HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
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.

Rick Nash continued - Portzline: NYR PHI PIT DET SJS and BOS

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-08-2012, 10:58 PM
  #76
Finlandia WOAT
Do U Like Quebec?
 
Finlandia WOAT's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Raleigh NC
Country: United States
Posts: 9,358
vCash: 500
Rick Nash's contract is so expensive because it bought out 8 UFA years.

Finlandia WOAT is offline  
Old
07-08-2012, 10:59 PM
  #77
thebus2288
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Michigan
Country: United States
Posts: 688
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrjimmyg89 View Post
What makes you think these prospects are the same? And, if they are the same and Columbus holds them in high regard, why wouldn't they want to get them? I mean, for them, having more would be awesome. They lack depth up front and having more prospects that are like the ones they have, if they like them, would be exactly what they would be looking for. Also, the sheer quantity of prospects would lead to having more players likely to be in the NHL and contribute.

Columbus is not getting the select 3 from the Rangers. If they aren't getting star players from other teams, they might as well accept the best offer. I doubt many of the other teams are throwing a forward that is a veteran and is as good as Dubinsky is. The prospects from both sides might be the same, but the centerpiece of the deal is not.

EDIT: If Dubinsky at 4.2 is a cap dump, Rick Nash at 7.8 is the same.
Well, you guys helping Nash again. The ONLY thing you can compare with prospects is their numbers, their style of play, team they played on, and draft position. Problem is NOTHING is guaranteed after that. The Jackets need SKILL up front not more depth. They dont need a "star" player now for him but one with potential to be within a few years. Or there's no trade.

thebus2288 is offline  
Old
07-08-2012, 10:59 PM
  #78
Machinehead
Moderator
Purple Hayes
 
Machinehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New York New York
Country: United States
Posts: 35,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueline Bomber View Post
That's where you're wrong. Nash's contract isn't nearly as bad as it's made out to be, especially with the way free agency has played out thus far. In a world where Wideman gets 5 million, Nash at 7.8 isn't that bad. And in fact, in a year or two, will likely be on par with other star players.



Carolina does have that luxury. The only reason they've balked is when Columbus asked for a player that has produced like Nash. It was a parallel move at best for them. Ranger fans are balking when a guy who's put up 7 points in the league is asked for a guy who's averaged 35 goals.

I understand being high on your prospects and having hope that they'll pan out and become impact players. But if that hope is preventing you from acquiring a proven asset, I don't know what to tell you.

Canes fans are really high on Murphy. Everything we've heard from Day 1 is that he's got the potential to be one of the most dynamic offensive defensemen this league has seen in ages (and yes, that includes Karlsson and Green). Would I trade Murphy for Nash? In a heartbeat. I'd be angry if Murphy DID turn out to be that player, but the production of Nash in the time it takes him to BECOME that player would ease the pain...a lot. And if Murphy didn't turn out to be that player...

Unless you believe Kreider can be a consistent 40-50 goal scorer, and have some sort of guarantee, I don't see why he'd put a stop to a deal to acquire a 35-goal scorer. The only explanation I could come up with would be salary, but for a team that's paying a guy 6.5 million to play in the minors...
And if we trade Kreider for Nash, who is our 1st line LW?

That's what people aren't understanding. Kreider isn't a prospect, he's already on our 1st line.

It's a pretty ****ed up situation we're in where a kid who hasn't played a regular season game is such in an important roster player, but that's the way it is. Thank our management and their vendetta against offensive depth for that.

We should be looking to fully improve the team, meaning giving up minimal roster assets to gain a roster asset. Trading one top 6 player for another is not where I want this team to go, even if the one coming back is better.

Machinehead is offline  
Old
07-08-2012, 11:03 PM
  #79
Cash for Nash
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,660
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoneil View Post
The point in comparing what the two teams have developed over the last 10 years is to demonstrate that maybe, just MAYBE, the Rangers' scouts have been doing a better job than the Columbus scouts. As such, the players near the top of the Rangers prospects list are more than likely going to be better than guys who you think "are just as 'valuable'" that are already in the BJ's organization. Is that an unfair statement to make? I don't know. Let's look at the last 10 years of evidence.

That's fine that Miller and Thomas aren't prospects that "wow" your management. On the other hand, you might want to consider the fact that your management has a proven track record of being "wowed" by players who seem to fail/bust with alarming frequency.
lmao....
Is that the sell here? Because Stall, Dell Zotto,Stepan have seemingly panned out all Ranger prospects are now gold out of the womb. Dude you are a *****.

Sure I would say that Kreider due to his size has higher upside than Cam Atkinson.
Just as I would say Ryan Johannsen as a 19 year old is better than any prospect in your system older or younger. The Anaheim Ducks were asking for Johannsen in a deal for Bobby Ryan when the CBJ asked about his availability. I seriously doubt a deal including all three of your so called prized prospects like JT Miller Tim Erixon and Christian Thomas would even get a sniff of interest from Anaheim for Ryan. But yet they asked for Johansen. Go figure.

Cash for Nash is offline  
Old
07-08-2012, 11:04 PM
  #80
Kershaw
 
Kershaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country:
Posts: 25,519
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cash for Nash View Post
lmao....
Is that the sell here? Because Stall, Dell Zotto,Stepan have seemingly panned out all Ranger prospects are now gold out of the womb. Dude you are a *****.

Sure I would say that Kreider due to his size has higher upside than Cam Atkinson.
Just as I would say Ryan Johannsen as a 19 year old is better than any prospect in your system older or younger. The Anaheim Ducks were asking for Johannsen in a deal for Bobby Ryan when the CBJ asked about his availability. I seriously doubt a deal including all three of your so called prized prospects like JT Miller Tim Erixon and Christian Thomas would even get a sniff of interest from Anaheim for Ryan. But yet they asked for Johansen. Go figure.
Yes Johansen is a great prospect, I just hope CBJ doesn't ruin him like all their other non-Nash lottery picks! Not a good start to his career either, ouch!

Kershaw is offline  
Old
07-08-2012, 11:05 PM
  #81
N o o d l e s
Registered User
 
N o o d l e s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: MA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,185
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinehead View Post
And if we trade Kreider for Nash, who is our 1st line LW?

That's what people aren't understanding. Kreider isn't a prospect, he's already on our 1st line.

It's a pretty ****ed up situation we're in where a kid who hasn't played a regular season game is such in an important roster player, but that's the way it is. Thank our management and their vendetta against offensive depth for that.

We should be looking to fully improve the team, meaning giving up minimal roster assets to gain a roster asset. Trading one top 6 player for another is not where I want this team to go, even if the one coming back is better.
Wait, I don't get it. Nash would be your first line LW if you traded Kreider for him, no? Sure Kreider had a good playoff, but I didn't realize you guys had already penciled him into line 1. But even if that's the case and he was moved for Nash, what's the issue. Nash on first line LW is definitely better than Kreider there.

N o o d l e s is offline  
Old
07-08-2012, 11:05 PM
  #82
KingJet*
Welcome Back
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,651
vCash: 500
I say its most likely to either be NYR or Pittsburgh

Nash and Boll for Girardi, Dubinsky, Hagelin, Stepan, 1st and 2nd 2013, makes room if say... Shane Doan signs, and McIlrath and the middle (Richards, Callahan, Anisimov, Boyle).
Pittsburgh for 1st and 2nd 2013, 1st 2014, Niskanen, Martin and Kunitz.

KingJet* is offline  
Old
07-08-2012, 11:07 PM
  #83
Cash for Nash
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,660
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kershaw View Post
Yes Johansen is a great prospect, I just hope CBJ doesn't ruin him like all their other non-Nash lottery picks! Not a good start to his career either, ouch!
Not disastrous either....He flashed early then hit a wall. He's like 19 dude. He's about 20 lbs heavier this year we'll see what he's got.

Cash for Nash is offline  
Old
07-08-2012, 11:07 PM
  #84
lakai17
Registered User
 
lakai17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,973
vCash: 637
Thornton-Nash duo!!

lakai17 is online now  
Old
07-08-2012, 11:08 PM
  #85
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 KingJet View Post
I say its most likely to either be NYR or Pittsburgh

Nash and Boll for Girardi, Dubinsky, Hagelin, Stepan, 1st and 2nd 2013, makes room if say... Shane Doan signs, and McIlrath and the middle (Richards, Callahan, Anisimov, Boyle).
Pittsburgh for 1st and 2nd 2013, 1st 2014, Niskanen, Martin and Kunitz.
If I am Sather, I hang up the phone on that offer.

