Rick Nash Part III

[NYRFAN218]

1) Yes. Yes.

2) No way of knowing that, we can only hope he scores some goals. Barry Bonds was terrible in the playoffs for years and then went off. Datsyuk too. There are a million examples of players who put it together eventually. We don't really have a choice but to find out if Nash is one of them. He's very green with playoff hockey.

There was also the notion that Gaborik was terrible in the playoffs. I remember 10-11 he had that awful, injury filled season. Shoulder injury and a minor concussion being the ones I remember. 22 goals in 62 games that season with most of those goals coming in hat tricks against bottom feeders. 2 points in 5 games against the Caps in the playoffs and I remember him being booed by those in the 400's during game 4 of that series. Lot of fans were done with Gaborik at that point and wanted him dealt. 07-08 was his most recent playoff performance before that and between that one and this one, he had 3 points in 11 games with only one goal.

He bounced back with 41 goals the next season and put up 5 goals and 11 points in 20 playoff games that season with a major shoulder injury. Still got criticized but I think that's pretty impressive in itself. Looked done after we traded him and then gets dealt to LA and goes off in the playoffs.

My point is unless some amazing option pops up out of nowhere for next season, the best option is to ride Nash and hope he breaks out. We all know the talent and skill is there and he's shown it at times too. I just think it's extremely foolish to sell low on the guy especially when he's the best goal scorer we have. Like I said, if it happens again or he has a disastrous season then you re-evaluate his spot on the team next offseason.

 

[Radek27]

So in your world anything you say is valid response to anything, as long as you can say it's 'a fact'.

Priceless.

I don't even think it's a fact considering players do get money for making it to the ECF and SCF. I believe they get some kind of bonus check for winning the conference, at least they used to. So then yeah Nash did get paid for his playoff performance.

 

[NYRFAN218]

I don't even think it's a fact considering players do get money for making it to the ECF and SCF. I believe they get some kind of bonus check for winning the conference, at least they used to. So then yeah Nash did get paid for his playoff performance.

IIRC, they get a cut of the revenue or something along the lines and that's split among the players.

Just googled it and here's what they get.

The money that goes to players on winning playoff teams has basically doubled from $6.5-million last season. There will be $13-million put into the playoff pool for each of the next two seasons, and that figure will rise by another $1-million every two seasons, culminating in $17-million in 2020-21 and beyond.

You always hear players don’t get paid in the playoffs, but that’s not true. For one, they receive 50 per cent of all hockey-related revenue, not just regular-season revenue, and part of the player share under benefits is allocated to this pool money, which will see a member of teams that go deep in the playoffs get a nice little bonus. I was told members of the winning Los Angeles Kings team, for example, received something like $75,000 each, money that would likely double under the new agreement.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/spor...or-nhl-players-in-the-new-cba/article7029965/

 

[jerseyjinx94]

This Nash doesn't get paid in the playoffs thing really is stupid, it's irrelevant whether it's a fact or not. It's just a pointless statement.

 

[YoSoyLalo]

Lots of fresh, never touched on topics in this thread!

 

[Kel Varnsen]

Lots of fresh, never touched on topics in this thread!

You're right. Nash is clearly a loser who is killing us with that cap hit. Lets all just accept that and move on. Possible other Nash topics:

1. Why is he such a loser? CBJ days? Maybe he was born a loser?

2. How can we get this loser off the team? Trade him, would anyone take him? Would Nash allow it? Does that matter anymore since we waived the clause already? Buy him out? Boo him until he demands a trade from Sather in private, but lies to the public saying that first he doesn't want to be traded and then changing the story to that he only wants to be traded to bring back value to the team to help them build something?

3. Should he play the Brian Boyle, defensive fourth line role in the playoffs in 2015 since he clearly can't provide offensive in NHL playoff hockey?

These are just a few, I'll try to add some more if we finish these.

 

[YoSoyLalo]

Yes, your opinion is fact, you have told this to people countless times.

 

[ltrangerfan]

After reading through this thread here is my suggestion:

Try to move Nash for a 4th round draft. Then pickup MDZ and move him into Nash's position on the wing. This will make quite a number of ranger boosters happy.

 

[Radek27]

Lots of fresh, never touched on topics in this thread!

Ah yes lets talk more about the amazing talents of Tanner Glass and Matthew Lombardi. Maybe you should accept the fact the Ranger fans want to discuss this player since this is part 3 of the thread.

 

[Radek27]

This Nash doesn't get paid in the playoffs thing really is stupid, it's irrelevant whether it's a fact or not. It's just a pointless statement.

When a poster claims something as "fact" when it is not why is it pointless to correct that?

 

[Doctyl]

When a poster claims something as "fact" when it is not why is it pointless to correct that?

Umm I'm pretty sure it's a fact Nash doesn't get paid any more for the playoffs than he would without the playoffs.

Nash should want to win for the sake of winning not because we're paying 7.8 a year

 

[Kel Varnsen]

Umm I'm pretty sure it's a fact Nash doesn't get paid any more for the playoffs than he would without the playoffs.

Nash should want to win for the sake of winning not because we're paying 7.8 a year

Operative word being "should" in that. I've never seen anyone more uncomfortable with winning than Nash.

 

[Doctyl]

Operative word being "should" in that. I've never seen anyone more uncomfortable with winning than Nash.

Yea? How many times have you seen him after winning? How is he uncomfortable? Does he to and cry in his locker after the rangers win a game or something? Stop acting like Nash wants to lose. No on in the NHL wants to lose or gets there without an incredibly high compete level.

 

[Jersey Girl]

Umm I'm pretty sure it's a fact Nash doesn't get paid any more for the playoffs than he would without the playoffs.

Did you completely miss post #178, which explains the playoff bonus pool system for winning playoff teams? Or did you decide to pretend it doesn't exist?

The word 'fact' is used pretty loosely around here sometimes...

 

[Tawnos]

Did you completely miss post #178, which explains the playoff bonus pool system for winning playoff teams? Or did you decide to pretend it doesn't exist?

The word 'fact' is used pretty loosely around here sometimes...

It's still a little absurd to claim they're paid. Say the pool is evenly divided into 4 rounds. $3.25m per round. 8 winning teams in round 1. $20k per player. $40k for round two. $80k for round 3. $160k for round 4. That's $200k. I'm also probably oversimplifying that, but I'm on my phone. Research is harder.

My point is that the playoff pay isn't much of an incentive to players making millions.

 

[Radek27]

It's still a little absurd to claim they're paid. Say the pool is evenly divided into 4 rounds. $3.25m per round. 8 winning teams in round 1. $20k per player. $40k for round two. $80k for round 3. $160k for round 4. That's $200k. I'm also probably oversimplifying that, but I'm on my phone. Research is harder.

My point is that the playoff pay isn't much of an incentive to players making millions.

I think 200k is big enough to care about even for a loaded SOB. I mean who wouldn't want to be $200,000 richer?

 

[Raspewtin]

Operative word being "should" in that. I've never seen anyone more uncomfortable with winning than Nash.

Are you his wife or something? Do you have some kind of personal connection with Nash? Because you certainly seem to know an awful lot about how Nash feels and how indifferent he is to winning.

 

[jerseyjinx94]

When a poster claims something as "fact" when it is not why is it pointless to correct that?

My point was it was pointless to bring up in the first place. He gets $7.8M for the season, not just the regular season. When he gets those checks is not relevant.

 

[Kel Varnsen]

Are you his wife or something? Do you have some kind of personal connection with Nash? Because you certainly seem to know an awful lot about how Nash feels and how indifferent he is to winning.

Just a guy who actually bothers to watch the games, and actually understands hockey. I guess compared to some that gives me special insight.

 

[Zil]

Just a guy who actually bothers to watch the games, and actually understands hockey. I guess compared to some that gives me special insight.

We get it. You don't like him. And nobody has forgotten the special insight you showed when you spent most of the season railing on Torts' firing and AV's hiring.

 

[Raspewtin]

Just a guy who actually bothers to watch the games, and actually understands hockey. I guess compared to some that gives me special insight.

lol oh man the irony of this post.

 

[haveandare]

So in your world anything you say is valid response to anything, as long as you can say it's 'a fact'.

Priceless.

No. That was a fact, and it was also extremely valid. Someone said something about how much Nash gets paid to play poorly, or some equally stale and ridiculous argument about how getting paid X amount should make a player score X points, and someone else responded that he's not paid for the playoffs, so by that insane logic, nothing is expected of him. It's a point made to illustrate a faulty idea. You plug in something outside of the commonly used points and show that the logic doesn't hold.

 

[haveandare]

Umm I'm pretty sure it's a fact Nash doesn't get paid any more for the playoffs than he would without the playoffs.

Nash should want to win for the sake of winning not because we're paying 7.8 a year

That is the exact point of the "he doesn't get paid for the playoffs, so why should he care?" question.

It's an absurd statement. It's absurdity makes the point.

He, like probably any other player, want to win because he wants to win. I really doubt anyone is looking at their check thinking, "damn, I better score in the finals so that I can justify this to the community at large." They want to score because they want to win and they want to win because they're competitors who have spent their entire lives so far trying to be in a position to win an NHL championship.

Paycheck doesn't correlate to performance at all times for all players. It just doesn't work that way. There are countless examples.

 

[KingWantsCup]

I'm sticking to what I've been saying. Trade him on a hot streak to some desperate, dumb team. I just want him off of this team. His cap hit is atrocious and I don't give a rat's ass about his 30 goals if he can't score in the playoffs.

"But but we won't make da play0ffs with0ut him!!1!"

If Nash taking us to the playoffs means us losing again because he doesn't show up, just pass me a golf club instead. My heart still aches from the final loss, where Nash was MOST inept.

 

[jerseyjinx94]

Are you guys still on this?