TSN Off-Season Game Plan: Winnipeg Jets

[The Unknown Poster]

catch is that Florida apparently specified they don't want to move further than 8

All that tells me is they want more value to whatever the Jets would be offering.  They wouldnt take Kane?  Sure they would.  Thing is, if Chevy trades a core piece for a draft pick, he's either going to have to swing another significant deal or be very active in free agency as one of our glaring issues is depth.

 

Looking around the internet, the word seems to be the Jets would draft a centre at the #1 spot.

[17to85]

Florida has a guy they'd like to get but they can't justify taking him at #1 overall but they don't think he'll be around past a certain point, that's there whole mentality here.

[The Unknown Poster]

Florida has a guy they'd like to get but they can't justify taking him at #1 overall but they don't think he'll be around past a certain point, that's there whole mentality here.

Then it wouldnt be Kane + 9 for 1.  Kane for 1 is fair and actually hurts the Jets in the short term.  Florida apparently desperately wants a scoring winger.  Kane would fit in well there.  He'd be a young star the Panthers can market.  For the Jets, having #1 AND #9 would be tremendous.  But it leaves a gaping hole at LW when we're already weak at Centre and RW.

 

On the other hand, there's a chance to do that deal, then either slot Buff in at 2RW or 2LW or trade him for a package, then use the savings to be active in Free Agency.

[17to85]

you don't seem to grasp the idea that Florida wants a high first round pick as well.... Why does every trade you suggest involve under paying compared to what is being asked? Florida isn't unhappy to be forced to take the best player in the draft, but they're willing to go down if some team gives them a stupid price. 

[The Unknown Poster]

Kane is under value??? 

 

You dont think Kane & 9 for 1 is WAAAAY over paying on the part of the Jets?

 

Looking around the internet, the consenus is Kane for 1 is a good value both ways.  It does more for the Panthers in the short term than it does the Jets and draft picks are crap shoots.  There is no telling whether whomever the Jets pick at 1 will have a better career than Kane.  Likewise, the Panthers know what they get in Kane and dont know what they get in a draft pick.

 

Im not comfortable with the trade from the jets perspective to be honest.  But I'd be floored if the Jets gave up their first AND Kane.

[Floyd]

IF Chevy makes any trades, I'd say Kane to Philly...  they need a LW now that Hartnell is gone - Maybe Kane and a goalie prospect for Couturier and Laughton?

 

Possibly Bogo and 4th to Edmonton for Gagner and Fasth?

 

Armchair GM day

[Jimmy Pop]

A deal that would focus on Kane going and strictly pick(s) coming back defies all logic, IMO.

Kane, with warts and all, is a proven commodity. Look up his 5on5 numbers...one of the games best scorers, period. Loads to work on, but he's 22 and signed long term. To me, it's as simple as put him with Scheif and Wheels all year. If he can't produce then, consider moving him.

Only receiving picks means the team is taking a step towards a rebuild rather than a step towards playoffs. I know, we're not winning Lord Stanley's Grail anytime soon, but I thought doing everything we can to get in the playoffs was a logical next step.

[17to85]

what I'm saying is that kane for #1 is not bloody likely to happen. Florida will take Ekblad and trust that he turns into that top pairing defenseman he is projected to be but for a team to convince them to move down it's going to be a payment that you don't want to part with, like 9th overall and a pretty big piece. Stop trying to make a fair trade because a fair trade isn't going to happen any trade involving the #1 overall is going to favour Florida by quite a bit otherwise what's their incentive to do it?

[Atomic]

Taking Ekblad is a waste of the first overall pick IMO

[The Unknown Poster]

what I'm saying is that kane for #1 is not bloody likely to happen. Florida will take Ekblad and trust that he turns into that top pairing defenseman he is projected to be but for a team to convince them to move down it's going to be a payment that you don't want to part with, like 9th overall and a pretty big piece. Stop trying to make a fair trade because a fair trade isn't going to happen any trade involving the #1 overall is going to favour Florida by quite a bit otherwise what's their incentive to do it?

Kane for #1 favours Florida.

[17to85]

 

what I'm saying is that kane for #1 is not bloody likely to happen. Florida will take Ekblad and trust that he turns into that top pairing defenseman he is projected to be but for a team to convince them to move down it's going to be a payment that you don't want to part with, like 9th overall and a pretty big piece. Stop trying to make a fair trade because a fair trade isn't going to happen any trade involving the #1 overall is going to favour Florida by quite a bit otherwise what's their incentive to do it?

Kane for #1 favours Florida.

 

Only in your mind. This draft is not as weak as people make it out to be, there are some pretty good pieces in the top 4 or 5. They're not surefire like some of the past drafts but they are pretty "safe" while still having high potential. Kane doesn't have that kind of value because top line centres or top pairing D (which is what the top 4 of this draft is) are more valuable than wingers. 

[The Unknown Poster]

 

 

what I'm saying is that kane for #1 is not bloody likely to happen. Florida will take Ekblad and trust that he turns into that top pairing defenseman he is projected to be but for a team to convince them to move down it's going to be a payment that you don't want to part with, like 9th overall and a pretty big piece. Stop trying to make a fair trade because a fair trade isn't going to happen any trade involving the #1 overall is going to favour Florida by quite a bit otherwise what's their incentive to do it?

Kane for #1 favours Florida.

 

Only in your mind. This draft is not as weak as people make it out to be, there are some pretty good pieces in the top 4 or 5. They're not surefire like some of the past drafts but they are pretty "safe" while still having high potential. Kane doesn't have that kind of value because top line centres or top pairing D (which is what the top 4 of this draft is) are more valuable than wingers. 

 

Nope, not in my mind.  Look around and read some different discussion.  And then apply some common sense.

 

You're saying Kane is not worth as much as mystery door number 1.  That's ludicrous.  10-15 years from now perhaps we can look back and say Ekblad or Bennett or whomever had better careers than Kane.  Maybe Kane comes out on top.  One in the hand is worth two in the bush.  Kane is the established top line player.  Not only that, but he fills what some speculate to be a burning desire on Florda's part.  Not only that, he's got a good contract.  Not only that, he's the right face for a lower tier team like Florida to market.

 

If Panthers draft Ekblad and the next day call Chevy and offer Ekblad for Kane, straight up, you're saying we'd have to throw in an early round first round draft pick as well?  Not a chance.

 

No expert has called anyone in this draft a franchise player.  Yes, there is talent.  yes there is first line top talent.  But I'd say it falls short of franchise talent and thats right where Kane would be slotted right now.

[17to85]

#1 picks are hardly mystery door #1. You gotta go back a long way to find one that didn't pan out. 

[The Unknown Poster]

#1 picks are hardly mystery door #1. You gotta go back a long way to find one that didn't pan out. 

 

 

2012 # 1: Yak.  At this stage I'd rather have Kane.  So that year, Kane for #1 would have favoured Edmonton

2011 # 1: RNH.  Again, at this stage, I'd rather have Kane.

2006 # 1: Erik Johnson.  Rather have Kane.

2003 #1: MAF.  Rather have Kane.

2001 #1: Kovalchuk.  Points to be made either way but if Kane has a long career and doesnt bolt to the KHL, then Kane's the better deal.

2000 #1: Rick DiPietro.  Rather have Kane.

1999 #1: Patrick Stefan.  Rather have Kane.

1996 #1: Chris Phillps.  Rather have Kane.

 

The list goes on.  A player you *know* is a top 5 pick calibre player versus a pick you *hope* is.

[Floyd]

I'd rather have John Tavares than Kane.

[sweep the leg]

 

 

No expert has called anyone in this draft a franchise player.  Yes, there is talent.  yes there is first line top talent.  But I'd say it falls short of franchise talent and thats right where Kane would be slotted right now.

Kane might have potential to be a franchise player, but nothing he's done to date puts him in that category yet. A career high 57 points after five years in the league does not make anybody a franchise player, unless the definition has changed dramatically. IMO franchise players are guys like Crosby, Malkin, Giroux, Tavares, Getzlaf, etc.

 

Disregard if that's not what you meant. Your last line could be intrepreted either way.

[17to85]

 

#1 picks are hardly mystery door #1. You gotta go back a long way to find one that didn't pan out. 

 

 

2012 # 1: Yak.  At this stage I'd rather have Kane.  So that year, Kane for #1 would have favoured Edmonton

2011 # 1: RNH.  Again, at this stage, I'd rather have Kane.

2006 # 1: Erik Johnson.  Rather have Kane.

2003 #1: MAF.  Rather have Kane.

2001 #1: Kovalchuk.  Points to be made either way but if Kane has a long career and doesnt bolt to the KHL, then Kane's the better deal.

2000 #1: Rick DiPietro.  Rather have Kane.

1999 #1: Patrick Stefan.  Rather have Kane.