GregSirico is offline  
Old
07-08-2012, 11:08 PM
  #86
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 N O O D L E S View Post
Wait, I don't get it. Nash would be your first line LW if you traded Kreider for him, no? Sure Kreider had a good playoff, but I didn't realize you guys had already penciled him into line 1. But even if that's the case and he was moved for Nash, what's the issue. Nash on first line LW is definitely better than Kreider there.
Because it's a lateral move. You don't get better by making lateral moves. Those kind of GM's fail.

GregSirico is offline  
Old
07-08-2012, 11:09 PM
  #87
Cash for Nash
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,660
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregSirico View Post
If I am Sather, I hang up the phone on that offer.
teehee....A little overpayment there....just a tad.

Cash for Nash is offline  
Old
07-08-2012, 11:09 PM
  #88
N o o d l e s
Registered User
 
N o o d l e s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: MA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,185
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingJet View Post
I say its most likely to either be NYR or Pittsburgh

Nash and Boll for Girardi, Dubinsky, Hagelin, Stepan, 1st and 2nd 2013, makes room if say... Shane Doan signs, and McIlrath and the middle (Richards, Callahan, Anisimov, Boyle).
Pittsburgh for 1st and 2nd 2013, 1st 2014, Niskanen, Martin and Kunitz.
That deal from PITT pales in comparison to NYR's. What value do the Penguin's first and 2nd's have in a trade for Nash? With him on board Pitt is picking annually in the last 5 of the draft, they basically do without him. Add in two defenseman that don't really excite anyone and Kunitz who has thrived because of Crosby and idk why Columbus would consider it. I think Pittsburgh is likely out on someone like Nash cause they don't have a lot to offer, unless you count pieces like Despres or others that they probably don't wanna move.

N o o d l e s is offline  
Old
07-08-2012, 11:09 PM
  #89
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueline Bomber View Post
Unless you believe Kreider can be a consistent 40-50 goal scorer, and have some sort of guarantee, I don't see why he'd put a stop to a deal to acquire a 35-goal scorer. The only explanation I could come up with would be salary, but for a team that's paying a guy 6.5 million to play in the minors...
For me (and to be clear, I've NEVER wanted Nash on the Rangers, regardless of the price) it's more about the fact that Nash comes with a pack of excuses. Yes, his team is bad. He's not the only star player to play on a bad team. Those other players still find a way to put up star stats.

The Rangers used to make a living getting guys like Nash. Expensive. Underwhelming. Supposedly going to be a "totally different player" as soon as they pull on a Rangers' sweater. Bottom line, almost every single time, that underwhelming player was just as underwhelming (frankly, they were usually worse) when they got to the Rangers.

The excuses are also ridiculous when you consider the team that he would be joining. Nash plays well with Team Canada? Lovely for him. If you don't know this, let me remind you--the Rangers aren't Team Canada. They don't have the skill and they don't play anything even resembling the same system. The other popular excuse--Nash would put up more points when surrounded by more talented players--who would that be, exactly? Gaborik and Callahan play the same position. Richards plays with Gaborik. The whole reason the Rangers seem to be interested in Nash is because they have trouble scoring. Doesn't it strike you as odd that one of the excuses for Nash is that he'll score more when surrounded by players/a system that doesn't score many goals?

Finally, the biggest knock against acquiring Nash is that he just doesn't know how to win. He's been in the league a long time, and he hasn't ever been a winner. Even his biggest accomplishments are things that he didn't win outright (he tied for the Richard in the weakest year ever in the history of that trophy). Nash was developed amid failure. He's seen highly touted young players fail one after the other. Season after season, he's breathed, slept, eaten and lived failure. When a player does that for 10 years, I'm sorry, but he's not going to be part of any solution. The Rangers, with the team they have, came within two games of the Stanley Cup finals. Subtracting key pieces from that puzzle for a player who only knows how to lose is just pure foolishness.

