Wait, so your saying the Hawks need 104 points to make the playoffs? I don't think that is the case.... The Hawks would have to have an epic downfall to not make the playoffs this year. I love all the doom and gloom with this team. They have holes, as does everyone else! Every team can't be perfect..... you guys pretend like we are watching Columbus.
- droe411

The numbers tell the truth - .500 team since 12/15. No signs of that getting better. Look at the schedule and look at the road win pct. I still think they end at 95 and miss.

You don't deal Kane for a defenseman. At least not a defenseman like Campbell.
- EKolb13

Agreed. The only way I'd take a dman is if it's added.

Bobby Ryan AND Cam Fowler

Evander Kane AND Zach Bogosian

Guys like Parise, Perry, Nash would all be pretty equal.

Rick Nash is Kane in a bigger body. I had to laugh about Kane hanging out at the blue line cherry-picking. I watched Nash go flying out of the zone on 2 separate PK's against Anaheim when he assumed his defense was going to get control of the puck. Both times the Ducks regained control and once they scored on a "5 on 3". Be careful what you ask for JJ.
- duxcup07

Does anyone realize that Kane was out there for one reason and one reason only...to score. There was a minute left, what else was he supposed to do? Didn't matter if the Preds scored...but it mattered if the Blackhawks didn't.

???? You ALWAYS trade offense for defense. Now Campbell's contract probably wouldn't work but if the Hawks could get Weber or Suter for Kane...
- duxcup07

I'm using Campbell as an example.....And to answer the "who would over pay for KANE"......TALON will overpay EVERYONE EVERY TIME....

Wait, so your saying the Hawks need 104 points to make the playoffs? I don't think that is the case.... The Hawks would have to have an epic downfall to not make the playoffs this year. I love all the doom and gloom with this team. They have holes, as does everyone else! Every team can't be perfect..... you guys pretend like we are watching Columbus.
- droe411

It took 97 to make it last year, after Minnesota had to knock off Dallas for the Hawks to make it in. I think 97 points is a safe number to shoot for at this point.

???? You ALWAYS trade offense for defense. Now Campbell's contract probably wouldn't work but if the Hawks could get Weber or Suter for Kane...
- duxcup07

While those two are amazing.. That leaves another hole in the top 6..

I'm using Campbell as an example.....And to answer the "who would over pay for KANE"......TALON will overpay EVERYONE EVERY TIME....
- PuckkmeNOpuckU

If you want folks to take you seriously, find a better example.

.500 in the remaining games get the Hawks to what, 96 points? Everyone here should stop pretending that this is the worst team in the league. Are there problems? Heck yes, but I would bet there are a long line of teams wishing they had the same problems. .600 hockey gets this team to 102 points, this place is crazy some times.

And once again...not even close. Not even in the atmosphere.
- HawkFan27

I am going to assume any deal a Hawks would even be ok with coming from Buffalo would be something like:

Myers, Kassian, 1st.

And go from there.

Late in the game a lot of coaches will let guys do that..

Why do you think Kane was on the ice during a PK anyway? To do exactly that.. Try and get a breakaway. Harp on Q if you don't like that, not Kane..
- pri$ey

Second period and the Ducks had a one goal lead at the time. Now last night maybe it was warranted, I just don't see how Nash is an upgrade over Kane.

With 6 million under the cap, they have room to gain a big name or names. They're still one of the best teams in hockey and going to get even better before March. I look for addition only, with Hopefully Bickell going and hopefully Frolik. They need a Centerman, a big "D" and perhaps a goalie as JJ stated.

Does anyone realize that Kane was out there for one reason and one reason only...to score. There was a minute left, what else was he supposed to do? Didn't matter if the Preds scored...but it mattered if the Blackhawks didn't.
- HawkFan27

At the last minute, and you need a goal to tie it up, I'd assume that would be the strategy.

Kaner's play has been mediocre this year, but i don't want him gone. He'll come out of it, hopefully. His confidence is low right now and you saw what you saw last night. 88's on a mini-breakaway, is in a good shooting position and has a step on the defender, but what does he do? Bails out and tries a weak spin-o-rama and then sends a weak backhand wide. Why he didn't drive the net shows me he's lost his mojo in a big way. Like i said, HOPEFULLY, it comes back. He's too young and too ingrained with us to trade away in knee jerk fashion.

Hockey is a business almost as much as it is a game. They will not trade one of the biggest marketing values they have. I don't know what Nash's marketing value is and if he came to Chi-town I don't think it would be as high as Kane's. Maybe if he scores a OT cup winning goal. On a side note: where is the player Kane set out to be at the beginning of the season? He said he want to be an elite player, game changer at both ends of the ice. I guess it's pretty hard to stop cherry picking and floating around the ice.

.500 in the remaining games get the Hawks to what, 96 points? Everyone here should stop pretending that this is the worst team in the league. Are there problems? Heck yes, but I would bet there are a long line of teams wishing they had the same problems. .600 hockey gets this team to 102 points, this place is crazy some times.
- droe411

They have not played .600 hockey in six weeks against a weaker group of opponents than they will face primarily ON THE ROAD, where the Hawks are less than stellar.

Like I said before - it's not about where they stand now - its about if they can get ~40 more points in the next 32 games. I mean you don't want them to be an eight seed again right? Especially if they can't win on the road.

