I'm bored, lets talk Nash

Post by **Batman21** » Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:06 am

My office is a ghost town this morning, so lets look at this.

First off, i dont think he is a great fit for a dozen reasons, among them - he doesnt appear to be what gmrs is looking for in terms of the return on an investment of $7.8M.

That said, here are some reasons to make this happen. (I know im reaching on a few of these but whatever...)

1. So we dont have to deal with him on NYR or PHI for the next 6 yrs.

2. Cost - TK +#1 next yr + young top dman for nash AND my point above. Is that enough? Seems fair to me. Cbus doesnt send him to detroit and he is out of west all together. And we got the extra #1 from car this yr, so even steven.

3. Yes its 7.8 million against cap, but its only 6 yrs. 6 yrs of a legit anchor winger that has been missing. He is 28, these are traditionally prime yrs.

4. Big body, pretty much injury free so far. 75 games is lowest he has played in last 5 yrs.

Thats all i got.

FLPensFan · Post by **FLPensFan** » Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:15 am

1. I wouldn't make any trade just so we don't have to deal with him on another team.
2. Columbus is going to get WAY BETTER offers for Nash. WAY BETTER OFFERS. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyy Better.
3. 6 years is a long time. 2-3 years, maybe I would consider it.
4. Agree here.

I don't think we have the pieces to get Nash unless we gave up somebody on our top 6 to get him. Only person I would consider and say possible might be a package with Kunitz, d-prospect, #1 pick.....and I still think someone would offer better. Nash would be an upgrade over Kunitz, you'd only be taking on 4mil extra in salary, and could still go out and get another mid-level player to round out top 6.

Post by **penny lane** » Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:20 am

I can't believe cbj haven't already received offers for nash? Why the delay?
It certainly doesn't hurt to make an offer. I think columbus wants parts for now and for the future.

Kraftster · Post by **Kraftster** » Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:21 am

Ah, yes, the ever-enticing TK + 1st + Dman prospect. When that package is finally dealt, it is sure to go down as one of the finest returns that a team has ever received.

Edit: Also, what an NHL world we live in to result in remarks like "it's only 6 years."

Arlow · Post by **Arlow** » Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:22 am

I wouldn't mind if he did go to Philly or NYR. It would just mean that either of their moronic GM's just staked numerous young stars and future draft picks and/or prospects to get him there and he's not worth it.

Post by **canaan** » Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:23 am

Kunitz is the exact type of player this team doesnt need to get rid of, but acquire more of.

That being said, Its gonna take at least Despres, Maata, and a top 6 guy for Howson to be interested, in my opinion. Howson knows that getting rid of Nash could mean the death knell for that franchise without a superstar player. I cant imagine that we have the parts (nor the want to deplete the prospect pool) for Nash.

JoseCuervo · Post by **JoseCuervo** » Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:28 am

Pens don't have the assets to trade for nash and won't get him or ryan.

/discussion

sil · Post by **sil** » Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:32 am

My guess at our minumum offer that would work (meaning CBJ would accept)...assuming (1) CBJ likes these guys (which who the heck knows?), and (2) other teams decide to forego Nash for whatever reason...because other offers WILL be better...

Chris Kunitz
Matt Niskanen
Beau Bennett
Derek Pouliot
PIT's 1st in 2013

for

Rick Nash

That'd be the minimum I'd guess would work, but, again, only if ao teams forego Nash...which won't happen. We really don't have the pieces to make somthing like this work.

sil · Post by **sil** » Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:33 am

Haha...in the time it took me to write my post...three other people said basically the same thing I did.

Let's all say it together..."We don't have the pieces."

Froggy · Post by **Froggy** » Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:34 am

sil wrote:My guess at our minumum offer that would work (meaning CBJ would accept)...assuming (1) CBJ likes these guys (which who the heck knows?), and (2) other teams decide to forego Nash for whatever reason...because other offers WILL be better...

Chris Kunitz
Matt Niskanen
Beau Bennett
Derek Pouliot
PIT's 1st in 2013

for

Rick Nash

That'd be the minimum I'd guess would work, but, again, only if ao teams forego Nash...which won't happen. We really don't have the pieces to make somthing like this work.

Yeah, and if we offered that trade, and for some reason it was accepted, we would STILL need a top 6 winger. Nash ain't gonna happen.

