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, 05:11 PM
  #101
PatriceBergeronFan
U.S. Army Hooah!
 
PatriceBergeronFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 7,928
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledHawkFan View Post
Krejci has barely broken sixty twice, and scored 73 once. Kane's career low is 66, with two seasons where is on pace for 80+.

Calling Krejci a 60-70 point player is only acceptable if you're willing to call Kane a 70-80+ point player.
Krejci has broken 60+ points in three of the last four seasons; yes, that is a 60-70 point player.

And Perry >> Kane

PatriceBergeronFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 05:14 PM
  #102
DisgruntledHawkFan
Moderator
 
DisgruntledHawkFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 21,633
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to DisgruntledHawkFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Vezina Thomas View Post
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
Patrick Kane was a 72 point player his rookie season, as an 18 year old.

Three or so seasons? In the past 4 Kane's scores an average of 74.25 points to Krejci's 62.2

Over the last three, it's Kane at 75.67 to Krejci's 58.67.

That said, we've both pretty much said the same thing. We see Kane as a 75-90 point per season player. I see Krejci hovering around sixty points. The value is close, and that's all a number of Hawks fans have insisted. Nobody is downplaying Krejci here, he's the next Plekanec. Coming from me, believe me when I say that's very high praise. I'd love him on Chicago, but if we're sending Patrick Kane the other way, we'd need a hell of a sweetener coming back the other way.

DisgruntledHawkFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 05:15 PM
  #103
DisgruntledHawkFan
Moderator
 
DisgruntledHawkFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 21,633
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to DisgruntledHawkFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by NathanHortonFan View Post
Krejci has broken 60+ points in three of the last four seasons; yes, that is a 60-70 point player.

And Perry >> Kane
Then you'd concede that Kane is, at worst, a 70-80 point player?

DisgruntledHawkFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 05:16 PM
  #104
DisgruntledHawkFan
Moderator
 
DisgruntledHawkFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 21,633
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to DisgruntledHawkFan
If I had to win one game tomorrow, I'd take Perry over Kane. That doesn't make him more valuable considering his contract status and age.

DisgruntledHawkFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 05:54 PM
  #105
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,238
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NathanHortonFan View Post
Krejci has broken 60+ points in three of the last four seasons; yes, that is a 60-70 point player.

And Perry >> Kane
Luongo > Rask

Rask is still more valuable.

Hawkaholic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 07:52 PM
  #106
PatriceBergeronFan
U.S. Army Hooah!
 
PatriceBergeronFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 7,928
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledHawkFan View Post
Then you'd concede that Kane is, at worst, a 70-80 point player?
Sure. So is that ~10 points difference worth the difference in his defensive game versus Krejci's, as well as adding in Hamilton?

I like Kane, but I still wouldn't want to see the B's make this trade!

PatriceBergeronFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2012, 08:16 PM
  #107
DisgruntledHawkFan
Moderator
 
DisgruntledHawkFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 21,633
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to DisgruntledHawkFan
It's ten at worst, and close to thirty at best.

DisgruntledHawkFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-21-2012, 09:24 AM
  #108
Tim Vezina Thomas
Dougie Time
 
Tim Vezina Thomas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 6,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledHawkFan View Post
Patrick Kane was a 72 point player his rookie season, as an 18 year old.

Three or so seasons? In the past 4 Kane's scores an average of 74.25 points to Krejci's 62.2

Over the last three, it's Kane at 75.67 to Krejci's 58.67.


That said, we've both pretty much said the same thing. We see Kane as a 75-90 point per season player. I see Krejci hovering around sixty points. The value is close, and that's all a number of Hawks fans have insisted. Nobody is downplaying Krejci here, he's the next Plekanec. Coming from me, believe me when I say that's very high praise. I'd love him on Chicago, but if we're sending Patrick Kane the other way, we'd need a hell of a sweetener coming back the other way.
Why are u acting as if I think Krejci is more valuable than Kane? I havent said that ever. And your fascination with point averages is kind of ridiculous. Theres more to hockey than what a player averages point wise. Krejci is a better defensive player, a better player at the more important position, and has proven to be successful on OUR team in OUR system.

