Why do people want Berglund? We have enough 3rd liners. We need 1st line talent. No point trading for players that will make our team marginally better, so that we just miss the playoffs again or get bumped in the first round, and end up drafting a player that is AT BEST a 2nd liner.
Either trade for Kane and get a first line winger, or roll with the team we have, end up bottom 5 and draft a star forward. You can trade for all the Berglund's, Stewart's, and Hodgson's of the world...but if you don't have legitimate 1st line forwards (including a 1A C), you won't be a cup contender. And that's the goal right? Not to just make the playoffs, but to contend for years on years like CHI/LA?
Evander Kane is a 1st line talent and Patrik Berglund is a 3rd line talent? I don't agree.
I understand perfectly the motivation to look for high end, first-line, talent players over a collection of mediocre ones, and in most cases I would agree with you. In this instance however, I really don't see the vast gulf of talent/potential between the two players that you see.
Kane is almost exactly 3 years younger, which is a definite point in his favour, but he would also cost a lot more in $ and assets to acquire. Kane has been in the NHL for 5 seasons. Berglund for 6 seasons. They're about the same size. Actually, Berglund is slightly bigger and taller but not noticeably.
Kane has 99 goals in 5 years, Berglund has 106 in 6 seasons. (About 2 goals difference a year if you break it down). I'm not a big "advanced stats guy", but Berglund also plays significantly less even strength and PP minutes than Evander Kane as well, so if you put them on an even playing field for ice-time, it would probably go Berglund's way. Assists are about the same as well, 101 to 114 in favour of Berglund, but he has also played more games with less ice-time. Berglund has the better shooting % of the two.
They both play in all situations, ES, PP, and PK. As mentioned, Kane plays more minutes, though I hesitate to penalize Berglund for playing on a much deeper team. I also don't penalize Kane for always missing the playoffs either.
As far as giveaways/takeaways go, Kane gives the puck away more than Berglund and Berglund takes it away from the opposition far more. This is a significant point in Berglund's favour. Kane hits a lot more, but Berglund has a better +/-. (I don't really put much faith in either stat because hits are often inflated by certain teams and +/- is more of a team statistic and I don't want to benefit Berglund or penalize Kane for something their team mates are doing.)
Both of them have had good line mates and poor line mates over the years, and although I can't imagine any argument that gives either player a significant advantage in this department, I'd be willing to listen to one.
It should also be noted that Kane takes A LOT more penalties than Berglund, more than twice as many. That is great for fantasy hockey, but Ottawa already takes a lot of penalties, and they can really hurt a team.
If it matters, they were both first round draft picks, though Kane was picked higher.
Maybe you can explain what you see that differentiates them so much. I see two good VERY good 2nd line players who contribute in different ways to their teams, and while I fully understand that Kane is a much more valuable player and a better scorer, I don't see the gulf in talent that you see.
I've seen Berglund play about 20-25 times and Kane about a dozen, maybe that might influence me a bit.