FLPensFan · Post by **FLPensFan** » Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:37 am

canaan wrote:Kunitz is the exact type of player this team doesnt need to get rid of, but acquire more of.

That being said, Its gonna take at least Despres, Maata, and a top 6 guy for Howson to be interested, in my opinion. Howson knows that getting rid of Nash could mean the death knell for that franchise without a superstar player. I cant imagine that we have the parts (nor the want to deplete the prospect pool) for Nash.

I agree that Kunitz is the type we need to get more of, but you also can't put together a offer for Nash without at least one top 6 forward from our roster. Nash would be an upgrade over Kunitz. He may not be the same type of run into the corners and lay people out, but Nash is bigger and is still a physical player. We need more size in our top 6, not just guys that can hit. Sure, in an ideal world, if we went after Nash, I'd love to keep Kunitz too. But they aren't going to consider Dupuis a top 6 player, and we aren't giving up James Neal for Nash. That would be monumentally stupid.

DelPen · Post by **DelPen** » Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:40 am

We have the pieces to land anyone in a video game but real worls doesn't dictate that other teams need those pieces.

For either Ryan or Nash the starting would be Kunitz, Morrow, Bennet, and several high draft picks.

But that leaves us still down a top 6 wing. Doesn't make too much sense.

FLPensFan · Post by **FLPensFan** » Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:42 am

Froggy wrote:
sil wrote:My guess at our minumum offer that would work (meaning CBJ would accept)...assuming (1) CBJ likes these guys (which who the heck knows?), and (2) other teams decide to forego Nash for whatever reason...because other offers WILL be better...

Chris Kunitz
Matt Niskanen
Beau Bennett
Derek Pouliot
PIT's 1st in 2013

for

Rick Nash

That'd be the minimum I'd guess would work, but, again, only if ao teams forego Nash...which won't happen. We really don't have the pieces to make somthing like this work.
Yeah, and if we offered that trade, and for some reason it was accepted, we would STILL need a top 6 winger. Nash ain't gonna happen.

Take out Niskanen and I'd do it in a heartbeat. Kunitz, Bennett, Pouliot/Maata/Harrington, and a #1 would be a fair offer. It's a roster player, 2 of our top prospects, and a 1st rounder.

If that was accepted, I'd then look to flip Martin, Despres, Kennedy, and a 2nd-3rd rd pick to Edmonton for Sam Gagner and Ladislav Smid. Top 6 set Nash-Crosby-Dupuis, Neal-Malkin-Gagner. Smid>>>Michalek. He hits, he blocks shots, he kills penalties, he's 6'3"

Pens15 · Post by **Pens15** » Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:42 am

There a few factors that make it, while probably a long shot, not impossible.

First, that Nash has full veto power and a short list of teams he'll go to, which reportedly includes Pittsburgh. So that right there eliminates a lot of competition.

Second, NYR and Philly, both teams that have more to offer then the Pens, apparently have been discussing a deal with Columbus for a long time now, and neither appear willing to gut their team to acquire Nash. The Rangers reported final offer for Nash was something like Dubinsky, Tim Erixon, and a few other prospects and picks. The Pens could potentially compete with that offer.

sil · Post by **sil** » Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:50 am

Pens15 wrote:Nash has full veto power and a short list of teams he'll go to, which reportedly includes Pittsburgh.

Where'd this info come from?

Idoit40fans · Post by **Idoit40fans** » Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:51 am

I don't always drink water, but when I do, I prefer vitamin water. Stay vitaminized, friends.

Pens15 · Post by **Pens15** » Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:53 am

sil wrote:
Pens15 wrote:Nash has full veto power and a short list of teams he'll go to, which reportedly includes Pittsburgh.
Where'd this info come from?

Either LeBrun or McKenzie, tweeted it last night.

Columbus Dispatch beat writer also reported it.

Aaron Portzline ‏@Aportzline
Confirmed today Pittsburgh is on Rick Nash's "approved" list. So #NYR, #Flyers, #RedWings, #SJSharks, #PghPenguins. Could be 1-2 others.

Steve · Post by **Steve** » Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:54 am

Kennedy, Lovejoy, Asham and a 3rd round pick should do it.

mikey287 · Post by **mikey287** » Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:00 am

Christ, this thread again...

