Jump to content

Considering how little SJ gave up for Kane, should Flyers have tried to get him

RonJeremy

By RonJeremy
in Philadelphia Flyers

Recommended Posts

ruxpin Grand Master

ruxpin

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, RonJeremy said:

I still love how he knocked out the cheapshot weasel Matt Cooke

 

I think that alone gets him some props and balances out everything else.  

 

The malcontent thing has merit but may be a bit overblown.   I'm not sure what went on in Winnipeg.  It was reportedly with several players, but the primary thing was Buff, so the other players may have just drawn sides.

 

He's been good in stretches, but he good hot and really cold.   He's been really cold.   He's Schenn (the not as bad one) in some ways.    My thing largely is that I really don't want to screw up whatever it is we have going on right now by bringing in a question mark like that.   And especially someone like that who seems like he'll only be a rental and sign elsewhere.  

 

I suppose the rental thing could be argued both ways.   One is that he doesn't plan on staying, makes no attachments and is just kind of there (at best, or a problem at worst).  OR, he knows he wants a contract somewhere and tries to earn it.   The fact that Buffalo gave up so little says (to me, anyway) that it's very possible he has a lot to do to earn it in this league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ruxpin Grand Master

ruxpin

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, radoran said:

I don't mind Kane, but would not have given up what San Jose did.

 

A nothing AHLer, a (likely) 2nd, and a 4th?

 

I wouldn't have either, but in the grand scheme of things he probably should have garnered a lot more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
flyer4ever Rising Star

flyer4ever

Posted
Posted

Time will tell. Is the goal in the Flyers office to have a good AHL team or win a cup? Kane and Maroon could have been had for next to nothing (draft picks that will probably never play an NHL game) and would both improve the current team and possibly be resigned. Both big improvements on #15 and #22, who everyone love to bash. Big fast wingers are gold come playoff time. Kane has never played an NHL playoff game, IMO he will light it up with the Sharks with something to actually play for. The off ice stuff is ancient history that can be marshaled by good coaching and quality leadership in the room. What say all the saints in this chatroom when Lindros refused to report to Quebec and got in bar fights in Muskoka, or when Richards and Carter were running the playboy club in Philly? This from the city that Alan Iverson had his fun in. Just curious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RonJeremy Mentor

RonJeremy

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Kane has 20 goals and 20 assists, which is pretty good playing on that crap team in Buffalo. I guess Hexy can do some research on Kane  and go over the cap numbers and maybe we can sign him if his demands are reasonable. Kane has played in Atlanta, Winnipeg and Buffalo, all horrible teams during his time there. Maybe he will take a reasonable contract to play on a good up and coming team like the Flyers.  I think having a big physical wing who can score is a big help for us.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
vis Contributor

vis

Posted
Posted

probably not especially since Hextall traded a couple of picks for Mrazek.  If he didn’t have to make that trade, then I would have considered Kane at that price assuming the flyers could have resigned him as well. However, as I mentioned in another thread, I would have been leery to change the culture of the locker room, which  might have been the case if the Flyers traded for Kane.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bertmega Rookie

Bertmega

Posted
Posted

As another poster pointed out to me yesterday, where does Kane fit in the lineup?

 

If he were to play with Simmonds, than you have to bump Voracek off that line. 

 

If he plays with Couturier and Giroux than TK gets bumped. 

 

He just doesn't fit IMO 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
vis Contributor

vis

Posted
Posted
31 minutes ago, Bertmega said:

As another poster pointed out to me yesterday, where does Kane fit in the lineup?

 

If he were to play with Simmonds, than you have to bump Voracek off that line. 

 

If he plays with Couturier and Giroux than TK gets bumped. 

 

He just doesn't fit IMO 

Doesn't seem to be a problem to me.  I'd love to try to fit a 20/20 player in the lineup.  For shits and giggles:

 

Giroux/Couturier/Konecny

Lindblom/Patrick/Voracek

Kane/Laughton/Simmonds

Raffl/Filpulla/Lehtera

 

Not saying they should have traded for him.  Just pointing out where he could have fit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
flyerrod Rising Star

flyerrod

Posted
Posted

BEST.NON-MOVE.EVER. The ONLY way that Kane would become a Flyer was if they took MacDud(WHO GRANTED HAS BEEN PLAYING SERVICEABLE NOW)/Lehtera/Weise/Read. For that trade I would have moved him......Not re-signed him but moved him. Ultimately, this guy will show his true colors and what a cancer he is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Podein25 Proficient

Podein25

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, RonJeremy said:

make him a better person

 

The problem is, this isn't possible. Not at this point at least. The guy is a POS of the first order. It will take some terrible life event to snap him from being a self-absorbed, entitled brat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
elmatus Contributor

elmatus

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, RonJeremy said:

I was thinking that Simmonds could keep him In line and make him a better person. 

 

Byfuglien tried to do just that and failed. I see no reason to try it again. Too many warning signs for my like. Besides, he's never shown anything more than potential with just one season above 40 pts. Part of me wonders why folks are so high on this guy to begin with. Let the Sharks have him. He looks an awful lot like a one-dimensional puck hog from where I'm standing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
elmatus Contributor

elmatus

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, vis said:

Giroux/Couturier/Konecny

Lindblom/Patrick/Voracek

Kane/Laughton/Simmonds

Raffl/Filpulla/Lehtera

 

Not saying they should have traded for him.  Just pointing out where he could have fit.

 

He would likely have played on the 2nd. Also, Patrick and Voracek would have been left tapping the ice a lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AJgoal Newbie

AJgoal

Posted
Posted

Also keep in mind that the Flyers would have likely needed to pay more, as their 2nd rounder is technically unavailable. The Flyers were also higher in the standings (by a point) with San Jose still not a lock to make the playoffs, so that may have had an effect on the cost as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bertmega Rookie

Bertmega

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, vis said:

Doesn't seem to be a problem to me.  I'd love to try to fit a 20/20 player in the lineup.  For shits and giggles:

 

Giroux/Couturier/Konecny

Lindblom/Patrick/Voracek

Kane/Laughton/Simmonds

Raffl/Filpulla/Lehtera

 

Not saying they should have traded for him.  Just pointing out where he could have fit.

Would he be a 20/20 player on the 3rd line? I like the looks of that line, but feel he may need to see more ice time to achieve just that. 

 

Who did he play with in Buffalo? @Miller Time may be able to shed a little more light on this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
King Knut Newbie

King Knut

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, RonJeremy said:

In seeing what SJ gave up to get Kane , maybe the Flyers should have taken a  chance on him. Imagine him and Simmonds on the same line,  two tough wingers....

 

That requires imagining the top nine without LIndblom and right now, I'm not interested in that.

 

And frankly, that's exactly what Hextall suggested in his statements.  

 

I think it's time to consider that the Flyers didn't want and couldn't really use Kane. And that maybe he's just not a fit.  He's not going to do you any good on the 4th line and when Wayne is back, that's really the only place there would have been room for him.  

 

He's also not a sound defensive player.  He doesn't play Hakstol's "200 ft" game.  He would likely be in the dog house as soon as he got here.  Toss in his "toughness" and 113 PIM last year and he'd be in immediate and direct conflict with the Flyers focus on not committing penalties and going on their ridiculously bad PK.  

 

Kane wasn't going to work here.  I'm happy they didn't do it. 

What the Flyers really needed most was a guy like McDonagh to play in the second pairing and bump Manning from the roster, but there's no way on earth I'd give a divisional rival that much leverage and besides, I don't think you could put his locker far enough away from Simmer's to calm that all down.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Philly29 Newbie

Philly29

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, RonJeremy said:

In seeing what SJ gave up to get Kane , maybe the Flyers should have taken a  chance on him. Imagine him and Simmonds on the same line,  two tough wingers....

No way he's a troubled player, attitude problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AJgoal Newbie

AJgoal

Posted
Posted

Let's put this into perspective. The Flyers need even strength scoring. Kane is first among forwards in Buffalo with 896 5 on 5 minutes. He has 9 goals in those 896 minutes. Sean Couturier has 16 in 924. Giroux 13 in 918. Konecny 12 in 754. Raffl 9 in 737. Hell, Laughton has 8 in almost 300 fewer minutes.

 

You buy at the deadline when there's a realistic shot at the Cup. The Flyers could very well catch lightning in a bottle, but they need a better defense to be able to take an honest look at themselves from a management standpoint and say "This is a year we go for it." Now, those assets that they didn't trade away are assets that they can trade down the line when they can make that honest assessment. They're going to have to make some two-for-one deals in the not-so distant future as it is.

 

Pop quiz: When the Flyers went to the Cup final in 2010, what huge deal did they make at the deadline?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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