Dude - most defensemen are paid to play defense first. Seabs > Buff - at D - all day.

It;s too bad that Buff did not see his own potential as a power forward. That my friend would likely have been Hall of Fame material under the right coaching.
- Return of the Roar

I agree. I don't watch Jets games, but I saw buff during the 2010 run, and no one could handle him. he was a -2 last year, Seabrook was an even. I'm saying, I'd look another direction before trading Kane.

Yep and further along in his career as well.
- Al

Let's just look at Patrick Kane from a pure hockey point of view. As a player of very small physical stature, he can and will never be a dominant player despite his incredible skill level, elite passing ability and the offensive excitement he can generate. The best teams have found a way to shut him down and push his play to the perimeter. (As you know, I don't like small perimeter players much because they don't win very often in the big boy nasty NHL).

Therefore, he becomes icing on the cake or the cherry on top of dessert that excels on a great team with a mix of high skill and big physical players. Expecting him to be an awesome 200 foot player who will continually go to the net and be physical is way too much to ask him for.

If I know Scotty Bowman's thinking, he would trade Kane in a heartbeat for the right player to help his team win. That's all he cares about, winning, not how many Budweisers a player can sell on game night. Contracts aside, any of Shea Weber, Tyler Meyers, Getzlaf, Perry, Evander Kane and probably a signed Parise would work for Scotty.

And you know what? I doubt Brian Burke would swap Phil Kessel even up for Pat Kane.

Islanders wouldn't trade Tavares for Kane.
- isles10289

I think the Isles hold their chips until their stadium deal gets done. Then Wang will sell to a real owner who will have lots of young talent to develop/trade with.

A couple of things I can't let pass...

Seabrook was the best defesneman in the Cup Finals.

Seabrook has been the best defesnseman for the Hawks since they won the Cup.

Seabrook is a $5.8 mill cap hit not a $7 mill cap hit.
- Al

I love Byfuglien. I think he could have been an all-world forward if he had wanted to. He is a unique, two-dimensional defenseman. But for what i want a d-man to do, I take Seabrook. And I agree with Al, he is the Hawks' best defenseman night in and night out the last two years.

The Swedish kid with the funny name does nto get enough credit either.

Islanders wouldn't trade Tavares for Kane.
- isles10289

I wouldn't either, Tavares is really coming into his own this year, just imagine if/when he has a better team around him.

Could Chicago deal with the cap hit that Parise would come in around, even with sending Kane the other way? If Parise ended up on Chicago though... jeez, I might have to change favorite teams. He and Toews are my top two faves...
- Lohaus

Parise will have a cap hit close to Kane's.

I went back and amended a bit - for the most part it was about avoiding pay. +1 on the Savard/Keenan thing.
- Return of the Roar

Keenan had a lot of power back then and wound up being GM, although it didn't last long.

Chellios was in the prime of his career and Savard wasn't= Great trade for the Hawks.

A couple of things I can't let pass...

Seabrook was the best defenseman in the Cup Finals.

Seabrook has been the best defenseman for the Hawks since they won the Cup.

Seabrook is a $5.8 mill cap hit not a $7 mill cap hit.
- Al

Indeed, but now at 7.0 mil. are you getting that Seabrook?

The Swedish kid with the funny name does nto get enough credit either.
- John Jaeckel

+1

Don't you think his potential is being held back under the "system" they play in the D zone?

FYI , Parise's cap hit is an even 6 mil.

Keenan had a lot of power back then and wound up being GM, although it didn't last long.

Chellios was in the prime of his career and Savard wasn't= Great trade for the Hawks.
- Al

That Chelios trade was a disaster: Eriksson, and pick that turned into Adam Munro and a pick that turned into Steve McCarthy. Ugh. I just vomited in my mouth. Someone owes Bob Murray a kick in the you know whats.

+1

Don't you think his potential is being held back under the "system" they play in the D zone?
- Return of the Roar

Somewhat, yes.

Let's just look at Patrick Kane from a pure hockey point of view. As a player of very small physical stature, he can and will never be a dominant player despite his incredible skill level, elite passing ability and the offensive excitement he can generate. The best teams have found a way to shut him down and push his play to the perimeter. (As you know, I don't like small perimeter players much because they don't win very often in the big boy nasty NHL).

Therefore, he becomes icing on the cake or the cherry on top of dessert that excels on a great team with a mix of high skill and big physical players. Expecting him to be an awesome 200 foot player who will continually go to the net and be physical is way too much to ask him for.

If I know Scotty Bowman's thinking, he would trade Kane in a heartbeat for the right player to help his team win. That's all he cares about, winning, not how many Budweisers a player can sell on game night. Contracts aside, any of Shea Weber, Tyler Meyers, Getzlaf, Perry, Evander Kane and probably a signed Parise would work for Scotty.

And you know what? I doubt Brian Burke would swap Phil Kessel even up for Pat Kane.
- RickJ

The other point is this might be the perfect setting for Kane becasue he needs others, he can't carry a team on his own...

Now he gets a ton of attention and isn't one of the top two forwards on the team.

In fairness he does help make players better...Stalberg would agree and I think even Toews would also.

But Kane is the ultimitae cherry on the cake as you said and is still the best perimeter player in the game....Problem is that might not matter as much in other places as here...Actually I know it wouldn't.

These are the type of trades/discussion of trades that wields no return. There is no way that The Hawks can truely win any deal that Kane is involve in. Just as in Pittsburgh there is no trade for Malkin or Crosby. Either the Cap Issues that would accompany the players in return or the risk in prospects/draft picks.

Kane is a true talent. He is young and has an amazing future ahead of him. That is also his curse in the trade game. Just my opinion.

If you're not looking for fair valuve, Paul Martin for Kane is okay by me.

Indeed, but now at 7.0 mil. are you getting that Seabrook?
- dstarz20

The cap hit is not $7 mill.

Let's just look at Patrick Kane from a pure hockey point of view. As a player of very small physical stature, he can and will never be a dominant player despite his incredible skill level, elite passing ability and the offensive excitement he can generate. The best teams have found a way to shut him down and push his play to the perimeter. (As you know, I don't like small perimeter players much because they don't win very often in the big boy nasty NHL).

Therefore, he becomes icing on the cake or the cherry on top of dessert that excels on a great team with a mix of high skill and big physical players. Expecting him to be an awesome 200 foot player who will continually go to the net and be physical is way too much to ask him for.


- RickJ[b]If I know Scotty Bowman's thinking, he would trade Kane in a heartbeat for the right player to help his team win. That's all he cares about, winning, not how many Budweisers a player can sell on game night. Contracts aside, any of Shea Weber, Tyler Meyers, Getzlaf, Perry, Evander Kane and probably a signed Parise would work for Scotty.

And you know what? I doubt Brian Burke would swap Phil Kessel even up for Pat Kane.

Great post.

At one time, I thought Kane could possibly become a Datsyuk-like player (and he of course, said it himself). When I say Datsyuk like I mean a guy who is small but pound for pound a beat and very physical AND creative AND defensively sound.

But maybe I was being delusional. Players like Datsyuk don't come along very often.

The bolded, italicized part is what I am saying. And that's all fans should care about too.

Go back and read mine and then read yours. You toss in things like "I know it" "Ask a player" and "genius". Insulting, flat out. Just attempts to put down me instead of my opinions. Not to mention you are wrong in doing so.

It isn't about being 3 on 5.

3 on 5 with a guy on the red line.
4 on 5 with a guy inside the blue line.

Clearly the Preds have a better chance to score on the 3 on 5, but that doesn't matter in this situation. The situation is about what gives the Blackhawks a better chance to score, which is the 3 on 5 with a guy on the red line.ny
- HawkFan27

The only condescending JJ thing that didn't get thrown your way was him calling you "pal" at the end.

The cap hit is not $7 mill.
- Al

He's still getting 7 million, cap or not.

There are two reasons why this team is struggling. 1. Roster construction. Bowman once again did a horrible job filling the role player positions. This team again has been soft and small in this department. He had a chance to change that and picked the wrong guys. 2. Current- injuries. You aren't going to win many games when you field 5 rookies to go along with another 20 year old. Especially when you have two superstars out of the lineup. And when you compound 1 and 2, you are in some trouble.

Patrick Kane isn't going to be traded. Bowman isn't as stupid as the traditional "what have you done for me lately" Chicago fan. Kane brings too much to the table with his unique talents. And you have to add on whether you like it or not... what he has done for this franchise in the past (marketing, Stanley Cup winning goal, and he did have a great playoff performance that year). And let's not forget his age.

Now can a deal come along that "could" happen? Sure. But it's highly highly unlikely. So I think it's quite a waste of time really to talk about. When healthy... this is a very good team that needs some changes to make them great in their role players. Not their superstars. Health, a more balanced lineup, and less reliance on 20 year old kids to fill roles is what we need. Not dealing a guy who has proven to be a huge contributor to he past success of this team who happens to be 23.

What's Seabrook on pace for? 39 Points...+18? On a much better team? He's not worth 7 mil.
- dstarz20

Seabs isn't a point scoring defenseman.. that's the problem. He's a very very solid defenseman who is very much worth what he's getting paid.

Winnipeg is a .500 team in a much much crappier division. He's still on pace to have a -19 +/-. Again.. he's a pretty bad defensive player and can't find a spot to call "home" on the offensive side.

The cap hit is not $7 mill.
- Al

Guys,
Once and for all... The only thing that matters is THE CAP HIT. The average amount of his total salary over the length of the contract. They could be paying Seabrook $12 million this year and $1 million next year and his cap hit would not change. Stop arguing what he's worth relative what he is making this year.

He's still getting 7 million, cap or not.
- dstarz20

His salary only matters to Rocky Wirtz.

There are two reasons why this team is struggling. 1. Roster construction. Bowman once again did a horrible job filling the role player positions. This team again has been soft and small in this department. He had a chance to change that and picked the wrong guys. 2. Current- injuries. You aren't going to win many games when you field 5 rookies to go along with another 20 year old. Especially when you have two superstars out of the lineup. And when you compound 1 and 2, you are in some trouble.

Patrick Kane isn't going to be traded. Bowman isn't as stupid as the traditional "what have you done for me lately" Chicago fan. Kane brings too much to the table with his unique talents. And you have to add on whether you like it or not... what he has done for this franchise in the past (marketing, Stanley Cup winning goal, and he did have a great playoff performance that year). And let's not forget his age.

Now can a deal come along that "could" happen? Sure. But it's highly highly unlikely. So I think it's quite a waste of time really to talk about. When healthy... this is a very good team that needs some changes to make them great in their role players. Not their superstars. Health, a more balanced lineup, and less reliance on 20 year old kids to fill roles is what we need. Not dealing a guy who has proven to be a huge contributor to he past success of this team who happens to be 23.
- ilinkhawk

His skills and age are valid points. Marketing and what he has done in the past are meaningless. He's done some things in the past that could get a player traded.

I don't think he's getting traded either. I'm not sure, in the end, that's the right thing. Not sure it wouldn't be either.

Guys,
Once and for all... The only thing that matters is THE CAP HIT. The average amount of his total salary over the length of the contract. They could be paying Seabrook $12 million this year and $1 million next year and his cap hit would not change. Stop arguing what he's worth relative what he is making this year.
- furso27

Only thing that matters.

Good God, I wish I had as many free accountants as Rocky does here on this board.

Seabs isn't a point scoring defenseman.. that's the problem. He's a very very solid defenseman who is very much worth what he's getting paid.

Winnipeg is a .500 team in a much much crappier division. He's still on pace to have a -19 +/-. Again.. he's a pretty bad defensive player and can't find a spot to call "home" on the offensive side.
- CaptainBlackhawk

I said it before he was signed and will say again.

The only defender better than Seabrook his age is Weber...In a few years it shouldn't shock anyone if we refer to #2 and #7 as Seabrook and Keith instead.

Seabrook, if he doesn't suffer a bad injury could have a Pronger like career....