The first proposal is horrendous.

The Pens just don't have what Columbus is looking for, if you wanted a shot, I'd say maybe, maybe, maybe they'd consider this but it doesn't really help them:

Orpik, Sutter, Dupuis, Morrow, plus 2 out of 4 of Dumoulin/Despres/Pouliot/Harrington, a 1st in 2013 and a conditional 1st in 2014...but I would guess they'd want younger pieces than Orpik and Dupuis...I still don't think they'd want even that...

ffemtreed · Post by **ffemtreed** » Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:02 am

Steve wrote:Kennedy, Lovejoy, Asham and a 3rd round pick should do it.

you might have to add Sullivan in there to sweeten the pot!

Pens15 · Post by **Pens15** » Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:02 am

mikey287 wrote:Christ, this thread again...

The first proposal is horrendous.

The Pens just don't have what Columbus is looking for, if you wanted a shot, I'd say maybe, maybe, maybe they'd consider this but it doesn't really help them:

Orpik, Sutter, Dupuis, Morrow, plus 2 out of 4 of Dumoulin/Despres/Pouliot/Harrington, a 1st in 2013 and a conditional 1st in 2014...but I would guess they'd want younger pieces than Orpik and Dupuis...I still don't think they'd want even that...

I hear you. But the thing is, it might not matter what they want. They might have to take what they can get.

As of now, they aren't getting what they want from the Pens or from anybody. I'm not sure if they are prepared to just keep a disgruntled Nash or not.

Mr. Colby · Post by **Mr. Colby** » Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:05 am

I mean the guys Columbus wants from NYR are young IMPACT players with high ceilings.

They're looking at guys like Del Zotto, McDonagh, Dubinsky, Stepan, Kreider, and then prospects like J.T. Miller, and then picks

There's not a guy on our team that's better than the first 5 names I listed that could be moved.

Post by **canaan** » Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:05 am

they dont have to move him at all.

Steve · Post by **Steve** » Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:06 am

ffemtreed wrote:
Steve wrote:Kennedy, Lovejoy, Asham and a 3rd round pick should do it.

you might have to add Sullivan in there to sweeten the pot!

I don't know, that's alot of players. I would first add a case of Mark Recchi bobbleheads to my deal, and see if they accept that first.

Post by **shmenguin** » Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:06 am

Pens15 wrote:
mikey287 wrote:Christ, this thread again...

The first proposal is horrendous.

The Pens just don't have what Columbus is looking for, if you wanted a shot, I'd say maybe, maybe, maybe they'd consider this but it doesn't really help them:

Orpik, Sutter, Dupuis, Morrow, plus 2 out of 4 of Dumoulin/Despres/Pouliot/Harrington, a 1st in 2013 and a conditional 1st in 2014...but I would guess they'd want younger pieces than Orpik and Dupuis...I still don't think they'd want even that...
I hear you. But the thing is, it might not matter what they want. They might have to take what they can get.

As of now, they aren't getting what they want from the Pens or from anybody. I'm not sure if they are prepared to just keep a disgruntled Nash or not.

they'll get more from the rangers than they will from us. that's basically a fact at this point

I'm bored, lets talk Nash

I'm bored, lets talk Nash

Re: I'm bored, lets talk Nash

Re: I'm bored, lets talk Nash

Re: I'm bored, lets talk Nash

Re: I'm bored, lets talk Nash

Re: I'm bored, lets talk Nash

Re: I'm bored, lets talk Nash

Re: I'm bored, lets talk Nash

Re: I'm bored, lets talk Nash

Re: I'm bored, lets talk Nash

Re: I'm bored, lets talk Nash

Re: I'm bored, lets talk Nash

Re: I'm bored, lets talk Nash

Re: I'm bored, lets talk Nash

Re: I'm bored, lets talk Nash

Re: I'm bored, lets talk Nash

Re: I'm bored, lets talk Nash

Re: I'm bored, lets talk Nash

Re: I'm bored, lets talk Nash

Re: I'm bored, lets talk Nash

Re: I'm bored, lets talk Nash

Re: I'm bored, lets talk Nash

Re: I'm bored, lets talk Nash

Re: I'm bored, lets talk Nash

Re: I'm bored, lets talk Nash