HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Nash On The Block Part III: ALL NASH TALK & PROPOSALS HERE!

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-16-2012, 10:48 AM
  #976
Grant
LL Genius
 
Grant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: London
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,726
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by waffledave View Post
I actually feel Mike Richards had more trade value than Rick Nash.
I was thinking the same thing, I feel now that if he is traded prior to the deadline, it will be for likely a 1st rounder to help rebuild, an NHL ready player still with potential filling a need of Columbus (defence/goalie), a salary dump to help even the salary but is still producing a little (any position) and another prospect (but not a top prospect). From a leafs fan point of view, I think this is what would be offered:

Schenn
Connolly/Lombardi
1st rounder
Prospect that isn't yet NHL ready

Note: I would be more than willing to swap Gardiner in for Schenn, but then I think the pick would be lowered to a second or the prospect is removed/lowered to one not projected to be good at all. I would probably be willing to offer more in the offseason, but its harder at this point in the season to add such a high profile player as it shakes up your roster a fair bit.

(Carter got about this value minus the additional prospect so I feel this is offering more, atleast in my opinion, people will probably say I overvalue leaf players/undervalue Nash)
-----
Edit: Forgot to take the placement of the 1st round pick in the Carter trade into consideration, but I will stand by what I said still.

Grant is online now  
Old
02-16-2012, 10:49 AM
  #977
NYR1967
Registered User
 
NYR1967's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New York, N.Y.
Country: United States
Posts: 628
vCash: 500
Delete

NYR1967 is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 10:52 AM
  #978
NYR1967
Registered User
 
NYR1967's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New York, N.Y.
Country: United States
Posts: 628
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FANonymous View Post
Since all the real insiders are making up crap... Sources tell me that if Pitt wants Nash it's going to cost Malkin, Crosby and a 1st. That concussion has really hurt Sid's value.

Edit: if you're going to use statistics at least use them right. You can't just arbitrarily drop a number for comparison because it suits you.




Maybe they should pay him 7.8M/year because in 57 games in his worst season yet he has almost completely matched the goal output of three other guys who have played over 100 more games, not to mention this isn't taking into account the production of the guys that replace those lost in the trade.
Ok, and who would those guys be? Wolski? Bourque? Zuccarello? The Rangers don't HAVE anyone to replace those guys.

NYR1967 is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 10:56 AM
  #979
Crisp Breakout
Registered User
 
Crisp Breakout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 4,774
vCash: 500
Well that's the icing on the cake.... Mike Richards is not more valuable than Rick Nash. And with thay ridiculousness, I'm away until the trade happens.

Crisp Breakout is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 10:58 AM
  #980
Coach Parker
Stanley Cup Champion
 
Coach Parker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,652
vCash: 500
Just to clarify for everyone...

'Insiders' are giving their prices. Insiders don't know for certain one single team that has been named by Nash. No one knows what Howson and Columbus have asked for in exchange for Nash.

Coach Parker is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 10:59 AM
  #981
Pens1566
Registered User
 
Pens1566's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: WV
Country: United States
Posts: 11,609
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crisp Breakout View Post
Well that's the icing on the cake.... Mike Richards is not more valuable than Rick Nash. And with thay ridiculousness, I'm away until the trade happens.
When talking just talent, no he probably isn't. But this isn't NHL '12, it's the real world where cap hits, contract length, past performance, assets going the other way, trade circumstances and team chemistry matter. All of that considered, I fail to see how it's not at least arguable that Richards was worth more when he was dealt to the Kings.

Pens1566 is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 11:01 AM
  #982
Perro
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Calgary, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,130
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crisp Breakout View Post
Well that's the icing on the cake.... Mike Richards is not more valuable than Rick Nash. And with thay ridiculousness, I'm away until the trade happens.
As a kings fan I would way rather have Richards. At the time our biggest need was a center, and I would rather have that need met than the need for a winger.

Perro is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 11:02 AM
  #983
Perro
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Calgary, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,130
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pens1566 View Post
When talking just talent, no he probably isn't. But this isn't NHL '12, it's the real world where cap hits, contract length, past performance, assets going the other way, trade circumstances and team chemistry matter. All of that considered, I fail to see how it's not at least arguable that Richards was worth more when he was dealt to the Kings.
Agree with this.

Perro is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 11:04 AM
  #984
Grant
LL Genius
 
Grant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: London
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,726
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pens1566 View Post
When talking just talent, no he probably isn't. But this isn't NHL '12, it's the real world where cap hits, contract length, past performance, assets going the other way, trade circumstances and team chemistry matter. All of that considered, I fail to see how it's not at least arguable that Richards was worth more when he was dealt to the Kings.
Richards is also a center which are generally more valued by teams than wingers. Richards is also considered to be one of the better centers in the league that almost any team would want.

Grant is online now  
Old
02-16-2012, 11:05 AM
  #985
WJG
Running and Rioting
 
WJG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Country: Ireland
Posts: 12,736
vCash: 500
When this trade eventually goes down (which it absolutely has to now that the bridges have been burned), I'll be interested to see what the return is.

IMO, he'll return something between what Carter and Richards returned this summer (high end) and what Heatley and Richards returned a few years ago (low end).

WJG is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 11:07 AM
  #986
FANonymous
Registered User
 
FANonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR1967 View Post
Ok, and who would those guys be? Wolski? Bourque? Zuccarello? The Rangers don't HAVE anyone to replace those guys.
Who replaces those guys is not my concern. I was merely talking numbers which were unfairly skewed. If you want to compare a team without Nash to a team with Nash you can't omit data just because it doesn't serve your purpose. If you literally have no one to replace those 3 then it probably is a bad trade since you'll be forced to play 5 on 4 for the duration of Nash's contract.

FANonymous is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 11:08 AM
  #987
DPyro
Registered User
 
DPyro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,300
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach Parker View Post
Just to clarify for everyone...

'Insiders' are giving their prices. Insiders don't know for certain one single team that has been named by Nash. No one knows what Howson and Columbus have asked for in exchange for Nash.
Looks like the Bruins, Kings, Leafs, Rangers, and Sharks are teams he'd go to.

DPyro is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 11:12 AM
  #988
ForzaZuffa
Don't stare at it...
 
ForzaZuffa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Country: Italy
Posts: 9,283
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DPyro View Post
Looks like the Bruins, Kings, Leafs, Rangers, and Sharks are teams he'd go to.
He'd be an outstanding fit on 4 of those 5, I can't see why the Rangers would go for him when they're rolling so well. Not to mention they have so much money tied up in Richards, Gaborik, Callahan, and Dubinsky for a couple more years at least.... They need another high end D man I'd say-- someone like Suter if he makes it to UFA

ForzaZuffa is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 11:14 AM
  #989
Mafoofoo
:facepalm:
 
Mafoofoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 12,873
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DPyro View Post
Looks like the Bruins, Kings, Leafs, Rangers, and Sharks are teams he'd go to.
Well I hope to god DW doesn't blow his load and acquire him. Let him go to one of the others.

Mafoofoo is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 11:16 AM
  #990
bizzz*
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Minsk
Country: Tokelau
Posts: 3,107
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perro View Post
As a kings fan I would way rather have Richards. At the time our biggest need was a center, and I would rather have that need met than the need for a winger.
You've got Richards and you're the lowest scoring team in the NHL. Even CBJ with ESHL defense and amateur goaltending scored more. And the Kings got 2 all-stars centers now.

bizzz* is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 11:18 AM
  #991
LombardiTool
Registered User
 
LombardiTool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Fontana, Ca
Country: United States
Posts: 2,758
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WJG View Post
When this trade eventually goes down (which it absolutely has to now that the bridges have been burned), I'll be interested to see what the return is.

IMO, he'll return something between what Carter and Richards returned this summer (high end) and what Heatley and Richards returned a few years ago (low end).
I love comments like this. What bridges have been burned. The only thing this is now is a media circus. I can bet you that there is no bad blood between Howsen or Nash. Dont fall for all the media hype.

LombardiTool is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 11:20 AM
  #992
Gagnefan924
Need Moar AmericanZ
 
Gagnefan924's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 8,056
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LombardiTool View Post
I love comments like this. What bridges have been burned. The only thing this is now is a media circus. I can bet you that there is no bad blood between Howsen or Nash. Dont fall for all the media hype.
Thank you. People take media BS as gospel around here.

Gagnefan924 is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 11:22 AM
  #993
Neely2005
Grey Cup Champions
 
Neely2005's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,347
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DPyro View Post
Looks like the Bruins, Kings, Leafs, Rangers, and Sharks are teams he'd go to.
Do Not Want!

Neely2005 is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 11:22 AM
  #994
Perro
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Calgary, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,130
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bizoncol View Post
You've got Richards and you're the lowest scoring team in the NHL. Even CBJ with ESHL defense and amateur goaltending scored more. And the Kings got 2 all-stars centers now.
Hate to imagine where we would be without him. I still blame Terry Murray for our lack of goal scoring. I know Sutter is a defense first coach as well, but next year with a full year to impliment his system we will score more.
I wasn't sayign I wouldn't love to have Nash, just saying if I had to pick between the two I would go with Richards.

