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

Similarities between Gomez/Nash trades

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-11-2012, 01:14 PM
  #1
hagsfan924
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 73
vCash: 500
Similarities between Gomez/Nash trades

Did anyone notice that our trade for Nash was sort of like the trade Montreal made to get Scott Gomez from us?

Dubinsky
Anisimov
Erixon
1st

for

Nash
Delisle
3rd

compared to

Higgins
Janik
McDonaugh
Valenteko

for

Gomez
Pyatt
Busto

While the Gomez trade was made for the Rangers to clear salary, his productivity in his final season with the Rangers based purely on points was almost identical to Nash's in his final season with the Bluejackets. Gomez had 58 points in 77 games, while Nash had 59 points in 82 games. Nash and Gomez' contracts are very similar-although us Ranger fans would quickly say that Gomez was well overpaid (8 years, $62.5 mil for Nash, 7 years $51.5 for Gomez). Obviously Nash was a fan favorite in Columbus while Gomez not so much in NY. The Canadiens gave up a pretty highly-touted prospect in McDonaugh to get Gomez. The Rangers gave up a pretty highly-touted prospect in Erixon to get Nash. Higgins was coming off a down-year, and the same can be said for Dubinsky (and possibly for Anisimov?). The Rangers gave up a bit more to get Nash than Montreal gave up to get Gomez.

With all that said, I don't think Erixon will reach McDonaugh's level of play. Nor do I think that Nash will drop off so much as Gomez did after his first season in Montreal. But there is certainly similarities between the trades. Many along with myself say that the trade with Montreal is probably the greatest trade Sather ever made with NY, and could go down as one of the greatest trades in franchise history. I hope that Columbus won't have that same feeling with the Nash trade in years to come!

hagsfan924 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2012, 01:23 PM
  #2
mschmidt64
Registered User
 
mschmidt64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 833
vCash: 500
I don't think McDonagh and Erixon were on the same level even then.

I remember people were ecstatic that Sather had landed McDonagh. As soon as we got him, people were saying that he was a top-4 D prospect that Montreal had given up on for some reason.

mschmidt64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2012, 01:30 PM
  #3
silverfish
KEVIN!
 
silverfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Standing on a Train
Country: United States
Posts: 15,984
vCash: 500
Hm, it's an interesting idea. Though I remember at the time it was known that Sather had completely robbed Montreal. I feel like after the Nash trade it was pretty well known that Sather had taken Howson to the bank.

So yeah, I'd say that's the biggest difference, that both trades the consensus seemed to be that Sather had won.

silverfish is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2012, 01:37 PM
  #4
Silence Of The Plams
Zemgod
 
Silence Of The Plams's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Lancaster, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 18,354
vCash: 476
In all that he does, Sather is very intelligent at trading IMO. He's a smart dude.

Silence Of The Plams is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2012, 01:41 PM
  #5
hagsfan924
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 73
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mschmidt64 View Post
I don't think McDonagh and Erixon were on the same level even then.

I remember people were ecstatic that Sather had landed McDonagh. As soon as we got him, people were saying that he was a top-4 D prospect that Montreal had given up on for some reason.
I think Erixon certainly has the potential to be a top-4 dman, maybe not a number 1 guy like McD. But at the time, many more were excited about getting rid of Gomez as McD was an unknown. Yes he had potential but I don't think anyone thought he would be this good this quick.

Quote:
Originally Posted by silverfish View Post
Hm, it's an interesting idea. Though I remember at the time it was known that Sather had completely robbed Montreal. I feel like after the Nash trade it was pretty well known that Sather had taken Howson to the bank.

So yeah, I'd say that's the biggest difference, that both trades the consensus seemed to be that Sather had won.
We have a pretty deep system and didn't have to give up a ton, but McD was Montreal top defensive prospect and Erixon was ours at the time of their respective trades.

hagsfan924 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2012, 01:43 PM
  #6
Cliffy1814
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 652
vCash: 500
Nash is a more dominant player than Gomez. Most people would have said Gomez was a really good 2nd line center even during his hey dey. Not too much doubt that Nash is one of the top wingers in the game.

