Yeah they were just so scared that John Scott would beat them they didn't rough anyone up. John Scott was the reason for our great effort last night. He catalyzed the whole thing. Without him in the lineup it likely would have been another apathetic Loss. Now it was still a loss, but he is the sole reason for the improved play. Perhaps he should adopt the nickname John "The Difference Maker" Scott. Or maybe John "The Intimidator" Scott. Either one works.
- anawrocki

He looks pretty darned intimidating on the bench.

Myers missed a number of games earlier this year with injuries. He's playing on a team that is underachieving and has had a huge number of man games lost.

Underachieving is what Pat Kane is doing this year as well.

Love #88 all you want, doesn't bother me. I'm just saying I personally would make the trade even up with the Sabres but I doubt Buffalo would.
- RickJ

I have a feeling neither team would do this deal...
If we didn't have Seabrook locked long term plus another 5 mil D in Keith... But we do.

Can a team have one guy on it who plays poorly without the puck? But adds 70 - 90 points a year or is that unacceptable?
- mvp0207

Sure, the Hawks do.

That doesn't make him a great, "untradeable" hockey player. There's no mystery here.

This argument is getting really old. I know you want to think I hate Kane, but sorry, you are not getting it. It's not about hate, it's about fairly, honestly valuating players.

He is a premier, perimeter player in a sport that does not place a high premium on perimeter play. End of argument.

Sure you can have Kane with his less than stellar play without the puck. Are you happy? Great.

The history of the NHL is full of guys who put up big points but were ineffectual elsewhere on the ice. Good, but not truly great players.

I guess all we can do is see how each of their careers end up.

Has Myers play got better or worse in each of his last two seasons since his rookie year?
- mvp0207

He hasn't gotten worse. Teams gameplan around him now. If anything he still hasn't adjusted. We don't need wingers. We need centers. Kane couldn't play center. We don't have a need for him unless a perfect deal was in place.

No we won't because franchise d-men for our organization have been nearly impossible to find. Myers will most likely be our best d-man in franchise history. You can't look at the stats. If you watch the Sabres on a nightly basis you would realize. Plus Myers was benched for one game when we were doing really well earlier in the year and was never benched again. He is going nowhere and there are very very few players I would trade him for. None of them are named Kane. Myers is future captain material. Kane will never wear the C in his lifetime. No thanks.
- SabresOnAWarpath

Well Thank God because neither would I. So why are we arguing best of luck Tyler and Buffalo.

The Sabres already turned down Getzlaf for Myers. I like Kane the player but Meyers is already a force and a franchise D at age 22. The biggest negative for Kane is that he isn't a center.
- Slump Buster

Agree. Would you consider trading Myers for Kane if you are Buffalo owner? The ownership would be attracting serious sponsor $ to the team if they could market Kane there. Plus, Kane would be make serious $ in endorsements if he played in Buffalo (not that he is not doing the same in Chicago). This is why I think Kane would accept trade to Buffalo.

I still would think it takes Myers + to get Kane.

Where do I sign up for this?
- ilinkhawk

Not happening.

with hawks fans so often looking for that "ladd type player" (myself included) anybody find what Tessier blogged about today interesting? my mind begins to wonder if any type of package deal with prospects would interest the Jets. i'd gladly give up prospects for a proven guy like Ladd.
- dr_boloney

The Hawks haven't replaced Ladd yet..

Even at $4.4 which is a bit rich there are teams which would take him.

He has two Cups, can play in almost any situation and pound for pound is one of the toughest/strongest guys in the league.

The player they have that would be worth taking a chance on here is Evander Kane.

Just stop. Gragnani has been awful this year. He got pp time the other night but when we are totally healthy on the backend he's the 8th best d-mn on the team.
- SabresOnAWarpath

I guess all we can do is see how each of their careers end up.

Has Myers play got better or worse in each of his last two seasons since his rookie year?
- mvp0207

Nobody is bagging on Kane. Myers is now back to playing over 25 minutes a game. It really is something to see him pinch in deep and then beat everyone back down the ice. He did slump a bit at times but what 19 or 20 year old doesn't? Don't forget that this kid didn't start playing hockey until age 11. The sky is the limit but he is their #1 D now (by a mile).

Besides, the Sabres problem is too many wingers and no centers.

Agree. Would you consider trading Myers for Kane if you are Buffalo owner? The ownership would be attracting serious sponsor $ to the team if they could market Kane there. Plus, Kane would be make serious $ in endorsements if he played in Buffalo (not that he is not doing the same in Chicago). This is why I think Kane would accept a trade to Buffalo.

I still would think it takes Myers + to get Kane.
- Nerko77

In a heartbeat.

Not happening.
- John Jaeckel

Agreed...

Nobody is bagging on Kane. Myers is now back to playing over 25 minutes a game. It really is something to see him pinch in deep and then beat everyone back down the ice. He did slump a bit at times but what 19 or 20 year old doesn't? Don't forget that this kid didn't start playing hockey until age 11. The sky is the limit but he is their #1 D now (by a mile).

Besides, the Sabres problem is too many wingers and no centers.
- Slump Buster

Same with the Hawks, who have a bunch of "centers" who are more comfortable/better on the flank: Frolik, Sharp, Olesz,

No we won't because franchise d-men for our organization have been nearly impossible to find. Myers will most likely be our best d-man in franchise history. You can't look at the stats. If you watch the Sabres on a nightly basis you would realize. Plus Myers was benched for one game when we were doing really well earlier in the year and was never benched again. He is going nowhere and there are very very few players I would trade him for. None of them are named Kane. Myers is future captain material. Kane will never wear the C in his lifetime. No thanks.
- SabresOnAWarpath

I can see him wearing a C for Team USA at somepoint in his career. Anything is possible.

Agree. Would you consider trading Myers for Kane if you are Buffalo owner? The ownership would be attracting serious sponsor $ to the team if they could market Kane there. Plus, Kane would be make serious $ in endorsements if he played in Buffalo (not that he is not doing the same in Chicago). This is why I think Kane would accept trade to Buffalo.

I still would think it takes Myers + to get Kane.
- Nerko77

If there is a reason... this is why Sabres would actually do this deal. He is a money maker.

You know I really like Stalberg but for the right return.......... see ya Vik
- RickJ

stalberg in my opinion has the most upside
if he is moved and gets proper coaching and not punished every time he makes a mistake stalberg has the potential to be a 30 plus goal scorer
he is also developing his physical play and could be a force to deal with
the guy is big and fast and when he hits someone they know it

The Hawks haven't replaced Ladd yet..

Even at $4.4 which is a bit rich there are teams which would take him.

He has two Cups, can play in almost any situation and pound for pound is one of the toughest/strongest guys in the league.

The player they have that would be worth taking a chance on here is Evander Kane.
- Al

so are you saying that kane is a better fit for the hawks? or are you saying, kane is a tougher guy to find compared to a "ladd type" which can be got for less?

i doubt it could ever happen, but was just a thought. always interested to see how we're still all whining about losing ladd and at the same time, the Jets blogger is writing about how he is a bad captain who takes lazy penalties.

Sure, the Hawks do.

That doesn't make him a great, "untradeable" hockey player. There's no mystery here.

This argument is getting really old. I know you want to think I hate Kane, but sorry, you are not getting it. It's not about hate, it's about fairly, honestly valuating players.

He is a premier, perimeter player in a sport that does not place a high premium on perimeter play. End of argument.

Sure you can have Kane with his less than stellar play without the puck. Are you happy? Great.

The history of the NHL is full of guys who put up big points but were ineffectual elsewhere on the ice. Good, but not truly great players.
- John Jaeckel

Alright you obviously dont read my posts because I listed a number of players I'd trade him for BY NAME and also stated over and over and over how he is tradeable. All I said is Myers for Him straight up is crazy for me.

Permieter players have a place in the game.

Alright you obviously dont read my posts because I listed a number of players I'd trade him for BY NAME and also stated over and over and over how he is tradeable. All I said is Myers for Him straight up is crazy for me.

Permieter players have a place in the game.
- mvp0207

They do with his skill... and age.

Here's the problem: he hasn't done it by himself.

He had some huge games especially in 09. He disappeared at times too.

For the now 8 millionth time, points are NOT the sole valuator of a hockey player.

They don't do it by themselves. Play with—and WITHOUT— the puck determines a hockey player's worth Spare me the "you need both types of players" argument. That is the fallback of people who don't fully understand the game.

This is why hockey people will tell you that guys like Toews and Datsyuk and Crosby are the best players in the game. Play with—and without— the puck.
- John Jaeckel

and will go into the corers to get it unlike kanes stick check skate by approach

if we can get good value for kane he is the core guy i would be most willing to trade

Not happening.
- John Jaeckel

Agree. They should have never traded his rights. When they did, they thought they could keep Hjammer and Niemi. Then, SJ offer sheet to Hjammer screwed everything up. We know the rest.

Must be a Quebec thing, you turn everything into a debate. Jiri Tlusty has more goals this year so far than Kane. Only a simpleton would even think Tlusty or his ilk would be involved in a trade for Patrick Kane.

Think battleship for battleship or star for star. Is that too hard?
- RickJ

Careful not to turn this into a cultural debate Rick.

We're saying the same thing here. I'm saying if we trade Kane, it cannot be for 2 Jiri Tlusty's. Go back and read the thread before assuming.

In a heartbeat.
- John Jaeckel

Getting Tyler Myers and Tyler Ennis for Kane would be a move to make. But if Tyler Myers is the focal point of what were getting back, were making a huge mistake. He makes poor decisions with the puck and is soft as well. Why are we even discussing making moves with Buffalo that dont involve Pominville or Vanek? They have nothing to offer us. Keep Kane, move Sharp to Buffalo for Pominville and Gragniani.

Alright you obviously dont read my posts because I listed a number of players I'd trade him for BY NAME and also stated over and over and over how he is tradeable. All I said is Myers for Him straight up is crazy for me.

Permieter players have a place in the game.
- mvp0207

You are right. It is needed on the PP. The hawks just don't have net presence or a shot from the point. And the PP is so much more important in today's NHL. Good PP + decent PK + even 5 on 5 = Top 5 team in league IMO.

Here's the problem with the whole you need "both types of players" argument.

Look no further than the 2011-12 Chicago Blackhawks. Finesse players and slugs.

Very few all around players who play well with—and without— the puck. Now you'll default to, "look at the 2009-10 team."

But what you fail to appreciate is that guys like Byfuglien, Brouwer, Ladd (and more) were ALL good WITHOUT the puck as well as relatively to very good with it.

Look at the Boston Bruins. How many soft players do they have? Damn few, if any.

Look at Detroit, their finesse players are all also tough as nails: Datsyuk, Zetterberg, even Fillipula.

There is no mystery here. Only people who want to hold on to the argument that points by themselves make a great player. And those types of players make a great team.

They don't.