Nash or Ovechkin??

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jason MacIsaac

Registered User
Jan 13, 2004
22,221
5,936
Halifax, NS
sveiglar said:
Care to tell me next week's lottery numbers while you're at it, Nostradamus?



Mariusz Czerkawski is one-dimensional. Rick Nash is not one dimensional.
If you pick 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 odds are you will not win.

Nash is one dimentional, the guy doesn't play defense, has little to no assists. He can score goals like the best of them, a similar player to Andreychuk in his early days. Ovechkin is a much more complete player.
 

CRAZY_FAN

Registered User
Aug 26, 2002
1,362
415
Quebec
JasonMacIsaac said:
If you pick 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 odds are you will not win.
QUOTE]

Well in theory you have has much chance that those number are selected as any other combination... ;)
 

sveiglar

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
8,585
4
JasonMacIsaac said:
If you pick 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 odds are you will not win.

Thanks.. I'll make a note of that.

Nash is one dimentional, the guy doesn't play defense, has little to no assists. He can score goals like the best of them, a similar player to Andreychuk in his early days. Ovechkin is a much more complete player.

So you're completely overlooking the fact that Nash can run over guys, being well-suited to the physical side of the game? And you don't believe that defense can be taught to a 20 yr old? And you don't think that as he matures (see Kovalchuk, Ilya from years 1 and 2 to year 3) and gets better linemates that he will start to accumulate a few more assists? Well, if that's the case then I guess he is one dimensional, Donkin boy.
 

Jason MacIsaac

Registered User
Jan 13, 2004
22,221
5,936
Halifax, NS
sveiglar said:
Thanks.. I'll make a note of that.



So you're completely overlooking the fact that Nash can run over guys, being well-suited to the physical side of the game? And you don't believe that defense can be taught to a 20 yr old? And you don't think that as he matures (see Kovalchuk, Ilya from years 1 and 2 to year 3) and gets better linemates that he will start to accumulate a few more assists? Well, if that's the case then I guess he is one dimensional, Donkin boy.
I didn't think Nash was all that physical outside the crease. There he had to take a beating like many other players but along the boards and in the neutral zone his physical game didn't impress me. He can learn defense but hasn't yet. People still call Kovalchuk one dimentional yet he can still learn that aspect of the game. I am talking about right now. Ovechkin is better allround and would rather him on my team next year over Nash.
 

bizzz*

Guest
JasonMacIsaac said:
Ovechkin here, he dominated at the World Championships and will be close to a ppg at the world cup. He is a very special player who's allround game is allready miles ahead of one dimentional Nash.
Where did he dominate? I probably missed all the World Championships, because at the last one Ovechkin had 2 frikin points in 6 games and both of them were earned in the very first game against such a great team as Denmark. All the teams like Sweden, Finland, USA, Slovakia and even Japan kept him pointless.
He would be happy to leave the World Cup with 0.5 PPG and this is his ceiling.
And Nash is dimentional? That's just senseless.
 

Jason MacIsaac

Registered User
Jan 13, 2004
22,221
5,936
Halifax, NS
bizoncol said:
Where did he dominate? I probably missed all the World Championships, because at the last one Ovechkin had 2 frikin points in 6 games and both of them were earned in the very first game against such a great team as Denmark. All the teams like Sweden, Finland, USA, Slovakia and even Japan kept him pointless.
He would be happy to leave the World Cup with 0.5 PPG and this is his ceiling.
And Nash is dimentional? That's just senseless.
How is it? What other aspects of the game does Nash do well other then scoring.
 

BlackJack21

Registered User
Nov 6, 2002
863
0
Montreal
Visit site
JasonMacIsaac said:
Ovechkin here, he dominated at the World Championships and will be close to a ppg at the world cup. He is a very special player who's allround game is allready miles ahead of one dimentional Nash.

One dimentional?

Have you ever watch him play???

If you say it becase of the Assist production of the kid, I reply that Gretz would have had trouble to record 50 assist on CLB last year.

This kid can score, hit, brig some leadership, brig some energy and agresivity, and more...

BJ21
 

X0ssbar

Guest
JasonMacIsaac said:
If you pick 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 odds are you will not win.

Nash is one dimentional, the guy doesn't play defense, has little to no assists. He can score goals like the best of them, a similar player to Andreychuk in his early days. Ovechkin is a much more complete player.

Look, your entitled to your opinion but I get a little tired of the Nash "lack of defense" bashing. If you gonna call him out, you might as well call out the majority of every offensively gifted player to come along in the NHL in the past 15 to 20 years b/c almost all of them struggled early on in their careers with their defensive games.

Here is a list of stats from, how should we say, "decent" offensive players who have graced the NHL with their presence as young adults. I tried to pick players that were in the relative same position as Nash currently is w/ the CBJ (i.e. a young offensive franchise type player who was taken early in his draft year playing on a weak team). These stats are from the player's first season and I also included their +/- from their second season.

Mario Lemieux
1984-1985 Penguins 73 43 57 100 -35 54 11 0 2 0 209 20.6
NOTE: He was a -6 even with scoring 141 points in his 2nd season.

Joe Thornton
1997-1998 Bruins 55 3 4 7 -6 19 0 0 1 0 33 9.1
NOTE - Joe had a total of 7 points as a 18/19 year old. He was a +6 in his 2nd season.

Wayne Gretzky
1979-1980 Edmonton 79 51 86 137 21 0 13 1 6 4 284 17.96
NOTE - Oh yes, even the greatest player of all time didn't have a positive +/- even with his point total early in his career. He was a +41 in his 2nd season while scoring 164 points - that is impressive.

Ilya Kovalchuk
2001-2002 Thrashers 65 29 22 51 -19 28 7 0 4 1 184 15.8
NOTE - He was a -24 in his 2nd season

Steve Yzerman
1983-1984 Red Wings 80 39 48 87 -17 33 13 0 2 1 177 22
NOTE - He was a 0 in his 2nd but a -24 in his 3rd season

Joe Sakic
1988-1989 Nordiques 70 23 39 62 -36 24 10 0 2 1 148 15.5
NOTE - He was a -40 (yes, worse than Rick!!) in his 2nd season.

Eric Lindros
1992-1993 Flyers 61 41 34 75 28 147 8 1 5 1 180 22.8
NOTE: He was a +16 his 2nd season.

Vincent Lecavalier
1998-1999 Lightning 82 13 15 28 -19 23 2 0 2 1 125 10.4
NOTE - He was a -25 in his 2nd season.

Rick Nash
2002-2003 Blue Jackets 74 17 22 39 -27 78 6 0 2 0 154 11
NOTE - He was a -35 in his 2nd season

I will be the first one to agree Nash needs to improve his defensive game and I believe it will improve in time, especially as he matures and the team improves.

It will be very interesting to see how Ovechkin does in his first year. I don't think I am going out on to much of a ledge here to say his numbers (especially +/-) will be similar to these players at the same age.

Stats provided by nhl.com.
 

Beukeboom Fan

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
15,391
1,189
Chicago, IL
Visit site
JasonMacIsaac said:
Nash is one dimentional, the guy doesn't play defense, has little to no assists. He can score goals like the best of them, a similar player to Andreychuk in his early days. Ovechkin is a much more complete player.

1) Nash is 19 YO. How many above average 19 YO guys play great D?
2) IMO, like someone said - Val Bure or Czerkawski (or Gomez for that matter) are one trick ponies.
3) Playing with a bunch of guys that can't score in a whorehouse with a roll of $100 bills is going to negatively affect Nash's A total's. When the BJ's add some more talent, I expect that Nash is a 40/40 type of player.
 

Vlad The Impaler

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
12,315
644
Montreal
JasonMacIsaac said:
Nash is one dimentional, the guy doesn't play defense, has little to no assists. He can score goals like the best of them, a similar player to Andreychuk in his early days.

You're making the same mistake people made about Kovalchuk. Forget his assist total, the guy can pass and will over time.

Nash is miles ahead of Andreychuk as far as grit goes. Andreychuk is a very strong player but was never very proactive physically. Nash is going to be a beast, and more importantly he has shown me smart grit. He annoys pro level, elite defensemen and keeps a great composure for a young intense man. This is very difficult to do and one of the main reason I wouldn't trade him one on one for any single asset in this league right now.

I am convinced his assist total will go up over time but with goals being at a premium in this league, I'd be happy with him even if he was a whining, soft, undisciplined 5 foot 5 midget.

His progression is almost perfect the last few years, and that's more than I can say of Ovechkin who has yet to reach the NHL. That is not something to overlook IMO.

It doesn't mean Ovechkin won't be better, but I think you're reading way more into Ovechkin than there really is. I'd like to have seen him in the NHL this year, see how well rounded he really is. There's more than offense and defense in being well-rounded, IMO. And Nash provides great power and maturity along with his scoring.

I don't want to knock you but this is a too common trend on HF. People judge early NHLers very harshly, and then they have glowing reports on guys like Parise (whom I love), Ovechkin, Phaneuf, etc. Meanwhile they knock young phenoms who have the opportunity, balls and talent to jump early.

Well, duh. Of course they look good *there*. Let me tell you it would be a much different story if they played in the NHL and you'd see holes (or a well-rounded but timid game) in them like anybody else in the NHL. It's not a walk in the park, and for Nash to go from a low-profile junior player to one of the top player, overcome Jay Bo as the #1 overall, jump in the NHL at 18 when people were saying he couldn't skate a lick, have a satisfactory first season, win the Rocket Richard as a *19 yearsold*... well to me Ovechkin better be damn good because so far I am not overly impressed by what I have seen.

Nobody expects young future superstars in the NHL to do even HALF of what Nash did so far. It's your prerogative if you prefer Ovechkin but I think your report on Nash is very unfair.
 

Jovavic

Gaslight Object Project
Oct 13, 2002
15,102
2,769
New Born Citizen Erased
Vlad The Impaler said:
Nash is miles ahead of Andreychuk as far as grit goes. Andreychuk is a very strong player but was never very proactive physically. Nash is going to be a beast, and more importantly he has shown me smart grit. He annoys pro level, elite defensemen and keeps a great composure for a young intense man. This is very difficult to do and one of the main reason I wouldn't trade him one on one for any single asset in this league right now.


This is very true, and why I like the kid so much. He'll stand in front of the goalie with Pronger/Ohlund/Nortstrom hacking and slashing at him to get out of the way and he draws a PP. If these elite defensemen are having trouble with him now, what are they going to do when he gains another 15 pounds of muscle?
 

xander

Registered User
Nov 4, 2003
4,085
0
Section A Lynah Rink
Visit site
i don't think anyone is getting what JasonMacIsaac is sayiny. He said that Nash is RIGHT NOW a pretty one demensional player. Syaing that many young offensive players have had this problem and have improved, while true, does not refute this claim.
 

Hockeycrazed07

Registered User
Jun 15, 2002
2,361
3
Buena Vista, VA
www.hockeycrazed.com
Nash isn't given much of a chance to thrive in the C-Bus system, either. His job is to crash and bang and supply goals. His job (especially on his lines) isn't to pass, and generally not to drop back on D. This can't be discounted, either.

As to which I'd rather have, it depends on the team/coaching I have. If I need physicality, I go with Nash. If I need all-around play in the future (especially if I have an extremely young team not expected to win, such as the Caps), I can take the time to let AO grow into the NHL and he's my pick.

~Crazed.
 

Vlad The Impaler

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
12,315
644
Montreal
xander said:
i don't think anyone is getting what JasonMacIsaac is sayiny. He said that Nash is RIGHT NOW a pretty one demensional player. Syaing that many young offensive players have had this problem and have improved, while true, does not refute this claim.

But I disagree with him for two reasons:

1-I've never seen dimensions as being simply about offense and defense. I think Nash is a well-rounded player in several respects. This doesn't mean he has no faults or things he can improve. But he will improve and the faults he'll have will make him pretty much as any other superstars. Nobody is good at anything.

I could draw you a list of players with that kind of power and that kind of goalscoring in the last 20 years and it would be extremely slim. Lots of stars in this league aren't half as tough, never were and have years over him.

2-He's saying Ovechkin is a more well-rounded player. I contend that it is much easier to round your game at a lower level of play. Put Nash at a lower level and he'll score goals, be captain, pound on players like a bulldozer and be able to keep a closer eye on his Dzone. It will help a lot more also if he is on a decent team. Right now, his faults are glowing in great part because of the poor quality of the Jackets.

So we can point at Nash's shortcomings, but unless Ovechkin is in the NHL, I can't see how well he will fare. He may be as well-rounded as he wants in the RSL but in the NHL, it may well be another story.

Look at Rick Nash. Before he was drafted, the worry was on his skating. Now, it's on his passing and defense. The focus has totally shifted.
 

xander

Registered User
Nov 4, 2003
4,085
0
Section A Lynah Rink
Visit site
Vlad The Impaler said:
But I disagree with him for two reasons:

1-I've never seen dimensions as being simply about offense and defense. I think Nash is a well-rounded player in several respects. This doesn't mean he has no faults or things he can improve. But he will improve and the faults he'll have will make him pretty much as any other superstars. Nobody is good at anything.

I could draw you a list of players with that kind of power and that kind of goalscoring in the last 20 years and it would be extremely slim. Lots of stars in this league aren't half as tough, never were and have years over him.

2-He's saying Ovechkin is a more well-rounded player. I contend that it is much easier to round your game at a lower level of play. Put Nash at a lower level and he'll score goals, be captain, pound on players like a bulldozer and be able to keep a closer eye on his Dzone. It will help a lot more also if he is on a decent team. Right now, his faults are glowing in great part because of the poor quality of the Jackets.

So we can point at Nash's shortcomings, but unless Ovechkin is in the NHL, I can't see how well he will fare. He may be as well-rounded as he wants in the RSL but in the NHL, it may well be another story.

Look at Rick Nash. Before he was drafted, the worry was on his skating. Now, it's on his passing and defense. The focus has totally shifted.

I wasn't directing that at anyone inparticular, i just read through the thread and saw that most people where responding with: "he can get better" which wasn't relavent.

I'm not gonna enter the debate becouse i've never seen ovechkin play.
 

ZombieMatt

Registered User
May 20, 2002
5,242
1
JasonMacIsaac said:
Ovechkin here, he dominated at the World Championships and will be close to a ppg at the world cup. He is a very special player who's allround game is allready miles ahead of one dimentional Nash.

Jason...I wish I had your crystal ball and your confidence.

You're telling me that a guy who was just drafted a few weeks ago is already miles ahead of a player who has two years experience in the NHL and won a major scoring award?

Okay, first of all, anyone who is calling Rick Nash uni-dimensional either needs to better define what they consider one dimension or needs to order NHL Centre Ice and watch all the re-runs from last season I assume they're going to show in place of the probably non-existent 2004-05 season.

Rick Nash is a great finisher, an ugly but very competant and surprisingly speedy skater, a physical competitor who is willing to throw his body around, a very strong puck handler and yes, a good passer.

I'm not certain what part of that is unidimensional. But okay, lets say you group that all as "OFFENCE". So what does that leave for multidimensional? "DEFENCE" and....??? For the sake of an argument lets say "LEADERSHIP/INTANGIBLES" is the third category just so we dn't have two categories because that's lame.

Nash, in my opinion, has demonstrated very strong leadership skills for a 19 year old. It's difficult to measure intangibles but whatever you want to call them, I'm thinking Nash has it going for him.

So I'd say at worst he's got two out of three.

Uni-dimensional? That's Jason Chimera. He's fast...that's it.

I think its extraordinarily unfair to try to claim Nash is unidimensional simply because he played on an abysmal team that had every single player basically be in the minus...sure Nash was the worst but he also logged big minutes. Assists? Who the heck is he supposed to pass to? One 20 goal scorer and three guys with 10 or more!?!?

I'm sorry, but bookmark this, I will be shocked if AO is plus in his first two seasons either.

This isn't a bash Ovechkin post, I think the guy is great. A tad overhyped, but all prospects are here and all NHL players are brought down a little, its just the way things go. Ovechkin is going to be a great player, I'm sure, but all I can say is I admire your foresight JasonMacIsaac. I wish I was so brave.
 

LoudmouthHemskyFan#2

Registered User
May 15, 2003
1,593
0
Visit site
capman29 said:
You do not have to worry Ovechkin will be as advertised the next wayne or mario and you can take that to the bank. To bad your team does not have him . :D

Do you actually have a bank fettish? LOL...Every post i've seen you make you've mentioned a bank...
 

Levitate

Registered User
Jul 29, 2004
30,948
7,655
i can't believe so many are picking ovechkin when he hasn't played a single NHL game, over a guy who scored 41 goals in his second season...kovulchuk didn't even score 41 goals in his second season...nash is an established NHLer who has put up big points and definatly looks like the next superstar powerforward in the league

ovechkin is...an "overager" for his draft year who hasn't played NHL hockey at all. sure it's said that he has a rounded game...but who knows how that translates into the NHL? maybe his game is rounded in the RSL but in the NHL he's gonna have troubles...

to be completely honest i don't think ovechkin is even gonna be as good as kovulchuk at the NHL level, at least offensively. and i'll say that no i haven't seen ovechkin play so me making that statement is iffy...however i do have opinions still and i'll still state them from time to time...nash, kovulchuk = established NHL superstars and still YOUNG. ovechkin = ?????

this would be a better thread to have after ovechkin plays at least one year, as of right now it's just garbage. right now i'd take nash for sure...future, i have no idea...ovechkin could turn out to be mediocre, or he could be the next superstar.

blah
 

ZombieMatt

Registered User
May 20, 2002
5,242
1
This is a good point to discuss.

What players are in their junior/foreign leagues does not always translate over to the NHL. Alexander Ovechkin may have played an all around complete game in Russia but that doesn't ensure that he'll be the same sort of player in the NHL. Jiri Dopita was a great scorer at home, but was not in the NHL. Darcy Tucker was an amazing goal scorer for Kamloops and now he's a pest. And so on.

We'll see what Ovechkin becomes in due time, but to call him a more rounded player than Rick nash right now is a little too forward and assuming for my nature.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->