Toggle sidebar

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.
bl02 said:
Well i was being a bit hyperbolic but 0 points in the finals. 3 goals in 25 games. Its very difficult to overlook that. Probably our best and only chance to win a cup in what will probably be 35-40 years most likely (hopefully we will get back there by 2030 or so). That hurts. Sometimes coming up Money (no pun intended) when it counts most is what big time players will be remembered for. Just my opinion. When its all said and done Rick Nash will not be known for his shots generated but rather for his failure to do his part in helping this team win a cup in 2014. Call it bias or whatever you like.
Click to expand...

In regard to any marquee player, why wouldn't you[ubiqutous you; not @bl02 ] not "like him" or revere him?

In contrast,why do we honor certain players?

Because they came up big when it was the hardest and they did it the most consistently.

On a related note, in regard to the 2030+ number [I know just random, I don't think Rick Nash will even be looked at as era defining. That doesn't mean that during his prime he didn't have a explosive combination of speed, lower body strength , and quick release on the door step, but era defining? Not really.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bl02
silverfish said:
@True Blue this is your original post:



This post was in response to @Dactyl 's post about Nash being a generational goal scorer.

If I was to assume that your post was directed at current Rick Nash, I did not make that assumption, as your post suggests that's what you think Rick Nash is, and always has been, as you reference the "Generational" standpoint, which had me assuming, again I guess incorrectly(?), that you were referencing past Nash AND current Nash.

If your belief is that current Nash is a 3/2 tweener who can score 20 goals, then I don't care to debate that. If your belief is that's what Nash has always been, that's where we have beef, and why I came into this thread.
Click to expand...
Then just a misunderstanding as I was referring to the current Nash. And you are right. The term "generational" gets thrown around very quickly. VERY few players fit that bill.
 
Dactyl said:
Again its fine to say Nash isnt dominant like he used to be. Its absolutely not fine to pretend hes a career 20 goal scorer who has never been worth his contract.
Click to expand...
Except that is essentially what he has been for the Rangers. A good two way player who had one career year. Aside from that, he exceeded the 25 goal mark just once. For a player who was brought here to score goals, he has utterly failed when his team needed him the most.

And I LOVE when "drive the offense" comes out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ReggieDunlop68
Time to move on from Nash. No player loves AV's 45-second shift rule than Nash, who looks gassed at the end of shifts anyway.

Contributing player and improved his overall game, but I think his production can be replaced for a lot less than $3.5 mil.

I think he can still score 25-30 and revive his career like Eric Staal, just not on this team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bl02, ReggieDunlop68, eco's bones and 1 other person
Rick Nash since joining the Rangers at even strength:

30th in P/60
15th in P1/60
3rd in G/60

Yes, only 2 other players have a higher goals per 60 minutes than Rick Nash since 2012 and those are Auston Matthews and Andreas Athanasiou.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dactyl
Dactyl said:
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.
Click to expand...
I'm more than willing to admit many of our guys have not produced in the playoffs. Only one of them was a supposedly elite goal scorer in his prime at the time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ReggieDunlop68
True Blue said:
Except that is essentially what he has been for the Rangers. A good two way player who had one career year. Aside from that, he exceeded the 25 goal mark just once. For a player who was brought here to score goals, he has utterly failed when his team needed him the most.

And I LOVE when "drive the offense" comes out.
Click to expand...
You’re wrong bit okay
 
Amazing Kreiderman said:
Rick Nash since joining the Rangers at even strength:

30th in P/60
15th in P1/60
3rd in G/60

Yes, only 2 other players have a higher goals per 60 minutes than Rick Nash since 2012 and those are Auston Matthews and Andreas Athanasiou.
Click to expand...
Extrapolated stats produce extrapolated results and tell extrapolated stories. If he is such an elite goal scorer, you would have no problem in having him be the person who you build your team around. The reality is how many players in the league would you take before even considering taking Nash?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ReggieDunlop68, Off Sides, LORDE and 1 other person
True Blue said:
Extrapolated stats produce extrapolated results and tell extrapolated stories. If he is such an elite goal scorer, you would have no problem in having him be the person who you build your team around. The reality is how many players in the league would you take before even considering taking Nash?
Click to expand...

