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

Nash Trade Redux

View Poll Results: Would you trade for Nash again?
Yes 97 44.50%
No 121 55.50%
Voters: 218. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-29-2013, 11:50 AM
  #201
Ail
k.
 
Ail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Mysidia
Country: United States
Posts: 16,631
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
I was in favor of getting Nash. Even now I can't say we are a better team if the trade never took place.

With that said, it's becoming painfully obvious that Nash is the guy who plays with "the guy" -- as opposed to being "the guy."
This is my stance as well.

The problem with the people saying, "I told you so!" about Nash is that they immediately use his tenure here as proof that this team would be better off without him, which is not only impossible to know, but also unlikely.

A lot of things ran that '11-'12 team off the rails the following year and it wasn't just Nash related. In fact Nash was one of two bright spots last year.

It's sad to think that if Nash does not justify his being traded for before he moves on from this club, that people will use it as an excuse for years to come as to why the Rangers returned to the "Dark Ages" and destroyed a winning environment. An exaggerated and perpetually unverifiable claim. Reading it for the next decade should be fantastic.

__________________
Ail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-29-2013, 12:02 PM
  #202
dethomas07
Registered User
 
dethomas07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: New York, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,215
vCash: 500
deff still happy about the trade.. just wish we someway kept Dubi and moved another piece..

you need to better your team and take risks.. we needed more of a scoring threat, he was available we got him.. we thought kreider wouldve made an impact last year..

his heart and grit is surely missed..

its just bs how the players arent responding well to the coaching change bc i feel we have the talent, nothings meshing well..

dethomas07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2013, 01:00 PM
  #203
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
And now what? Cue the "We need to bring someone for Nash to play with and make him go" discussions and rumors. Insert name X in for Nash, and you have practially every big name that Sather has acuired during his tenure. And then trades are made to bring in another expensive player who will let Nash play. THen that player fails. And before you know it, you are starting with the yells that the team canibalizes its youth. And then more band aid trades are made.

This story tends to repeat itself. Sather just could not help himself after 11-12. He had to meddle.
In fairness though, I never thought the 11-12 team was going to take it to the next level without some help.

This team has had a hard time scoring for several years now. We've changed coaches, we've added some players, etc. The reality is that those teams were hard-working, low scoring teams.

I've always felt that the problem is that this team tried to rebuild on the fly, as opposed to taking a year or two to use its improved scouting department to get some high draft picks and high impact, young scorers to build around.

When you look at the teams that are more or less challenging for the cup, many of them are built around significant, early first round talent, or the parts they acquired for those significant, early first round talent.

Guys like Stepan, Callahan, Hagelin, etc. are the guys who support the drafting of players like Toews, or Kane, etc. Just imagine if this team had actually drafted a top end talent in 2003, 2005, 2006 or 2007 to go along with the gems they found in later rounds -- they wouldn't need to go out and trade for Nash, or sign Richards.

I firmly believe that a lot of what we're seeing now is the difference between sucking it up for two years, about eight years ago, versus what we did.

At the end of the day, we just don't have the young, top end offensive talent we need. I love hard working guys as much as the next person, but I think some people may be kidding themselves if they think that bigger and better things were right around the corner. It may have been a more enjoyable team to watch, because it worked hard, but the difference in the end result - a legit shot at a championship - is not all that different. It was just an easier medicine to take when we actually liked the taste.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2013, 01:19 PM
  #204
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,606
vCash: 500
Edge- I definitely agree.

And in typical NY fashion people are extremely fast forgetting what Nash did for us last season. I've followed this team for a little more than 20 years, during those years 3-4 guys has put a team on their back and that is what Nash did last season when he put a team on his back and carried it alone (Hank did not have that great of a year last season during the regular season).

We should also note that Nash is not a good PP player, never will be. A PP is all about passing tempo and being able to handle being pressured.

Getting Nash was however a cap dump.

When you summerize what we got, I would never reverse the trade. We gave up two decent but almost regularly struggling 2-3 line forwards, an offensive D without PP ability and a first for a player that takes up a ton of space on the ice and can score goals by himself and break things open.

