Speculation: Roster Building Thread XLV: Summer bummer edition

[Oscar Lindberg]

How would everyone feel about this potential deal for Nash (assuming they move him)

:

Rick Nash w/ 1,300,000 million retained


for

:

Jack Dougherty
Calle Jarnkrok
2016/2017 1st round pick
2016 2nd round pick
2017 3rd or 4th round pick

Too much from Nashville, or too little?

The real prize here is Dougherty, but Jarnkork would be a good get, he had 16 goals last season, and is only 24 years old. Probably a small cap dump to be added so the salary is a little more even, but Nashville has the space. 2nd rounder for this year allows the team to recoup the asset the moved for Staal.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

How would everyone feel about this potential deal for Nash (assuming they move him)

:

Rick Nash w/ 1,300,000 million retained


for

:

Jack Dougherty
Calle Jarnkrok
2016 2nd round pick
2017 3rd or 4th round pick

Too much from Nashville, or too little?

The real prize here is Dougherty, but Jarnkork would be a good get, he had 16 goals last season, and is only 24 years old. Probably a small cap dump to be added so the salary is a little more even, but Nashville has the space. 2nd rounder for this year allows the team to recoup the asset the moved for Staal.

I have zero clue why Nashville (or any team, really) would be forking over multiple assets for Nash.

 

[Thirty One]

I have zero clue why Nashville (or any team, really) would be forking over multiple assets for Nash.

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...=0&type=individual&sort=igoals60&sortdir=DESC

 

[TheTakedown]

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...=0&type=individual&sort=igoals60&sortdir=DESC

I'll add to this:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/NSH/2016.html#skaters::5

There's a huge drop off in their scoring between Forsberg/Neal (33/31 goals respectively this year) and Craig Smith (21 goals this year). After that, if you look at the top 6 goal producers on their team, 4 of them are defensemen.

Shea Weber, Dman
Calle Jarnkrok, Center
Roman Josi, Dman
Mike Fisher, Center
Ryan Ellis, Dman
Mattias Ekholm, Dman

That's a problem. They need more scoring and more depth. Nash fits that team very well. an all around presence, and a great RWer for Ribeiro or Johansen.

On the rangers, he's not going to produce in this system. He obviously thrives more in a system at this stage where he won't be the primary scoring threat.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...=0&type=individual&sort=igoals60&sortdir=DESC

So the Rangers made a good trade for him. Nashville has to take a look at the next 4 years of production. Do you think that'll be in line with the previous 4?

 

[TheTakedown]

So the Rangers made a good trade for him. Nashville has to take a look at the next 4 years of production. Do you think that'll be in line with the previous 4?

not even sure what you're trying to say here? Clarify?

 

[Thirty One]

So the Rangers made a good trade for him. Nashville has to take a look at the next 4 years of production. Do you think that'll be in line with the previous 4?

No, but it wouldn't have to be to justify giving up "multiple assets" for him.

 

[UAGoalieGuy]

Rangers better be getting a first in any deal for Nash, especially if they are retaining, along with another asset or two.

 

[DanielBrassard]

Rick Nash has become so underrated. It's crazy

 

[TheTakedown]

No, but it wouldn't have to be to justify giving up "multiple assets" for him.

on top of that, Nashville needs to find a way to get past the 2nd round. Fans are most likely getting impatient, and Poile is getting older. The busted hard in the 2015 playoffs after buying two crappy players for the cost of a great prospect and a pick. They didn't go hard at the deadline this year, and that team looked very good for the most part. I think they'll be open to adding another scoring option up front.

If they have 3 guys who can pot 30 goals, that's a huge pickup for them. It also allows them to slot some other players down, so it simultaneously improves their depth, as well as their forwards defensive play.

Makes a ton of sense. If the Rangers are retaining, another 1st rounder needs to be added.

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

Rangers better be getting a first in any deal for Nash, especially if they are retaining, along with another asset or two.

Rick Nash has become so underrated. It's crazy

If the Rangers are retaining, another 1st rounder needs to be added.

I agree that he's easily worth a 1st rounder, but wanted to take a conservative approach.

 

[Ghost of jas]

So the Rangers made a good trade for him. Nashville has to take a look at the next 4 years of production. Do you think that'll be in line with the previous 4?

Why should Nashville care about the next four years of production if Nash only has 2 years left on his deal?

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Why should Nashville care about the next four years of production if Nash only has 2 years left on his deal?

4 years was just a point of reference because thats how far back we need to go to cherry pick the GF/60 stats to make him seem like a prime asset here in 2016.

Anyway, good point, that would actually drive his trade value lower.

 

[Ghost of jas]

Why trade away a capable and cheap top4 RD if this side is the Rangers most glaring team weakness compared to any other are?

You'd be getting a younger one back in Dumba?

 

[alkurtz]

Overrated and on the downside he may be....but it would be a mistake to trade Nash without bringing back a #1 draft pick (or someone's #1 from last year) in return.

We must replenish our depleted prospect group.

 

[silverfish]

If Nash @ $1.8m retained, let's say, doesn't return what Kessel did for the Leafs, then JG got a bad deal.

1 NHL player - preferably RHD or RHW
1 good prospect - preferably RHD or RHW
1st round pick
2nd round pick

If I don't get that haul for Nash, I don't trade Nash.

 

[Raspewtin]

4 years was just a point of reference because thats how far back we need to go to cherry pick the GF/60 stats to make him seem like a prime asset here in 2016.

TIL goal scoring at even strength over a 4 year sample is "cherry picking".

Anyway, good point, that would actually drive his trade value lower.

Quite the opposite actually

 

[DanielBrassard]

4 years was just a point of reference because thats how far back we need to go to cherry pick the GF/60 stats to make him seem like a prime asset here in 2016.

Anyway, good point, that would actually drive his trade value lower.

So having Nash in his 2 more declining seasons as you put, would drive his value down?

 

[TheTakedown]

4 years was just a point of reference because thats how far back we need to go to cherry pick the GF/60 stats to make him seem like a prime asset here in 2016.

Anyway, good point, that would actually drive his trade value lower.

Nash only having two years on his contract is a HUGE boost of his value. Even more so, the salary retention warrants another 1st round pick.

 

[Matz03]

Nash should absolutely bring back multiple assets. One year removed from a 40 goal season doesn't make you worthless. Nash's scoring will come back, injuries and bad luck will happen, his career shooting % is 12% vs. last year of only 8%. At his worst he's a 20-25 goal scorer still over a full season.

If Nashville is a trading partner then I'd target Ryan Ellis as a piece coming back our way. They might be willing to move him for the right player.

 

[Miller Time NYR]

Rick Nash has become so underrated. It's crazy

Every players become undervalued on this team as far as trades go. It's a convenient narrative the negative nancies love to push around here. It's as if Nash put up 20 points last season and Staal was shooting pucks into our own net.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

If Nash @ $1.8m retained, let's say, doesn't return what Kessel did for the Leafs, then JG got a bad deal.

1 NHL player - preferably RHD or RHW
1 good prospect - preferably RHD or RHW
1st round pick
2nd round pick

If I don't get that haul for Nash, I don't trade Nash.

The Rangers could maybe get that if a crap contract is coming back the other way, or the "1 NHL player" is under a crap contract

 

[Thirty One]

4 years was just a point of reference because thats how far back we need to go to cherry pick the GF/60 stats to make him seem like a prime asset here in 2016.

Anyway, good point, that would actually drive his trade value lower.

Four years is his time with the Rangers. If you're unhappy with that time frame, in the past two, three, or five seasons, he's 2nd in that measure (goals scored per 60, not GF/60).

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Every players become undervalued on this team as far as trades go. It's a convenient narrative the negative nancies love to push around here. It's as if Nash put up 20 points last season and Staal was shooting pucks into our own net.

Hmm, maybe they should just keep him.

 

[NYRKindms]

Rick Nash has become so underrated. It's crazy

People don't like soft big men. It's that simple. Same reason Boyle got crap in his time here. You are given the one asset you can't teach and they either refuse or don't know how to use it.