I would do Krejci for Kane, Kane is a more talented player and worth more, obviosuly, but there is no way in hell I would include Hamilton in that. I don't think Kane is worth Hamilton more than Krejci, if that makes sense.

Plus, we already have Seguin and Marchand, imagine the trouble those three would get into together?

Tim Vezina Thomas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-21-2012, 10:06 AM
  #109
DisgruntledHawkFan
Moderator
 
DisgruntledHawkFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 21,633
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to DisgruntledHawkFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Vezina Thomas View Post
Why are u acting as if I think Krejci is more valuable than Kane? I havent said that ever. And your fascination with point averages is kind of ridiculous. Theres more to hockey than what a player averages point wise. Krejci is a better defensive player, a better player at the more important position, and has proven to be successful on OUR team in OUR system.

I would do Krejci for Kane, Kane is a more talented player and worth more, obviosuly, but there is no way in hell I would include Hamilton in that. I don't think Kane is worth Hamilton more than Krejci, if that makes sense.

Plus, we already have Seguin and Marchand, imagine the trouble those three would get into together?
I've gone out of my way multiple times to tell you I'm not accusing you of this. And I've already stated I understand it isn't a great fit. All I'm saying is that the valuable is close in a vacuum, even if it doesn't work for Boston.

My whole argument is that Kane is absolutely worth a solid two-way 60 point center and a high end prospect. To call that laughable is what I take umbrage with.

DisgruntledHawkFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-21-2012, 10:47 AM
  #110
TurdFerguson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 768
vCash: 500
Really don't like the trade. Hamilton isn't even what we need. And Kane's off ice behavior should be renamed to his off season behavior.

TurdFerguson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-21-2012, 12:17 PM
  #111
Oates2Neely
Registered User
 
Oates2Neely's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: BeanTown
Country: Azores
Posts: 6,797
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledHawkFan View Post
I've gone out of my way multiple times to tell you I'm not accusing you of this. And I've already stated I understand it isn't a great fit. All I'm saying is that the valuable is close in a vacuum, even if it doesn't work for Boston.

My whole argument is that Kane is absolutely worth a solid two-way 60 point center and a high end prospect. To call that laughable is what I take umbrage with.
Well we disagree right there. Kane IMO is only slightly better than a 62 point average center. AND you want Boston to add a bluechip (currently rated the best defensive prospect in the world).. No dice. Your value of Kane & my value of Kane differ slightly. Kane is a wing who averages 73pts...Krejci is a center who averages 62pts. Dougie Hamilton isn't being added for an additional 10 to 15 points at an inferior position.

Oates2Neely is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-21-2012, 01:07 PM
  #112
Tim Vezina Thomas
Dougie Time
 
Tim Vezina Thomas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 6,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oates2Neely View Post
Well we disagree right there. Kane IMO is only slightly better than a 62 point average center. AND you want Boston to add a bluechip (currently rated the best defensive prospect in the world).. No dice. Your value of Kane & my value of Kane differ slightly. Kane is a wing who averages 73pts...Krejci is a center who averages 62pts. Dougie Hamilton isn't being added for an additional 10 to 15 points at an inferior position.
Pretty much how I feel about it. Krejci has proven to be a #1 center on a Stanley Cup winning team, and being the best forward PO performer on that team. I consider him much more than a "60 point center," he does everything. Kills penalties, runs one unit of the PP, and is incredibly defensively responsible...all with adding 60+ points.

I wouldnt call it laughable that Kane could net a 60 point center and a top prospect, I just think Kane is less than what he thinks and Krejci is more than what he thinks.

Kane for Krejci I'd do, Krejci + Hamilton for Kane Id say no in a heartbeat.

Tim Vezina Thomas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-21-2012, 01:56 PM
  #113
handyj
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 136
vCash: 500
As an outside observer with no allegiance to either team, I agree that Boston gets hosed if they have to add Hamilton in this deal. Kane is probably the better player, but if you take everything into account it's a lot closer than everyone (especially Hawks fans) make it out to be.

For starters Krejci is a centerman which gives him slightly higher value. You also have to take into account the fact that he is much more solid defensively, and he can play on both the PP and the PK. It seems like points and goals are given too much credit a lot around here and other skills are ignored.

That being said Kane is probably a bit better and more valuable, but Krejci is an important player on his team as well. And Hawks fans are acting in this thread like they are doing Boston a favour by dealing them Kane, when in actuality the B's are happy with their top six and it's the Hawks that need the centerman. If I'm Boston in this situation I'd tell the Hawks they have to overpay if they want Krejci just because there is no good reason to have to deal him and disrupt team chemistry.

handyj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-21-2012, 03:21 PM
  #114
JetsWillFly4Ever
Registered User
 
JetsWillFly4Ever's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Winnipeg MB.
Country: Canada
Posts: 324
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledHawkFan View Post
It's ten at worst, and close to thirty at best.
Provide something else to this because it looks like complete ******** to me.

edit: those stars could be represented by BS.

Kane's best season is only 35 points better than Krejci's worst, and there could be close to thirty points difference.

hahaha. He hasn't even out scored his worst season by over 30 more than once.

JetsWillFly4Ever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-21-2012, 06:17 PM
  #115
Billdo
Registered User
 
Billdo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Ocean County
Posts: 1,097
vCash: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spitsfan67 View Post
.... wouldn't do all three for Kane, he's elite and a superstar Period.
Not trying to argue here, but what exactly about Kane screams untouchable elite player? Hes averaging 74 points a year, with 25 goals a year. I don't see how that is elite.

Billdo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-21-2012, 06:46 PM
  #116
Chris Hansen
VERSTEEG REDEMPTION
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JetsWillFly4Ever View Post
Provide something else to this because it looks like complete ******** to me.

edit: those stars could be represented by BS.

Kane's best season is only 35 points better than Krejci's worst, and there could be close to thirty points difference.

hahaha. He hasn't even out scored his worst season by over 30 more than once.
Wait, what?

88 - 62 = 26. Given Kane is still pretty young (i.e. not done improving), how is it at all "BS" to say Kane outscores Krejci by 30 in a great year?

Honestly, 30 may have been a tad conservative. If Kane plays to his potential, there's no reason he can't hit 95-100 points. Again, best case scenario for Kane, a 30+ point edge on Krejci is by no means out of the question. Not even close to it.

Chris Hansen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-21-2012, 06:48 PM
  #117
Chris Hansen
VERSTEEG REDEMPTION
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 732DevilsFan View Post
Not trying to argue here, but what exactly about Kane screams untouchable elite player? Hes averaging 74 points a year, with 25 goals a year. I don't see how that is elite.
Elite playmaking, very young, proven big-game player. People really have to stop using Kane's goal totals as an indication of an apparent lack of ability. He's a playmaker, of course he's not going to be lighting it up with 40 each year. Peter Forsberg never had a 30 goal season, for example (no, I am not saying Kane = Forsberg).

His offensive potential is extremely high. He is a top-5 RW at worst, and one of the most dynamic offensive players in the NHL.

(Not directed at you). HF has forgotten all of the above because he had a down year playing 50 games out of position.

Chris Hansen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 12:52 AM
  #118
DisgruntledHawkFan
Moderator
 
DisgruntledHawkFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 21,633
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to DisgruntledHawkFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
Wait, what?

88 - 62 = 26. Given Kane is still pretty young (i.e. not done improving), how is it at all "BS" to say Kane outscores Krejci by 30 in a great year?

Honestly, 30 may have been a tad conservative. If Kane plays to his potential, there's no reason he can't hit 95-100 points. Again, best case scenario for Kane, a 30+ point edge on Krejci is by no means out of the question. Not even close to it.
Krejci can have a really good year, score seventy and still be bested by thirty. Kane is far from a finished product.

DisgruntledHawkFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 12:55 AM
  #119
DisgruntledHawkFan
Moderator
 
DisgruntledHawkFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 21,633
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to DisgruntledHawkFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by handyj View Post
As an outside observer with no allegiance to either team, I agree that Boston gets hosed if they have to add Hamilton in this deal. Kane is probably the better player, but if you take everything into account it's a lot closer than everyone (especially Hawks fans) make it out to be.

For starters Krejci is a centerman which gives him slightly higher value. You also have to take into account the fact that he is much more solid defensively, and he can play on both the PP and the PK. It seems like points and goals are given too much credit a lot around here and other skills are ignored.

That being said Kane is probably a bit better and more valuable, but Krejci is an important player on his team as well. And Hawks fans are acting in this thread like they are doing Boston a favour by dealing them Kane, when in actuality the B's are happy with their top six and it's the Hawks that need the centerman. If I'm Boston in this situation I'd tell the Hawks they have to overpay if they want Krejci just because there is no good reason to have to deal him and disrupt team chemistry.
A bit?

DisgruntledHawkFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 07:31 AM
  #120
Oates2Neely
Registered User
 
Oates2Neely's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: BeanTown
Country: Azores
Posts: 6,797
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledHawkFan View Post
Krejci can have a really good year, score seventy and still be bested by thirty. Kane is far from a finished product.
Krejci can score 65.. Kane can score 70.. But Boston would still have Hamilton on their blueline & this B's fan is more than ok with that.

Oates2Neely is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 07:58 AM
  #121
Ujjy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,149
vCash: 500
How is Kane's value similar to Krejci? If anything Krejci's value is comparable to Sharp's, and even then Sharp's might be a little ahead.

Ujjy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 10:32 AM
  #122
Jack Donaghy
Good God Lemon
 
Jack Donaghy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Somerville MA
Country: United States
Posts: 12,768
vCash: 500
I'd give up Krejci and any other prospect for Kane, but the Bruins have no other defenseman with Hamilton's potential.

Jack Donaghy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 10:33 AM
  #123
IrishPaulie
Sooshii is AWESOME!!
 
IrishPaulie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Woostah
Country: Ireland
Posts: 4,653
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to IrishPaulie
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ujjy View Post
How is Kane's value similar to Krejci? If anything Krejci's value is comparable to Sharp's, and even then Sharp's might be a little ahead.
That's fine and I agree Kane has more value than Krejci (just how much more is debatable). Sharp and Krejci seem about as close as you get but Sharp's NMC/NTC(?) make a deal moot.

Chicago fans need to realize that Boston fans aren't asking for Kane here. There should be some uproar because the value of Dougie Hamilton to the B's is astronomically higher than his league wide value as a blue chip prospect. He represent the one bright spot in the desolate oblivion that is Boston's defensive prospect pool. A top-5 prospect (#1 defensive prospect) in the world. With Chara's age and the fact Boston has to run with Boychuk as their #2 almost any deal surrounding Dougie would be met with an instant hang up unless the deal was unbelievably in Boston's favor.

If Chicago fans want a legitimate talk about Krejci it has to start with Sharp (not my first choice seeing as how he plays the wrong wing) or Hossa. Other than that most prospects are up for grabs besides Dougie. Defensemen are off limits unless one is coming back of near equal value.

IrishPaulie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 12:05 PM
  #124
Leafs For Life*
Nothing
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 6,636
vCash: 500
I see Kane+Hjalmarsson for Krejci+Hamilton fair. Kane is a top 5 RW(St. Loius, Perry, Kovy, Kane, Kessel) and Hjalmarsson is a 2nd line dman, while Hamilton is a top 5 prospect, and Krejci is a 2nd line forward.

Leafs For Life* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 12:30 PM
  #125
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,238
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaffan16 View Post
I see Kane+Hjalmarsson for Krejci+Hamilton fair. Kane is a top 5 RW(St. Loius, Perry, Kovy, Kane, Kessel) and Hjalmarsson is a 2nd line dman, while Hamilton is a top 5 prospect, and Krejci is a 2nd line forward.
I think you forgot Hossa. Kane isnt even the best RW on our team.

Hossa is most certainly better than St. Louis, Kane, and Kessel.

Hawkaholic 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 10:14 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.