Guerin isn't moving a 2nd and Beckman for Domi.

Drury says no thanks, keep Kane at that cost.

I can deal with that to get Kane. You’ve taken nothing from me that I truly can’t lose

I disagree I like this deal. We have to give them something lol. The first hurts but it isn’t this year. Which is key imo

Taking the Myers contract off TB's hands would probably increase the return beyond what you have here. Lafferty isn't like a superstar but he's a good asset and taking back a cap dump should cost something.

I wouldn't mind trading a first and a third for McCabe as long as it was our 2024 first. We traded away our 2022 first in the Fiala deal.

No need to give up Jones. Kravstov wouldn't need to go if not for our cap situation. You'll get next year's 1st kravstov and a B prospect for 40 games of Kane and that is a good return given the circumstances.

Wild don’t like domi at all. He is apparently of no interest to them. According to their best writer. Could have gotten him a dozen times the last year and never had interest.

I do this if I'm Drury. The only piece that really hurts is the first-rounder but when you go all-in, you go all-in. Jones has been one of my favorite prospects in recent years but with Matthew Robertson on his heels and now Mikkola ahead of him (would they re-up with him if the $ is good?), he's pretty much the odd-man out. This is without even mentioning Ben Harpur, who was given an extension.

Chicago GM has 3 choices if Kane limits him to just the Rangers...1. trade him to the Rangers for whatever he can get...2. keep him and let him become a free agent and get nothing...and 3. keep him and sign him. If this rumor is true, then Drury has all the leverage, like Gorton with Adam Fox and the Canes, and what happened? There is no reason to give up much in that circumstance. But if Kane will go to other teams like Carolina or Vegas, then the cost will be too high for the Rangers IMO and they are better off chasing a guy like Janeau or Bjugstad or Lafferty.

I wouldn’t give a squirt of watered down mustard for Domi!

Literally. Jack Johnson. I did like him in COL tho

Yeah I agree. I leaned a bit conservative here but probably could get more.

I disagree its not like Fox at all. Its much more like Giroux, as I explained. Fox was an unsigned NCAA player who had already been traded once.

Is...that not what I put in the trade? I guess you can argue about if Jones is a "B" prospect but...you're acting like I'm asking you to trade Lidstrom

Assume you're referring to Russo? If so, I trust that man so thanks for bringing that up. Lets just use Minnesota as an example team then, where 2nd+prospect is the return for Domi who is having a good year.

Think that could be doable

Jones is an NHL ready player that is going to have a long NHL career. He's just not the type of player this coach wants to play. I wouldn't call him a B prospect.

The thing with the idea of "the coach doesn't want to play him" is that it drives down his value and perception. I'm not disagreeing that its because of Gallant he's not playing, but to other NHL GMs and coaches they think "huh, this coach who is relatively highly regarded doesn't think this guy is cut out for NHL minutes." Also, he's played less than 40 NHL games to date. You are again just proclaiming that he will have a long NHL career based on....what? Prospects can and do bust or just don't work all the time. I'm not saying he WILL but that will the counter argument from other GMs. It is very common for us fans to think all our prospects are going to be long time NHLers, and I don't mean to **** on you or anything. But, that is the way the business works. You're also getting PATRICK KANE who is older but has a resume that is going to demand a decent return even if he forces his way to the Rangers. Giroux, a player I love but is not Patrick Kane, got a 1st and a guy similiar to Kravtsov in Tippett and a 3rd. You think Kane is worth the same (I'd say the 3rd and the "B" prospect are the same), but I'm telling you he is going to get a bit more which could be Jones.

Wrong. Fox made it known he would stay in college one more year and become a UFA and sign with the Rangers in a year so Carolina had no choice but to trade him and got what they could, which was way less than if he didn't put them in a corner. IF....and the most important word here is IF........IF Kane has told Chicago only the Rangers, it's the same. In that IF scenario, Chicago has no leverage and should take whatever Drury offers because it's better than nothing. I am still of the opinion this rumor is BS and the Rangers are NOT trading for Kane.

Wrong. Adam Fox was very wishy-washy about if he'd sign in CGY or CAR, and he honestly was a bit underscouted by other teams. Rangers were both smart to see his upside, and lucky that they didn't have to worry about wishy-washy feelings since he was open about wanting to play for the Rangers. Plus, with Fox it is a younger player who you are trading the rights for. Check out this Rangers blog post about how he was non-commital about signing elsewhere before the Rangers acquired him: https://bluelinestation.com/2022/04/30/april-30-new-york-rangers-history-adam-fox-becomes-blueshirt/

Patrick Kane is a proven NHL superstar and Cup winner. And again, Giroux said "I'm going to Florida or I'm not waiving my NTC." You can verify that point here: https://nhl.nbcsports.com/2022/03/21/claude-giroux-arrives-in-florida-time-to-go-to-work/ If Kane says "I'm going to the Rangers or I'm not waiving my NTC" are you seriously saying that Chicago can't get a comparable or better return than CHUCK FLETCHER got for Giroux?

Wrong. Fox wanted to play for the Rangers and forced his way there. All he had to do was play one more year and college and then sign with them. Carolina had no leverage. Same thing. Bottom line is Kane isn't being traded to NY. Drury wouldn't have traded for Tarasenko if he had interest.

It is absolutely not the same thing and I don't know how you don't understand that. When Adam Fox was traded for he was seen as a promising young defenseman, but not really the Norris level player we know he is. Patrick Kane is Patrick Kane. Also, before you said he didn't force his way to NYR, now you are saying he did (which is what I said?). I'm glad to see you answered my question that you do think there is a stupider GM than Chuck Fletcher if the Blackhawks can't get a better deal for Kane than he got for a Giroux who also forced his way to Florida, I'm sure Blackhawks fans will be happy to hear that.

Seriously, explain to me how a guy who hadn't played a single NHL game who forced his way to a team is more comparble to Kane than another player who was a franchise icon forcing his way to a team (Giroux). And do it without being a broken record.

Isn't it funny how the Rangers are holding out Kravtsov and Lecyshyn, two guys who I said had to be traded/waived to make Kane work, as of today? Weird, its almost like they may have interest in Kane.

The comparison has nothing to do with the talent level or status of the players involved, it has to do with how Fox handcuffed Carolina forcing them to take less in a trade because it was Rangers or nothing, which was the rumor of what Kane is doing to Chicago. Get that now? It's the player leaving the team they play for little choice but trade them to one team. Pretty simple really and it absolutely is the same thing.

If they do trade for Kane, it will be Kravstov, a player like Jones, and a 2nd round draft pick for 50% retention and maybe a 4th to another team for 50% more retention. Chicago isn't getting any more than that IF it happens. Still don't think they do it.

How do you not understand that Giroux handcuffed the Flyers to go to Florida and they got a 1st, a Kravtsov like player, and a 3rd. Kane is better (or seen as better), so that 3rd would be Jones instead? Get that now? Its the same...exact...thing.