HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Notices

Nash Rumors Part VI: Carter to LA; Nash next to move?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-24-2012, 07:12 PM
  #951
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Just went back and double checked--the ONLY players on this roster to see a playoff game past the 2nd round are Richards, Rupp, Feds and Gabby. I hope the team can win it this year, but to say that they are built to win it this year and we CAN'T wait until next year? That's crazy--Only two important players have been there before (one of many reasons why I would prefer the team to wait and pick up somebody in the post-season. Aside from the fact that he has underwhelming regular season numbers for his salary, Nash only has three or four playoff games under his belt--being a good regular season player does not always equal being a good post-season player. Perfect example--see Ilya Kovalchuck. He's a MUCH better regular season player than Nash, but he melts in the post-season).

smoneil is offline  
Old
02-24-2012, 07:14 PM
  #952
SlingshotVv
nerdy wrist-locks
 
SlingshotVv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Jersey City, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,467
vCash: 500
The Rangers "year" to win is any years over the next 7 years, and possibly more, where Lundqvist is healthy.

Staal and Girardi are only going to get better the next few seasons. McD and MDZ will only get better. Stepan, Hagelin, Anisimov will only get better. Kreider will be in the NHL. Miller will be in the NHL. Erixon will be in the NHL. McIlrath will(?) (should? i haven't followed his development) be in the NHL. You really of the opinion that any decline in Callahan's game will outweigh the development taking place among our future?

SlingshotVv is offline  
Old
02-24-2012, 07:19 PM
  #953
Rust Heisenberg
Registered User
 
Rust Heisenberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 6,153
vCash: 50
Wrote this on the game thread, it's relevant here too:

To be quite honesty, it seems that not only does Richards not trust anyone else on his line, he doesn't trust his abilities either.

What most of you need to understand is that while 7.8 cap hit might be bad, 9 more years of a useless Richards is even worse.

Get Richards a stud. I don't care who it is. We need our #1 center to ****ing produce. I'm tired of this.

Nash so happens to be a top 5 talent in this league, and available...

Rust Heisenberg is offline  
Old
02-24-2012, 07:27 PM
  #954
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenjets36 View Post
Wrote this on the game thread, it's relevant here too:

To be quite honesty, it seems that not only does Richards not trust anyone else on his line, he doesn't trust his abilities either.

What most of you need to understand is that while 7.8 cap hit might be bad, 9 more years of a useless Richards is even worse.

Get Richards a stud. I don't care who it is. We need our #1 center to ****ing produce. I'm tired of this.

Nash so happens to be a top 5 talent in this league, and available...
And here's my response from the game thread:

To be quite honesty back at you, how the hell can you know how much/little Richards "trusts" his linemates?

Also, when at any point in his overrated career, has Rick Nash EVER been in the same hemisphere as a "top 5 talent in this league"? He's a guy who brings nothing but scoring, and his career year put him at 18th in the league.

And further--how many times do we have to covet another team's player based on the belief that that player would DEFINITELY mesh with the players we've already got? How many times do we have to do that and watch it fail miserably (Gomez/Jagr, Drury/Jagr, Richards/Gaborik, etc etc etc) before we stop and realize that chemistry is more important than stat lines?

smoneil is offline  
Old
02-24-2012, 07:29 PM
  #955
SlingshotVv
nerdy wrist-locks
 
SlingshotVv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Jersey City, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,467
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenjets36 View Post
Wrote this on the game thread, it's relevant here too:

To be quite honesty, it seems that not only does Richards not trust anyone else on his line, he doesn't trust his abilities either.

What most of you need to understand is that while 7.8 cap hit might be bad, 9 more years of a useless Richards is even worse.

Get Richards a stud. I don't care who it is. We need our #1 center to ****ing produce. I'm tired of this.

Nash so happens to be a top 5 talent in this league, and available...
No way is he top 5 in the league. I can think of 12 more dominant forwards off the top of my head, and another 5 or so questionably better forwards. And another 5 that i'd prefer over Nash.

SlingshotVv is offline  
Old
02-24-2012, 07:31 PM
  #956
Jumbo*
TARGET: ACQUIRED
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 16,720
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlingshotVv View Post
The Rangers "year" to win is any years over the next 7 years, and possibly more, where Lundqvist is healthy.

Staal and Girardi are only going to get better the next few seasons. McD and MDZ will only get better. Stepan, Hagelin, Anisimov will only get better. Kreider will be in the NHL. Miller will be in the NHL. Erixon will be in the NHL. McIlrath will(?) (should? i haven't followed his development) be in the NHL. You really of the opinion that any decline in Callahan's game will outweigh the development taking place among our future?
So how do you know Lundqvist will be healthy for the next 7 years? What we do know is he IS healthy this year.

Jumbo* is offline  
Old
02-24-2012, 07:31 PM
  #957
GregSirico
PUCK LUCK
 
GregSirico's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,687
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlingshotVv View Post
No way is he top 5 in the league. I can think of 12 more dominant forwards off the top of my head, and another 5 or so questionably better forwards. And another 5 that i'd prefer over Nash.
totally off topic ... but glad to see another bjj'er

GregSirico is offline  
Old
02-24-2012, 07:34 PM
  #958
JoeRangers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Staten Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 389
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregSirico View Post
totally off topic ... but glad to see another bjj'er
Make that 2. Also at a Renzo Gracie school

JoeRangers is offline  
Old
02-24-2012, 07:37 PM
  #959
GregSirico
PUCK LUCK
 
GregSirico's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,687
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeRangers View Post
Make that 2. Also at a Renzo Gracie school
Nice!

GregSirico is offline  
Old
02-24-2012, 07:39 PM
  #960
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badgerfan View Post
So how do you know Lundqvist will be healthy for the next 7 years? What we do know is he IS healthy this year.

Besides the fact that he's been healthy since 2005? Is this a serious question?

smoneil is offline  
Old
02-24-2012, 07:42 PM
  #961
Rust Heisenberg
Registered User
 
Rust Heisenberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 6,153
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoneil View Post
And here's my response from the game thread:

To be quite honesty back at you, how the hell can you know how much/little Richards "trusts" his linemates?

Also, when at any point in his overrated career, has Rick Nash EVER been in the same hemisphere as a "top 5 talent in this league"? He's a guy who brings nothing but scoring, and his career year put him at 18th in the league.

And further--how many times do we have to covet another team's player based on the belief that that player would DEFINITELY mesh with the players we've already got? How many times do we have to do that and watch it fail miserably (Gomez/Jagr, Drury/Jagr, Richards/Gaborik, etc etc etc) before we stop and realize that chemistry is more important than stat lines?
Does he have any type of chemistry with any of his line mates? Where is the creative passing he had with Eriksson on this team? Maybe he has team chemistry and bonding with them, but on the ice, what you usually see is him dumping the puck or holding the puck instead of passing it. He's not trusting his instincts, and it probably means he doesn't trust his linemates, therefore he tries to do more with the puck than he needs to.

And Rick Nash has NEVER played with any semblance of a team. In the olympics, he was by far and away the best player on the ice, for any team. Talent wise, he is top 5. Crosby has Malkin, similarly Malkin has Crosby. Toews has Kane and Hossa. Datsyuk has Zetterberg and Fransen. Stars need other stars. Richards and Nash also know each other from that olympic team, where Nash played the left wing on his line... where he would need to play on our 2nd line.

Edit: and by "his line" I mean Nash's own. I know he was centered by Crosby. I'm just saying he's familiar with the position and he's clearly familiar with Richards as well.

And that's why you have to match players to have chemistry. Nash and Richards have already played together. Nash also plays a game more similar and suitable to Richards (a lot closer to that than Gaborik's style).

The fact that you argue that Nash isn't a top 5 talent means you must not watch him much. As you're referring to, team assembly and chemistry is very important. When in Nash's entire career have the Jackets supplied him with a good, even a decent core? Jagr in Washington faired with similar problems.

WE NEED SCORING.


Last edited by Rust Heisenberg: 02-24-2012 at 07:54 PM.
Rust Heisenberg is offline  
Old
02-24-2012, 07:55 PM
  #962
Rust Heisenberg
Registered User
 
Rust Heisenberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 6,153
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlingshotVv View Post
No way is he top 5 in the league. I can think of 12 more dominant forwards off the top of my head, and another 5 or so questionably better forwards. And another 5 that i'd prefer over Nash.
If he's traded to this team I think you have a different sentiment about Nash's worth in this league and to a team.

Rust Heisenberg is offline  
Old
02-24-2012, 08:00 PM
  #963
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenjets36 View Post
Does he have any type of chemistry with any of his line mates? Where is the creative passing he had with Eriksson on this team? Maybe he has team chemistry and bonding with them, but on the ice, what you usually see is him dumping the puck or holding the puck instead of passing it. He's not trusting his instincts, and it probably means he doesn't trust his linemates, therefore he tries to do more with the puck than he needs to.

