HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Rangers are interested in Nash (McKenzie: Rangers/Kings Strongest Suitors) PART II

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-19-2012, 05:12 PM
  #976
New York RKY
Moderator
Let's Go Rangers!
 
New York RKY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Dirty Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 12,220
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Punxrocknyc19 View Post
just saw that also and if thats true, lets hope Sather tries to get Perry instead. thats too much for Nash. Perry is a better player..
And when exactly did Corey Perry become available??

To add to that it would cost us 100000x more to get Perry than it would to get Nash if hypothetically they were both available to us.

__________________
New York RKY is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 05:14 PM
  #977
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Boyler87 View Post
Another way to look at Nash:

Gaborik was signed @ 27. Nash is 27.

Gaborik makes 7.5 million. Nash makes 7.8 million.

Gaborik signed for 5 years. Nash has 6 years left.

Nash and Parise are the same age.
Just to play devil's advocate, Gaborik had been coming off four straight seasons where his production was better than ppg (to be fair, a couple of those seasons were injury shortened, one significantly).

Nash has only put up PPG production twice (one of which was in an injury shortened year and the other was his 79 points in 78 games season--he hasn't been close to ppg production in the last 3 seasons).

smoneil is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 05:16 PM
  #978
rangersbaby
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 61
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoneil View Post
I agree with your last comment, but the rest of your post? How can you disagree with something that's a statistical fact? Dubinsky has never scored less than 40 points in a full season. Last season, he scored about 55. Nash scores about 65 points on average (a few lower, one outlier where he scored 70+). It's a 10 to 20 point difference (10 if you compare Dubi's numbers from last year to Nash's average, but ranged out to 20 when you factor in the fact that Dubi's numbers from last year might be just as much of an outlier as Nash's 70+ year).

here are the stats per 82 games played in the nhl.

nash
games goals pts
650 272 527

per 82 games 35 66

dubi
369 77 204

per 82 games 17 45

difference is 18 goals and 21 pts per 82 games

rangersbaby is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 05:16 PM
  #979
Jumbo*
TARGET: ACQUIRED
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 16,720
vCash: 500
Wouldnt it be funny if he was traded after the 2nd period and came out in a Rangers jersey for the 3rd period

(and Dubinsky and Bickle in a Jackets jersey for the 3rd)

Jumbo* is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 05:18 PM
  #980
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 17,083
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UAGoalieGuy View Post
Columbus should take that and run. That's a lot to give up. That'd be like the Rangers giving up MDZ or McD, Kreider, Miller or Erixin, and a 1st.
I don't see that kind of value there. I take MDZ or McD over Schenn and Kadri 10 times out of 10. Reimer was hyped up too quickly and is now floundering and overpaid.

Trxjw is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 05:18 PM
  #981
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rangersbaby View Post
here are the stats per 82 games played in the nhl.

nash
games goals pts
650 272 527

per 82 games 35 66

dubi
369 77 204

per 82 games 17 45

difference is 18 goals and 21 pts per 82 games

Which pretty much fits into the upper range of what I said. 10-20 points. I'm not sure why there's confusion over this.

smoneil is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 05:21 PM
  #982
OverTheCap
Registered User
 
OverTheCap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 9,913
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Dubinsky, Thomas, and a 1st

"Oh yea, I'd do that." Thats nice of you guys.

Im sure Columbus would do it too, if their GM is mailing it in and the franchise is ready to be moved/contracted.

For anyone who is enthusiastic about making a Nash deal, you need to be prepared to part with what it would actually take. Columbus is not under immediate pressure to make a deal for their franchise player. Read Sting's post and understand the timing of this. They're not trading Nash for peanuts now...why would they? And a Dubinsky, Thomas, 1st package is less than peanuts.

Its worthless discourse to me when you say 'Yes' to Nash and then provide a package thats not even in the realm if possibility to get it done.
Some people are failing to comprehend this. Howson can just pull Nash off the market instead of settling for some mediocre package. Same thing happened with Ryan earlier this season. Both Ryan and Nash can placed back on the market during the summer after teams have evaluated their needs and have a better idea of what the cap will be like under the new CBA.

Quote:
The asking price for Rick Nash is astronomical, and the timing of his availability is bad, leading many NHL executives to believe a deal for the Columbus winger won’t come to fruition before the Feb. 27 trade deadline.

And that might be the best thing possible for the woeful Blue Jackets.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fact is, with so few teams capable of fitting Nash into their payroll right now, the Blue Jackets are limiting their options with a deadline deal. As messy as this divorce will be, they’ll have more than a dozen possible suitors this summer, including the Detroit Red Wings.
http://www.calgarysun.com/2012/02/19...trade-deadline

OverTheCap is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 05:27 PM
  #983
rangersbaby
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 61
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoneil View Post
Which pretty much fits into the upper range of what I said. 10-20 points. I'm not sure why there's confusion over this.

no confusion at all... its over 20 points.
but the 18 goals is a pretty big number actually

38 or 20 per 82 games is quite a difference.

rangersbaby is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 05:28 PM
  #984
Bauer Warrior*
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,183
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rangersbaby View Post
the trade doesnt work without dubis salary. they need the cap relief there is no way they trade him for stepan...he is on an elc and putting up the same numbers as richards at 1/10th the price.
Then he would fall into the "plus" category. And if there's cap relief involved, the price only goes up.

