Player Discussion Rick Nash

[Dabruins]

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.

Wow, wonderfully summarized. This is exactly how I feel about the situation.

 

[Blowfish]

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.

There aren’t any right or wrong fans. Just opinionated. Lol.

 

[easton117]

I liked that the Bruins tried at the deadline to improve their team. Do people not remember the Greg Zanon days?

They also gave up next to nothing that won’t be replaced this upcoming season. The 1st is a late one. Lindgren is way down the depth chart. Spooner had never really established himself on any line consistently.

Did it work out? Not really. Nash got hurt. It happens. Is it going to hurt them going forward? No it is not.

As a fan all I ask year in year out is they give themselves a chance to win consistently. After a few rough years I’d say for the most part Boston has done that.

 

[WJCJ]

I think Zuc would have been more expensive.

More expensive than Nash probably. Less expensive than McDonagh I am guessing.

 

[GloryDaze4877]

There aren’t any right or wrong fans. Just opinionated. Lol.

The way the playoffs unfolded, with the B’s basically living and dying with the production of one line, are you going to sit there and honestly say that the B’s shouldn’t have added to the F group at the deadline?

If so, you are lying to yourself.

You can debate if Nash was the best choice (opinion), but with the lack of secondary scoring, there can be no doubt that the B’s needed to try to improve that forward group (fact).

 

[Blowfish]

The way the playoffs unfolded, with the B’s basically living and dying with the production of one line, are you going to sit there and honestly say that the B’s shouldn’t have added to the F group at the deadline?

If so, you are lying to yourself.

You can debate if Nash was the best choice (opinion), but with the lack of secondary scoring, there can be no doubt that the B’s needed to try to improve that forward group (fact).

I wanted to see bruins add speedy winger. If that wasn’t possible then go internal. Don’t give up anything for risky rental. Nash was not risky it was in my opinion completely the wrong choice for all reasons mentioned already. Simply put the bruins did not improve with Nash one could argue spooner might have been the better player to go with.

 

[RussellmaniaKW]

I wanted to see bruins add speedy winger. If that wasn’t possible then go internal. Don’t give up anything for risky rental. Nash was not risky it was in my opinion completely the wrong choice for all reasons mentioned already. Simply put the bruins did not improve with Nash one could argue spooner might have been the better player to go with.

that line was objectively much better than it was before the trade until Nash got injured and at some points after. Krejci and Debrusk were on point per game paces after the trade until Nash got hurt. not to mention it's universally understood that they wanted a big winger to play with krejci

 

[Blowfish]

that line was objectively much better than it was before the trade until Nash got injured and at some points after. Krejci and Debrusk were on point per game paces after the trade until Nash got hurt. not to mention it's universally understood that they wanted a big winger to play with krejci

Im pretty sure Debrusk and krejic played as well if not better with Spooner. I liked that allot before they added Nash.

 

[LSCII]

Im pretty sure Debrusk and krejic played as well if not better with Spooner. I liked that allot before they added Nash.

I think it was really Spooner and Debrusk that had better chemistry than DK and Debrusk.

 

[easton117]

Im pretty sure Debrusk and krejic played as well if not better with Spooner. I liked that allot before they added Nash.

It’s hard to evaluate that line at all. Debrusk was also hurt. That’s 2/3 of a line playing through injuries.

Would like to see them play a full year together. Will probably not happen though

 

[Blowfish]

I think it was really Spooner and Debrusk that had better chemistry than DK and Debrusk.

True that.

 

[RussellmaniaKW]

Im pretty sure Debrusk and krejic played as well if not better with Spooner. I liked that allot before they added Nash.

except they really didn't

 

[RussellmaniaKW]

Krejci and Debrusk in the 10 games before Rick Nash joined the Bruins:
both 4 points in 10 games
After Nash joined the team:
Krejci 8 pts in 10 games
Debrusk 9 pts in 9 games

Debrusk got injured on March 13th and Nash on March 17th so that killed that line until the playoffs started.

Incidentally when Debrusk returned on the 31st he and Krejci both had 3 point nights. When they were together with Nash or Donato they had plenty of chemistry, not sure where the "spooner had better chemistry with Debrusk than Krejci did" idea comes from.
IMO having to cover for Spooner's defensive gaffes held that line back quite a bit.

 

[False Start]

Krejci and Debrusk in the 10 games before Rick Nash joined the Bruins:
both 4 points in 10 games
After Nash joined the team:
Krejci 8 pts in 10 games
Debrusk 9 pts in 9 games

Debrusk got injured on March 13th and Nash on March 17th so that killed that line until the playoffs started.

Incidentally when Debrusk returned on the 31st he and Krejci both had 3 point nights. When they were together with Nash or Donato they had plenty of chemistry, not sure where the "spooner had better chemistry with Debrusk than Krejci did" idea comes from.
IMO having to cover for Spooner's defensive gaffes held that line back quite a bit.

Agreed. As soon as Nash got here you could see Krejci taking risks up the ice knowing Nash could cover up defensively. This line was great for about two weeks.

Then after that we got the concussed 50% effective Rick Nash, who simply wasn't good enough.

Makes no sense to re-sign Nash, given our open spots and prospects. He'll be looking to cash in for a somewhat long term deal somewhere else.

 

[RussellmaniaKW]

Agreed. As soon as Nash got here you could see Krejci taking risks up the ice knowing Nash could cover up defensively. This line was great for about two weeks.

Then after that we got the concussed 50% effective Rick Nash, who simply wasn't good enough.

Makes no sense to re-sign Nash, given our open spots and prospects. He'll be looking to cash in for a somewhat long term deal somewhere else.

I'd sign him if it was for short term and cheap money but only because I think depth is super valuable and it wouldn't hurt to have him as long as it didn't prevent us from signing someone else.

That said, I think if he doesn't come back then Donato has that spot locked up at least to start.

 

[Blowfish]

except they really didn't

Well you REALLY didn’t watch bruins hockey. Because they were pretty darn good together. Simply google if you need some help remembering.

Pieces Fall Into Place On Second Line
"It's lots of fun playing with those guys. JD makes plays, he gets to the net. Spoons has lots of speed and he finds guys," said Krejci. "Sometimes I feel like I'm not even open and I get the puck. Really enjoy playing with those guys."

 

[missingchicklet]

Nash's point totals since his great 14-15 season:

15-16: 36 pts
16-17: 38 pts
17-18: 34 pts

Heck, Heinen and DeBrusk (rookies) had more points (47, 43) this past season than Nash has had in any of his past three seasons.

Nash was here for a very small sample size of games. A guy just traded over is generally going to be bringing it harder than usual. Nothing about Nash's recent years say that he would play amped up hockey over the course of a full season. He is an overpaid, under-performing, half-asser of a player. He also is a soon to be a 34 yr old with a concussion history and a knack for getting other injuries. Bodies tend to get more injury prone, not less, at Nash's age.

The second line needs a consistent scorer to go along with what is already there. It's bad enough that line already has an aging overpaid player who struggles to stay interested for long stretches. There is no way in hell the Bs need to bring in a so-called snake-bit player who cannot finish well and who disappears more games than he plays well. I would much rather give a youngster a shot on that line or try to bring in a hungrier, more-skilled player from outside the organization than throw money away on Nash. The window for the core keeps getting smaller. No time to dick around by gambling that a declining player with motivation issues will be of benefit to the team.

 

[TheReal13Linseman]

Nash's point totals since his great 14-15 season:

15-16: 36 pts
16-17: 38 pts
17-18: 34 pts

Heck, Heinen and DeBrusk (rookies) had more points (47, 43) this past season than Nash has had in any of his past three seasons.

Nash was here for a very small sample size of games. A guy just traded over is generally going to be bringing it harder than usual. Nothing about Nash's recent years say that he would play amped up hockey over the course of a full season. He is an overpaid, under-performing, half-asser of a player. He also is a soon to be a 34 yr old with a concussion history and a knack for getting other injuries. Bodies tend to get more injury prone, not less, at Nash's age.

The second line needs a consistent scorer to go along with what is already there. It's bad enough that line already has an aging overpaid player who struggles to stay interested for long stretches. There is no way in hell the Bs need to bring in a so-called snake-bit player who cannot finish well and who disappears more games than he plays well. I would much rather give a youngster a shot on that line or try to bring in a hungrier, more-skilled player from outside the organization than throw money away on Nash. The window for the core keeps getting smaller. No time to dick around by gambling that a declining player with motivation issues will be of benefit to the team.

God, this is so spot on that I wept upon reading it.

How so many here don't understand this is really alarming. There are so many reasons to walk away from this guy yet many people prefer to overlook to odds and percentages and hope the underdog shows up to save the day.

 

[GordonHowe]

Nash's point totals since his great 14-15 season:

15-16: 36 pts
16-17: 38 pts
17-18: 34 pts

Heck, Heinen and DeBrusk (rookies) had more points (47, 43) this past season than Nash has had in any of his past three seasons.

Nash was here for a very small sample size of games. A guy just traded over is generally going to be bringing it harder than usual. Nothing about Nash's recent years say that he would play amped up hockey over the course of a full season. He is an overpaid, under-performing, half-asser of a player. He also is a soon to be a 34 yr old with a concussion history and a knack for getting other injuries. Bodies tend to get more injury prone, not less, at Nash's age.

The second line needs a consistent scorer to go along with what is already there. It's bad enough that line already has an aging overpaid player who struggles to stay interested for long stretches. There is no way in hell the Bs need to bring in a so-called snake-bit player who cannot finish well and who disappears more games than he plays well. I would much rather give a youngster a shot on that line or try to bring in a hungrier, more-skilled player from outside the organization than throw money away on Nash. The window for the core keeps getting smaller. No time to dick around by gambling that a declining player with motivation issues will be of benefit to the team.

My precise attitude, at the trade deadline and thereafter.

 

[JOKER 192]

Nash's point totals since his great 14-15 season:

15-16: 36 pts
16-17: 38 pts
17-18: 34 pts

Heck, Heinen and DeBrusk (rookies) had more points (47, 43) this past season than Nash has had in any of his past three seasons.

Nash was here for a very small sample size of games. A guy just traded over is generally going to be bringing it harder than usual. Nothing about Nash's recent years say that he would play amped up hockey over the course of a full season. He is an overpaid, under-performing, half-asser of a player. He also is a soon to be a 34 yr old with a concussion history and a knack for getting other injuries. Bodies tend to get more injury prone, not less, at Nash's age.

The second line needs a consistent scorer to go along with what is already there. It's bad enough that line already has an aging overpaid player who struggles to stay interested for long stretches. There is no way in hell the Bs need to bring in a so-called snake-bit player who cannot finish well and who disappears more games than he plays well. I would much rather give a youngster a shot on that line or try to bring in a hungrier, more-skilled player from outside the organization than throw money away on Nash. The window for the core keeps getting smaller. No time to dick around by gambling that a declining player with motivation issues will be of benefit to the team.

Holy shit bro, you are on a roll. You have owned these boards the last few days

 

[Blowfish]

Nash's point totals since his great 14-15 season:

15-16: 36 pts
16-17: 38 pts
17-18: 34 pts

Heck, Heinen and DeBrusk (rookies) had more points (47, 43) this past season than Nash has had in any of his past three seasons.

Nash was here for a very small sample size of games. A guy just traded over is generally going to be bringing it harder than usual. Nothing about Nash's recent years say that he would play amped up hockey over the course of a full season. He is an overpaid, under-performing, half-asser of a player. He also is a soon to be a 34 yr old with a concussion history and a knack for getting other injuries. Bodies tend to get more injury prone, not less, at Nash's age.

The second line needs a consistent scorer to go along with what is already there. It's bad enough that line already has an aging overpaid player who struggles to stay interested for long stretches. There is no way in hell the Bs need to bring in a so-called snake-bit player who cannot finish well and who disappears more games than he plays well. I would much rather give a youngster a shot on that line or try to bring in a hungrier, more-skilled player from outside the organization than throw money away on Nash. The window for the core keeps getting smaller. No time to dick around by gambling that a declining player with motivation issues will be of benefit to the team.

Bruin analytics dude was off a couple decimal points...lol

 

[bearcountry17]

Rick Nash’s last 3 playoffs showed him score 10 goals 23 points in 36 games. That’s a 20+goal and 50+point pace over a full season and would have been welcomed at the second line RW spot. Not exactly the obvious no show people are describing here.

He had great chemistry with his line until he got concussed, too bad. He had his moments but definitely looked off during the playoffs and got progressively worse after looking great in game 1 verse Tampa. Only
reason I’d take him back is if he takes a bargain one year contract and I don’t see that happening.

 

[ODAAT]

Rick Nash’s last 3 playoffs showed him score 10 goals 23 points in 36 games. That’s a 20+goal and 50+point pace over a full season and would have been welcomed at the second line RW spot. Not exactly the obvious no show people are describing here.

He had great chemistry with his line until he got concussed, too bad. He had his moments but definitely looked off during the playoffs and got progressively worse after looking great in game 1 verse Tampa. Only
reason I’d take him back is if he takes a bargain one year contract and I don’t see that happening.

really hard to truly assess his brief time here but nonetheless, I`m not willing to open the bank to him

 

[DKH]

Holy **** bro, you are on a roll. You have owned these boards the last few days

The only thing owned is the title of Most Disappointing Poster of the Decade

I weep having to post this especially looking at such a large field

 

[Gordoff]

Nash's point totals since his great 14-15 season:

15-16: 36 pts
16-17: 38 pts
17-18: 34 pts

Heck, Heinen and DeBrusk (rookies) had more points (47, 43) this past season than Nash has had in any of his past three seasons.

Nash was here for a very small sample size of games. A guy just traded over is generally going to be bringing it harder than usual. Nothing about Nash's recent years say that he would play amped up hockey over the course of a full season. He is an overpaid, under-performing, half-asser of a player. He also is a soon to be a 34 yr old with a concussion history and a knack for getting other injuries. Bodies tend to get more injury prone, not less, at Nash's age.

The second line needs a consistent scorer to go along with what is already there. It's bad enough that line already has an aging overpaid player who struggles to stay interested for long stretches. There is no way in hell the Bs need to bring in a so-called snake-bit player who cannot finish well and who disappears more games than he plays well. I would much rather give a youngster a shot on that line or try to bring in a hungrier, more-skilled player from outside the organization than throw money away on Nash. The window for the core keeps getting smaller. No time to dick around by gambling that a declining player with motivation issues will be of benefit to the team.

Holy "hit the nail on the head" Batman!!