If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
All: The new Billszone site with the updated software is scheduled to be turned on Tuesday, May 21, 2024. The company that built it, Dynascale, estimates a FOUR HOUR shut down, from 8pm Pacific, (5pm Eastern) while they get it up and running. Nobody will be able to post in any forum until they are done. Afterwards, you may need to do a web search for the site, as old links will not work, because the site is getting a new IP address. Please be patient. If there are bugs, we will tackle them one at a time. Remember the goal is to be up and running with no glitches by camp. Doing this now assures us of that, because it gives us all summer to get our ducks in a row. Thank you!
There is work to be done and things to be learned. We are going to try to get the old look back - or something close to it. We also know there are bugs. A thread will be started to report bugs and then we can pass those onto the host.
Thank you for all the patience and support with this - hopefully this will greatly reduce the crashes and other site issues we have had lately.
Please use this thread to report any issues you come across
http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/forum/feedback-forums/billszone-q-a/6521455-upgrade-report-bugs-here
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.
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.
It's silly season. Starting there seems appropriate considering the nature of this article.
We've been through this before, but I'll refresh your memory of what I'm talking about here (in a story about the rumors of a Ryan McDonagh trade):
1) Leading up to the trade deadline.
2) The first
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Tweet
Comment