I only fear that the insane pressure Nash is facing in NY could break him.

Ola is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2013, 01:28 PM
  #205
Off Sides
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 964
vCash: 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post

I firmly believe that a lot of what we're seeing now is the difference between sucking it up for two years, about eight years ago, versus what we did.
In 8 years the same statement will be just as true. If they don't suck it up and sell now when they have a great opportunity to, finish in their natural draft position for a couple years, it's just going to be the same thing.

Off Sides is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2013, 01:36 PM
  #206
SERE 24
LGR
 
SERE 24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 9,779
vCash: 500
What did Nash do for us last year? Did he do something different than Gaborik in years past, which people are happy to discount. Put up gaudy regular season numbers and play soft, invisible hockey when he was needed?

I actually agree with Edge's post with one caveat. It's not just an easier medicine to swallow when the team's efforts amount to mediocrity and a mid-round playoff exit but the compete level and hardwork is present. When we were the most blue collar, stingy team in the league and willed/lucked our way to game 6 of the ECF we were a team worth investing in. Whether we had the talent to genuinely compete (I think we'd have been bulldozed by the Kings) or not we had an identity and a team we knew would show up, play a certain way and on any given night, if Hank was in the zone and just one guy stepped up and gave us that extra goal of support we could at least hang with any team and make them bite their nails going into the third. That's an exciting role to play. The wild card. The spoiler. The team that works so hard they just might upset anybody they face. As a fan the only thing more you can ask for, beyond being entertained and believing you have a chance in every match is actually winning it all.

I agree that we're long overdue a proper rebuild and that if we want to genuinely be up there with the big dog, annual contenders than that's the only way we're going to obtain the top end talent to do so. But in an organization that has made it clear they'd rather be a poor playoff team every year than build a genuine contender, I would much rather have built on that blue collar identity and cultivated that mentality so that I could at least have pride in the team on the ice than bring back the heartless, mercenary mentality that guys like Nash come with. Yes, it's easier medicine to swallow, but even if it doesn't genuinely cure the mediocrity that has plagued this franchise, it does halve some other pleasant axis effects that this roster can't provide.

SERE 24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2013, 01:49 PM
  #207
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola View Post
Edge- I definitely agree.

And in typical NY fashion people are extremely fast forgetting what Nash did for us last season. I've followed this team for a little more than 20 years, during those years 3-4 guys has put a team on their back and that is what Nash did last season when he put a team on his back and carried it alone (Hank did not have that great of a year last season during the regular season).

We should also note that Nash is not a good PP player, never will be. A PP is all about passing tempo and being able to handle being pressured.

Getting Nash was however a cap dump.

When you summerize what we got, I would never reverse the trade. We gave up two decent but almost regularly struggling 2-3 line forwards, an offensive D without PP ability and a first for a player that takes up a ton of space on the ice and can score goals by himself and break things open.

I only fear that the insane pressure Nash is facing in NY could break him.

I'm not forgetting last season, Ola, but I do think you are romanticizing it a little bit. While I don't think anybody put the team on their back last season, if I had to pick a name, it would be Stepan, not Nash. Nash was cold as ice to start the season last year. I remember at one point, whichever line Stepan was moved to immediately became the Rangers best (ie- only) scoring line. Nash away from Stepan struggled. Even then, before the Gaborik trade and the best stretch of Brassard's career that followed it, the Rangers were in serious danger of missing the playoffs altogether.

Also, people point to Nash's production last year and act like it's something new. Nash has never had a problem putting up points. His problems have been putting up points against good teams and playing/practicing hard all the time (instead of just when he wants to). People on here were surprised when the playoffs rolled around and he scored zero goals in the (7 game) first round series. Was that how he "carried the team on his back"? It should have been no shock at all. Yeah, Nash had 21 regular season goals. You know how many of those were against playoff teams? Six. And only two of those were against a team that was an upper seed.

If you want a player to put up a shiny stat line, then Nash is your man. If you want to win? He's anathema to that. For proof, I point you to the last decade plus of NHL hockey.

smoneil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2013, 01:50 PM
  #208
Off Sides
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 964
vCash: 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by SERE 24 View Post
the heartless, mercenary mentality
I think that comes with the management style of Sather more so than the players themselves.

Coddle the free agents to the maximum, gush over the marketability of "star" players and trade for them, fight with every home grown player in contract disputes until they reach free agent status. Byproduct = heartless, mercenary mentality

Off Sides is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2013, 02:38 PM
  #209
Blueshirt Special
Registered User
 
Blueshirt Special's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 3,095
vCash: 500
First couple of times I saw Nash play for the Rangers at the Garden I thought "Wow! this guys is the real deal! And he's not old and past his prime! Did we get it right?"



I hope he is able to shake off whatever funk he is in and score 25-30 goals for us, but realistically he is never going to put the team on his back ala Jagr. He can score goals but it seems like conditions have to be perfect for him. He doesn't make other players better, he needs better players.

Blueshirt Special is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2013, 02:40 PM
  #210
RangersHank*
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 2,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueshirt Special View Post
First couple of times I saw Nash play for the Rangers at the Garden I thought "Wow! this guys is the real deal! And he's not old and past his prime! Did we get it right?"



I hope he is able to shake off whatever funk he is in and score 25-30 goals for us, but realistically he is never going to put the team on his back ala Jagr. He can score goals but it seems like conditions have to be perfect for him. He doesn't make other players better, he needs better players.
What did you say about Gaborik when you first saw him at MSG?

RangersHank* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2013, 02:40 PM
  #211
Blueshirt Special
Registered User
 
Blueshirt Special's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 3,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangersHank View Post
What did you say about Gaborik when you first saw him at MSG?
same thing

Blueshirt Special is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2014, 02:53 AM
  #212
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SERE 24 View Post
What did Nash do for us last year? Did he do something different than Gaborik in years past, which people are happy to discount. Put up gaudy regular season numbers and play soft, invisible hockey when he was needed?

I actually agree with Edge's post with one caveat. It's not just an easier medicine to swallow when the team's efforts amount to mediocrity and a mid-round playoff exit but the compete level and hardwork is present. When we were the most blue collar, stingy team in the league and willed/lucked our way to game 6 of the ECF we were a team worth investing in. Whether we had the talent to genuinely compete (I think we'd have been bulldozed by the Kings) or not we had an identity and a team we knew would show up, play a certain way and on any given night, if Hank was in the zone and just one guy stepped up and gave us that extra goal of support we could at least hang with any team and make them bite their nails going into the third. That's an exciting role to play. The wild card. The spoiler. The team that works so hard they just might upset anybody they face. As a fan the only thing more you can ask for, beyond being entertained and believing you have a chance in every match is actually winning it all.

I agree that we're long overdue a proper rebuild and that if we want to genuinely be up there with the big dog, annual contenders than that's the only way we're going to obtain the top end talent to do so. But in an organization that has made it clear they'd rather be a poor playoff team every year than build a genuine contender, I would much rather have built on that blue collar identity and cultivated that mentality so that I could at least have pride in the team on the ice than bring back the heartless, mercenary mentality that guys like Nash come with. Yes, it's easier medicine to swallow, but even if it doesn't genuinely cure the mediocrity that has plagued this franchise, it does halve some other pleasant axis effects that this roster can't provide.
I know I've said this in the past, and it's not a popular stance, but I can't help but feel that team in ECF was almost unreal - they never looked dominant, and at times looked like they were barely a playoff team. The hard part was figuring out how to invest in that team, without giving up significant portions of its nucleus.

The other reality is that for as good as our scouting has been, we've missed out on some intriguing young offensive talent the past 5 or 6 years - Saad, Eberle, Tarasenko, etc. Now don't get me wrong, other teams missed those guys too -- but for an offensively starved team, finding those guys is a must.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2014, 09:09 PM
  #213
Kel Varnsen
Below: Nash's Heart
 
Kel Varnsen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,102
vCash: 500
Does this bum even make team Canada this year? Maybe he just needs a coach like Torts to get the best out of him. What a loser.


Last edited by Kel Varnsen: 01-03-2014 at 09:14 PM.
Kel Varnsen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2014, 09:19 PM
  #214
Mint
Only One King
 
Mint's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Country: Sweden
Posts: 3,057
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kel Varnsen View Post
Does this bum even make team Canada this year? Maybe he just needs a coach like Torts to get the best out of him. What a loser.
Best years under Hitchcock who is a tough SOB and Torts.

Mint is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2014, 09:20 PM
  #215
Kel Varnsen
Below: Nash's Heart
 
Kel Varnsen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,102
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mint View Post
Best years under Hitchcock who is a tough SOB and Torts.
Maybe Sather should have considered there might be a difference between the coach the players want and the coach they need.

Kel Varnsen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2014, 09:30 PM
  #216
ChrisKreider20
Oh Hai Guise
 
ChrisKreider20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,313
vCash: 500
I don't like Nash's game to be honest.
He simply does not make the players around him better. He holds onto the puck too long and gives away the pick too frequently. He just isn't a complete player. He is a good scorer and talent but he just isn't a player to build a team around. He is a born loser.

I'd trade him for picks & prospects. Some team would still pay up for him.

Trade him for Dustin Brown, Dean Lombardi would do it lol

ChrisKreider20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2014, 09:37 PM
  #217
Blueshirt Special
Registered User
 
Blueshirt Special's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 3,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kel Varnsen View Post
Maybe Sather should have considered there might be a difference between the coach the players want and the coach they need.
That's a bingo!

Blueshirt Special is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2014, 10:05 PM
  #218
rdhstlr23
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
In fairness though, I never thought the 11-12 team was going to take it to the next level without some help.

This team has had a hard time scoring for several years now. We've changed coaches, we've added some players, etc. The reality is that those teams were hard-working, low scoring teams.

I've always felt that the problem is that this team tried to rebuild on the fly, as opposed to taking a year or two to use its improved scouting department to get some high draft picks and high impact, young scorers to build around.

When you look at the teams that are more or less challenging for the cup, many of them are built around significant, early first round talent, or the parts they acquired for those significant, early first round talent.

Guys like Stepan, Callahan, Hagelin, etc. are the guys who support the drafting of players like Toews, or Kane, etc. Just imagine if this team had actually drafted a top end talent in 2003, 2005, 2006 or 2007 to go along with the gems they found in later rounds -- they wouldn't need to go out and trade for Nash, or sign Richards.

I firmly believe that a lot of what we're seeing now is the difference between sucking it up for two years, about eight years ago, versus what we did.

At the end of the day, we just don't have the young, top end offensive talent we need. I love hard working guys as much as the next person, but I think some people may be kidding themselves if they think that bigger and better things were right around the corner. It may have been a more enjoyable team to watch, because it worked hard, but the difference in the end result - a legit shot at a championship - is not all that different. It was just an easier medicine to take when we actually liked the taste.
This. All of this. So much this.

rdhstlr23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2014, 10:53 PM
  #219
HatTrick Swayze
Tomato Potato
 
HatTrick Swayze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,395
vCash: 500
Nash looks like every big NYR acquisition over the years. One good season. Right about on par with his recent trend. Not his prime. But good enough. Then his play drops off the face of the earth. Every. Time.

He was never a high motor player who competed every shift. He was opportunistic and had the ability to create out of nothing on his own. He looks like a flat out shell of himself. He looks afraid to engage. He looks like a player who has had 2 concussions in a calendar year. It's frustrating and sad.

__________________
"Here we can see the agression of american people. They love fighting and guns. when they wont win they try to kill us all." -HalfOfFame
HatTrick Swayze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2014, 10:56 PM
  #220
HatTrick Swayze
Tomato Potato
 
HatTrick Swayze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
In fairness though, I never thought the 11-12 team was going to take it to the next level without some help.

This team has had a hard time scoring for several years now. We've changed coaches, we've added some players, etc. The reality is that those teams were hard-working, low scoring teams.

I've always felt that the problem is that this team tried to rebuild on the fly, as opposed to taking a year or two to use its improved scouting department to get some high draft picks and high impact, young scorers to build around.

