HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Notices

Rangers are interested in Nash (McKenzie: Rangers/Kings Strongest Suitors) PART II

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-19-2012, 01:50 AM
  #676
bleedblue94
Registered User
 
bleedblue94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,220
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by slipknottin View Post
So your argument is that you want them to score more goals.



Anyway. The thread wasent about whether it would be nice if they scored more, it was about bringing in Nash, while giving up multiple prospects/picks/players, and paying him 7.5 mil a season.

How about if you want more goals you just start hoping Dubi starts putting some pucks in the net.


In any case, 11th in the league in goals, thats pretty damn good considering they are 2nd in goals against.

If only the powerplay improved to mid-league level.
huh? where did i say i want them to score more. if thats what you took away from it you clearly missed me commenting on your wording that we dont need or you dont want big name players


youre thinking is so linear. this team has been successful with extreme intensity in the regular season. teams are generally not matching up hard on us or playing with intense strategy. when the playoffs come matchups are more strategic, players from other teams are more intense, and that is when our need for another scoring threat will truly be highlighted AGAIN. it has been a massive issue each and every year for us in the playoffs. the regular season means very little except home ice. we simply are not good enough as presently constructed. add another scorer and it slots everyone down a notch to make a deeper overall team

and no im not dillusional enough to rely on dubi to fill the need. hes never been that kind of player and i think people need to accept what he is and not try to force that hes something else. hes a very streaky player who gobbles up a bunch of points at a time and then statistically disappears for long stretches, this has been the case his whole career and not just this year. while he does provide other parts to the team game besides scoring, we have an endless number of players who provide those same things. i love dubi but he is not the answer, even if he suddenly gets hot for a couple weeks. a small streak doesnt change the dynamics for a good team creating a strategy to beat us in the playoffs and to matchup against us

bleedblue94 is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 01:53 AM
  #677
slipknottin
Registered User
 
slipknottin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: CT
Posts: 2,422
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ailurophile View Post
Yes they have, but what is so different about this team from last season? What is making them suddenly win games, and elevate their play to a team riding a comfortable first in the conference lead?

Some of the young guys are having bounce-back years, Gaborik is back, but the addition of Richards has certainly changed the landscape, and can be attributed to their success as much as any other factor. You make it sound like the guy has had zero bearing on their capacity to win games.
Whats different about this team? Familiarity in the system. Thats it.

Richards hasent changed the culture, and has often been the worst player on the team for games.

Its not like this was a bad team last year. Gaborik is actually just slightly ahead of where he finished last year. He certainly is not performing at the level he was in 09.

slipknottin is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 01:55 AM
  #678
slipknottin
Registered User
 
slipknottin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: CT
Posts: 2,422
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedblue94 View Post
and no im not dillusional enough to rely on dubi to fill the need. hes never been that kind of player and i think people need to accept what he is and not try to force that hes something else
Have you heard of regression to the mean?

If yes, can you apply it to dubinsky?

That should solve that entire argument for you.


But if you really believe the rangers won all season because they played harder than everyone else, then why oh why would you want a player added from any other team? Lets take players from all the other lazy teams and make the rangers less hard working.

slipknottin is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 02:05 AM
  #679
bleedblue94
Registered User
 
bleedblue94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,220
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by slipknottin View Post
Have you heard of regression to the mean?

If yes, can you apply it to dubinsky?

That should solve that entire argument for you.


But if you really believe the rangers won all season because they played harder than everyone else, then why oh why would you want a player added from any other team? Lets take players from all the other lazy teams and make the rangers less hard working.
i understand regression but hes never actually been the type of player which im saying the team is lacking.

as a team i think youre lost if you havent seen this team consistantly outwork other teams.... lost

bleedblue94 is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 02:09 AM
  #680
Zil
Registered User
 
Zil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 3,253
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inferno View Post
link?

ive seen it reported everyone expect the player portion to decrease, havent seen the cap expected to drop immediately. agian, you cant do that. youd have 1/3rd of the teams immediately over the cap, forced to Chicago their teams to get under. it would be a nightmare.
I don't have a link, but it seems like it has been brought up every time I've seen something about the new CBA. Either way though, if Nash doesn't put us over the top, we have no room to make adjustments. There's serious potential for a Nash trade to blow up in our faces and that is what you and HP don't seem to acknowledge.

Zil is online now  
Old
02-19-2012, 03:09 AM
  #681
SnowblindNYR
Registered User
 
SnowblindNYR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 17,204
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stan the caddy View Post
I hate to bash Richards because I wanted him just as much as anyone else, even at last year's deadline. The bottom line - Richards sucks this year. You can point to all the game winning goals but, Richards has the worst +/- of any regular. The team plays ****tier while he's on the ice.
Give me a break Cally is only +2 on a team that, I believe is 3rd in the league in goal differential (not counting shootout). Maybe even second.

SnowblindNYR is online now  
Old
02-19-2012, 03:15 AM
  #682
mrhockey193195
Registered User
 
mrhockey193195's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 3,298
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinehead View Post
Hmmmm....not sure if sabotage

But seriously, I agree 100%.

Except the part about Suter. This team needs another defenseman like they need a hole in their head.
I think he said Suter, just to distract us away from Parise.

In all seriousness, I do not want Nash under any circumstances with that cap hit. It would take way too much to get him, and we have a good thing going. I'd rather play out this season, and then add a piece at no roster-cost in the offseason.

mrhockey193195 is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 03:31 AM
  #683
SnowblindNYR
Registered User
 
SnowblindNYR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 17,204
vCash: 500
Offensively this team is averaging 2.77 goals per game, that's 0.04 more than last year's 2.73. Yes last year's team which had Lundqvist allow 2.25 goals per game and lose in 5 games. Last year's team got completely shut down offensively. This year even with Richards and with Gaborik improving exponentially, we're marginally higher scoring. Granted, last year was a higher scoring year, still we're winning because of good defense and lights out goaltending. However, we got good goaltending last year and got smoked against Washington. Maybe we win one round against a defensively poor team like the Leafs or Sens, but once you get past that we don't have enough scoring.

BTW, I keep reading about this window, as someone said what happens when Crosby is back next year for the Pens, Pronger with the Flyers, and Horton with the Bruins? Who's to say we don't go back to fighting for 5th or 6th seed? We're more or less in the driver's seat for 1st place in the east and are in good position for the president's trophy this year, let's waste because we MIGHT be in this position next year?

SnowblindNYR is online now  
Old
02-19-2012, 03:39 AM
  #684
SnowblindNYR
Registered User
 
SnowblindNYR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 17,204
vCash: 500
One more thing, I forgot. Did anyone see hockey night live and the interview with the Columbus reporter? He said he thinks the Rangers have the best shot to land Nash, since CBJ likes Dubinsky and the Rangers prospects.

SnowblindNYR is online now  
Old
02-19-2012, 04:18 AM
  #685
Khelvan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: San Francisco, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,373
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Khelvan Send a message via AIM to Khelvan Send a message via MSN to Khelvan
Quote:
Originally Posted by slipknottin View Post
Have you heard of regression to the mean?

If yes, can you apply it to dubinsky?

That should solve that entire argument for you.
I understand what you're trying to say here, but you want him to apply regression to the mean across four data points? Is that really enough of a sample size for you to start claiming statistical outliers?

Khelvan is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 04:20 AM
  #686
hpNYR
HF Forecaster
 
hpNYR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Burbank, CA
Country: Armenia
Posts: 7,092
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrhockey193195 View Post
I think he said Suter, just to distract us away from Parise.

In all seriousness, I do not want Nash under any circumstances with that cap hit. It would take way too much to get him, and we have a good thing going. I'd rather play out this season, and then add a piece at no roster-cost in the offseason.
You realize with all the RFAs in 2014 you're going to have to dump some salary somewhere. So it's not like roster moves won't be made in the near future either way.

Everyone is all up in arms about not wanting to get Nash (while sending some salary the other way) because we'll have a tough time signing our own guys. Well guess what, those same people want Parise and if youre not going to dump some salary and youre going to just sign Parise then that makes it much harder to sign our guys because you haven't cleared any cap space like you would via a Dubinksy trade to Columbus


Last edited by hpNYR: 02-19-2012 at 04:28 AM.
hpNYR is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 04:29 AM
  #687
mrhockey193195
Registered User
 
mrhockey193195's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 3,298
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hpNYR View Post
You realize with all the RFAs in 2014 you're going to have to dump some salary somewhere. So it's not like roster moves won't be made in the near future either way.

Everyone is all up in arms about not wanting to get Nash (while sending some salary the other way) because we'll have a tough time signing our own guys. Well guess what, those same people want Parise and if youre not going to dump some salary and youre going to just sign Parise then that makes it much harder to sign our guys because you haven't dumped any salary ala Dubinsky.
Granted, I don't pay too much attention to the cap/contracts, but Gaborik is coming off the books that year too? I think if the Rangers sign Parise, it's assumed that Gaborik won't be back after this contract. Signing the RFAs in '14 will the be priority. Also, it's all the more reason not to make a trade like this, because chances are guys like Kreider and/or Erixon will have to be involved in the deal on top of Dubinsky, and those guys will be on ELCs/cap friendly contracts, which will help when when we have to give big raises to some of our current young guys.

mrhockey193195 is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 04:30 AM
  #688
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 13,857
vCash: 500
Get the youtube videos and visions of Nash posterizing Henrik out of your head.

He's overrated. You're hedging your bets on Nash becoming a 35-plus goal scorer simply by pairing him with Richards or on the top line.

Easier said than done. Rangers fans should know this. Watch Nash go goal-less in his first 8 or 9 games, loaf on a backcheck, and all of a sudden, your 7.8 million dollar guy is playing with Brian Boyle and Ruslan Fedotenko.

Plus, nobody seems to mention that his natural position is right wing, even though he's a LH shot.

So you're going to break the bank for a massively overpaid guy who has never won anything in 10 years, gut your assets in half, and either play him out of position or displace Gaborik or Callahan from the top-6?

Nope. No thanks. Nash is a good player. A very good player, but he's not an elite player you acquire to become a perennial Cup contender or Cup winner. I dont buy into the whole "his teams have stunk" hogwash one bit. For a 1st overall pick who played almost his entire career in the post-Dead Puck era, one season of 70-plus points doesnt cut it.

GWOW is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 04:35 AM
  #689
hpNYR
HF Forecaster
 
hpNYR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Burbank, CA
Country: Armenia
Posts: 7,092
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrhockey193195 View Post
Granted, I don't pay too much attention to the cap/contracts, but Gaborik is coming off the books that year too? I think if the Rangers sign Parise, it's assumed that Gaborik won't be back after this contract. Signing the RFAs in '14 will the be priority. Also, it's all the more reason not to make a trade like this, because chances are guys like Kreider and/or Erixon will have to be involved in the deal on top of Dubinsky, and those guys will be on ELCs/cap friendly contracts, which will help when when we have to give big raises to some of our current young guys.
Gaborik comes off the books in 2 years. Parise is a UFA this coming offseason. Del Zotto is a RFA this coming offseason.

If you don't move any contracts and just sign Parise it's far worse then moving contracts in a a trade for Nash.

If you can keep your top guns like Kreider while be able to land Nash you do it. Just my opinion. Also, instead having 2 playoff runs with Parise, Richards, and Gaborik with a Nash trade you can have 3 playoff runs with Richy and Gaborik. Then if you wish when Gabbys contract expires you can let him walk.

