PDA

View Full Version : Where is Rick Nash?



Pages : [1] 2

CreaseCrusader91
12-19-2013, 12:51 AM
Straight forward. What is going on with him?

One goal in last five. He needs to step up while this team is struggling.

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/13/12/19/ydagetaz.jpg

Phil in Absentia
12-19-2013, 01:03 AM
Shame is, it's all he did last year. Nothing but third period game-winners.

My problem with him is that he isn't a superstar. He's a star. Bit of an underwhelming one at that to boot. But there's a difference to me. It's why I warned everyone of the dangers of comparing him, even remotely, to Jágr when the trade was done. He's not in that tier. At all. He's a tier below, or at least a class.

If Jágr is 1A, Nash is 1B, for example. He'll get you the goals a superstar should, but with none of the rest of the flash and impact that would make him a superstar. With a physical game or the vision to pass, he's Eric Lindros. With neither... he's Rick Nash.

CreaseCrusader91
12-19-2013, 01:07 AM
Jagr would look pretty good on this team now.

EdMc28
12-19-2013, 01:09 AM
1 goal in 5 games? That's probably great by his standards after his "good" playoff run where he had 1 goal in 12 games. Whoever compared him to Hossa in another thread is spot on. He can't be the guy but he can be a great guy to have behind a bonafide superstar.

Pete
12-19-2013, 01:52 AM
He's a joke. Such a bad trade.

Rangers
12-19-2013, 02:17 AM
Local Star, not a NHL star. I was all in favor for his trade, but abviously thats because we were desperate, and thought he would help.
He did help last season, but its a new season now. For the money he is getting, he should be more consistent.

I think this is the fith time i am stating this, we should trade him and every one else who had health issues. Especisally concussions.
I dont care how many points he can put on board fron now on.

1. He no longer fits the system new coach has hired to implement.
2. He is not as healtrhy as he was when we traded for him.
3. He is a small market player.
4. while trade value is still up, needs to go!

Shane Falco
12-19-2013, 02:36 AM
He's a joke. Such a bad trade.

I'll admit I didn't feel that way when we made the trade, but I do now.

torontonyr
12-19-2013, 05:52 AM
Shame is, it's all he did last year. Nothing but third period game-winners.

My problem with him is that he isn't a superstar. He's a star. Bit of an underwhelming one at that to boot. But there's a difference to me. It's why I warned everyone of the dangers of comparing him, even remotely, to Jágr when the trade was done. He's not in that tier. At all. He's a tier below, or at least a class.

If Jágr is 1A, Nash is 1B, for example. He'll get you the goals a superstar should, but with none of the rest of the flash and impact that would make him a superstar. With a physical game or the vision to pass, he's Eric Lindros. With neither... he's Rick Nash.

Love that you used my scale to make that comparison. Glsf to see it put to good use.

RichieNextel305
12-19-2013, 06:44 AM
Quickly becoming an all time bust. Absolutely pathetic effort.

Respecttheblue
12-19-2013, 07:28 AM
I wuz just about to check his game log, for the same reasons, and this thread saved me the trouble.

Underwhelming is the word. It's gotten too predictable seeing him try that same, solo, skate toward the opposing D, turn my back protect the puck while I figure out whether to try the slow fail spinorama again (Too often tries to do too much by himself at the wrong time). To be fair he does have another scoring move that we saw earlier this week, but we're not seeing much in the way of passing vision or a shot/snipe to complement things. Expected a lot more. How much is on his equally AWOL teammates such as Stepan for not being in the right place to work a give and go, or some other play? I'm not sure, but he's not doing much to make others around him that much better this year. I'm wondering if the following is the way to go:


Local Star, not a NHL star. I was all in favor for his trade, but abviously thats because we were desperate, and thought he would help.
He did help last season, but its a new season now. For the money he is getting, he should be more consistent.

I think this is the fith time i am stating this, we should trade him and every one else who had health issues. Especisally concussions.
I dont care how many points he can put on board fron now on.

1. He no longer fits the system new coach has hired to implement.
2. He is not as healtrhy as he was when we traded for him.
3. He is a small market player.
4. while trade value is still up, needs to go!

To be honest I don't like to give up even a 1B/C player (I'd say 1C -- to me Crosby and Malkin are 1A !B) when you have one, but this team does not seem close enough to being able to go deep. And when you're that far off serious contention, you might as well be miles away. He's not getting any younger, not getting any better, not getting any healthier. Can we get enough in the way of 1st round picks and prospects, or are we fucked and better off sticking with him?

RichieNextel305
12-19-2013, 07:30 AM
Absolutely disgusted with this guy. Seriously. The guy is a bust.

Niko
12-19-2013, 07:41 AM
All for the nominal fee of 7.8 mil per year.

Vodka Drunkenski
12-19-2013, 08:24 AM
He's playing scared, said it weeks ago. He's done

Dunny
12-19-2013, 08:29 AM
Yeah, he's fine. Same guy he always was. 30+ goals. I don't know what you thought you were getting or that you thought he'd turn in to a PPG guy when he put on a Ranger jersey.

Pete
12-19-2013, 09:01 AM
Uh...You mean like last year when he had 42 in 44...?

TwoMinutesForNothing
12-19-2013, 09:02 AM
He's not been great at all, but he could really use a proper center. Stepan has been the one who has been playing terrible on their line and just seems to be way too slow for them. Always a step behind.

Pete
12-19-2013, 09:06 AM
Can we really blame missing camp at this point?

Dunny
12-19-2013, 09:08 AM
Hard to say really. Everyone knows about his skating ability.

RichieNextel305
12-19-2013, 09:10 AM
Absolutely disgusted with this guy. Seriously. The guy is a bust.

Pete
12-19-2013, 09:12 AM
Absolutely disgusted with this guy. Seriously. The guy is a bust.


Absolutely disgusted with this guy. Seriously. The guy is a bust.

...?

Phil in Absentia
12-19-2013, 09:20 AM
Love that you used my scale to make that comparison. Glsf to see it put to good use.

Huh? What scale?


Quickly becoming an all time bust. Absolutely pathetic effort.

I wouldn't call him a bust, but I would say that that trade won't be looked upon favorably if this team gets torn down. It'll get looked at as the tipping point as to why it all started. Some will say it was the Nash deal, others the Gáby trade, others the Tortorella firing, but if you are looking at them in succession, it all began with Nash.

Phil in Absentia
12-19-2013, 09:21 AM
He's not been great at all, but he could really use a proper center. Stepan has been the one who has been playing terrible on their line and just seems to be way too slow for them. Always a step behind.

Yeah, said the same thing to Morphinity last night. The biggest issue wasn't even that the team traded Gáborík. It's that Richards was the guy deemed to be his center, and when that continually failed, he was given Derek Stepan, who is like Matt Stajan. Jack of all trades, master of none. Very vanilla player and his foot speed (LULZ) has killed so much of that lines' momentum.

Phil in Absentia
12-19-2013, 09:22 AM
Uh...You mean like last year when he had 42 in 44...?

Aberration. Shortened year, too. He's a career 65 point player.

Dunny
12-19-2013, 09:24 AM
His goals and assists generally mirror each other.

Pete
12-19-2013, 09:25 AM
Aberration. Shortened year, too. He's a career 65 point player.

Its an abberation when it happens once. He's been a p/g player more than once.
I'm aware it was a shortened year, and I'm aware of his stats. What he did in Columbus has nothing to do with what he did/will do here.

Last year he showed he could be a P/G player. This year not so much. Think it's a combination of the concussion and Stepan being off his game.

Dunny
12-19-2013, 09:28 AM
It has a lot to do with what you can project him to do here. Everything really.

Morphinity
12-19-2013, 09:30 AM
I absolutely despise the way he plays. I was expecting a completely different player. I guess that's what happens when all you know about a player is what you see on the Youtube highlight videos.

Ba Ba Bluey
12-19-2013, 09:30 AM
Blame it on the injuries, missing camp, new city, or maybe he lost his cat. Either way he is not the same player.

He will never put the team on his back, he doesn't have that extra gear and never turns it up when the team needs him.

He just floats around like a vagina.

Pete
12-19-2013, 09:32 AM
It has a lot to do with what you can project him to do here. Everything really.

Not at all. Two completely different teams and situations, and conferences for that matter. Guys go to new teams and explode all the time. Look at Steen.

Mike
12-19-2013, 09:58 AM
Blame it on the injuries, missing camp, new city, or maybe he lost his cat. Either way he is not the same player.

He will never put the team on his back, he doesn't have that extra gear and never turns it up when the team needs him.

He just floats around like a vagina.

Where the fuck do you live? I'm coming over.

momentum
12-19-2013, 10:03 AM
As much as I like Nash I have also been disappointed this year, it's probably a combination of factors such as the concussions, Stepan who I really think doesn't fit with him (too slow) and just not driving himself enough too. And also the general funk and mess of the whole team. But no excuses.
It's clear to me he has the ability to play at a higher level, he needs to have the drive to play at that level but so far he doesn't. A shame.

I still have hope that if he can go a longer stretch without injury to get confidence in his body back combined with the changes to the team that are coming to be made so the team can settle down and find an identity and get in a groove (Feels like everything is in limbo right now) that he can get to that other level that i think he can play at.

Dunny
12-19-2013, 10:04 AM
Not at all. Two completely different teams and situations, and conferences for that matter. Guys go to new teams and explode all the time. Look at Steen.

Oh come on. He was rode hard in Columbus. If anything you would expect his #'s to drop slightly here as in theory it's a deeper team with the offence spread around and it was anyways, a defence first team. He wasn't going to get any more opportunity here than he was in Columbus.

Now he's recently returned from injury and only on pace for 30 goals in a frighteningly small sample size and people are yelling "Bust!" Like they thought he was Jaromir Jagr. We're talking about a SS so small that had he scored instead of hitting the post last night he'd be on pace for some thing like 35 goals over a season.

As for Steen, he didn't go to St. Louis and break out, he wallowed in mediocrity for what? 5 years first?

Morphinity
12-19-2013, 10:10 AM
As much as I like Nash I have also been disappointed this year, it's probably a combination of factors such as the concussions, Stepan who I really think doesn't fit with him (too slow) and just not driving himself enough too. And also the general funk and mess of the whole team. But no excuses.
It's clear to me he has the ability to play at a higher level, he needs to have the drive to play at that level but so far he doesn't. A shame.

I still have hope that if he can go a longer stretch without injury to get confidence in his body back combined with the changes to the team that are coming to be made so the team can settle down and find an identity and get in a groove (Feels like everything is in limbo right now) that he can get to that other level that i think he can play at.

Folks, if even momentum is disappointed in Nash, you know there's something wrong. :(

Pete
12-19-2013, 10:26 AM
Oh come on. He was rode hard in Columbus. If anything you would expect his #'s to drop slightly here as in theory it's a deeper team with the offence spread around and it was anyways, a defence first team. He wasn't going to get any more opportunity here than he was in Columbus.

Now he's recently returned from injury and only on pace for 30 goals in a frighteningly small sample size and people are yelling "Bust!" Like they thought he was Jaromir Jagr. We're talking about a SS so small that had he scored instead of hitting the post last night he'd be on pace for some thing like 35 goals over a season.

As for Steen, he didn't go to St. Louis and break out, he wallowed in mediocrity for what? 5 years first?

No, that's actually not true, but we're getting off the point.

The point is that you said "What did you think, he would put on a Rangers sweater and be a P/G player", and yet he did exactly that last year. There's no reason to think he wouldn't this year, under the offensive whiz kid AV. You'd also think that surrounded by "better" players, his assist totals would rise organically.

But alas, this team is no better than the Jackets, because we are the Jackets.

I don't think he's a bust, per se, but it keeps going back to the deal being a trade that should never have been made.

ThirtyONE
12-19-2013, 10:31 AM
He's a 30 goal guy. Simple as that. Get's paid like a star to be less than a PPG player. That's what he's always been. Hossa comparisons are spot on.

Phil in Absentia
12-19-2013, 10:38 AM
He's a 30 goal guy. Simple as that. Get's paid like a star to be less than a PPG player. That's what he's always been. Hossa comparisons are spot on.

Not really. Hossa is an incredible two-way player and a penalty-killer too. Nash only really plays in one direction.

JOHN
12-19-2013, 11:15 AM
Right now in the offensive zone, Rick Nash looks like Artem Anisimov. He's got a couple of moves every once in a while when he gets a little space and can use his reach decently, but if he can't get around you he sure as hell isn't going through you.

Rangers
12-19-2013, 11:24 AM
I wuz just about to check his game log, for the same reasons, and this thread saved me the trouble.

Underwhelming is the word. It's gotten too predictable seeing him try that same, solo, skate toward the opposing D, turn my back protect the puck while I figure out whether to try the slow fail spinorama again (Too often tries to do too much by himself at the wrong time). To be fair he does have another scoring move that we saw earlier this week, but we're not seeing much in the way of passing vision or a shot/snipe to complement things. Expected a lot more. How much is on his equally AWOL teammates such as Stepan for not being in the right place to work a give and go, or some other play? I'm not sure, but he's not doing much to make others around him that much better this year. I'm wondering if the following is the way to go:



To be honest I don't like to give up even a 1B/C player (I'd say 1C -- to me Crosby and Malkin are 1A !B) when you have one, but this team does not seem close enough to being able to go deep. And when you're that far off serious contention, you might as well be miles away. He's not getting any younger, not getting any better, not getting any healthier. Can we get enough in the way of 1st round picks and prospects, or are we fucked and better off sticking with him?

I think at trade deadline we can still get back what we have gave up for him.
Look at Washington, they gave up Forseberg at trade for who? :rofl:
I'm sure Slats can get more for Nash..

Ba Ba Bluey
12-19-2013, 11:36 AM
As much as I like Nash I have also been disappointed this year, it's probably a combination of factors such as the concussions, Stepan who I really think doesn't fit with him (too slow) and just not driving himself enough too. And also the general funk and mess of the whole team. But no excuses.
It's clear to me he has the ability to play at a higher level, he needs to have the drive to play at that level but so far he doesn't. A shame.

I still have hope that if he can go a longer stretch without injury to get confidence in his body back combined with the changes to the team that are coming to be made so the team can settle down and find an identity and get in a groove (Feels like everything is in limbo right now) that he can get to that other level that i think he can play at.

http://thumbs.newschoolers.com/index.php?src=http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n148/RadiantSilvergun/gifs/Sunglasses_shock.gif&size=400x1000

G1000
12-19-2013, 11:41 AM
I think at trade deadline we can still get back what we have gave up for him.
Look at Washington, they gave up Forseberg at trade for who? :rofl:
I'm sure Slats can get more for Nash..

Ryan Parent (at the time, a top defensive prospect), Scottie Upshall, a 1st and a 3rd. The Flyers traded that first back to Nashville for the rights to Hartnell and Timonen.

In essence, it was Forsberg for Parent, Upshall, Timonen, Hartnell and a 3rd.

JOHN
12-19-2013, 11:42 AM
I just wonder how much playing in a demanding market factors into his issues.

Jerms
12-19-2013, 11:45 AM
What happened to the guy who was so great for about 15 games last year. That guy gave me a tingle up my leg. Who were hus linemates during that stretch?

NYR2711
12-19-2013, 11:49 AM
I dont have a problem with Nash on this team, I know Im in the minority. When he is really the only offensive threat on the team, its easy to shut him down. No one is playing good on this team, no one. Im not absolving him of playing poorly, but the team is struggling as a whole, and he has also been moved away from Step and Krieder for a couple of games and then was put back. IMO, his trade didnt hurt the team because the players we gave up werent doing anything here really either. Anisimov was the only one that IMO would have really benefitted from AV, but no one expected Torts to be fired this summer. IMO, the trade that hurt this team was the GAbby trade because we gave up scoring without bringing any back, and it took away from having a 1-2 punch on two different lines. If this team had another legit scorer, I think we wouldnt be as worried as we are right now.

RichieNextel305
12-19-2013, 12:03 PM
...?

No clue how that posted twice.

josh
12-19-2013, 12:09 PM
I thought Nash was fine, last night. He has some chances, passed a couple times when he shouldn't, but that crap happens when a team is struggling like this. The entire line was trying to do too much. Settle down, skate, shoot, crash the net.

Ba Ba Bluey
12-19-2013, 12:28 PM
Nash played on crappy Columbus teams, so this shouldn't be new to him. The guy has no spark and brings nothing to this team when he isn't scoring goals.

He's compete level is pretty low and he's far away from being an "impact" player at this point.

I want to see him take over a game and dominate...

CreaseCrusader91
12-19-2013, 12:45 PM
I wonder when Brooks is going to write about this.

ZebraDude
12-19-2013, 12:52 PM
I kinda zeroed in on him last night while at the game. The guy plays "stiff" for lack of any other term. His hands are made of stone and he has no fluidity. Terrible comparison, but when watching Crosby, he's like Gumby. The guy twists and turns and contorts himself any way he can to break his checks. Nash just stiffly spins and is easily knocked off the puck. He's a big stiffy!

Phil in Absentia
12-19-2013, 12:55 PM
No wonder the ladies love him so...

Morphinity
12-19-2013, 12:58 PM
No wonder the ladies love him so...

Hey, baby :bravery:

http://smelltheglove.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/rick-nashmustache.jpg

Dunny
12-19-2013, 01:02 PM
I'm very very close with a girl (sister really) who was banging Rick for a couple years. She still loves the guy, has nothing bad to say about him at all.

Morphinity
12-19-2013, 01:03 PM
Well at least we know he's a Cassanova.

Mike
12-19-2013, 01:06 PM
I'm very very close with a girl (sister really) who was banging Rick for a couple years. She still loves the guy, has nothing bad to say about him at all.

For 7.8 I'll nail both of them.

ZebraDude
12-19-2013, 01:08 PM
For 7.8 I'll nail both of them.

Sold! Send the 7.8 to Dunny....in toonies, 'natch eh?

Puck Head
12-19-2013, 01:13 PM
I'm very very close with a girl (sister really) who was banging Rick for a couple years. She still loves the guy, has nothing bad to say about him at all.

He's probably one of the nicer guys in the NHL from what I've seen.
That being said, he's probably too nice. Just doesn't play the game with any kind of edge.
Looks like a man having fun playing a game with a contract he loves.

I'd like a redo on the Nash, Gaborik and Clowe trades.

NYR2711
12-19-2013, 01:19 PM
Nash played on crappy Columbus teams, so this shouldn't be new to him. The guy has no spark and brings nothing to this team when he isn't scoring goals.

He's compete level is pretty low and he's far away from being an "impact" player at this point.

I want to see him take over a game and dominate...

And that Columbus team wasn't a team of third line grinders and had some skilled offensive players. This team has none of them.

Puck Head
12-19-2013, 01:22 PM
And that Columbus team wasn't a team of third line grinders and had some skilled offensive players. This team has none of them.

Richards, Stepan, Kredier, Zuuc, McDonagh.....that's as much supporting cast as he ever had in Columbus.

Pete
12-19-2013, 02:06 PM
Nash played on crappy Columbus teams, so this shouldn't be new to him. The guy has no spark and brings nothing to this team when he isn't scoring goals.

He's compete level is pretty low and he's far away from being an "impact" player at this point.

I want to see him take over a game and dominate...

I see this complaint here, and I read it about Gaby...And Zherdev...And Jagr. Get used to it, folks. Not every NHL player is Datsyuk. That's why Datsyuk is who he is.

Goal scorers score goal. I don't expect anything but offense from Nash, and neither should anyone else, really.

!br-avery!
12-19-2013, 02:08 PM
He was playing pretty good when he first came back,like Many other players at times this season,he's in a rut.He will find his way out but we need more help offensively to lessen the burden on him.if we had a couple more scorers it would help a ton.

dome
12-19-2013, 05:11 PM
He seems too passive.

IMO he would benefit from a player/leader firing him up. This is where I see Thornton coming in for Sather to overpay

JOHN
12-19-2013, 07:02 PM
I see this complaint here, and I read it about Gaby...And Zherdev...And Jagr. Get used to it, folks. Not every NHL player is Datsyuk. That's why Datsyuk is who he is.

Goal scorers score goal. I don't expect anything but offense from Nash, and neither should anyone else, really.

The reason though that a lot of us defended Gaborik and Jagr to death though was that, even at their worst here, they still felt dangerous when they touched the puck. It felt like something could happen. With Nash, I have never had that feeling. The 15 game stretch he had last year was pretty close, but even still he has no ability to make a play for himself, and if you can't use your line mates to set yourself up, you can't maximize your talents. Gaborik did it, Jagr did it, and when Zherdev wasn't busy being crazy he did it too.

ThirtyONE
12-19-2013, 07:06 PM
Zherdev was a total bust. Let's not get crazy. Nash has been okay. Not great. Not even good. But okay. He's been okay his whole career playing with bad players. Guess what? He's still playing with bad players. I don't like Nash, I don't even like the idea of Nash on this team but he's doing what he's always done throughout his career. The only way you can be upset is if you expected him to be something he's not.

Pete
12-19-2013, 07:34 PM
Zherdev wasn't a bust IMO.

The Dude
12-19-2013, 08:14 PM
Yeah. Ummmm. 1 goal in 5 games and we are mad?

He's gonna go on a tear. Needs consistant line mates. May need someone riding shot gun for him as well.

His game fits the system. His linemates don't fit him. So many times you see him take the puck deep and he's got nobody going with him or to the net. I think he'd played better recently and will get hot. We will see what this guy can do by himself.

JOHN
12-19-2013, 08:30 PM
Zherdev wasn't a bust IMO.

Agreed. His attitude was his problem, not his play. The guy put up good numbers on a god awful team.

Kevin
12-19-2013, 08:50 PM
Ryan Parent (at the time, a top defensive prospect), Scottie Upshall, a 1st and a 3rd. The Flyers traded that first back to Nashville for the rights to Hartnell and Timonen.

In essence, it was Forsberg for Parent, Upshall, Timonen, Hartnell and a 3rd.
I think he meant Filip Forsberg who was traded to Nashville last year for Erat.

Rangers
12-19-2013, 09:02 PM
I think he meant Filip Forsberg who was traded to Nashville last year for Erat.

Exactly what i meant.

BlueJay
12-19-2013, 10:06 PM
Extremely disappointed with Rick Nash thus far, do over!

Respecttheblue
12-19-2013, 10:19 PM
Yeah. Ummmm. 1 goal in 5 games and we are mad?

He's gonna go on a tear. Needs consistant line mates. May need someone riding shot gun for him as well.

His game fits the system. His linemates don't fit him. So many times you see him take the puck deep and he's got nobody going with him or to the net. I think he'd played better recently and will get hot. We will see what this guy can do by himself.

<I feel a rambling dog rant coming on>

Some of them fit OK last year — at least until that horrorshow acid test in the payoffs against Boston where our heroes rolled over and played possum.

This year Stepan just seems off, even though his numbers right now are comparable to 2011-12, I think we've come to expect more. I'm kinda more mystified by Stepan and Brassard than I am by Nash, who had his clock/cleaned/bell rung this season. Not that I expect him to heave the team on his shoulders like a vintage Messier, but we know he was capable of stretches of better higher level regular season play at least.

But together the two of them — Steps and Nash — [I]play with a soft and fluffy edge a little too much of the time, though I did see Nash rub a Wilkes-Barre Penguin into the boards pretty good last night, but hey...thank goodness for small mercies, it might have helped us somehow to that extra point, right, *cough*.

Add Kreider in there and you have a bit more aggro in the top 6, though not near enough. Again, Steps, grow some fangs a bit will ya! A bit of snarl, you know.

But then much of the team is only producing "it" — that kind of offensive intensity and flow that some of us are craving — in fit and starts, and little spurts right now. They're making Zook look like Mr. Consistency, and he deserves some credit.

The situation reminds me of one of the anecdotes from McDonagh's High School career — they had him play forward because they needed the power offense he brought that not enough of their forwards did! Well we're in about the same situation as that Cretin-Derham high school team during some shifts. McD ... wanna play forward again? JK JK
<end dog rant>

fletch
12-20-2013, 05:52 AM
I dont have a problem with Nash on this team, I know Im in the minority. When he is really the only offensive threat on the team, its easy to shut him down. No one is playing good on this team, no one. Im not absolving him of playing poorly, but the team is struggling as a whole, and he has also been moved away from Step and Krieder for a couple of games and then was put back. IMO, his trade didnt hurt the team because the players we gave up werent doing anything here really either. Anisimov was the only one that IMO would have really benefitted from AV, but no one expected Torts to be fired this summer. IMO, the trade that hurt this team was the GAbby trade because we gave up scoring without bringing any back, and it took away from having a 1-2 punch on two different lines. If this team had another legit scorer, I think we wouldnt be as worried as we are right now.


He's probably one of the nicer guys in the NHL from what I've seen.
That being said, he's probably too nice. Just doesn't play the game with any kind of edge.
Looks like a man having fun playing a game with a contract he loves.

I'd like a redo on the Nash, Gaborik and Clowe trades.

A few factors for me:
Nash is a skilled offensive player without a mean streak, coming back from a concussion. NYR are struggling as team. Kreider and Stepan are fine as linemates, but I'd like to see Hagelin with Nash occasionally (speed to open up ice). Superstars should create more chances for themselves, but it's hard with a team that has few scorers, and Nash potentially has some concerns about another head shot. Not much deterrence on this team, so opponents are free to take shots at Nash, Lundqvist, etc. without fear of retaliation.

When NYR improves play, I expect Nash will be one who is leading the way (another day... what can I say?) Just a bad stretch - things will feel better when NYR win a few games in a row. It's shaping up to be a cupless year, more concerning is the lack of direction to the franchise. No confidence that we're building a cup contender.

Ba Ba Bluey
12-20-2013, 09:03 AM
I see this complaint here, and I read it about Gaby...And Zherdev...And Jagr. Get used to it, folks. Not every NHL player is Datsyuk. That's why Datsyuk is who he is.

Goal scorers score goal. I don't expect anything but offense from Nash, and neither should anyone else, really.


The reason though that a lot of us defended Gaborik and Jagr to death though was that, even at their worst here, they still felt dangerous when they touched the puck. It felt like something could happen. With Nash, I have never had that feeling. The 15 game stretch he had last year was pretty close, but even still he has no ability to make a play for himself, and if you can't use your line mates to set yourself up, you can't maximize your talents. Gaborik did it, Jagr did it, and when Zherdev wasn't busy being crazy he did it too.

I was gonna respond, but Chappie pretty much summed it up. Even when Gabby was slumping, he still threw everything he had at the net and created chances. I know what goal-scorers do, we traded ours to Columbus for a bunch of butt-plugs. I don't ever see Nash dominate or takeover a game. My expectations for him were much higher than what I've seen.

And you may have seen that complaint before about those players, but you never saw it from me........so all I have to say to you Peetie is:

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view7/4385426/dodgeball-scooter-o.gif

JOHN
12-20-2013, 09:05 AM
I was gonna respond, but Chappie pretty much summed it up. Even when Gabby was slumping, he still threw everything he had at the net and created chances. I know what goal-scorers do, we traded ours to Columbus for a bunch of butt-plugs. I don't ever see Nash dominate or takeover a game. My expectations for him were much higher than what I've seen.

And you may have seen that complaint before about those players, but you never saw it from me........so all I have to say to you Peetie is:

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view7/4385426/dodgeball-scooter-o.gif

:rofl:

Fuhgeddaboudit
12-20-2013, 09:22 AM
He's "so nashty"

Phil in Absentia
12-20-2013, 09:23 AM
Ryan Parent (at the time, a top defensive prospect), Scottie Upshall, a 1st and a 3rd. The Flyers traded that first back to Nashville for the rights to Hartnell and Timonen.

In essence, it was Forsberg for Parent, Upshall, Timonen, Hartnell and a 3rd.

He's talking about Filip, not Peter. The Forsberg for Erat deal.

Mike
12-20-2013, 10:02 AM
Nash is in the same position here, as he was in Columbus. Shit, we're the BlueJackets in Ranger sweaters. He's the best player who's relied upon to carry the offense on a team that has none. Without knowing too much about all those Jacket teams, I'd like to think that we're a little more talented than any of those teams were. He can't disappear for 2-3 games, as I'm sure he did in Columbus. It's not acceptable here, and he's going to start to feel the heat even more if he continues to play 1 in every 3-4 games. I'd also like to add that I'm sick of the concussion excuse, not only with Nash, but with any Ranger, and any player. They're cleared to play, they're not concussed anymore. If you're scared, then fuckin retire. Crosby has had 43 concussions, and that mother fucker gets better every time he comes back. NO EXCUSES.

Pete
12-20-2013, 10:25 AM
I was gonna respond, but Chappie pretty much summed it up. Even when Gabby was slumping, he still threw everything he had at the net and created chances. I know what goal-scorers do, we traded ours to Columbus for a bunch of butt-plugs. I don't ever see Nash dominate or takeover a game. My expectations for him were much higher than what I've seen.

And you may have seen that complaint before about those players, but you never saw it from me........so all I have to say to you Peetie is:

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view7/4385426/dodgeball-scooter-o.gif

OK, that's great, but now it just seems you're selectively complaining about Nash...Come on there were games last year when you didn't even know Gaborik was playing (other times he was involved, just not scoring, and people made a big deal about it anyway) and Zherdev stopped playing in February. I had no problem with either player, players sometimes slump. But acting like when these guys were slumping they were somehow better than when Nash is slumping is revisionist history, or too much

http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/HBD_jimmy.gif

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/198/010/tysonreaction.gif

My issue isn't with Nash, it's what we gave up to get Nash, and what we had to give up to cover up giving up too much for Nash.

Ba Ba Bluey
12-20-2013, 10:57 AM
OK, that's great, but now it just seems you're selectively complaining about Nash...Come on there were games last year when you didn't even know Gaborik was playing (other times he was involved, just not scoring, and people made a big deal about it anyway) and Zherdev stopped playing in February. I had no problem with either player, players sometimes slump. But acting like when these guys were slumping they were somehow better than when Nash is slumping is revisionist history, or too much

My issue isn't with Nash, it's what we gave up to get Nash, and what we had to give up to cover up giving up too much for Nash.

I selectively complain about everything, where have you been?

Like you just said, Gabs was involved while not scoring. Maybe I'm being a hater or maybe I'm expecting too much out of Nash, but IMO, since he arrived there's been more instances where you don't even notice he's playing than times he's been a gamebreaker. Guy was an absolute ghost during the playoffs and besides the occasional breakaway, dude has been pedestrian. Would you consider him dangerous?

fletch
12-20-2013, 10:59 AM
Nash is in the same position here, as he was in Columbus. Shit, we're the BlueJackets in Ranger sweaters. He's the best player who's relied upon to carry the offense on a team that has none. Without knowing too much about all those Jacket teams, I'd like to think that we're a little more talented than any of those teams were. He can't disappear for 2-3 games, as I'm sure he did in Columbus. It's not acceptable here, and he's going to start to feel the heat even more if he continues to play 1 in every 3-4 games. I'd also like to add that I'm sick of the concussion excuse, not only with Nash, but with any Ranger, and any player. They're cleared to play, they're not concussed anymore. If you're scared, then fuckin retire. Crosby has had 43 concussions, and that mother fucker gets better every time he comes back. NO EXCUSES.

It's just human nature. After you've got your bell rung a few times, it's harder to go balls to the wall. If you are scared, you do have to retire.

Have you had a concussion? Freaky. I haven't had anything to the extent of these athletes. But I've taken shots to the head that have left me disoriented. I'd move to my left, and it would take a couple seconds for my mind to realize I was going left. Kind of like a lag with computers/electronics when you see someone's lips move on the screen, but you don't hear the words until a couple of seconds later.

These guys have taken many more and much harder hits than I ever took. So I understand if a player doesn't always have their head down charging for the puck. You can play with total disregard for your own safety, and have a short career. Or, you can play with some restraint. You can call them a pussy. But head injuries are scary and cumulative, and these guys are one hit away from getting Lindrosed out of the league.

Mike
12-20-2013, 11:11 AM
It's just human nature. After you've got your bell rung a few times, it's harder to go balls to the wall. If you are scared, you do have to retire.

Have you had a concussion? Freaky. I haven't had anything to the extent of these athletes. But I've taken shots to the head that have left me disoriented. I'd move to my left, and it would take a couple seconds for my mind to realize I was going left. Kind of like a lag with computers/electronics when you see someone's lips move on the screen, but you don't hear the words until a couple of seconds later.

These guys have taken many more and much harder hits than I ever took. So I understand if a player doesn't always have their head down charging for the puck. You can play with total disregard for your own safety, and have a short career. Or, you can play with some restraint. You can call them a pussy. But head injuries are scary and cumulative, and these guys are one hit away from getting Lindrosed out of the league.

4, maybe 5, cant remember. All from hits. I know 2 were from hitting my head on the ice, 1 from hitting it on the boards, and 1 from skating with my head down in the neutral zone and almost biting my tongue in half. I still feel that one from time to time. When you feel better, it's like it never happened. It's all mental after that. It's not like a sore knee or shoulder from surgery. The results come years later ... occasional dizziness, forgetfulness, losing train of thought, etc ... I've been to doctors for it, and they said it's from concussions even if they were from 20+ years ago. You see it now with former hockey and football players, so I feel they're right, or I'd have to admit that I'm a just a fuckin idiot.

momentum
12-20-2013, 12:02 PM
I have to strongly disagree with the ppl saying Gaborik was so dangerous every time he touched the puck and when not scoring at least he was involved. NO. There were TONS of complaints about Gaborik being totally invisible and I PERSONALLY remember defending him in several posts saying he's not a fancy player, he's a sniper and will float behind the play ready to jump on a chance, an opportunist. But when the opportunities are not there he can turn invisible even though he's trying as hard as a game where he scores as hat trick, only the results were different. He can shoot a couple of shots in a game that were inches from being goals but they weren't and the rest of the game he would "seem" invisible. The next game he could do the exact same thing but those couple of pucks when into the net and he had a 2 goal game, both games playing identical with same effort level. That's just the type of player he was.

Now I hear ppl saying how Gaborik was always so visible and tried so hard etc etc. Funny how quickly ppl forget and how everything was always better before/the grass is also always greener. Just what we have right now suck....all the time. But when it becomes the past it turns great I guess.

Nash is in a funk like the entire team. Hopefully both can straighten out and work out the issues whether through improved play or trades or whatever.

Patrick Bateman
12-20-2013, 12:18 PM
Yep, towards the end of his time here, almost all of Gaboriks goals were scored by cleaning up the garbage in front of the net. He wasn't sniping shit, and he certainly wasn't dangling.

fletch
12-20-2013, 12:26 PM
4, maybe 5, cant remember. All from hits. I know 2 were from hitting my head on the ice, 1 from hitting it on the boards, and 1 from skating with my head down in the neutral zone and almost biting my tongue in half. I still feel that one from time to time. When you feel better, it's like it never happened. It's all mental after that. It's not like a sore knee or shoulder from surgery. The results come years later ... occasional dizziness, forgetfulness, losing train of thought, etc ... I've been to doctors for it, and they said it's from concussions even if they were from 20+ years ago. You see it now with former hockey and football players, so I feel they're right, or I'd have to admit that I'm a just a fuckin idiot.

You've had more severe head traumas than I've had. It's gets weirder as you get older. Loved one tells me that I forgot to do something, ha ha ha, silly me. I usually chalk it up to not paying enough attention, but sometimes I wonder.

So I'm hypocritical - I want Rangers to fight, claw, and do everything possible to win. But when they retire, I'm not going to give a second thought to what their daily life is like. No one feels sorry for the retired former athlete, when they run out of money, or their spouse leaves them, or they get lost on the way home from the store. Unless we see them on TV (like Mohammed Ali shaking like a leaf), and then we feel some empathy. Out of sight, out of mind.

Myusername
12-20-2013, 12:46 PM
I have to strongly disagree with the ppl saying Gaborik was so dangerous every time he touched the puck and when not scoring at least he was involved. NO. There were TONS of complaints about Gaborik being totally invisible and I PERSONALLY remember defending him in several posts saying he's not a fancy player, he's a sniper and will float behind the play ready to jump on a chance, an opportunist. But when the opportunities are not there he can turn invisible even though he's trying as hard as a game where he scores as hat trick, only the results were different. He can shoot a couple of shots in a game that were inches from being goals but they weren't and the rest of the game he would "seem" invisible. The next game he could do the exact same thing but those couple of pucks when into the net and he had a 2 goal game, both games playing identical with same effort level. That's just the type of player he was.

Now I hear ppl saying how Gaborik was always so visible and tried so hard etc etc. Funny how quickly ppl forget and how everything was always better before/the grass is also always greener. Just what we have right now suck....all the time. But when it becomes the past it turns great I guess.

Nash is in a funk like the entire team. Hopefully both can straighten out and work out the issues whether through improved play or trades or whatever.

Totally agree man, and completely disagree with the notion that Gaboik was dangerous every game. Simply not true, especially the season he got traded when he looked like a total shell of his former self and was floating on a regular basis. Jagr yes, Gaborik hell no.

That said, Nash hasn't been that much better although his production is decent. Then again, some people are expecting way too much or never watched him in Columbus. He never really took over games... He's just not that type of player. There is a reason we didn't have to give up anything significant for him. That said, he needs to start playing at least like he did last season. He's mailing it in

Rangers
12-20-2013, 01:13 PM
http://www.rantsports.com/nhl/2013/12/19/rick-nash-needs-to-be-dominant-every-game-for-new-york-rangers/

The truth is that the Rangers need at least one goal per game from Nash. The only man on the Ranger roster that comes close to his talent level is rookie Chris Kreider, and Mats Zuccarello is trying his hardest to reach that level this season. Nash, however, was brought to New York to be the Rangers’ best player.

Best player is not what we have in him.

Read more at http://www.rantsports.com/nhl/2013/12/19/rick-nash-needs-to-be-dominant-every-game-for-new-york-rangers/#Vu5eJKB2MKkF5Dsx.99

ThirtyONE
12-20-2013, 01:14 PM
You don't know what you got till it's gone...

People hated Jagr, booed him even. People hated Gabby, wanted him traded all year, and now it's "I wish Nash was more like them." Gaborik wasn't great last year. He looked like he was coming off shoulder surgery, which he was, but the thing about Gabby and Jagr that made them different than Nash was toughness. Both mentally and physically.

Now you might laugh at that because people on this board were called Gaborik "GLASS" his whole Ranger career but the fact is he might have ruined his career playing hurt for us in the playoffs. He no longer has the lethal wrist shot he once did because of that shoulder injury he sustained in round one but you know what he kept playing and scored one of the biggest goals that year in triple OT. Jagr was just a tank of a man and rarely sat out and I think a lot of what he's done throughout his career (which is a lot) has to do with his mental make up. He a tough son of a bitch even now at 41.

Rick Nash is not on that level. Mentally or physically. We saw what he did last spring. Nothing. And yet he told us himself, he was "good." That's just what Rick Nash is. He doesn't expect himself to do more that what he does. That's part of the reason he's not elite, IMO. He has the skill but not the same drive as someone like Ovi or Crosby or Kane or Towes. Those guys will their teams to win while Nash is along for the ride.

I can't hate that. There are a lot of guys in the NHL like that. Guy who are just part of the team. Guys who just blend in. That's fine. But Jagr took a team that was supposed to finish last and nearly won the division. Gaborik was the only "talented" player on the team when he first signed here and he potted 40 goals and 40 assists, then played hurt all the way through to the ECF a few years later. Rick Nash doesn't have the same swagger those guys did. He's just "one of the guys."

Johnnydollaz18
12-20-2013, 07:04 PM
2 goals tonight, calling it now.

Mike
12-20-2013, 07:06 PM
2 goals tonight, calling it now.

Yeah, our stars seem to shine against the Islanders. I think Gaborik scored 34 of his 40 goals against them in one year.

!br-avery!
12-20-2013, 07:51 PM
Hey he had one good shot at least

RichieNextel305
12-21-2013, 03:19 AM
Another horrific performance from the gutless wonder. Trade his ass if anyone wants him.

momentum
12-21-2013, 09:05 AM
Another horrific performance from the gutless wonder. Trade his ass if anyone wants him.

I thought he was pretty ok actually, visibly trying and made some plays happen that Stepan fucked up..but..not goals so not good enough.
REALLY don't like Stepan and him together, I don't care if they played well at some stretch in the past it's not working, Stepan doenst have the means to keep up with either him or Kreider IMO. I would try Brassard or even Miller instead of Stepan with Nash.

Pete
12-21-2013, 09:26 AM
Nash has played with every center we have. Maybe it's just him.

RichieNextel305
12-21-2013, 12:48 PM
At the money he's making, he's not even close to being a quarter as good as he should be. Outside of that one stretch last year when he was scoring at an absurd clip, he hasn't done much here at all. He could get away with 1 dominating game out of 5 or 6 with CBJ. It won't happen here. He'll be called out for his inconsistent bullshit in New York. And he is being called out for it. The sad thing is, from a mental POV, I don't know if it's something that could push a player like him to be better. I don't know if this is the right environment for a player as fragile minded as Nash.

Dr. Jimmy
12-21-2013, 12:58 PM
You don't know what you got till it's gone...

People hated Jagr, booed him even. People hated Gabby, wanted him traded all year, and now it's "I wish Nash was more like them." Gaborik wasn't great last year. He looked like he was coming off shoulder surgery, which he was, but the thing about Gabby and Jagr that made them different than Nash was toughness. Both mentally and physically.

Now you might laugh at that because people on this board were called Gaborik "GLASS" his whole Ranger career but the fact is he might have ruined his career playing hurt for us in the playoffs. He no longer has the lethal wrist shot he once did because of that shoulder injury he sustained in round one but you know what he kept playing and scored one of the biggest goals that year in triple OT. Jagr was just a tank of a man and rarely sat out and I think a lot of what he's done throughout his career (which is a lot) has to do with his mental make up. He a tough son of a bitch even now at 41.

Rick Nash is not on that level. Mentally or physically. We saw what he did last spring. Nothing. And yet he told us himself, he was "good." That's just what Rick Nash is. He doesn't expect himself to do more that what he does. That's part of the reason he's not elite, IMO. He has the skill but not the same drive as someone like Ovi or Crosby or Kane or Towes. Those guys will their teams to win while Nash is along for the ride.

I can't hate that. There are a lot of guys in the NHL like that. Guy who are just part of the team. Guys who just blend in. That's fine. But Jagr took a team that was supposed to finish last and nearly won the division. Gaborik was the only "talented" player on the team when he first signed here and he potted 40 goals and 40 assists, then played hurt all the way through to the ECF a few years later. Rick Nash doesn't have the same swagger those guys did. He's just "one of the guys."

Spot on.

Never thought of him as an elite player even with the CBJ's. Best player on their team? Perhaps, but elite, not close.

momentum
12-21-2013, 01:15 PM
Nash has played with every center we have. Maybe it's just him.

Maybe but I see him create chances over and over again that a talented center would finish.

momentum
12-21-2013, 01:27 PM
Spot on.

Never thought of him as an elite player even with the CBJ's. Best player on their team? Perhaps, but elite, not close.

I actually would put Gaborik in the same class as Nash in the way that they are simply just goal scorers, neither one is a player like Jagr who has the ability to put a team on their back and win games alone, Gaborik might have been an even more dangerous goal scorer than Nash when he still had his wrist shot but both are streaky and just produces goals on an uneven basis. When not scoring neither one is hurting the team but neither are they exactly helping. I never thought of Nash as on Jagr's level, Jagr is one of the best players to every have played BUT I did think of him as a simlarISH player in the style that he plays, meaning he makes a lot of moves and is hard to knock off the puck when on his game and is decent at setting up his line mates as well, more well rounded perhaps than Gaborik who was a pure sniper who you barely saw until he scored (which was his game and why he was good), just a different style.
I def thought though that Nash could increase he's stat output from Columbus where he as a 65 ish 30-35 goal player to more 40-40 80 point something player which is where I think his actual talent level is. His projection level last year was close to this 40-40 but still not as good as I thought he could be. Now our team is not very much more talented than Columbus tbh so I guess it's foolish now to expect any much bigger out put than the 30-35 goals 65 ish points that he was putting up on Columbus.

He does seem like he gives up on plays too easy though sometimes which i did not see earlier in his career so I def question his drive right now and often he makes one or two moves too much when he should just shoot the puck. If you watch him he's clearly a case of a player with tons of talent but that needs to learn to keep it simple sometimes, sometimes watching him dipsy doodle too much he makes me think of that story of the wizard who was so skilled that he made himself disappear.

Also ppl keep saying Nash has sucked except for that short stretch last year of 15 games where he was very dominating, well keep in mind that we only played around 40 games last year so dominating 15 of them isn't so bad tbh, it's almost half that season. He obviously has the ability to dominate a game with his talent but for some reason he just haven't been able to do it now. Whether its injuries or the whole team sucking or himself just given up who knows.

I still really like Nash though, I think he's superbly talented and I find him entertaining to watch most of the time. I have hopes that he can put it together better for us if the team straightens out more. Everyone is struggling and I feel all players are playing distracted waiting for what's going to happen instead of just going out working keeping it simple.

I might be one of the very few but I'm very happy he's on our team.

Puck Head
12-21-2013, 02:00 PM
Hard to compare anybody to Jagr.
Right now Ovechkin and Crosby would be damn lucky to end up with his career. At their absolute best, they are equal to Jagr when he was younger.
Nash and Gaborik are a long ways from that.

Puck Head
12-21-2013, 02:01 PM
Hard to compare anybody to Jagr.
Right now Ovechkin and Crosby would be damn lucky to end up with his career. At their absolute best, they are equal to Jagr when he was younger.
Nash and Gaborik are a long ways from that.

!br-avery!
12-21-2013, 02:36 PM
I thought he was pretty ok actually, visibly trying and made some plays happen that Stepan fucked up..but..not goals so not good enough.
REALLY don't like Stepan and him together, I don't care if they played well at some stretch in the past it's not working, Stepan doenst have the means to keep up with either him or Kreider IMO. I would try Brassard or even Miller instead of Stepan with Nash.
Couple good shifts but too often he tried to do his one move and then I saw him shy away from contact a bunch of times like a big Vagine

Gorilla Salad
12-21-2013, 03:30 PM
BRINK BACK ZHERDEV!

2012-2013 Atlant Moscow Region-KHL 39Games 13G 24A 37PTS 20PIM (JUST KIDDING!)

Nash is quickly turning into an all-time disaster of a bust. What the hell is he afraid of on the ice, that shadow that looks just like him?

Any chance of trading him to a contending team out west? Trade him, dump Richards next year.

Amazing how many "potential star" players (not superstars) we have that just can't develop here. We had a defense first system that was a total failure and now the offensive system is an even bigger failure. This team is a giant pile of steaming shit. What a pathetic mess. Last night's game was the nail in the coffin. Time to gut this team and start over. At least we have a franchise goalie signed for the next 450 years.

ThirtyONE
12-21-2013, 03:39 PM
Defense first was not a total failure at all. Some people just simply didn't like it. And now we have to start over.

Steveace
12-21-2013, 04:05 PM
Nash looks like he's figure skating on the ice these past couple of games. He just glides around the ice and once in a blue moon h does the spin-aroma and losses the puck.

ThirtyONE
12-21-2013, 04:11 PM
I don't care how he does it or what he looks like but as long as he's putting up points I won't care. Right now he's not and for as much shit as hank gets (rightfully so) Nash is in the same boat.

Pete
12-21-2013, 04:21 PM
Defense first a failure? Team looked far more formidable doing that, than whatever they are doing now.

Gorilla Salad
12-21-2013, 04:39 PM
Defense first a failure? Team looked far more formidable doing that, than whatever they are doing now.


Yes, FAILURE.


NYR

2008–09*
21 12 7 - 2 26 4th in Atlantic (95 Pts.) 3 4 .429 Lost in First Round (WSH)

NYR

2009–10
82 38 33 - 11 87 4th in Atlantic -- -- -- Missed Playoffs

NYR

2010–11
82 44 33 - 5 93 3rd in Atlantic 1 4 .200 Lost in First Round (WSH)

NYR

2011–12
82 51 24 - 7 109 1st in Atlantic 10 10 .500 Lost in Conference Finals (NJD)

NYR

2012–13
48 26 18 - 4 56 2nd in Atlantic 5 7 .417 Lost in Second Round (BOS)


No cup, just a short sniff. Run out of town like a thief. FAILURE

Pete
12-21-2013, 04:41 PM
Nah. Not really.

Gorilla Salad
12-21-2013, 04:43 PM
Nah. Not really.

Really? What part do you consider a success? Or are you simply satisfied with moral victories? By the way, those were very few and far between.

Pete
12-21-2013, 04:46 PM
I just don't consider anything short of a Cup failure, as far as system is concerned. Players need to execute.

I don't subscribe to "we didn't win a Cup so the system was a failure". If that were the case 29 teams would change their system every summer.

Gorilla Salad
12-21-2013, 04:54 PM
I just don't consider anything short of a Cup failure, as far as system is concerned. Players need to execute.

I don't subscribe to "we didn't win a Cup so the system was a failure". If that were the case 29 teams would change their system every summer.

Oh come on. Really? Every team's #1 goal is to win the cup. Not winning the cup means you failed to meet your #1 goal. This team has gone nowhere since 1994. It's been year after year of promise and disappointment. This team needs to hit the giant reset button or else we are gong to suffer with the same bullshit until the date Sather drops dead sitting behind his desk. The ENTIRE executive staff from top down needs to GO and NOW. The team needs to be broken down, trade what we can, get some sort of return and start over.

Do you enjoy watching this shit night after night year after year? I have watched almost every single game for as long as I can remember and I'm just plain sick and tired of it.

Pete
12-21-2013, 04:59 PM
Oh come on. Really? Every team's #1 goal is to win the cup. Not winning the cup means you failed to meet your #1 goal. This team has gone nowhere since 1994. It's been year after year of promise and disappointment. This team needs to hit the giant reset button or else we are gong to suffer with the same bullshit until the date Sather drops dead sitting behind his desk. The ENTIRE executive staff from top down needs to GO and NOW. The team needs to be broken down, trade what we can, get some sort of return and start over.

Do you enjoy watching this shit night after night year after year? I have watched almost very single game for as long as I can remember and I'm just plain sick and tired of it.

I think you're misunderstanding my point. Teams fail, yes. But that doesn't make their "plan" or system a failure.

You said that defense first system was a failure because they didn't win a Cup playing it. I don't agree.

I mean, yea the roster sucks, but there's a way to get more out of it and AV ain't doing it.

Gorilla Salad
12-21-2013, 05:00 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46RoP_-PwRQ
Nash looks like he's figure skating on the ice these past couple of games. He just glides around the ice and once in a blue moon h does the spin-aroma and losses the puck.

Exactly. What happened to these type of moves where 4 guys on the other team have no clue what's going on ?

Puck Head
12-21-2013, 05:00 PM
Case in point
I bet ye Avs are pretty damn happy this season even without a cup

Gorilla Salad
12-21-2013, 05:06 PM
Tortarella's system failed because it took a toll on the player's bodies and they were a group of walking wounded barely able to skate come playoff time. Plus, they grew tired of his yelling and caustic attitude and he lost the room.

AV's system is a failure because suddenly Lundqvst looks like an AHL goalie night after night because the defense can't support him plus we have no one that can finish on the offensive side. We cant win 2-1 games anymore because we can't score 2 or hold the other team to 1.

Answer this question, when was the last time you were able to sit on your couch with a frosty beverage and a snack and sit and enjoy a game without constantly wondering what we could or should be, but simply aren't? When was the last time you watched a game in January and said "Yep, we got this, playoffs and cup, here we come".

Gorilla Salad
12-21-2013, 05:10 PM
Case in point
I bet ye Avs are pretty damn happy this season even without a cup

Colorado is 13 points better than us, are exciting to watch and are holding their own in a tough division. They win at home and on the road. I see potential to surprise there. Here? a dim bulb that's flickering towards death.

Puck Head
12-21-2013, 05:16 PM
Colorado is 13 points better than us, are exciting to watch and are holding their own in a tough division. They win at home and on the road. I see potential to surprise there. Here? a dim bulb that's flickering towards death.

My point was in reference to only one team a year meeting a goal.

Believe me, some of these GMs are pretty damn happy even when their team doesn't win the cup.
Reason being is the potential of the future and growth of their team.

Gorilla Salad
12-21-2013, 05:18 PM
My point was in reference to only one team a year meeting a goal.

Believe me, some of these GMs are pretty damn happy even when their team doesn't win the cup.
Reason being is the potential of the future and growth of their team.

We have neither of those things.

Puck Head
12-21-2013, 05:35 PM
We have neither of those things.

Oh I couldn't agree more with you.
Thus why I wanted certain veterans traded this season for prospects and picks.
Think about this....right now Buffalo has a brighter future then the Rangers.

Respecttheblue
12-21-2013, 05:37 PM
I just don't consider anything short of a Cup failure, as far as system is concerned. Players need to execute.

I don't subscribe to "we didn't win a Cup so the system was a failure". If that were the case 29 teams would change their system every summer.

Right, a satisfactorily executed system is just one part of necessary package.


Really? What part do you consider a success? Or are you simply satisfied with moral victories? By the way, those were very few and far between.

Not too many teams are getting much of a sniff of the cup. Pitt. Bos. Chi. LA. Detroit.
it's a pretty elite group, and the barrier to entry is high. Cracking that group is the key. The other year Boston exposed us in the playoffs, or we exposed ourselves as being woefully short of cracking the top group of elite teams, and it really doesn't seem to have gotten any better.

I'd guess these are some of the necessary ingredients — though I'm not sure exactly how many of the below ingredients are mandatory, but system ain't everything,

• an overwhelming desire to win and do what it takes to win
• consistent ability to score 1 more goal than the other team (amazing how that works)/find ways to win/ or play as more than sum of its parts
• drafting high, multiple times, a core of young fast durable #1 picks / or / equivalent mix of young and veteran players with great chemistry
• a hot or great goalie
• and a smart-enough coach who knows how to get the best from his people
• a system that doesn't neglect some vital aspect of the game
• luck (i.e not losing your star forward with a concussion, or star defenseman with a broken ankle [ice, Leetch slips, he falls]
• good health or great depth

When we came closest we had

When we came closest we had an obsolete system

Gorilla Salad
12-21-2013, 05:47 PM
Respecttheblue; Not too many teams are getting much of a sniff of the cup. Pitt. Bos. Chi. LA. Detroit.
it's a pretty elite group, and the barrier to entry is high.

And this year we have Boston, Tampa, Detroit, Montreal, Pittsburgh, Washington, Chicago, St. Louis, Colorado, Anaheim, Los Angeles, San Jose and Vancouver who ALL have a legitimate chance of winning the cup. 45% of teams in the league are in that possible elite status right now.

We are in one of the biggest market's in the league, with one of the most loyal fan bases. Yes, there is a salary cap but we have money to burn. We have not managed our finances well, nor selected for, developed or traded for players that can form a cohesive team that can contend for the ultimate prize. Why is that? Why do we constantly end up with 1B's and not 1A's? Look what Pittsburgh did to us the other night with an AHL defense and 1 superstar on offense. We looked like a bunch of monkeys fucking a football. And last night's Islander game was the ultimate in shit hockey. The first period alone was beyond words.

WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? WHERE?

Respecttheblue
12-21-2013, 05:50 PM
Not too many teams are getting much of a sniff of the cup. Pitt. Bos. Chi. LA. Detroit.
it's a pretty elite group, and the barrier to entry is high.



And this year we have Boston, Tampa, Detroit, Montreal, Pittsburgh, Washington, Chicago, St. Louis, Colorado, Anaheim, Los Angeles, San Jose and Vancouver who ALL have a legitimate chance of winning the cup. 45% of teams in the league are in that possible elite status right now.

We are in one of the biggest market's in the league, with one of the most loyal fan bases. Yes, there is a salary cap but we have money to burn. We have not managed our finances well, nor selected for, developed or traded for players that can form a cohesive team that can contend for the ultimate prize. Why is that? Why do we constantly end up with 1B's and not 1A's? Look what Pittsburgh did to us the other night with an AHL defense and 1 superstar on offense. We looked like a bunch of monkeys fucking a football. And last night's Islander game was the ultimate in shit hockey. The first period alone was beyond words.

WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? WHERE?

I don't know.

I got really depressed after posting that.

Sorry, can't help. I think it requires a bigger fix than I'm capable of getting my head around. ...
cue Rome [Wasn't Built in 14 years/a Day] 2.0, Slats 3.0?

As for Pittsburgh...I think Kunitz became an even better player when he got there. That was a brilliant fucking acquisition by them IMO and paid the most dividends. Ever notice how well Dupuis has done there since we let him go, a week before we signed Avery. Feck that bag of hockey playing eyebrows.

Gorilla Salad
12-21-2013, 05:52 PM
Plagiarized from another thread...:D






ZebraDude is online now Senior Member Junior Division
ZebraDude's Avatar
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Join Date:Nov 2011Location:A rink near youPosts:6,312Rep Power:22

His past success has ZERO to do with the team system being played. Absolutely zero. He won the fucking Vezina because of the INSANE SAVES our "great defensive system" forced him to make, game after game after game. If our great shot blocking system was such a security blanket, then why was he routinely called upon to make these insane saves every game? It's bullshit. He won "player of the game" on these boards more than any other player. How on earth can anyone say that his success was due to our "shot blocking"???? Have you really forgotten how he had to stand on his head to bail us out almost every game? How often did we ever say "well that was an easy game for Hank." Hardly ever. Did he win the Vezina for having easy games? Or did he win it for making incredible saves on a consistent basis? If the latter, the shot blocking myth is de-bunked.


Last edited by ZebraDude; Today at 05:46 PM.

Pete
12-21-2013, 06:02 PM
Tortarella's system failed because it took a toll on the player's bodies and they were a group of walking wounded barely able to skate come playoff time. Plus, they grew tired of his yelling and caustic attitude and he lost the room.

AV's system is a failure because suddenly Lundqvst looks like an AHL goalie night after night because the defense can't support him plus we have no one that can finish on the offensive side. We cant win 2-1 games anymore because we can't score 2 or hold the other team to 1.

Answer this question, when was the last time you were able to sit on your couch with a frosty beverage and a snack and sit and enjoy a game without constantly wondering what we could or should be, but simply aren't? When was the last time you watched a game in January and said "Yep, we got this, playoffs and cup, here we come".

Anyone saying that in January hasn't been around hockey too long.

Cup winners aren't picked in January.

Gorilla Salad
12-21-2013, 06:20 PM
Anyone saying that in January hasn't been around hockey too long.

Cup winners aren't picked in January.

No, 50 years isn't that long. You're right. The cup is won sometime in June based upon the number of games it takes to win 4 of the 7 scheduled games. In January, you've pretty much played over half of the 82 games in your scheduled season. In January, you pretty much know where your team is going and plan accordingly.

The 2014 NHL trading deadline is March 5th, which is a week after the Olympic break. Teams will have about 21 games to play from January through the Olympic break. So, in 21 games are you going to say that this team can put forth enough of an effort, based upon what you have seen, to contend for the cup? If not, if you were the GM, would you be looking to dump dead weight, useless and underperforming pieces and plan for next year. Or would you, stand pat and hope to go 21-0 and surge into 1st place?

The Rangers have 5 more games in December. If they win all 5, they will have 44 points and would still be 11 points behind Pittsburgh if the Pens were to lose every game in the same period. Would that make us "buyers" on our way to the cup ?

Just wondering. Since I really don't know that much about hockey.

ZebraDude
12-21-2013, 06:26 PM
We're not winning any kind of Cup this season. We likely aren't even making the playoffs this season. This team needs to be a seller this season. Start early, get there before the good deals are gone. Throw in a Sather bobblehead doll with every deal.

Pete
12-21-2013, 06:26 PM
No, 50 years isn't that long. You're right. The cup is won sometime in June based upon the number of games it takes to win 4 of the 7 scheduled games. In January, you've pretty much played over half of the 82 games in your scheduled season. In January, you pretty much know where your team is going and plan accordingly.

The 2014 NHL trading deadline is March 5th, which is a week after the Olympic break. Teams will have about 21 games to play from January through the Olympic break. So, in 21 games are you going to say that this team can put forth enough of an effort, based upon what you have seen, to contend for the cup? If not, if you were the GM, would you be looking to dump dead weight, useless and underperforming pieces and plan for next year. Or would you, stand pat and hope to go 21-0 and surge into 1st place?

The Rangers have 5 more games in December. If they win all 5, they will have 44 points and would still be 11 points behind Pittsburgh if the Pens were to lose every game in the same period. Would that make us "buyers" on our way to the cup ?

Just wondering. Since I really don't know that much about hockey.Can you show me the post where I said you don't know much about hockey? I can assure you that post does not exist.

Not sure what this post is supposed to prove. This is all common knowledge.

I'd be worried if a GM watched his team in January and said "yea, we got this, playoffs and cup, here we come."

So many things can change between January and June.

But 11-12 I felt pretty good about a playoff run. I don't think I've ever watched a team in January and think the "we're gonna win the Cup". Not even in '94...because the team in January looked NOTHING like the team at the deadline. Hence the reason I don't say things like that...In January.

BlueJay
12-21-2013, 06:32 PM
Calling Torts and his system a failure,is just a flat out lie. He knew what we had here and did exactly what was needed to win.
When a 3rd period came around, I actually watched the whole game, knowing we actually had a chance to win that game.

Now, I'm turning that shit off in the first period.

Gorilla Salad
12-21-2013, 06:46 PM
Can you show me the post where I said you don't know much about hockey? I can assure you that post does not exist. You said "Anyone saying that in January hasn't been around hockey too long. " I said exactly that. So I believe that's what you were responding to.

Not sure what this post is supposed to prove. This is all common knowledge. Just babbling

I'd be worried if a GM watched his team in January and said "yea, we got this, playoffs and cup, here we come." I think many GMs have said that followed by "What 1 or 2 pieces do we need to solidify this puzzle and make sure we win it all"

So many things can change between January and June. Yes, but you have a very good idea where you stand and if it's time to buy or sell.

But 11-12 I felt pretty good about a playoff run. I don't think I've ever watched a team in January and think the "we're gonna win the Cup". Not even in '94...because the team in January looked NOTHING like the team at the deadline. Hence the reason I don't say things like that...In January. . If I was the GM of the Pens or Washington, right now I know I can go 16-26 through the rest of the season and finish ahead of the Rangers unless they play better than .500 hockey. If I'm in the big chair, and I've seen what the Rangers have done, I know I'm in the driver's seat and I'm picking up those last pieces I mentioned earlier.

You can spot a good team that has the potential from a shit team that has no chance from a mile away. If the Islanders their win last 42 in a row, they'll still finish behind Pittsburgh if Pitt plays at the same level they are playing at now and go 31-18.

Gorilla Salad
12-21-2013, 07:17 PM
Calling Torts and his system a failure,is just a flat out lie. He knew what we had here and did exactly what was needed to win.
When a 3rd period came around, I actually watched the whole game, knowing we actually had a chance to win that game.

Now, I'm turning that shit off in the first period.

Win a few games yes. Win the big prize. NO. When you have the wrong pieces for a system, you don't take the cup. We had the wrong pieces then for that system, we have the wrong pieces now for this system. Both are failures.

ThirtyONE
12-21-2013, 07:21 PM
Win a few games yes. Win the big prize. NO. When you have the wrong pieces for a system, you don't take the cup. We had the wrong pieces then for that system, we have the wrong pieces now for this system. Both are failures.

Wow. I would say the exact opposite. We had the right peices and that's why we were able to go to the ECF. I would call that season and the building of personel and identity up to that season a major success. You do t have to win the cup to be considered a success.

Pete
12-21-2013, 08:02 PM
Can you show me the post where I said you don't know much about hockey? I can assure you that post does not exist. You said "Anyone saying that in January hasn't been around hockey too long. " I said exactly that. So I believe that's what you were responding to.

Not sure what this post is supposed to prove. This is all common knowledge. Just babbling

I'd be worried if a GM watched his team in January and said "yea, we got this, playoffs and cup, here we come." I think many GMs have said that followed by "What 1 or 2 pieces do we need to solidify this puzzle and make sure we win it all"

So many things can change between January and June. Yes, but you have a very good idea where you stand and if it's time to buy or sell.

But 11-12 I felt pretty good about a playoff run. I don't think I've ever watched a team in January and think the "we're gonna win the Cup". Not even in '94...because the team in January looked NOTHING like the team at the deadline. Hence the reason I don't say things like that...In January. . If I was the GM of the Pens or Washington, right now I know I can go 16-26 through the rest of the season and finish ahead of the Rangers unless they play better than .500 hockey. If I'm in the big chair, and I've seen what the Rangers have done, I know I'm in the driver's seat and I'm picking up those last pieces I mentioned earlier.

You can spot a good team that has the potential from a shit team that has no chance from a mile away. If the Islanders their win last 42 in a row, they'll still finish behind Pittsburgh if Pitt plays at the same level they are playing at now and go 31-18.

Couldn't disagree more. Plenty of stud teams become 1st round exits. Any GM who's "comfortable" about cup chances in January isn't doing their job.

Gorilla Salad
12-21-2013, 09:16 PM
Couldn't disagree more. Plenty of stud teams become 1st round exits. Any GM who's "comfortable" about cup chances in January isn't doing their job.

I never said they were comfortable, I said they should be confident and looking to improve their team even further.

Gorilla Salad
12-21-2013, 09:17 PM
Wow. I would say the exact opposite. We had the right peices and that's why we were able to go to the ECF. I would call that season and the building of personel and identity up to that season a major success. You do t have to win the cup to be considered a success.

OK then what happened? Two steps forward four steps back. How is that a success?

Pete
12-21-2013, 09:58 PM
I never said they were comfortable, I said they should be confident and looking to improve their team even further.

This sounds like comfort to me, sorry if I mistook it.

"Yep, we got this, playoffs and cup, here we come".

ZebraDude
12-21-2013, 10:32 PM
Wow. I would say the exact opposite. We had the right peices and that's why we were able to go to the ECF. I would call that season and the building of personel and identity up to that season a major success. You do t have to win the cup to be considered a success.

As a long suffering ranger fan, my measuring stick for "success" doesn't reach the Stanley Cup. As long as we play a fun style of hockey, I consider it a success. It's entertainment, after all. Nothing more. When you start taking it for more than that, anger and frustration sets in.

fletch
12-22-2013, 05:35 AM
Anyone saying that in January hasn't been around hockey too long.

Cup winners aren't picked in January.

But you can look at the standings in January and have a good idea who the favorites are. Sure, a team can come on late, or a low playoff seed can make a playoff run. But about halfway through the season, you can usually pick out the best teams - they've earned the most points.

Respecttheblue
12-22-2013, 08:11 AM
As a long suffering ranger fan, my measuring stick for "success" doesn't reach the Stanley Cup. As long as we play a fun style of hockey, I consider it a success. It's entertainment, after all. Nothing more. When you start taking it for more than that, anger and frustration sets in.
:repped:
Nice, need a bit more of that.

But dang, all this time I thought it was redemption, salvation, justification for existence, etc. Now what am I gonna do?

Anyway, this team's looking like dog-doo far too often.
And if Hank's going to be letting in softies on a routine basis, we've got an even bigger problem than whether this team can figure out how to get their act together.



“We have not done that on a consistent basis, and on a game to game basis. Just look at our lineup, look at our core group and look at our key guys and there’s the answer.”
...
“I’m hoping that with the experience that the players I’m talking about have, the sense of accountability and the sense of the responsibility that they should have, that I won’t need to get to that,” Vigneault said of potential benchings. “If we are going to get some traction, they’ve got to figure it out.

“I feel we’re all being tested right now, the coaches and that group and we need to find a way to get some traction consistently and respond.”
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/hockey/rangers/alain-issues-warning-500-rangers-stall-article-1.1536835


That was 12/4, Hank's still woeful, the core, such as it is, is still inconsistent and mentally absent too often, but then they always did lean on Hank to bail them out, and that's just not on the menu for Hank most nights.

I'd hate to sell the wrong pieces because Hank's not being Hank, but the problem seems to go deeper than that, but Madison Square Garden management do not like the word "rebuild." 2004 was a rarity, and a lockout made it much more feasible. But the natives are restless, and there's no doubt some of our assets are nearing their sell-by dates, if we want to get a meaningful return.

I'd like to say maybe it's time for some of these bozos to get their shyte together and bail Hank out in his time of need, or enjoy their new careers in a different town, but Hank's not even helping himself here. With a 47th-ranked GAA of 2.77 and a 53rd-ranked sv% of around .905, and an $8.5 million contract screaming "play me," we're in a bit of a tight spot if you like understatement, or screwed, if you prefer it straight.

Vodka Drunkenski
12-22-2013, 08:48 AM
As a long suffering ranger fan, my measuring stick for "success" doesn't reach the Stanley Cup. As long as we play a fun style of hockey, I consider it a success. It's entertainment, after all. Nothing more. When you start taking it for more than that, anger and frustration sets in.

You can say that about the Washington Capitals. Fun, exciting team, year in and year out. Always a team discussed as a possible cup winner.

But never took the next step as of yet.

Pete
12-22-2013, 10:01 AM
But you can look at the standings in January and have a good idea who the favorites are. Sure, a team can come on late, or a low playoff seed can make a playoff run. But about halfway through the season, you can usually pick out the best teams - they've earned the most points.

That's all very debateable as last year's Ducks will tell you.

But even so, I think its very short sighted to say, in January, "cup, here we come," and "we got this."

fletch
12-22-2013, 10:47 AM
That's all very debateable as last year's Ducks will tell you.

But even so, I think its very short sighted to say, in January, "cup, here we come," and "we got this."

It's probabilistic. If you have more points, you have a better chance at a better playoff position, home ice, and are playing better hockey. Low playoff seeds make deep runs, teams collapse late in the season, and teams play better as the playoffs approach. I'm talking about the majority of cases, not the outliers. You can point out all the outliers that you want, my premise is sound.

Pete
12-22-2013, 10:59 AM
It's probabilistic. If you have more points, you have a better chance at a better playoff position, home ice, and are playing better hockey. Low playoff seeds make deep runs, teams collapse late in the season, and teams play better as the playoffs approach. I'm talking about the majority of cases, not the outliers. You can point out all the outliers that you want, my premise is sound.

That's fine, but that's why they play the games and they don't just enter stats in to a machine, determine probability, and award the Cup based on that.

Sports legend is made by outliers. Even highly successful teams like last year's Blackhawks can be considered outliers based on their record setting point streak. We could debate this all day and have valid point on each side, of course, but my stance in this thread is: I think its very short sighted to say, in January, "cup, here we come," and "we got this."

I'd never feel that type of comfort level with to say "we got this", in January. Even in 11-12 it wasn't until the Winter Classic that I really started to believe what the team was capable of, but I wouldn't say I was relaxed and felt we had a Cup final locked up. I've seen this team crash and burn too many times. Disappointment leaves scars.

Rangers
12-22-2013, 11:19 AM
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/12/21/hartnett-rangers-problems-run-far-deeper-than-nashs-production-issues/

"Rick Nash has become a popular whipping boy among Rangers fans who expect the 6’4″ winger to carry the woeful Blueshirts on his back.
To demand more from Nash is fair given that he’s being paid a hefty $7.8 million salary and was a near point-per-game player in his first season in New York.
Let’s be clear. Nash needs to raise his game. One goal in seven games isn’t cutting it, yet to call Nash “soft” and “invisible” isn’t accurate."

While i do agree that we are not always right on making someone a scapegoat, i do believe Nash needs to do a lot more then what he is doing now.

Mike
12-22-2013, 11:31 AM
It's probabilistic. If you have more points, you have a better chance at a better playoff position, home ice, and are playing better hockey. Low playoff seeds make deep runs, teams collapse late in the season, and teams play better as the playoffs approach. I'm talking about the majority of cases, not the outliers. You can point out all the outliers that you want, my premise is sound.

Majority cases as in what? The 3-5 teams that are obvious to make the playoffs at that point? Because 3-5 isn't a majority in a league of 30. There are more teams in the league battling for a playoff spot in the last 2 months, then there are teams that are locked in already. We see it year after year, and prior to this year's playoff set up, we've seen 2 Southleast division teams battling to win the division just to get in. It was 3rd or out. I think you have about 3-4 teams in each conference that are obviously going to make it come January. Everyone else is in a dog fight for a berth. And to think that the 3-4 teams in each conference are content to be where they are without trying to improve the team for a run, well that just isn't true. The Stanley Cup is deemed as the hardest trophy to win in sports, yet GM's, coaches, and players are sitting there in January saying "Yeah, we got this shit"? Don't agree, at all.

ZebraDude
12-22-2013, 11:35 AM
You can say that about the Washington Capitals. Fun, exciting team, year in and year out. Always a team discussed as a possible cup winner.

But never took the next step as of yet.

Yup. They give their fans something to look forward to every game/every year.....as long as Ovechkin is in the mix, that is. There's the key....a cornerstone player that was obtained as an entry-level kid full of ambition.....and talent. Sigh.......

Steveace
12-22-2013, 12:10 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46RoP_-PwRQ

Exactly. What happened to these type of moves where 4 guys on the other team have no clue what's going on ?

Yeah we need him to do more of that. He's a big guy he just needs to take the puck and skate hard towards the net. Maybe he's still concussed lol

fletch
12-22-2013, 12:11 PM
That's fine, but that's why they play the games and they don't just enter stats in to a machine, determine probability, and award the Cup based on that.

Sports legend is made by outliers. Even highly successful teams like last year's Blackhawks can be considered outliers based on their record setting point streak. We could debate this all day and have valid point on each side, of course, but my stance in this thread is: I think its very short sighted to say, in January, "cup, here we come," and "we got this."

I'd never feel that type of comfort level with to say "we got this", in January. Even in 11-12 it wasn't until the Winter Classic that I really started to believe what the team was capable of, but I wouldn't say I was relaxed and felt we had a Cup final locked up. I've seen this team crash and burn too many times. Disappointment leaves scars.

I agree, sports would be boring as hell if we could always correctly predict who will win. I love the upsets in the NCAA basketball tournament, and always root for the double digit seeds.

Players are always trying to win and improve their playoff prospects (getting in or seed), coaches and GMs are trying to construct winning rosters. And you are right, teams should never be satisfied in January. One game at at time.

fletch
12-22-2013, 12:25 PM
Majority cases as in what? The 3-5 teams that are obvious to make the playoffs at that point? Because 3-5 isn't a majority in a league of 30. There are more teams in the league battling for a playoff spot in the last 2 months, then there are teams that are locked in already. We see it year after year, and prior to this year's playoff set up, we've seen 2 Southleast division teams battling to win the division just to get in. It was 3rd or out. I think you have about 3-4 teams in each conference that are obviously going to make it come January. Everyone else is in a dog fight for a berth. And to think that the 3-4 teams in each conference are content to be where they are without trying to improve the team for a run, well that just isn't true. The Stanley Cup is deemed as the hardest trophy to win in sports, yet GM's, coaches, and players are sitting there in January saying "Yeah, we got this shit"? Don't agree, at all.

I was a little loose with language, so probably was unclear. If you look at the standings in January, you have a pretty good picture of how the majority of teams are going to finish. Some are clear Cup favorites, some are borderline playoff teams, some are bottom of the barrel. A few teams will drastically improve or collapse. But the majority of teams will finish in a similar position to where they are in January.

Usually (but not always) a top seed (1-3) will win the Cup, although occasionally a low seed will make a deep run and get to the Finals and/or win.

Pretending this is January, with a few more games of information.
East:
Pittsburgh and Boston have the most points, and probabilistically have a good shot at reaching the Stanley Cup Finals. I wouldn't bet the house on Buffalo, Islanders, Florida, Columbus, Ottawa, or Rangers winning the Cup. Rest of teams are in middle. Fortunes can change (trades, injuries, etc.), but most of these teams aren't going to dramatically change their prospects this year.
West:
Anaheim, Chicago, Los Angeles, St Louis, and San Jose have the most points, and have the best shots at reaching the Stanley Cup Finals.
Edmonton, Calgary, Nashville, and Winnipeg have had poor seasons so far, and shouldn't have very high expectations.

Again, sports would be pretty boring if we could always predict winners/champions. But we've got some ideas about which teams have the best chances to go deep in the playoffs. But a few puck bounces or lucky goals or effort can swing a series and send an underdog past a favorite... and hockey is more of an effort/grit/bruises/blood sport (to get those 16 wins) which is why the playoffs are so riveting. And why I talk in terms of probability, not certainty.

thecurse0101
09-08-2014, 01:17 PM
Top 10 players/coaches on The Hot Seat

http://www.thehockeynews.com/blog/top-10-playerscoaches-on-the-hot-seat/

Our boy Ricky is number 1 on the list.


1. Rick Nash: The New York Rangers winger led the team in goals with 26 last season, but Nash simply can’t produce when his team needs him most. Including all his NHL playoff games and the two Olympics in which he has participated, Nash has seven goals in 54 games. There was a time when Nash seemed to be able to carry players on his back on his way to the opposing net. It seems now he can’t even get himself to the net, which is why he finds himself on the periphery so much.

Morphinity
09-08-2014, 01:22 PM
I was talking about it with my dad this weekend. He's public enemy number one. Expect the boo-birds to start raining down if he doesn't score early on in the season.

Slobberknocker
09-08-2014, 01:26 PM
man talk about thread necromancy. i'm as disappointed as the next guy about this years playoffs performance though the lack of production was an issue with all of our top guys.

i'd like to think that the concussion was a bit of an issue and that hopefully given the time that has passed maybe we'll get a better bang for our buck but who knows. maybe he is what he is.

Vodka Drunkenski
09-08-2014, 01:30 PM
Hopefully he doesn't played scared anymore.

Thump23
09-08-2014, 01:31 PM
I was talking about it with my dad this weekend. He's public enemy number one. Expect the boo-birds to start raining down if he doesn't score early on in the season.

The problem is, the entire world knows he's on the hot seat. But if he sucks, what recourse does this team really have? Who is gonna take on that contract?

Morphinity
09-08-2014, 01:36 PM
The problem is, the entire world knows he's on the hot seat. But if he sucks, what recourse does this team really have? Who is gonna take on that contract?

It may seem unlikely, but we've seen this question answered tons of times in the past - teams sometimes take on bad contracts in trades. If it gets really bad, they could even retain salary.

Mike
09-08-2014, 01:51 PM
What is leading people to believe that he's going to suck at the beginning of the season? He was our leading scorer 2 years in a row,and just sucked in the playoffs. By the time the sucking happens, it'll be too late to do anything about it.

Morphinity
09-08-2014, 01:53 PM
What is leading people to believe that he's going to suck at the beginning of the season? He was our leading scorer 2 years in a row,and just sucked in the playoffs. By the time the sucking happens, it'll be too late to do anything about it.

Nothing is leading anyone to believe that. It's just if it happens, he's going to have a bad time because he's on thin ice with the fans.

Also, even during the regular season, he's well known for going on 8-12 game "breaks". For his sake, just hope that this break doesn't happen from games 1-12.

Phil in Absentia
09-08-2014, 01:56 PM
Hopefully he doesn't played scared anymore.

I'm not sure fear is really the issue. I just think he lacks that same "fire" that a lot of the better post-season performers have. Let's call it a "give a shit" factor.

Nash cares, but he cares probably the minimum amount. He's that guy, to me, that when the season officially ends, basically heads to the locker room a little disappointed/angry, takes a quick shower, cleans out his locker and is already in summer-mode by the time he gets into his car.

Thump23
09-08-2014, 01:57 PM
What is leading people to believe that he's going to suck at the beginning of the season? He was our leading scorer 2 years in a row,and just sucked in the playoffs. By the time the sucking happens, it'll be too late to do anything about it.

Personally, I'm just losing faith in the guy. I'm sure my view and the team's view are different, though.

Future
09-08-2014, 02:38 PM
I'm not sure fear is really the issue. I just think he lacks that same "fire" that a lot of the better post-season performers have. Let's call it a "give a shit" factor.

Nash cares, but he cares probably the minimum amount. He's that guy, to me, that when the season officially ends, basically heads to the locker room a little disappointed/angry, takes a quick shower, cleans out his locker and is already in summer-mode by the time he gets into his car.
Sort of. I agree that he doesn't die with wins and losses, but I think the pressure certainly weighs on him or he wouldn't struggle in the playoffs.

I think he's a sport purist in that he plays for big moments, rather than to win at all costs. He plays in a vacuum, so to speak. There are lots of guys like that in every sport.

Vodka Drunkenski
09-08-2014, 03:21 PM
I'm not sure fear is really the issue. I just think he lacks that same "fire" that a lot of the better post-season performers have. Let's call it a "give a shit" factor. Nash cares, but he cares probably the minimum amount. He's that guy, to me, that when the season officially ends, basically heads to the locker room a little disappointed/angry, takes a quick shower, cleans out his locker and is already in summer-mode by the time he gets into his car.

I know I'll get killed for this but to me, he showed me that he gives a shit in the playoffs last year. Maybe not offensively but he did everything that was asked of him. I think he gave a shit even more the deeper they went. He was a much better offensive threat when he was going to the net with the puck, so much so that I said it reminded me of Lindros. Once he got the concussions, he changed his game.

Ba Ba Bluey
09-08-2014, 03:36 PM
I know I'll get killed for this but to me, he showed me that he gives a shit in the playoffs last year. Maybe not offensively but he did everything that was asked of him. I think he gave a shit even more the deeper they went. He was a much better offensive threat when he was going to the net with the puck, so much so that I said it reminded me of Lindros. Once he got the concussions, he changed his game.

Isn't that every player's responsibility though?

Vodka Drunkenski
09-08-2014, 03:38 PM
Isn't that every player's responsibility though?

Yes but not all of them do it. How many players didn't back check like asked or expected.

Ba Ba Bluey
09-08-2014, 03:54 PM
Yes but not all of them do it. How many players didn't back check like asked or expected.

True, can't really argue that.

I guess when you have an impact player like Nash, hearing "well, at least he back-checked properly.." gets a bit frustrating.

Vodka Drunkenski
09-08-2014, 04:02 PM
No doubt and that's where I blame playing scared and changing his offensive game because of the concussions.

fletch
09-08-2014, 04:02 PM
:deadhorse:

I'm OK with Nash and his scoring level in the regular season. He contributes in the playoffs - sorry if he's not putting up the points in the playoffs commensurate with his salary, but it's not like he's dogging it. He's an important contributor, and I can accept his limitations.

Myusername
09-08-2014, 04:33 PM
He's not dogging it, but I'm sorry, we have every right to expect better than 3rd line production in the playoffs from someone with the skill and goal scoring capability of Nash. Not to mention someone who's making 7+ million.

Dare I say our players might have had rings right now had our best goal scorer actually scored some big goals when we needed them.

Vodka Drunkenski
09-08-2014, 04:57 PM
No one says they don't have the right to expect the offensive production.

fletch
09-08-2014, 05:00 PM
He's not dogging it, but I'm sorry, we have every right to expect better than 3rd line production in the playoffs from someone with the skill and goal scoring capability of Nash. Not to mention someone who's making 7+ million.

Dare I say our players might have had rings right now had our best goal scorer actually scored some big goals when we needed them.

I saw our third and fourth lines scoring a lot of key goals. There's a lot of blame to be spread among the top six, and credit for the team depth getting us thisclose to a Cup.

Niko
09-08-2014, 05:22 PM
I'm not sure fear is really the issue. I just think he lacks that same "fire" that a lot of the better post-season performers have. Let's call it a "give a shit" factor.

Nash cares, but he cares probably the minimum amount. He's that guy, to me, that when the season officially ends, basically heads to the locker room a little disappointed/angry, takes a quick shower, cleans out his locker and is already in summer-mode by the time he gets into his car.

As evident in the fact that he opted not to participate in the voluntary work outs earlier this week.

BlueJay
09-08-2014, 08:16 PM
Not a winner, chicken dinner!

NYR2711
09-09-2014, 11:28 AM
He's not dogging it, but I'm sorry, we have every right to expect better than 3rd line production in the playoffs from someone with the skill and goal scoring capability of Nash. Not to mention someone who's making 7+ million.

Dare I say our players might have had rings right now had our best goal scorer actually scored some big goals when we needed them.

We didn't lose because of Nash. We lost because of defensive breakdowns. LA only played with a lead for 1 game in that series. The Rangers outplayed them, and led for almost every game that series. Defensive breakdowns were the main issue.

Thump23
09-09-2014, 11:32 AM
We didn't lose because of Nash. We lost because of defensive breakdowns. LA only played with a lead for 1 game in that series. The Rangers outplayed them, and led for almost every game that series. Defensive breakdowns were the main issue.

He had ZERO points in the Kings series. ZERO.

Vodka Drunkenski
09-09-2014, 12:12 PM
Still doesn't mean we lost because of him. Sure, it would help if he scored but it would've also helped if Stepan doesn't go up the middle of the ice with the puck in game 1 with a 2-0 lead. There are a bunch of contributing factors as to why we did not win the cup.

Slobberknocker
09-09-2014, 12:13 PM
he did take a ton of shots in the playoffs. if a few of those fell maybe the story is vastly different.

problem with a lot of those shots though were many were not from the dirty areas of the ice.

Mike
09-09-2014, 12:14 PM
We didn't lose because of Nash. We lost because of defensive breakdowns. LA only played with a lead for 1 game in that series. The Rangers outplayed them, and led for almost every game that series. Defensive breakdowns were the main issue.

If Nash was Nash, maybe those 2-0 leads are increased to 3-0. Maybe the 2-1 lead goes to 3-1. Maybe he scores the tie breaker at some point. Maybe he scores first in game 3 to set the tone. He had PLENTY of chances to put his mark on a game in a big moment.

Vodka Drunkenski
09-09-2014, 12:17 PM
So did many other players. Kreider scores on a breakaway (big moment) in OT of game 2, it's 1-1 going back to NY. Like I said, many contributing factors to losing, not just Nash inability to score. He was snake bitten for sure, he had an empty net in Game 6 and the defenseman throws his thick out in desperation and gets it. That's not Nash, that's just luck for La.

Pete
09-09-2014, 12:20 PM
But are you really going to depend on a rookie to win you the game there? Would it have been nice if he did? Sure.

But when was Nash ever even a threat or a force, for even a shift? He wasn't even noticeable, I don't even care about the stats. That's my issue. Assert your will on the game. Make life hard on the other team. He didn't even do that.

Vodka Drunkenski
09-09-2014, 12:28 PM
And my original point is that he's playing scared. I'm not saying he's not at fault, I'm defending the he doesn't give a shit and that he's the reason we lost the cup. Could the results have been different if he scored? Sure. Could've the results have been different if La is called for goalie interference? Sure.

Thump23
09-09-2014, 12:28 PM
So did many other players. Kreider scores on a breakaway (big moment) in OT of game 2, it's 1-1 going back to NY. Like I said, many contributing factors to losing, not just Nash inability to score. He was snake bitten for sure, he had an empty net in Game 6 and the defenseman throws his thick out in desperation and gets it. That's not Nash, that's just luck for La.

Kreider, Richards, Hagelin, Zuc.. they all had the game on their sticks, more than once for a few players. The thing is, Nash was brought here, and is paid handsomely, to do one thing, put up points. Sure they failed collectively, but Nash has to be "the" guy. Zero points in the finals isn't going to cut it, regardless of how snake bitten a player is.

Vodka Drunkenski
09-09-2014, 12:29 PM
Kreider, Richards, Hagelin, Zuc.. they all had the game on their sticks, more than once for a few players. The thing is, Nash was brought here, and is paid handsomely, to do one thing, put up points. Sure they failed collectively, but Nash has to be "the" guy. Zero points in the finals isn't going to cut it, regardless of how snake bitten a player is.

He's still not the sole reason they lost is my point. I never said I accept his offensive production. All I said is that he's playing scared.

Thump23
09-09-2014, 12:33 PM
He's still not the sole reason they lost is my point. I never said I accept his offensive production. All I said is that he's playing scared.

I don't think anyone would argue that he was the sole reason. But if I'm starting a list of why they failed in the finals, he's at the top of it.

Pete
09-09-2014, 12:34 PM
And my original point is that he's playing scared. I'm not saying he's not at fault, I'm defending the he doesn't give a shit and that he's the reason we lost the cup. Could the results have been different if he scored? Sure. Could've the results have been different if La is called for goalie interference? Sure.

Oh, yea I think he cares. He's just not intense, and he never will be. He just isn't built that way.

I think he poor production is definitely a reason we lost. Added to not having a legit #1C, Girardi being terrible in the final, MSL not showing up, etc.

Think about how much easier some of the other rounds would be had they not had to go 7 games...Kings couldn't handle our speed. We just couldn't keep skating with all those OT games. If we're fresher, maybe we can.

Vodka Drunkenski
09-09-2014, 12:37 PM
I totally agree on the intensity part but I wonder if that would've shown the closer they got if he wasn't playing scared. It's very tough not to play scared and change your game after having your bell rung a couple of times already. I have a bad shoulder and still hesitant in non contact pickup games.

fletch
09-09-2014, 07:55 PM
So are we singling out Nash because he gets paid so much? I'm not happy with the production of any of our top two lines in the Kings series.

Pete
09-09-2014, 08:11 PM
We aren't singling him out. It's a Nash thread. Richards is gone. MSL is 39.

If you want to discuss the failings of the entire top 6, pretty sure there was a thread on it at some point...

fletch
09-10-2014, 06:38 AM
Just seeking clarification... because Nash seems to be the current favorite whipping boy. Wasn't sure why.

lefty9
09-10-2014, 07:21 AM
We aren't singling him out. It's a Nash thread. Richards is gone. MSL is 39.

If you want to discuss the failings of the entire top 6, pretty sure there was a thread on it at some point...
I thought he is a very young 39 like going on 30, that's why we gaved up two number ones for him

NYRangers723
09-10-2014, 08:10 AM
I think the reason some are upset with Nash is because his production hasnt come close to what we were expecting. Now i didnt expect im to score 45 goals but i feltt hat getting out of Columbus would get is production up even more. I mean he had nobody in Columbus for 10 years and he stll put up 30-40 goals evey year. Now there are other things Nash des well like play well on the PK. However we need hm to be a 3 goal scorer again and d well in the playofs

Pete
09-10-2014, 08:36 AM
Just seeking clarification... because Nash seems to be the current favorite whipping boy. Wasn't sure why.

Because he's the biggest failure. Makes the most, has the talent, has the physical tools, in his prime, contributed the least.

Thump23
09-10-2014, 10:02 AM
Because he's the biggest failure. Makes the most, has the talent, has the physical tools, in his prime, contributed the least.

:thumbs:

Perfect answer. I don't even think it can be debated at this point.

Slobberknocker
09-10-2014, 12:45 PM
There was blame to go around. He was not alone in that regard. The performance of our top guys was all pretty much a let down.

that being said this guy was brought in here to shine in games like this. Big Prototypical power winger... He should have been out there throwing the body around with reckless abandon, instead we got a version of Brian Boyle Lite.

fletch
09-10-2014, 04:38 PM
Because he's the biggest failure. Makes the most, has the talent, has the physical tools, in his prime, contributed the least.

Disagree. If Nash was getting paid 5 million a year and didn't come with the superstar tag, I don't think we'd be having this discussion.

Media have labeled him a superstar, teams have paid him like a superstar, but he's not. He's a solid hockey player. Expectations exceed reality. Fair if people want to be disappointed. I'll accept him for the contributions he brings on and off the ice.

Phil in Absentia
09-10-2014, 04:39 PM
Disagree. If Nash was getting paid 5 million a year and didn't come with the superstar tag, I don't think we'd be having this discussion.

Media have labeled him a superstar, teams have paid him like a superstar, but he's not. He's a solid hockey player. Expectations exceed reality. Fair if people want to be disappointed. I'll accept him for the contributions he brings on and off the ice.

Pay is what determines stardom, and like it or not, he's paid like a star player, and has played like one (at least in the goal-scoring department) in nearly every regular season of his career. The problem arises when you look at his production the moment the playoffs start, because it collapses.

Pete
09-10-2014, 05:15 PM
Disagree. If Nash was getting paid 5 million a year and didn't come with the superstar tag, I don't think we'd be having this discussion.

Media have labeled him a superstar, teams have paid him like a superstar, but he's not. He's a solid hockey player. Expectations exceed reality. Fair if people want to be disappointed. I'll accept him for the contributions he brings on and off the ice.I had a long post typed up, but there's no need for it. It's in the spoiler if you want to read it.

Fact is, he's the highest paid player on the team and the most talented forward. What you're saying is "No one would be talking about Lundqvist not being able to stop pucks is he wasn't the goalie."

It's moot. Non-starter.

But he isn't getting paid $5 million. He's getting $7.8, and he has a superstar tag because of his pedigree, draft status, and production so far in his career. There is absolutely no reason to disregard his salary in a cap world, or the fact that he has in the past, for long stretches, played like a star player. 2013 he was almost P/G and a disaster in the playoffs.

If you want to drop off the labels, that's fine. It's living in a vacuum, but do as you wish. Fact is, His P/G dropped by 1/3 in the playoffs, his G/G went from .4 to .11 — Those drops in production are unacceptable from any player, let alone your highest paid and most talented one.

fletch
09-10-2014, 05:18 PM
Pay is what determines stardom, and like it or not, he's paid like a star player, and has played like one (at least in the goal-scoring department) in nearly every regular season of his career. The problem arises when you look at his production the moment the playoffs start, because it collapses.

It's a lot easier to get to the net and score on a Thursday night in Florida than it is deep in the playoffs against Chicago. I just think his style of play is more effective in the regular season than the higher intensity playoffs, where there is more physical play, more intense defense, and fewer team breakdowns. That's where I think the regular season vs playoff numbers come from. I don't think Nash's play drops off. I just think the level of play is higher and chances are harder to come by in the playoffs.

Just my opinion, and I'm OK with being an outlier on this one.

Thump23
09-10-2014, 05:21 PM
It's a lot easier to get to the net and score on a Thursday night in Florida than it is deep in the playoffs against Chicago. I just think his style of play is more effective in the regular season than the higher intensity playoffs, where there is more physical play, more intense defense, and fewer team breakdowns. That's where I think the regular season vs playoff numbers come from. I don't think Nash's play drops off. I just think the level of play is higher and chances are harder to come by in the playoffs.

Just my opinion, and I'm OK with being an outlier on this one.

Then what good is he? If you can't perform in the postseason, where it matters most, you're pretty useless. Especially at that salary.

Phil in Absentia
09-10-2014, 05:24 PM
It's a lot easier to get to the net and score on a Thursday night in Florida than it is deep in the playoffs against Chicago. I just think his style of play is more effective in the regular season than the higher intensity playoffs, where there is more physical play, more intense defense, and fewer team breakdowns. That's where I think the regular season vs playoff numbers come from. I don't think Nash's play drops off. I just think the level of play is higher and chances are harder to come by in the playoffs.

Just my opinion, and I'm OK with being an outlier on this one.

Even if that were the case, the team is doing itself a disservice in continuing to pay top dollar for a player who's game simply doesn't translate successfully to the post-season. They'd be better off with a lesser regular season player at a fraction of the cost who improves or matches his regular season production in the playoffs — like Justin Williams.

I'd gladly trade in his 25-35 regular season goals for 25 points in 26 games in the playoffs (Williams).

fletch
09-10-2014, 07:00 PM
Even if that were the case, the team is doing itself a disservice in continuing to pay top dollar for a player who's game simply doesn't translate successfully to the post-season. They'd be better off with a lesser regular season player at a fraction of the cost who improves or matches his regular season production in the playoffs — like Justin Williams.

I'd gladly trade in his 25-35 regular season goals for 25 points in 26 games in the playoffs (Williams).

Agreed. We could find someone with his playoff production for a smaller salary.

We could also find a cheaper option in goal without that much of a drop off in GAA.

If we're going to look at stats.

I remember the media/fan uproar when Callahan left. So I do think intangibles/presence/leadership is overrated as long as leaders remain in the locker room. As long as McDonagh and other younger players step forward, I don't mind seeing a changing of the guard.

BlueJay
09-10-2014, 08:04 PM
It's a lot easier to get to the net and score on a Thursday night in Florida than it is deep in the playoffs against Chicago. I just think his style of play is more effective in the regular season than the higher intensity playoffs, where there is more physical play, more intense defense, and fewer team breakdowns. That's where I think the regular season vs playoff numbers come from. I don't think Nash's play drops off. I just think the level of play is higher and chances are harder to come by in the playoffs.

Just my opinion, and I'm OK with being an outlier on this one.

Tell that to THIS guy, who should have never left.

http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BqatvQ1CcAAfmXF.png:medium

NYR2711
09-10-2014, 08:06 PM
Then what good is he? If you can't perform in the postseason, where it matters most, you're pretty useless. Especially at that salary.

The argument against this is that he isn't paid for the playoffs, he is paid for the regular season. Plus, if he helps them win in the regular season, thats just as important. You can't get into the playoffs by losing games.

I agree he sucks in the playoffs point production wise. But he did do things to help the team in other area's. Yes, I would have loved to have had him ripping it up in the post season, and I am not absolving him of that, but I also wouldn't say he is a total failure.

Thump23
09-11-2014, 10:07 AM
The argument against this is that he isn't paid for the playoffs, he is paid for the regular season. Plus, if he helps them win in the regular season, thats just as important. You can't get into the playoffs by losing games.

I agree he sucks in the playoffs point production wise. But he did do things to help the team in other area's. Yes, I would have loved to have had him ripping it up in the post season, and I am not absolving him of that, but I also wouldn't say he is a total failure.

Do you really think, considering what they gave up to get him and what they're paying him, that his time here can be classified as successful?

Slobberknocker
09-11-2014, 10:21 AM
this was always the knock on Arod until the last world series win.

hopefully he reflected over the course of the summer and comes in this season on a mission. Having MSL they have to figure this is the last Hurrah.

NYR2711
09-11-2014, 11:35 AM
Do you really think, considering what they gave up to get him and what they're paying him, that his time here can be classified as successful?

I wouldn't say its successful, but I also wouldn't say that he is a complete failure as well. Its 2 years in, he still has time to redeem himself here.

Thump23
09-11-2014, 12:01 PM
I wouldn't say its successful, but I also wouldn't say that he is a complete failure as well. Its 2 years in, he still has time to redeem himself here.

If he wasn't such a failure in the postseason, I'd agree with your assessment. But he's going to have to do a lot this year, specifically in the post season, to right the ship.

NYR2711
09-11-2014, 12:06 PM
If he wasn't such a failure in the postseason, I'd agree with your assessment. But he's going to have to do a lot this year, specifically in the post season, to right the ship.

IMO, its still too early for me to call him a success or failure. His first year here, he had a great regular season. Last year, he had the concussion, and I don't know how that affected his play. Offensive wise, he was terrible, but he did do other things that did help the team. Yes, thats not what he is here for, but Im not going to say he did absolutely nothing to help the team in the playoffs. To me, the regular season is just as important as the post season, because your not getting into the post season without playing well in the regular season.

lefty9
09-11-2014, 12:37 PM
I wouldn't say its successful, but I also wouldn't say that he is a complete failure as well. Its 2 years in, he still has time to redeem himself here.
Absolutely ,if he scores 30 Goals and goes on and scores some goals in the playoffs , everything will be forgotten

Thump23
09-11-2014, 01:25 PM
IMO, its still too early for me to call him a success or failure. His first year here, he had a great regular season. Last year, he had the concussion, and I don't know how that affected his play. Offensive wise, he was terrible, but he did do other things that did help the team. Yes, thats not what he is here for, but Im not going to say he did absolutely nothing to help the team in the playoffs. To me, the regular season is just as important as the post season, because your not getting into the post season without playing well in the regular season.

But what good is getting to the postseason if your best player is a no show? Really difficult to win it all when your best player(s) aren't at their best.

RichieNextel305
09-11-2014, 03:14 PM
Nash has 2 things he has to prove this year: consistency and playoff performance.

Nash had 26 goals last year. But, he was far too streaky. I understand he is a streaky player. I get that. But, he really just had 2 streaks, 1 of which he was on absolute fire, where he poured in nearly half of his goals in 12 games. And yeah, while it's huge during those 12 games, he needs to show up on the scoresheet more often. Remember the 2nd year Gaborik was here? He had 22 goals, and 10 of those came in 3 games in which he had 3 hat tricks, including 1 4-goal game. All the talk then was that he had to show more consistency. The number 26 as far as his goal total goes looks good. And it is. But, it needs to be more spread out. And yeah, I'd like to see it higher. 26 goals is a good year for a good player. But, we're paying Rick Nash money to be more than a good player.

He needs to be more consistent, and more noticeable offensively when he does hit a rut. He can't go on a tear for 12 games and then be completely dry for 25 or more games. He just can't. He is too talented and much too important to us for that to happen.

As far as the playoff performances go, I'm not even gonna touch that. It's September, and everything that has been said was said about Nash in the playoffs still rings true. But, we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. To say the least, that is an area he's obviously going to have to improve upon. And that really is putting it gently.

NYR2711
09-11-2014, 04:17 PM
But what good is getting to the postseason if your best player is a no show? Really difficult to win it all when your best player(s) aren't at their best.

It's also difficult to get into the playoffs, especially now, if all your players aren't firing on all cylinders. If your best player is coasting and dogging it all season, and doesn't show up, your team is going nowhere. I never got people saying the regular season doesn't matter.

RichieNextel305
09-11-2014, 05:08 PM
The regular season matters. I don't think anyone will say it doesn't. That being said, the playoffs are where players like Nash are supposed to step up their play. He is yet to even come close to doing so.

Pete
09-11-2014, 05:11 PM
I don't think anyone says the regular season doesn't matter, period.

What is said is that the regular season doesn't matter if you can't produce in the playoffs.

That's a big difference.

NYR2711
09-11-2014, 05:27 PM
I don't think anyone says the regular season doesn't matter, period.

What is said is that the regular season doesn't matter if you can't produce in the playoffs.

That's a big difference.

I disagree with that, but that's just me. Look at McD, he had a great year, but his playoffs were pretty bad. I wouldn't say that he had a bad year then.

RichieNextel305
09-11-2014, 05:38 PM
I wouldn't say McDonagh had a bad playoff. McDonagh had a half-bad/half-good series vs. Philadelphia. He was just coming off that injury he sustained vs. Vancouver to end the year. He started the playoffs slow, but eventually picked up his game. Other than that, he played good.

Even if Nash scored 50 goals during the regular season, it would still boil down to just how embarassingly absent he was from the scoresheet in the playoffs. He had 3 goals in 25 games, 1 of which was the 7th goal in a 7-2 win. When you have the responsibility Nash has, you have to step up more than that.

I'm sorry, but you have to do better than that. You can't be making $7.8 Million dollars per year and be in the same company as someone like Dan Carcillo when it comes to playoff goals.

Pete
09-11-2014, 05:55 PM
I wouldn't say McDonagh had a bad playoff. McDonagh had a half-bad/half-good series vs. Philadelphia. He was just coming off that injury he sustained vs. Vancouver to end the year. He started the playoffs slow, but eventually picked up his game. Other than that, he played good.

Even if Nash scored 50 goals during the regular season, it would still boil down to just how embarassingly absent he was from the scoresheet in the playoffs. He had 3 goals in 25 games, 1 of which was the 7th goal in a 7-2 win. When you have the responsibility Nash has, you have to step up more than that.

I'm sorry, but you have to do better than that. You can't be making $7.8 Million dollars per year and be in the same company as someone like Dan Carcillo when it comes to playoff goals.

Bingo. Didn't McDonagh lead the team in scoring against the Canadiens?

Morphinity
09-11-2014, 05:58 PM
Any word if Rick the Dick has been at the informal skates? Or is he still off puffing the magic dragon in Muskoka?

Pete
09-11-2014, 06:26 PM
He showed up this week.

Dunny
09-11-2014, 07:43 PM
It's fucking hard to get off Muskoka Time. I think he cottages a little more north though.

Puck Head
09-12-2014, 02:04 AM
Bingo. Didn't McDonagh lead the team in scoring against the Canadiens?

Didn't McDonagh lead the team in playoff scoring and icetime?

He was pretty bad coming off the injury the first round.
After that first round he was probably the best defenseman in the NHL playoffs.

Pete
09-12-2014, 07:04 AM
Didn't McDonagh lead the team in playoff scoring and icetime?

He was pretty bad coming off the injury the first round.
After that first round he was probably the best defenseman in the NHL playoffs.

Doughty.

Vodka Drunkenski
09-12-2014, 07:18 AM
I'll give the edge to Doughty as well, he was an animal.

Pete
09-12-2014, 08:33 AM
I'll give the edge to Doughty as well, he was an animal.

Yea, he was fairly dominant wire to wire.

Thump23
09-12-2014, 10:21 AM
Yea, he was fairly dominant wire to wire.

He was. That douchey Russell Brand look alike prick.

Puck Head
09-12-2014, 04:29 PM
Doughty.

I think it's close.
After the first round...

McDonagh- 17 points (lead his team)
Doughty- 12 points

McDonagh- +1
Doughty- 0

Head to head in the finals...
Mcdonagh 4 pts +1
Doughty 2 pts -3

Either way, hard pressed to saw McDonagh wasn't flat out awesome in the playoffs after 1st round.

Dunny
09-12-2014, 04:29 PM
Side mouth talking weirdo.

RichieNextel305
09-16-2014, 03:29 PM
Over the past few days, MSG has been showing the Rangers-Blue Jackets game from March 21st. While watching that game, I remember thinking that it was Nash's best game as a Ranger. And now, months later, watching it again, wow was he good. Nash needs to bring that type of intensity more often. He was dominant in every sense of the word in this game.

Listen, I know the saying is to bring your 'A' game every single night. But these guys are humans. They are going to have off nights where they don't look good. It happens. That being said, I can only pray that Nash can play more games like this over the course of 82 games this year as opposed to the ghost show he put on for most of last year.

Pete
09-16-2014, 03:32 PM
It's not even about bringing "A" game. It's about "A" effort.

If Ryan Callahan can bring his effort every night, why can't Nash? It's because he never had to, and Callahan did, so Nash isn't conditioned that way. He's talent, but talent without hard work.

Hard work will beat talent if talent isn't working hard.

Future
09-16-2014, 04:07 PM
I'll give the edge to Doughty as well, he was an animal.
He wasn't nearly as good as McD defensively.

Pete
09-16-2014, 04:11 PM
He wasn't nearly as good as McD defensively.

Based on?

JOHN
09-16-2014, 04:15 PM
I don't know that Nash has effort problems. You see him putting that effort in on the defensive side. I think VD is right about him playing scared. You don't go from a guy who dominates the slot and skates in hard to someone who hangs in the perimeter and goes hard into the slot (when he does go) like that unless you have a mental block.

That being said, I'm not making excuses for the guy and I still regret getting him when we did. Timing is everything.

The Dude
09-16-2014, 04:51 PM
he did take a ton of shots in the playoffs. if a few of those fell maybe the story is vastly different.

problem with a lot of those shots though were many were not from the dirty areas of the ice.

Disagree big time. Nash was one of the few who would cut to the middle of the ice and take the puck to the net. He wasnt a perimeter player who took quick wristers as soon as he gained the blue line along the boards. Nash went deep with the puck. One of the few that did.

Pete
09-16-2014, 05:01 PM
Disagree big time. Nash was one of the few who would cut to the middle of the ice and take the puck to the net. He wasnt a perimeter player who took quick wristers as soon as he gained the blue line along the boards. Nash went deep with the puck. One of the few that did.

I have to disagree here. There were entire articles dedicated to how far away Nash's shots were coming from. The shots he actually attempted from the high quality areas of the ice (far less than from the middle), were missing the net.

BlueJay
09-16-2014, 09:13 PM
Disagree big time. Nash was one of the few who would cut to the middle of the ice and take the puck to the net. He wasnt a perimeter player who took quick wristers as soon as he gained the blue line along the boards. Nash went deep with the puck. One of the few that did.

Completely disagree. There's plenty of proof out there, that goes against most of what you're stating here.

It's already starting, even before the pre-season;
http://www.rantsports.com/nhl/2014/09/15/rick-nash-facing-make-or-break-2014-15-season-with-new-york-rangers/

NYRangers723
09-17-2014, 08:37 AM
Completely disagree. There's plenty of proof out there, that goes against most of what you're stating here.

It's already starting, even before the pre-season;
http://www.rantsports.com/nhl/2014/09/15/rick-nash-facing-make-or-break-2014-15-season-with-new-york-rangers/


Actually nash did shy away from the "dirty areas" ater his concussion. With nash's size and skill he is better suited going to the net and getting goals there. he has a nice shot but the concussion clearly affected him. Also you cant blame people for being impatient since nash has been at best inconsistent and the playoffs ave been a nightmare for him. With is skills and ca hit people rightfully expect more.

Future
09-17-2014, 10:45 AM
Based on?
Well I guess +- is the only stat you could use, but I just go with the eyeball test.

Pete
09-17-2014, 10:54 AM
Well I guess +- is the only stat you could use, but I just go with the eyeball test.

Well Doughty was a +2 and McD was -1.

Taking nothing away from McD, the Doughty was simply up against another class of player, logging more minutes against guys like Getzlaf/Perry, Toews/Kane, and...well the Sharks imploded. I mean McD had to go against Giroux and he wasn't even very good that series, AV mainly used Staal against Crosby IIRC, and no one really scary on Montreal.

I just feel like Doughty was a force wire-to-wire against better teams.

Vodka Drunkenski
09-17-2014, 11:00 AM
Well Doughty was a +2 and McD was -1. Taking nothing away from McD, the Doughty was simply up against another class of player, logging more minutes against guys like Getzlaf/Perry, Toews/Kane, and...well the Sharks imploded. I mean McD had to go against Giroux and he wasn't even very good that series, AV mainly used Staal against Crosby IIRC, and no one really scary on Montreal. I just feel like Doughty was a force wire-to-wire against better teams.

+1

Great post, Pete.

Phil in Absentia
09-17-2014, 11:11 AM
Well Doughty was a +2 and McD was -1.

Taking nothing away from McD, the Doughty was simply up against another class of player, logging more minutes against guys like Getzlaf/Perry, Toews/Kane, and...well the Sharks imploded. I mean McD had to go against Giroux and he wasn't even very good that series, AV mainly used Staal against Crosby IIRC, and no one really scary on Montreal.

I just feel like Doughty was a force wire-to-wire against better teams.

I agree. It's the same argument against Stepan, but for Kopitar as 1C, where Kopitar went up against and through Thornton, Getzlaf and Toews to reach the Cup Final. Substantially greater talent pool than the group Stepan was deployed against.

momentum
09-17-2014, 01:21 PM
Over the past few days, MSG has been showing the Rangers-Blue Jackets game from March 21st. While watching that game, I remember thinking that it was Nash's best game as a Ranger. And now, months later, watching it again, wow was he good. Nash needs to bring that type of intensity more often. He was dominant in every sense of the word in this game.

Listen, I know the saying is to bring your 'A' game every single night. But these guys are humans. They are going to have off nights where they don't look good. It happens. That being said, I can only pray that Nash can play more games like this over the course of 82 games this year as opposed to the ghost show he put on for most of last year.

If you watch that game again instead of paying attention to Nash, pay attention to how the Blue jackets played him, they were on him sticking him, hitting him, slashing him, beating on him constantly, they played him dirty. You could see in that game that Nash finally had enough and got pissed off and guess what happened then? He forgot about being scared of bonking his head, instead you could almost read his mind where he thought fuck this shit i'm going to fuck them up and off he went.
I honestly think Nash's problem is that he's a sleeping giant most nights...Bruce Banner skating around and if opponents MOSTLY leave him alone he remains sleeping/playing scared trying to get things done with low risk plays.
Biggest problem with this is that it's hard to dictate how the opponent plays one of your players, I sure wish they would piss him off like blue jackets did that night because you could see how he just let go and turned into a beast. He would do it more often if opponents pissed him off more.
I think Nash is just one of those guys who isn't naturally aggressive in a way that he can't turn it on like with a switch like some guys can, instead he requires someone to make him angry enough but then the ability is there to take over.
It's too bad he doesn't have that switch.

Future
09-17-2014, 01:36 PM
Well Doughty was a +2 and McD was -1.

Taking nothing away from McD, the Doughty was simply up against another class of player, logging more minutes against guys like Getzlaf/Perry, Toews/Kane, and...well the Sharks imploded. I mean McD had to go against Giroux and he wasn't even very good that series, AV mainly used Staal against Crosby IIRC, and no one really scary on Montreal.

I just feel like Doughty was a force wire-to-wire against better teams.
Fair enough, I guess I was just only looking at the final series and extrapolating that, to be honest.

Slobberknocker
09-18-2014, 09:19 PM
Disagree big time. Nash was one of the few who would cut to the middle of the ice and take the puck to the net. He wasnt a perimeter player who took quick wristers as soon as he gained the blue line along the boards. Nash went deep with the puck. One of the few that did.

you know DUDE, (i always wanted to type that) I thought about that when i typed this because there were times where he did go to the middle but in my eye it was largely times when he wasn't contested and it looked to me like a lot of show without result, sort of a big hat no cattle type of thing.

ill go on record. i like nash, have his jersey and root like hell for him but i just didn't see the step up the playoffs required this year. maybe it was the injury, who knows, maybe its just who he is.

i don't know what thread it was but Dunny made a hell of a point about what Nash is.

Slobberknocker
09-18-2014, 09:21 PM
from puck head:

McDonagh- 17 points (lead his team)
Doughty- 12 points

didnt realize that. interesting from a stat perspective.

God we were so close....

Pete
09-18-2014, 09:36 PM
from puck head:

McDonagh- 17 points (lead his team)
Doughty- 12 points

didnt realize that. interesting from a stat perspective.

God we were so close....

Doughty had 18 points.

The Dude
09-18-2014, 09:59 PM
I have to disagree here. There were entire articles dedicated to how far away Nash's shots were coming from. The shots he actually attempted from the high quality areas of the ice (far less than from the middle), were missing the net.

Not that i dont believe you, but do you have a link. Im interested to read this.

I saw Nash taking the puck to the middle of the ice and attacking the net on his own. Sure most of his drives to the net were cut short, he WAS going to the dirty areas. Shit, he was everywhere out there.

Wish he was stronger on the puck and had more than 2 moves, but the guy was putting out the effort and certainly wasnt dogging it or playing a perimeter weakling game.

Hes really gotta turn it up a notch this year. I mean like how he played against Columbus that one game. THATS the Rick Nash we all want. Fire, and some anger.

JOHN
09-18-2014, 11:07 PM
I don't care if Rick Nash is happiness and rainbows, just score goals and be dangerous in the offensive zone.

Pete
09-19-2014, 06:27 AM
Not that i dont believe you, but do you have a link. Im interested to read this.

I saw Nash taking the puck to the middle of the ice and attacking the net on his own. Sure most of his drives to the net were cut short, he WAS going to the dirty areas. Shit, he was everywhere out there.

Wish he was stronger on the puck and had more than 2 moves, but the guy was putting out the effort and certainly wasnt dogging it or playing a perimeter weakling game.

Hes really gotta turn it up a notch this year. I mean like how he played against Columbus that one game. THATS the Rick Nash we all want. Fire, and some anger.

There were all threads from the beginning of the playoffs, after the Philly series. I'll try and look but I make no promises about finding it haha. There are a lot of Nash threads.

Vodka Drunkenski
09-19-2014, 07:20 AM
Nash went to the net 1 out of every 10 times.

Puck Head
09-19-2014, 12:55 PM
Doughty had 18 points.

If you read original post, it was in regards to McDonagh being as good as any defenseman in the NHL after first round.

I explained that McDonagh was much better then Doighty after first round (17pts to 12)

Pete
09-19-2014, 01:14 PM
If you read original post, it was in regards to McDonagh being as good as any defenseman in the NHL after first round.

I explained that McDonagh was much better then Doighty after first round (17pts to 12)

Oh. Why are we forgetting the first round? Because McD was bad? That's not fair to Doughty.

CreaseCrusader91
09-19-2014, 02:13 PM
Oh. Why are we forgetting the first round? Because McD was bad? That's not fair to Doughty.
Because he was playing hurt? Sure appeared to be the case, but maybe that was debunked.

Pete
09-19-2014, 02:17 PM
Because he was playing hurt? Sure appeared to be the case, but maybe that was debunked.

He was definitely rusty, but I'm not going to just toss out an entire series when Doughty was a P/G player. I won't hold Doughty's health against him.

CreaseCrusader91
09-19-2014, 02:19 PM
He was definitely rusty, but I'm not going to just toss out an entire series when Doughty was a P/G player. I won't hold Doughty's health against him.
Neither will I. Just trying to address why that may have been said.

Pete
09-19-2014, 02:30 PM
Neither will I. Just trying to address why that may have been said.

I mean...

McD:
4/16/2014 Missed the last 5 regular season games (bruised left shoulder).
4/03/2014 Bruised left shoulder, day-to-day.

Doughty:
4/16/2014 Missed the last 4 regular season games (bruised left shoulder).
4/05/2014 Bruised left shoulder, day-to-day.

RichieNextel305
09-19-2014, 02:34 PM
The simple fact that we have a defenseman that we could say is virtually on the same level as someone like Doughty is enough to me. I won't get into a debate over who is better, because both are young studs and I think any team in hockey would literally die to have any of those horses on their top pair.