Bur14Kes17 Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 Disclaimer: I've been against every Evander Kane trade proposal to date, but now I'm starting to wonder if Benning knew better When Evander Kane came back from injury, he went through his first 5 games without a point. Since that time, including tonight, he now has 18 G 10 A for 28 Pts in 38 GP. That's good enough for 4th on the Canucks roster with 17 less games played, and at a .73 PPG pace works out to a 60 pt season and around 38 Goals. That's without mentions the fast physical hard hitting in your face brand he would bring that we have almost none of. obviously how CDC feels about Kane isn't going to change what Jim Benning is going to do, but when you look at the type of season Evander is now putting together in Buffalo, does that change how you feel about him and even the amount of trust you have in Bennings ability to judge talent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 Wow! 100% hate the guy, and don't want him here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silky mitts Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 Would want him here , need more cocky players Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockhart Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 No, I don't want a fast, physical forward who would be our leading scorer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 The Canucks can't afford him now. Also, as said in the other Kane thread, he becomes a UFA after next season. So after next season, he'll go for "free" to the highest bidder for his services. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bur14Kes17 Posted February 12, 2017 Author Share Posted February 12, 2017 1 minute ago, SabreFan1 said: The Canucks can't afford him now. Also, as said in the other Kane thread, he becomes a UFA after next season. So after next season, he'll go for "free" to the highest bidder for his services. Hindsight is 20/20 but I would have rathered have Kane now and when his contract expires, give him Eriksons contract which to date is looking very regrettable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 I think Bear and Granlund can provide what Kane would on the scoresheet with a lot less BS. We don't really need him anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 Voted "no" because Kane's play of late doesn't surprise me. He's basically being the player I was expecting (which is the reason I had interest in him even with all the off ice stuff). Where my opinion has changed is in what I'd expect his price tag to be. At the worst moments of his criminal case, I felt a trade could be very good value (if a trade was even available at that time). At this point though, I don't see us having the assets (to spare) that would be required to make a deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 Just now, Bur14Kes17 said: Hindsight is 20/20 but I would have rathered have Kane now and when his contract expires, give him Eriksons contract which to date is looking very regrettable. With his off-ice problems, he's a tough decision for any GM to make. For the Canucks though he's too expensive. The Sabres' biggest need is a young (20-25 y.o.) left handed top 4 d-man. Since the Canucks don't have one of those, they would need to part with other things which they cannot afford. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 Just now, SabreFan1 said: With his off-ice problems, he's a tough decision for any GM to make. For the Canucks though he's too expensive. The Sabres' biggest need is a young (20-25 y.o.) left handed top 4 d-man. Since the Canucks don't have one of those, they would need to part with other things which they cannot afford. Hutton? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 1 minute ago, Alflives said: Hutton? His value doesn't equal Kane's right now. He'd be Top 4 on the Sabres' below average defence but right now he's not a true NHL top 4 overall d-man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaBamba Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 We need him as much as this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shazzam Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 If he wants to come home via UFA on a reasonable contract then sure, especially if the Sedins are coming off the books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jiggs50 Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 Want him cause he's so talented but Canucks probably couldn't handle him and Virtanen lol. Plus Buf asking price is way too high Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 No reason to bring a guy with character issues into a young lineup led by a bad coach. Vrbata was bad enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cripplereh Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 Nope not at all he is injury prone and that is something we do not need anymore of Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 Only way I'd take him on the team is as a UFA. Wouldn't give up assets for him. And even then, it depends on how much he's asking for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinny in Vancouver Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 47 minutes ago, Alflives said: Hutton? Maybe the Hutton at the end of last season. The Hutton of this season is not looking like a top-4 D-man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabcakes Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 46 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said: His value doesn't equal Kane's right now. He'd be Top 4 on the Sabres' below average defence but right now he's not a true NHL top 4 overall d-man. Agreeing with this assessment. Right now, Hutton is a 5D. He'll come around and have a nice career as a 3/4 D. Just not now and is therefore not a match is a trade for Kane the way he has played. Benning doesn't need the headaches. He's another Kassian off the ice imo. No thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-AJ- Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 I didn't want him when he was doing well either. We have a locker room full of character guys and Kane would be out of place if he were to come here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.