HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Chicago-Boston

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-20-2012, 03:34 PM
  #76
Oates2Neely
Registered User
 
Oates2Neely's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: BeanTown
Country: Azores
Posts: 8,228
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
What people aren't considering here is the posibility that Hamilton becomes just a decent 2nd pairing D-man. I mean, I like the guy a lot, but the Hawks definitely take a big risk in this deal.
Very true. But with Kane Boston would be acquiring a career 25 goal, 73 point winger. Giving up their top line center, and top defensive prospect is a huge gamble for a winger who is very good but not great. Hamilton could infact become a 2nd pairing dman, OR he could fulfill his potential & become Bostons version of Petriangelo.

Krejci is a career 62 point player. He's the teams top playmaking center. He plays both PK & PP. Very responsible defensively. The extra 11 points Kane averages more per season isn't worth giving up Hamilton IMO. Especially IF Hamilton fulfills his potential, that deal would look incredibly lopsided in the future.

Oates2Neely is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 03:34 PM
  #77
Tim Vezina Thomas
Dougie Time
 
Tim Vezina Thomas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,477
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
Would it even matter if he did? Take a look at his career playoff stats, over PPG.
Kane is a great PO performer, but hes also a cool -11 in those games.

Krejci was our best PO performer in our Cup run...take a look at his stats and get back to me. Using his stats in an argument over Krejci is pretty misguided, theyre both great PO performers.

Tim Vezina Thomas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 03:34 PM
  #78
Paradise
Individual thinker
 
Paradise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Waiverpeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
What people aren't considering here is the posibility that Hamilton becomes just a decent 2nd pairing D-man. I mean, I like the guy a lot, but the Hawks definitely take a big risk in this deal.
Us Boston fans are willing to take that risk, as I'm sure Chia is also. If he doesn't develop how most of us hope he will (top pairing), then so be it. We'd rather risk him not developing than trading him and have him develop into a top pairing d-man.

Paradise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 03:39 PM
  #79
Oates2Neely
Registered User
 
Oates2Neely's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: BeanTown
Country: Azores
Posts: 8,228
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
Would it even matter if he did? Take a look at his career playoff stats, over PPG.
Yes it matters. Assuming the debate is still Kanes value = Krejci + Hamilton.

Career Playoff Points:

Kane
Games Played: 51, Points: 52

Krejci
Games played: 59, Points: 47

Kane's average is better, but "include Hamilton in the deal" better? No.

edit*

FWIW, Cory Perry has 88 points in 59 playoff games.

Oates2Neely is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 03:40 PM
  #80
Chris Hansen
Versteeg's Concubine
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,395
vCash: 500
Only on HFboards does Patrick Kane not have a massive amount more trade value than David Krejci. This site never fails to make me laugh.

Chris Hansen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 03:43 PM
  #81
Tim Vezina Thomas
Dougie Time
 
Tim Vezina Thomas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,477
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
Only on HFboards does Patrick Kane not have a massive amount more trade value than David Krejci. This site never fails to make me laugh.
Krejci was on pace for 64 points last season...Kane got 66 points in 82 games.

Please explain to me how Kane has a "massive amount more trade value"

Tim Vezina Thomas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 03:47 PM
  #82
IrishPaulie
Sooshii is AWESOME!!
 
IrishPaulie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Woostah
Country: Ireland
Posts: 4,821
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to IrishPaulie
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
What people aren't considering here is the posibility that Hamilton becomes just a decent 2nd pairing D-man. I mean, I like the guy a lot, but the Hawks definitely take a big risk in this deal.
What you aren't considering is Chara's age and the fact Boston has 0.0 D prospects after Dougie that don't look to be anything more than bottom pairing NHLers. He may be "just an unproven prospect" but he is also currently the consensus top defensive prospect outside of the NHL who projects to be a #1/#2 two-way PP QB that Boston has been looking for for the last 5 years. He means more to Boston than a lot of teams and there's a reason why B's fans cling to him like an NRA member clings to their shotguns.

IrishPaulie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 03:47 PM
  #83
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
Only on HFboards does Patrick Kane not have a massive amount more trade value than David Krejci. This site never fails to make me laugh.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Vezina Thomas View Post
Krejci was on pace for 64 points last season...Kane got 66 points in 82 games.

Please explain to me how Kane has a "massive amount more trade value"
Out of all of the guys we have / had, Kane was never one of my favoites on the team, and it is nothing against him, I just love Toews, Bolland, Sharp, Hossa, Seabrook, even Crawford though he has something to prove now. But after reading all of this ******** about Kane because he had a subpar year, he's becoming one of my favorites and I am rooting hard for him to get back to where he usually is as a player.

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 03:50 PM
  #84
Tim Vezina Thomas
Dougie Time
 
Tim Vezina Thomas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,477
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
Out of all of the guys we have / had, Kane was never one of my favoites on the team, and it is nothing against him, I just love Toews, Bolland, Sharp, Hossa, Seabrook, even Crawford though he has something to prove now. But after reading all of this ******** about Kane because he had a subpar year, he's becoming one of my favorites and I am rooting hard for him to get back to where he usually is as a player.
So whats a "par" year for him? Are we calling his 88 point season his typical season? Or the other four years where he was 73 points and under (which just so happens to be Krejci's highest point total.

No one is suggesting theyre worth the same, thatd be moronic, but its not as big as youre making it out to be.

Tim Vezina Thomas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 03:52 PM
  #85
DisgruntledHawkFan
Moderator
 
DisgruntledHawkFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 25,542
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to DisgruntledHawkFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Vezina Thomas View Post
Krejci was on pace for 64 points last season...Kane got 66 points in 82 games.

Please explain to me how Kane has a "massive amount more trade value"
Because 66 points is an outlier from his norm. And it's still better then Krejci's average.

I'm not saying the trade makes sense for Boston. Honestly, with our blueline it doesn't make too much sense for Chicago. I'm just saying that some - NOT YOU - Boston posters are saying the offer is laughable when in all reality the value is pretty damn close.

I'd LOVE Krejci in the Indian Head. I really would. But moving him for Kane makes us weaker in the short term, and we're hardly a rebuilding team. And if we were, we probably wouldn't be looking to move a franchise player that is 23 years old.

DisgruntledHawkFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 03:52 PM
  #86
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Vezina Thomas View Post
So whats a "par" year for him? Are we calling his 88 point season his typical season? Or the other four years where he was 73 points and under (which just so happens to be Krejci's highest point total.

No one is suggesting theyre worth the same, thatd be moronic, but its not as big as youre making it out to be.
PPG is par. That 73 was a PPG season and I call it par, average, whatever you want to call it. Kane is a PPG player as is and could easily become a 90-100 point player.

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 03:52 PM
  #87
Chris Hansen
Versteeg's Concubine
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Vezina Thomas View Post
Krejci was on pace for 64 points last season...Kane got 66 points in 82 games.

Please explain to me how Kane has a "massive amount more trade value"
Kane played with a wrist injury all year, missed training camp and preseason, and played 50 games out of position at center instead of wing.
He's also a good deal younger.

Just a year ago, people would have been laughing at this thread. But right, I forgot - isn't this the forum that says Ovechkin isn't very good anymore? I need to stop being surprised by these things.

Chris Hansen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 03:53 PM
  #88
DisgruntledHawkFan
Moderator
 
DisgruntledHawkFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 25,542
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to DisgruntledHawkFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Vezina Thomas View Post
So whats a "par" year for him? Are we calling his 88 point season his typical season? Or the other four years where he was 73 points and under (which just so happens to be Krejci's highest point total.

No one is suggesting theyre worth the same, thatd be moronic, but its not as big as youre making it out to be.
I'd say a mid 70's point season is his current norm with the fact that he's 23 and has a ton of potential to do better making him more valuable. I expect him to be a 80-95 point player in his prime.

DisgruntledHawkFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 03:57 PM
  #89
Oates2Neely
Registered User
 
Oates2Neely's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: BeanTown
Country: Azores
Posts: 8,228
vCash: 500
Perry
-----
Kane
-----
Krejci


I'll start by saying imo Kane is more valuable than Krejci. I will also say Perry is more valuable than Kane. So if Hawk fans suggest Boston needs to add Hamilton to Krejci in order to acquire Kane, what would Chicago need to add to Kane in order to aqcuire Perry?

Oates2Neely is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 03:59 PM
  #90
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
Perry is my favorite player not on the Hawks but he only has 1 year left on his deal so they would add nothing.

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 04:00 PM
  #91
Oates2Neely
Registered User
 
Oates2Neely's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: BeanTown
Country: Azores
Posts: 8,228
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
Kane played with a wrist injury all year, missed training camp and preseason, and played 50 games out of position at center instead of wing. He's also a good deal younger.

Just a year ago, people would have been laughing at this thread. But right, I forgot - isn't this the forum that says Ovechkin isn't very good anymore? I need to stop being surprised by these things.
2 years younger = "good deal younger"?

Oates2Neely is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 04:03 PM
  #92
Chris Hansen
Versteeg's Concubine
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oates2Neely View Post
2 years younger = "good deal younger"?
Krejci's 26, Kane's 23. Given the tendency for forward's best years to be anywhere between 22-23 and 30 years of age, it's a fairly significant difference. So yes, a good deal younger.

Chris Hansen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 04:04 PM
  #93
Chris Hansen
Versteeg's Concubine
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oates2Neely View Post
Perry
-----
Kane
-----
Krejci


I'll start by saying imo Kane is more valuable than Krejci. I will also say Perry is more valuable than Kane. So if Hawk fans suggest Boston needs to add Hamilton to Krejci in order to acquire Kane, what would Chicago need to add to Kane in order to aqcuire Perry?
Nothing. Kane is almost four years younger than him.

Chris Hansen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 04:05 PM
  #94
Tim Vezina Thomas
Dougie Time
 
Tim Vezina Thomas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,477
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledHawkFan View Post
Because 66 points is an outlier from his norm. And it's still better then Krejci's average.

I'm not saying the trade makes sense for Boston. Honestly, with our blueline it doesn't make too much sense for Chicago. I'm just saying that some - NOT YOU - Boston posters are saying the offer is laughable when in all reality the value is pretty damn close.

I'd LOVE Krejci in the Indian Head. I really would. But moving him for Kane makes us weaker in the short term, and we're hardly a rebuilding team. And if we were, we probably wouldn't be looking to move a franchise player that is 23 years old.
Average point totals isn't a good way to look at it, maybe the last three or so years is a good barometer because its more recent, but are you really factoring rookie years in here? Is Kane the same player he was his rookie year? Of course not.

Of course Kanes 66 point is an outlier from his norm, no question. But by no means is he a 90-100 point player, I could use the same "outlier from his norm" comment with the 88 point season as well, dont you think? I think he'll round out as a PPG player...75-85 points a season.

Trade is definitely not laughable, but I think the value is more from Boston. No one in Boston would be surprsied if krejci put up 70+ point again, he did it in his first full season why cant he do it in his prime? Thats all im saying.

I'd love Kane on the Bruins as well, but NOT at that expense. Krejcis a proven playoff performer in this system, plays center in this system perfectly and is a great two way center. Would you trade a 26 year old 65-75 point center who has proven success and the best defense prospect in the world (a position youre very very weak at organizationally) for a largely offensive player who might not be able to produce more than the person you gave up? Not so sure.

Kane > Krejci tho ... for anyone who says i think otherwise

Tim Vezina Thomas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 04:08 PM
  #95
Oates2Neely
Registered User
 
Oates2Neely's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: BeanTown
Country: Azores
Posts: 8,228
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
Krejci's 26, Kane's 23. Given the tendency for forward's best years to be anywhere between 22-23 and 30 years of age, it's a fairly significant difference. So yes, a good deal younger.
Kane turns 24 this november (before/ during regular season)

Krejci turns 27 next april (after regular season)

My calculator says "4 yrs younger" is a tad off. During this upcoming regular season (if there is one) Kane will be playing the entire season at age 24. Krejci will be playing at age 26.

Oates2Neely is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 04:13 PM
  #96
Tim Vezina Thomas
Dougie Time
 
Tim Vezina Thomas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,477
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
Nothing. Kane is almost four years younger than him.
Kane is turning 24 in November, Krejci will be 26 until next april.

2 and a half is a tad more accurate dont ya think?

Unless you mean Perry, of course.

Tim Vezina Thomas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 04:37 PM
  #97
Chris Hansen
Versteeg's Concubine
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oates2Neely View Post
Kane turns 24 this november (before/ during regular season)

Krejci turns 27 next april (after regular season)

My calculator says "4 yrs younger" is a tad off. During this upcoming regular season (if there is one) Kane will be playing the entire season at age 24. Krejci will be playing at age 26.
Difference in seasons relative to age is 3 - beyond that, this argument is rather silly. Yes, I am aware they were not born a perfect 1095 days apart.

Chris Hansen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 04:38 PM
  #98
Chris Hansen
Versteeg's Concubine
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Vezina Thomas View Post
Kane is turning 24 in November, Krejci will be 26 until next april.

2 and a half is a tad more accurate dont ya think?

Unless you mean Perry, of course.
Yeah, I was responding to a post about Perry. Again, the difference in seasons relative to the players' ages is in this case 4, even though Kane and Perry were obviously not born exactly 4 years apart.

Chris Hansen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 04:54 PM
  #99
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,235
vCash: 500
In what world is Perry more valuable than Kane.

Kane is younger
Kane is signed for 3 more years - Perry 1
Kanes points per game is higher
Perry has had 1 season in which he had better totals than Kane.

Anaheim would add to a deal involving Kane and Perry.

Hawkaholic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 05:05 PM
  #100
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
Maybe , I don't know, I don't value guys with one year left even close to what they'd be with multiple years, but Perry is better.

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:14 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.