You say that pretty dismissively. Spending $6 million in cap space on a guy that doesn't produce would be disastrous IMO.
only if we're stuck with that 6M charge for multiple years. obviously the best case would be to get him to sign a 1 or 2 year deal to minimize that possibility, but that's probably unlikely. heck, i'd be open to giving him a 1 year 7M contract. if it doesn't work out he's gone and all our cap space is free to go after another UFA next summer.
Nash would instantly be the most talented forward on our roster. Getting him, in my opinion, would put us ovEr the top for Cup contention as long as the roster pieces are some combination of Dubi/AA/Hagelin.
Gaborik is a better player. Richards is a better overall player too
e: Nash's flashes here and there aren't enough to make up for the fact he's just as not as good as them. And Gaborik can most certainly take over a game on his own
Not sure how a guy who hasn't scored 60 points in the last 4 seasons is truly a game-breaker. He's a very good talent, but not elite. And not worth nearly 8M/year.
You say that pretty dismissively. Spending $6 million in cap space on a guy that doesn't produce would be disastrous IMO.
Well it would depend on the terms of course, I wouldn't want that either. But assuming the years aren't too long, it might be worth the gamble. The Rangers could always buy themselves out of a contract if need be, they certainly have the money to do so.
It's still a better option than trading away players for Nash IMO.
__________________ "Matteau! Matteau! Matteau!"~H. Rose
Nash would instantly be the most talented forward on our roster. Getting him, in my opinion, would put us ovEr the top for Cup contention as long as the roster pieces are some combination of Dubi/AA/Hagelin.
Seriously, if I had a nickle for every time I heard this over the years.
He hasn't scored more than 57 points in the last 4 years. That's hardly game-breaker status. Steven Stamkos, in comparison, has scored nearly as many goals each season as Nash has points. That is a game breaker.
79 in 08-09. 67 in 09-10. 66 in 10-11. 59 in 11-12.
At least do some research.
He still hasn't had game breaker stats (only 67 points max) in the last several (3) years. That's very good...but not elite. For 7.8M/year I'd expect more than that.
He hasn't scored more than 57 points in the last 4 years. That's hardly game-breaker status. Steven Stamkos, in comparison, has scored nearly as many goals each season as Nash has points. That is a game breaker.
Think you're reading his stats upside-down. He didn't crack 57 points in his first 4 years.
I agree and concede that he's in their category, or tier. He's a power forward type, so his ability to take over a shift is more noticeable and pronounced than the playmaker and sniper. He's a very, very good player.
I worry over A) what it will cost to get him, and B) what it will cost to keep him on the cap.
I think we'd be better of going after Ryan (so long as Stepan isn't going the other way), or hitting up Doan.
Yeah Ryan would be my top choice, but Stepan would have to go back so I don't know if that will happen, and even if it could, Stepan is more valuable imo. Nash will cost less in terms of who might get the job done, and to be honest, Sather seems to really want Nash. The cap hit worries us because he might not be the impact player that some (including myself) hopes he could be here. That's risky but worth it imo.
Are we really saying he'd be better than Gabby? As in, Marian Gaborik, the guy who has scored more than 100 points than him in only 50~ more games? I don't think so.
First post he said he hadn't scored 60 points in four years 2nd post he said he hadn't scored more than 57... Typo mania.
Yes, I messed up. But that doesn't change the fact that he had 13 more points last season than Callahan. Do you really think spending 7.8M/year is a wise investment for a 67 point player?
He still hasn't had game breaker stats (only 67 points max) in the last several (3) years. That's very good...but not elite. For 7.8M/year I'd expect more than that.
Ok, and look what team he played on and who he played with...
Are we really saying he'd be better than Gabby? As in, Marian Gaborik, the guy who has scored more than 100 points than him in only 50~ more games? I don't think so.
Would you want to score goals and constantly have to hear "For those about to rock...We salute you?"
Nothing against AC/DC or the late Bon Scott, but...DEAR LORD!
He still hasn't had game breaker stats (only 67 points max) in the last several (3) years. That's very good...but not elite. For 7.8M/year I'd expect more than that.
Game breaker stats? What are those? He can score timely goals in a dominant fashion. Not going to try fluff him up because that's not my agenda, his stats don't tell the whole story when evaluating his skill level. It's a risk sure, but if the cost is right I think it's worth taking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by broadwayblue
Yes, I messed up. But that doesn't change the fact that he had 13 more points last season than Callahan. Do you really think spending 7.8M/year is a wise investment for a 67 point player?
How many 60 point players do we have?
He also would have been 3rd on this team in scoring this year, first last year, 2nd the year before that and 1st four years ago.
