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
09-22-2012, 12:51 PM
  #126
redsox7327
Registered User
 
redsox7327's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,256
vCash: 500
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.
You took Kane's best season and Krejci's most recent. If you reverse that we get:

73 - 66 = 7. Krejci outscores Kane by 7 in a great year.

redsox7327 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 12:55 PM
  #127
Chris Hansen
VERSTEEG REDEMPTION
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,181
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.
To echo Hawkaholic, I'd slot Hossa into Kovalchuk's spot (he's a natural LW, isn't he?) and that'd be my top-5.

Chris Hansen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 12:57 PM
  #128
Chris Hansen
VERSTEEG REDEMPTION
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by redsox7327 View Post
You took Kane's best season and Krejci's most recent. If you reverse that we get:

73 - 66 = 7. Krejci outscores Kane by 7 in a great year.
A great (no, career) year for Krejci and a terrible year for Kane, yes.

I took a great year for Kane and a likely year for Krejci. Quite a difference.

If you do not see the pretty sizable offensive difference between the two, you're not looking very hard.

Chris Hansen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 01:02 PM
  #129
redsox7327
Registered User
 
redsox7327's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,256
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
A great (no, career) year for Krejci and a terrible year for Kane, yes.

I took a great year for Kane and a likely year for Krejci. Quite a difference.

If you do not see the pretty sizable offensive difference between the two, you're not looking very hard.
I think we both took great and likely years.

I don't see how this past season in which Kane played all 82 games and averaged over 20 minutes a game cannot be considered a likely year.

I do see the offensive difference between the two, but the stats tell me that Kane has averaged 66-73 points in every year he has played except for one. So I consider any point number in that range to be a likely year.

And I'll grant you that the 10-11 season could have been closer to 80 points if he played all 82, but so far that 88 looks more like the outlier than any output in the 66-73 range.

redsox7327 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 01:07 PM
  #130
Chris Hansen
VERSTEEG REDEMPTION
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by redsox7327 View Post
I think we both took great and likely years.

I don't see how this past season in which Kane played all 82 games and averaged over 20 minutes a game cannot be considered a likely year.

I do see the offensive difference between the two. But the stats tell me that Kane has averaged 66-73 points in every year he has played except for one. So I consider any point number in that range to be a likely year.
It's been said already.

-Horrible Chicago PP, largely systemic issues
-Kane playing with wrist injury for the entire season
-Kane playing center for more than half the year (although apparently he should've just sucked it up and put up 150 points according to some people in a different thread)

He was a PPG player (88 in 82 in '10, 73 in 73 in '11) for both of the season prior to this one, but now due to a down year, he's a 65-70 per 82 guy at best, I suppose. I see nothing wrong with that logic - Ovechkin is never scoring 40 goals again, right?

Chris Hansen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 01:15 PM
  #131
Oates2Neely
Registered User
 
Oates2Neely's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: BeanTown
Country: Azores
Posts: 6,793
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
A great (no, career) year for Krejci and a terrible year for Kane, yes.

I took a great year for Kane and a likely year for Krejci. Quite a difference.

If you do not see the pretty sizable offensive difference between the two, you're not looking very hard.
Fact is since both being full time NHLers Kane has averaged 73pts per season thus far in his career, Krejci has averaged 62pts. So there ya go. Kane averages 11 points more per season than Krejci. "Pretty sizable offensive difference"? Depends on who you ask.

I do like how you inserted the word "offensive" in there. mking no mention of Krejci's superior defensive advantage when discussing player values.

Oates2Neely is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 01:41 PM
  #132
Chris Hansen
VERSTEEG REDEMPTION
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oates2Neely View Post
Fact is since both being full time NHLers Kane has averaged 73pts per season thus far in his career, Krejci has averaged 62pts. So there ya go. Kane averages 11 points more per season than Krejci. "Pretty sizable offensive difference"? Depends on who you ask.

I do like how you inserted the word "offensive" in there. mking no mention of Krejci's superior defensive advantage when discussing player values.
Considering defensive proficiency is vastly overrated on here, I figured it would prove to be a pointless distraction.

