That's the worst attempt at an analogy I've ever read, but okay, whatever you say guy.
Speculation: Roster Building Thread Part VIII: Autumn in New York
- Thread starter Gardner McKay
- Start date
- Status
That's the worst attempt at an analogy I've ever read, but okay, whatever you say guy.
LORDE
I am Lorde, YA YA YA
Machinehead
Fox Mafia Consigliere
- Aug 5, 2010
- 13,920
- 9,561
Is he then the one not wearing a seatbelt or Nash who's riding a shotgun? What if I say that they are keeping a kidnapped Miller on the floor in the back... no seatbelt either...
Relax, comradewe are on the same side. You missed a little back and forth Avery16 has been engaged in with a couple of posters here.
Sorry, that was more directed at him. I actually was the one who called him out on it earlier in the day. Or at least was one of the first couple.
This whole discussion is laughable. Laughable to try and justify trading Nash because an 18 year old (who I definitely think could make the team) had one very good preseason game. And should he make the team, his minutes will be managed because, ya know, he is 18. And yet we have someone here who thinks that makes it ok to trade Nash, still arguably one of our best wingers, if not our most valuable winger with his ability on both sides of the puck, who also has an expiring contract, and is one of the leaders in that lockerroom. A group that should have playoff aspirations yet again. You still have Hank and you add Shattenkirk, you are not anticipating missing the playoffs. You do not trade Nash.
thanks in advance for the vote of confidence.
Like RB said, there's always 10%.....
Here's one:
Smith 4.35 x 4 and Zuc 4.5 x2, BOTH AT HALF
so that's 2.175 + 2.25 per for each or 4.425 annual cap hit
to Dallas for
Heiskanen, just drafted 30A elc 3yrs .925 per, huge upside and projects to NHL next yr.
and
Gurianov, high draft pick in the system already, can be plugged in soon if not immediately, 20 yrs old, listed as LW, has a C in his resume. elc 3 yrs 894,166 per
and
Pitlick, Oiler pick 2nd rounder 31OA, 3yrs 1m per
total annual is 2.7+m
Rangers are buying younger players by eating cap + salary.
This is huge HUGE value to Dallas
Is enough to justify Rangers not sending draft picks to offset age differences.
As to value.
for Stars Smith plays either side and is IMMEDIATE help
Zuc may/not walk in 2 yrs but is solid add
for Rangers
they make room, start w/McD, Skjei, Beargloves, Graves,
Day 2 yrs away
Staal part time 3rd pair/4th LW until we can move him
we move McD now or next year whichever is when the price we can extract is most exorbitant, and we have his replacement ready prob at 2LD while Skjei moves up
gives us a little more flexibility on waiting to get top dollar for Holden
I see Gurianov as a 3LW who competes at C if needed, looks good w/Buch at opposite RW.
Pitlick to 4RW while Fast recuperates
trade Nash
Andersson + maybe Chytil force their way
play da kids
Smith 4.35 x 4 and Zuc 4.5 x2, BOTH AT HALF
so that's 2.175 + 2.25 per for each or 4.425 annual cap hit
to Dallas for
Heiskanen, just drafted 30A elc 3yrs .925 per, huge upside and projects to NHL next yr.
and
Gurianov, high draft pick in the system already, can be plugged in soon if not immediately, 20 yrs old, listed as LW, has a C in his resume. elc 3 yrs 894,166 per
and
Pitlick, Oiler pick 2nd rounder 31OA, 3yrs 1m per
total annual is 2.7+m
Rangers are buying younger players by eating cap + salary.
This is huge HUGE value to Dallas
Is enough to justify Rangers not sending draft picks to offset age differences.
As to value.
for Stars Smith plays either side and is IMMEDIATE help
Zuc may/not walk in 2 yrs but is solid add
for Rangers
they make room, start w/McD, Skjei, Beargloves, Graves,
Day 2 yrs away
Staal part time 3rd pair/4th LW until we can move him
we move McD now or next year whichever is when the price we can extract is most exorbitant, and we have his replacement ready prob at 2LD while Skjei moves up
gives us a little more flexibility on waiting to get top dollar for Holden
I see Gurianov as a 3LW who competes at C if needed, looks good w/Buch at opposite RW.