I believe McDonough was a higer rated prospect than Erixon although that is probably a pretty good comparison.

That deal was amazing. everyone knew we were looking to dump salary and Gomez' contract was ridiculous yet we still got Gainey to bite.

That cap space became Gaborik within 24 hours. Higgins also was large piece in getting Prust, so....

Gomez

for

McDonough, Gaborik, Prust

Unreal...

Cliffy1814 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2012, 01:44 PM
  #7
hagsfan924
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 73
vCash: 500
Also, I'm not against the trade with CBJ and I think Sather is pretty damn awesome with trades, when I took a look at the two trades if Nash and Erixon follow the trend of Gomez and McD that would be a scary thought. They could turn out to be eerily similar deals. Hopefully for the future of the Rangers it won't turn out that way, and hopefully we find that Nash was the missing piece for our Stanley Cup dreams.

hagsfan924 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2012, 01:52 PM
  #8
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 20,257
vCash: 500
rick nash and scott gomez's names shouldnt be in the same post ever.

heres the difference. Rick Nash is a great hockey player. Scott Blowmez was overrated and had artificially inflated numbers thanks to who he played with and the system he had. He has a limp noodle shot, and can't play the boards. Rick nash is a monster on the boards, has an elite shot, has elite skating for his size, has elite hands, is an average passer, and can play in all aspects of the game.

Rick Nash is a top 10 player in the league on any team other than Columbus.

Inferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2012, 01:54 PM
  #9
hagsfan924
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 73
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliffy1814 View Post
Gomez

for

McDonough, Gaborik, Prust

Unreal...
I always look at that trade that way as well. Based on a production standpoint prior to their trades Gomez and Nash have had similar numbers throughout their careers. Nash may be a more dominant talent but their numbers are close with each other.
Also, they both have a big cap hit. 7.35/year for Gomez and 7.8/year for Nash.

hagsfan924 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2012, 02:02 PM
  #10
hagsfan924
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 73
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inferno View Post
rick nash and scott gomez's names shouldnt be in the same post ever.

heres the difference. Rick Nash is a great hockey player. Scott Blowmez was overrated and had artificially inflated numbers thanks to who he played with and the system he had. He has a limp noodle shot, and can't play the boards. Rick nash is a monster on the boards, has an elite shot, has elite skating for his size, has elite hands, is an average passer, and can play in all aspects of the game.

Rick Nash is a top 10 player in the league on any team other than Columbus.
its a game of devils advocate...Gomez came to NY having won two stanley cups. He was a plus player pretty much his whole career. His highest point total was 84 points. Nash's highest point total was 79 points. He has been a minus player a lot of his career. Look at Gomez's playoff stats--he scores. To say that they shouldn't be in the same post is a matter of opinion. I hope so much that Nash in NY will be beastly and will be worth the money and whatever they gave up.. But who knows...

hagsfan924 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2012, 02:06 PM
  #11
CM PUNK
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,311
vCash: 500
the only similarity that i see is that both trades involved a bunch of players...beyond that i see nothing in common

CM PUNK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2012, 02:07 PM
  #12
Blueshirt Believer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 6,565
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inferno View Post
rick nash and scott gomez's names shouldnt be in the same post ever.

heres the difference. Rick Nash is a great hockey player. Scott Blowmez was overrated and had artificially inflated numbers thanks to who he played with and the system he had. He has a limp noodle shot, and can't play the boards. Rick nash is a monster on the boards, has an elite shot, has elite skating for his size, has elite hands, is an average passer, and can play in all aspects of the game.

Rick Nash is a top 10 player in the league on any team other than Columbus.
Yeah, the comparison is kinda silly. Scott Gomez main tool was his ability to skate the puck through the neutral zone, which was VERY important during the "dead puck era".

He was a very good player to have on the counter punch, where he could create plays on the rush(because he was an excellent skater). He was tailor made for the Devils old trapping system. Not to mention, that he was a solid defensive player in his prime.

But Gomez was never dynamic(unlike Nash). He couldn't create anything on the cycle and didn't have great vision. He was never a "super star" player at any time of his career. He was a very good 2nd line center, who the Rangers wrongfully assumed could turn into a 1st liner.

