haohmaru
boomshakalaka
Are we removing from the equation the fact that the few weeks we'd be adding this player for would be the playoffs with the hopes of winning the Stanley Cup, which is the whole point of all of this? Seems important to mention.
I'm not saying I would even want to trade one of our firsts for Kane (I wouldn't and definitely not the Dallas one) but if trading for Kane is in the cards you can't dismiss it without acknowledging how adding a player that good for a playoff run really strengthens the forward group to go after a cup. A Kane type player in our forward group last year could've been the difference between us puttering out where we did and us winning the cup, we were that close already.
So much has to happen between now and the TDL it's not even really worth discussing that much at this point because so much can and will change.
I get that but:
A.) There's nothing guaranteed about adding a 34 year old Patrick Kane to this roster and the Cup is ours.
B.) This is strong draft and, especially if the ultimate goal (Cup) isn't reached, you're likely giving up on a 1st round draft pick that will likely contribute to the Rangers roster for YEARS and that's IF that's all it takes to acquire him (it won't be).
C.) The Cap gyrations required to get this done are likely to be onerous.
D.) Chicago has made the playoffs once in the last 5 years. Not saying this is Kane's fault but it sure has to make you think a bit about it.
Well everything I've seen about this regime suggests that they would prefer the elite scorer for the few weeks that the Stanley Cup will be decided. So I would prepare yourself.
Who was the "elite scorer" last year under Drury? Copp? His TDL moves last year were phenomenal. Until I see differently I don't see him trading the house for a short term rental of Kane.