I see far more pro's than con's as long as you don't give up too many good pieces for Nash.

hpNYR is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 04:41 AM
  #690
Blue Blooded
Registered User
 
Blue Blooded's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Handicap spot
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,725
vCash: 504
Quote:
Originally Posted by slipknottin View Post
Whats different about this team? Familiarity in the system. Thats it.

Richards hasent changed the culture, and has often been the worst player on the team for games.

Its not like this was a bad team last year. Gaborik is actually just slightly ahead of where he finished last year. He certainly is not performing at the level he was in 09.
What is this I don't even...

This conclusion can ONLY be drawn from pure stat watching. Gaborik has been on a completely different level this year compared to last.

In 10-11 he was mostly useless and invisible except for a handful of games against bottom feeders where he racked up points. Outside of these games he was basically a one-dimensional ~40-point player, like a Robert Nilsson or something.

This year he has raised his game considerably, being a consistent threat to the opposition and contributed outside of the scoreboard.

I didn't watch many games in 09-10, and most of those I caught were down the stretch where he was playing injured. But from what I saw earlier that season, he was playing about as well as he is now, with the difference being he had a bigger focus on offence then and the benefit of being a bit of an unknown to the EC defenses.

Regarding Richards, he is a decently skilled hockey player with great cerebral talents that has struggled with how he should play in this system. His high scoring days in Dallas were the product of great chemistry with great linemates as well as free regins regarding offence. In Dallas he was encouraged to make the high risk-high reward play, whereas Torts doesn't want that. He is beginning to find a way to be successful in our system and I think he will be a consistent 70-point player with great clutch play.

That also needs to be put into perspective. A 70-point player in our system has probably contributed more than a 90-point player in an offensive system.

Regarding Nash I'm 100% agreeing with Brooks, why give up assets for a contract you wouldn't sign in free agency? Lunacy!

Blue Blooded is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 04:52 AM
  #691
Sticky Fingers
Registered User
 
Sticky Fingers's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,504
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by German Way of War View Post

So you're going to break the bank for a massively overpaid guy who has never won anything in 10 years, gut your assets in half, and either play him out of position or displace Gaborik or Callahan from the top-6?
Gold in the Olympics 09/10, WC Gold, MVP 06/07. I call that winning something.

I say take him as long as the return is not too much. If Dubi, Two prospects (not Kreider,Erixon) Wolski, 1st, 2nd get it done, do it. I don't think it will though.

Sticky Fingers is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 05:12 AM
  #692
mrhockey193195
Registered User
 
mrhockey193195's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 3,298
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hpNYR View Post
Gaborik comes off the books in 2 years. Parise is a UFA this coming offseason. Del Zotto is a RFA this coming offseason.

If you don't move any contracts and just sign Parise it's far worse then moving contracts in a a trade for Nash.

If you can keep your top guns like Kreider while be able to land Nash you do it. Just my opinion. Also, instead having 2 playoff runs with Parise, Richards, and Gaborik with a Nash trade you can have 3 playoff runs with Richy and Gaborik. Then if you wish when Gabbys contract expires you can let him walk.

I see far more pro's than con's as long as you don't give up too many good pieces for Nash.
Gotcha, thanks for the clarification. How big of a raise is MDZ looking at this coming offseason?

And I don't know, call me stubborn, call me stupidly attached to all our homegrown guys because I've seen them grow and develop together, but I don't want to move Dubi for Nash. Or Carter. I want Carter even less on this team.

mrhockey193195 is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 05:13 AM
  #693
mrhockey193195
Registered User
 
mrhockey193195's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 3,298
vCash: 500
Also, someone on FB just mentioned that Elliotte Friedman said that BOS, NYR, and VAN dropped out of the Nash sweepstakes. Can anyone confirm?

mrhockey193195 is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 05:14 AM
  #694
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,471
vCash: 500
Dubinsky wants no part of Columbus

Quote:
Take it to the bank. Kirk Muller from the Canadiens to the Islanders equals Jeff Carter from the Flyers to the Blue Jackets, which would equal Brandon Dubinsky from the Rangers to Columbus.
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/devil...#ixzz1mpEbCh8m

Brooks is tight with Dubinsky. Columbus can't afford anymore unhappy players.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 05:57 AM
  #695
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 12,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rangerfans View Post
Don't take this the wrong way, but I am thrilled you're not the GM

That is way too much for him. As others have stated: Why on Earth would you overpay for him now when we passed on him as a FA?
Actually, if that was the deal, sign me up, because neither Valentenko or Johnson have any value to that other than removing contracts from the organizations 50 contract limit. Thomas is a player I'd much rather see go than Miller, and one of Erixon or McIlrath means you're leaving the defensive core intact. And, the Rangers never passed on Nash, because he never reached free agency.

I'm still not pro-trade-for-Nash, but, people need to stop with the hyperbole on both sides.

jas is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 06:17 AM
  #696
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 13,857
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellohf View Post
Gold in the Olympics 09/10, WC Gold, MVP 06/07. I call that winning something.

I say take him as long as the return is not too much. If Dubi, Two prospects (not Kreider,Erixon) Wolski, 1st, 2nd get it done, do it. I don't think it will though.
Yeah, riiiiiight. He really carried that Canadian Olympic team. It was all on his shoulders and he delivered.

Nobody cares about the World Championships.

Nash hasn't won dick.

GWOW is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 06:33 AM
  #697
Sticky Fingers
Registered User
 
Sticky Fingers's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,504
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by German Way of War View Post
Yeah, riiiiiight. He really carried that Canadian Olympic team. It was all on his shoulders and he delivered.

Nobody cares about the World Championships.

Nash hasn't won dick.
So by your logic I guess you don't want Parise neither, since he haven't won anything. It really cuts down the list.

I'm not all in for getting Nash, but it's not like he's been having a real shot at "winning anything" in Colombus? And mather of fact is that he could help us win something. He most likely would be an improvement. Then again, it comes with a price.

Sticky Fingers is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 07:20 AM
  #698
GAGLine
Registered User
 
GAGLine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hpNYR View Post
You realize with all the RFAs in 2014 you're going to have to dump some salary somewhere. So it's not like roster moves won't be made in the near future either way.

Everyone is all up in arms about not wanting to get Nash (while sending some salary the other way) because we'll have a tough time signing our own guys. Well guess what, those same people want Parise and if youre not going to dump some salary and youre going to just sign Parise then that makes it much harder to sign our guys because you haven't cleared any cap space like you would via a Dubinksy trade to Columbus
How about we don't generalize, ok? There are many of us who have said that neither Nash nor Parise (nor Weber nor Suter) will be Rangers. This team doesn't need another long term, 7+ mil contract. Period.

GAGLine is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 07:32 AM
  #699
Leetch66
Registered User
 
Leetch66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: PEI Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,143
vCash: 500
LOL...if I was Dubi I would find a way to get sort of hurt today...sore back...concussion...something along those lines that will clear up in about 9 days . It certainly can't be too hard to get concussion symptoms for 9 days ...can it ? That would have to be be better then playing for Columbus ? I would hate to see Dubi leave...just something about him that I know we will miss and I think he will break out of the drought someday ...perhaps maybe when all the trade hype is over and he can relax and assume a role that takes us deep while battling hard .

Anybody ever think about Alfredsson[sp] from Ottawa...he would fit our sytem and would be a great pal to Hank & Hag . I'm not sure of his Cap hit or length .It might cost us AA and a couple of picks .

Leetch66 is offline  
Old
02-19-2012, 07:37 AM
  #700
Barbara Underhill
Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuke
 
Barbara Underhill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Montana
Country: United States
Posts: 13,111
vCash: 373
Quote:
Originally Posted by German Way of War View Post
Yeah, riiiiiight. He really carried that Canadian Olympic team. It was all on his shoulders and he delivered.

Nobody cares about the World Championships.

Nash hasn't won dick.
What have you won?

Barbara Underhill 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 10:06 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.