Comments on: Roenick says Chicago “can afford to get rid of Patrick Kane”

By: kibbee2545

kibbee2545 — Thu, 16 Feb 2012 04:10:38 +0000

Detroit will take him

By: gbiscottagecheesefatties

gbiscottagecheesefatties — Thu, 16 Feb 2012 02:56:16 +0000

for MN, Harding will be tough to move before the deadline, he will be a free agent this summer…. and why would Fletcher trade his prospects when they are looking like a bottom 5 team and possible draft lottery. Makes no sense

By: blkeskimo1785

blkeskimo1785 — Thu, 16 Feb 2012 01:48:49 +0000

I haven’t been following Chicago closely, but didn’t they switch Kane between the wing and center often this season? Could that have something to do with his poor numbers?

By: danphipps01

danphipps01 — Thu, 16 Feb 2012 01:06:44 +0000

I don’t know why people keep going on about the Kane-for-Miller thing like it’s that or nothing. A lot of teams could benefit from a fast offensive winger who’s great at both passing and scoring. And a lot of teams have backup goalies who are substantially more competent than Corey “Thank God Bryzgalov sucks worse than me” Crawford. Minny, for instance – could add a couple parts in and swing for Harding and Coyle, maybe. New York needs offensive cogs to make it go, though it seems they’re looking for a bigger guy and one who finishes the play more than he sets it up. LA’s got Bernier and Voynov, and their actual roster D has a couple good depth guys. And hey, they need offense. Like, desperately. Let’s see… St. Louis could probably stand to upgrade their forward stock, but I can’t see them giving up either of their goalies for Kane even in a straight one-for-one deal. I’d sooner peg them as one of the bidders for Parise in the offseason than anything. Still, far from out of the question. Florida? They’ve got a decent offense now, but it’s not Cup-run calibre yet. A top-end forward would go a long way, and hey, they’ve got Markstrom.

Point is, a one-for-one Kane-for-Miller deal is probably less than they COULD get if they shopped around a little – but they don’t seem intent on doing that, so it’s kind of a moot point. Whether or not it’s the RIGHT decision, they seem to be more content risking their playoff spot and Q’s job than trading Patrick Kane for desperately-needed back-end stability.

By: buffalomafia

buffalomafia — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 23:57:33 +0000

Kane would be pissed to go to an underachieving team regardless its his home town.

By: realnostalgia

realnostalgia — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 23:42:32 +0000

Too add hockey is more than stats obviously and a lot goes into +/- (teammates and line match ups and whatever you want to add) I just personally don’t think Kane is as much of a one trick pony everyone assumes he is. I personally just don’t think moving a player like Kane would help the franchise.

By: gbiscottagecheesefatties

gbiscottagecheesefatties — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 23:40:52 +0000

it doesn’t make sense to me the Miller / Kane deal. I think Buffalo wins this deal easily due to the players ages. Buffalo would have to ship more than just Miller. (in my eyes) not too much tho, but something

By: realnostalgia

realnostalgia — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 23:33:38 +0000

Yes hockey is way, way more than just points. Kane is not in any means a good two way player but +8 is not bad. You can say that its the players around him and you have an argument but some credit still has to go to Kane. I also could name forwards that most would consider great two way players that have a worse +/- than his but the list is way to long.

I’m not trying to be a homer here either I understand that Kane has his defensive flaws and his inability to hit players but I wouldn’t call him a huge liability.

By: buffalomafia

buffalomafia — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 22:51:55 +0000

@nostaglia guy teams are desperate to win now! I agree with you on Kane’s stats.

By: gretzkyoneyzermantwo

gretzkyoneyzermantwo — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 22:32:17 +0000

Too bad hockey is more than just points and playing with great players.
Once every 4-5 games Kane finishes or makes an attempt to tie up an opponent with a check.
His +/- has been substantially lower than Hossa, Sharp and Toews.
When he is on the ice without the puck he is a liability and that fact gets covered up by the talent of others in most cases.
He is Alexander Semin without the great shot and an English speaking name

By: realnostalgia

realnostalgia — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 22:12:10 +0000

I can’t believe I have to say this again in a three days.

people forget so fast what Kane has accomplished in the past 4 years.

2010-11 – 73 points tied 15th
2009-10 – 88 points tied 9th
2008-09 – 70 points tied 39th
2008-07 – 72 points tied 28th *rookie season* (Calder Trophy)

303 points in his first 4 seasons. That ranks up there in the top 60 of all time.

Yes obviously he is dealable but as a chicago fan I hope this does not happen.

By: buffalomafia

buffalomafia — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 21:26:16 +0000

Kane needs to hit the weight room & then he will be fine!

Miller to Chicago makes them a sure contender.

By: spezzabangsmilfs

spezzabangsmilfs — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 20:37:20 +0000

And he is 100% correct on Coach Q

By: spezzabangsmilfs

spezzabangsmilfs — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 20:36:20 +0000

Been saying it for weeks, massively over-rated and near useless without the puck. He needs to score 40 or have 80 point seasons to justify his one-trick poniness.

Each of the Sedins twins finish and deliver more checks than Kane.