Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 73

Thread: Who Won the Trade?

  1. #21
    Senior Member Pee-Wee Division
    Fatfrancesa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    962
    Rep Power
    25
    And a franchise player as josh noted two posts prior

  2. #22
    Russian Meddling BSBH Rookie
    josh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    25,081
    Rep Power
    261
    In Columbus, where he was.

    Not in NY, as he wasn’t, and wasn’t expected to be, as I said.

    Lias Andersson for #AJT2019

  3. #23
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    75,430
    Rep Power
    489
    The talk was he'd finally have help...

    Turns out he needed much more help

  4. #24
    Senior Member Pee-Wee Division
    Fatfrancesa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    962
    Rep Power
    25
    Expectations by whom? He absolutely was brought here to be a game changer. To be a singular offensive player the rangers didn’t have. To drive the play and score meaningful goals come spring time. He was a franchise player in Columbus you say. He was paid as such. Expectations of him did not drop when he was traded. He wasn’t expected to be a franchise player in Columbus and something less here. Yes the rangers could surround him with better players but never was he taking a back seat in importance.

  5. #25
    Senior Member Junior Division
    The Dude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    6,161
    Rep Power
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by josh View Post
    They weren’t winning a cup with Dubinsky and Anisimov.
    And who did they miss out on?

    And Nash’s contract wasn’t the issue with Richards, Staal, Girardi, etc when they were winning the President’s trophy or going to the cup final.
    Exactly. Are people still butt hurt about the loss of Dubinsky? Come onnnnnnnn. They keep those two, they don't do anything. Nash wasn't some gigantic overpaid player. Girardi, Staal, Lundqvist, Richards in his final year here were bigger burdens than Nashs contract.

    For crying out loud, Dubinsky is making 5.8 million and has done donkey dick compared to what Nash helped this team accomplish.

    No doubt the Rangers win that trade. I do that deal 10 out of 10 times.

  6. #26
    Senior Member Junior Division
    The Dude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    6,161
    Rep Power
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by rmc51 View Post
    Most likely you are right re: no Cup with those guys versus Nash, but you really do not know that. What we do know for sure is they did not win one with Nash when they were already a Cup contender before acquiring him, and in the process they lost two center trade chips and a 1st round pick along with 8 mill in cap space. I'm sure there are plenty of other options that would have been available either by trade or by signing with that cap space.

    Dubinsky is the exact kind of player everyone talks about this team needing by the way. Someone who plays a hard nosed game, defends teammates, and doesn't completely suck offensively...and they traded him for someone who was softer than Charmin and failed to perform in the playoffs when they needed him most.
    Dubinsky had 16 points last season and hardly played in the playoffs.. Columbus contemplated buying him out... I'd imagine if he doesnt get his shit together, he might wind up on waivers this year... Maybe he CAN be a Ranger again.

    BTW Nash is only two years older than Dubinsky. It's not like they traded for an old man...

  7. #27
    Senior Member Junior Division
    The Dude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    6,161
    Rep Power
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by rmc51 View Post
    At the time it was a trade they had to make. The team needed a high end scorer and that is what they went for....nothing wrong with that. But in retrospect, it failed. A Cup contending team brought him in and still did not win a Cup. He did not put them over the top. They went for it and lost.

    Same thing with the Yandle and MSL trades. No Cup = failure...but nobody is going to blame the Rangers for going for it.
    But it's not like they ruined the franchise in doing so. They gave up a guy that became an overpaid role player, and a decent center that isn't some kind of difference maker.

    You trade depth players for a potential difference maker. Nash did ok here. Can't blame the teams failure completely on him.

    No doubt, most expected more from him. Especially in the playoffs. I don't think keeping that package, gets the Rangers close to what they were. Disappointment or not.

  8. #28
    Moderator BSBH Prospect
    Puck Head's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    North Pole
    Posts
    10,766
    Rep Power
    131
    Quote Originally Posted by The Dude View Post
    Dubinsky had 16 points last season and hardly played in the playoffs.. Columbus contemplated buying him out... I'd imagine if he doesnt get his shit together, he might wind up on waivers this year... Maybe he CAN be a Ranger again.

    BTW Nash is only two years older than Dubinsky. It's not like they traded for an old man...
    Errr, Nash had like 28 pts last season

    Season before
    Nash- 38
    Dubsinsky- 41

    Season before that
    Nash- 36
    Dubinsky- 48



    Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

  9. #29
    Senior Member Pee-Wee Division rmc51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    569
    Rep Power
    18
    As much as I find it intriguing that since the trade Dubinsky's production on a mediocre team was almost as good as Nash's on a perennial contender, the argument isn't Dubinsky vs. Nash. The argument is what else could they have done with the assets they gave up for Nash, plus 8 million in cap space that has been tied up in Nash for the last 6 years. Clearly he was not built to perform when it matters most. He never was. It was a failed trade no matter how you slice it. They were an ECF team the year before they got Nash. They saw the Cup Finals once, and not because of Nash, as that was the worst playoff performance of his career.

  10. #30
    Senior Member Pee-Wee Division
    Fatfrancesa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    962
    Rep Power
    25
    I don’t question the trade and the intentions. I don’t even have an issue saying that the rangers won the trade. My argument is the expectations of what they were trading for and what they got in Nash. The team was already at the precipice before he got here. He was the final piece to put them over the top. He was the elite player who would fill the scoresheet when the games tightened up. He was supposed to be the missing piece. That was the idea when that trade went down. End of story.

  11. #31
    Senior Member Midget Division
    Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    2,638
    Rep Power
    21
    With the return Rangers got for Nash (Spooner, beleskey, 1st) there's no way Rangers lost the trade with CBJ. They got the best player, was the most successful team and got a good return for him.

  12. #32
    Senior Member Junior Division
    BlairBettsBlocksEverything's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    6,015
    Rep Power
    69
    Columbus still hasn't gone past the first round. We've made some strong playoff runs with Nash.

    Nash turned into more draft picks. We also got Buch from our pick while they got a guy who barely had a cup of coffee in the league with their first rounder

    We won that trade by a ton
    __________________________________

  13. #33
    Senior Member Bantam Division
    Flynn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Down South
    Posts
    1,629
    Rep Power
    29
    The real question when examining the winner of the trade is looking back, knowing everything you know now- would you still make the trade?

    In my opinion the answer is Yes, no doubt.

    Nash, while not a 50 goal scorer was a threat that needed to be accounted for every shift, he played about as good a 2 way game as you could have asked for. Yeah, the last couple years injuries and concussions sucked, but looking at the whole package- we won. If I was put in time machine back to trade date, I'd pull the trigger exactly as it was originally composed.

  14. #34
    Senior Member Pee-Wee Division rmc51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    569
    Rep Power
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by Flynn View Post
    The real question when examining the winner of the trade is looking back, knowing everything you know now- would you still make the trade?

    In my opinion the answer is Yes, no doubt.

    Nash, while not a 50 goal scorer was a threat that needed to be accounted for every shift, he played about as good a 2 way game as you could have asked for. Yeah, the last couple years injuries and concussions sucked, but looking at the whole package- we won. If I was put in time machine back to trade date, I'd pull the trigger exactly as it was originally composed.
    Knowing that we would not win a Cup? Absolutely not. I would have invested the assets and cap space elsewhere.

  15. #35
    Senior Member Bantam Division
    Flynn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Down South
    Posts
    1,629
    Rep Power
    29
    Quote Originally Posted by rmc51 View Post
    Knowing that we would not win a Cup? Absolutely not. I would have invested the assets and cap space elsewhere.
    Using your baseline, every draft pick, free agent, trade, coaching hire, GM and/or Owner action since June 1994 has been a failure. That's one hell of a high bar.

  16. #36
    Russian Meddling BSBH Rookie
    josh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    25,081
    Rep Power
    261
    because im bored and like to post,

    I have a bigger issues with the trades that followed over this one. Gaborik for Brassard, picks for Clowe, Mike Rupp.

    Acquired St. Louis and Carcillo the following year, followed by Yandle.
    And the team was playing well under AV. What could have been...
    Lias Andersson for #AJT2019

  17. #37
    Senior Member Pee-Wee Division rmc51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    569
    Rep Power
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by Flynn View Post
    Using your baseline, every draft pick, free agent, trade, coaching hire, GM and/or Owner action since June 1994 has been a failure. That's one hell of a high bar.
    That is quite an over-reaching conclusion based on my answer to the question you posed. Winning championships is usually the measure of success for contending teams, which the Rangers have been for the better part of the last decade. The team was an ECF finalist the year before they acquired Nash. The team was built for a run, and they had some assets to acquire a piece that could put them over the top to win a Cup. They made moves and have no Cup to show for it. Yes, I call that a failure. Apparently, this describes a success for you.

  18. #38
    Moderator BSBH Prospect
    Puck Head's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    North Pole
    Posts
    10,766
    Rep Power
    131
    One thing to note.
    Nash had a much greater impact on the culture and professionalism of the younger players.
    Much more so than Anisimov or Dubinsky would have had


    Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

  19. #39
    Senior Member Junior Division
    The Dude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    6,161
    Rep Power
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by Puck Head View Post
    Errr, Nash had like 28 pts last season

    Season before
    Nash- 38
    Dubsinsky- 41

    Season before that
    Nash- 36
    Dubinsky- 48



    Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
    Ok. You build a team around Dubinsky. I'll build one around Nash. I don't think many people on Earth would be behind you.

    We REALLY going to debate who the better player is? Really?

  20. #40
    Moderator BSBH Prospect
    Puck Head's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    North Pole
    Posts
    10,766
    Rep Power
    131
    Quote Originally Posted by The Dude View Post
    Ok. You build a team around Dubinsky. I'll build one around Nash. I don't think many people on Earth would be behind you.

    We REALLY going to debate who the better player is? Really?
    You brought up points not me.
    And it wasnít Dubinsky for Nash


    Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •