Rangers interested in Nash: Part III
View Single Post
02-20-2012, 02:02 AM
Join Date: Dec 2008
Originally Posted by
the bolded has proven to be wrong time and time again yet it is ALWAYS brought up when talking about adding an underperforming player from another team
can someone please point me to an example in the last 20 years where a player came to the rangers and performed considerably above their career averages? i haven't looked up any stats but i can't think of any off the top of my head...i can however think of plenty that haven't.
I've heard/said that exact statement about the following players and without fail it was
people apparently think the lights in NYC have some sort of superman/yellow sun effect on hockey players....unfortunately its just not true
The only players that work out to have better numbers AFTER they get here are players at the BEGINNING of their careers.
If we trade young players for Nash, Nash will ONLY BE HERE for 3 years tops. And we will rue the day we traded Carl Hagelin who will end up playing for a decade ala Kelly Miller/Mike Ridley. Heck, we don't need to look further than Fedor Tyutin tonight. BAD MOVE.
I was watching Nash carefully tonight and sure, he has a big body, but he did not get any of his chances by going into traffic, they were all from the outside or hanging at the blue line. Nash is not nearly as effective away from the puck as any of the players we'd be trading him for that are already on the roster. For a guy with some of his tools, I just don't see him making as big of an impact as he should make on a game. he's not 7.8 million dollar player. If he was 6 mil or even 5 - do you think Scott Howson would even be exploring a trade? Hell no.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by gravey9