Toggle sidebar

What is Rick Nash's legacy as a Blueshirt?

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.

Rick Nash's Ranger legacy is...

  • He fell way short of expectations

  • He slightly underperformed

  • Basically got what you thought we were getting

  • He exceeded expectations

Results are only viewable after voting.
ReggieDunlop68 said:
Holy **** balls! Why do you keep talking about the regular season?
Click to expand...

Believe it or not the playoffs aren’t some mythical form of hockey that’s completely different. It’s the same thing just a smaller sample size and thus highly prone to variance. You can now proceed to respond by stating how variance isn’t real and that if Nash worked harder and wanted it more he would have scored more in the playoffs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: silverfish and Machinehead
Also tough to be upset by the trade itself. Dubi is essentially a 3rd line grinder. Tim Erixon was nothing. Anisimov is a good player but he's not really burning up any lineup. The Blue Jackets used our pick to select Kirby Rychel who isn't an NHLer. I'd do that trade over 10 times out of 10 and twice on Sunday.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jeff Groten
Filthy Dangles said:
During his Ranger tenure Nash was..

26th in the league in goals
93rd in the league in points
led the Rangers in total scoring once (finished close runner up to Step in 2013)
produced like garbage in the playoffs

The rate at which he scored 5on5 goals argument is pretty pathetic. They don't ask at which strength goals come or how efficient you were in scoring them. He simply didn't get anywhere close to enough of them and espeically so in the playoffs.

Advanced stats folks are all about value, the guy was making 8 million dollars when 8 was closer to 10 million all for what, scoring 5v5 goals effecieintly...? Not carrying a team offensively in all situations? That's definitely the guy they thought they were getting in Nash. He wasn't that piece.
Click to expand...
Nash NEVER carried a team offensively in all situations.

That was sort of my point when I posted about expectations.

If you expected that, I'm frankly not sure why.
 
Filthy Dangles said:
During his Ranger tenure Nash was..

26th in the league in goals
93rd in the league in points
led the Rangers in total scoring once (finished close runner up to Step in 2013)
produced like garbage in the playoffs

The rate at which he scored 5on5 goals argument is pretty pathetic. They don't ask at which strength goals come or how efficient you were in scoring them. He simply didn't get anywhere close to enough of them and espeically so in the playoffs.

Advanced stats folks are all about value, the guy was making 8 million dollars when 8 was closer to 10 million all for what, scoring 5v5 goals effecieintly...? Not carrying a team offensively in all situations? That's definitely the guy they thought they were getting in Nash. He wasn't that piece.
Click to expand...

Seems like you already had all the answers when you started the thread.
 
SA16 said:
Believe it or not the playoffs aren’t some mythical form of hockey that’s completely different. It’s the same thing just a smaller sample size and thus highly prone to variance. You can now proceed to respond by stating how variance isn’t real and that if Nash worked harder and wanted it more he would have scored more in the playoffs.
Click to expand...

Na. I can’t take you seriously if you don’t think the playoffs are different, and I don’t care what circular logic with the stats you will use to support that nonsense.
 
AV also hurt him a lot.

Rick Nash was always among the cream of the crop in the NHL at even strength.

He was always terrible on the powerplay for a player of his ilk.

AV essentially used him as a PP specialist and a third liner at ES.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Miamipuck
you blue pilled stat bois won’t stop ignoring the 375 games where he led the team in points for the 73 real games where he led the team in ES points. Get with the program, he’s a disappointment because not a single Ranger scored more points than Rick Nash at even strength in the playoffs during his tenure. It is completely unacceptable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Miamipuck and Machinehead
Dactyl said:
you blue pilled stat bois won’t stop ignoring the 375 games where he led the team in points for the 73 real games where he led the team in ES points. Get with the program, he’s a disappointment because not a single Ranger scored more points than Rick Nash at even strength in the playoffs during his tenure. It is completely unacceptable.
Click to expand...

Rick Nash was the best we had in the playoffs.
 
For me, it's between he slightly under performed and fell well short of expectations. I wouldn't go as far as saying he became Chris Higgins 2.0, but it was close.
 
ReggieDunlop68 said:
He’s was not my favorite to say the least, but basically everything the peanut gallery through at him was wrong.

It just became a meme at some point once Girardi was absent.

Marek Malik also has a Samoan Bias.
Click to expand...
Yea I agree. We really missed Girardi this season. There was no structure to the defense at all once we lost our top pairing RD.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Miamipuck
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom