Rick Nash rumor

This was posted by SabresTalk365 tonight:

2 days ago, I posted a rumor about New York Rangers potentially talking to The Buffalo Sabres about a trade involving LW Rick Nash. Well...guess what, it could actually happen. According to Harrki oy Kaartokatu of The Finland Times reported that Rick Nash is in Buffalo this week to visit some players on the current Sabres roster in which can lead a trade in the coming weeks.

Obviously there were rumors about him being traded on Monday night to Buffalo but that never happened, so now the Sabres are continuing to talk with the Rangers and they still have interest in C Zemgus Girgensons and LW Evander Kane. One of Buffalo's prospects could be heading out in which all eyes are on Nick Baptiste who's currently in Sabres development camp right now, but GMTM is pretty sure of trading a prospect.

Keep an eye out, things can happen and keep in mind that Buffalo was one of the teams he put on his 15 team list in order to waive his no-trade clause (NTC). The return may not big for the Rangers but Nash could be a short term gem.
Thoughts?

Don't know if there's any credibility to it, but I like the deal. Zemgus doesn't want to be here and Kane is one bender from being untrade-able.

Make it so...

Zemgus and Kane is too steep for Nash. One or the other and a prospect seems fair.

Kane in NYC seems like a disaster waiting to happen

I'd hang on to Kane and hope he grows the hell up.

Nash - ROR - Okposo

all day long.

Also this:

The Hockey Press® ‏@TheHockeyPress 6h6 hours ago
#NHL RUMORS:
• Per @scanadusa Rick Nash is visiting Buffalo to meet w/players. A trade is likely to follow. #Sabres

Also saw something from Harrington about them still pursuing Fowler.

If so... Murray is making a play to contend now.

Losing Baptiste isnt a big deal... He just doesnt have the talent to be a top 6 forward.. Trading for a winger and trading Girgs I hope somehow puts Reinhart back at center full time his skill set isn't being used properly playing wing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ginger Vitis

Losing Baptiste isnt a big deal... He just doesnt have the talent to be a top 6 forward.. Trading for a winger and trading Girgs I hope somehow puts Reinhart back at center full time his skill set isn't being used properly playing wing

---

Eichel and ROR are clearly our top two C's. Z has been a third liner. I would LOVE to have enough talent for Reinhart to be a 3rd liner but we aren't even close to that talent level.

I'd pass on nash unless the parts leaving are minimal. He's aging, he disappears when it matters, and he's in decline. Unless the parts going the other way are not core pieces or future major pieces, I don't touch him. And it's unlikely the rags will give him away. Pass on it.

Kane is an expensive train wreck waiting to happen, we need to get rid of this guy and Zem doesn't like Buffalo. Those 2 going are fine with me, do it.

The original tweet is from a guy that's often full of crap - but has also nailed a few things. I think the second tweet was based off the first

When did it come out that Girgensons wants out of here? There was a report of him going to the KHL that was shot down

Girgs, Kane and a prospect for an aging player in decline is way too much. Add to that, we would probably be helping them with their cap and i say no. I do think maybe it is time to part ways with Kane. So, Kane and a prospect and/or draft pick would work for me.

Love Kane's energy on the ice, hate some of it off the ice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OpIv37

Eichel and ROR are clearly our top two C's. Z has been a third liner. I would LOVE to have enough talent for Reinhart to be a 3rd liner but we aren't even close to that talent level.

---

I wasn't a fan of the O reilly trade... I guess forward wise you can always move parts around but didnt see the point after drafting 2 centres 2nd overall 2 years in a row..

the girgs wanting to leave has picked up steam with no proof. I wouldn't take nash unless its for kane straight. we don't trust kane, and nash is too expensive and useless and old for NYR. we are swapping headaches in the hopes that they both find their legs again. nash is kind of intriguing because at least he performs in oct/November and December when you need to play well to make the playoffs likely. we'll have to bench him come playoffs. I think the team can get there without this. this trade probably will mean they have little to no faith that they are getting Vesey.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chernobylwraiths

Girgs, Kane and a prospect for an aging player in decline is way too much. Add to that, we would probably be helping them with their cap and i say no. I do think maybe it is time to part ways with Kane. So, Kane and a prospect and/or draft pick would work for me.

