Trade Rumors and Free Agent TalkTrade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.
Plekanec, Gorges, 2012 2nd, Weber for Kane, Jimmy Hayes
As the title states, how do fans feel about this one?
Plekanec, Gorges, Weber, 2012 2nd
For
Kane and Jimmy Hayes
Hawks get great 2nd line center, top defensive d-man, young developing d-man, 2012 2nd rounder.
Habs get great young winger with skill, and a young developing winger with size.
Comments?
I don't think this would be a smart move for the Habs. That 2nd rounder is crazy valuable, Kane is neither a center, big, nor a big time goal scorer and he has character issues. Hayes is nothing, a throw in worth as much as Weber.
Pleaknec, Gorges and the 32nd (Jersey will forfeit their pick) for Kane
An (aging) 2C and a good second-pairing defenseman for a 23 year-old, PPG RW? Seems a bit light.
I don't think it is a deal either side does, but it would have to be the 3rd OA + ...
Aging? He is 29 or 30. He is signed to a very good value contract, and he would be killer on your PK as well as centering Hossa and whomever else you put with him. The 3rd overall is not in play since Kane is small, not a center, and my have other issues we must be wary about.
You also forgot about a potential top 4 PMD and the 32nd overall pick.
However, if you do not like the offer we each keep our assets and move on.
Next opinion, please!
Last edited by Drydenwasthebest: 05-16-2012 at 08:25 PM.
Aging? He is 29 or 30. He is signed to a very good value contract, and he would be killer on your PK as well as centering Hossa and whomever else you put with him. The 3rd overall is not in play since Kane is small, not a center, and my have other issues we must be wary about.
You also forgot about a potential top 4 PMD and the 3nd overall pick.
However, if you do not like the offer we each keep our assets and move on.
Next opinion, please!
What?
I called Gorges a "good second pairing defenseman," which I think is a fair characterization. Plekanec is a decent 2C, but the combination isn't enough for Chicago to move Kane--they don't have the scoring depth to do it.
Mostly, though, you might want to re-read your OP. You didn't offer the 3rd overall pick.
2. I'm sorry, but a few booze pics don't completely undercut a player's value. See Richards, Mike; Carter, Jeff.
I don't think he's a good fit in Montreal. I assume he stays in Chicago, or that Buffalo decides to overpay for marketing reasons.
Regardless, there's no value in that deal for Chicago.
I hate comments like that last one. I have been involved in a lot of threads where Hawks fans have made very attractive offers for Plekanec (Morin, McNeil, Jimmy Hayes and a pick, as one example) because he would be their ideal second line center. You guys also need a top defensive d-man, which Gorges is. How is there no value there? Say not enough, maybe, but none at all? That is a bit ignorant, no?
I hate comments like that last one. I have been involved in a lot of threads where Hawks fans have made very attractive offers for Plekanec (Morin, McNeil, Jimmy Hayes and a pick, as one example) because he would be their ideal second line center. You guys also need a top defensive d-man, which Gorges is. How is there no value there? Say not enough, maybe, but none at all? That is a bit ignorant, no?
Didn't meant to offend--I'll tweak my post.
First, I'm not a Blackhawks fan. Perhaps they will feel differently about the proposal.
Second, value is determined by the assets in the deal. Plekanec could, indeed, be an ideal 2C for Chicago, allowing them to shift Kane / Sharp to their preferred positions. But there is no (good) value to the Blackhawks in swapping Kane for a package around Plekanec and Gorges.
As you point out, there might be a match to make between the two teams around Plekanec, but I don't think you can do it around Kane (and Gorges).
I called Gorges a "good second pairing defenseman," which I think is a fair characterization. Plekanec is a decent 2C, but the combination isn't enough for Chicago to move Kane--they don't have the scoring depth to do it.
Mostly, though, you might want to re-read your OP. You didn't offer the 3rd overall pick.
I meant 32nd overall pick. You are right, I didn't, and wouldn't offer the 3rd overall for Kane.
You actually said there was nothing of value in the deal, that is what annoyed me. I have no problem with thinking the value is off and tweaking it, but you clearly stated there was nothing of value in the trade and that was completely wrong.
I would also point out that Plekanec is an elite 2nd line center and a decent 1st line center. He is great defensively and is a leading reason why our PK was top 3 this year.
I wouldn't be interested in that from the Habs' POV. For starters, I wouldn't be interested in Kane. Talented, but too much trouble for the Habs atm. Plekanec and Gorges are huge pieces of the Habs' team. The offensive upgrade of Kane over Plekanec would not be close to enough to offset the defensive hit the team would take in losing Plekanec and Gorges. I don't really care much about the picks/kids around it, the basic premise is not going to help the Habs win games.
First, I'm not a Blackhawks fan. Perhaps they will feel differently about the proposal.
Second, value is determined by the assets in the deal. Plekanec could, indeed, be an ideal 2C for Chicago, allowing them to shift Kane / Sharp to their preferred positions. But there is no (good) value to the Blackhawks in swapping Kane for a package around Plekanec and Gorges.
As you point out, there might be a match to make between the two teams around Plekanec, but I don't think you can do it around Kane (and Gorges).
Say what?
top 6 forwards:
C: Toews, Plekanec
W: Hossa, Sharp, Stalberg + Saad maybe? or a UFA or whatever.
+ a high 2nd rounder (32th, basically a late 1st) + Gorges a really dependable D who would help Blackhawks alot.
You do realize we're hoping Galchenyuk or Grigorenko become has good as Kane already is, yes? We'd do that trade in a nanosecond.
Actually, you are wrong. We want Galchenyuk or Grigorenko to be goal scorers in the 30+ range with size and physicality to provide space for our other players. We are not looking at them as playmaking centers, we are hoping they become goal scoring centers who can crash the net, create space, play physical, hit hard, etc...
So, yes, Kane is very good. No, we do not send the 3rd overall that we need to get a big center for another small skilled winger who only scored 66 points this season on a vastly more offensive oriented team with better offensive stars than Montreal has.
I am willing to send Plekanec ++ for Kane because of how good Kane can be, but we need to get that big center far more than we need Kane. Sorry, the only way the 3rd overall is traded is for one of the big centers who are already in the NHL that we would like to get (dreaming about Eric Staal...sigh...never going to happen...).
my bad. There is a Plekanec to Ducks just under this thread. Pressed on the wrong one. Cut me some slack it's 4.47 am over here 
.
