Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,357
3.6 for three years. That's negative value to me.i dunno, i think Lukes been a pretty mediocre to borderline terrible defenseman for most of his career. i just dont see the value.
3.6 for three years. That's negative value to me.i dunno, i think Lukes been a pretty mediocre to borderline terrible defenseman for most of his career. i just dont see the value.
Trick question. Hype is his strength.Never got the Brayden hype, I just don't see what he can do at the NHL level consistently, like what is his strength that justifies his hype?
Is it 2010? Are the Schenn's still valuable?I would throw a party if this trade happened. Change that 2nd to a 1st and throw in a good prospect and the Flyers will listen.
Is it 2010? Are the Schenn's still valuable?
I think Luke gets a little too much flak. He's not a terrible defenseman and he's just what this team could use right now.
Brayden is just frustrating.
I would love them both regardless.
I am sorry, I don't follow at all.
Dominant force every shift? Who is that? Lebron James? Let's look past the two guys in Pittsburg and AO in the East; Stamkos, Tavares, Giroux and co are extremely far from dominat players on a shift by shift basis.
Nash has his faults, yes. But I don't know, I'd like to see him on a good high scoring team. Last year under Torts was just more of the same he faced in CBJ, he was forced to do it by himself. And he played extremely well during the regular season. No other line really created any momentum and he got very little help.
He is our best forward by a wide margin. If you hit the UFA market 6m get you David Clarkson.
So I just don't get the relevance of what you are saying at all. What is your point? He is not the by far best player in the league? He is not Lebron James? You sound like the Knicks fans comparing Melo with Lebum. He is not top 5/10/15/25 among forwards? I still don't get your point. So what should we have done? Kept AA and Dubi and signed Clarkson? Signed LeCavalier?
And the talk about him being one of the worst defensive player in the league is also just a bunch of meaningless crying. What are you talking about? There was not often we got in trouble defensively due to Nash all of last season. What else matters?
but I don't think Simmonds is the player the Rangers need.
I am sorry, I don't follow at all.
Dominant force every shift? Who is that? Lebron James? Let's look past the two guys in Pittsburg and AO in the East; Stamkos, Tavares, Giroux and co are extremely far from dominat players on a shift by shift basis.
Nash has his faults, yes. But I don't know, I'd like to see him on a good high scoring team. Last year under Torts was just more of the same he faced in CBJ, he was forced to do it by himself. And he played extremely well during the regular season. No other line really created any momentum and he got very little help.
He is our best forward by a wide margin. If you hit the UFA market 6m get you David Clarkson.
So I just don't get the relevance of what you are saying at all. What is your point? He is not the by far best player in the league? He is not Lebron James? You sound like the Knicks fans comparing Melo with Lebum. He is not top 5/10/15/25 among forwards? I still don't get your point. So what should we have done? Kept AA and Dubi and signed Clarkson? Signed LeCavalier?
And the talk about him being one of the worst defensive player in the league is also just a bunch of meaningless crying. What are you talking about? There was not often we got in trouble defensively due to Nash all of last season. What else matters?
So then, in other words, you're criticizing him for the fact that he's not one of the approximately three players in the league that is a dominant force every shift. Exactly as Ola said.I dont know whats so difficult to follow. I never said he wasn't a top-tier player in the NHL, or that he wasnt our best forward by a wide margin. What I am saying is the go-to guys in this league, are better all-around players than Nash. Specifically, they find a way to be effective no matter the type of game. Nash shrinks in physical games. He just does. If hes not allowed to fly through the neutral zone, he doesnt do anything else particularly well. Part of it is bad habits from playing with a perpetual loser for so long.
I dont know whats so difficult to follow. I never said he wasn't a top-tier player in the NHL, or that he wasnt our best forward by a wide margin. What I am saying is the go-to guys in this league, are better all-around players than Nash. Specifically, they find a way to be effective no matter the type of game. Nash shrinks in physical games. He just does. If hes not allowed to fly through the neutral zone, he doesnt do anything else particularly well. Part of it is bad habits from playing with a perpetual loser for so long.
Ok, if you think that he shrinks in physical games I get your point. That would be a problem.
I've not noticed that. He had a few awesome games early against Boston and Philly last season that was very physical, but they could be exemptions.
I think he is a player who, besides after like the first game in the POs last season, who is very hard to contain for a D and who, when he is in any type of form, is a player that worries a team that face him, forces them to adjust and open up space for others. And he can score goals by himself.
That is important to have. We don't have anyone like him, and haven't had since JJ.
Ok, if you think that he shrinks in physical games I get your point. That would be a problem.
I've not noticed that. He had a few awesome games early against Boston and Philly last season that was very physical, but they could be exemptions.
I think he is a player who, besides after like the first game in the POs last season, who is very hard to contain for a D and who, when he is in any type of form, is a player that worries a team that face him, forces them to adjust and open up space for others. And he can score goals by himself.
That is important to have. We don't have anyone like him, and haven't had since JJ.
I feel like Brass is starting to turn it on, we'll see. Start of this season has looked an awful lot like most of his Columbus years but the last handful of games you can kinda of see last year's Brass. If the points start coming and he goes the next 70 games playing at close to last years production I think you keep him. It's a career defining season for him.
Again, Im not trying to diminish how talented Nash is. But when you're talking about the best 5,10, 15 players in the sport, you can generally count on them to be effective in big games, despite the type of game thats taking place. I don't trust Nash in that situation, yet. The head issues certainly aren't going to help his cause.
Here we do agree. After what we've seen with Beuk, LaFontaine, Richter, Lindros and Sauer, I am a tad nervous that we may never see the player we had last year again. That would be yet another tragedy for this team.
I feel like Brass is starting to turn it on, we'll see. Start of this season has looked an awful lot like most of his Columbus years but the last handful of games you can kinda of see last year's Brass. If the points start coming and he goes the next 70 games playing at close to last years production I think you keep him. It's a career defining season for him.
That is exactly the player the Rangers need. This guy is bringing the fire that Prust brought and that we lack, if the team is not awake, he will wake them up, Simons brings it every shift.
I would trade .... for him even <<< Do not have guts t write it for all the slack I am going to get![]()
Again, Im not trying to diminish how talented Nash is. But when you're talking about the best 5,10, 15 players in the sport, you can generally count on them to be effective in big games, despite the type of game thats taking place. I don't trust Nash in that situation, yet. The head issues certainly aren't going to help his cause.