Love Kane's energy on the ice, hate some of it off the ice.

---

The latest has the Sabres sending Ennis and Franson.

ennis and franson for nash? that's intriguing. we can part with franson due to the panthers trade, but it will keep us thin on the blue line when injuries mount. but the sabres did pick up like4-5 developmental Dmen who could start in Rochester and maybe work up. ennis is a huge concussion risk. I think if we could give them ennis and kane and eat some salary to help them with their longer term contract with nash, that becomes very intriguing for both sides.

No sure the Rangers would do that - the cap savings would be minimal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WagonCircler

The latest has the Sabres sending Ennis and Franson.

---

I'm thinking the Rangers don't do that, unless they really want to unload his salary.

One thing I think is intriguing, has Nash ever not been the main focus? This could take pressure off of him and not be the focal point of the offense.

Rick Nash is actually rated #68 of top 100 forwards... Not bad. https://www.nhl.com/news/fantasy-hoc...?tid=277729150

I'd take my chances on a Kane for Nash deal... Or even Ennis and Kane.

nash is a headcase. even if he is in a secondary role, he will disappear when you need him most. he's anti-clutch. that's never going to change. that's why a trade has to be garbage out for their garbage in.

I disagree... And so does this article...
http://www.blueshirtbanter.com/2016/...potential-move

Quote:

---

Nash has been a consistent force for the Rangers, despite the fan outrage that would confuse an outsider to thinking he's the worst player in New York Rangers history. In the 248 games he's played as a Ranger (regular season) he's scored 104 goals (good for 8th in the league in total goals over that span). At a goals-per-game basis, his 0.419% goals per game is good for 5th in the league over his time on Broadway. Those aren't shabby numbers.

People will yell about how he's not a playoff producer. About how he wasn't good enough. About how he was only a 40-goal scorer once (this ignores his 20-goal season in the lockout shortened year). About how he sucks.

Could Nash have better playoff numbers? Yeah, there's really no debating that. Does the lack of goals mean Nash sucked in the playoffs? No. The past two years Nash has had very good production (granted this year's was only five games) and the work he does defensively helped keep the Rangers afloat against speedier teams.

---

Mike Harrington says it's ************.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yasgur's Farm

I disagree... And so does this article...
http://www.blueshirtbanter.com/2016/...potential-move

---

Take a look at the dip he had last year.

Last year was an injury filled season... Yet his output projected to 20.5 goals over 82 games. Have a look at what he did in 2015 when he didn't play injured... 43.6 goals over 82 games. Combine the last 2 seasons and he's still scoring .41 goals per game... That's 33.6 goals over an 82 game season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yasgur's Farm

Last year was an injury filled season... Yet his output projected to 20.5 goals over 82 games. Have a look at what he did in 2015 when he didn't play injured... 43.6 goals over 82 games. Combine the last 2 seasons and he's still scoring .41 goals per game... That's 33.6 goals over an 82 game season.

---

Yeah, but it's more then injuries IMO. He's in decline.

Quote:

---

Here's the thing about Nash no one seems to appreciate: He's a true three-zone star. New York is a tough room to play, no one is denying that, but the hate Nash gets on a daily basis from this fanbase is insane.

Nash is one of those rare elite goal scorers who can impact the game even when he's not scoring. He's a monster in his own zone and in the neutral zone.

---

Quote:

---

As an example: with Nash out Mats Zuccarello and Derick Brassard floundered in the possession game and saw a decrease in their own production. Why? Because Nash was no longer pulling the opposing team's defense away from them and they didn't have the puck as much because Nash helped carry their possession.

A lot of people don't want to admit to it, but Nash's impact on the game goes far beyond his goals and assists. Especially when his play adds to the team's overall offense

---

Here's my question. If nash is as good as advertised, why trade him in the first place?

Like I said, unless the package going to new York is minimal, I don't have much interest in a 32 year old player who is in decline. I feel the sabres shoukd restock their system so they can be like tampa. Constantly recycling players. They play at an elite level and keep their prospect cupboard well stocked.

If the sabres were to go after nash, it would cost them alot. With the sabres not ready to contend for a cup (realistically. They are a potential playoff team) I don't feel the move and subsequent trade off is worth it.

I'd prefer the sabres to add some depth via free agency and maybe explore a trade for a d-man, but that's really it. Okposo filled so many needs.

If the price was right, then sure. But I would imagine it being steep.

http://rangers.lohudblogs.com/2016/0....T05OmpDd.dpbs

1) Rangers motivation is purely cap... I've read that they need to address that.
2) Nash, being on the decline, is based 100% on 1 injury plagued season... May or may not be true... NHL.com has him ranked as #68 for forwards.
3) Okposo is a great addition. But may be a wash if we lose/dump Kane. We're still looking to fill top 6... ROR, Eichle, Reinhart, & Okposo for sure... Kane, Ennis, Vesey depending on their independent circumstances. Leaves no doubt we need at least 1 more IMO. And at the least, Nash is a 20 goal scorer (my money's on 30+) with a 1 year commitment (risk).
4) Price, as reported, is our 3rd center (Girgensons), or our trouble top 6 forward (Kane), and/or our mush head, undersized top 6 forward (Ennis). Low risk, high reward IMO.

I'd rather keep ennis. When healthy, he can produce, play all forward positions, and works his ass off. Injury troubles, yeah. But nash has em too.

Our top 6 can survive as it is. And vesey could sign too.

the real move would be to just tender one of the ranger RFA and see if we get that younger guy. like krieder. that'd force the rangers to either sign him or get crunched harder under the cap and maybe move nash for absolutely nothing because they have no other choice.

I wouldn't part with girgs

currently...

Top 5 C... ROR, Jackle, Reinhart, Girgensonns, Ennis... Room to lose 1 if Reinhart returns to his natural position.
Top 3 LW... Kane, Foligno, Larson... Need 1 desperately... Especially if Kane is run outta town. May force Reinhart to abandon center again... Can you say Rick Nash?
Top 3 RW... Okposo, Gionta, Fasching... Pretty desperate need here as well... Gonna need help here as well.

Best move is to trade Ennis (and player/prospect/draft pick) for Nash... And we still need a RW or 2 to fill out an effective 3rd & 4th lines.

You guys can have Stafford back. That will help you at RW.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mightysimi

You guys can have Stafford back. That will help you at RW.

---

I think I just threw up in my mouth a little.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mightysimi

You guys can have Stafford back. That will help you at RW.

---

Lick a tent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WagonCircler

The latest has the Sabres sending Ennis and Franson.

---

I only do that if have Fowler or make a hard push hard to add RFA Lindholm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OpIv37

I think I just threw up in my mouth a little.

---

Just to complete the vomit, he scored more than 5.5M Kane last year. Playing mostly 3rd line minutes. He was minus a million though. Sorry guys I can't help it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mightysimi

You guys can have Stafford back. That will help you at RW.

---

https://38.media.tumblr.com/1140f4ea...n14ao1_500.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yasgur's Farm

currently...

Top 5 C... ROR, Jackle, Reinhart, Girgensonns, Ennis... Room to lose 1 if Reinhart returns to his natural position.
Top 3 LW... Kane, Foligno, Larson... Need 1 desperately... Especially if Kane is run outta town. May force Reinhart to abandon center again... Can you say Rick Nash?
Top 3 RW... Okposo, Gionta, Fasching... Pretty desperate need here as well... Gonna need help here as well.

Best move is to trade Ennis (and player/prospect/draft pick) for Nash... And we still need a RW or 2 to fill out an effective 3rd & 4th lines.

---

I suppose, to be fair, I need to add Bailey and Baptiste to the RW list. But we are still desperate for LW.

What about hudler? He's got good possession numbers, can score and play all 3 forward positions.... and he would come cheap

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JATMtheJATM

What about hudler? He's got good possession numbers, can score and play all 3 forward positions.... and he would come cheap

---

The case for signing Jiri Hudler

I like Hudler. If he can stay on the ice. He had a rough go last year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mightysimi

I like Hudler. If he can stay on the ice. He had a rough go last year.

---

His production dipped last year, but he still produces.

I want him in buffalo.

And of course, ennis doesn't have to play RW, He has played LW alot earlier in his career