Nash Bridges: What should the Sharks offer for Rick Nash?

Your signs are stupid and I feel like making you sad.

I don't really need to link to background information on this, right? You people know what's up. The Sharks are one of about five teams in serious contention to trade for Rick Nash sometime soon. San Jose was apparently trying to make a deal during the past season but Blue Jackets GM Scott Howson wanted Logan Couture and what the hell kind of sense does that make? None sense.

Anyways the Sharks probably aren't going to be significantly better than last year if they don't adjust the lineup a bit. Rick Nash is a very good player, though he's not the amazing savior some people make him out to be, and he's probably overpaid. The fact is that he's the best offensive player that is likely to be available, so he's a target for the Sharks.

So. What should the Sharks offer for Nash?

#1 Logan Couture? No. Unacceptable. The Sharks have very few young players worth a damn. If they don't win the Cup in the next two or three seasons they'll be rebuilding with Couture as the centerpiece. No deal.

#2 Patrick Marleau? Damn it people, are you trying to make Marleau cry? Why does everyone always want to trade Marleau? Trading one of the team's best offensive players in order to get a different offensive player is not the way to improve the Sharks. Did Heatley for Havlat fix anything? No. No it did not.

Don't trade Marleau, you assholes.

#3 Joe Pavelski? Yeah, I'd be okay with this. The Sharks have a wealth of players that are really popular with fans, including me, but that haven't been good enough or consistent enough to get the team where they need to be. Pavelski is a big asset in certain areas, especially on the defensive side of things, but the team would obviously be in a better place with Nash instead of Pavelski. Sorry, Joe.

#4 Douglas Murray? Aw, man. Yes, begrudgingly, I agree with trading Douglas Murray. I totally adore Murray. I'd be sad to see him go. But, again...he's not that great. He's a bit slow, and his occasional big hits don't compensate for his defensive weakness, and with Brad Stuart (who, in my opinion, sucks) likely to be returning to the Sharks there just might not be a suitable spot for Murray in the lineup, any more.

*sniff* :-(

#5 Antti Niemi? Welp. Niemi is fine. He's...fine. This past season his save percentage was .915, which was on the low side for NHL starters, but isn't awful. He was better than Marc-Andre Fleury, I guess, but who isn't? His GAA was 2.42, 17th in the league among goalies that played a significant amount of games. That's...that's a reasonable number, right? Right?

You know what? Niemi kind of blows.

Is Alex Stalock feeling better? He is? Great!

Yeah, I'd trade Niemi.

#5 Joe Pavelski, Douglas Murray, AND Antti Niemi? Sure. Why the hell not? These three guys combined make $10.3 million. Moving them helps the Sharks afford Nash's stupid $7.8 million contract and have money left over to fill out the roster with young fools and worthless "character" guys.

Maybe that'll work.

Knowing how much Scott Howson loves crappy defensemen makes me wish the Sharks still had Kent Huskins. San Jose could probably offer him and a couple of draft picks for Nash.

SB Nation Featured Video
Log In Sign Up

Log In Sign Up

Forgot password?

We'll email you a reset link.

If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.

Forgot password?

Try another email?

Almost done,

By becoming a registered user, you are also agreeing to our Terms and confirming that you have read our Privacy Policy.

Join Battle of California

You must be a member of Battle of California to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Battle of California. You should read them.

Join Battle of California

You must be a member of Battle of California to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Battle of California. You should read them.




Choose an available username to complete sign up.

In order to provide our users with a better overall experience, we ask for more information from Facebook when using it to login so that we can learn more about our audience and provide you with the best possible experience. We do not store specific user data and the sharing of it is not required to login with Facebook.