|
Should The Hawks Bring Back Patrick Kane? |
|
|
|
|
|
Scott Powers did have a nice little question-and-answer session in his latest offering for the Athletic, and as expected, the question of whether the Hawks would bring back Patrick Kane came up. Now reading Powers response definitely gives us a lot to think about and gives us a lot of what-ifs. To paraphrase, Powers said that before he was very confident that the Kane era in Chicago was closed, but now he isn’t so sure the door is completely closed. This would be a very interesting turn of events from what Kyle Davidson had previously talked about regarding moving on for the Kane/Toews era, but is KD right to go back on his original stance?
Why bring Kane back makes sense for him and the Hawks
There is no question what 88 means to this city; he was the goal scorer for the first Stanley Cup in 49 years for the Hawks; he helped bring this city two more cups; he became the first American to win the Art Ross Trophy; and so much more, all in the Indian head sweater. No matter how hard you try to move on from that era, Patrick Kane will always be associated with the Hawks, so why not just embrace it? For Kaner, there are still two big milestones for him to reach, and while one he needs to be a Hawk to achieve it, the other would just make it sweeter doing it in Chicago. I am, of course, talking about making a run for Mikita's all-time point lead in Hawks history and becoming the all-time leading point getter among Americans. He is only 90 points away from tying Mike Modano and could do that in the next two seasons if he stays healthy. Mikita is a little bit tougher as he is 294 points away from that mark, but if you give him a 3-year deal and just let him play his game, the excitement behind that is well worth it. Why would this make sense? Because the Hawks will go hand in hand with his chase for Mikita. This team has an amazing young core ready to make the jump and take their games to the next level. They are going to need so many veterans to help mentor them and show them the ropes. Nick Foligno has done an amazing job at this so far, but this team needs a skilled guy in the same role. Who is better than Patrick Kane? A player who is a former first-round pick and has gone through all the ups and downs a player could go through. We saw what Connor Bedard could do without legitimate talent around him; now just imagine what he could do with a player like Patrick Kane on his line. This could be the boost that this team and the fans need to help get over this rebuild hump.
Why this doesn’t make sense
When Kyle Davidson made the tough choice to move on from Kane and Toews as fans, it stung, but in the bigger picture, it made sense. Fast forward a year, and the original idea still stands and makes sense. This team is never going to move on and create their new identity if those two are around. Having them on this team, there is concern that the younger guys who should be learning from them will use them more as a crutch and rely way too much on them. How can your young player develop and learn to play in big-time moments when you can just defer it to Kaner? You also have the work Nick Foligno has been doing to help change and create a new culture in the Hawks locker room. Does that all go out the window if Kane comes back, or is he able to come in and accept the way things are now and just fall in line?
After the season the Hawks had last year, no one would blame KD for changing his stance and bringing Kane back. However, I think there is a new level of respect to be earned if he sticks to his guns and lets that era stay in the past. I would love to see Kane back in the Indian Head sweater, but at the end of the day, we have good memories from the past, so why risk a bad reunion and tarnish that? KD should be making a call to Kane's agent and seeing where his head is, and if the stars align and it makes sense, absolutely pull the trigger. But if not, well, see you back in Chicago for one last shift and a nice one-day contract to retire a Hawk.
Chicago Blackhawks Blogger • 
Join the Discussion:
»