Thread: Value of: Rick Nash
View Single Post
Old
05-16-2012, 03:37 PM
  #98
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 18,157
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UniverStalinGraduate View Post
Here's a question hockeyball.

Do you think Pavelski would have averaged 63.5 points per season the last 2 years if he was in Columbus in place of Nash?
Yes, because players do not historically change their production significantly when they move from a good team to a poor team or vise versa. Seriously, find an example of it, it's rare. More often than not, baring injury, or the occasional discontented player, it simply isn't the case. You are assuming, in a vacuum, that because a player is on a poor team he is automatically going to produce less points, but that does not take into account a lot of factors like:

Ice time
Sheltering
Coaching
Compatible system
Chemistry (with line mates)

Those things tend to have a bigger impact on an individual players production than simply the quality of the team. Nash might come here and have terrible chemistry with Thornton and his line mates, we have no real way of knowing that (Thornton is a much different player now than we he played with Nash in Sweden). He might struggle with our system (which is terrible and why most every shark had a down season offensively, besides Pavelski/Couture).

Pavelski produces for himself. He produced career point totals playing on the 3rd line with Wellwood and Mitchell much of the time. He played with Thornton this season, and had more goals, but slightly less points. So yes, Absolutely, I think Pavelski would have produced (within a reasonable margin) essentially the same point totals. Same with Nash if he was in San Jose.

The point is, you don't take stupid gambles like that with reliable players like Pavelski.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crisp Breakout View Post
That's fine, I mean you're certainly entitled to hold that opinion. I think, and no I don't have any proof of this, that pairing Nash with Thornton would make the Sharks a better playoff team. I'd love the chance to watch it on the NHL stage and to see Nash finally get the recognition he deserves.
So your opinion is based on the fact that you guess Nash and Thornton would have chemistry? The same thing was assumed about a lot of players and it hasn't worked out that way (Heatley, Michalek, Bell, Setoguchi, Couture, Clowe...) the only players that have really excelled with Thornton are Cheechoo, and arguably Pavelski (he only saw a small increase in production, and he's been getting better every season anyway). So if I'm the GM I wouldn't be taking that kind of risk again.

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote