thes5 Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 As much as I would love Tolvanen, I doubt Nashville part with him for a rental. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosenvold Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 It's really surprising for me that Nash is valued so highly. I know how good and strong he is, but is he so much more valuable than Eric Staal was last year? He cost us two 2nd-round picks + a low-tier prospect. Imagine if the Rangers spent a 1st round pick AND a top prospect for a 3rd line rental player... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangers4Life Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 It's really surprising for me that Nash is valued so highly. I know how good and strong he is, but is he so much more valuable than Eric Staal was last year? He cost us two 2nd-round picks + a low-tier prospect. Imagine if the Rangers spent a 1st round pick AND a top prospect for a 3rd line rental player... Fan bases always tend to overrate their players. Nash is a known playoff bust, why would teams give so much for him? As someone else mentioned, maybe Grabner is a more valuable piece to a contending team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunny Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 He has 23 points in his last 35 playoff games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangers4Life Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 Does he really? Didn?t even notice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatfrancesa Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 It's really surprising for me that Nash is valued so highly. I know how good and strong he is, but is he so much more valuable than Eric Staal was last year? He cost us two 2nd-round picks + a low-tier prospect. Imagine if the Rangers spent a 1st round pick AND a top prospect for a 3rd line rental player... Welcome to an alternate reality called ranger land. He’s not it’s just not worth wasting the time to argue it anymore. I have read multiple places, last was Matt Larkin, hockey news, that Nash might be had for a 2nd and mid level prospect. So in the end I agree with you that the Staal trade is probably the comparable. We are not getting any teams top prospect, let alone the number 2 ranked guy in the entire league. Oh wait plus a first for a rental 2nd/3rd line winger. Would anyone want to trade our first and chytil for Nash? I don’t why people seem to think that every other gm is retarded. They are trying to make themselves better too. This is not a video game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunny Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 You're describing the payment for Ryan Clowe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunny Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 They aren't going to get a 1st and a Top Prospect, but they'll get one of the two and possibly more if a bidding war ensues, which is the problem with Barry Larkins prediction, he's not factoring emotion in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 Welcome to an alternate reality called ranger land. He’s not it’s just not worth wasting the time to argue it anymore. I have read multiple places, last was Matt Larkin, hockey news, that Nash might be had for a 2nd and mid level prospect. So in the end I agree with you that the Staal trade is probably the comparable. We are not getting any teams top prospect, let alone the number 2 ranked guy in the entire league. Oh wait plus a first for a rental 2nd/3rd line winger. Would anyone want to trade our first and chytil for Nash? I don’t why people seem to think that every other gm is retarded. They are trying to make themselves better too. This is not a video game cant really compare the situations. Staal had a NMC and only wanted to waive it for the Rangers. With Nash we have many options and it will be a bidding war bumping the price up. And besides - two 2nd rounders (50th and 52nd OA) are value wise the same as a really late 1st (that we would get from a contender wanting Nash). And Saarela is a decent prospect. Factor in the "bidding war", Nash being a more "known name" and imo a better player then Staal was I dont see a 1st and a good (obviously not a great) prospect being so far off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynn Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 If he does go to Nashville.... I hope the first practice he attends, Nash takes a shit in both Forsberg and Emelin's lockers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giacomin Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 Welcome to an alternate reality called ranger land. He’s not it’s just not worth wasting the time to argue it anymore. I have read multiple places, last was Matt Larkin, hockey news, that Nash might be had for a 2nd and mid level prospect. So in the end I agree with you that the Staal trade is probably the comparable. We are not getting any teams top prospect, let alone the number 2 ranked guy in the entire league. Oh wait plus a first for a rental 2nd/3rd line winger. Would anyone want to trade our first and chytil for Nash? I don’t why people seem to think that every other gm is retarded. They are trying to make themselves better too. This is not a video game If it comes down to trading Nash for a 2nd and mid level prospect, I'll keep Nash. Here is what I have to say...... Fuck that, fuck them, fire AV, Sather and Gorton and we'll keep Nash and make a playoff run ourselves. If we trade Nash for that shit we will never be able to make a good trade again. You prefer that Fatty? You can take your single second rounder (50 - 62) and your AHL fodder and skip paying your kids college education for hockey tickets at MSG. Welcome to the land of competitve professional sports where winning a Stanley Cup is brutally hard and if you hold on to every PROSPECT you don't deserve to be World Champions. BTW, someone care to tell me the last Cup Nashville won? St Louis? Winninpeg? Dallas? .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phillyb Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giacomin Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 Frankly I'd rather take a small underpayment from the Pens and help them win another Cup by sending them both Nash and Grabs, then take pennies on the dollar from a few asshole GMs in the other conference who think we are fools/chumps/morons to send them Nash for a 2nd.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 damn, that escalated quickly. I agree tho Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
torontonyr Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 I keep seeing the argument that Nash > Grabner. I don't think anyone would correctly argue against the fact that Nash is a more complete, proven player. With that said, what we're talking about is a potential return for each of these players and while you may be first inclined to believe that the haul will be dependent on their overall ability, it may be more nuanced than that. If a team is desperately in need of what Grabner can provide, which is speed, finishing ability, defensive prowess and most of all - being utterly cost effective - it may (or may not) result in an equal and/or similar price to Nash despite not being a comparatively better player. These types of transactions can be found many times, but for the point of my illustration I'll look at the NBA. At the trade deadline, a team with terrible or non-competitive 3 point shooting may acquire a lethal 3 point shooter at a premium due to the demand for the player's specific talent and/or contract structure which may allow them to make subsequent moves. Now I'm not saying this is guaranteed, but I don't think people who believe Grabner may fetch a solid if not similar return to Nash are off the reservation for this exact reason and I do not think saying Nash is the better player restricts Grabners value to potential trade partners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunny Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 Grabner has "finishing ability"? Huh? I like Grabner, but he's a one trick pony offensively. He can't shoot, he can't pass, he can't dangle and he can't play the PP. He can skate, that his only weapon, and it's a great weapon, but it's all he's got, its all he's ever had. I don't say this to disparage thoughts of the return he could provide in a trade, despite his obvious flaws he's still a useful piece on any team and you could make an argument that he could be a better value than Nash when you factor in price, sure I can buy that, but these are two vastly different hockey players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giacomin Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 Grabner has "finishing ability"? Huh? I like Grabner, but he's a one trick pony offensively. He can't shoot, he can't pass, he can't dangle and he can't play the PP. He can skate, that his only weapon, and it's a great weapon, but it's all he's got, its all he's ever had. I don't say this to disparage thoughts of the return he could provide in a trade, despite his obvious flaws he's still a useful piece on any team and you could make an argument that he could be a better value than Nash when you factor in price, sure I can buy that, but these are two vastly different hockey players. Damn you are both wrong. Grabner is very valuable. Nash is more valuable. Sure, for a few desperate for his kinda player and not wanting to move other salary (Tampa, Pens or Boston maybe) Grabner may have an edge. Particularly because he will return less in assets. But in general, Nash is perceived as the better player. Now Dunny, when are you going to realize that Grabs is a hockey player, not a one trick speed skater in the 500 meter. The guy is a shutdown defensive player and A+ Pker. He has decent size, is not afraid to go to the boards, excellent forechecker, backchecker and really great stick checker. And he turns D into O w/o needing a linemate to make a good play. He's scored a ton of even strength goals his entire time here. He will adjust to his new team quickly, as long as they play a fast game. The big thing is that Nash brings the same defense and PK. We are flooding the mkt with solid D players. Would you really prefer Evander Kane at the same cost? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
torontonyr Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 Grabner has "finishing ability"? Huh? I like Grabner, but he's a one trick pony offensively. He can't shoot, he can't pass, he can't dangle and he can't play the PP. He can skate, that his only weapon, and it's a great weapon, but it's all he's got, its all he's ever had. I don't say this to disparage thoughts of the return he could provide in a trade, despite his obvious flaws he's still a useful piece on any team and you could make an argument that he could be a better value than Nash when you factor in price, sure I can buy that, but these are two vastly different hockey players. Yes. He does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Long live the King Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 If Grabner had finishing ability he'd be a 50 goal scorer... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siddious Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 omgggg do something already! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynn Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 We are arguing about apples and oranges here.... ignoring the fact that both apples and oranges are both quite good for different reasons. Nash is a big body, a puck protector, a presence on both ends of the ice. I think he could/would absolutely thrive in the playoffs with a quality play-maker. Grabner is a home run threat, the finish isn't the best, but he still puts the puck in the net- his even strength numbers the past few seasons ooze value. He will also make your opponents ass pucker when he's on the PK. Neither guy is perfect... Neither guy is going to make this Ranger team a winner in the Spring.... Nash, for all of his "faults" would be a massive addition to a team on the cusp. Grabner, while cut from a different cloth is equally valuable to a team right trying to get over the hump. Both guys absolutely have huge value. Is it worth a late 1st and a big time prospect for a legit cup run? 1 cup in 77 years tells me that answer should be "fuck yes". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Future Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 I think the biggest difference between Nash and Grabner is that Grabs is more system-dependent. Grabner has similar upside in the right system, but Nash is pretty system agnostic and can play anywhere in a lineup. For all his upside, Grabner is pretty much relegated to a third or 2b line. Plus, Grabner only really does have one way to beat you - speed. He's got a good stick and is generally smart, but those both just compliment his speed. Without that, he's Jesper Fast. Nash isn't a blazer, but he's fast enough and has size and hands that make him effective even if the legs aren't there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatfrancesa Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 The rangers may get a first and a second tier prospect. I hope they get what some on here think they will. I just don’t see getting a trade like Tolvanen or fabbro plus a first. Maybe one of those guys and a second. That would be pretty good. If a bidding war ensues sure it could be more. Fact is there are a lot of options for those who don’t want to pay up. Grabner is just a start. Giac. No I don’t prefer that. The ufas have to go for the best they can get. Whatever that is. People thought talbot and hagelin were going to bring back nice returns. They didn’t. Different situation with Nash but only different for the better if there is a bidding war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giacomin Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 The rangers may get a first and a second tier prospect. I hope they get what some on here think they will. I just don’t see getting a trade like Tolvanen or fabbro plus a first. Maybe one of those guys and a second. That would be pretty good. If a bidding war ensues sure it could be more. Fact is there are a lot of options for those who don’t want to pay up. Grabner is just a start. Giac. No I don’t prefer that. The ufas have to go for the best they can get. Whatever that is. People thought talbot and hagelin were going to bring back nice returns. They didn’t. Different situation with Nash but only different for the better if there is a bidding war. Sure, that seems much more in line. We have to receive at least the value of a 1st + for Nash. It should be a 1st for Grabs, I hope I'm not being optimisic with either. I said over a week ago we are not getting Tolvanen period. Nor is Fiala happening. I could see Nashville offering a 1st this year and a 2nd next. Or Fabbro and a 2nd this year. I hope we can do a little better, but I'm managing my expectations. Nash plays up to his potential he is worth a 1st and a Fabbro like (2nd to 3rd best) prospect for a team like Nashville. Mgmt must be sharp and maximize these deals. BTW, not interested in other teams quantity and junk adding up to some lotto hope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatfrancesa Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 31 thoughts Elliotte Friedman Nash market heating up. He questions if Nashville will pay fabbro or Tolvanen plus the first. Rangers are pushing for them. We’ll see maybe it will happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.