Re: Rick Nash, anyone?
posted at 5/23/2013 8:06 AM EDT
In response to Bookboy007's comment:
The "linemates" arugment only really goes so far, doesn't it? At what point does someone say yeah, but, Rick, I mean...come on.... Brad Richards is exactly the kind of player you would expect Nash to thrive with. He distributes the puck very well - good proxy for JT Superstar, who is the best fit for Nash I've ever seen. They had his with Gaborik on the other side. That line worked out so badly that Gaborik was shipped out, Richards demoted to the fourth line...and St. Rick? Derick Brassard is able to score almost a point/game in that system, with those teammates, in the playoffs. Nash is 6th on the team in playoff scoring. Again, I agree with a lot of the things people are saying in Nash's defense, but it isn't a "not-guilty" defense. It's a "guilty under extenuating circumstances."
I think there's a lot more invovled. Let's also not forget that he was almost a point-per-game (44 games, 42 points), so it's not like he was Gomez in New York. He was 10th in the league in goals.
Looking over his season, as he got more comfortable with his team, he started scoring a lot more.
(more games were played in Mar and Apr)
Another factor for not being #1 in the league is that the opposing shutdown guys probably face Nash at all times. It's not like the Rangers have much of an attack outside of the top line, right?
There are plenty of reasons to be down on Nash, but a lack of talent isn't one of them. The guy is amazing.
I am no big Nash fan, a Nash apologist, or a closet Nash lover. The guy is having a terrible playoffs in which Brad Richards play has been so bad he's on the fourth line. His regular season stats didn't put him at the very top of the the league in all point categories, but the same team at the same time saw Gaborik fail to flourish as well.