Cousin Eddie
You Serious Clark?
- Nov 3, 2006
- 40,161
- 37,363
Nah bro. Bill Nylander is the comeback story of the century.Nuke for Come Back Player of the Year!!!
Nah bro. Bill Nylander is the comeback story of the century.Nuke for Come Back Player of the Year!!!
I’m assuming Nuke will want another short term deal to prove he can keep doing this but I would love to get him on one of those Nashville/Islanders long term, low aav specials.How much is this monster going to cost us this summer?
I don’t know Nuke, and stereotyping isn’t always nice but it is well known that Russians number one priority is getting the most money they possibly can. Here’s to hoping he’s different.
He's definitely earned those second line minutes with Kadri, and he's done nothing but prove the coaches right to trust him there.
Crazy to think that the only two opinions anybody had around here when this was announced were "Meh" and "Fire Sakic".
TBF it would've even crazier if anyone expected this back then
I think he takes 3 x 3.5 which is more than fair.
Nuke fled to Russia when Dallas wouldn't give him the contract he wanted off his ELC... he's going to want to get paid.
Try to deke out Nuke = failure.
Complete animal.
Which is a lesson for all of us to be patient in evaluating a player before crapping on them.
He never showed this forechecking/puck hound/takeaway machine side in Dallas, did he?
We played them a fair bit and I never came away thinking he was this type of dog on a bone.
If Nichushkin is succeeding on the second line then how do you justify paying him less than the sweetheart deal that Kadri signed or less than Burakovsky who has projected to be paid upwards of $5M? Obviously Nichushkin hasn't scored like Burakovsky but the real point is he may not really know himself what he should be asking for because even he doesn't know what his top end is. The guy is scoring more regularly. But in terms of effort, it would not surprise me if he fit in well in Landeskog's spot (if JB had to put him there). It's just crazy to think the guy we thought was headed back to Russia out of training camp has turned out to be such a pleasant surprise.
Not to disagree with your point in general -- as I agree with it wholeheartedly -- it's still only been ~30 games that Nuke's been producing, so we still don't know what this lesson has to teach us. Most jokes were being made about his stone hands, not that he was Bura-esque against the puck...which is the part of the game that I do think we can start to assess; although even there I want to see whether/how his work-rate is affected by no longer having his career on the line.
Nuke had been doing a good job against the puck last season before his coldstreak got to him; so there wasn't much crapping on adding him to the 4th line mix from anyone who wasn't just b****ing to b****. We only really got snarky on here when it started to be suggested that Nuke had been brought in to deputize-for & put-pressure-on Mikko, should Rantanen have held out.
Hench brought up the point that the objection was to Burakovsky's streakiness and not the 2nd and 3rd picks in the deal that was objectionable. I disagree in part because Sharks fans used to talk about how Donskoi would also go cold but IIRC, fans weren't on him right away.
I agree. My point is that when we start crapping on these players, they get a rep very quickly and then it's get rid of them. Jost is a perfect example. I could imagine a debate with JB about Jost's value to the team. My argument is that Jost is a bona fide NHL'er but there would be better 3C options than him. But Jost was crapped on so early and quickly and constantly that I could see it wearing on a player. Now these are pros so I get criticism is to be expected. But it can be unfair and more importantly, have a negative effect on the player's ability to produce. Especially since Burakovsky and Nichushkin were new to the club.
Hench brought up the point that the objection was to Burakovsky's streakiness and not the 2nd and 3rd picks in the deal that was objectionable. I disagree in part because Sharks fans used to talk about how Donskoi would also go cold but IIRC, fans weren't on him right away.
I agree. My point is that when we start crapping on these players, they get a rep very quickly and then it's get rid of them. Jost is a perfect example. I could imagine a debate with JB about Jost's value to the team. My argument is that Jost is a bona fide NHL'er but there would be better 3C options than him. But Jost was crapped on so early and quickly and constantly that I could see it wearing on a player. Now these are pros so I get criticism is to be expected. But it can be unfair and more importantly, have a negative effect on the player's ability to produce. Especially since Burakovsky and Nichushkin were new to the club.
Hench brought up the point that the objection was to Burakovsky's streakiness and not the 2nd and 3rd picks in the deal that was objectionable. I disagree in part because Sharks fans used to talk about how Donskoi would also go cold but IIRC, fans weren't on him right away.
That's not how I remember the Jost discussion prior to this season lol. This is the first season were it seems like most of the board has accepted that whether Jost is or isn't an NHLer, he's not a good fit with a team as fast as we are.
The big thing that makes people more tolerant of Donskoi's streakiness than they are of Bura's is that Bura can't contribute anything other than his streaky offense. Whereas even when Donskoi is cold, he makes a positive impact for his team away from the puck. That and the disparate expectations of the roles that they were 'brought in to fill'.
...and the issue with the picks wasn't the picks themselves. It was that we were cheaping out on a riskier half-measure instead of paying up for a more certain solution; at a point where our team needed to take another step forward this season to maintain the momentum from our positive progress last season & had the ammo to afford it.
My gripe wasn't ever that it couldn't work out or the price we paid was obscene; it was that we had taken a gamble when we could've comfortably afforded to pay more for a surer-thing. And if you happen to think that (arguably) the biggest variable to our window's length will be when we open it -- as I lean towards -- then adding unnecessary gambles in important positions prior to this season in which we could open our window for realsies, isn't a "good call" even if it pays off.
The difference between Donskoi and Bura is playstyle and expectations. Donksoi was brought in to be a middle six swiss army knife type and is extremely useful when he isn't scoring. Bura was brought in to be a 2nd line winger who when he isn't scoring may as well not play.