I guess G/60 isn't a stat to use when discussing Nash' tenure as a Ranger. He's an elite goalscorer at even strength, which is the majority of minutes in a game. The only 2 players who score more than Nash at even strength are 2 guys who have been in the league since 2016.
 
Amazing Kreiderman said:
I guess G/60 isn't a stat to use when discussing Nash' tenure as a Ranger. He's an elite goalscorer at even strength, which is the majority of minutes in a game. The only 2 players who score more than Nash at even strength are 2 guys who have been in the league since 2016.
Click to expand...
He's also terrible on the powerplay and terrible in the playoffs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bl02, ReggieDunlop68 and Off Sides
True Blue said:
Extrapolated stats produce extrapolated results and tell extrapolated stories. If he is such an elite goal scorer, you would have no problem in having him be the person who you build your team around. The reality is how many players in the league would you take before even considering taking Nash?
Click to expand...

There was no extrapolation there...

Rick Nash has the 3rd highest G/60 5v5 since joining the Rangers. That's not extrapolation. It's a fact. Additionally you can easily say he is first if you just bump up the required TOI since AA and Matthews are way lower.

And yes, he's not a good PP goal scorer. Hasn't been for almost 10 years. That's the coaches fault for using him there. He doesn't need to be on the top PP unit but he should get way more 5v5 ice time than he does.

Additionally it's significantly more important to be a good 5v5 scorer than PP scorer come the playoffs because penalty rates decrease then (in before "but Nash is bad in the playoffs anyway")
 
  • Like
Reactions: Amazing Kreiderman
Yeah, I don't see how stats per 60 is extrapolation. It's not even an advanced stat. It's goals/points combined with TOI.

If that's advanced stats, then we can just call points and goals advanced stats as well
 
Amazing Kreiderman said:
Yeah, I don't see how stats per 60 is extrapolation. It's not even an advanced stat. It's goals/points combined with TOI.

If that's advanced stats, then we can just call points and goals advanced stats as well
Click to expand...
Can't use GAA anymore for goalies either, I guess. I've debated this AM starting a thread about airing all grievances about 'extrapolated' metrics, but that thread would devolve so fast and I like the mods too much to give them the work it'd take to maintain the thread.
 
In June he'll be 34 and his numbers have been declining for 3-4 years now. For those who would like to re-sign you're probably talking at best a 20 goal 40 player and you should ask yourself how much is that worth cap wise/term wise keeping in mind he's also an aging player. Keeping in mind as well that the Rangers really could use an injection of more youth into their top 6--top 9 forwards. Rick Nash does get more shots than any other player--a lot of shots he does take though are not that dangerous--a lot of the moves he makes to get the shots he takes we've seen literally hundreds of times over the last few years and they're low %--he might as well be shooting them from right off the boards. Defenses and goalies have read the Book of Nash before--they know what to expect--they've become past masters disseminating his story line. He is good two way, good on the PK--yes, he is.

There comes a time--painful however it might be for some--when you have to cut ties. The Rangers as a team need to rebuild a bit--and older players for the most part are in the way of that and the more money you shell out to players who can no longer carry the load is only going to complicate things going forward. Nash had his shot--he made it to the Cup finals once. The chances of that happening again with the Rangers are practically 0. Not all his fault but for a team whose window has closed there is no point going with declining old timer's and it's time to say 'see you later' and move on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LORDE, ReggieDunlop68, Off Sides and 1 other person
Dactyl said:
Stamkos averages under 50 points a year over the last 5 years. Am I wrong?
Click to expand...
The question was what am I wrong on? Has Nash exceeded 25 goals more than twice as a Ranger? Was he or was he not brought here to score big goals?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom