Too much!!
- LeftCoaster

nonsense. One player who can't get in the lineup, two players who may never get a chance to play in the NHL and a backup goalie for a top 6 power forward. I'd do it even though Kane won't play another game this season. none of the pieces going the other way will make one bit of difference where the Canucks finish this season.

You are misrepresenting the Against category.

Reasons not to go for Kane:
It will likely cost us one or more of our best prospects, of which we have a dearth
He has 1 season out of 6 where he has cracked 20 goals and has never played a full 82 games
He has a history of maturity and locker room issues

Also Evander Kane is not a bonafide 1st line player. On a good team he is a second liner
- bezz44

Maybe "Under-representing" I could agree with as the strongest argument against, for me, in an immediate financial one.

I can't really comment on his potential except to ask who on the Canucks is currently better than him?

I am not sure the deal has to include prospects. The Jets window of opportunity is widening... who knows for how long.... they want players like Kassian with size and Burrows with tenacity. They do not covet juniors breaking in style players at this point.

Maybe "Under-representing" I could agree with as the strongest argument against, for me, in an immediate financial one.

I can't really comment on his potential except to ask who on the Canucks is currently better than him?
- Beatle_john

Dude, all the other stuff (Jensen, Cassels, 2nd etc.) doesn't matter. It's all replaceable. If you could acquire an impact, top 6 forward without giving up your two blue chip prospects and this year's first round pick its worth it. Volume would never get a deal done, the Jets will want quality, and there's not a whole lot of that in the system.
- 1970vintage

Somebody is overrating Kane. His production has dropped and he is clearly an immature cancer in the locker room. I highly doubt linden and Benning want anything to do with him. Mccann, Horvat, Virt are definitely off the table.

- 1970vintage

Yeah, as soon as I wrote that I thought "Fuuuuuuoooooocccccckkkkk... there is a lot of truth there."

Maybe "Under-representing" I could agree with as the strongest argument against, for me, in an immediate financial one.

I can't really comment on his potential except to ask who on the Canucks is currently better than him?

I am not sure the deal has to include prospects. The Jets window of opportunity is widening... who knows for how long.... they want players like Kassian with size and Burrows with tenacity. They do not covet juniors breaking in style players at this point.
- Beatle_john

IMO the only player over 30 we have that would be enticing enough for them is Hamhuis. Kassian, Burrows, Higgins, Lack, Hansen are all minor pieces that could be had for a 3rd rounder and minor prospects. You don't trade a top 6 fwd unless you are getting back a pivotal piece of the puzzle, whether that is picks + prospects or another impact player. He would certainly be top 6 on our team but that is not saying much and if we are building around Evander Kane then we have some serious problems going forward

Somebody is overrating Kane. His production has dropped and he is clearly an immature cancer in the locker room. I highly doubt linden and Benning want anything to do with him. Mccann, Horvat, Virt are definitely off the table.
- CanuckDon

He would be the best player on the team, by a large margin.

Somebody is overrating Kane. His production has dropped and he is clearly an immature cancer in the locker room. I highly doubt linden and Benning want anything to do with him. Mccann, Horvat, Virt are definitely off the table.
- CanuckDon

I agree the young guys are not in the picture.

Production??? Meh. A combination of injury, some immaturity and playing in a city he clearly has stated he never wanted to be in in the first place. He signed in Hotlanta, not Winterpeg. Thats one hell of a culture change.

And, yes, by all speculation, he was a negative in that room.... does not translate he would be in another, expecially his hometown.

Besides what do we have to lose except KAssian (sitting), Higgins (????ing) or Burrows.

- 1970vintage

Sedins, Vrbata, Edler, Tanev, Hamhuis are all better players

I agree the young guys are not in the picture.

Production??? Meh. A combination of injury, some immaturity and playing in a city he clearly has stated he never wanted to be in in the first place. He signed in Hotlanta, not Winterpeg. Thats one hell of a culture change.

And, yes, by all speculation, he was a negative in that room.... does not translate he would be in another, expecially his hometown.

Besides what do we have to lose except KAssian (sitting), Higgins (????ing) or Burrows.
- Beatle_john

If everyone on here is aware that these are poopty pieces, I think WPG management is even more so... Every single team in the NHL could beat that offer

IMO the only player over 30 we have that would be enticing enough for them is Hamhuis. Kassian, Burrows, Higgins, Lack, Hansen are all minor pieces that could be had for a 3rd rounder and minor prospects. You don't trade a top 6 fwd unless you are getting back a pivotal piece of the puzzle, whether that is picks + prospects or another impact player. He would certainly be top 6 on our team but that is not saying much and if we are building around Evander Kane then we have some serious problems going forward
- bezz44

I somewhat agree with you that the sum of the parts we can offer may not make the whole they are giving up...

I suggest that you are undervaluing the character guys we have that winning teams need rather than just offensive for offensive. I think Burrows is a highly effective playoff guy.

Call me cynical, but where does this incredible value really lie? He's a 23 year old who's hit 50 points once.

Constant drama and distraction in the media. Hasn't played a full season in years. Coming off shoulder surgery now.

Not a huge difference between him and Schenn to be honest. Far less off-ice with Brayden too.

What is with this perception that he wants to play in his home town??

His ex fiancé moved back to Vancouver after he ended it, he is still playing for a canadian city, and people will always judge his value because of the amount we would have to give up in a trade.

Develop our own talent.

Sedins, Vrbata, Edler, Tanev, Hamhuis are all better players
- bezz44

I would agree with this. But all of the players listed have one thing in common. I wouldn't call them soft, but they don't leave many bruises after you play against them. Also, there's not a lot of speed there.

Sedins, Vrbata, Edler, Tanev, Hamhuis are all better players
- bezz44

debatable.

Dreger says regardless of Kane injury Canucks are very interested as a long term aquisition.
- vancity787

And first thing they plan on teaching him is how to use debit and credit cards, so he doesn't have to carry around such fat stacks of cash everywhere.

Hi,

Looking at Kane through another lens, and a poll, among the items in today's new blog:

http://www.hockeybuzz.com...Market-Shifting/194/66176

I would agree with this. But all of the players listed have one thing in common. I wouldn't call them soft, but they don't leave many bruises after you play against them. Also, there's not a lot of speed there.
- CubanBuffet

Sure, all I'm saying is that if we're going to mortgage the farm, why would we do it for Evander (frank)ing Kane. I would rather try to move into the top 10 in this year's draft and grab Crouse if we are trying to get stiffer

debatable.
- 1970vintage

No it really isn't he is on pace for 40 points

If everyone on here is aware that these are poopty pieces, I think WPG management is even more so... Every single team in the NHL could beat that offer
- bezz44

Yes, they are poopy here --- under their current given circumstances... but so is Kane there.... or others such as Richards in LA or Hodgson in BUF. A new address can do wonders.

I think Higgins is a crappy piece... a potential buyout only a few strides over David Booth.... BUT ---- he may be needed in a trade like this to balance the loss of someone like Markstrom--- who I see as the only young gun who is available for a trade.

So my trade would look like this:

Burrows, Higgins, Kassian (or Markstrom) for Kane, a top six or nine forward. ( I do not know enough abouot the Jets to speculate on who would come back, just I know what hole we are creating by losing the players we woudl give up.)

Sedins, Vrbata, Edler, Tanev, Hamhuis are all better players
- bezz44

......

I am really tring to give you the benefit of the doubt here... maybe Hamhuis.... but the rest are not. Vrbata is great with certain players but he is not the straw that mixes the drinks --- where as Kane is.... or has a higher potencial to be.

I somewhat agree with you that the sum of the parts we can offer may not make the whole they are giving up...

I suggest that you are undervaluing the character guys we have that winning teams need rather than just offensive for offensive. I think Burrows is a highly effective playoff guy.
- Beatle_john

Would you trade Edler for a signed Mike Santorelli, Jake Gardiner, and David Clarkson? Because that is as comparable a trade proposal as I can make

......

I am really tring to give you the benefit of the doubt here... maybe Hamhuis.... but the rest are not. Vrbata is great with certain players but he is not the straw that mixes the drinks --- where as Kane is.... or has a higher potencial to be.
- Beatle_john

You can't be serious

Hi,

Looking at Kane through another lens, and a poll, among the items in today's new blog:

http://www.hockeybuzz.com...Market-Shifting/194/66176
- Carol Schram

Oh my goodness, it is the rare blog-post. "We are not worthy!"



Seriously through, thank you for the daily forum

Would you trade Edler for a signed Mike Santorelli, Jake Gardiner, and David Clarkson? Because that is as comparable a trade proposal as I can make
- bezz44

I do not see that connection at all to what I am proposing.

You can't be serious
- bezz44

Quite!