Perro is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 11:23 AM
  #995
NYR1967
Registered User
 
NYR1967's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New York, N.Y.
Country: United States
Posts: 628
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FANonymous View Post
Who replaces those guys is not my concern. I was merely talking numbers which were unfairly skewed. If you want to compare a team without Nash to a team with Nash you can't omit data just because it doesn't serve your purpose. If you literally have no one to replace those 3 then it probably is a bad trade since you'll be forced to play 5 on 4 for the duration of Nash's contract.
Ok, fine.

Rick Nash GP 57 G 18 A 21 P 39

Derek Stepan GP 55 G 11 A 26 P 37

So 7.8M/year for 7 more goals, 5 less assists and 2 more points, PLUS the Rangers lose a top 2 D man, a very good 3rd line C/LW (at worst), and a 1st round pick. No matter how you slice it, it's still crazy talk.

NYR1967 is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 11:23 AM
  #996
Blades of Glory
Troll Captain
 
Blades of Glory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 18,334
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grant123 View Post
I was thinking the same thing, I feel now that if he is traded prior to the deadline, it will be for likely a 1st rounder to help rebuild, an NHL ready player still with potential filling a need of Columbus (defence/goalie), a salary dump to help even the salary but is still producing a little (any position) and another prospect (but not a top prospect). From a leafs fan point of view, I think this is what would be offered:

Schenn
Connolly/Lombardi
1st rounder
Prospect that isn't yet NHL ready

Note: I would be more than willing to swap Gardiner in for Schenn, but then I think the pick would be lowered to a second or the prospect is removed/lowered to one not projected to be good at all. I would probably be willing to offer more in the offseason, but its harder at this point in the season to add such a high profile player as it shakes up your roster a fair bit.

(Carter got about this value minus the additional prospect so I feel this is offering more, atleast in my opinion, people will probably say I overvalue leaf players/undervalue Nash)
-----
Edit: Forgot to take the placement of the 1st round pick in the Carter trade into consideration, but I will stand by what I said still.
I simply cannot fathom how you could come to the conclusion that the package you are offering is enough to acquire Rick Nash. Luke Schenn's trade value isn't exactly skyrocketing through the roof of the ACC at the moment. But at least he is a young player with potential to develop into a very good player. As for the other junk you are attempting to sell as fair value for Nash, it's not happening. We are talking about Matthew Lombardi and/or Tim Connolly, are we not? So Columbus is going to deal their franchise player for Luke Schenn and a first rounder, oh, and a couple warm bodies? That offer might get you Tyson Nash. It certainly won't sniff Rick Nash, however.

Blades of Glory is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 11:24 AM
  #997
TwoPadStack
Gross Misconduct
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,311
vCash: 50
Nash missed practice today? Any reason given?

TwoPadStack is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 11:26 AM
  #998
Gagnefan924
Need Moar AmericanZ
 
Gagnefan924's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 8,056
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TwoPadStack View Post
Nash missed practice today? Any reason given?
Maintenance day.

Gagnefan924 is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 11:27 AM
  #999
Gagnefan924
Need Moar AmericanZ
 
Gagnefan924's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 8,056
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR1967 View Post
Ok, fine.

Rick Nash GP 57 G 18 A 21 P 39

Derek Stepan GP 55 G 11 A 26 P 37

So 7.8M/year for 7 more goals, 5 less assists and 2 more points, PLUS the Rangers lose a top 2 D man, a very good 3rd line C/LW (at worst), and a 1st round pick. No matter how you slice it, it's still crazy talk.
God posts like these are annoying. If Nash played for the Rags, he'd put up 80. Stepan would barely hit 50..

Gagnefan924 is offline  
Old
02-16-2012, 11:28 AM
  #1000
SeriousHabs
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Montreal
Posts: 2,661
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR1967 View Post
Ok, fine.

Rick Nash GP 57 G 18 A 21 P 39

Derek Stepan GP 55 G 11 A 26 P 37

So 7.8M/year for 7 more goals, 5 less assists and 2 more points, PLUS the Rangers lose a top 2 D man, a very good 3rd line C/LW (at worst), and a 1st round pick. No matter how you slice it, it's still crazy talk.
One would be tempted to conclude that Columbus is a worst team than the Rangers. Of course the standings don't reflect this, and we know that teamates do not affect production, so I guess it is crazy talk.

SeriousHabs is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:53 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.