And Rick Nash has NEVER played with any semblance of a team. In the olympics, he was by far and away the best player on the ice, for any team. Talent wise, he is top 5. Crosby has Malkin, similarly Malkin has Crosby. Toews has Kane and Hossa. Datsyuk has Zetterberg and Fransen. Stars need other stars. Richards and Nash also know each other from that olympic team, where Nash played the left wing on his line... where he would need to play on our 2nd line.

And that's why you have to match players to have chemistry. Nash and Richards have already played together. Nash also plays a game more similar and suitable to Richards (a lot closer to that than Gaborik's style).

The fact that you argue that Nash isn't a top 5 talent means you must not watch him much. As you're referring to, team assembly and chemistry is very important. When in Nash's entire career have the Jackets supplied him with a good, even a decent core? Jagr in Washington faired with similar problems.

WE NEED SCORING.

I watch Nash far more than most people on this board, and I think that's the problem. Most of you guys see him once or twice a year, or only during the Olympics (where he was NOT Canada's best player) and remember that he was a 1st overall pick and you dream about what you think he COULD be. I see the player who actually plays NHL games and that player couldn't even shine the shoes of a real top-5 talent in the league.

You undo your own argument. Malkin, this season, does NOT have Crosby. He hasn't had Crosby all year. Malkin is putting up great numbers. Nash has not had a "star" to play with, but he's had a solid supporting cast (which frankly, is only marginally worse than what the Rangers could offer him). Outside of Richards and Gaborik, how different are Carter/Vyborny/Umberger/Zherdev/Vermette from Cally/Dubi/Stepan/AA? If people were arguing that Nash couldn't make Columbus into a winner because of his supporting cast, I would see the merit of such an argument (though I think it's more to do with the Jacket's awful D and Goalie than anything else). They aren't. People are arguing that Nash doesn't put up POINTS because of his cast. Plenty of superstars, and ALL of the top 10 talents in this league can and often have put up elite point totals without another superstar to help out. Nash, consistently, shows that he can't do that.

You talk about Richards and Eriksson. Did you bother to look at Richards' first season in Dallas? The one where he was adjusting to a new team, a new system and a new city? He had lousy numbers. Once he got comfortable, he put up a career year in his 2nd season with Dallas. You see mistrust of linemates because you want Nash and want to believe whatever you need to believe to justify bringing him in. I see a player adjusting to a new city/team/system because that fits with what happened the last time the player was traded and, from the beginning of the season, that's what the player himself has said would happen. Which of us do you think is more likely to be correct?

smoneil is offline  
Old
02-24-2012, 08:07 PM
  #964
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenjets36 View Post
If he's traded to this team I think you have a different sentiment about Nash's worth in this league and to a team.
Remind me again--of the dozens of players signed or traded for by the Rangers who we were sure would be much better than they seemed before they pulled on a Rangers sweater, how many of them actually worked out that way?

The opposite almost universally proves true. Poti? Cullen? Holik? Gomez? Drury? Zherdev? Redden? Ringing any bells? It's not very bright to want to trade for a player in the hopes that he'll be much better than he's ever shown in 10 years in the league. It's just insane to do it over and over again.

smoneil is offline  
Old
02-24-2012, 08:08 PM
  #965
bmw2004
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Brooklyn, N.Y.
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 2,468
vCash: 500
Question: What if Nash will not work out great in New York? What if he'll score 15 goals for 35 points next year? Will he lose his trade value? If yes what will they do? Another Gomez, Drury, Redden case?

bmw2004 is offline  
Old
02-24-2012, 08:15 PM
  #966
JoeRangers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Staten Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 389
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmw2004 View Post
Question: What if Nash will not work out great in New York? What if he'll score 15 goals for 35 points next year? Will he lose his trade value? If yes what will they do? Another Gomez, Drury, Redden case?
Whens the last time that happened?

JoeRangers is offline  
Old
02-24-2012, 08:16 PM
  #967
Jumbo*
TARGET: ACQUIRED
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 16,720
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoneil View Post
Besides the fact that he's been healthy since 2005? Is this a serious question?
Is that a serious response?

Because he has been healthy for the most part, that means he's going to be healthy for the next 7 years. K gotcha. Great logic.

Jumbo* is offline  
Old
02-24-2012, 08:17 PM
  #968
SlingshotVv
nerdy wrist-locks
 
SlingshotVv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Jersey City, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,467
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badgerfan View Post
So how do you know Lundqvist will be healthy for the next 7 years? What we do know is he IS healthy this year.
I didn't say I know he'll be healthy, my god this forum could use some reading comprehension work. Reread my post.

How do you know Lundqvist won't get injured the day after the deadline? This team isn't a "this year or bust team".

SlingshotVv is offline  
Old
02-24-2012, 08:18 PM
  #969
SlingshotVv
nerdy wrist-locks
 
SlingshotVv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Jersey City, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,467
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenjets36 View Post
If he's traded to this team I think you have a different sentiment about Nash's worth in this league and to a team.
Well his value to me would be much higher if he was here. But that doesn't put him in the top 5 in the NHL. Maybe, maybe maybe, the top 15 forwards.

Stamkos, Crosby, Malkin, Toews, Datsyuk, Giroux, Perry, Ovechkin, Sedin, Kovalchuk, Parise, Marleau, Getzlaf are all easily more valuable. I'd also put Benn, Lucic, Tavares, Kesler, Pavelski, Gaborik, Vanek, Couture, and Neal ahead of Nash, as far as players I'd love to see here.


Last edited by SlingshotVv: 02-24-2012 at 08:27 PM.
SlingshotVv is offline  
Old
02-24-2012, 08:21 PM
  #970
Rust Heisenberg
Registered User
 
Rust Heisenberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 6,153
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoneil View Post
I watch Nash far more than most people on this board, and I think that's the problem. Most of you guys see him once or twice a year, or only during the Olympics (where he was NOT Canada's best player) and remember that he was a 1st overall pick and you dream about what you think he COULD be. I see the player who actually plays NHL games and that player couldn't even shine the shoes of a real top-5 talent in the league.

You undo your own argument. Malkin, this season, does NOT have Crosby. He hasn't had Crosby all year. Malkin is putting up great numbers. Nash has not had a "star" to play with, but he's had a solid supporting cast (which frankly, is only marginally worse than what the Rangers could offer him). Outside of Richards and Gaborik, how different are Carter/Vyborny/Umberger/Zherdev/Vermette from Cally/Dubi/Stepan/AA? If people were arguing that Nash couldn't make Columbus into a winner because of his supporting cast, I would see the merit of such an argument (though I think it's more to do with the Jacket's awful D and Goalie than anything else). They aren't. People are arguing that Nash doesn't put up POINTS because of his cast. Plenty of superstars, and ALL of the top 10 talents in this league can and often have put up elite point totals without another superstar to help out. Nash, consistently, shows that he can't do that.

You talk about Richards and Eriksson. Did you bother to look at Richards' first season in Dallas? The one where he was adjusting to a new team, a new system and a new city? He had lousy numbers. Once he got comfortable, he put up a career year in his 2nd season with Dallas. You see mistrust of linemates because you want Nash and want to believe whatever you need to believe to justify bringing him in. I see a player adjusting to a new city/team/system because that fits with what happened the last time the player was traded and, from the beginning of the season, that's what the player himself has said would happen. Which of us do you think is more likely to be correct?
I also watch Nash more so than most on this board, as my room mate is a diehard bluejackets fan, as odd as that may seem..

As for Malkin, I didn't limit his success to any one particular year. But his team is built to succeed from top to bottom. Strong defense, strong offensive core, very good coach. Are you comparing the Penguins to the Jackets? I thought you said you watch their games more often than most here yet you make a statement like that. As for CBJ's core, of course it is no where as near as good as ours. What type of statements are these? If that core was as good as ours they'd be a lot more successful than they are. The Blue Jackets have no goalie, no defense, and their offense is composed of players who are journeymen or ridden away from their past teams. If Zherdev was a part of a "core" he would still be on this team. Our core offers consistency, at least a lot more so than that of CBJ's. As for Richard's first season in Dallas... he was injured! Of course his stats are gonna be bad if he doesn't play for 1/3 of the season.

And how about this...

Which is a more likely statement?

"Richards succeeds with a bunch of role players who can't consistently score?"

or...

"Richards succeeds with a bonafide NHL sniper?"

And also... please answer me this... who exactly has Nash had to help him with scoring? An aging and inconsistent Kristian Huselius? Journeyman Antoine Vermette? An injured Jeff Carter basically thrown off of his team and forced into the situation he was in in CBJ? Derrick Brassard, a 2nd liner?

Don't even try to argue that Nash has had adequate support. He's a star in a terrible situation (a situation that he himself chose) but nonetheless a terrible one. He's a stud. Period.

