Kxsuited and Qxsuited over smaller suited connectors

[Buckmulligan]

In a smaller game, (4-7 players), loose, I was thinking that it may be more profitable to play Kxsuited and Qxsuited than cards like 87s on down through 54s. The large number of pots you win with a lone high pair I think would far exceed those straights. No one ever discredits those smaller cards in games like these though, nor do credit the K3s and the likes.
One reason people say they play hands like 78s is for deception. Wouldn't it be even more deceptive to show a K6s down for a flush after you raised preflop?

Comments?

[RRRRICK]

I'm not one who believes in playing trash in the name of deception. I think playing speculative hands that have some merit like 87s will separate one from the tight players who only like playing strong starting hands. I think mixing up play is important but playing trash will just confuse your opponents. Raise preflop with K6s and your opponents will think you’re LAG but you would have to do it many times to make it stick which would be most unprofitable

[NMcNasty]

Its generally unprofitable to play either suited connectors or Kxs and Qxs in shorthanded games, but I would agree that in the circumstances where they are playable, Kxs and Qxs are better than the connectors. I'll routinely raise with K6s from the button when its folded to me, while I'll usually fold 67s. I'll very rarely play Qxs outside the blinds.