Player Discussion Rick Nash

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Only Stepan and Brassard have more playoff points over Nash's tenure. Only Brassard has more ES points. Only Stepan and Brassard have more ES goals. All situations? Just add Kreider to that short list. Only Brass and Taco score at a better rate at ES.

If you want to call out Nash for his lack of production in the playoffs, call out everyone sans Brassard. Why doesnt Zuccarello get ripped for producing at a worse pace than Nash? Kreider gets worshipped and Nash outpaces him. Beaves and MSL get remembered as clutch in the playoffs, you know who outpaced their production? Rick Nash. How bout Kevin Hayes's 7 points in 34 games?

Literally only Brassard performed better than Nash across the board. Thats it.

I hope GM's around the league feel the same way and feel he can make a difference for a team in the playoffs. We need to get something for him. I'm glass half empty on him. I don't think we get a first. Hope i'm wrong.
 
No one gets paid for the playoffs

Can’t be on the team in the playoffs if we can’t afford to sign you. I can play semantics too. You understood the point. You get paid like the man, hyped like the man, people expect you to be the man. Kreider, Hayes, Zucc aren’t “the man”. Nash was supposed to be.
 
Can’t be on the team in the playoffs if we can’t afford to sign you. I can play semantics too. You understood the point. You get paid like the man, hyped like the man, people expect you to be the man. Kreider, Hayes, Zucc aren’t “the man”. Nash was supposed to be.
Richards and MSL? Nash outperformed them. This is a biased narrative built upon very selective memories.
 
Richards and MSL? Nash outperformed them. This is a biased narrative built upon very selective memories.

I remember Richards being the subject of some pretty serious criticism.

MSL, for one thing, was 38 and then 39 years old when we had him. If his tank ran out in the playoffs people were less surprised. The year MSL was 38 years old he had 15 points in 25 playoff games. Richards had 12 points as 33 years old. Nash had 10 points at 29. The following year Richards was gone, MSL was 39 and had only 7 points. Nash had 14. In the two years that we had MSL, MSL had 22 points and Nash had 24. MSL was 38/39. Nash was 29/30.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bl02
Dont you have a coach to defend?

It's not so much defending AV as it is finding a tacit and tactful ways of telling people "calm down moron. There isn't always one thing. I hear that every year!"

No one gets paid for the playoffs

This is a horrible evasion.

The "not paid for playoffs" is more about accounting, and psssst...

[looks around before letting you in on a huge secret]

they get bonuses in the playoffs
 
  • Like
Reactions: bl02
I remember Richards being the subject of some pretty serious criticism.

MSL, for one thing, was 38 and then 39 years old when we had him. If his tank ran out in the playoffs people were less surprised. The year MSL was 38 years old he had 15 points in 25 playoff games. Richards had 12 points as 33 years old. Nash had 10 points at 29. The following year Richards was gone, MSL was 39 and had only 7 points. Nash had 14. In the two years that we had MSL, MSL had 22 points and Nash had 24. MSL was 38/39. Nash was 29/30.

Richards got some criticism towards the end, but nothing like the vitriol spewed about Nash.

This isnt giving it the proper context. Nash and MSL got roughly equal TOI (MSL with 10 more minutes total). Nash had a 1.83 P/60 in all situations compared to MSL's 1.66. Nash played 52.66 minutes on the PK while all of MSL's 795 minutes came at ES or on the PP.

Also if Nash is getting blamed for his contract, then MSL has to bear the full weight of that trade value. He doesnt get a pass for being old.
 
RangersTown™ was desperate to buy him out, and then did...
Yea because if he retired we were f***ed. It was more about the structure of his contract and the CBA than it was about his play.

You have to literally be Girardi level atrocious to get bought out for your play.
 
No it really wasn't.

The beaver was disappointing in the blueshirt to say the least.
Wrong. He had 6 years left. We had a compliance buyout available to use that had to be used that year.

Sather called the decision "extremely difficult," adding that Richards' "leadership and guidance for our young players was invaluable."

Was he disappointing? Yea. Was he bought out because of his play and the fans dislike of him? f*** no
 
Wrong. He had 6 years left. We had a compliance buyout available to use that had to be used that year.

Sather called the decision "extremely difficult," adding that Richards' "leadership and guidance for our young players was invaluable."

Was he disappointing? Yea. Was he bought out because of his play and the fans dislike of him? **** no

Really I'm surprised Slats didn't grab the mic and say "gtfo you big toothed bitch"

His underwhelming play was more than half of the decision.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bl02
Really I'm surprised Slats didn't grab the mic and say "gtfo you big toothed *****"

His underwhelming play was more than half of the decision.
Gorton basically did with Girardi.

Sure if Richards was setting the world on fire, yea we wouldve kept him. He had 6 years left at 6.66 per. A compliance buyout to get out of this potentially crippling contract had to be used. This isnt the same situation as Girardi where it was "we would literally rather have negative cap space than your corpse." Richards play was not the primary motivator behind this buyout, it was a business decision.
 
Richards was so bad that the best team in the league at the time thought he was worth a look.

Silly Blackhawks with their Stanley Cup.

Well hopefully someone picks up a cheap third liner Rick Nash for a run as the Beaver was for the Blackhawks after the buyout.

The capital gains on that lump sum must have been more than his salary in CHI-town.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bl02
Gorton basically did with Girardi.

Sure if Richards was setting the world on fire, yea we wouldve kept him. He had 6 years left at 6.66 per. A compliance buyout to get out of this potentially crippling contract had to be used. This isnt the same situation as Girardi where it was "we would literally rather have negative cap space than your corpse." Richards play was not the primary motivator behind this buyout, it was a business decision.

Yes. Business decisions involve off loading players not living up to expectations.

If your argument is "well if he played for free, you'd like him then huh Reg..." , we can't get anywhere.
 
Well hopefully someone picks up a cheap third liner Rick Nash for a run as the Beaver was for the Blackhawks after the buyout.

The capital gains on that lump sum must have been more than his salary in CHI-town.
So you're admitting it was about money and not play.

Glad we agree.
 
If Rick wants to re-up here for 2 million for 1-2 years sure bring him back. If not I think we should move on. I have a enough flashback nightmares of the spring/summer of 2014
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheTakedown
Yes. Business decisions involve off loading players not living up to expectations.

If your argument is "well if he played for free, you'd like him then huh Reg..." , we can't get anywhere.
You brought up the Richards buyout to imply he wasnt living up to expectations and was subject to just as much criticism as Nash.

If the Richards buyout was purely about performance, why hasnt Nash been bought out?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad