2017-18 NHL Trade deadline

[Buffalo Rick]

On 2/28/2017 at 12:22 PM, J0e Th0rnton said:

Anisimov missing from Hawks practice?

 

Sick or.......? Duchene?

The Sharks/Sabres trade appears to be a win win for our teams JT

 

https://www.nhl.com/sabres/news/sabres-acquire-two-conditional-picks-oregan-for-kane-on-deadline-day/c-296388912

[WordsOfWisdom]

59 minutes ago, Hockey Junkie said:

Evander Kane is a San Jose Shark.  For a first round conditional and 4th rounder.

 

Addition by subtraction. Sabres improve with this trade. 

[Buffalo Rick]

12 minutes ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

 

Addition by subtraction. Sabres improve with this trade. 

Amen brother

[jammer2]

1 hour ago, TropicalFruitGirl26 said:

My Bolts have upgraded with McDonagh and JT Miller....but man....I hate losing Namestnikov.

 

I am thinking Yzerman thinks someone else could do just as well with Stamkos and Kucherov on the top line in place of Namest....I certainly hope so.

Maybe Miller himself coming in....maybe TyJo gets put on the top line with Stammer and Kuch...maybe Gourde.

 

Mikhail Sergachev's name was bandied about earlier, but I am glad the Bolts decided on keeping him.

I believe he will be a Vladimir Malakhov type Russian defender (meaning good size, mobility, puck movement, some scoring ability) for years to come....and hopefully WITHOUT Malakhov's injury history!

 

Bolts give up top picks (1st and conditonal 2nd I am hearing) for the incoming Rangers as well..... and two prospects I don't know much about...Howden (C) and Hajek (D)..... Brett Howden's numbers look fantastic in the WHL though.

 

 Even though Namestnikov is more proven, Brett Howden is a BIG GET by the NYR. He's a big rangy kid with good hands and excellent smarts. I *think* I know what is going on in Stevie Y's head. You trade away a top 6 in Namer and a potential top 6 down the road....for one reason....REALLY...2 reasons. Tyler Raddysh is the real deal and will inevitably require a top 6 role. Same for Cirelli, those two WILL break into the roster, and Stevie is making room for them AND strengthing the defense...very smart. 

[yave1964]

 I like JT Miller but he is one of the worst faceoff men in the game, really the only chink in his armor and the reason the Rangers keep moving him back out to the wing. I am kind of curious to see what the Bolts do with him, if they get him to a near 50 percent faceoff percentage they have a hell of a solid middle six center and it would say a lot about how poorly the Rangers are at fixing glaring deficiencies in their players. My bet is he stays in the middle and his faceoff pct goes up. The Bolts are one of the most cerebral organizations in the game and if anyone can maximize his talent they are the team to do so.

 

EDIT Just looked at Millers faceoff numbers this year, he is actually over 50 percent this season so he seems to have fixed the hitch in his giddyup. 

[MadDevil]

2 hours ago, jammer2 said:

  SOOOOO, you would think the Devils will try and show off their new guy, you can probably expect a top pp of Hall, Palmeri, Hircher, Maroon and Vatanen, who has taken over from the demoted Will Butcher. 

 

Hopefully it works. The PP has been god awful since January. I like both the Grabner and Maroon deals. Even if they both walk this summer, Shero didn't give up any 1st rounders or any of their top prospects.

[TropicalFruitGirl26]

The Red Wings seem to be collecting the ingredients needed to properly rebuild through the draft and mix in their young guys as well.

Surprised they couldn't find a home for Mike Green though.

I suppose we might here about a Wings trade on draft day. We will see.

 

The Minnesota Wild.

Ugh.

Yea, guys, stand pat why don't you.

On a hot run right now, but this team is FAR from Cup ready...and I even proclaimed them probably not PLAYOFF ready....where @yave1964 figured my fellow Wild fans might wanna lynch me.... 

 

But you know, I love my teams, but gotta call it as I see it sometimes, and Minnesota is still very flawed, very susceptible to late game meltdowns, and their passing ability and overall defense is still suspect, IMO, current hot streak or no.

 

I think the Wild probably could have gotten a 6th or 7th rounder, at the very least, for little used Chris Stewart, and Morgan Reilly, well, he might be something down the road, but I honestly was not that impressed with him watching him play. Too many mistakes and not enough urgency was what I saw.

 

But to not be able to ADD anyone for a playoff drive?? Cmon, Chuck Fletcher......you have got to be defecating me!

 

Jack Johnson wanted OUT of Columbus...the Jackets already got his replacement in Ian Cole, and likely weren't asking for a lot for him. He would have made sense in Minnesota.

Or maybe Ian Cole himself before the Sens dealt him to the Jackets.

 

The Lightning have some defenseman they were looking to upgrade from (and they did) in Andrei Sustr and Slater Koekkoek...perhaps they would have fared better in a different environtment in Minnesota as opposed to the up-tempo, win it all now situation in TB.

 

Very disappointed in the Wild's moves....or lack thereof....

 

 

NJ Devils.

Very nice acquisitions. Trying very hard to fix what needs fixing while not messing with what is working.

Patrick Maroon, while I feel he isn't the type of player who raises the level of play of those around him, IS the type of player that other talented forwards can raise HIM to.

Taylor Hall, Nico Hischier, Kyle Palmeiri...guys like that...Maroon should fit in nicely.

 

Vatanen earlier in the year for NJ, very nice.

Grabner, another nice potentially big add for their run.

And if they can just get Cory Schneider back already, HE will be like adding another piece for their playoff drive.

[JR Ewing]

1 hour ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

 

Addition by subtraction. Sabres improve with this trade. 

 

1 hour ago, Hockey Junkie said:

Amen brother

 

This is a serious question: how few points does Kane's replacement have to put up for him to be better if personality is not an issue at all? We see this sort of "Oh, his personal issues are so bad that he's dragged the team down" all of the time, but the very best thing we could say is that sort of notion is beyond vague. It's the same sort of silliness where people felt the need to give Rod Langway a Norris over Paul Coffey because "he's better defensively" while not noting the 100-point gap in scoring. He wasn't better enough to prevent 100 extra goals against. Not by a mile.

 

Is it possible that Kane is a pain in the ass? Very possible; we know his teammates in Winnipeg expressed frustration. Neverthless, Evander Kane has scored at a 50-point pace. His return today (O'Regan) has no chance at approaching that, and the odds aren't amazing at finding that in a pick in the #50 range.

 

I don't see how the Buffalo Sabres are objectively better today other than to say "Well, they probably didn't want to re-sign him anyway, so get what you can." which would still be neglecting poor management to have put themselves in this position in the first place. Teams at the bottom of the standings find all sort of excuses to justify bleeding talent off their roster.

 

The Sabres were terrible before Evander Kane put on their uniform, and this trade does nothing to remedy the situation.

 

[Buffalo Rick]

2 hours ago, J0e Th0rnton said:

I posted that an hour before you

 

 

 

Actually, its a great deal for the sharks.

 

Your conditional 1st becomes a 2nd if he does not resign

I would say its good for both teams.  Good for Sharks now.  Good for us long term

[TropicalFruitGirl26]

A Rangers draft board was posted on another thread after the Rick Nash trade..

Here is an updated one, courtesy of capfriendly, after the McDonagh / Miller deals.

Very nice.

But again, now all they gotta do is not screw this up, draft well, play the patient game and build themselves another winner without taking shortcuts.

 

[TropicalFruitGirl26]

And speaking of teams needing to rebuild, here are the Wings and they too have a nice draft board after their dealings.

This could improve even further if they decide to trade guys during the off season or on draft day.

 

[WordsOfWisdom]

5 hours ago, JR Ewing said:

This is a serious question: how few points does Kane's replacement have to put up for him to be better if personality is not an issue at all? We see this sort of "Oh, his personal issues are so bad that he's dragged the team down" all of the time, but the very best thing we could say is that sort of notion is beyond vague.

 

I think he's one of those problem players that teams are better off without. Everywhere he goes, teams lose. Everywhere he goes, there are problems.

 

It is possible to get points in the NHL but be so much of a negative for your team that you hurt all the players around you and the team suffers overall. 

 

My two cents. 

 

 

 

[JR Ewing]

40 minutes ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

 

I think he's one of those problem players that teams are better off without. Everywhere he goes, teams lose. Everywhere he goes, there are problems.

 

Atl/Wpg: treaded water for years and only improved on their Pts% three seasons after trading Kane.

Buffalo: were picking in lottery position before Kane even showed up in town.

 

I could perhaps see your argument if these teams had terrific records, acquired him and THEN turned bad, only to markedly improve after he left, but that's not the case.

 

 

40 minutes ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

It is possible to get points in the NHL but be so much of a negative for your team that you hurt all the players around you and the team suffers overall. 

 

My two cents. 

