he didn't give up kreider for him. nash and joe thorton love eachother. JT is a free agent in the summer. what if they buy out richards and sign big joe to a 2 year contract??? maybe kick start nash a little. the trade needed to be made. losing prust dubi anisimov and to so me extent john mitchell all at the same time really changed the culture of this team. prust mostly, steven mcdonald award winner, great locker room guy, real close with boyle and del zotto. i'm not just talking about the impact on ice either, he was a model citizen and big in the community. to let a guy like that walk because of an extra million dollars a year was flat out irresponsible by sather and his puppets. dorseet boyle prust would have been a great fourth line and a nightmare to play against. i'm not ready to blow everything up. in one year the turnover of gabby dubi ani mitchell prust and the freaking coach after a pretty good run in the playoffs ALL OUT the you introduce nash brassard dorsett moore kreider (full time),. that's a lot of culture change to deal with on top of learning a whole new system. there is going to be down time. especially with injuries and sub par goal tending. it just seemed that everything went wrong at the same time and it was a recipe for disaster. the positive thing is you have the best goalie in the world locked up for the rest of his career. mc D kreider nash and youth. the cap is going up. the rangers have to really decide what this team needs now and in the future while you have cash and important decisions. does brass fit the team moving forward? does zucc? girardi? stralman?cally??(i think they need him) they have a goof foundation and the cupboard in hartford is not bare but this is the offseason that will define them for the next 4-5 years. the only window that this current franchise will have to make a cup run with the core of hank cally nash etc. they need to draft and spend very wisely and not completely panic and abandon all hope yet. sorry for the rant.
One of the worst feelings in the world is having to be upset about a deal when just about everyone else is happy... and then watching everything you were worried about come true.
When was the last time the Rangers did a deal like this and it worked for us?
It's terrible because it looks soooo tempting and most teams that do this deal it probably works out at least ok for them.
Nash came to a Rangers team that had a vacuum in character and grit that he is not capable of filling. He's not a player that has a history of putting a team on his shoulders and that's what we needed from this deal. He's a better fit on a team that's much deeper and better balanced.
I really, really hope I'm wrong, but this smells all too familiar right up until they say the dreaded words on NBC.
"Nash as a Ranger is a shadow of the player he used to be."
No, I didn't want to do the trade then and after seeing what he's done so far, I definitely wouldn't do it again. I'll admit, for a short period of time last year he almost won me over but then the playoffs came and now this. I know he's highly skilled, but he hasn't shown me that he actually gives a crap, just floating out there. Since we're stuck with him I hope he turns it around.
4:18PM: Nash says that he is a streaky player and is just looking for consistency in his offensive game and trying to help the team in other areas when he can’t get that going. (Daily News)
He says that anytime you are off the ice for an extended period of time, like he was, it takes time to get your game back but he feels that his is coming and that he has had good stretches. He says that most of all it is a consistency issue and that he knows there are games where he needs to be better. (Daily News)
12/20/13: 11:51AM: Alain Vigneault thinks that Nash is “real close” to getting his production going. (Katie Strang)
He will skate tonight with Derek Stepan and Mats Zuccarello.
how about **** you Rick? You can't AFFORD to be a streaky player when you eat up 12% of the cap on your own...
****ing loser ass with a completely individualistic mindset. I'm so insulted
I don't understand how it's Nash's fault that he "can't carry this team alone."
There are what, maybe three players in this league capable of that?
Rick Nash is the best forward on this team since Jagr, bar none. He was better than Gaborik then, better than the Stars version of Richards, and better than Stepan/Callahan/etc.
It's his fault now that the rest of the team sucks too?
And it's not his fault that Sather is unable to replace the depth players that were traded for him, especially considering the minimal impact the two of them (not counting Erixon) had provided the previous year.
This is a tough call. Because of the hard cap, you're unfortunately evaluated not just on play but on cap-hit. We had depth on RW (Gaborik, Callahan) and we're really just looking to add to a position of strength.
On the other hand, with the exception of Anisimov and perhaps Erixon (as a trade chip) we're not really missing a whole lot. We definitely received an upgrade in terms of total talent. Call it a dollar for seventy five cents.
I don't think I'd do it again knowing what we do about the cap-recapture rule (and that's a very onerous commitment to a player) but all things considered it isn't a horrible trade.
nobody wanted to do this trade til they dropped the price then it was a no-brainer. this was a good trade that you make 99 out of 100 times. if people are pretending that we didn't come out on top in the nash trade, they're kidding themselves. the return on gaborik was garbage, but there was no reason to think that with gaborik and nash and richards on our team after being a top 4 team in the league before, 1 win off of the presidents trophy, that we wouldn't win with that talent stacked. we were a stacked team that just came within a game of the SCF.
It was a good trade at the time no doubt, it just didn't end up working out.
Originally Posted by RangersHank
Nash wasnt a need on this team at the time the trade was made. We needed to add to that team, not tear it apart
we needed goal scoring... that's what nash was brought in to do.
At the time, and even now, a lot of fans think that the trade was a no-brainer, but I think it was much riskier than many make it out to be.
Gorton realized there could be potential negative ramifications to the Nash trade:
Gorton said that the Rangers have had a number of discussions about depth dating back to the summer when they acquired Rick Nash and the organization knew that they might have a problem, “we know where we’re at. We knew this could be a potential issue.”
I had never seen Nash play before we traded for him -- so I didn't know how to react to the trade at the time. Nevertheless, his stats impressed me, and I figured that, despite his contract's cap hit, having a twenty-something power-forward with multiple 40-goal seasons under his belt can't hurt. Plus, I wondered, was Dubinsky's poor performance the beginning of a long-term decline? The answer: apparently not. Nash, due to injury or otherwise, hasn't lived up to expectations. Maybe his underperformance is purely injury-related; maybe he's not used to the pressure of playing in a substantial hockey market (though, considering he's played for Team Canada, I doubt that's the case). Only Nash knows. But that, of course, is in hindsight.
All we know, though, is that he sustained a significant injury and (consequently or not) he hasn't lived up to his potential or to expectations. I would be comfortable with dealing Nash in exchange for (at least one) promising prospect and (at least one) first-round draft pick. I would also have no problem renegotiating the Richards contract. I don't know Brad personally, and I don't know how the locker room responds to him, but his successes and experience are valuable; his calm demeanor could make him a valuable mentor. Yes, he did have an off season last year, but even the greatest players have off years. Even the great Mike Modano, who totaled 561 goals in his career, scored just 14 (76 GP) in 2003/2004 (source). In short: we are lucky to have Nash. If he turns things around, we have a bona fide scorer, and, if he doesn't, dealing him could give us the draft picks / prospects we need to start a successful rebuild. Richards, on the other hand, has little trade value but could still prove a valuable mentor (assuming, again, we can renegotiate his contract) to our youngsters.
Last edited by Clausewitz: 12-21-2013 at 02:01 AM.
I see a lot of words like Elite Goal Scorer or Game changer being thrown around in this thread. I had to go back and make sure we were discussing the same Rick Nash who plays for the NYR
He has been an utter flop here. I see no elite game changing skills at all. If anything he is a floater. A 6 foot + 200 pound + floater. There is no edge to his game.
The answer is NO I do not make that trade. He was a complete no show in the playoffs, he disappears for long stretches and that stupid pivot move to go to the center of the ice that he ALWAYS tries hardly ever works. How hard is to make that move and dish the puck ? Yet he never seems to even be thinking about the players moving around him. Add to that he now has a concussion history and is playing scared.
From someone who watched Nash a lot in Columbus this sums up what I and many others came to believe.
To answer the poll question- from the Rangers perspective, No, from the Jackets Yes.
Nash was a beast at times last year. Pretty much our only hope is that he can make a full recovery from the concussions and return to that form. But it's really worrying that he seems to be playing timid/scared now.