Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Rumour] Patrick Kane Trade Talks


Recommended Posts

 

+

 

Quote

“It’s been reported and I think it’s true that Colorado has asked about Kane and I believe the Rangers have too,” Friedman responded. “It’s been a couple of times this year that teams have asked about Kane and I think those two teams have done it and it wouldn’t surprise me if there were more.”

https://www.sportsnet.ca/marek-friedman-the-perfect-eichel-return-for-the-sabres/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, JM_ said:

This serves as an example that we do have some competition when trying to move Miller. NYR can probably get CHI to retain 1/2 on Kane and pay less than we're demanding for Miller. 

the canucks aren't trying to move miller, though. 

  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would the Avs add Kane?  It’s not scoring that is their problem.  He might actually make them worse.  He’s terrible without the puck.  This makes no sense, so is likely smoke.  Avs need a goalie and their top minute guys to play better without the puck.  

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rumoured ask for Kessel starts at a 3rd.  With Arizona potentially willing to retain up to 50 percent.

 

I'd think Kessel would be a boon to the Avs especially having played with Kadri and having incredible success doing it.

 

I can't see Kane going for less than an upgraded version of the return for Tofolli and that may price him out of things

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, JM_ said:

not now, but a month ago it seemed like everything was on the table. 

Until we realized the offers available sucked.

 

Teams can settle for a pending UFA in Giroux and pay a hefty price still to acquire his services. Or they can settle for a one dimensional winger. Even at 50%, he'd cost the same as Miller who's producing at the same pace as Kane while being a strong faceoff man and can play the PK as well. There's no doubt that Miller is still the cream of the crop amongst these players. We have no pressure to move Miller right now either.

 

IMO, Colorado is not really in the running for Miller and maybe kicked the tires on Garland. They're probably using Kane to see if they can get some leverage on a potential Giroux deal.

 

I'd wonder if they'd be interested in Pearson if Pearson is willing to be moved there.

  • Vintage 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

Until we realized the offers available sucked.

 

Teams can settle for a pending UFA in Giroux and pay a hefty price still to acquire his services. Or they can settle for a one dimensional winger. Even at 50%, he'd cost the same as Miller who's producing at the same pace as Kane while being a strong faceoff man and can play the PK as well. There's no doubt that Miller is still the cream of the crop amongst these players. We have no pressure to move Miller right now either.

 

IMO, Colorado is not really in the running for Miller and maybe kicked the tires on Garland. They're probably using Kane to see if they can get some leverage on a potential Giroux deal.

 

I'd wonder if they'd be interested in Pearson if Pearson is willing to be moved there.

I'd like to see a Pearson deal, maybe the Pens? Pearson and Poolman for Marino? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, JM_ said:

I'd like to see a Pearson deal, maybe the Pens? Pearson and Poolman for Marino? 

Pens would love that deal!  I would think they would want us to take Kapanen too though.

Dickinson + Poolman + Pearson for Kapanen + Marino.

That's likely what a fair deal looks like.  They might have to add a guy like Rodriguez to balance the cap.

  • Haha 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Teemu Selänne said:

Seems like Giroux could also be moved with retention. That's 3 big names. Lately I've personally be more on the re-sign Miller train

That's all fine and dandy but we need Miller to be on the re-sign train. 

  • Cheers 2
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Pens would love that deal!  I would think they would want us to take Kapanen too though.

Dickinson + Poolman + Pearson for Kapanen + Marino.

That's likely what a fair deal looks like.  They might have to add a guy like Rodriguez to balance the cap.

I'll get in touch with Burkie on that one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Pens would love that deal!  I would think they would want us to take Kapanen too though.

Dickinson + Poolman + Pearson for Kapanen + Marino.

That's likely what a fair deal looks like.  They might have to add a guy like Rodriguez to balance the cap.

Ahh yes the good ol spare parts and extra pieces for one of a teams best players.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Who is the best player?  Marino or Kapanen?

I mean Marino. We aren’t getting him without giving up Boeser or Garland. Both guys Pittsburgh is interested in and I could see Garland for Marino straight across or a package including Marino for Boeser. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Pears said:

I mean Marino. We aren’t getting him without giving up Boeser or Garland. Both guys Pittsburgh is interested in and I could see Garland for Marino straight across or a package including Marino for Boeser. 

Are we talking the same middle of the Rd Marino?

 

Boeser for him 1-1 is a loss

 

Garland for him 1-1 I'd consider a loss as well.  He's not a terrible player at all.  But I'd dare say Boeser and garland hold far higher value to our team currently to just shuffle them off in a 1-1 style trade.

 

We'd have to shed cap or gain something else 

Edited by Warhippy
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Warhippy said:

Are we talking the same middle of the Rd Marino?

 

Boeser for him 1-1 is a loss

 

Garland for him 1-1 I'd consider a loss as well.  He's not a terrible player at all.  But I'd dare say Boeser and garland hold far higher value to our team currently to just shuffle them off in a 1-1 style trade.

 

We'd have to shed cap or gain something else 

Yeah don’t get me wrong I’m not wanting to trade either, but Garland for Marino makes a lot of sense from a neutral standpoint. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Warhippy said:

I'd be more inclined to trade out Boeser myself

If anything it’ll be for Marino and one of their prospects and a 1st. A trade with Pittsburgh is probably inevitable but we could probably find better offers for Boeser. 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...