of his past playoff invisible man act.
if we retain some $$ and add a middling prospect as a sweetener, the return may well be a 1st and a decent player.
some team looking to make a move or feeling they are one player away, will certainly look to add him irrespective of his past playoff invisible man act.
if we retain some $$ and add a middling prospect as a sweetener, the return may well be a 1st and a decent player.
Amazing Kreiderman
Registered User
- Apr 11, 2011
- 45,075
- 40,935
Nash at 4m is a great asset.
Krams
Registered User
- Feb 13, 2012
- 8,042
- 1,982
To me, Nash is a 20-25 goal, 40-45 point player at this point in his career. You add in his two-way game at EV and PK ability and he's a very good player. Not $7.8m good. At the trade deadline, with significantly less than half of that owed, he would easily be the best rental player available IMO. Even if he's traded, I'd love him back next year at $4-4.5m.
DanielBrassard
It's all so tiresome
lucky13
Iron Chic
I’d bring him back for 3.5 ..... he can get more but according to that post article today it sounds like he really wants to stay
At that salary, I think he was too one dimensional in his offensive production. And he still generally bled chances against. He was far from a very top player IMO.
- Status
