Southpop45 Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 via provies Thursday April 10 "if the jets are really going to trade evander kane, and the odds are still long, the canucks have to be all-in. And not the ray shero "sutter and a couple of sh*tty picks for kesler all-in." "the canucks need to be we're building a package around Bo Horvat our only blue chip prospect all-in" very interesting to hear botch highly support trading for kane even though it would cost us bo. would you guys be okay will trading horvat+ for evander kane. should note that while E. Kane is not having the best of seasons this year he is still a guy who many think will turn into a consistent 40-50 goal scorer in his prime and that he really wants to play for vancouver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tambellini's Wrist Shot Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 If our new GM pulls that trigger I will lose my marbles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watermelons Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 I'm against trading Horvat. Period.Horvat, Shinkaruk, Jensen, Tanev and Lack are going to be important pieces for the franchise going forward.Obviously, to get a player of Kane's caliber, we will need to give up some good assets but I don't want to trade away our prospects. It doesn't look like the Canucks have much chance to win now anyways, why not let our prospects develop together and rebuild through the draft?I know Kane isn't "old" by any means, but he seems redundant in our system. We have guys who can shoot the puck (Kesler, Higgins, Daniel) but we don't have enough elite playmakers to get them the puck. As mentioned by other posters, our team did best when Henrik was on a tear, making great passes everywhere to everyone in December. That's what we need. Playmakers, not more shooters or grinders.That being said, I'd love to have a guy like Kane on the Canucks. But at the price that he will go for, I don't think the Canucks should take the risk. We'd be better off going for a playmaking centre/winger instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimberWolf Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 Terrible idea. What's with these media doofs. They trash on our lack of prospects for years and then push us to trade them away. No we should not put a package with Horvat for Kane. Yes, I am aware that's what it would take but we'd be better off without Kane for that kind of price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merci Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 Horvat is an untouchable. Kesler wants out and Henrik Sedin has 40 points. Please do not trade Horvat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tambellini's Wrist Shot Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 I'm against trading Horvat. Period. Horvat, Shinkaruk, Jensen, Tanev and Lack are going to be important pieces for the franchise going forward. Obviously, to get a player of Kane's caliber, we will need to give up some good assets but I don't want to trade away our prospects. It doesn't look like the Canucks have much chance to win now anyways, why not let our prospects develop together and rebuild through the draft? I know Kane isn't "old" by any means, but he seems redundant in our system. We have guys who can shoot the puck (Kesler, Higgins, Daniel) but we don't have enough elite playmakers to get them the puck. As mentioned by other posters, our team did best when Henrik was on a tear, making great passes everywhere to everyone in December. That's what we need. Playmakers, not more shooters or grinders. That being said, I'd love to have a guy like Kane on the Canucks. But at the price that he will go for, I don't think the Canucks should take the risk. We'd be better off going for a playmaking centre/winger instead. Precisely. Kane is your typical tunnel-vision, fast winger. He picks up speed through the neutral zone and does one of either two things: 1. Tries to drive to the net and usually loses the puck into the corner. 2. Wrister from the wing that never hits the net. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisbanks Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 id trade bo for kane no problem... 1 guy is proven the other isnt.... i would also point out that ryan johansen is a RFA id throw away a bunch of draft picks and sign him to a huge offer sheet...and then trade kesler for some picks and prospects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 We have guys who can shoot the puck besides Kesler? Daniel Sedin? That's funny. I wouldn't give away Horvat though. Probably Hansen, Gaunce, and Stanton does it. All three can be moved. Kane would ignite the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tambellini's Wrist Shot Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 We have guys who can shoot the puck besides Kesler? Daniel Sedin? That's funny. I wouldn't give away Horvat though. Probably Hansen, Gaunce, and Stanton does it. All three can be moved. Kane would ignite the team. I just don't see Kane fitting with the other guys in the room. All the players on the Canucks are professionals on, and off the ice. Kane is a punk who likes to get into fights at nightclubs and not paying his tabs at restaurants. Oh and hits on underage girls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merci Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 We have guys who can shoot the puck besides Kesler? Daniel Sedin? That's funny. I wouldn't give away Horvat though. Probably Hansen, Gaunce, and Stanton does it. All three can be moved. Kane would ignite the team. I'd do our 1st this year, Booth, and Stanton. Hansen is useless and Gaunce is going to be a lot better than he's being given credit for. Kane Kesler Kassian Daniel Henrik Jensen Burrows Horvat Matthias Higgins Santorelli Richardson Hansen Gaunce, Cassels, Shinkaruk, Fox all in the oven to replace Burrows/Daniel/Hansen/Higgins on the depth chart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Sestito Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 Hansen gaunce and Stanton does it? That package is the equivalent of frolik, petan, postma. If we had Kane, do you think that package would pry him away from us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silfverberg Snipes Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 Horvat as a centerpiece for Kane? Done in a heartbeat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tystick Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 Why do we need to go all in for Evander Kane? He gives no reason He just sounds angry and impatient Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Del Rio Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 I would love Kane, but not at the expense of Horvat. Bo Horvat needs to be untouchable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Sestito Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 Also I think it depends on the player we're acquiring re horvat. I'd rather give up a scoring winger prospect like shinkaruk or jensen, while giving them our draft pick if it's past 6 or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 I'm not sure what Winnipeg would even be aiming for in a trade for Kane. They're pretty decent on the backend and have Schiefele already. I'd think they'd be looking for a player similar in Kane's age. Someone like Ryan, Schenn or Skinner as parts of a bigger trade. And there's the rub. They don't need to load up on futures. They need to make the playoffs so any trade they make should be aimed at improving their roster for next season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueLemming Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 So Botchford writes an article about his opinion and suddenly it's a rumor. Not even an original opinion either, this has been suggested by many for a very long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merci Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 I'm not sure what Winnipeg would even be aiming for in a trade for Kane. They're pretty decent on the backend and have Schiefele already. I'd think they'd be looking for a player similar in Kane's age. Someone like Ryan, Schenn or Skinner as parts of a bigger trade. And there's the rub. They don't need to load up on futures. They need to make the playoffs so any trade they make should be aimed at improving their roster for next season. Yea I don't think Kane would like it here anyway. Send him to Cali or NY Damn Schenn is from Sask, that is a good one for one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BananaMash Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 So Botchford writes an article about his opinion and suddenly it's a rumor. Not even an original opinion either, this has been suggested by many for a very long time. It's not even a rumor, it's just his opinion. It's not a very good opinion, but I guess that's expected with Botchford. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
messier's_elbow Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 Lets not trade Horvat, Tanev and a 1st cause thats what it would take. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.