Rust Heisenberg is offline  
Old
02-24-2012, 08:21 PM
  #971
bmw2004
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Brooklyn, N.Y.
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 2,468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeRangers View Post
Whens the last time that happened?
It happens with this club pretty often when they sign or trade for a "star" player. They come here and forget how to score goals.

bmw2004 is offline  
Old
02-24-2012, 08:25 PM
  #972
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmw2004 View Post
Question: What if Nash will not work out great in New York? What if he'll score 15 goals for 35 points next year? Will he lose his trade value? If yes what will they do? Another Gomez, Drury, Redden case?
I don't think there's any worry in that happening. Even floating, clashing with Torts, whatever, I don't see Nash ever going lower than 25-30 goals/50 points. My issue is that he's a 65 point player on a 100 point player's contract with no playoff experience and a history of soft/uninspired play. I don't think he'd regress, I just don't think he'll magically start living up to his contract.

smoneil is offline  
Old
02-24-2012, 08:29 PM
  #973
NYRangers16
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Westchester
Posts: 1,047
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoneil View Post
I don't think there's any worry in that happening. Even floating, clashing with Torts, whatever, I don't see Nash ever going lower than 25-30 goals/50 points. My issue is that he's a 65 point player on a 100 point player's contract with no playoff experience and a history of soft/uninspired play. I don't think he'd regress, I just don't think he'll magically start living up to his contract.
Exactly my point all along. Costs more than Gabby and isn't as good. Having said that we could probably fit him in.

NYRangers16 is offline  
Old
02-24-2012, 08:31 PM
  #974
JoeRangers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Staten Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 389
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmw2004 View Post
It happens with this club pretty often when they sign or trade for a "star" player. They come here and forget how to score goals.
Whos the last one to come here and put up half their career average in goals and points

JoeRangers is offline  
Old
02-24-2012, 08:39 PM
  #975
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenjets36 View Post
I also watch Nash more so than most on this board, as my room mate is a diehard bluejackets fan, as odd as that may seem..

As for Malkin, I didn't limit his success to any one particular year. But his team is built to succeed from top to bottom. Strong defense, strong offensive core, very good coach. Are you comparing the Penguins to the Jackets? I thought you said you watch their games more often than most here yet you make a statement like that. As for CBJ's core, of course it is no where as near as good as ours. What type of statements are these? If that core was as good as ours they'd be a lot more successful than they are. The Blue Jackets have no goalie, no defense, and their offense is composed of players who are journeymen or ridden away from their past teams. If Zherdev was a part of a "core" he would still be on this team. Our core offers consistency, at least a lot more so than that of CBJ's. As for Richard's first season in Dallas... he was injured! Of course his stats are gonna be bad if he doesn't play for 1/3 of the season.

And how about this...

Which is a more likely statement?

"Richards succeeds with a bunch of role players who can't consistently score?"

or...

"Richards succeeds with a bonafide NHL sniper?"

And also... please answer me this... who exactly has Nash had to help him with scoring? An aging and inconsistent Kristian Huselius? Journeyman Antoine Vermette? An injured Jeff Carter basically thrown off of his team and forced into the situation he was in in CBJ? Derrick Brassard, a 2nd liner?

Don't even try to argue that Nash has had adequate support. He's a star in a terrible situation (a situation that he himself chose) but nonetheless a terrible one. He's a stud. Period.
Regarding Richards--again, watch the games. He was sub-par in his first season in Dallas. People were upset that they picked up such a huge contract for a player who wasn't dominating. Yes, he got injured. He also PLAYED 60 percent of the season, and he didn't play it to the standard he had set in Tampa Bay.

I also never compared the Penguins to the Jackets. There you go again, trying to "win" an argument by railing against things that I never actually said. I stated that a top 5 talent can put up big numbers without another star. YOU claimed that stars need other stars. My reference to Malkin's current season was to refute that statement. Just because your statement was fairly easily shown to be bunk, does not mean that you get to pretend that my response was about something else entirely.

Who has Nash had to help in the scoring? Seriously? Zherdev was kicked off this team because of his personality. The only thing he COULD do was score. Vermette isn't a star, but he (for most of the time he was in C-Bus) was a top 6 guy. Brassard and Voracek were young guys, who played like young guys--good some nights, not so much on others. As for Carter, he usually puts up more points than Nash! So if Nash is a top 5 talent, Carter must be a top 3, right? I notice that you side-stepped names like Umberger and Vyborny? Umberger is cut from the same mold as Dubi and Cally. Vyborny usually put up better numbers than Nash as well. This board used to covet trading for Vyborny back in the day.

Again, is that enough of a cast to win? Nope, but it's more than enough to put up more than ~65 points if he was a real top-5 player.


Last edited by smoneil: 02-24-2012 at 08:57 PM.
smoneil 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 08:23 AM.

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.