Patrick Kane is too small to play in the NHL.
Heck, I even thought he was too small for junior hockey.
The first time I saw Kane in a London Knights uniform, I thought somebody dressed the equipment manager's son and, giggling, pointed him in the direction of the ice. Figured it was some sort of bizarre hockey joke.
Once I realized Kane actually was a player, I started to get a little concerned. Sure, he did play for the Knights, the team everyone around the OHL loves to hate. But you don't want to see anyone get seriously hurt, even a Knight.
And I believed Kane, all 5-foot-10 and 163 pounds of him, was going to get left behind in a crumpled heap when he went into the corner against some of the OHL's heavy hitters.
Never happened, though many tried.
In terms of pure skill, Kane was among the best players I've ever seen skate through the OHL. Better than Joe Thornton. Better than Rick Nash. Better than Eric Staal. None of them could do more with the puck than Kane.
But even after seeing Kane dominate his peers to the tune of nearly three points per game last year, I was very skeptical how that would translate at the next level. I figured the wee lad wasn't going to cut it in the Show.
In the NHL, danger lurked in every corner and in front of every net. He wouldn't make the team, let alone have any kind of impact, as an 18-year-old. Not after just one year in junior.
I've been proven wrong. Kane, who looks more like the neighborhood paper boy than a rising NHL superstar, belongs in the NHL.
Seems to me people said talked about Kane the same way they did about some slight, blond-haired fella from Brantford nearly 30 years ago. Oh, that skinny Gretzky kid, they said, had a great junior career but he won't stand up to the hammering he'll take in the NHL.
How did that turn out, anyway?