Bauer Warrior* is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 05:29 PM
  #985
Barbara Underhill
Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuke
 
Barbara Underhill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Montana
Country: United States
Posts: 13,274
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OverTheCap View Post
Some people are failing to comprehend this. Howson can just pull Nash off the market instead of settling for some mediocre package. Same thing happened with Ryan earlier this season. Both Ryan and Nash can placed back on the market during the summer after teams have evaluated their needs and have a better idea of what the cap will be like under the new CBA.



http://www.calgarysun.com/2012/02/19...trade-deadline
The whole we'll have more suitors in the offseason comment is stupid. Nash only wants to play for a select few teams. Doubt he changes his mind much just because the season is over.

Barbara Underhill is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 05:33 PM
  #986
OverTheCap
Registered User
 
OverTheCap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 9,913
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barbara Underhill View Post
The whole we'll have more suitors in the offseason comment is stupid. Nash only wants to play for a select few teams. Doubt he changes his mind much just because the season is over.
I wouldn't be so sure of that. In the offseason, he's not going to be analyzing where he wants to go based on the standings, which is pretty much what he's doing right now. Some teams in the playoffs could make a surprise run and he may decide he wants to be a part of it.

Detroit isn't in the running to trade for Nash right now but they might be this summer. Can't imagine he wouldn't waive to go there.

OverTheCap is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 05:34 PM
  #987
Bauer Warrior*
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,183
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barbara Underhill View Post
The whole we'll have more suitors in the offseason comment is stupid. Nash only wants to play for a select few teams. Doubt he changes his mind much just because the season is over.
The Blue Jackets DO NOT need to trade him. If they do trade him, it won't be for a little. Teams are going to have to cough something up. He's not a hold out, he's not a pending free agent, he's not, at least overtly, itching to get out of Columbus.

Bauer Warrior* is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 05:35 PM
  #988
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 15,856
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Atoz View Post
Great retort.

You think Dubinsky, Thomas, and a 1st is enough to land an upper-echelon talent?

Dubinsky played like a legitimate 2nd liner last year, got paid, and now cant put the puck in the ocean. 6 goals on the season. If the Rangers were trading a big-time talent and a guy like Dubinsky was the key roster player coming back the other way, I'd be absolutely livid.

Christian Thomas? Small chance of him becoming an impact NHL player. Not even a top 5 prospect in the organization.

1st rounder - near #30 overall. Not much value, at all.

Thats the definition of a **** package when talking about Rick Nash. I dont want Nash here for a plethora of reasons...but if I did, Id at least have the decency to put forth a legitimate package...one that would include Kreider and/or one of our current top 4 defensemen.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 05:37 PM
  #989
Mr Atoz*
I hid the Atavachron
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 2,915
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bauer Warrior View Post
I thought they were nuts for trading Tony Amonte and Mike Gartner at the deadline, but they wound up with the Stanley Cup.

Other than the Matteau Matteau Matteau goal, that trade was highway ******* robbery.

Not that I'd redo it of course, because you never know what would have happened in '94.

Mr Atoz* is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 05:38 PM
  #990
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rangersbaby View Post
no confusion at all... its over 20 points.
but the 18 goals is a pretty big number actually

38 or 20 per 82 games is quite a difference.
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.

smoneil is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 05:39 PM
  #991
Barbara Underhill
Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuke
 
Barbara Underhill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Montana
Country: United States
Posts: 13,274
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OverTheCap View Post
I wouldn't be so sure of that. In the offseason, he's not going to be analyzing where he wants to go based on the standings, which is pretty much what he's doing right now. Some teams in the playoffs could make a surprise run and he may decide he wants to be a part of it.

Detroit isn't in the running to trade for Nash right now but they might be this summer. Can't imagine he wouldn't waive to go there.
He'll still want to go to a playoff caliber team. Detroit has been rumored the whole time but only if they wait. Still it would be the same teams or very close plus a few.


Last edited by New York RKY: 02-19-2012 at 05:54 PM. Reason: slight flaming
Barbara Underhill is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 05:41 PM
  #992
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 15,856
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barbara Underhill View Post
It's common sense.

He may add a few teams but ot's not going to be wide open.
Sounds like its you trying to rush things along because Rick Nash gives you a little tingle up your leg. Which, incidentally, makes little sense for either side.


Last edited by New York RKY: 02-19-2012 at 05:44 PM. Reason: qdp
Bleed Ranger Blue is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 05:44 PM
  #993
dtrap
Registered User
 
dtrap's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Charleston, SC
Country: United States
Posts: 1,720
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to dtrap
Quote:
Originally Posted by GaBorat View Post
The scary thing is that if CBJ takes that, none of those players could conceivably be as good as Dubinsky.
An offer of Dubi straight up could provide more value...
Drinkin' the cool aid a little early today eh? That's three damn good players right there.

dtrap is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 05:44 PM
  #994
Barbara Underhill
Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuke
 
Barbara Underhill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Montana
Country: United States
Posts: 13,274
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Sounds like its you trying to rush things along because Rick Nash gives you a little tingle up your leg. Which, incidentally, makes little sense for either side.
More like regardless of when he gets traded he controls his destiny. You're the one that got super upset and defended an article I disagreed with. But nice assumption!

Barbara Underhill is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 05:44 PM
  #995
rangersbaby
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 61
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoneil View Post
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.

rangersbaby 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 01:06 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.