I'm going to throw this out there. If we trade Kane, the acquiring team has to take Huet & Olesz too. I guess if everyone is going to get stupid crazy with this, I may as well throw some more $^%# at the wall too.

Kaner's play has been mediocre this year, but i don't want him gone. He'll come out of it, hopefully. His confidence is low right now and you saw what you saw last night. 88's on a mini-breakaway, is in a good shooting position and has a step on the defender, but what does he do? Bails out and tries a weak spin-o-rama and then sends a weak backhand wide. Why he didn't drive the net shows me he's lost his mojo in a big way. Like i said, HOPEFULLY, it comes back. He's too young and too ingrained with us to trade away in knee jerk fashion.
- philco28

He was tired, with the lack of scoring depth right now, Q was shifting him and Hoss alot last night. At least that's what it appeared to me alot last night.

Oh man,

This is where you wanted the conversation to go? This is the time for the "trade Kane..." talk? I mean, fine, it's your blog. I think 88 might be.....9th or 10th on the to do list on this team. But other things have been talked to death.


There's no reason at all to trade Patrick Kane. He's still a "star" and he's still a hell of a player, even in spite of this goal slump that he's in. The Hawks aren't in need of a radical shake-up. And even if a Kane for Nash trade made some sense ( I'm not sure it does) questions of how Nash plays with Toews? If not who does Nash play with? Where does Nash fit in leadership wise? None of these need to be asked with Kane.....

It's funny, this time last year, everyone wanted Kane to cut out the partying and take his Hawk career more seriously. Well.......? I know I haven't seen him on TMZ. He clearly came into camp in better shape.He switched to Center when his coach asked. He did everything all his critics asked him to do. And yet it's not good enough.

I'm not opposed to trading any player. ( Except for Toews. That guy's headed for a statue next to Mikita and Hull when it's all said and done.) But I don't see the player that you trade Kane for that makes you say "Wow....Really should consider THAT one..."

Right now Kane is part of a core that is covering for all the other flaws on the team. The goal shouldn't be to change the core.

Kane for Nash,I would never do...if i am trading Kane it is for a center,Tavares perhaps,someone who plays a 2 way style of hockey..however i don't think the islanders would ever go for that

Hockey is a business almost as much as it is a game. They will not trade one of the biggest marketing values they have. I don't know what Nash's marketing value is and if he came to Chi-town I don't think it would be as high as Kane's. Maybe if he scores a OT cup winning goal. On a side note: where is the player Kane set out to be at the beginning of the season? He said he want to be an elite player, game changer at both ends of the ice. I guess it's pretty hard to stop cherry picking and floating around the ice.
- Blackhawks4life

I agree totally. Bobby Ryan is #2 in popularity behind Selanne. Chicks and kids LOVE the guy and if Bar Stool Bob Murray trades him, there better be a helluva lot coming back or there's going to be a lot of pissed off ticket buyers. The Honda Center will rival Phoenix and Dallas in attendance woes.
Kane won't be moved until his production drops off so dramatically that fans start turning on him. Of course then you won't get anywhere near what he's worth which is why it's nearly impossible to trade stars. Unless you're in Edmonton and you'll show up to see anything they throw out there.

what about kane, leddy and a pick for lecavalier, purcell and panik.

We will take kane all day and i m sure he would waive his no trade clause to come back home.

Miller, Roy and Stafford for Kane, Bolland and crawford
- Cpilc

We keep bolland you get Bickell in his place

Oh man,

This is where you wanted the conversation to go? This is the time for the "trade Kane..." talk? I mean, fine, it's your blog. I think 88 might be.....9th or 10th on the to do list on this team. But other things have been talked to death.


There's no reason at all to trade Patrick Kane. He's still a "star" and he's still a hell of a player, even in spite of this goal slump that he's in. The Hawks aren't in need of a radical shake-up. And even if a Kane for Nash trade made some sense ( I'm not sure it does) questions of how Nash plays with Toews? If not who does Nash play with? Where does Nash fit in leadership wise? None of these need to be asked with Kane.....

It's funny, this time last year, everyone wanted Kane to cut out the partying and take his Hawk career more seriously. Well.......? I know I haven't seen him on TMZ. He clearly came into camp in better shape.He switched to Center when his coach asked. He did everything all his critics asked him to do. And yet it's not good enough.

I'm not opposed to trading any player. ( Except for Toews. That guy's headed for a statue next to Mikita and Hull when it's all said and done.) But I don't see the player that you trade Kane for that makes you say "Wow....Really should consider THAT one..."

Right now Kane is part of a core that is covering for all the other flaws on the team. The goal shouldn't be to change the core.
- yahoodi

I agree with you,but what i think JJ
Was getting at is that Kane can get the most value back in a trade,possibly plugging up any holes the hawks have...trade toews doesn't help,trade keith?we are already short quality d men etc...don't get me wrong i agree with you don't trade kane,just don't pay montador that kinda money,or frolik for that matter,but hey hindsight is 20/20
[url]

what about kane, leddy and a pick for lecavalier, purcell and panik.
- boltsfan48

hahaha are you being serious?

what about kane, leddy and a pick for lecavalier, purcell and panik.
- boltsfan48

Why would ANYONE take this contract?