 

 

I understand that points aren't everything: it's what you get minus what you give up. My point is, even if we agree that he's a pain in the ass, just how much is it costing his teams, and what is an approximate cut-off point where a player without issues, but who doesn't bring offense reverses that? Does a 40 point player with similar defense cover that? Does a 30 point player? Is Kane so cancerous that a 20 point player make up for that difference?

 

It's not like Winnipeg shot up the standings as soon as he left. In fact, they slipped back a little bit. Anybody attempting to say that they really know is totally, completely, and without reservation, talking out of their ass.

 

[WordsOfWisdom]

8 hours ago, JR Ewing said:

I understand that points aren't everything: it's what you get minus what you give up. My point is, even if we agree that he's a pain in the ass, just how much is it costing his teams, and what is an approximate cut-off point where a player without issues, but who doesn't bring offense reverses that? Does a 40 point player with similar defense cover that? Does a 30 point player? Is Kane so cancerous that a 20 point player make up for that difference?

 

That's a good question, and I don't have an answer.

 

However, a better question might be: if he's so good, why don't teams want him?

 

The classic example that springs to my mind was Barry Bonds on the Giants. He was setting MLB records for home runs and was an amazing baseball player with rapidly diminishing skills. He insisted on playing left field, even though he was a major liability and hurt his team defensively. He insisted on swinging for the fences every at-bat to chase home runs, thereby costing him team wins by refusing to work with what pitchers were giving him (or not giving him). His teammates hated him. The Giants never won anything while he was there (although they did get close once). The only thing that kept him on that team was his home run chase. The moment that fiasco ended, the Giants were all too happy to get rid of him and no other team in baseball showed any interest in signing him. He retired as a free agent that nobody wanted. 

 

 

[TropicalFruitGirl26]

@JR Ewing

@WordsOfWisdom

 

Here ya go guys

 

https://www.tsn.ca/kane-defends-character-i-ve-grown-up-a-lot-1.1012533

 

 

Maybe Evander Kane HAS grown up some and many people are still judging him by things he did when he was in his early twenties.

 

Hey, I am not saying some dust up is not going to happen in San Jose (hopefully it doesn't), but even I have to admit (and I liked poking fun at his previous antics as much as anyone) that his time with the Sabres has been relatively incident free.

 

The article does touch up a bit on the screaming match he had during practice with teammate Justin Falk.

But then again, it is my understanding that sort of thing happens in practice more times than people think....teammates yell at each other, sometimes they check each other a bit harder than they should, but then it gets smoothed over.

 

At any rate, Evander Kane IS a very good NHL caliber talent.  He is still in his prime at 26 and if he can stay healthy, not listen to the critics of his youth, and just focus on hockey, the Sharks got themselves one hell of a player.....and one they could possibly consider re-signing when the 2017-18 season ends.

[JR Ewing]

40 minutes ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

 

That's a good question, and I don't have an answer.

 

However, a better question might be: if he's so good, why don't teams want him?

 

He's been traded twice, the second time on deadline day in his UFA year. We're not exactly talking about Brent Ashton here.

 

40 minutes ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

The classic example that springs to my mind was Barry Bonds on the Giants. He was setting MLB records for home runs and was an amazing baseball player with rapidly diminishing skills. He insisted on playing left field, even though he was a major liability and hurt his team defensively. He insisted on swinging for the fences every at-bat to chase home runs, thereby costing him team wins by refusing to work with what pitchers were giving him (or not giving him).

 

 

Narrative. A lot of trash talk to match narrative, and none of it matches with inconvenient reality.

 

Barry Bonds, doped up to the gills and old, was more productive than Babe Ruth. To say that the Giants did better with him in the lineup is to put it as mildly as anybody ever could. In 1,976 games with the Giants, he finished with 107 Offensive Wins Above Replacement, and with -4 Defensive Wins Above Replacement. That still leaves the Giants +103 with him in the lineup. Apparently, he insisted on only swinging for the fences in every AB, yet he took 132 walks in his final year, chasing Aaron's HR record? I could perhaps see your argument if he had started passing up borderline pitches in an effort to get his dingers, but he matched his career average in walks per plate appearance that last year.

 

40 minutes ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

 

His teammates hated him. The Giants never won anything while he was there (although they did get close once). The only thing that kept him on that team was his home run chase. The moment that fiasco ended, the Giants were all too happy to get rid of him and no other team in baseball showed any interest in signing him. He retired as a free agent that nobody wanted. 