1996 #1: Chris Phillps.  Rather have Kane.

 

The list goes on.  A player you *know* is a top 5 pick calibre player versus a pick you *hope* is.

 

as I said, you really are over valuing Kane. Yakupov having a down year in a year when most oiler players had down years doesn't diminish his value that much, and if you think Kane is a better player than RNH you clearly don't watch RNH play. His point totals might have lagged lately but he is playing a very tough role as a skinny young centre in the biggest toughest division in hockey. 

 

as for the rest of the comparables, 2000 was a hell of a long time ago already so that's what I said, you gotta go back a long way. Fleury I'd have ahead of Kane too because for all his faults the guy is still a cup winning goaltender. Johnson is a tougher one, but this past season he did look like that legit #1 D which is more valuable than Kane. Now granted Johnson had some early issues, but I wonder how much of that was related to screwing up his knee getting out of a golf cart? 

 

Now let's look at some others... Hall is way ahead of Kane, Tavares is way ahead of Kane, Mckinnon is way ahead of Kane, Kane is way ahead of Kane, Crosby and Ovechkin no more needs to be said. The fact that you even think Kane is on a comparable level to Kovalchuk says all I need to know about how you over value Kane. Kovalchuk did way more than Kane ever has. Kane is a nice player, but these days the first overall pick is so well scouted it's a gimmie pick. 

[Brandon]

I doubt The Jets make any big moves... They will draft and keep adding to the young core.

[The Unknown Poster]

 

 

 

No expert has called anyone in this draft a franchise player.  Yes, there is talent.  yes there is first line top talent.  But I'd say it falls short of franchise talent and thats right where Kane would be slotted right now.

Kane might have potential to be a franchise player, but nothing he's done to date puts him in that category yet. A career high 57 points after five years in the league does not make anybody a franchise player, unless the definition has changed dramatically. IMO franchise players are guys like Crosby, Malkin, Giroux, Tavares, Getzlaf, etc.

 

Disregard if that's not what you meant. Your last line could be intrepreted either way.

 

I meant Kane is a notch below franchise players.

[The Unknown Poster]

 

 

#1 picks are hardly mystery door #1. You gotta go back a long way to find one that didn't pan out. 

 

 

2012 # 1: Yak.  At this stage I'd rather have Kane.  So that year, Kane for #1 would have favoured Edmonton

2011 # 1: RNH.  Again, at this stage, I'd rather have Kane.

2006 # 1: Erik Johnson.  Rather have Kane.

2003 #1: MAF.  Rather have Kane.

2001 #1: Kovalchuk.  Points to be made either way but if Kane has a long career and doesnt bolt to the KHL, then Kane's the better deal.

2000 #1: Rick DiPietro.  Rather have Kane.

1999 #1: Patrick Stefan.  Rather have Kane.

1996 #1: Chris Phillps.  Rather have Kane.

 

The list goes on.  A player you *know* is a top 5 pick calibre player versus a pick you *hope* is.

 

as I said, you really are over valuing Kane. Yakupov having a down year in a year when most oiler players had down years doesn't diminish his value that much, and if you think Kane is a better player than RNH you clearly don't watch RNH play. His point totals might have lagged lately but he is playing a very tough role as a skinny young centre in the biggest toughest division in hockey. 

 

as for the rest of the comparables, 2000 was a hell of a long time ago already so that's what I said, you gotta go back a long way. Fleury I'd have ahead of Kane too because for all his faults the guy is still a cup winning goaltender. Johnson is a tougher one, but this past season he did look like that legit #1 D which is more valuable than Kane. Now granted Johnson had some early issues, but I wonder how much of that was related to screwing up his knee getting out of a golf cart? 

 

Now let's look at some others... Hall is way ahead of Kane, Tavares is way ahead of Kane, Mckinnon is way ahead of Kane, Kane is way ahead of Kane, Crosby and Ovechkin no more needs to be said. The fact that you even think Kane is on a comparable level to Kovalchuk says all I need to know about how you over value Kane. Kovalchuk did way more than Kane ever has. Kane is a nice player, but these days the first overall pick is so well scouted it's a gimmie pick. 

 

You have a lot of excuses as to why guys who didnt rise to the occasion are better than Kane.  Why do you feel Kane isnt a top tier player?  You have excuses for everyone else.  You under-value Kane.  A lot of people get down on the guy whether it's because of rumours, racism or because he's not as media friendly as other players.

