Nash Trade Redux
View Single Post
12-20-2013, 11:40 PM
Join Date: Dec 2013
I had never seen Nash play before we traded for him -- so I didn't know how to react to the trade at the time. Nevertheless, his stats impressed me, and I figured that, despite his contract's cap hit, having a twenty-something power-forward with multiple 40-goal seasons under his belt can't hurt. Plus, I wondered, was Dubinsky's poor performance the beginning of a long-term decline? The answer: apparently not. Nash, due to injury or otherwise, hasn't lived up to expectations. Maybe his underperformance is purely injury-related; maybe he's not used to the pressure of playing in a substantial hockey market (though, considering he's played for Team Canada, I doubt that's the case). Only Nash knows. But that, of course, is in hindsight.
All we know, though, is that he sustained a significant injury and (consequently or not) he hasn't lived up to his potential or to expectations. I would be comfortable with dealing Nash in exchange for (at least one) promising prospect and (at least one) first-round draft pick. I would also have no problem renegotiating the Richards contract. I don't know Brad personally, and I don't know how the locker room responds to him, but his successes and experience are valuable; his calm demeanor could make him a valuable mentor. Yes, he did have an off season last year, but even the greatest players have off years. Even the great Mike Modano, who totaled 561 goals in his career, scored just 14 (76 GP) in 2003/2004 (
). In short: we are lucky to have Nash. If he turns things around, we have a bona fide scorer, and, if he doesn't, dealing him could give us the draft picks / prospects we need to start a successful rebuild. Richards, on the other hand, has little trade value but could still prove a valuable mentor (assuming, again, we can renegotiate his contract) to our youngsters.
Last edited by Clausewitz: 12-21-2013 at
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Clausewitz