 

 

 

Barry Bonds is a prick; entire books could be written about it. So was Ty Cobb. Entire books HAVE been written about was a miserable and awful SOB he was. So was Ted Williams. So what? Their teams ended up not winning the World Series despite having these guys in the lineup, not because of it. So what? Ernie Banks, Ken Griffey Jr. and Tony Gwynn also never won a World Series either, and they're famous for being wonderful human beings. So what?

 

Also, is Evander Kane now in the same territory as Barry Bonds? What the hell has he done that puts him in the same territory as a man who demanded his own dressing room, refused to speak with teammates, and turns his back to people he doesn't wish to lower himself to speak to? Are we comparing Kane to a married guy who told his girlfriend that he would cut out her breast implants and get a refund if she didn't shut up?

 

You would have done much better with this tripe if you called your local sports radio show. The ham and eggers stuck in traffic love this type of stuff.

 

[WordsOfWisdom]

12 hours ago, JR Ewing said:

Narrative. A lot of trash talk to match narrative, and none of it matches with inconvenient reality.

 

Barry Bonds, doped up to the gills and old, was more productive than Babe Ruth. To say that the Giants did better with him in the lineup is to put it as mildly as anybody ever could. In 1,976 games with the Giants, he finished with 107 Offensive Wins Above Replacement, and with -4 Defensive Wins Above Replacement. That still leaves the Giants +103 with him in the lineup. Apparently, he insisted on only swinging for the fences in every AB, yet he took 132 walks in his final year, chasing Aaron's HR record? I could perhaps see your argument if he had started passing up borderline pitches in an effort to get his dingers, but he matched his career average in walks per plate appearance that last year.

 

12 hours ago, JR Ewing said:

Barry Bonds is a prick; entire books could be written about it. So was Ty Cobb. Entire books HAVE been written about was a miserable and awful SOB he was. So was Ted Williams. So what? Their teams ended up not winning the World Series despite having these guys in the lineup, not because of it. So what? Ernie Banks, Ken Griffey Jr. and Tony Gwynn also never won a World Series either, and they're famous for being wonderful human beings. So what?

 

Also, is Evander Kane now in the same territory as Barry Bonds? What the hell has he done that puts him in the same territory as a man who demanded his own dressing room, refused to speak with teammates, and turns his back to people he doesn't wish to lower himself to speak to? Are we comparing Kane to a married guy who told his girlfriend that he would cut out her breast implants and get a refund if she didn't shut up?

 

You would have done much better with this tripe if you called your local sports radio show. The ham and eggers stuck in traffic love this type of stuff.

 

What I'm trying to say (poorly) is that teams are willing to overlook the negatives so long as a player is productive. The more negatives a player has, the more productive he has to be for teams to forgive the other crap. 

 

I honestly don't follow Evander Kane much, but from what I read, he has been a "problem" player. When you get enough of those players on a team, it destroys team chemistry and the whole is less than the sum of its parts. (Teams that have enormous talent but that don't play well together because the locker room is a toxic environment.) 

 

[flyercanuck]

16 hours ago, TropicalFruitGirl26 said:

@JR Ewing

@WordsOfWisdom

 

Here ya go guys

 

https://www.tsn.ca/kane-defends-character-i-ve-grown-up-a-lot-1.1012533

 

 

Maybe Evander Kane HAS grown up some and many people are still judging him by things he did when he was in his early twenties.

 

Hey, I am not saying some dust up is not going to happen in San Jose (hopefully it doesn't), but even I have to admit (and I liked poking fun at his previous antics as much as anyone) that his time with the Sabres has been relatively incident free.

 

The article does touch up a bit on the screaming match he had during practice with teammate Justin Falk.

But then again, it is my understanding that sort of thing happens in practice more times than people think....teammates yell at each other, sometimes they check each other a bit harder than they should, but then it gets smoothed over.

 

At any rate, Evander Kane IS a very good NHL caliber talent.  He is still in his prime at 26 and if he can stay healthy, not listen to the critics of his youth, and just focus on hockey, the Sharks got themselves one hell of a player.....and one they could possibly consider re-signing when the 2017-18 season ends.

 

Well there was the bar incident about a year and a half ago where he'd reportedly grabbed a girl by the hair and the neck and was forcibly removed by bouncers. 

 

There was the time he posted photos of him partying after the NBA allstar game and was late for practice the next day, for which he was suspended. I think there was one or two more legal issues in his time in Buffalo. His track record is not good.

[yave1964]

Maybe it is just me.

 

  Kane is a free agent at seasons end and if he signs with the Wings I would be delighted. DELIGHTED. I doubt it happens, I believe he is Vancouver bound which makes oodles of sense but if he came to Detroit I would be thrilled. The reason? I don't give a damn one way or the other about the whole everybody loves each other in the clubhouse thing, I think it is overrated for the samereasons that @JR Ewing mentioned. Kane can play. End of  story.

 

   Now I am not talking about an Aaron Hernandez or a Sean Avery or Raffi Torres or even a Jarret Stoll, I am not talking criminal or severe pain in the arse, just a young player who plays hard who needs to mature. Lots of them need that. Hell look at his cousin Patrick.

 

  Detroit has for too long had a country club culture where players sign long term deals and hang out and IMHO bringing in a jerk or two would be a good thing, shake it up. Kane has 30 goal scoring power forward written allover him, the right team with the right coach and right situation? I believe he will thrive. 

 

  Who were the team leaders in Buffalo? O'Reilly? He was too busy opening new Tim Horton's drive thru's to be a team leader. Gionta was quiet. I truly cannot think of anyone else. Don't give me Eichel, too young, maybe someday but he is an I, I me me type right now in his own right. In Detroit he would be surrounded by professionals who have been there before. 

 

  So fire Blashill or more correctly put him out of his misery, never before has a man been more out of his element as a head coach in the NHL, bring in a tough love coach who shakes up the clubhouse and gives this lazy bunch of veterans a reason to fear him before they ruin the good young kids such as Larkin, Athanasiou and Mantha as well and bring in a jerk like Kane who can play the game. I would call that a win of a summer. San Jose has loooooooong beenknown for an inmates running the asylum mentality and Kane is coming on board may just disrupt their lockerroom a bit and perhaps it has intended. I like the move for the rest of the season for them, very little gamble, a top six  power forward without giving up a roster player for this year. You do that every year.

[Podein25]

2 hours ago, yave1964 said:

Maybe it is just me.

 

Maybe.

[TropicalFruitGirl26]

I never quite understood what the point is in media reporters asking head coaches how they feel or think about trades made to their teams after deadlines like this.

 

What is a coach supposed to say??

 

Sure, if the trade made was good, it is easy for him to tell the media how fantastic the deal was and how this really helps the team.

But if a trade was not so good, they are going to, predictably, spin it in a positive way.

 

Hey, I don't blame the head coach on this..... he needs to do what he can with what he has and stay positive about it...but the media...really...what kind of answers are they expecting to hear from a coach who ended up with lesser players or on the short end of his GM's lopsided deal?

 

In the history of trade deadlines, has their ever been a coach who said:

 

"The deal was terrible. Weakens us, may as well chalk up 'L's for the rest of the season. Don't know what the GM was thinking. Mortgaging our future for washed up rental veteran players. I just don't see how he expects us to make the playoffs now. And now I might get fired for the team not winning. Go figure that one out."

 

I think not.....

[brelic]

On 2/27/2018 at 11:35 AM, TropicalFruitGirl26 said:

@JR Ewing

@WordsOfWisdom

 

Here ya go guys

 

https://www.tsn.ca/kane-defends-character-i-ve-grown-up-a-lot-1.1012533

 

 

Maybe Evander Kane HAS grown up some and many people are still judging him by things he did when he was in his early twenties.

 

Hey, I am not saying some dust up is not going to happen in San Jose (hopefully it doesn't), but even I have to admit (and I liked poking fun at his previous antics as much as anyone) that his time with the Sabres has been relatively incident free.

 

The article does touch up a bit on the screaming match he had during practice with teammate Justin Falk.

But then again, it is my understanding that sort of thing happens in practice more times than people think....teammates yell at each other, sometimes they check each other a bit harder than they should, but then it gets smoothed over.

 

At any rate, Evander Kane IS a very good NHL caliber talent.  He is still in his prime at 26 and if he can stay healthy, not listen to the critics of his youth, and just focus on hockey, the Sharks got themselves one hell of a player.....and one they could possibly consider re-signing when the 2017-18 season ends.

 

The thing is, you don't really get to defend your character. Certainly, you can defend and shape your reputation, because that's what people perceive you to be. 

 

But your character reveals itself through actions. Of course it can improve and grow over time. With Kane, the question is, with so many incidents putting his true character on display, is it a risk worth taking? For the Sharks, seems so. 

 

The difference with Patrick Kane is that I never got the sense his own teammates hated him. That's a very significant distinction.

 

Bryzgalov was the same. He was not liked in Arizona, and the reports were already public. Flyers decided to target him anyway, and it turned out the same way in Philly.

 

Personally, I don't want to cheer for a guy that's not even liked by his teammates.