Skip to content

Columnist shoots down Patrick Kane trade talk

Feb 15, 2012, 7:55 PM EDT

Patrick Kane Getty Images

If you ask Jeremy Roenick, trading Patrick Kane is certainly within the realm of reason for the Chicago Blackhawks.

CSNChicago.com’s Chris Boden was quick to throw a bucket of water on the wacky rumors circling the 23-year-old star, though.

It’s not impossible, just don’t hold your breath for those anxious to ship the guy who scored your Stanley Cup-clinching goal out of town for the sake of doing something and immediate gratification. Stan Bowman’s not in line with J.R.’s thinking. Of course, he’d always listen. Just don’t believe Kane will be aggressively shopped.

In times like these, I cannot help but reflect on the woeful era of Blackhawks hockey that just passed. When Eric Daze and Alexei Zhamnov were among the biggest beacons of hope in Chicago, one would have had a tough time believing that they’d consider trading a young star less than two years after he scored a Stanley Cup-winning goal.

Talking imaginary GMs off the ledge

Kane’s 45 points in 57 games is far from a disaster. The dazzling winger is obviously more of a playmaker than sniper, but it’s telling that his shooting percentage is at a paltry 6.8 percent this season.

The American forward’s shooting percentage has never been lower than 9.8 percent in any other season and while that difference might not sound like much, he’d have 16-17 goals instead of 12 if he was connecting at his career 10.5 rate.

Blockbuster goalie moves are far from guaranteed – especially for ‘Hawks

Long story short, much like his team, Kane isn’t getting many bounces right now. It would be a little hasty to move a franchise cornerstone for struggling a bit – especially since Chicago’s goalie successes usually come from unexpected sources rather than marquee moves.

(See: Cristobal Huet vs. Antti Niemi for the most lucrative example.)

  1. fourfeatherfury - Feb 15, 2012 at 8:36 PM

    This is exactly what this conversation needed: rationality.

    • 1943mrmojorisin1971 - Feb 15, 2012 at 8:50 PM

      Exactly. It amazes me that we’ve reached the point that when a guy like Kane or Miller has his first down year or their teams are struggling everyone immediately thinks trade.

  2. sknut - Feb 15, 2012 at 8:38 PM

    This just seems to be a reaction to having a bad stretch, there would no shortage of suitors if they were to dangle Kane but it would have to be an overwhelming offer to move him.

    Love the Daze-Zhamnov reference, I also remember that Arnson-Bell-Calder were supposed to lead the Hawks back to the playoffs. Oh the dark days at the United Center are long gone now.

    • James O'Brien - Feb 15, 2012 at 10:07 PM

      Oof, Arnason. Chicago’s come a ridiculously long way.

  3. buffalomafia - Feb 15, 2012 at 9:28 PM

    Why doesnt Chicago trade for Montreals Price?

    • 1943mrmojorisin1971 - Feb 15, 2012 at 10:05 PM

      Montreal will probably pay Price to stay…and drug laws are a lot more lax in Canada than the US.

  4. gretzkyoneyzermantwo - Feb 15, 2012 at 10:29 PM

    Oh well if a columnist says no then it’s a no.

    Score an important goal two years ago and lets forget about the problems the Hawks have had ever since.

    Hawks have a miserable past so accept the flaws of Kane, forget where the team is lacking and keep covering up his flaws.

    Allow him to finish out his contract and pay him the 5 million per he will be seeking and be stuck with him while not having the cap space to fix the problems that are there and he helps create.

    Funny how the Wings and Bruins do not have a single player that is like Kane getting more than 15 mins per game.

    Pat Kane couldn’t make the Red Wings, he would be a healthy scratch until shipped outta town under Bowman or Babcock, they wouldn’t allow a player like him on the ice much until he knew how to be responsible and effective at both ends.

    But what would the Wings, Bruins, and Roenick know? a local columnist thinks differently at thats that.

  5. asublimeday - Feb 16, 2012 at 1:12 AM

    It would be infuriating if they traded Kane.

  6. monarch897 - Feb 16, 2012 at 9:56 AM

    There are many other tradable commodities within the Blackhawk organization to consider.

    The new acquisitions haven’t panned out as expected for the Hawks and that is why they are suffering.

    The fact that Kane is having an off year only amplifies this.

Sign up for Fantasy hockey

Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. J. Quick (1229)
  2. B. Schenn (1110)
  3. N. Horton (1006)
  4. R. McDonagh (986)
  5. B. Bishop (958)