What is Rick Nash's legacy as a Blueshirt?

[SA16]

What offensive shortcomings?

 

[JT Kreider]

What offensive shortcomings?

I'm obviously talking about his postseason play. Where it actually matters. Specifically the 2014 and 2015 playoffs. Our two year peak of the last 20+seasons where we had to come away with a Stanley Cup. And outside of two games against Tampa, he was pretty much non-existent.

 

[lilphildub]

I don't think he was this great Selke worthy winger where his defense was good enough to excuse his offensive shortcomings.

And what were your expectations of him? Because he scored a lot of goals as silverfish brought out. Playoffs? That’s fair but I think he definitely played better the last couple year

 

[TheGuarantee]

And what were your expectations of him? Because he scored a lot of goals as silverfish brought out. Playoffs? That’s fair but I think he definitely played better the last couple year

Doesn’t matter. Didn’t perform in a cup run. I don’t care that he played well in a first and second round exit seasons.

 

[SA16]

Oh the playoffs where he did the exact same thing but shot 3% instead of 10%

 

[JT Kreider]

And what were your expectations of him?

To do what Kessel did for the Penguins. Be the difference between failing every year in the playoffs and winning back to back Stanley Cup championships.

If we get HALF of what the Penguins got out of Kessel we come away with a Cup in '14 or '15.

 

[SML2]

What in the world are you even talking about? Former athletes always debate was Player X greater than Player Y on sports talk shows almost daily. How a bunch of people remember you as a player is pretty significant

Former athletes. On talk shows. Trying to stir debate so people call and argue. It's the entire basis of sports talk radio. Rick Nash himself I doubt is too concerned about this topic.

 

[Kakko Schmakko]

His 86 assists in the last 331 regular season games with the Rangers is beyond embarrassing is averages out to only 21 assists over 82 game season. Don't know why nobody ever talks about his lack of assists with the Rangers.

 

[SA16]

The difference in his assist rate with the Rangers versus with the CBJ (last/first five years) was 0.05 assists/60. It barely changed. If you were expecting more assists your expectations were wrong.

 

[Kakko Schmakko]

The difference in his assist rate with the Rangers versus with the CBJ (last/first five years) was 0.03 assists/60. It barely changed. If you were expecting more assists your expectations were wrong.

no, take Nash's last 520 games with the BJs he scored 220 assists that averages almost 35 assists per 82 game season. 21 vs 35 that is increase of 66% (or a decrease of 40% however you want to look at it)

 

[JT Kreider]

The difference in his assist rate with the Rangers versus with the CBJ (last/first five years) was 0.05 assists/60. It barely changed. If you were expecting more assists your expectations were wrong.

Everyone always thought he was being held back in CBJ. Both lack of teammate support and being in a small market. The expectation was for him to raise his level of play on a better team, in New York.

Like Tavares will for the Leafs.

It turns out the only thing holding Nash back was Nash himself. And it's no coincidence CBJ turned things around once they got rid of him.

 

[SA16]

That's not raising his game. That's changing his game from a goal scorer to a playmaker.

Tavares will likely score less points for the Leafs than he just did for the Islanders because the Islander ride their top guys 20 mins/game and the Leafs spread it out much more evenly. He's played 19:56 or more every year since his rookie year. Under Babcock the Leafs haven't had a center over 18:16 and that was Kadri the year before Matthews. Now they have to spread it out between JT Matthews and Kadri. This is also the case on the PP. The Leafs play their two units evenly whereas the Islanders gave the JT unit about 2/3 the ice time.

 

[JT Kreider]

That's not raising his game. That's changing his game from a goal scorer to a playmaker.

Tavares will likely score less points for the Leafs than he just did for the Islanders because the Islander ride their top guys 20 mins/game and the Leafs spread it out much more evenly. He's played 19:56 or more every year since his rookie year. Under Babcock the Leafs haven't had a center over 18:16 and that was Kadri the year before Matthews. Now they have to spread it out between JT Matthews and Kadri. This is also the case on the PP. The Leafs play their two units evenly whereas the Islanders gave the JT unit about 2/3 the ice time.

I'm not talking about points specifically. Points during the regular season are meaningless. To quote Lou Lamoreillo "great individual success".

I'm talking about raising your game when it matters most, being a difference maker when your team needs it most. That's what the Leafs are bringing Tavares in to do. Get them past the Bruins in the first round, the Lightning in the second round, the Caps/Penguins in the conference final. Whoever in the Stanley Cup Final.

That is what the Rangers brought Nash in to do. Outside of two games against Tampa he failed. Failed majorly. A big fat F

 

[eco's bones]

A question: Does anyone here think that he has any chance of ever entering the Hall of Fame other than buying his own ticket? I really don't. Highest season point total as a Ranger 69, second highest point total--42. Those were his two best seasons with us. Those are his only good seasons with us. He had long stretches of non-production his last three years for us. Wasn't much of a leader either IMO---not when you say shit like--'I just want to be one of the guys'. That ain't a very swaggering statement for a guy who is supposed to lead your offense.

That's partly what I'll remember. I'll also remember him as being pretty damned good (not great) defensively away from the puck which will be contrasted by seeing over and over again in my memory his making the same move out of the right wing corner to the top of the circle to get off a 30-35 foot shot almost invariably along the ice and almost invariably kicked away or swallowed up by the enemy goalie. He reminds me a bit of Messier 2 and Ranger Lindros--kind of a shell of what he once was.

 

[Harbour Dog]

His P/60 was elite, but with injury shortened seasons and a dismal playoff S%, can you really say that he over-achieved?

It isn't necessarily any fault of his that he missed so many games and couldn't bury goals in the playoffs, but when we judge achievements, it should be entirely on achievements, and not whether he put himself in the position to succeed or not.

I think he gets a lot of unwarranted shit on here, but this survey isn't asking if he was good; it's asking if his accomplishments were on par with what we expected.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

A question: Does anyone here think that he has any chance of ever entering the Hall of Fame other than buying his own ticket? I really don't. Highest season point total as a Ranger 69, second highest point total--42. Those were his two best seasons with us. Those are his only good seasons with us. He had long stretches of non-production his last three years for us. Wasn't much of a leader either IMO---not when you say **** like--'I just want to be one of the guys'. That ain't a very swaggering statement for a guy who is supposed to lead your offense.

That's partly what I'll remember. I'll also remember him as being pretty damned good (not great) defensively away from the puck which will be contrasted by seeing over and over again in my memory his making the same move out of the right wing corner to the top of the circle to get off a 30-35 foot shot almost invariably along the ice and almost invariably kicked away or swallowed up by the enemy goalie. He reminds me a bit of Messier 2 and Ranger Lindros--kind of a shell of what he once was.

I don't think he will be in the HHOF, but if he does, it will be for what he did in Columbus, not in New York.

What he did in Columbus is HHOF material. He was the face of that franchise. I could definitely see him making it, not on the first ballot though. And I think Columbus could retire his number.

 

[Deleted member 23124]

A question: Does anyone here think that he has any chance of ever entering the Hall of Fame other than buying his own ticket? I really don't. Highest season point total as a Ranger 69, second highest point total--42. Those were his two best seasons with us. Those are his only good seasons with us. He had long stretches of non-production his last three years for us. Wasn't much of a leader either IMO---not when you say **** like--'I just want to be one of the guys'. That ain't a very swaggering statement for a guy who is supposed to lead your offense.

That's partly what I'll remember. I'll also remember him as being pretty damned good (not great) defensively away from the puck which will be contrasted by seeing over and over again in my memory his making the same move out of the right wing corner to the top of the circle to get off a 30-35 foot shot almost invariably along the ice and almost invariably kicked away or swallowed up by the enemy goalie. He reminds me a bit of Messier 2 and Ranger Lindros--kind of a shell of what he once was.

He will make it on stats alone....he's got over 400 goals and over 800 points. Kariya, Lindros and Pronger are recent entries with similar numbers.

 

[Kakko Schmakko]

He will make it on stats alone....he's got over 400 goals and over 800 points. Kariya, Lindros and Pronger are recent entries with similar numbers.

Lindros' numbers are not even close to Nash's. Nash does not have HOF numbers, he won't get there.

Kariya's are not close to Nash either.

 

[JT Kreider]

Nash will not get in the HOF

 

[eco's bones]

He will make it on stats alone....he's got over 400 goals and over 800 points. Kariya, Lindros and Pronger are recent entries with similar numbers.

There are quite a number of 1000+ point players who have not made the Hall and are not likely to. One Steve Larmer for instance. Bernie Nicholls. 400 goals is not going to get him into HOF at least not for a good 20-30 years. Rick Nash ranks 160--all time points. A lot of guys ahead of him aren't in the HOF.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Poor Man's Mike Gartner. Soft and often absent in big games.

Extremely good in the first half of the 2014-2015 season. Fans will always wonder if 2014 winds up differently if he shows up.

 

[Deleted member 23124]

There are quite a number of 1000+ point players who have not made the Hall and are not likely to. One Steve Larmer for instance. Bernie Nicholls. 400 goals is not going to get him into HOF at least not for a good 20-30 years. Rick Nash ranks 160--all time points. A lot of guys ahead of him aren't in the HOF.

Nash vs. Recent HOF Inductees

Nash – 437 – 358 – 805
Kariya – 402 – 587 – 989
Lindros -- 372 -- 493 – 865
St. louis – 381 – 642 -- 1033
Pronger – 157 -- 541 -- 698

The overall disadvantage is that Nash has not won a cup.

The fact that Lindros is there without a Cup gives Nash a chance (IMO, of course).

 

[Hunter Gathers]

He's going to get the Carlos Beltran as a Met treatment, which is unfortunate.

 

[ReggieDunlop68]

Former athletes. On talk shows. Trying to stir debate so people call and argue. It's the entire basis of sports talk radio. Rick Nash himself I doubt is too concerned about this topic.

If this were true [I don't believe it is], it would literally explain everything about his enigmatic switch from regular season to playoff performance.

Fans might get more concerned with nuance and obscure stats, which I'm sure Hall of Fame players don't give a shit about, but it's preposterous to think that they care about their legacy.

The whole stupid system from when we were mini mites until those who made it to the NHL let alone became hall of fame players after violence soaked 15 year NHL careers, was based on self-pride and fellow + fan admiration.

Rick Nash performed better in the playoffs then your last two points.

 

[ReggieDunlop68]

Nash vs. Recent HOF Inductees

Nash – 437 – 358 – 805
Kariya – 402 – 587 – 989
Lindros -- 372 -- 493 – 865
St. louis – 381 – 642 -- 1033
Pronger – 157 -- 541 -- 698

The overall disadvantage is that Nash has not won a cup.

The fact that Lindros is there without a Cup gives Nash a chance (IMO, of course).

Lindros also played exactly 300 less regular season games.

This doesn't even take into consideration the entire league adjusted their play to contain "the next one" until his concussion issues came up.