But two can play at that game, really. So...

"I do like how you inserted the phrase 'full time NHLers' so you wouldn't have to take into account Krejci's 60 game season where he was under 0.5 ppg."


Offense is not solely about points. Kane creates a lot more opportunities for his teammates (and himself) than Krejci does. He is shiftier (although Krejci is great in that regard - I love watching him handle the puck), he is a better passer, has a better shot, is a proven big-game player... he has an advantage over Krejci in every single offensive category there is.

Chris Hansen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 02:01 PM
  #133
Minnesota
Moderator
L'Étoile du Nord
 
Minnesota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Minnesota
Country: United States
Posts: 14,831
vCash: 404
Khudobin is being vastly underrated in this thread.







Minnesota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 02:09 PM
  #134
PatriceBergeronFan
U.S. Army Hooah!
 
PatriceBergeronFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 7,926
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.
Kane will not likely hit 100 points. If he can, who's to say Krejci cannot hit 80+ himself? I mean in all of your arguments here, you seem to allow for some extreme scenario that favors your player, and never gives Krejci much credit.

PatriceBergeronFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 02:12 PM
  #135
PatriceBergeronFan
U.S. Army Hooah!
 
PatriceBergeronFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 7,926
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
Considering defensive proficiency is vastly overrated on here, I figured it would prove to be a pointless distraction.

But two can play at that game, really. So...

"I do like how you inserted the phrase 'full time NHLers' so you wouldn't have to take into account Krejci's 60 game season where he was under 0.5 ppg."


Offense is not solely about points. Kane creates a lot more opportunities for his teammates (and himself) than Krejci does. He is shiftier (although Krejci is great in that regard - I love watching him handle the puck), he is a better passer, has a better shot, is a proven big-game player... he has an advantage over Krejci in every single offensive category there is.
You have to be kidding me! Watch Lucic botch up easy tap in goals from Krejci passes, or Horton unable to unleash his shot in time after a nifty pass from Krejci. I'm no real Krejci fan, but this is a laughable post.

PatriceBergeronFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 02:14 PM
  #136
Chris Hansen
VERSTEEG REDEMPTION
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NathanHortonFan View Post
You have to be kidding me! Watch Lucic botch up easy tap in goals from Krejci passes, or Horton unable to unleash his shot in time after a nifty pass from Krejci. I'm no real Krejci fan, but this is a laughable post.
Yes, poor Krejci, having to play with two reliable 25 goal scorers

What is laughable about it? Kane is better in all of those aspects. Only a Bruins fan would disagree, and even most of them would not.

Chris Hansen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 02:26 PM
  #137
PatriceBergeronFan
U.S. Army Hooah!
 
PatriceBergeronFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 7,926
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
Yes, poor Krejci, having to play with two reliable 25 goal scorers

What is laughable about it? Kane is better in all of those aspects. Only a Bruins fan would disagree, and even most of them would not.
Sure, Kane might be a tad better in some aspects. But why do you care so much to refute everyone's opinion here? Are you a Blackhawks fan? Really, I'm curious. Most would agree Kane is a little better offensively overall than Krejci. As an overall player, Krejci's position and defensive play closes the gap at the very least. So why should we add Hamilton as well to this proposed trade? It's horrible for the Bruins.

You say Kane is easily capable of 95-100 points with a difference of 30+ over Krejci... well if Kane can improve his points total so much, who's to say Krejci won't suddenly become an 80-90 point player too, in this same fantasy world?

PatriceBergeronFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 02:36 PM
  #138
Chris Hansen
VERSTEEG REDEMPTION
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NathanHortonFan View Post
Sure, Kane might be a tad better in some aspects. But why do you care so much to refute everyone's opinion here? Are you a Blackhawks fan? Really, I'm curious. Most would agree Kane is a little better offensively overall than Krejci. As an overall player, Krejci's position and defensive play closes the gap at the very least. So why should we add Hamilton as well to this proposed trade? It's horrible for the Bruins.