 

Edited to Add:

 

You claim last season was a "down year" for Yak.  He's played two seasons.  Season 1: 17g, 14a, 31 points.  Season 2: 11g, 13a, 24 points.  So how do you know the second year was the down year?  Maybe the first year was the up year?  We can look at Yak's talent and say "he should be a top scoring player" but the same can be said about Kane.

 

Both guys played 111 games the past two seasons.  Yak had 28 goals and 55 points.  Kane had 36 goals and 74 points.  Granted Yak is younger.  But if we're adding "*", add the fact Kane scored 30 goals as a 20 year old.

 

If all things being equal, you'd pick Yak over Kane...I'd disagree with that.

 

The unknown factor is Kane's intent.  The people that argue to keep Kane usually say "he's a 30+ goal scorer, only 22 years old" etc.  But surely the Jets know by now if Kane wants to be here.  If he wants to have a long career with the Winnipeg Jets and is a team player, fits in etc etc, then don't trade him.  If he intends to run out his contract and move on, trade him as soon as you can get a good offer.  Period.

[The Unknown Poster]

Anyone have any thoughts on Ryan Malone?

 

Assuming he's not a raging coke-head and assuming he wants to turn the page (he still has a court case upcoming and the NHL has to weigh in), I've always liked him.  He's been Compliance Bought Out by Tampa Bay.  As a cheap 3rd line LW, perhaps?  He's 34....

[sweep the leg]

Anyone have any thoughts on Ryan Malone?

 

Assuming he's not a raging coke-head and assuming he wants to turn the page (he still has a court case upcoming and the NHL has to weigh in), I've always liked him.  He's been Compliance Bought Out by Tampa Bay.  As a cheap 3rd line LW, perhaps?  He's 34....

I'd definitely take him if you could get him for a one year deal. He's big and good defensively, but at this stage of his career he's more likely a 4th liner. He'll come cheap b/c of his injuries & off ice issues.

 

I think he might end up back in Pittsburgh. They need size & some grit & he's friends with the top players on the team.

[17to85]

 

You claim last season was a "down year" for Yak.  He's played two seasons.  Season 1: 17g, 14a, 31 points.  Season 2: 11g, 13a, 24 points.  So how do you know the second year was the down year?  Maybe the first year was the up year?  We can look at Yak's talent and say "he should be a top scoring player" but the same can be said about Kane.

 

ahh yes, leaving out the games played because of the lockout to try and make it seem like Yakupov accomplished less than he did in his rookie season... How do I know he had a down year? His shooting percentage fell off the map, if you watched him play at all you could see he lost his confidence where as in his first year his confidence was growing and he was playing better as the year went on. When you consider that the entire Oilers team had their confidence broken it makes sense right? 

 

Again who else are there excuses for? RNH? Well go look at the numbers, Kanes best year is 57 points, RNH has a best year of 56 points playing a much tougher position in a year that was widely regarded as a year he struggled in. Stop over rating Kane compared to #1 picks. 

[sweep the leg]

 

 

You claim last season was a "down year" for Yak.  He's played two seasons.  Season 1: 17g, 14a, 31 points.  Season 2: 11g, 13a, 24 points.  So how do you know the second year was the down year?  Maybe the first year was the up year?  We can look at Yak's talent and say "he should be a top scoring player" but the same can be said about Kane.

 

ahh yes, leaving out the games played because of the lockout to try and make it seem like Yakupov accomplished less than he did in his rookie season... How do I know he had a down year? His shooting percentage fell off the map, if you watched him play at all you could see he lost his confidence where as in his first year his confidence was growing and he was playing better as the year went on. When you consider that the entire Oilers team had their confidence broken it makes sense right? 

 

Again who else are there excuses for? RNH? Well go look at the numbers, Kanes best year is 57 points, RNH has a best year of 56 points playing a much tougher position in a year that was widely regarded as a year he struggled in. Stop over rating Kane compared to #1 picks. 

 

Yak's rookie year S% of 21% wasn't sustainable. His S% last year was low, but it's more reasonable that his rookie season. It would be very high risk/high reward trading for him.

 

I'd trade Kane for RNH without hesitation. Much more valuable position & has a higher ceiling IMO.

[The Unknown Poster]

Kane for RNH is reasonable.  17 just wants to win an argument so it doesnt really matter what the facts are.  Trading for Kane for Yak is a bad deal for the Jets.  Which wasnt even the debate.  It was whether Kane to Florida for first overall was more reasonable than Kane + 9th overall for first overall.