Nash, on the other hand, has always been in the spotlight. Another important point, Nash is a consistent goal scorer. Gomez was a set up man(and an offensively one dimensional one at that).


Last edited by Blueshirt Believer: 09-11-2012 at 03:21 PM.
Blueshirt Believer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2012, 02:26 PM
  #13
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 20,257
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dubifan924 View Post
its a game of devils advocate...Gomez came to NY having won two stanley cups. He was a plus player pretty much his whole career. His highest point total was 84 points. Nash's highest point total was 79 points. He has been a minus player a lot of his career. Look at Gomez's playoff stats--he scores. To say that they shouldn't be in the same post is a matter of opinion. I hope so much that Nash in NY will be beastly and will be worth the money and whatever they gave up.. But who knows...
During Blowmez's 3 deep runs in the playoffs here are his numbers...

24gp 3/9/12
23 4/6/10
25 5/9/14

total is exactly .5ppg

in his career with the Devils playing with some pretty good players like Mogilny, Stevens, Neidermeyer, Elias, and Zach Parise.

He was never the top scorer on his team. He had exactly 1 season as being a 30 goal scorer (granted thats not his game). He was insulated from having to be "the man" on his team. His flaws were completely hidden by being within the confines of a system that allowed him to play without having to worry about the entire teams fate falling on his shoulders. In short, he was a good ancillary player. Precisely what he was...precisely what Chris Drury was. Precisely why they should have NEVER been paid more than 4.5 mil a year on their contracts. That's what they were worth. Anyone with half a brain who did any sort of statistical analysis on them would realize it.

Switch to Rick Nash. With the exception of his rookie year and the 06/07 season he led his team in goals and points per game played in every single season he's been in the nhl. Other than his rookie season no player has come within 7 goals (when adjusted for goals per game played) of him on his own team. In most years he's outscoring the next closest player by 10-15 goals. He holds every statistical record for his franchise by a MILE. He's got over 2 and half times as many goals scored as the next closest player. He's got 50+ more assists than the next closest player. He's got 230 more points than the next closest player.

If you look at Scott Gomez's time on the Devils...hes a good above average player that helped a damn good team by being another weapon in their arsenal. If you look at Rick Nash's tenure as a Blue Jacket he was the ONLY weapon on that team during his tenure there. There's pretty much nothing else to target if you are the opposing team. Shut down Nash, and you will run that team over.

Their D has never been that great, their goaltending has been mediocre.

If there is a hockey season this year, I can see Rick Nash exploding finally having players to play with, a damn good D and goalie behind him, and no pressure of having to be the only guy on his team to score goals. Frankly, when Gaborik is healthy, he's one of 3 guys we have capable of single handedly beating you with their offensive talent on any given night....and the players beyond those other 2 are so much better than anything he's ever played with. Ryan Callahan is pretty much a 30 goal scorer, he's barely talked about as a weapon of ours. Stepan, Callahan, Kreider, and Hagelin give us a lot of good players behind Nash.

I could see Nash score 50 this year if he's given a full 82 games...but 40 would be my target for him.

Inferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2012, 03:05 PM
  #14
broadwayblue
Registered User
 
broadwayblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 15,765
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inferno View Post
rick nash and scott gomez's names shouldnt be in the same post ever.
I agree completely.

Quote:
Rick Nash is a top 10 player in the league on any team other than Columbus.
That might be a bit of a stretch, but I hope you're right...time will tell.

broadwayblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2012, 03:05 PM
  #15
hagsfan924
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 73
vCash: 500
Okay fair enough, Nash is a 'dynamic' player and Gomez isn't.
But if Nash trends downwards from 59 points when he comes to New York for whatever reason (pressure, age, any reason) these trades could turn out to be remarkably similar. Rangers would be stuck with an albatross of a contract just like Montreal.

