HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > San Jose Sharks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Dreger: Sharks strong contender for Nash

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-21-2012, 09:02 PM
  #26
Les Wynan*
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,745
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fistfullofbeer View Post
Also, not sure what Nitty's situation is. I know he is in Syracuse but can we get him back up here? Or will he need to go through waivers if we end up doing that.
Why in the world would you want him?

Les Wynan* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2012, 09:05 PM
  #27
stalockrox
Registered User
 
stalockrox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,792
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fistfullofbeer View Post
I am fine with getting Nash. Clowe+ is fine but no Pavs or Cooter.

I cant defend Nemo at all for his bad play. We can just hope that he is in a slump and comes out of it.

Also, not sure what Nitty's situation is. I know he is in Syracuse but can we get him back up here? Or will he need to go through waivers if we end up doing that.
Niitty's AHL stas: GA: 3.12 SP: .891

stalockrox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2012, 09:06 PM
  #28
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 33,560
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by StreetSharks View Post
I still don't see why giving up offense for offense is a good thing.

Sharks want to add more depth to the top 6.. trading O for O wouldn't really do anything.
There's more to the argument of trading Clowe for Nash than O for O. Clowe is the only one of the three top six without a clause, that doesn't help in the defensive side of things. That's why Pavs and Couture are non-starters. They do more than just score. They play defense at a high level. Clowe for Nash is also an improvement in team speed and in defensive play. The team gets better in general going from Clowe to Nash but it does suffer a decrease in certain important aspects with such a deal.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2012, 09:09 PM
  #29
Kitten Mittons
Registered User
 
Kitten Mittons's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: San Francisco
Country: Armenia
Posts: 47,632
vCash: 500
Clowe+White+Ferriero+TB 7th. No more.

Kitten Mittons is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2012, 09:15 PM
  #30
magic school bus
***********
 
magic school bus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: San Jose, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,326
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stalockrox View Post
Niitty's AHL stas: GA: 3.12 SP: .891
Does that convert to him being worse than Steve Mason at the NHL level?

magic school bus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2012, 09:15 PM
  #31
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,461
vCash: 500
The only trade that would seem to make sense:

Clowe, Demers/Braun, 1st-round-pick for Nash. Maybe add a prospect...

Can SJ even handle Nash's cap hit in the future? I realize that Clowe was probably due a raise anyways

OrrNumber4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2012, 09:15 PM
  #32
Inub0i
For the Alliance!
 
Inub0i's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: UC Irvine, Irvine
Country: United States
Posts: 8,643
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Inub0i Send a message via MSN to Inub0i Send a message via Skype™ to Inub0i
Do Not Want.

Inub0i is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2012, 09:18 PM
  #33
ChubbChubby
My life is a gym
 
ChubbChubby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 3,076
vCash: 500
Trading for Nash would be a reactionary move that would kill our team's chances in the near future.

We're too topheavy as it is with Thornton, Marleau, and Boyle, and we got young guys coming up who are going to get raises. We were all happy to get Heatley's cap hit off the books, and now you want to trade off assets and roster players for a guy with a BIGGER cap hit? Way too short-sighted and would be a huge mistake by DW.

ChubbChubby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2012, 09:19 PM
  #34
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 33,560
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by superroyain10 View Post
The only trade that would seem to make sense:

Clowe, Demers/Braun, 1st-round-pick for Nash. Maybe add a prospect...

Can SJ even handle Nash's cap hit in the future? I realize that Clowe was probably due a raise anyways
That is completely dependent on the CBA. There's really no way to know until that is finalized what they are capable of. If it was just another year with the same CBA, they likely would be able to make it work since the formula likely would have it go up 2 mil maybe. But with the CBA up in the air, it could mean a rollback, a lockout that costs part of the season, and a reduction in the cap.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2012, 09:19 PM
  #35
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 33,560
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chubbs View Post
Trading for Nash would be a reactionary move that would kill our team's chances in the near future.

We're too topheavy as it is with Thornton, Marleau, and Boyle, and we got young guys coming up who are going to get raises. We were all happy to get Heatley's cap hit off the books, and now you want to trade up assets and roster players for a guy with a BIGGER cap hit? Way too short-sighted and would be a huge mistake by DW.
Rick Nash is a much better overall player than Dany Heatley so it's a bit different.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2012, 09:20 PM
  #36
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,461
vCash: 500
I feel for DW. The only way he can win is if the team wins a Cup.

No doubt the ownership group is clamoring for a right-now plan. At the same time, f he acquires Nash and all fails, he'll take the fall when cap and depth issues destroy the team.

OrrNumber4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2012, 09:21 PM
  #37
ChubbChubby
My life is a gym
 
ChubbChubby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 3,076
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Rick Nash is a much better overall player than Dany Heatley so it's a bit different.
It's no difference in the sense that it will handicap our team's ability to move and sign players and will make us more top-heavy than we already are. Top-heavy teams don't win the cup, depth does, and you won't have depth if you spend too much on your top guys.

ChubbChubby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2012, 09:23 PM
  #38
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,461
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Rick Nash is a much better overall player than Dany Heatley so it's a bit different.
This is true. He is the ultimate complimentary winger. Though I shudder to think that the cost of essentially recapturing the Thornton-Cheechoo magic is nearly 8 million

OrrNumber4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2012, 09:23 PM
  #39
ChubbChubby
My life is a gym
 
ChubbChubby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 3,076
vCash: 500
Also Nash isn't a defensive possession-type player either, so it's the wrong fit anyway.

ChubbChubby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2012, 09:25 PM
  #40
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,461
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chubbs View Post
It's no difference in the sense that it will handicap our team's ability to move and sign players and will make us more top-heavy than we already are. Top-heavy teams don't win the cup, depth does, and you won't have depth if you spend too much on your top guys.
In truth, you need both. Actually, if SJs top players actually played to their ability, they'd have won a Cup by now.

OrrNumber4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2012, 09:27 PM
  #41
ChubbChubby
My life is a gym
 
ChubbChubby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 3,076
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by superroyain10 View Post
In truth, you need both. Actually, if SJs top players actually played to their ability, they'd have won a Cup by now.
Two highly paid forwards is more than enough. When you get three, you're limiting what you can dress for your depth. 7.8 million is enough to sign two quality second liners, so you're essentially robbing yourself of two forwards to overload your first line. That mindset won't work in the playoffs because every team has their own first line and defensive pair that can match your own, but the other lines will have an advantage.

ChubbChubby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2012, 09:28 PM
  #42
Barrie22
Shark fan in hiding
 
Barrie22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,312
vCash: 500
Pf, never thought I would read a post from you saying nash is better defensively then any one on the sharks lol.

Nash is just like thornton, in the fact he has a very underated defensive game. Nash when asked to play defense can handle almost any assignment in the nhl, but like thornton pre mclellan his focus is asked to run the offense and let others worry about the defensive side of the game.

I don't mean to say he is the best defensive forward alive, just that if asked to be a defensive forward the team wouldn't need to worry about him.

For others about if we could afford nash long term, that is a yes (if another top 6 is going the other way), if it is clowe and only clowe that would mean the sharks have about 5 million in cap space and 14 signed.

Barrie22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2012, 09:30 PM
  #43
ChubbChubby
My life is a gym
 
ChubbChubby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 3,076
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barrie22 View Post
Pf, never thought I would read a post from you saying nash is better defensively then any one on the sharks lol.

Nash is just like thornton, in the fact he has a very underated defensive game. Nash when asked to play defense can handle almost any assignment in the nhl, but like thornton pre mclellan his focus is asked to run the offense and let others worry about the defensive side of the game.

I don't mean to say he is the best defensive forward alive, just that if asked to be a defensive forward the team wouldn't need to worry about him.

For others about if we could afford nash long term, that is a yes (if another top 6 is going the other way), if it is clowe and only clowe that would mean the sharks have about 5 million in cap space and 14 signed.
Like I said, it will affect the team in the future. Nash is signed for a very long time, and you'll have a hard time moving him again. Couture is due for a raise as is Clowe, and Pavelski took a hometown discount that will definitely be higher next. Vlasic is due as well, among other defenseman. You can't overload on big players and expect everything else to work itself out without thinking things through.

Now is not the time to handicap yourself with a huge contract just because your team is slumping, especially not with the next salary cap in question and the new CBA coming up.

ChubbChubby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2012, 09:32 PM
  #44
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 33,560
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chubbs View Post
It's no difference in the sense that it will handicap our team's ability to move and sign players and will make us more top-heavy than we already are. Top-heavy teams don't win the cup, depth does, and you won't have depth if you spend too much on your top guys.
It's different because it's a wiser investment going with Nash than it is going with Heatley. Plus, what the Sharks capabilities are in terms of movement will depend on what the new CBA entails. The Sharks will still have a certain amount of flexibility in terms of assets and expendable players.

