Player Discussion Rick Nash
- Thread starter rocketdan9
- Start date
- Status
As usual, Mr. Know it all, condescendingly laughing off anyone who disagree's with, or even worse, challenges him.
I find it hard to believe Spooner would have been less of a contributor than Nash. Some of us didn't like the deal from day one. We didn't need to see Nash would be useless, we already knew that. Spooner was inconsistent so we traded for Nash , who is inconsistent, makes sense.
The fact that we will never know is a rock you can hide under but what you can't hide from is the fact that Nash didn't help at all. Some of us felt he would be useless before he was useless.
Nash brought what?
It was a trade the Bruins could afford to make but it wasn't the right one.
The only positive was that Beleskey contract and even that, in typical fashion was only half sold.
I would prefer the Bruins were sellers if they have anything to sell rather than buyers at trade DL. The winners are almost always the sellers.
Oh , and go to bed? Yikes
BruinsFanSince94
The Perfect Fan ™
Mr. Know it all? Now that’s a yikes. Lmfao.
You can “challenge” me on stupid “what if” scenarios. I will continue to laugh at them. If you don’t like my posts, ignore me. It’s that simple.
BruinsFanSince94
The Perfect Fan ™
With pleasure! Lmfao. If you have a problem, you can PM me. Clearly I rattle you for some reason.
Blowfish
Count down ...
I was asked a question and decide myself when to move on. This is a fan opinion board. You Don’t need to dictate who says what.
Blowfish
Count down ...
BruinsFanSince94
The Perfect Fan ™
I feel like people like different opinions. Not the same tired one, repeated over and over.
Blowfish
Count down ...
Blowfish
Count down ...
It’s been going on for how many months by many posters including yourself? A little more wont hurt. Btw this is far from
Over. Next up will be spooner success 1st round draft selected by rangers and lindgren development. And how many of us were upset with trade.
I hope you don't mind me sticking my 2 cents in here.
I liked that they made a move like this, Nash probably wasn't the perfect fit but he certainly gave them more of a net front presence than Spooner did and he was far better defensively and he scored as much as Spooner did. Anyway I look at it, and I would not have done that deal either, Nash was a better fit on the Bruins than Spooner was.
I do not think they were going to re-sign Spooner anyway, Lindgren was down pretty far on the D prospect depth chart so it did not hurt to trade him then as most likely he would have been traded or been stuck in the AHL anyway. Losing the first is what I didn't like but they got rid of Belesky and that was fantastic any way I look at it.
I wanted them to get McDonagh, I thought he was the player that they needed most of all. Not just for last season, but for the next 5-7 years.
- Jan 11, 2006
- 13,286
- 6,345
I didn’t want either Nash or McDanough. I was after Zucarello. He would have been great. People were clamoring for a trade to go for it, it’s what they got. Can’t make everyone happy. I hate the TD deadline. It’s the worst thing for a team to have to overpay. Then again, no one is telling teams to do it.
BruinsFanSince94
The Perfect Fan ™
Can’t win with fans unless you win the Cup.
1.) don’t make a trade? Fans complain
2.) make a trade and don’t win? Fans complain
1.) don’t make a trade? Fans complain
2.) make a trade and don’t win? Fans complain
Zucarello would have been great and cheaper too.
In all honesty, I am glad that they at least tried something. I get the feeling Sweeney is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't when it comes to deadline moves.
BruinsFanSince94
The Perfect Fan ™
Cheaper as far as the cost to acquire him, McDonagh's cost was very high. It's hard to figure what the Bruins would have had to pay to beat out Tampa for McDonagh, but it would have been a very high price.
Blowfish
Count down ...
BruinsFanSince94
The Perfect Fan ™
And if no trade was made, many fans would complain they didn’t make a trade.
Blowfish
Count down ...
Mpasta
Registered User
- Oct 6, 2008
- 5,804
- 722
Coming in to a Nash thread and complaining about people talking about the Nash trade. What a joke.
It's almost as if different people have different opinions. Weird huh?
GloryDaze4877
Barely Irrelevant
And they would be wrong.
The Bruins had very little secondary scoring in the playoffs with Nash. How bad would it have been with without him?
I thought he played well before the concussion. Coming off of that in the playoffs, I don’t think he was as good, but even then, he was creating a lot of scoring chances. He just lacked finish.
You always want your trade deadline acquisitions to light it up, but even though he didn’t, I had no issues with deal when they made it and none now.
Over the volcano
Registered User
Fans that forget the bad old days when they were one or two pieces away and management felt otherwise.
missingchicklet
Registered User
- Jan 24, 2010
- 36,589
- 34,464
Things we knew, and some of us pointed out, about Rick Nash at the deadline:
1) He has had injury issues more often than not throughout his recent career. Last full 82-game season he played was in 2011-12. He was due for an injury when the Bs brought him in. Yes, that mattered.
2) He is NOT a sniper, as some here seemed to think he was when he was brought in. He has been "snake bitten" for many years now, save for the 2014-15 season. Snake bitten applies to players who go through a stretch of not being able to score on good opportunities, not multiple seasons. When it is at the multiple season level you are no longer snake bitten, rather you are no longer a good scorer.
3) He is a playoff under-performer. You don't give up what the Bs did for a RENTAL who already has a history of being an under-performer in the playoffs. Any notion that Nash had a good playoffs in 2018 is not based on reality. He was mediocre, at best. 5 points in 12 games, -7, 2 takeaways and 7 giveaways, and multiple misses on shots that were very good looks. Throw in the fact he was behind on the play too often, and his much younger linemate had to bail that whole line out a lot in their own zone.
It was a dumb move, period. It falls in line with some other dumb moves the Bs have made in recent years for players who are declining. You would think at some point they would learn their lesson, but apparently they don't. I am not throwing the baby out with the bath water here. Just pointing out the obvious when it comes to a certain blind spot B's management seems to have. Management is clearly doing well in other areas.
Yes, it's great that management wanted to shore up the team before the playoff run. The problem is that they have trouble identifying vets who will make a significant difference, and then overpaying for said players. Nobody knows how Spooner would have done in the playoffs had the Bs stayed pat. He has only played 4 playoff games in his career. I do know that he has more speed than Nash and was having a pretty good season before he was traded -- 25 points in 39 games, +10, 12.9% shot pct, better than 50% FO pct, and had improved his play in his own zone. He was also part of a team that had great chemistry up to the point he was traded. Despite all that, I still have no issue in principle that he was traded. I understand the thought process in trading him. But, the player received in return as a rental for the amount given up was wrong. And for goodness sake they better not sign Nash for any kind of decent money. Stay far far away from throwing money at this guy. You got burnt once. Don't be stupid and get burnt twice.
Moving forward, the Bs need to learn from their mistakes, if that is possible, and quit being fascinated with players who were once good, had a good playoffs that one time, or do not bring much to the table in light of what is needed to be successful in today's playoffs.
1) He has had injury issues more often than not throughout his recent career. Last full 82-game season he played was in 2011-12. He was due for an injury when the Bs brought him in. Yes, that mattered.
2) He is NOT a sniper, as some here seemed to think he was when he was brought in. He has been "snake bitten" for many years now, save for the 2014-15 season. Snake bitten applies to players who go through a stretch of not being able to score on good opportunities, not multiple seasons. When it is at the multiple season level you are no longer snake bitten, rather you are no longer a good scorer.
3) He is a playoff under-performer. You don't give up what the Bs did for a RENTAL who already has a history of being an under-performer in the playoffs. Any notion that Nash had a good playoffs in 2018 is not based on reality. He was mediocre, at best. 5 points in 12 games, -7, 2 takeaways and 7 giveaways, and multiple misses on shots that were very good looks. Throw in the fact he was behind on the play too often, and his much younger linemate had to bail that whole line out a lot in their own zone.
It was a dumb move, period. It falls in line with some other dumb moves the Bs have made in recent years for players who are declining. You would think at some point they would learn their lesson, but apparently they don't. I am not throwing the baby out with the bath water here. Just pointing out the obvious when it comes to a certain blind spot B's management seems to have. Management is clearly doing well in other areas.
Yes, it's great that management wanted to shore up the team before the playoff run. The problem is that they have trouble identifying vets who will make a significant difference, and then overpaying for said players. Nobody knows how Spooner would have done in the playoffs had the Bs stayed pat. He has only played 4 playoff games in his career. I do know that he has more speed than Nash and was having a pretty good season before he was traded -- 25 points in 39 games, +10, 12.9% shot pct, better than 50% FO pct, and had improved his play in his own zone. He was also part of a team that had great chemistry up to the point he was traded. Despite all that, I still have no issue in principle that he was traded. I understand the thought process in trading him. But, the player received in return as a rental for the amount given up was wrong. And for goodness sake they better not sign Nash for any kind of decent money. Stay far far away from throwing money at this guy. You got burnt once. Don't be stupid and get burnt twice.
Moving forward, the Bs need to learn from their mistakes, if that is possible, and quit being fascinated with players who were once good, had a good playoffs that one time, or do not bring much to the table in light of what is needed to be successful in today's playoffs.
BruinsFanSince94
The Perfect Fan ™
I know. Coming to a Nash thread. Making the same points over and over about how one doesn’t like the trade and making baseless speculations like how spooner would have been better because it sounds good. What a joke is right.
- Status
