Brooks Rangers Will be in on Patrick Kane

[Long live the King]

7 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Yes, but what else do the Rangers have to offer that adds up to that package? If they can offer up Lafrenière, get retention AND prospects back, it kinda makes sense.

 

The closest thing they have to Tippet is Kravtsov. He's done virtually nothing so far (I think he's going to start lighting it up) and the article states, league interest in him is low. Gotta give to get. You give Lafrenière and you're getting a bit more back.  Not just a Kane rental. 

 

Don't forget Kane wouldn't be the only move needed at the deadline and the wanted salary retention is more or less helpful for adding more pieces, than it is -' just to get Kane here under the cap. They are going to have to spend on a vet D man that can be trusted to take a shift late in the 3rd and possibly slot up incase of an injury. 

 

We don't need retention, and the Hawks are in full rebuild mode when they trade Kane and Toews at the TDL.  What prospects worth anything are they getting rid of?

[The Dude]

6 hours ago, jsm7302 said:

Im keeping Kakko and sending Laf the other way if I had to choose. Tough to even consider it BUT CK and Panarin are going to be the core that goes for it for the next three years. If Laf brings in Kane and we have Kane and Kakko in our top 6, we aren't doing too bad. Sending Kakko slots who into that role? Krav? We are just spinning in circles of developing prospects at that point.

 

Panarin-Chytil-Kane

CK-Zib-Kakko

Goodrow-Trochek-Vesey

Blais-Brodzinski-Krav

 

This makes tons of sense to me.

 

Yes and considering the likelihood Kane can't be brought back next season,  you atleast have Kakko as a piece to have in place as a possible spot filler in the top 6 as a RW.  Next season you backfill Lafrenières spot with Othmann or Cuylle.  Heck maybe even Vesey. 

 

Plus I feel you can get more from Chicago for just Lafrenière alone. Kane, plus prospects, plus retention.  

[LindG1000]

1 hour ago, Pete said:

It's a topic of discussion because first and foremost, you're not right (but instead of that... let's just say I disagree), and second people are allowed to discuss things you don't agree with and guess what? You don't have to participate!

But I just showed that it did, so your hardheadedness doesn't equate to "It doesn't happen because the NHL doesn't operate this way.

 

There could be a mega deal where we get Kane+ for Kakko+. Who the fuck knows.

 

 

Tippett was in his D+4 season when he got moved and so was Patrick (technically he was moved going into his D+5). Neither of those facts changes the point though - players with Laf or Kakko's draft pedigree almost never get dealt at the deadline. The closest thing I can think of in recent memory that isn't Tippett is Erik Brannstrom, maybe? Even that's dicey - he was like a 16th overall dealt in his D+2 for a guy with a guaranteed extension and still hasn't quite figured it out in what's now his D+6 season. 
 

We have, what, 17 years of post-cap deadline deals to peruse? Has it ever happened? As I said, it would be unprecedented to see this kind of thing happen in the NHL. It's the TDL equivalent of offer sheeting a star player - it's the shit we all dream about and it never happens, so I just don't see a reason to entertain it - doubly so when the template for this kind of deal exists, it's been done over and over again, and it's never centered around someone quite as high profile. 

 

Aside from some of the other stuff (why try to blow Chicago's doors off for someone who can basically limit the market to one team if he wanted, or when the group of teams capable of acquiring is so small, or when Chicago's literal worst move is to refuse to trade him, or when there's good reason to believe that Kane's a diminished player from where he was last year and chalking it up to circumstance and attitude is a whole other red flag), I'd be floored if we saw something as substantial as Kane+ for Kakko+ at the deadline - and yes, regardless of who it is or how they've performed, moving a 2nd overall or a 1st overall is a substantial deal. It's the sort of deal you'd be far more likely to see in the offseason (and if it were June of 2022, sure, I'd buy it), but since that's off the table in the Kane sweepstakes, we're left with what usually happens at the TDL. 

[RangersIn7]

29 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Yes, but what else do the Rangers have to offer that adds up to that package? If they can offer up Lafrenière, get retention AND prospects back, it kinda makes sense.

 

The closest thing they have to Tippet is Kravtsov. He's done virtually nothing so far (I think he's going to start lighting it up) and the article states, league interest in him is low. Gotta give to get. You give Lafrenière and you're getting a bit more back.  Not just a Kane rental. 

 

Don't forget Kane wouldn't be the only move needed at the deadline and the wanted salary retention is more or less helpful for adding more pieces, than it is -' just to get Kane here under the cap. They are going to have to spend on a vet D man that can be trusted to take a shift late in the 3rd and possibly slot up incase of an injury. 

It shouldn’t cost Laf, Kakko, or Chytil, to bring in a straight rental. Even if that rental is named Patrick Kane. No disrespect to him, but come on.

 

We are seeing Chytil really turn into something right before our eyes. They were patient. And now it looks to be paying off.

I understand where people are coming from regarding Kakko and LaFreniere. I get it. Super high picks. You’ve expected more. It hasn’t come as of yet. So I get the logic. Just think it’s flawed. 
 

I think if you move on from them, especially for a rental, you’re going to watch them blossom on someone else’s roster. 

[jsm7302]

11 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

It shouldn’t cost Laf, Kakko, or Chytil, to bring in a straight rental. Even if that rental is named Patrick Kane. No disrespect to him, but come on.

 

We are seeing Chytil really turn into something right before our eyes. They were patient. And now it looks to be paying off.

I understand where people are coming from regarding Kakko and LaFreniere. I get it. Super high picks. You’ve expected more. It hasn’t come as of yet. So I get the logic. Just think it’s flawed. 
 

I think if you move on from them, especially for a rental, you’re going to watch them blossom on someone else’s roster. 

I get what you're saying but is the goal to watch Laf blocked for 4 seasons and logjam our LW with Othmann waiting for a shot too or is it to win a Cup now?

 

I want a cup with the ability to compete for a number of years. If Laf fetches Kane and more in a package due to the pedigree then so be it; let's fill the LD role too from this deal 

 

I get where this is sourced from and more but I don't care about five years from now at this point. We went to the ECF last year and have our core under contract for the next four. Let's play our pieces to win a Cup and not just wait around for Laf to turn into JT Miller. The timing is off. Leverage the pick to win a Cup.

Edited December 20, 2022 by jsm7302

[jsm7302]

Seasoning Othmann like we are Laf is more akin to replacing Kreider due to timing of contract and all.

[jsm7302]

Seasoning Othmann like we are Laf is more akin to replacing Kreider due to timing of contract and all.

[Pete]

25 minutes ago, LindG1000 said:

 

Tippett was in his D+4 season when he got moved and so was Patrick (technically he was moved going into his D+5). Neither of those facts changes the point though - players with Laf or Kakko's draft pedigree almost never get dealt at the deadline. The closest thing I can think of in recent memory that isn't Tippett is Erik Brannstrom, maybe? Even that's dicey - he was like a 16th overall dealt in his D+2 for a guy with a guaranteed extension and still hasn't quite figured it out in what's now his D+6 season. 
 

We have, what, 17 years of post-cap deadline deals to peruse? Has it ever happened? As I said, it would be unprecedented to see this kind of thing happen in the NHL. It's the TDL equivalent of offer sheeting a star player - it's the shit we all dream about and it never happens, so I just don't see a reason to entertain it - doubly so when the template for this kind of deal exists, it's been done over and over again, and it's never centered around someone quite as high profile. 

 

Aside from some of the other stuff (why try to blow Chicago's doors off for someone who can basically limit the market to one team if he wanted, or when the group of teams capable of acquiring is so small, or when Chicago's literal worst move is to refuse to trade him, or when there's good reason to believe that Kane's a diminished player from where he was last year and chalking it up to circumstance and attitude is a whole other red flag), I'd be floored if we saw something as substantial as Kane+ for Kakko+ at the deadline - and yes, regardless of who it is or how they've performed, moving a 2nd overall or a 1st overall is a substantial deal. It's the sort of deal you'd be far more likely to see in the offseason (and if it were June of 2022, sure, I'd buy it), but since that's off the table in the Kane sweepstakes, we're left with what usually happens at the TDL. 

You just repeated a bunch of stuff that I already refuted, so I'm not going to keep going back and forth. 

[The Dude]

35 minutes ago, Long live the King said:

 

We don't need retention, and the Hawks are in full rebuild mode when they trade Kane and Toews at the TDL.  What prospects worth anything are they getting rid of?

Doesn't matter. They would be getting Lafrenière. If he's as valuable as you think,  the Rangers could have a pick at any of their prospects. They're rebuilding and would be adding this vaunted 10A,that you are saying don't get moved. 

 

It would be more than a vet deadline trade. It would have to include prospects coming the Rangers way AND retention.  

 

Like I said.  The retention on Kane isn't just to fit Kane under the cap.  It's to make more moves. Like a GOOD vet D man to pair with Schneider.  A player Gallant can trust late in the game, so he doesn't have to shorten the bench and burn out the top 4. 

[RangersIn7]

13 minutes ago, LindG1000 said:

 

Tippett was in his D+4 season when he got moved and so was Patrick (technically he was moved going into his D+5). Neither of those facts changes the point though - players with Laf or Kakko's draft pedigree almost never get dealt at the deadline. The closest thing I can think of in recent memory that isn't Tippett is Erik Brannstrom, maybe? Even that's dicey - he was like a 16th overall dealt in his D+2 for a guy with a guaranteed extension and still hasn't quite figured it out in what's now his D+6 season. 
 

We have, what, 17 years of post-cap deadline deals to peruse? Has it ever happened? As I said, it would be unprecedented to see this kind of thing happen in the NHL. It's the TDL equivalent of offer sheeting a star player - it's the shit we all dream about and it never happens, so I just don't see a reason to entertain it - doubly so when the template for this kind of deal exists, it's been done over and over again, and it's never centered around someone quite as high profile. 

 

Aside from some of the other stuff (why try to blow Chicago's doors off for someone who can basically limit the market to one team if he wanted, or when the group of teams capable of acquiring is so small, or when Chicago's literal worst move is to refuse to trade him, or when there's good reason to believe that Kane's a diminished player from where he was last year and chalking it up to circumstance and attitude is a whole other red flag), I'd be floored if we saw something as substantial as Kane+ for Kakko+ at the deadline - and yes, regardless of who it is or how they've performed, moving a 2nd overall or a 1st overall is a substantial deal. It's the sort of deal you'd be far more likely to see in the offseason (and if it were June of 2022, sure, I'd buy it), but since that's off the table in the Kane sweepstakes, we're left with what usually happens at the TDL. 

This is similar to what I think

 

If you feel like you can deal LaFreniere or Kakko for a player that makes you a fair amount better, right now… ok. I can get behind that. Because then, it’s a hockey trade.

I give you a young, pedigreed, talented kid, with NHL experience who has underperformed thus far, but still clearly has the potential to be a great player for years to come. You give me a vet who can conceivably produce more than one of those kids over the next few seasons. 
 

But that’s not what a Kane deal would be.

He’s a straight rental. You’re only getting 6 weeks of the regular season, plus 8 weeks in the postseason. Max. 
 

Can’t give up one of those kids for a rental. Nor should they.

And I can’t honestly recall when a player like Kakko or LaFreniere went the other way at the deadline for a rent-a-player.

 

 

[RangersIn7]

50 minutes ago, jsm7302 said:

I get what you're saying but is the goal to watch Laf blocked for 4 seasons and logjam our LW with Othmann waiting for a shot too or is it to win a Cup now?

 

I want a cup with the ability to compete for a number of years. If Laf fetches Kane and more in a package due to the pedigree then so be it; let's fill the LD role too from this deal 

 

I get where this is sourced from and more but I don't care about five years from now at this point. We went to the ECF last year and have our core under contract for the next four. Let's play our pieces to win a Cup and not just wait around for Laf to turn into JT Miller. The timing is off. Leverage the pick to win a Cup.

He’s not actually blocked by the players in front of him. If he’s blocked at all, it by the coach. And it’s reasonable to give the proven vets more ice time.

But… The kids have started to really play well together and take a bigger piece of that ice time. I don’t see that trend reversing. 
 

As for getting more from the Hawks… I don’t see that.

Theyre in a full rebuild and the roster isn’t exactly brimming with guys I’d want to bring in that they’d reasonably part with. They’re not likely to trade prospects or picks or young NHL players. That’s what they want to build with. And I don’t see many vets there that legitimately help the Rangers.

 

Not shitting on the idea. Not at all. Just asking… What “other” piece do they have, that they’ll trade, that you want, and that actually helps them over next couple of seasons?

 

Also… what you’re talking about, vis a vis, leveraging the pick to win now… could’ve done that this past summer with Eichel. They didn’t. 
 

I don’t see them trading a kid. Especially for a rental. If at all.

Maybe in a “hockey trade” in the summer . But no. Not at the deadline 

Edited December 21, 2022 by RangersIn7

[LindG1000]

34 minutes ago, Pete said:

You just repeated a bunch of stuff that I already refuted, so I'm not going to keep going back and forth. 

 

[Pete]

10 minutes ago, LindG1000 said:

 

Yeah, nobody likes her either. 

[Pete]

https://www.hawksinsider.com/Patrick-Kane-Blows-Up-After-Hawks-8th-Straight-Loss-190447

 

Quote

Chicago Blackhawks superstar Patrick Kane was held off the scoresheet in last nights 2-4 loss against the Nashville Predators, to make it 8 straight losses for the Blackhawks.

 

Kane had 12 shot attempts, 8 shots on goal, 6 quality scoring chances all by himself, alongside many opportunities setup by his teammates could not finish whatsoever, which can be seen below.

 

It's almost like his point totals are indicative of not playing with really good players...

[torontonyr]

If we hypothetically move forward with this trade, when does it happen?

 

Do we need to wait for the trade deadline to maximize cap flexibility, or is it likely that we pull the trigger sooner to allow the roster to gel?

[RangersIn7]

10 minutes ago, torontonyr said:

If we hypothetically move forward with this trade, when does it happen?

 

Do we need to wait for the trade deadline to maximize cap flexibility, or is it likely that we pull the trigger sooner to allow the roster to gel?

It depends on Kane. 
If he goes to management there and says trade me now and trade me here, then it probably happens quickly. 
 

But most likely it’s not till nearer to the deadline if not day of. 

[jsm7302]

51 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

It depends on Kane. 
If he goes to management there and says trade me now and trade me here, then it probably happens quickly. 
 

But most likely it’s not till nearer to the deadline if not day of. 

As of today, I don't really care if/when it happens. When we looked lost in the woods a couple of weeks ago I felt it couldn't happen soon enough. 

 

I'm totally unsure what to expect here. Team is performing right now; do you mess with that? I don't know.

[Pete]

13 minutes ago, jsm7302 said:

As of today, I don't really care if/when it happens. When we looked lost in the woods a couple of weeks ago I felt it couldn't happen soon enough. 

 

I'm totally unsure what to expect here. Team is performing right now; do you mess with that? I don't know.

Right...Like who comes off PP1 for Kane? Trocheck? Gives it a totally different dynamic, which could be OK.

[RangersIn7]

11 minutes ago, jsm7302 said:

As of today, I don't really care if/when it happens. When we looked lost in the woods a couple of weeks ago I felt it couldn't happen soon enough. 

 

I'm totally unsure what to expect here. Team is performing right now; do you mess with that? I don't know.

I think it does happen. But not till deadline time. 
 

As for messing with stuff… we’ll that’s the key.

 

Im more concerned about them pulling a significant piece off the roster to acquire him, because somehow people everywhere have got it in their heads that a young, talented and established NHL player should go for a rental. 
 

I’d seriously like some of whatever they’re on. 

[josh]

3 hours ago, torontonyr said:

If we hypothetically move forward with this trade, when does it happen?

 

Do we need to wait for the trade deadline to maximize cap flexibility, or is it likely that we pull the trigger sooner to allow the roster to gel?

 A few days before the deadline

 

cap should be fine 

[RichieNextel305]

Deadline is March 3 I believe. I would expect this to happen around then.

 

 

[Blue Heaven]

https://www.tsn.ca/nhl/patrick-kane-update-chicago-blackhawks-1.1901295

 

Quote

 

Chicago Blackhawks forward Patrick Kane left Tuesday's game against the Tampa Bay Lightning and did not return because of a lower-body injury.

After the game, head coach Luke Richardson told reporters Kane took a hit last game and is still feeling it. Richardson added Kane will be examined Tuesday night and an update is expected on Wednesday.

 

 

Quote

The injury came just after TSN Hockey Insider Darren Dreger reported representatives for Kane and fellow pending unrestricted free agent Jonathan Toews would be meeting with the Blackhawks soon to discuss the future of the two franchise icons ahead of the March 3 trade deadline.

 

[Phil]

Seems a bit early for the trade deadline "injury" vacation, but OK.

[Pete]

8 minutes ago, Phil said:

Seems a bit early for the trade deadline "injury" vacation, but OK.

He wouldn't leave in the middle of a game for that.

[BrooksBurner]

I think the Rangers have to wait at least another month before they have the necessary cap space to acquire Kane at 50% plus make a couple of other moves.