The Rick Nash thread

Hoags wrote:

NEELY wrote:Howson should ask for the farm. He will get his price for sure.

I really doubt he'll get Del Zetto, McDonagh, Gardiner or any other prospect of such caliber. Teams would be filling a hole with Nash and opening up a hole elsewhere.

He'd probably want Karlsson from us if the Sens were on Nash's list.

Ha. I wouldn't trade Karlsson for Nash even if they threw in their 1st this year. Fact.

Obviously. The only way I would trade for Nash was if it as an upgrade on the current position. So, Butler + 1st + prospect (as an example). Obviously which is not good enough for Columbus.

Riprock wrote:Obviously. The only way I would trade for Nash was if it as an upgrade on the current position. So, Butler + 1st + prospect (as an example). Obviously which is not good enough for Columbus.

Exactly. I'm sure that kind of package gets laughed at, but that's probably the best that Ottawa would offer. Unless, of course, they decided to try to upgrade on Michalek and went with 9MM, 1st, Zbad/Puempel/Noesen/Silf. That would probably do it. Worth it? I honestly don't know.

Teams get alot more desperate after playoff failures. I also think Howson will get his return he seeks

Michallica wrote:Teams get alot more desperate after playoff failures. I also think Howson will get his return he seeks

He may get more, but his demands are nuts. He wants to make up for all their years of bad drafting in one trade.

spader wrote:

Riprock wrote:Obviously. The only way I would trade for Nash was if it as an upgrade on the current position. So, Butler + 1st + prospect (as an example). Obviously which is not good enough for Columbus.

Exactly. I'm sure that kind of package gets laughed at, but that's probably the best that Ottawa would offer. Unless, of course, they decided to try to upgrade on Michalek and went with 9MM, 1st, Zbad/Puempel/Noesen/Silf. That would probably do it. Worth it? I honestly don't know.

Thing is, while I believe personally Nash is a better player than Michalek, Michalek is having a career year. Right now, Nash is arguably better than Michalek. Makes no sense for Ottawa to move him. Same with Kessel (32 goals).

Riprock wrote:

spader wrote:

Riprock wrote:Obviously. The only way I would trade for Nash was if it as an upgrade on the current position. So, Butler + 1st + prospect (as an example). Obviously which is not good enough for Columbus.

Exactly. I'm sure that kind of package gets laughed at, but that's probably the best that Ottawa would offer. Unless, of course, they decided to try to upgrade on Michalek and went with 9MM, 1st, Zbad/Puempel/Noesen/Silf. That would probably do it. Worth it? I honestly don't know.

Thing is, while I believe personally Nash is a better player than Michalek, Michalek is having a career year. Right now, Nash is arguably better than Michalek. Makes no sense for Ottawa to move him. Same with Kessel (32 goals).

I agree that it probably doesn't make sense to make the trade that I proposed (I thought about it more after posting that I wasn't sure). On the other hand, when you say that Michalek is having a career year, do you mean out of his years in Ottawa? He's pacing for 35/21/56. From 06-07 through 08-09 he posted 26/40/66, 24/31/55, and 23/34/57. He's certainly having a career year goal-wise, but his production is now in line with his production when he was a Shark. I wouldn't say he's having a career year so much as he's finally becoming the player that Murray thought he was trading for. If he can hit the ground running (and get a couple assists in the first half of the year ), there's no reason why he can't have a career year next year. Either way, I love what he brings to the table and think that he's really earning his cap hit right now.

Nash is close to twice the cap hit as MM, I don't think he's that much better to be worth it.

Hoags wrote:Nash is close to twice the cap hit as MM, I don't think he's that much better to be worth it.

Ya, the more I think about it, the more I realize how much you'd have to pay for what amounts to an upgrade, but not one proportional to the price.

spader wrote:
Ya, the more I think about it, the more I realize how much you'd have to pay for what amounts to an upgrade, but not one proportional to the price.

It might impact us resigning Cowen etc. down the road.

We have NO bad long-term contracts on this team.

Hoags wrote:

spader wrote:
Ya, the more I think about it, the more I realize how much you'd have to pay for what amounts to an upgrade, but not one proportional to the price.

It might impact us resigning Cowen etc. down the road.

We have NO bad long-term contracts on this team.

Hoags wrote:

spader wrote:
Ya, the more I think about it, the more I realize how much you'd have to pay for what amounts to an upgrade, but not one proportional to the price.

It might impact us resigning Cowen etc. down the road.

We have NO bad long-term contracts on this team.

Bite your tongue, and knock on wood!