Player Discussion Rick Nash

[13Hockey]

I’d bet

I will be surprised if Vegas is within 10 points of Boston next year

I would be shocked if there within 20

 

[HuskyBruinPride]

Backes is more important to the team than a potential Nash signing. Backes only played 57 games, came back from colon surgery, dealt with a major leg injury, etc, yet he still only scored one less point than Nash for the season, having played 14 fewer games. Let's also not forget that Backes put up 225 hits his first season here and 137 this past season, adding a much better physical presence than Nash. Oh, and he doesn't coast and is a beast along the boards. As much as I am not a fan of the term on the Backes signing, he is not exactly expendable at this point. The Bs don't have anyone that can provide what Backes does, and Nash sure as hell is not the answer if Backes is dealt, which he won't be.

Very well said. Backes definitely has his place on the team, at least for now. They need his physical presence and his leadership abilities dont hurt either.

 

[Gordoff]

Very well said. Backes definitely has his place on the team, at least for now. They need his physical presence and his leadership abilities dont hurt either.

YES, Backes had a bad luck season. He may be a year older but he plays for my team for the next year, maybe two. After that he's trade fodder but IMO he's worth more to the team game in and game out, especially in the playoffs than a disinterested Krejci. I don't really understand why Sweeney stuck his neck out of that long of a contract only to try to get rid of it so soon? I would guess that it's because he has a move or two that depend on it.

 

[Blowfish]

YES, Backes had a bad luck season. He may be a year older but he plays for my team for the next year, maybe two. After that he's trade fodder but IMO he's worth more to the team game in and game out, especially in the playoffs than a disinterested Krejci. I don't really understand why Sweeney stuck his neck out of that long of a contract only to try to get rid of it so soon? I would guess that it's because he has a move or two that depend on it.

Backes was not that bad a signing. The term and $ were bad. With that said they should have pursued other avenues. Don’t think many if any would be upset if he were traded for anything st this point.

 

[veganbruin]

I think Backes helped turn the leadership tide after the two seasons of missing the playoffs. Just his emotional compete is worth keeping him. He’s slightly overpaid but I think he’s important.

 

[frickinbobby]

Very well said. Backes definitely has his place on the team, at least for now. They need his physical presence and his leadership abilities dont hurt either.

ridiculous. Backes is among the least effective players in the league with no exaggeration. he hits, so he deserves respect and he gets that from me, and is good in the locker room but pretending like he matters to the team's on-ice success is laughable.

he's totally done. wonderful guy. great teammate. warrior. but DONE.


as for NAsh, HEY, ISN'T THIS A NASH THREAD!!?? ISN'T THAT WHAT I'M SUPPOSED TO SAY WHEN SOMEONE DERAILS A THREAD?

GOOD, SO LET'S GET BACK TO RICK NASH.


the day after they signed him, I said putting two players together on the same line who disappear for weeks on end was a mistake, and that Krejci's uptick playing with him initially would drop off like a stone within 3 games. i was WRONG. it was 4. Krejci is a stiff and you can't have two disappearing stiffs on the same line and win in the playoffs. just can't do it. tried to tell you, coach, but you didn't listen. maybe next time you will.

 

[BruinDust]

ridiculous. Backes is among the least effective players in the league with no exaggeration. he hits, so he deserves respect and he gets that from me, and is good in the locker room but pretending like he matters to the team's on-ice success is laughable.

he's totally done. wonderful guy. great teammate. warrior. but DONE.


as for NAsh, HEY, ISN'T THIS A NASH THREAD!!?? ISN'T THAT WHAT I'M SUPPOSED TO SAY WHEN SOMEONE DERAILS A THREAD?

GOOD, SO LET'S GET BACK TO RICK NASH.


the day after they signed him, I said putting two players together on the same line who disappear for weeks on end was a mistake, and that Krejci's uptick playing with him initially would drop off like a stone within 3 games. i was WRONG. it was 4. Krejci is a stiff and you can't have two disappearing stiffs on the same line and win in the playoffs. just can't do it. tried to tell you, coach, but you didn't listen. maybe next time you will.

Backes for all the flak he gets around here for his flaws and struggles, is still a half-a-point a game player since joining the Bruins. You can criticize the contract he has all you want, but to say he's done or among the least effective players in the league is completely ridiculous.

 

[Gonzothe7thDman]

ridiculous. Backes is among the least effective players in the league with no exaggeration. he hits, so he deserves respect and he gets that from me, and is good in the locker room but pretending like he matters to the team's on-ice success is laughable.

he's totally done. wonderful guy. great teammate. warrior. but DONE.


as for NAsh, HEY, ISN'T THIS A NASH THREAD!!?? ISN'T THAT WHAT I'M SUPPOSED TO SAY WHEN SOMEONE DERAILS A THREAD?

GOOD, SO LET'S GET BACK TO RICK NASH.


the day after they signed him, I said putting two players together on the same line who disappear for weeks on end was a mistake, and that Krejci's uptick playing with him initially would drop off like a stone within 3 games. i was WRONG. it was 4. Krejci is a stiff and you can't have two disappearing stiffs on the same line and win in the playoffs. just can't do it. tried to tell you, coach, but you didn't listen. maybe next time you will.

With all these expert opinions you have, why don't you work in the league?

 

[chizzler]

ridiculous. Backes is among the least effective players in the league with no exaggeration. he hits, so he deserves respect and he gets that from me, and is good in the locker room but pretending like he matters to the team's on-ice success is laughable.

he's totally done. wonderful guy. great teammate. warrior. but DONE.


as for NAsh, HEY, ISN'T THIS A NASH THREAD!!?? ISN'T THAT WHAT I'M SUPPOSED TO SAY WHEN SOMEONE DERAILS A THREAD?

GOOD, SO LET'S GET BACK TO RICK NASH.


the day after they signed him, I said putting two players together on the same line who disappear for weeks on end was a mistake, and that Krejci's uptick playing with him initially would drop off like a stone within 3 games. i was WRONG. it was 4. Krejci is a stiff and you can't have two disappearing stiffs on the same line and win in the playoffs. just can't do it. tried to tell you, coach, but you didn't listen. maybe next time you will.

Easy there. Backes if he trims down can be effective. He actually was faster after coming back from surgery. He is what he is. Who do you think is going to do the Bruins a favor by taking him on? You have to add to get rid of him. I think they can work with him.

 

[Mpasta]

I would be okay with Nash 3yrs/$7-8m tops

Hold up, you think a $2.3m a year deal is even in the realm of possibility for Rick Nash. Or are you talking $7m a year? Either way it's never happening.

I bet he signs a 3 year deal totalling $15m and it won't be with the Bruins.

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

Hold up, you think a $2.3m a year deal is even in the realm of possibility for Rick Nash. Or are you talking $7m a year? Either way it's never happening.

I bet he signs a 3 year deal totalling $15m and it won't be with the Bruins.

im more comfortable with a shorter deal at bigger money. feels to me like a jarome iginla situation here. if nash wants to stay he has to consider the teams needs. we have cap room this year but next year looks scary

so a 1 year deal this year at maybe a million more than he can get anywhere else...

then next year we have a gentlemans agreement. he already got an extra million. he signs another 1 year deal next year that will be a 35 year old contract and will be eligible for bonus money.

if he earns those bonuses... we are happy to keep him and try to arrange a third deal after that. but if we just cant afford it we part company

so maybe 7 mill this year... maybe a 2 mill base and 3 mill in bonus money next year. he earns between 9 and 12 million over the next 2 seasons but has to be very very good to get to 12 mill

we get our big body top 6 winger we seem to be in the market for

 

[4ORRBRUIN]

If he wants a 3rd year I don't think he will sign with Boston.

I think he signs with Boston for 2 years / 10 million (6 in 2018, 4 in 2019)

I think Rick and the Bruins have some unfinished business

 

[Baddkarma]

With respect to Rick Nash, his big money days appear to be behind him. He should sign a sweetheart deal with a team that is a serious cup contender and wants a slower, puck controller, periphery type of player.

The Bruins should move on from him.

 

[Mainehockey33]

 

[Nothingbutglass]

I believe Nash and Backes are toast.

Not completely burnt toast, but same level of toast. We cant have both on the roster taking up $10 million. I was a big fan of the pickup but now I don't watch to watch him for a full year. He's a stuck X button on the controller. He creates great scoring chances and then the button gets stuck and he cant get the shot off or its a muffin into the goalies chest.

 

[GordonHowe]

I believe Nash and Backes are toast.

I believe David Backes is, perhaps, worth keeping, assuming one can't find an upgrade on what he brings. And he brings a lot. Veteran leadership, character and willingness to throw his body about.

Nash? NO. My fear is that having lost out on IK -- who I also saw as an aging, big buck stop gap -- Sweeney will circle back to an expensive bust. Nash does not belong on the Boston Bruins, however "great" he was in the past.

Signing him to a (likely) ungodly, bloated deal would be a disaster. If that's the push, it tells me Sweeney seeks short term flash (in the pan) to keep ticket sales going.

I understand the impulse to do that. But, sorry, Rick Nash is not a Bruin. And he shouldn't be in the Bruins picture, even short term, because his play/$$$ will ultimately prove an albatros.

A manager doesn't *have* to overpay for old & expensive players while bringing along younger ones. You guys are more knowledgeable than me; how about trading value for value, young or mid-contract rather than overpaying for over the hill types?

 

[TheReal13Linseman]

If he wants a 3rd year I don't think he will sign with Boston.

I think he signs with Boston for 2 years / 10 million (6 in 2018, 4 in 2019)

Sweeney is probably stupid enough to do that.

 

[missingchicklet]

I believe Nash and Backes are toast.

I don't necessarily think Backes is toast, yet. Nash is already there and only going to get worse. He will be a year older and have another concussion under his belt. He is not trending well the past three seasons either:

2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18
Pts per game: .60, .57, .48
Hits: 69 in 60 games, 63 in 67 games, 51 in 71 games
Playoffs: 4 pts/5 games, 5 pts/12 games, 5 pts/12 games

And throw in that during the 2015-16 season when his pts per game and hitting were at their highest the past three seasons he was doing that despite missing 22 games due to four separate injuries. He was worse the following two seasons when healthier. I cannot stress enough how foolish it would be for DS to throw a biggish contract for multiple seasons at Nash.

Backes this past season actually had his best pts per game over the past three years, and that was in a season full of nasty physical stuff that happened to him. No way would I say Backes is toast for next season.

 

[BNHL]

I believe Nash and Backes are toast.

 

[PlayMakers]

So with Kovalchuk gone and knowledge that the Bruins weren't comfortable with a 3rd year on Kovalchuk, it's safe to assume the Bruins aren't comfortable going with a 3rd year on Rick Nash either.

So the question is this....

Are you interested in Rick Nash on a two-year deal?

At this point you have to wonder if Rick Nash is interested in the Bruins. It’s pretty clear he wasn’t their top choice.

 

[bob27]

I would give him Eric Staal contract, or maybe something like 4-5 million AAV x 2 years. Injuries are a concern, but his underlying numbers were very encouraging last season. Just couldn't put the puck in, but still scored 20+ goals with the sheer volume of chances he generated.

 

[b in vancouver]

I'd like it if they could sign him. I like some vets on the team though.

Wondering to see if The Bruins are one of Tavares's 5 teams.

Still a lot of moving parts.

 

[RussellmaniaKW]

i'm definitely wary of giving him too much for too long, but I'm also incredibly wary of going into the season saying "let the kids play" and then being under pressure to give up assets at the trade deadline yet again when we could have just held on to Rick.

if you can get him for 2 years or less and the money doesn't prevent you from signing the guys you need to then I like him as an insurance policy. Even if a Bjork or Donato come out and have an outstanding season, it's playing with fire to expect them to sustain it through the playoffs.

 

[Estlin]

if you can get him for 2 years or less and the money doesn't prevent you from signing the guys you need to then I like him as an insurance policy. Even if a Bjork or Donato come out and have an outstanding season, it's playing with fire to expect them to sustain it through the playoffs.

When has Rick Nash ever had a sustained good performance in the playoffs? I hope that Sweeney is not dumb enough to offer him a contract. Let Bjork and Donato play regularly; they will put up numbers better than Nash.

 

[rocketdan9]

Rick Nash is probably turned off by Bruins 1st choice pursuit of Kovalchuk.

I doubt will be back

 

[DKH]

If Sweeney commented he didn’t like 3 years for Kovalchuk and he was his first choice I can’t see Nash getting that.

I like Rick but would NOT go 3 years.

 

[BruinDust]

At this point you have to wonder if Rick Nash is interested in the Bruins. It’s pretty clear he wasn’t their top choice.

If I was him, unless I had no other options, I wouldn't be.

I was confused as to why Sweeney would even say that to the media. Made no sense to me.

 

[Dr Hook]

Sweeney said that Nash has not yet decided whether he is going to keep playing or not. If so, no reason why he would be sore at the Bruins for exploring other options. Not that I want him back, but that is a bit of a different situation than him just being passed over in favor of another player.

 

[ODAAT]

If Sweeney commented he didn’t like 3 years for Kovalchuk and he was his first choice I can’t see Nash getting that.

I like Rick but would NOT go 3 years.

I agree with DS if the 3 year deal was uncomfortable for Kovalchuk. I would have been ok with a 2 year deal max, same for Nash, not a day longer than 2 years. Personally, I will lose no sleep if Nash isn`t signed by the B`s

 

[Blowfish]

Please No to A broken down fragile and concussed rapidly declining player. Much much better options internally and externally.

 

[ODAAT]

Rick Nash is probably turned off by Bruins 1st choice pursuit of Kovalchuk.

I doubt will be back

wonder how he`ll feel if he hits the UFA market and is offered a deal that`s humbling in comparison to what he`s made in his career?