You say Kane is easily capable of 95-100 points with a difference of 30+ over Krejci... well if Kane can improve his points total so much, who's to say Krejci won't suddenly become an 80-90 point player too, in this same fantasy world?
Oh, don't get me wrong - I stopped talking about the actual proposal a pretty long while ago. It's become a matter of who has more value and who is better between Krejci and Kane.

I didn't say Kane is easily capable of 95-100 points. But he certainly could do it.

Why won't Krejci become an 80-90 point player? Because he's been the same player for about four years now. His game looks pretty set. Would you deny that?

Kane is younger, more dynamic, and I don't think anyone's going to argue that his offensive ceiling is a good deal higher. Once again, he already has better offensive tools than Krejci in every aspect you can name. He has more to work with, and thus is more likely (far more, I would say) to explode for a huge season.


Yes, I am a Blackhawk fan, arguing that Kane is better than Krejci. Darn, I must be a homer

Chris Hansen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 02:38 PM
  #139
TheRollingPuck
Keep Calm & Corsi On
 
TheRollingPuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Moncton, NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,981
vCash: 500
David Krejci is a good player in his own right, but Patrick Kane he ain't.

TheRollingPuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 03:48 PM
  #140
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,223
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NathanHortonFan View Post
You have to be kidding me! Watch Lucic botch up easy tap in goals from Krejci passes, or Horton unable to unleash his shot in time after a nifty pass from Krejci. I'm no real Krejci fan, but this is a laughable post.
If you want to use that argument, do you know how many times Kane has set up nearly every LW he has ever played with in Chicago and they have completely botched it?

Kane isn't playing with Toews and Sharp every single night.

Stalberg, his most frequent LW last season missed opportunities on a nightly basis.
Brunette, his 2nd most frequent LW, was terrible and missed almost every goal set up by Kane.
Kane also spent quite a bit of time with Carcillo and Kruger as his linemates.

Using Lucic and Horton as examples pales in comparison to the players I just mentioned.

Hawkaholic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 03:57 PM
  #141
Chacal667
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Montreal
Posts: 1,507
vCash: 500
I'm not a bruins fan but I understand them to not approve this deal,

but it would be amazing to see Kane and Seguin together

Chacal667 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-22-2012, 05:13 PM
  #142
Oates2Neely
Registered User
 
Oates2Neely's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: BeanTown
Country: Azores
Posts: 6,793
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
Oh, don't get me wrong - I stopped talking about the actual proposal a pretty long while ago. It's become a matter of who has more value and who is better between Krejci and Kane.

I didn't say Kane is easily capable of 95-100 points. But he certainly could do it.

Why won't Krejci become an 80-90 point player? Because he's been the same player for about four years now. His game looks pretty set. Would you deny that?

Kane is younger, more dynamic, and I don't think anyone's going to argue that his offensive ceiling is a good deal higher. Once again, he already has better offensive tools than Krejci in every aspect you can name. He has more to work with, and thus is more likely (far more, I would say) to explode for a huge season.


Yes, I am a Blackhawk fan, arguing that Kane is better than Krejci. Darn, I must be a homer
WHERE is anybody saying Krejci "has more value" or is "better" than Kane?? The posts i read agree that while Kane holds more value than Krejci, the difference is not so significant that Hamilton would be added. Kane is slightly more valuable than Krejci. 10 to 15 points per season better,

Oates2Neely is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-23-2012, 09:59 PM
  #143
The Dangley One
Dangle dangle goal
 
The Dangley One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 2,650
vCash: 500
Not really sure I want Kane in the same city as the beer and chicken boys

The Dangley One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-23-2012, 10:01 PM
  #144
BostonBob
4 Ever The Greatest
 
BostonBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,062
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ballershotcaller12 View Post
Not really sure I want Kane in the same city as the beer and chicken boys
Don't worry about that - the leader of that group is now in LA.

BostonBob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-23-2012, 10:08 PM
  #145
The Dangley One
Dangle dangle goal
 
The Dangley One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 2,650
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BostonBob View Post
Don't worry about that - the leader of that group is now in LA.
Lackey and is double fistinways is still around

The Dangley One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-24-2012, 05:15 AM
  #146
nmbr_24
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 9,370
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
Oh, don't get me wrong - I stopped talking about the actual proposal a pretty long while ago. It's become a matter of who has more value and who is better between Krejci and Kane.

I didn't say Kane is easily capable of 95-100 points. But he certainly could do it.

Why won't Krejci become an 80-90 point player? Because he's been the same player for about four years now. His game looks pretty set. Would you deny that?

Kane is younger, more dynamic, and I don't think anyone's going to argue that his offensive ceiling is a good deal higher. Once again, he already has better offensive tools than Krejci in every aspect you can name. He has more to work with, and thus is more likely (far more, I would say) to explode for a huge season.


Yes, I am a Blackhawk fan, arguing that Kane is better than Krejci. Darn, I must be a homer
Most Bruins fans are not arguing that Krejci is better than Kane, they are saying some people are really underrating Krejci and the difference between Kane and Krejci is not the best D prospect in the entire league that has not played in the NHL yet.

nmbr_24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-24-2012, 09:19 AM
  #147
Bruinsfan_37
Stanley Cup Champs
 
Bruinsfan_37's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Laval
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,896
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superunknown94 View Post
David Krejci is a good player in his own right, but Patrick Kane he ain't.
No one is saying he is, but the difference will not be as big as Hamilton and Hamer will in the end. I'd pass and keep our own guys

Bruinsfan_37 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-24-2012, 09:30 AM
  #148
Chris Hansen
VERSTEEG REDEMPTION
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmbr_24 View Post
Most Bruins fans are not arguing that Krejci is better than Kane, they are saying some people are really underrating Krejci and the difference between Kane and Krejci is not the best D prospect in the entire league that has not played in the NHL yet.
Yes, I am aware. I was only arguing that Kane is a good deal more valuable than Krejci, because he is. Never mentioned Hamilton (who is apparently the next Bobby Orr, but I digress).

Chris Hansen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-24-2012, 09:52 AM
  #149
Oates2Neely
Registered User
 
Oates2Neely's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: BeanTown
Country: Azores
Posts: 6,793
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
Yes, I am aware. I was only arguing that Kane is a good deal more valuable than Krejci, because he is. Never mentioned Hamilton (who is apparently the next Bobby Orr, but I digress).
He is (10 to 15 points per season better than Krejci).

Boston in this case would keep their top line center who averages 10 to 15 points less than Kane (who apparently is the next Peter Forsberg, but I digress), all while keeping the best defensive prospect in the world on their roster.

Oates2Neely is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-24-2012, 10:10 AM
  #150
bostone737
Registered User
 
bostone737's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,057
vCash: 500
some you guys are being a little over sensitive about Krejci here, Kane is notably better than him, and that's not really a knock on Krejci. (and btw, Davids defensive game is not great, it's average, but he plays on a tight defensive team with good Dmen, for some of you saying his 'defensive game'. If I had a nickel for every goal against the bruins last year where a bruins fan here said, '****ing what is Krejci doing', well I may have a buck)

As for the proposal, IMO, Boston wouldn't do it. I think Krejci is the Bruins most expendable C and could be moved for a good winger, but not at the cost of moving Hamilton too. Dougie is in no way a sure thing, but there is too much optimism surrounding him to ship him off. I also would rather have Khudobin more so than Emery, I think he still has potential where as Emery is a bit of a journeyman now.

Imo, and some of this is obviously based off potential and high hopes

Kane > Krejci
Emery < Khudobin
Hjalmarsson < Hamilton

The value seems pretty close, and the bruins could use a winger, but I don't know if the gap between Kane and Krejci is worth giving up on Khudobin and Hamilton. Switch Hamilton with Krug and a pick and you got a deal.

bostone737 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 08:10 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.