Realistically both are great offers for all teams

VAN decline, they already said no to this offer.

If he's trying to trade him before training camp, then it's likely not going to be for Kane.

IMO better for Chicago helps rebuild massively and give lundkvist top 4 and kravtsov top 6 time and they actually start to produce and learn the NHL

Yeah they said no when the rangers could've gotten 2 cup runs with him now it's only one so the price goes down

VAN can just wait till the TDL for better offers.

Sure they can wait but not gunna get a better offer and would prefer Kane anyway

VAN isn't getting a better offer than this at the TDL. A first and 2 top 5 organizational prospects?

Swap Chytil in for Kravtsov in the Canucks deal;
- VAN is more likely to accept
- NYR stays under the cap

There won't be better offers, that's not how rentals work... unless a player comes with a pending extension

A 1st and top prospect plus a B+ level prospect is a nice retuen

Vancouver will get a better offer at the trade deadline most likely, I can hear the spite in both your voices

Top organizational prospects and top prospects are completely different. Imagine if Zibanejad was a rental right now. Would you accept Rathbone, Klimovich and a first for him?

Canucks pass easily

Klimovich and Rathbone are not comparable to Lundqvist and Kravtsov. This is the problem. Neither of those guys are top prospects. The Rangers players are much higher p the food chain.

I'm sorry, but how on Earth are Klimovich and Rathbone not comparable to Lundkvist and Kravtsov? It's not like those to Ranger guys are top prospects either

There's no spite. But at the deadline, there are a ton of pieces available at the deadline, and only the contenders will be willing to pay.............but if you review the past couple years the going rate is a first and 1 good prospect at most.

2 former firsts vs a 2nd and 3rd
High end offensive players vs projected 3rd liner and second pairing guy
I could go on.................

Youre right. Rathbone is better, and Klimovich is not a reclamation project like Kravtstov. To top it off, neither Rathbone or Klimovich have actively requested a trade, whereas both Lundkvist and Kravtstov have had issues with the Rangers management

That sounds like a pretty solid baseline to me



Klimovich has the potential to be more than just a 3rd liner

Both your guys still have holes in their game. Klim could be a star, but could also be another Gurianov. Rathbone looks good, but he'll never have the offensive upside of Lundqvist.

I'm not a fan of Kravtsov......but him and Lundqvist are much higher upside talents.

Rathbone will never have the offensive upside of Lundkvist? You don't know that. Also, Denis Gurianov as a floor doesn't sound too bad to me

Do you know nothing about Rathbone? AT ALL?

Jack Rathbone this season in the AHL: 40 points in 39 games. Last year: 9 points in 8 games. He is over a point per game in the AHL. Now lets catch up on Nils Lundkvist. 15 points in 34 games. Yup, Rathbone will never have the same offensive upside as Lundkvist, he has BETTER offensive upside.

In the AHL this past season:

Jack Rathbone: 10 goals, 30 assists, 40 points in 39 games
Nils Lundkvist: 3 goals, 12 assits, 15 points in 34 games

This guy knows nothing yet is pulling claims out of his @ss

Not the first Rangers fan whom I've seen that from

Easy pass for Van. Nothing high end here at all just two reclaim projects and what will likely be a late first.