Proposal: VAN / CHI

HawkeyTalkMan

Registered User
Jun 23, 2015
6,271
3,445
Pettersson’s production in his 20/21 year old seasons is nearly identical to Kane’s lol. Also Kane isn’t close to Brett Hull.



Kane will be 32 in a month...Also no GM trades a 22 year old superstar for a 32 year old superstar.



Thought it was clear I was talking position players but okay
except you didn't say position players so if you need to move the goal posts to support your argument have at it

also, take a look at scoring the past few years compared to kane's. scoring is wayyyy up and they shrunk goalie pads since then. at 21 Kane scored 88 pts, good for 9th in the league and there were 7 guys who scored 90+ pts. last year there were 14 guys who scored 90+

pettersson was 23 in scoring this year in his 21 year old year. don't even come close to calling it comparable. petterssons production line is just as close to toews as it is Kane at 21


anymore amazing arguments to compare pettersson to a 1st ballot hall of famer who he hopes he ends up with half the resume Kane has?

kane isn't close to hull. lol. mmmk. you have a better argument with modano.
 

GoodbyeLuongo

Registered User
Jun 8, 2012
1,927
638
Seattle
except you didn't say position players so if you need to move the goal posts to support your argument have at it

also, take a look at scoring the past few years compared to kane's. scoring is wayyyy up and they shrunk goalie pads since then. at 21 Kane scored 88 pts, good for 9th in the league and there were 7 guys who scored 90+ pts. last year there were 14 guys who scored 90+

pettersson was 23 in scoring this year in his 21 year old year. don't even come close to calling it comparable. petterssons production line is just as close to toews as it is Kane at 21


anymore amazing arguments to compare pettersson to a 1st ballot hall of famer who he hopes he ends up with half the resume Kane has?

kane isn't close to hull. lol. mmmk. you have a better argument with modano.


Pettersson 20/21 years: 0.94 PPG
Kane 20/21 years: 0.97 PPG

Looks pretty close to me.

Also Brett Hull is the all time American leading scorer history and scored 741 goals lol but sure, Kane’s better.

I never said Pettersson was a better offensive player right now. But he’s elite in all three zones.
 

HawkeyTalkMan

Registered User
Jun 23, 2015
6,271
3,445
Pettersson 20/21 years: 0.94 PPG
Kane 20/21 years: 0.97 PPG

Looks pretty close to me.

Also Brett Hull is the all time American leading scorer history and scored 741 goals lol but sure, Kane’s better.

I never said Pettersson was a better offensive player right now. But he’s elite in all three zones.
I guess one dimensional goal scoring is all that matters. you taught us all so much about hockey today

hull played until he was 41. kane is only 369 pts behind hull and has 10 years to catch him

you already embarrassed yourself by saying no GM would trade pettersson for a still in his prime Kane. just accept it, move on

but sure, lump two year spans together to compare players in times when scoring was down and larger pads were allowed vs now. noticed you didn't address that
 

Catamarca Livin

Registered User
Jul 29, 2010
4,908
983
Pettersson 20/21 years: 0.94 PPG
Kane 20/21 years: 0.97 PPG

Looks pretty close to me.

Also Brett Hull is the all time American leading scorer history and scored 741 goals lol but sure, Kane’s better.

I never said Pettersson was a better offensive player right now. But he’s elite in all three zones.
Hull could have played for team Canada. Kane was is amazing so is Petterson. Kane won 3 cups as the top offensive player. Petterson cannot yet be compared career wise. However, Petterson is a hybrid of Toews and Kane. He is as serious as Toews while having the offensive flair of Kane. Kane was 1st overall who was great from start. Petterson was 5th overall and his game has quickly improved in 3 years since draft. He is growing into 6'2 frame so more upside still. I expect he will be a top player like Kane. No one in Vancouver would ever want to trade for Kane despite respecting him. Toews is similar to Messier to me. He is an enemy. Kane is not but still not wanted.
 

Catamarca Livin

Registered User
Jul 29, 2010
4,908
983
I guess one dimensional goal scoring is all that matters. you taught us all so much about hockey today

hull played until he was 41. kane is only 369 pts behind hull and has 10 years to catch him

you already embarrassed yourself by saying no GM would trade pettersson for a still in his prime Kane. just accept it, move on

but sure, lump two year spans together to compare players in times when scoring was down and larger pads were allowed vs now. noticed you didn't address that
He is right no gm would trade Petterson for Kane. Petterson is as good right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pertti

Jamie Winston

Registered User
Jul 13, 2019
126
51
He is right no gm would trade Petterson for Kane. Petterson is as good right now.
Oof u gotta realize that this is a bad take. Kane is still drilling around 100 point pace. If u see a top 10 player list kane is on it. Pettersson doesn’t command that kinda respect right now.
 