Yes, Nash is a talented player with some appealing stats. The Rangers have been fooled into believing in such players too many times in the past. At the end of the day, he's just another overpaid "what could have been" who doesn't know how to win.

smoneil is offline  
Old
07-08-2012, 11:10 PM
  #90
N o o d l e s
Registered User
 
N o o d l e s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: MA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,185
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregSirico View Post
Because it's a lateral move. You don't get better by making lateral moves. Those kind of GM's fail.
Chris Kreider to Rick Nash is a lateral move? Talk about overselling someone based on a short window of play...

N o o d l e s is offline  
Old
07-08-2012, 11:10 PM
  #91
Machinehead
Moderator
Purple Hayes
 
Machinehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New York New York
Country: United States
Posts: 35,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by N O O D L E S View Post
Wait, I don't get it. Nash would be your first line LW if you traded Kreider for him, no? Sure Kreider had a good playoff, but I didn't realize you guys had already penciled him into line 1. But even if that's the case and he was moved for Nash, what's the issue. Nash on first line LW is definitely better than Kreider there.
Nash would step in for Gaborik at RW for at least half the season while he's out.

Even so, I'd rather have Nash AND Kreider. We need to build depth, not trade the whole team for one good line.

Machinehead is offline  
Old
07-08-2012, 11:10 PM
  #92
Kershaw
 
Kershaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country:
Posts: 25,519
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cash for Nash View Post
Not disastrous either....He flashed early then hit a wall. He's like 19 dude. He's about 20 lbs heavier this year we'll see what he's got.
Yeah, I know, he is safe bet to become a great player. And a skilled big centerman sounds like the perfect player to build around.

Kershaw is offline  
Old
07-08-2012, 11:11 PM
  #93
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 Cash for Nash View Post
teehee....A little overpayment there....just a tad.
Ya think?

GregSirico is offline  
Old
07-08-2012, 11:11 PM
  #94
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 N O O D L E S View Post
Chris Kreider to Rick Nash is a lateral move? Talk about overselling someone based on a short window of play...
The trade would not be straight up ... it would be something like CK + Dubinksky or Stepan ... that is a lot of production going the other way.

GregSirico is offline  
Old
07-08-2012, 11:13 PM
  #95
Kershaw
 
Kershaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country:
Posts: 25,519
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by N O O D L E S View Post
Chris Kreider to Rick Nash is a lateral move? Talk about overselling someone based on a short window of play...
I think it is. Mainly because CK has been hyped by management and fans as the next big scorer for the Rangers and he followed that up with a good postseason for a rookie player. He is also on a very affordable cap contract, which allows us to re-sign our star players with ease.

Kershaw is offline  
Old
07-08-2012, 11:14 PM
  #96
Giroux tha Damaja
Registered User
 
Giroux tha Damaja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mount Holly, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,232
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Giroux tha Damaja
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinehead View Post
Not according to mathematics.
There is something called opportunity cost. In this case we can measure it in minutes of ice time. If I am using double the minutes (via two players) to get the production I could from one player (the 40 goal scorer), then I am not doing well, because the player that I give time to when I have the 40 goal scorer is surely going to score some as well.

If every single hockey player in the world was guaranteed to score 20 goals a year in the NHL, except for one guy who scored 30 every year, he'd be worth ten of any other player in the league. Because every team gets the same number of minutes of ice time per year, and that is the only guy who produces at a greater clip than anyone else. That is an exaggerated example to make my point, but I think you get it. There are **** loads of guys who can fill smaller offensive and defensive roles on a team. There aren't that many real stars.

That said, Nash is bringing home some serious loot cakes right now. Do not want from a Philly perspective. Hell of a player though.

Giroux tha Damaja is offline  
Old
07-08-2012, 11:14 PM
  #97
Cash for Nash
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,660
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoneil View Post
For me (and to be clear, I've NEVER wanted Nash on the Rangers, regardless of the price) it's more about the fact that Nash comes with a pack of excuses. Yes, his team is bad. He's not the only star player to play on a bad team. Those other players still find a way to put up star stats.

The Rangers used to make a living getting guys like Nash. Expensive. Underwhelming. Supposedly going to be a "totally different player" as soon as they pull on a Rangers' sweater. Bottom line, almost every single time, that underwhelming player was just as underwhelming (frankly, they were usually worse) when they got to the Rangers.

