Rangers are interested in Nash (McKenzie: Rangers/Kings Strongest Suitors) PART II
View Single Post
02-19-2012, 05:44 PM
Join Date: Sep 2011
Originally Posted by
The other guy was saying 30 points. He was wrong. Also, I never said that "the average of their points per 82 games" would be 10-20. I explained exactly why I used that range (Dubi's last season against Nash's average would be a 10 point difference--Taking into account the possibility that Dubi's last season was an outlier, I ranged up to 20).
And yes, it is a difference. I have never once claimed that Dubinsky is better than Nash. My point is that, relative to their contracts, Dubinsky is more useful than Nash. Nash doesn't offer any of the off-the-scoresheet things that Dubinsky brings, and the on-the-scoresheet difference isn't massive (even if we use your average).
My initial point stands, despite all the quibbling. Would you want the team to pay a guy 3.5 million to score 21 points? If the answer is no, then I can't see how, from a cap perspective, you like the idea of bringing in Nash.
how many blue jacket games do you actually watch to state he doesnt bring the off the score sheet differences...
3.5 million for the extra 21pts doesnt really sit that well with me but when you factor in 18 of those 21 points are goals that actually makes quite a difference.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by rangersbaby