hf101 Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 Kane apparently is on the trading block. Is Nash the answer? Apparently Kane and Jack Johnson are close friends.Is this a fair deal straight up? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bertmega Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 (edited) First off, I will try and discount the "Wisconsin Weekend" antics and the "Buffalo Cab" incident due to the fact he is young and mentally still immature in the presence of alcohol.What I won't forgive him for is wearing the sacred #88. He is not nor will he ever be an #88 kind of guy.To answer your question, NO. Not in a million years in my book. The answer is not that short and kind of plays both angles, so please bear with me.To start, I think Nash is far more dynamic and multi-dimensional. His cap hit is higher, but he is more valuable overall in my book. In addition, his off ice maturity is far higher.However, this is not the only reason I say no to the trade. I think what some critics of Kane need to do is step back and weigh in his on ice attributes vs. his off ice antics. Any trade that could possibly take place may be because the Blackhawk organization needs to save face and keep their image squeaky clean, well, sans Dan Carcillo.I am not denying that Kane is a good hockey player. He had 41 points in 38 playoff games spanning from 2008-10. Very good and impressive numbers. The last 13 playoff games not so much, but I attribute that to not shooting as much.Kane has shown what he is both on and off the ice; he is blessed with athletic ability yet cursed with immaturity. Will age cure that? I would hope so. Is he a distraction? Yes, but not any more than any other distraction that existed before social media and the internet. I doubt the players were grandma's boys back in the 60's, 70's and 80's.So all in all, Kane is a Blackhawk, one that has proven his worth in the past. He needs to grow up, yes, but trading him would be harmful to the organization. Nash, is a great player, but not the one that would fill any voids left by Kane. In addition, I think Nash could get a far better return than Kane in the open market. Edited June 1, 2012 by Bertmega Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackStraw Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 I would take Nash over Kane so fast it would make your head swim. Really doesn't seem like an even trade to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyercanuck Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 Toews for Nash would be fair. Kane? I'd fire my GM in 2 seconds if he traded Rick Nash for "Kaner". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.