Southern_Canuck wrote: Count me in favour of a trade for Nash built around Cory Schneider.
ESQ wrote:I guess the question is, what "kind of player" is Rick Nash? Is he an elite power forward like Neely, Perry, and Bertuzzi in his prime, or is he a middling power forward, like Backes, Doan, Malone, Morrow?
Probably he falls somewhere in between the two groups, but his contract is squarely in the elite category. The point of "acquiring" a player like that is to make hay during those years that he's got a cheap entry-level contract, not when he's the 5-th highest paid player in the league and on pace for 60 points.
Put it this way: could you see the Canucks spending that kind of money for the 4th-best forward on the team? If it was a straight-up trade of Kesler for Nash, and bearing in mind the cap, would you do it? Both are some-time 40 goal forwards after all.
dbr wrote:I just can't stomach that cap hit for a player that I think could be our fourth-best forward a lot of nights.
dbr wrote:I could get excited about a deal for Nash if we could use it to solve some other problems with the team, but the BJs would be crazy to pull the trigger on something like that. So, unless Nash is going to start playing like a $7.8m player I just don't see it being a great move for the Canucks.
Southern_Canuck wrote:ESQ wrote: but I would consider Schneider, Schroeder, Ballard, and a 1st.
Would that be enough? I don't know.
RoyalDude wrote: the Dumb Blonde David 'the Rapture' Booth.
RoyalDude wrote:Southern_Canuck wrote:ESQ wrote: but I would consider Schneider, Schroeder, Ballard, and a 1st.
Would that be enough? I don't know.
That deal wouldn't work SC. Not enough coming off our books. An expensive forward who isn't The Sedins or Kesler would have to go and we all know who that is - the Dumb Blonde David 'the Rapture' Booth. You clear both Ballard and Booth, replace Ballard with Tanev in comes Nash, deal done. Makes total sense. Is Nash/Tanev better than Booth/Ballard? Fuckin eh! Lord Stanley here we come.
spooner wrote:If Nash had been a UFA last summer, I would not have wanted to sign him to a long-term contract at $7.8m per so ... I definitely have a hard time believing its a good move to trade valuable assets for that player on the same horrible contract.
If there is a hole on this team that is worth moving significant assets to fill then it is in the depth at D.
Secondly - Gillis and Co have, in my opinion, done a very good job of building this team with objective of having a long window in which to win a cup.
Southern_Canuck wrote:Do you think that Nash would look more like a $7.8M player if he were surrounded by more talented players than what Columbus ices? I do.
mr perfect wrote:Rick Nash - I used to think he was a one dimensional player until I saw Columbus play the Canucks three years ago. He is anything but. He skates well, does move the puck into the offensive zone and goes for the net. He is strong as a bull and was able to power around Matthias Ohlund to score a goal when I saw him. Had he been with the Canucks last Stanley Cup, they would have scored more than 8 goals against the Bruins and possibly the Cup would be here in the Lower Mainland. Now, if I'm Columbus GM and Vancouver comes a-calling, I wouldn't settle for than less Schneider, Hodgson, Edler and a first rounder. So no, I don't see Nash coming soon to the Canucks. There's also the problem of fitting his cap hit under the salary cap which could result in the Canucks losing much needed depth for a playoffs run.
Oh and even if the BJs would do a Luongo for Nash trade, there's no flogging way RL would waive his NTC to go to Columbus.
Consider this - the cap will continue to rise, and by the end of Nash's contract, players like Leino and Upshall will be getting $7.8M...! OK, an exaggeration, but if not now when the Canucks have a legitimate window to challenge for the Stanley Cup - when will the Canucks ever get a chance at a player like Nash?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests