PDA

View Full Version : Article: Lazerus: Hawks Could Revisit Trading Patrick Kane in Offseason



Phil in Absentia
11-05-2015, 05:33 PM
Of course, the biggest question moving forward is, do the Hawks trust Patrick Kane anymore?

And it doesn’t really matter what anybody says about that one. Actions will speak louder than words.

One team source said Thursday that Hawks brass is still quite angry with Kane for putting himself and the team in this position, and will reassess the situation — and Kane’s standing with the team — after the season. Only Kane and his accuser know what exactly happened that night, but as another team source put it earlier in the week, when it was first reported that Sedita was not going to file charges, “Even the best-case [scenario] here is pretty bad.”

The Sun-Times first reported on Sept. 2 that at least five teams told the Hawks they’d be interested in trading for Kane should the team feel the need to cut ties with its superstar winger. The Hawks have not actively shopped him, but the option remains on the table — especially now that Kane has been cleared of charges — if they believe the risk of keeping Kane is higher than the reward.

It almost certainly won’t happen during the season, and a league source said it was unlikely to happen at all. But given the fact that the Hawks essentially gave Kane a zero-tolerance ultimatum following his very public drunken escapade in Madison in May of 2012, and given the Hawks’ continuing salary-cap woes, it’s something the Hawks will at least discuss internally following the season, per the first team source.

http://chicago.suntimes.com/sports/7/71/1076817/actions-will-speak-louder-words-patrick-kane-blackhawks

Vodka Drunkenski
11-05-2015, 05:41 PM
Nash straight up

phillyb™
11-05-2015, 05:45 PM
Nash straight up

sure

Vodka Drunkenski
11-05-2015, 05:57 PM
sure

We'll throw in some wing sauce to take back to Chicago for you

Mike
11-05-2015, 06:05 PM
I'm not saying it isn't true, because it very well might be, and Chicago has all the right in the world to be angry. With that said, why put added pressure on a superstar player that they rely heavily on for success? I'm sure they're upset, and have had their words with Kane, but to dangle the trade stuff now seems odd to me.

Vodka Drunkenski
11-05-2015, 06:08 PM
He should ask for a trade at this point if it's true

Mike
11-05-2015, 06:30 PM
I understand their position, and how serious they want to be taken. I don't feel bad for Kane at all, but I'm sure he's been through a lot with this mentally, so why fuck with his head even more. Again, I'm looking at this from management's view, and by no means do I think they should take this lightly. Say your peace, and end it, or trade him now. Don't let your star player have more weight on him than neccessary.

Pete
11-05-2015, 07:05 PM
I'm just wondering what if Kane didn't do anything...Wasn't drunk, took the girl home, banged her...She regretted it or saw him as a mark...

And everyone's all pissed off and he didn't do anything.

Mike
11-05-2015, 07:19 PM
I'm just wondering what if Kane didn't do anything...Wasn't drunk, took the girl home, banged her...She regretted it or saw him as a mark...

And everyone's all pissed off and he didn't do anything.
Very possible. Was there ever a report from witnesses that stated he was drunk in the bar?

Shane Falco
11-05-2015, 07:46 PM
Would trade any combo of players we got for him. Hope the Rangers are one of the five teams

So Nashty
11-05-2015, 07:49 PM
Would trade any combo of players we got for him. Hope the Rangers are one of the five teams

Don't think there is a single player on this team that I wouldn't trade to get Kane. Maybe Hank.

Kevin
11-06-2015, 10:30 AM
I'm still in the minority here. If a team that has such an unbelievable track record of winning like the Blackhawks do wants to cut bait with a player because they don't trust that he can stay out of trouble, why would we blow up our winning team to take him on? I don't question Kane's talent or abilities in the playoffs but I can't imagine risking everything on a person that can't keep himself out of trouble. And I get that this woman maybe made the whole thing up. He still is not putting himself in good situations. And you want to bring him to NYC?

AmericanJesus
11-06-2015, 10:53 AM
I'm not saying it isn't true, because it very well might be, and Chicago has all the right in the world to be angry. With that said, why put added pressure on a superstar player that they rely heavily on for success? I'm sure they're upset, and have had their words with Kane, but to dangle the trade stuff now seems odd to me.

Guy put up 18 points in 13 games with possible rape prosecution hanging over his head. Seems like this kind of thing is rocket fuel for Kane. I'd put a couple of dead hookers in his hotel room when he's out at dinner while on the road. He might finish the season with 200 points.

phillyb™
11-06-2015, 11:04 AM
I'm still in the minority here. If a team that has such an unbelievable track record of winning like the Blackhawks do wants to cut bait with a player because they don't trust that he can stay out of trouble, why would we blow up our winning team to take him on? I don't question Kane's talent or abilities in the playoffs but I can't imagine risking everything on a person that can't keep himself out of trouble. And I get that this woman maybe made the whole thing up. He still is not putting himself in good situations. And you want to bring him to NYC?

yes

Vodka Drunkenski
11-06-2015, 11:40 AM
I'm still in the minority here. If a team that has such an unbelievable track record of winning like the Blackhawks do wants to cut bait with a player because they don't trust that he can stay out of trouble, why would we blow up our winning team to take him on? I don't question Kane's talent or abilities in the playoffs but I can't imagine risking everything on a person that can't keep himself out of trouble. And I get that this woman maybe made the whole thing up. He still is not putting himself in good situations. And you want to bring him to NYC?

Absolutely

Phil in Absentia
11-06-2015, 11:50 AM
It's easy to say you want Kane here. A lot harder when you have to offer up what you'd be willing to part with to get him.

The Hawks are a cap ceiling team, so the standard Nash for Kane isn't going to work.

They're much more likely going to want at least one first round pick, as well as whomever you feel is the Rangers top prospect (Skjei? Buchnevich?) on top of an NHL-now forward they can insert into their lineup to alleviate the loss of Kane. Kreider? Miller? Zuccarello?

Kevin isn't wrong to warn you'd be blowing up a portion of the team to get him.

phillyb™
11-06-2015, 11:53 AM
i was about to post some dumb shit and then looked up kane's contract. 10.5m - YUCK.
he justifies it with his play, but that's a hard pill to swallow.
i don't want to "blow up the team" to get kane.
nash plus another 3m is what it'd take just salary wise.
that means nash + zuc (or something like that) = fuck that.

Vodka Drunkenski
11-06-2015, 01:22 PM
Kane - 116GP 48G 66A 114P
Zuc & Nash - 103GP 16G 38A 54P

Kane 26 y/o
Zuc 28 y/o
Nash 31 y/o

Hank isn't getting any younger, the time is now IMO. If a deal for Kane came along, I would certainly go for it. Not saying it would but I wouldn't shrug it off so easily.

Phil in Absentia
11-06-2015, 01:49 PM
I'm not saying shrug it off either. I'm saying it's gonna cost a lot more than you think. It's Patrick fucking Kane we're talking about here.

Kevin
11-06-2015, 04:10 PM
We've all seen the Rangers go out and bring in the top named person in years past. How many of them have worked out to our level of expectation besides Jagr? To go out and trade for a guy that has the talent level of Kane would be very costly. I would definitely take the chance on a guy like him if he didn't have the off-ice issues. But Kane himself? Can you imagine the backlash the organization would feel if they pulled off a major trade to get him and then he got suspended for a length of time or, worse, arrested? I just don't think the Rangers would open themselves up to that level of risk.

Kevin
11-06-2015, 04:13 PM
Kane - 116GP 48G 66A 114P
Zuc & Nash - 103GP 16G 38A 54P

Kane 26 y/o
Zuc 28 y/o
Nash 31 y/o

Hank isn't getting any younger, the time is now IMO. If a deal for Kane came along, I would certainly go for it. Not saying it would but I wouldn't shrug it off so easily.

The talent is unquestioned. It's the other stuff. And that stuff is so frightening that you have a perennial Stanley Cup contender possibly contemplating unloading him.

Pete
11-06-2015, 06:04 PM
The talent is unquestioned. It's the other stuff. And that stuff is so frightening that you have a perennial Stanley Cup contender possibly contemplating unloading him.
Notice the issues his whole career... And they're unloading him after multiple Cups, when they are cap strapped... How convenient.

Phil in Absentia
11-06-2015, 06:13 PM
Well, they did re-sign him to an $80M+ extension, so they clearly saw a future there. I just think what Lazerus is saying is that from what he's being told, that future was contingent upon him being on his best behavior. And regardless of whether he did or didn't rape that woman, the fact that the image-conscious Hawks had their name drug through the mud, again, because of Kane, again, they're pissed, and are potentially re-thinking his future there.

The fact they have multiple Cups and had him through so much of his early prime years is just a bonus.