What does it take to get Nash?

Yeah, Murray isn't under any pressure to make a deal. Ryan would likely have a different price tag than Nash, given the needs of Anaheim differ from those of Columbus.

tim1_2 wrote:Yeah, Murray isn't under any pressure to make a deal. Ryan would likely have a different price tag than Nash, given the needs of Anaheim differ from those of Columbus.

Precisely.

Dealing with Columbus might make more SENSe from Ottawa's perspective, as we have Lehner/Bishop that we could dangle.

Then again, Ryan's current contract is more amenable to a "budget" team like Ottawa, so maybe we're willing to negotiate a little more to bring in Ryan over Nash.

The more I think about it the less I think we'll land Nash. It's a little bit like the situation with Heatly, Nash knows which teams are involved and won't say yes to one outside his list. Howsen will ha e tocave and make a smaller deal. The players control the destiny.

The thing that I find interesting is how quick most of us are to trade Zibanejad - even when it's for a player like Nash. I was told he'd be awesome.

SpezDispenser wrote:The thing that I find interesting is how quick most of us are to trade Zibanejad - even when it's for a player like Nash. I was told he'd be awesome.

If Murray really offered him then maybe they're not as high on him as we think they are. It's possible that Noesen will turn out to be the better player from that 1st round last year.

Hoags wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:The thing that I find interesting is how quick most of us are to trade Zibanejad - even when it's for a player like Nash. I was told he'd be awesome.

If Murray really offered him then maybe they're not as high on him as we think they are. It's possible that Noesen will turn out to be the better player from that 1st round last year.

I am 100% in the same group. I think Noesen was the real gem of the first.

I think Noesen makes Zibanejad a little more expendable, I'll agree with that for sure. Have very high hopes for Noesen.

NEELY wrote:
I am 100% in the same group. I think Noesen was the real gem of the first.

Yep and if Murray is truly offering him up in trades, he might be thinking the same thing, along with the rest of the team management.

SpezDispenser wrote:The thing that I find interesting is how quick most of us are to trade Zibanejad - even when it's for a player like Nash. I was told he'd be awesome.

I think that, optimistically, the best you can hope for is for him to become as good as Nash or Ryan. So... why not trade the "might" for the "real thing"? A bird in hand is worth two in the bush, or so they say.

rooneypoo wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:The thing that I find interesting is how quick most of us are to trade Zibanejad - even when it's for a player like Nash. I was told he'd be awesome.

I think that, optimistically, the best you can hope for is for him to become as good as Nash or Ryan. So... why not trade the "might" for the "real thing"? A bird in hand is worth two in the bush, or so they say.

Production wise I don't disagree at all, I think Nash and Ryan have a 90% chance of out-producing Z, but in the grand scheme of things, does Z bring things to the table that they don't? His endlessly running motor, his 2-way game, his clutch goal-scoring? Do these factor in, or do we just try to cash his chip in now for more production?

SpezDispenser wrote:
Production wise I don't disagree at all, I think Nash and Ryan have a 90% chance of out-producing Z, but in the grand scheme of things, does Z bring things to the table that they don't? His endlessly running motor, his 2-way game, his clutch goal-scoring? Do these factor in, or do we just try to cash his chip in now for more production?

I still think getting Nash is more about getting a potential successor to Alfie not to mention entice to stay out of retirement longer.

I mean if Murray actually improves the team on paper in the offseason (without breaking the bank) that's more encouraging for Alfie to come back(and potentially keep coming back) because we're better than last year so sky's the limit.

Am I the only one who believes the sky is already the limit with the prospects we have and the foundation we're adding to?

SpezDispenser wrote:Am I the only one who believes the sky is already the limit with the prospects we have and the foundation we're adding to?

Yes.

SpezDispenser wrote:Am I the only one who believes the sky is already the limit with the prospects we have and the foundation we're adding to?

Hard to say, as fans we tend to overrate our own assets much like everyone else.

Hoags wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:The thing that I find interesting is how quick most of us are to trade Zibanejad - even when it's for a player like Nash. I was told he'd be awesome.

If Murray really offered him then maybe they're not as high on him as we think they are. It's possible that Noesen will turn out to be the better player from that 1st round last year.

No, it's just a case of having to give to get. You offer Noesen instead and you get laughed at. Nobody wants to deal their top prospect.

Big Ev wrote:
No, it's just a case of having to give to get. You offer Noesen instead and you get laughed at. Nobody wants to deal their top prospect.

Yes but Murray has our prospects ranked in terms of value, I don't think he'd give up Silfverberg and Stone for example. My guess is he's OK with offering Zibanejad because he thinks Noesen(or someone else) will be just as good if not better. Trading Zibanejad is a loss and it will hurt but not as much.

Kind of like Rundblad, he was hyped to the moon here and yet Murray traded him because he felt it wasn't a big loss for us.

Would Murray have traded EK in the last few years ? No way, they knew what they had and they knew you don't trade a player like that.

Hoags wrote:

Big Ev wrote:
No, it's just a case of having to give to get. You offer Noesen instead and you get laughed at. Nobody wants to deal their top prospect.

Yes but Murray has our prospects ranked in terms of value, I don't think he'd give up Silfverberg and Stone for example. My guess is he's OK with offering Zibanejad because he thinks Noesen(or someone else) will be just as good if not better. Trading Zibanejad is a loss and it will hurt but not as much.

Kind of like Rundblad, he was hyped to the moon here and yet Murray traded him because he felt it wasn't a big loss for us.

Would Murray have traded EK in the last few years ? No way, they knew what they had and they knew you don't trade a player like that.

Stone would be traded ahead of Zibanejad. No doubt. They'd offer Zibanejad because they're getting Rick Nash. It's as simple as that. LA offers Schenn for Richards, Columbus trades Vorazcek for Carter, etc. Gotta give up good value to get a star player.

You're not trading Zibanejad because you like him less than other guys, you're trading him because you're getting a star player and the rest of our prospect pool is good.

Rundblad isn't the same as he was traded for a guy who was unproven and had much much less value than a star player like Nash.