Jeff Carter
Zach Parise
Ryan Getzlaf
Ryan Kesler
Mike Richards
Corey Perry
Duncan Keith
Anze Kopitar
Paul Stastny
Phil Kessel
Claude Giroux(To be determined)
Jeff Skinner
Michael Grabner
You've listed 12 players out of a pool of thousands. Even great drafting does not guarantee the selection of stars, especially outside the very top of drafts.
You've listed 12 players out of a pool of thousands. Even great drafting does not guarantee the selection of stars, especially outside the very top of drafts.
I also omitted a large number of players, and replied to a post which said you don't find top talent outside the top four. So, what exactly are you saying? Trade assets for Nash? Sign Richards?
Think Anisimov, Krieder, and Del Zotto for starters. Not to mention we probably couldnt fit a much needed center under the cap.
Columbus would never trade Nash, he has been the heart and soul of their franchise as long as they've been around and we would have too give up too much.
I also omitted a large number of players, and replied to a post which said you don't find top talent outside the top four. So, what exactly are you saying? Trade assets for Nash? Sign Richards?
Hes saying what a lot of people are thinking.
That it seems like a safer bet to acquire an actual star player, than refusing to tank and pinning your hopes on lottery ticket draft picks.
And I stress the phrase ACTUAL STAR PLAYER, which is what guys like Richards and Nash are....which guys like Drury, Gomez, and Redden aren't/never were.
That it seems like a safer bet to acquire an actual star player, than refusing to tank and pinning your hopes on lottery ticket draft picks.
And I stress the phrase ACTUAL STAR PLAYER, which is what guys like Richards and Nash are....which guys like Drury, Gomez, and Redden aren't/never were.
I like this. I don't think it's necessarily a safer bet since age becomes a factor but people look at UFA and don't think we should grab integral pieces there.
Sign a guy like Richards for Drury's contract and that's a very smart move that probably makes a much better team sooner, especially with Jagr, and in the future Gaborik.
That it seems like a safer bet to acquire an actual star player, than refusing to tank and pinning your hopes on lottery ticket draft picks.
And I stress the phrase ACTUAL STAR PLAYER, which is what guys like Richards and Nash are....which guys like Drury, Gomez, and Redden aren't/never were.
If you can sign Richards for five years or less to a reasonable term, I am fine with that.
Nash is a $7.8 cap it, and has only gotten 4+goals twice, with 70+ points once. Plus, haveing to trade assets for him is just crazy. Really, that's what I am replying to.
If you can sign Richards for five years or less to a reasonable term, I am fine with that.
Nash is a $7.8 cap it, and has only gotten 4+goals twice, with 70+ points once. Plus, haveing to trade assets for him is just crazy. Really, that's what I am replying to.
Nash also plays on the CBJ, a team where he doesn't get much support.
I agree with the cap hit, but if he had a cheaper hit and we could trade for him i'd be all for it. Especially if we could afford Richards afterwards.
Players who make money like that have to create on their own consistently. Nash is just not worth his salary.
I'm agreeing with you there, 7.8 is ridiculous, but Nash is a great player and if it was a 7 million hit i'd be all over it. I'd be more interested in signing him as a UFA and hoping he realizes 7.8 is nuts, but I doubt he leaves CBJ myself.
I'm agreeing with you there, 7.8 is ridiculous, but Nash is a great player and if it was a 7 million hit i'd be all over it. I'd be more interested in signing him as a UFA and hoping he realizes 7.8 is nuts, but I doubt he leaves CBJ myself.
I agree with that, Nash is an excellent player, and for around seven, more likely 6.5, I'd be on that too.
Agree with everything being said - Im not enamored with giving up assets and assuming Nash's massive cap hit....but if we strike out on Richards, something needs to be done.
I wouldnt be in such a rush to make a splash if Lundqvist was 24 and not 29.
Agree with everything being said - Im not enamored with giving up assets and assuming Nash's massive cap hit....but if we strike out on Richards, something needs to be done.
I wouldnt be in such a rush to make a splash is Lundqvist was 24 and not 29.
Yeah, this is why i'm more interested in starting to give up assets. Hank is the best in the NHL, imo, and to have a goalie like that on a team like this, WITH a real top line, we could win a cup.
Also, didn't Columbus just draft Ryan Johansen with the 4th pick in the draft last year? I would presume they got him to center Nash. Why trade Nash away when you just drafted the missing piece to his puzzle? People have said that he could do alot more if he had an actual #1C on his line....
...and if we got him, the problem remains the same. Great point. Gaborik+Nash doesn't solve a #1 C problem.
If we're looking to move assets, I sign Richards and look to trade for Weber (if he's available, all speculation at this point). He makes our d-corps and PP absolutely nasty.
I don't get why everyone wants to build this team around one player? We need skill guys, but gritty skill guys.
If I asked most people who is the best player on the Rangers, the answer SHOULD be Henrik Lundqvist.
Why build around a guy who has health issues and is streaky when we can build around our goaltender. Get a high skilled D-man who can shoot from the point.
I don't get why everyone wants to build this team around one player? We need skill guys, but gritty skill guys.
If I asked most people who is the best player on the Rangers, the answer SHOULD be Henrik Lundqvist.
Why build around a guy who has health issues and is streaky when we can build around our goaltender. Get a high skilled D-man who can shoot from the point.
*cough* Weber *cough*
I would trade anyone barring Hank, Staal, Cally, or Dubi.
Girardi, Kreider, anyone else is on the table.
If we were to add Weber and Richards this offseason it would be officially Cup or bust.
And TBH I think building the offense IS building around Hank, because our defense has been fine this year, it's our inability to have a consistent offense that sucks.
How is Nash better? Richards outscores him nearly every year, is better defensively, and more experienced. I really don't understand the Nash love fest. He's a player who has the abilities to be scoring more than he is, but isn't. You can blame linemates and whatnot, but he takes shifts off constantly, coasts, and is very inconsistent. He's a good player, don't get me wrong, but on a ludicrous contract, and seems to get more love than he actually deserves.
And if everyone calls Kovalchuk a perennial loser, than what is Nash? 0 playoff wins in 8(?) years of the NHL?
well the biggest difference imo is that richards (or another center) as a playmaker will hopefully make gaborik better...nash might score 40 to richard's 30 but if BR also turns gaborik back into a 40g guy then we've now got 2 elite guys and a #1 line with adding 1 guy. i'm not sure nash makes gaborik better
How is Nash better? Richards outscores him nearly every year, is better defensively, and more experienced. I really don't understand the Nash love fest. He's a player who has the abilities to be scoring more than he is, but isn't. You can blame linemates and whatnot, but he takes shifts off constantly, coasts, and is very inconsistent. He's a good player, don't get me wrong, but on a ludicrous contract, and seems to get more love than he actually deserves.
And if everyone calls Kovalchuk a perennial loser, than what is Nash? 0 playoff wins in 8(?) years of the NHL?
Nash is on one of the worst teams in the NHL. he gets paid 7.8 million because they need a face to the franchise to draw seats and that's what he is.
I wouldn't say Nash is better than Richards but i'm just saying I think he's better than what you're saying.
If you can sign Richards for five years or less to a reasonable term, I am fine with that.
Nash is a $7.8 cap it, and has only gotten 4+goals twice, with 70+ points once. Plus, haveing to trade assets for him is just crazy. Really, that's what I am replying to.
Id trade the moon and then some for him anyway, he is just that talented.
As an all around player, I'd take Nash over Richards any day every day.
Depends on the term you're comparing. For just next season, I take Richards over Nash without a second hesitation. Richards has a much bigger impact on making those around him better. For longer terms, I think it's a closer issue due to the age difference.
Rick Nash has played 4 playoff games and lost all four. Yes, he is stuck in Columbus, but it needs to be kept in consideration.
Richards has a Conn Smythe and a Stanley Cup. In fact, Richards has more assists (5) and points (9) in a Stanley Cup Finals series than Nash has playoff games played (4).
Richards is an elite player both in the playoffs and regular season. Nash remains an unproven playoff player.
Yeah, but you have to look at who is surrounding the player and the talent level(s). Nash has never had anything close to the support that Richards had in Tampa or in Dallas.