Quote:
Originally Posted by superroyain10 View Post
This is true. He is the ultimate complimentary winger. Though I shudder to think that the cost of essentially recapturing the Thornton-Cheechoo magic is nearly 8 million
Well, if Nash is acquired now and for Clowe mainly, I doubt that is what they'd try. Next season, maybe but not to finish this year. He'd almost certainly just replace Clowe's spot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chubbs View Post
Also Nash isn't a defensive possession-type player either, so it's the wrong fit anyway.
I agree he isn't the precise fit you'd like to get at that price but the only way that the team gets any better by potentially acquiring him is if it is Clowe going the other way. A Nash-Couture-Havlat 2nd line has some deadly potential.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2012, 09:35 PM
  #45
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 33,560
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chubbs View Post
Like I said, it will affect the team in the future. Nash is signed for a very long time, and you'll have a hard time moving him again. Couture is due for a raise as is Clowe, and Pavelski took a hometown discount that will definitely be higher next. Vlasic is due as well, among other defenseman. You can't overload on big players and expect everything else to work itself out without thinking things through.

Now is not the time to handicap yourself with a huge contract just because your team is slumping, especially not with the next salary cap in question and the new CBA coming up.
Just because Nash's contract may not be movable in the very near future doesn't mean others aren't. There is a legitimate argument to be made in moving Dan Boyle either this or next off-season which would create flexibility lost by acquiring Nash.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2012, 09:37 PM
  #46
Barrie22
Shark fan in hiding
 
Barrie22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,312
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chubbs View Post
Like I said, it will affect the team in the future. Nash is signed for a very long time, and you'll have a hard time moving him again. Couture is due for a raise as is Clowe, and Pavelski took a hometown discount that will definitely be higher next. Vlasic is due as well, among other defenseman. You can't overload on big players and expect everything else to work itself out without thinking things through.
And you are thinking that thronton, marleau, boyle, will all be making the same amount as they are in 3 years. If those 3 players are still with the sharks it won't be at 6.6 mil, 6.9 mil and 7.0 mil, they will all be much less. I am one of the biggest thornton fans there is, but if he is paid anything over 6 mil his next contract then it is a huge over payment.

Boyle will most likely be gone after or before his contract is up, as the sharks have already signed his replacement long term in burns.

Barrie22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2012, 09:38 PM
  #47
ChubbChubby
My life is a gym
 
ChubbChubby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 3,076
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Just because Nash's contract may not be movable in the very near future doesn't mean others aren't. There is a legitimate argument to be made in moving Dan Boyle either this or next off-season which would create flexibility lost by acquiring Nash.
Then you thin your defense. Like I said, the Sharks are too top-heavy as it is right now, so it would only worsen the situation by signing another big guy. And I repeat, it will handicap who you can sign and re-sign in the future by limiting your cap space. The salary cap is completely up in the air right now. It may in fact go down, which would kill our team is we had Thornton, Marleay, Nash, AND Boyle for the next few years.

It's something different if we were to trade Thornton or Marleau for Nash, but that isn't going to happen. Thornton and Marleau are both better players, and they have NMCes to boot so it's a moot point.

ChubbChubby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2012, 09:48 PM
  #48
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 33,560
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chubbs View Post
Then you thin your defense. Like I said, the Sharks are too top-heavy as it is right now, so it would only worsen the situation by signing another big guy. And I repeat, it will handicap who you can sign and re-sign in the future by limiting your cap space. The salary cap is completely up in the air right now. It may in fact go down, which would kill our team is we had Thornton, Marleay, Nash, AND Boyle for the next few years.

It's something different if we were to trade Thornton or Marleau for Nash, but that isn't going to happen. Thornton and Marleau are both better players, and they have NMCes to boot so it's a moot point.
Not necessarily. You're looking at it in absolute terms without enough information to base a legitimate conclusion on. They can trade Boyle for a left-handed d-man on the left side that moves the puck well at half his salary. Then they create flexibility to add depth up front, balance out their puck moving ability on the blue line, and can go from there.

There are still many other options that can be used to re-sign certain players like Vlasic and Couture at the point that their contracts are up. When Vlasic's contract is up, Murray's is as well and he is not all that important to keep at this point. When Couture's is up, Thornton, Marleau, Boyle, and Pavelski's are all up and three of those four are not likely to get a raise or even keep their current salary.

Basically, acquiring Nash doesn't hamstring their flexibility nearly as much as you might think.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2012, 09:49 PM
  #49
Brent Burns
TROTZTROTZTROTZTROTZ
 
Brent Burns's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Coming in hot
Posts: 6,584
vCash: 500
Just got my Couture jersey so please nooooo

Apparently the asking price is ridiculous so how can either Pavs or Couture not be included?

Brent Burns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2012, 09:50 PM
  #50
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 33,560
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent Burns View Post
Just got my Couture jersey so please nooooo

Apparently the asking price is ridiculous so how can either Pavs or Couture not be included?
If they insist on either of them being involved, you walk away. It's that simple.

Pinkfloyd 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 09:40 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.