Pitlick to 4RW while Fast recuperates
trade Nash
Andersson + maybe Chytil force their way
play da kids
Hire Sather
He Is Our Star
egelband
Registered User
- Sep 6, 2008
- 16,218
- 15,081
TheTakedown
Puck is Life
- Jul 11, 2012
- 13,694
- 1,493
Wouldn't look at it like that. Mcdonagh has 2 years left on his contract. Hank has 2 years of above average play, Shattenkirk and Smith are in their prime right now, Zib is trending up.
If there was ever a time for the rangers to trade for Duchene, now would be a good time especially considering how far sakic has tanked duchenes value.
Imagine this lineup
Kreider-Duchene-Zuccarello
Miller-Zib-Buchnevich
Vesey-Hayes-Nash
Grabner-Deharnais-Rotating forward
That's a cup contending team, especially with this defense.
The reasoning for the stepan trade was to a) replenish the system, b) clear cap space to fix the defense, and c) mitigate the risk of a guy that would slow down in 2 years with 2 years left on said contract at a high cap hit.... Duchene having only 2 years left on his contract mitigates that risk almost completely
- Nov 2, 2011
- 8,053
- 8,470
So he won't say what possible trades that Nash's cap hit is prohibiting - but instead compares it to a totally necessary safety precaution, but only in the event of imminent accident.
Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
....
Who is the seatbelt? Are the Rangers the car? Is Nash playing out his contract (aka this one year) a car crash? What is going on
Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
....
Who is the seatbelt? Are the Rangers the car? Is Nash playing out his contract (aka this one year) a car crash? What is going on
Kaapo Cabana
Next name: Admiral Kakkbar
Our goal is the same and I would be on the same page with you if I thought Nash could garner some real interest, but nobody seems to care. Shattenkirk may not be a good example also because 40pt Defensemen are in much higher demand than 40pt forwards. Especially ones that are getting paid near 8M. That number is going to stop us from getting any kind of fair value unless we retain heavily, in which case it will be rental prices anyway.
So the same school of thought that thinks:
1) 7.8 million is fine for a thirty-ish point player
2) that a cap hit has no effect on other personnel decisions
3) that players solidly in decline spontaneously perform at peak
4) and Gorton can't improve the team with added cap room,
Is also having a lot of trouble with a simple analogy. You don't say...
1) 7.8 million is fine for a thirty-ish point player
2) that a cap hit has no effect on other personnel decisions
3) that players solidly in decline spontaneously perform at peak
4) and Gorton can't improve the team with added cap room,
Is also having a lot of trouble with a simple analogy. You don't say...
Hunter Gathers
The Crown
If you eat contract $$$, you will get a first. I have no problem eating some of that money to secure a pick.
BBKers
Registered User
1. People have been arguing Nash isn't worth his cap hit since the moment we acquired him. Then during every playoff series. Then every summer. I don't know who you think believes his hit is justified.
2. Literally no one believes this, and if this is what you've taken away from the opposition to your arguments, then I don't know what to tell you.
3. Nash was on pace to score 50 and 46 points the past two seasons. His rapid decline has been heavily tied to injuries. He may or may not be able to rebound (by staying healthy) to produce at a similar pace. Even if he doesn't, his point per game production coupled with his 200 foot game still has value.
4. Again, that's just ridiculous and no one believes that.
The problem with your argument, particularly as it pertains to points 2 and 4, is that you're arguing in favor of trading him because that gives us cap space to do...something. You don't want to get into the something, so you're really only presenting half of the scenario. Having cap space is great but unless there a clear path to using it to improve the team, what's the point? Lots of teams have cap space. But maybe they have an internal budget and can't use it. So yeah, trading Nash for cap space COULD lead to improvements, but unless you play along and spell out what those improvements could be then you just look like you're arguing for the sake of arguing, creating cap space for the sake of having cap space.
As to your analogy, yeah, it was simple all right. Simple and irrelevant and not relatable to the debate. I could make an analogy about how sometimes you have to hit the john before a business meeting, and you have to decide whether to deal with it now and risk the repercussions of potentially being late or wait until later and feel really uncomfortable during the meeting. It would also be a stupid analogy, yet it actually is more relatable to the debate than what you presented! A good tip with analogies is that when it makes sense to you but no one else, it's probably not a good analogy.
Anyway, I'm done here. It's clear you are on a different page than pretty much everyone else, even those open to moving Nash at some point during the season (like yours truly). So I'm gonna walk away from this.
- Status