Connor McConnor

Registered User
Nov 22, 2017
5,242
6,010
You don't get Kane with that exact deal minus the cap dumps going the other way lmao. You PAY to get rid of terrible contracts IE. Toronto trading a 1st to get rid of Gardiner
 

bobbyb2009

Registered User
Sep 3, 2009
1,898
953
Oof u gotta realize that this is a bad take. Kane is still drilling around 100 point pace. If u see a top 10 player list kane is on it. Pettersson doesn’t command that kinda respect right now.

This thread is absolutely ridiculous and I can not believe it is still open. Ridiculous proposal!!!!!

However....I participate:

Patrick Kane has been a brilliant hockey player and remains one of the top players in the NHL in my opinion!!

Serious question for you though, are you telling me that you would not rather have on your team, right now and moving forward, the asset that is the 22 year old brilliant Pettersson over the asset of a 32 year old Patrick Kane (turns 32 in one month)?

Are you saying you would rather have Kane now for a declining contract at $10.5 million until his 35 birthday, or EP for another year on an ELC and then for 8 more as he moves into and through his prime at a contract comparable or less than Kane's?
 

GoodbyeLuongo

Registered User
Jun 8, 2012
1,927
638
Seattle
I guess one dimensional goal scoring is all that matters. you taught us all so much about hockey today

hull played until he was 41. kane is only 369 pts behind hull and has 10 years to catch him

you already embarrassed yourself by saying no GM would trade pettersson for a still in his prime Kane. just accept it, move on

but sure, lump two year spans together to compare players in times when scoring was down and larger pads were allowed vs now. noticed you didn't address that

Because Kane is on the wrong side of 30 and Pettersson is ten years younger? Is that so hard for you to understand? If you have two elite hockey players, you don’t take the one that is TEN years older. Would you trade DeBrincat for Blake Wheeler? Or Dach for Brayden Schenn?

You’re right I didn’t address pad sizes because it struck me as irrelevant.
 

HawkeyTalkMan

Registered User
Jun 23, 2015
6,271
3,445
Because Kane is on the wrong side of 30 and Pettersson is ten years younger? Is that so hard for you to understand? If you have two elite hockey players, you don’t take the one that is TEN years older. Would you trade DeBrincat for Blake Wheeler? Or Dach for Brayden Schenn?

You’re right I didn’t address pad sizes because it struck me as irrelevant.
haha almost as irrelevant as your definition of "elite"
 

wetcoast

Registered User
Nov 20, 2018
22,246
10,125
yeah it's just laughable. no single person with a front office job is taking pettersson over Kane for a full season + playoff run

kane has offensive vision like nobody else in the league except mcdavid or crosby. kane carried Michal handzus to a cup as his 2C.

pettersson is a really good player, Kane is still an elite game breaker. pettersson has yet to show he can win games on his own

My main argument is with the link you provided and that horrible list.

Kane is still better offensively sure but if I had a choice of other player just for next season I take EP40 8 days a week and I'm a huge fan of Kane.
 

BuresMafiaBuddies

Registered User
Aug 22, 2020
80
266
Beauty, peak HF, that incredibly talented forward who happens to be on the short list of all time clutch players, how could that POSSIBLY make a team better?


Canucks don't need a 32 year old winger who takes up 12 million dollars in cap space.

Not even considering the ridiculous amount of assets it would take to make a trade happen.

Thanks for coming out though. Smartass
 

HawkeyTalkMan

Registered User
Jun 23, 2015
6,271
3,445
Elias Pettersson isn’t elite, Vasili Podkolzin isn’t a top 50 prospect. Any more uninformed Canuck takes? Is Quinn Hughes mediocre?
how about this, what is your definition of elite because I hope you discern the difference between all star, which is roughly top 30 players in the league and ELITE which is usually a top5-10 player

kane is still a top 10 player in the league, pettersson is not really close to that discussion right now
 

Jamie Winston

Registered User
Jul 13, 2019
126
51
This thread is absolutely ridiculous and I can not believe it is still open. Ridiculous proposal!!!!!

However....I participate:

Patrick Kane has been a brilliant hockey player and remains one of the top players in the NHL in my opinion!!

Serious question for you though, are you telling me that you would not rather have on your team, right now and moving forward, the asset that is the 22 year old brilliant Pettersson over the asset of a 32 year old Patrick Kane (turns 32 in one month)?

Are you saying you would rather have Kane now for a declining contract at $10.5 million until his 35 birthday, or EP for another year on an ELC and then for 8 more as he moves into and through his prime at a contract comparable or less than Kane's?
In a situation where a team is pushing for a cup. Generally you would try to work a package of assets for kane but if it is a one of one deal it would make more sense to add the highly proven player still performing at a high level.
 

HockeySauce

Registered User
Jan 26, 2011
16,349
758
It would take:
Nils Hoglander
Vasily Podkolzin
2021 1st Round Draft Pick

Just to dump Louis and Sutter. That means Kane comes for free! :)

Literally this. This is a salary wash, but Van is trading 14 goals for one of the best wingers in the league. There's no deal to be made with Vancouver because the only chance you'd have at getting Kane would start with Hughes. I don't think either Toews or Kane will be traded but if they are, it's going to be for a team that can pay the necessary assets. Vancouver isn't one of those teams.
 

tyhee

Registered User
Feb 5, 2015
2,535
2,612
As a Canuck fan, I think this proposal is horrible for both teams and totally unrealistic.

Firstly, from the right team, I think Chicago could get a better deal. Others have already commented about it being bad for Chicago so I won't dwell on that. I also won't dwell on Kane's no move contract and whether he would or wouldn't waive for the Canucks.

Secondly, Vancouver is not the right team to be trading for Kane. Imo the original poster is being fooled by a lucky playoff run fuelled firstly by St. Louis being really weak at the time of the playoffs and secondly by really, really hot goaltending, firstly from Markstrom (who is gone and replaced by Holtby who is three years past his all-star years) and secondly from Demko (who was so hot it isn't remotely sustainable.)

The Canucks were soundly outplayed by Vegas and before that by a St Louis team that wasn't playing its best. Perhaps the OP forgets the Canucks were outshot by St. Louis 229-166 (ave per game 38-28) and by Vegas 275-169 (ave per game 39-24). They were really lucky to advance to play Vegas. They were on the bubble as to whether they would have made the playoffs in a normal year. There were not anything close to an elite team.

Yet the OP wants to make the ultimate "The future is now" trade. The Canucks already gave up this year's first, a second, a third and a good prospect in Madden just to get into this year's postseason where they simply weren't good enough to have a chance to compete for the Cup. Now the poster wants to trade two of their three best prospects and another first round pick, completely trashing the future in an attempt to try to win a Cup against long odds sometime in the next two or three years.

It seems totally unrealistic to me. Really, I don't want three years of the Canucks being good but not good enough, followed by several years of misery. It isn't the way to build a stable winning franchise.

Thirdly, even getting rid of two years of Eriksson's cap hit and one year of Sutter's, in 2021-22 the Canucks would be left with Kane @ 10.5, Myers @ 6, Schmidt @ 5.95, Pettersson at maybe 9, Hughes at maybe 7.5, Boeser/Horvat/Miller @ a combined 16.625, Roussel and Beagle @ a combined 6, Holtby @ 4.3, Demko at whatever he gets (if he beats Holtby out for starter it could be substantial but let's say 4.3), 3.5 for Ferland until the opening day injured list, $3.366 million for Sven Baertschi (or $2.292 million without filling a roster spot), very possibly $1.7 in deferred bonuses for the performance of Pettersson and Hughes in 2020-21 and $3.035 for the retired Roberto Luongo, all against a salary cap which is likely to stay at $81.5 million again as it is extremely unlikely we'll see fans in the seats for an 82 game 2020-21 NHL season.

If Baertschi were still in the organization but not on the Canucks that would leave, going into the opening day of the season, $2.5 million to fill 10 spots on the roster. Even with a roster of only 20 players plus Ferland it leaves $2.5 million to fill 8 spots on the roster, less than half the NHL minimum per player. Even if they somehow get rid of Ferland, that leaves $6 million for 11 spots, still below NHL minimum per player with nothing left to cover the inevitable short term injuries.

Note I haven't even included anything for Virtanen, who would be making considerably more than NHL minimum.

Even for 2020-21 it is very, very close. Right now Capfriendly shows about $46.592 million on 13 forwards who don't include Virtanen or Gaudette, $21.792 million on only six defencemen, $5.35 million for 2 goalies, 1.033 for buying out Ryan Spooner and $3.035 in recapture penalty for Roberto Luongo. Add to that the $1.7 million in deferred bonuses for Hughes and Pettersson for 2019-20, add $10.5 for Kane and assume $3 million for Virtanen while removing Eriksson and Sutter and that gets the Canucks to $82.627, already over the cap and they still need a 7th defenceman and enough space to cover short term injuries, even if willing to go with only 22 players on the regular roster. I suppose they could make the opening day roster if Ferland is hurt by not having a 7th defenceman and papering two of Pettersson, Hughes and Rathbone down to Utica for a day (imagine the reaction!) but heaven help them if Ferland is healthy enough to make the roster if anyone else gets hurt and has to be provided for without getting long term relief-at any time in the year. (Even then I haven't provided for Gaudette, who would put them further over the cap limit.)

So what do the Canucks do? Do this proposal and give up some additional high draft picks to get rid of the contracts of Beagle, Roussel, Ferland and Baertschi?

Strangely, as much as fans have pointed out the deal not making sense for the Hawks, it is actually worse for the Canucks. At least in the Hawks case the cap space doesn't make it impossible to make it work and it points to the future. In the Canucks case the cap makes it next to impossible to work the deal and it makes the future look really, really bleak even with their young stars.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->