When you look at the teams that are more or less challenging for the cup, many of them are built around significant, early first round talent, or the parts they acquired for those significant, early first round talent.

Guys like Stepan, Callahan, Hagelin, etc. are the guys who support the drafting of players like Toews, or Kane, etc. Just imagine if this team had actually drafted a top end talent in 2003, 2005, 2006 or 2007 to go along with the gems they found in later rounds -- they wouldn't need to go out and trade for Nash, or sign Richards.

I firmly believe that a lot of what we're seeing now is the difference between sucking it up for two years, about eight years ago, versus what we did.

At the end of the day, we just don't have the young, top end offensive talent we need. I love hard working guys as much as the next person, but I think some people may be kidding themselves if they think that bigger and better things were right around the corner. It may have been a more enjoyable team to watch, because it worked hard, but the difference in the end result - a legit shot at a championship - is not all that different. It was just an easier medicine to take when we actually liked the taste.
Spot on. Great post. Harsh reality. Going for it in the Jagr era, while alluring at the time, was a huge mistake. I still would at least rather watch a hard working team than this...but in terms of being a contender it's the truth.

HatTrick Swayze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2014, 11:21 PM
  #221
RangersHank*
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 2,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
In fairness though, I never thought the 11-12 team was going to take it to the next level without some help.

This team has had a hard time scoring for several years now. We've changed coaches, we've added some players, etc. The reality is that those teams were hard-working, low scoring teams.

I've always felt that the problem is that this team tried to rebuild on the fly, as opposed to taking a year or two to use its improved scouting department to get some high draft picks and high impact, young scorers to build around.

When you look at the teams that are more or less challenging for the cup, many of them are built around significant, early first round talent, or the parts they acquired for those significant, early first round talent.

Guys like Stepan, Callahan, Hagelin, etc. are the guys who support the drafting of players like Toews, or Kane, etc. Just imagine if this team had actually drafted a top end talent in 2003, 2005, 2006 or 2007 to go along with the gems they found in later rounds -- they wouldn't need to go out and trade for Nash, or sign Richards.

I firmly believe that a lot of what we're seeing now is the difference between sucking it up for two years, about eight years ago, versus what we did.

At the end of the day, we just don't have the young, top end offensive talent we need. I love hard working guys as much as the next person, but I think some people may be kidding themselves if they think that bigger and better things were right around the corner. It may have been a more enjoyable team to watch, because it worked hard, but the difference in the end result - a legit shot at a championship - is not all that different. It was just an easier medicine to take when we actually liked the taste.

Or what if we drafted differently and got Parise/Getzlaf and Eberle and Tarasenko/Schwartz? You dont need top 2-3 picks, you need to make sure you get a good player out of good drafts and we havent. Add Parise, Tarasenko and Eberle to our top 6 right now and push some guys down a line and see what you get.

Parise-Richards-Zuccarello
Kreider-Stepan-Eberle
Hagelin-Miller-Callahan

See? Not a bad top 9

RangersHank* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2014, 11:21 PM
  #222
RangersHank*
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 2,009
vCash: 500
Forgot Tarasenko, team is so stacked that i forgot to include him

RangersHank* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2014, 11:22 PM
  #223
Kel Varnsen
Below: Nash's Heart
 
Kel Varnsen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,102
vCash: 500
We're in the Dark Ages Nash.0

Kel Varnsen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2014, 04:16 PM
  #224
Jax1166
Registered User
 
Jax1166's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: I-95
Country: United States
Posts: 1,391
vCash: 500
Ummmm is it possible

That we could have gotten Nash without giving up Dubi and possibly AA?

Would a package of Hagelin, Miller, Erixon, and a first done it?
Or toss in Del Zotto?

Jax1166 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2014, 04:17 PM
  #225
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,863
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jax1166 View Post
That we could have gotten Nash without giving up Dubi and possibly AA?

Would a package of Hagelin, Miller, Erixon, and a first done it?
Or toss in Del Zotto?
Nope.

__________________
SingnBluesOnBroadway 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 02:31 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.