NHL Trade Deadline: Why Rick Nash Should Stay Put on Blue Jackets
Rick Nash is the biggest name swirling around the hockey world as the Monday trade deadline rapidly approaches.
However, if one really takes the time to consider a deal for Rick Nash and everything it would entail, it becomes obvious that no team should make the immense sacrifice it would take to acquire the winger, because the fact of the matter is that Rick Nash is overrated.
Let’s take a look at Nash from a numerical perspective.
He has notched but 530 points in 653 games played in his career, far below the superstar’s point-per-game benchmark. The most disturbing statistic though is that, as highly touted as Rick Nash has become this February, he has only once surpassed the 70-point plateau for a single season in eight professional years. He will likely fall way short of that mark yet again by the end of the 2011-2012 regular season.
It is understood that Nash has played on some sorry teams during his tenure with Columbus, but that does not excuse his severe statistical under-performance for a former first overall draft choice. The bottom line is that true stars find a way to produce at an elite level despite less-than-optimal circumstances.
For the amount of attention being paid to Nash, and the hefty rumored asking price for Nash’s services by Columbus’ general manager, Scott Howson, an ignorant bystander would believe that Nash is some sort of league-dominating world-beater, when in actuality Nash is merely good, not great.
As fans it is easy to be swept away by the endless rumors and potential deals of the NHL trade deadline, but keep a level head, especially regarding Rick Nash.
Nash does not sport the quality or production of player that you, as a diehard fan, want your beloved team to add to its offensive ranks in exchange for valuable assets, picks and prospects.
Frankly, the hopeful fan and media frenzy about Nash that has dominated the NHL for the entirety of the new calendar year is absolutely unwarranted once his on-ice production is closely examined.
He is not that good.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?