The excuses are also ridiculous when you consider the team that he would be joining. Nash plays well with Team Canada? Lovely for him. If you don't know this, let me remind you--the Rangers aren't Team Canada. They don't have the skill and they don't play anything even resembling the same system. The other popular excuse--Nash would put up more points when surrounded by more talented players--who would that be, exactly? Gaborik and Callahan play the same position. Richards plays with Gaborik. The whole reason the Rangers seem to be interested in Nash is because they have trouble scoring. Doesn't it strike you as odd that one of the excuses for Nash is that he'll score more when surrounded by players/a system that doesn't score many goals?

Finally, the biggest knock against acquiring Nash is that he just doesn't know how to win. He's been in the league a long time, and he hasn't ever been a winner. Even his biggest accomplishments are things that he didn't win outright (he tied for the Richard in the weakest year ever in the history of that trophy). Nash was developed amid failure. He's seen highly touted young players fail one after the other. Season after season, he's breathed, slept, eaten and lived failure. When a player does that for 10 years, I'm sorry, but he's not going to be part of any solution. The Rangers, with the team they have, came within two games of the Stanley Cup finals. Subtracting key pieces from that puzzle for a player who only knows how to lose is just pure foolishness.

Yes, Nash is a talented player with some appealing stats. The Rangers have been fooled into believing in such players too many times in the past. At the end of the day, he's just another overpaid "what could have been" who doesn't know how to win.
This is nonsense.

He would be the roster player on your entire team (goalie excluded).
Only Gaborik might rival him and that is very debateable.

Cash for Nash is offline  
Old
07-08-2012, 11:14 PM
  #98
domaug*
Flahr Pahr
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Archbald, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,123
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by N O O D L E S View Post
That deal from PITT pales in comparison to NYR's. What value do the Penguin's first and 2nd's have in a trade for Nash? With him on board Pitt is picking annually in the last 5 of the draft, they basically do without him. Add in two defenseman that don't really excite anyone and Kunitz who has thrived because of Crosby and idk why Columbus would consider it. I think Pittsburgh is likely out on someone like Nash cause they don't have a lot to offer, unless you count pieces like Despres or others that they probably don't wanna move.
take a chill pill. if it makes you feel any better, i, as a Pens fan, wouldn't even make that offer. i don't want Nash in Pittsburgh for $7.8M per year, let alone by giving up what Columbus apparently wants.

domaug* is offline  
Old
07-08-2012, 11:15 PM
  #99
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cash for Nash View Post
lmao....
Is that the sell here? Because Stall, Dell Zotto,Stepan have seemingly panned out all Ranger prospects are now gold out of the womb. Dude you are a *****.
Oh dear. I'm a "*****." This coming from the "expert" on the Rangers system who apparently hasn't watched a Rangers game in years. However shall I cope. BTW- It's "Staal" and "Del Zotto." And neither of them can play the LW.

Quote:
Sure I would say that Kreider due to his size has higher upside than Cam Atkinson.
Just as I would say Ryan Johannsen as a 19 year old is better than any prospect in your system older or younger. The Anaheim Ducks were asking for Johannsen in a deal for Bobby Ryan when the CBJ asked about his availability. I seriously doubt a deal including all three of your so called prized prospects like JT Miller Tim Erixon and Christian Thomas would even get a sniff of interest from Anaheim for Ryan. But yet they asked for Johansen. Go figure.
Rewind three years and replace "Johansen" with "Filatov." Rewind another year or two and replace "Filatov" with "Voracek and Brassard." Noticing a trend? I hope Johansen works out for your team. I'm just pointing out that the Blue Jackets' scouting and development history isn't such that you should be scoffing at top-5 prospects in the Rangers' MUCH more accomplished development system.

smoneil is offline  
Old
07-08-2012, 11:15 PM
  #100
N o o d l e s
Registered User
 
N o o d l e s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: MA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,185
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregSirico View Post
The trade would not be straight up ... it would be something like CK + Dubinksky or Stepan ... that is a lot of production going the other way.
I agree with you and Machinehead that you obviously want both, but depending on the return to CBJ I think it could benefit NY if Nash is able to produce (obviously ). I honestly wonder, though, if Sather is going to get what he wants in the end. The longer things drag on and the longer teams refuse to meet his needs he's going to have to let up sometime. I wonder if any GM's will bite before that.

N o o d l e s 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 12:13 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.