I don't expect this to happen, but I pointed out similarities that are fact (points per game in season before trade 58 pts vs 59 pts, large-salaried players (Nash and Gomez), and #1 defensive prospects involved in deal). It has the potential to turn out the same way as the Canadien deal. But it also has the potential to turn out brilliantly for the Rangers. You never know.

hagsfan924 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2012, 03:10 PM
  #16
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 20,257
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dubifan924 View Post
Okay fair enough, Nash is a 'dynamic' player and Gomez isn't.
But if Nash trends downwards from 59 points when he comes to New York for whatever reason (pressure, age, any reason) these trades could turn out to be remarkably similar. Rangers would be stuck with an albatross of a contract just like Montreal.

I don't expect this to happen, but I pointed out similarities that are fact (points per game in season before trade 58 pts vs 59 pts, large-salaried players (Nash and Gomez), and #1 defensive prospects involved in deal). It has the potential to turn out the same way as the Canadien deal. But it also has the potential to turn out brilliantly for the Rangers. You never know.
points down matter with Nash. Goals matter. hes not brought in here to score 40 or 50 assists. Hes bought in here to score goals.

and the "for whatever reason" needs to be fixed...what if the reason is a lockout? what if the reason is he gets slewfooted and is concussed? there are plenty of reasons a players point/goal totals can legitimately fall. so id say, barring a legitimate reason, theres no reason he shouldnt score at least 30 goals this season. 30 goals, to me, is the minimum. 40 would be excellent. 50 would be incredible.

Inferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2012, 03:16 PM
  #17
Kershaw
 
Kershaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country:
Posts: 25,519
vCash: 500
I can definitely see this being lopsided in 2-3 seasons for Columbus.

Kershaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2012, 03:22 PM
  #18
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 20,257
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tortorella View Post
I can definitely see this being lopsided in 2-3 seasons for Columbus.
you can?

really?

lopsided?

i could see it eventually becoming a fair deal..but lopsided in their favor?

barring injury...how exactly would you see that? You'd have to have 2 players in Anisimov and Dubinsky suddenly become something theyve never become in NY, consistent scorers...AA is a 15-18 goal scorer, and dubi is more like a 20 goal scorer. Dubi makes what...almost 5 mil a year? something like that? Next year AA is going to make 3-4 mil himself. its not like its McD coming in with an entry level deal for 3 full seasons for us. Tim Erixon is the wildcard, but you have to give to get...unless Tim Erixon becomes the next Nik Lidstrom, I dont see how this ever becomes lopsided in their favor.

Nash has scored less than 30 goals what...like twice in his career? something like that?

This isnt scott gomez. its the same thing when we got Brad Richards or Marian Gaborik. ppl were talking about how it would cripple us or what not. how? you pay great players what they are worth. Richards, after his slow start, was producing at a 93 point level after finally being put with Gabby. Gabby was what...3rd in the league in goals scored? has scored 40+ goals in 2 of his 3 years here...

Nash will be fine. barring a major injury or somehow the guys we gave up becoming players they never showed the ability to become here...i just dont see how your sentence is anything other than typical ranger paranoia.

Inferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2012, 03:22 PM
  #19
hagsfan924
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 73
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inferno View Post
points down matter with Nash. Goals matter. hes not brought in here to score 40 or 50 assists. Hes bought in here to score goals.

and the "for whatever reason" needs to be fixed...what if the reason is a lockout? what if the reason is he gets slewfooted and is concussed? there are plenty of reasons a players point/goal totals can legitimately fall. so id say, barring a legitimate reason, theres no reason he shouldnt score at least 30 goals this season. 30 goals, to me, is the minimum. 40 would be excellent. 50 would be incredible.
So then in the case of Gomez assists mattered...In his two years with the Rangers he had 54 and 42 which aren't bad assist numbers.
I agree that 30 goals would be minimum which is what he had last year with CBJ.

"For whatever reason" meant more along the lines of injuries/concussion, support around him, diminishing skills, role change (think Drury). Obviously a lockout would affect points/scoring totals so I didn't mean for that to be included as something that could lead to decline in production.

hagsfan924 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2012, 03:23 PM
  #20
broadwayblue
Registered User
 
broadwayblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 15,765
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tortorella View Post
I can definitely see this being lopsided in 2-3 seasons for Columbus.
If we win 1 cup in the next 2-3 seasons it won't matter if it is. This team is close and had the assets to take a calculated risk.

broadwayblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2012, 03:23 PM
  #21
Blueshirt Believer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 6,565
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tortorella View Post
I can definitely see this being lopsided in 2-3 seasons for Columbus.
If the Rangers win a cup in that time, its mostly irrelevant.

Blueshirt Believer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2012, 03:26 PM
  #22
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 20,257
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dubifan924 View Post
So then in the case of Gomez assists mattered...In his two years with the Rangers he had 54 and 42 which aren't bad assist numbers.
I agree that 30 goals would be minimum which is what he had last year with CBJ.

"For whatever reason" meant more along the lines of injuries/concussion, support around him, diminishing skills, role change (think Drury). Obviously a lockout would affect points/scoring totals so I didn't mean for that to be included as something that could lead to decline in production.
I dunno...blowmezs assist numbers were decent, but you never got the feeling that he was a #1 center during his tenure here...

Inferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2012, 03:59 PM
  #23
Giacomin
Registered User
 
Giacomin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,876
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tortorella View Post
I can definitely see this being lopsided in 2-3 seasons for Columbus.
I can definitely see Nash scoring 50 goals in a season for the Rangers in the next 2-3 seasons.

Giacomin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2012, 04:35 PM
  #24
Barnaby
Registered User
 
Barnaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Port Jefferson, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,587
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dubifan924 View Post
So then in the case of Gomez assists mattered...In his two years with the Rangers he had 54 and 42 which aren't bad assist numbers.
I agree that 30 goals would be minimum which is what he had last year with CBJ.

"For whatever reason" meant more along the lines of injuries/concussion, support around him, diminishing skills, role change (think Drury). Obviously a lockout would affect points/scoring totals so I didn't mean for that to be included as something that could lead to decline in production.
I'm not sure if you remember the Gomez years that well... he was brutal. It goes beyond the numbers. He was overpaid, infuriating, and seemed to be an anchor around the Rangers necks. Most of us - myself included - thought he was immovable. It was like Christmas morning when we heard that Sather somehow maneuvered out of that Albatross deal which produced a declining 2nd line center. The fact that the Rangers managed to get Higgins (who disappointed in the end), and a highly touted D prospect like McD was a miracle. Of course we didn't know McD would be THIS good, but most people viewed him as a very promising top 4 defenseman. He was no throw in.

Rick Nash. While Gomez played above himself with a perfect situation in Jersey, Nash has produced despite being a CBJ. Talent-wise (and he's done it before) this guy is capable of being in the vicinity of a top 10 goal scorer for the life of his contract. He is a player that was extremely desirable, but had the power of a NTC to influence who could attain him. The contract isn't great, but it isn't completely awful either. He will be paid through his 34th birthday when he should still be producing at a very high level. Factor in the deals being given to UFA's and suddenly you realize that this is the only way to obtain a player of his caliber without totally dismantling the team.

NHL consensus on the Gomez trade? - "What has Gainey been smoking?"
NHL consensus on Nash trade? - "Rangers acquired a PREMIER goal scorer without losing anyone they considered part of their young core."

I get the comparisons that you're trying to make, but when you compare Nash to Gomez - there is NO comparison. His arrival will be closer to bringing in Jagr, than Gomez. (I'm not saying he'll completely put the team on his back ala Jagr, but he will be viewed more along those lines...) ... and if you think I'm killing Gomez too much, then you haven't seen him skate in circles, and lightly shoot the puck into a goalies chest. Feel free to respond to the MTL board. Don't even ask about McD, just ask about their opinion on Gomez production.

Barnaby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2012, 04:52 PM
  #25
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 15,111
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tortorella View Post
I can definitely see this being lopsided in 2-3 seasons for Columbus.
Lemme guess. In the future, you might see:

Dubinsky: 50 points
Anisimov: 50 points
Erixon: 30 points

Nash: 70 points

130 points vs. 70 points = lopsided

Thats the extend of your analysis, Im assuming.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 02:50 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.