Player Discussion Evander Kane - Part 4

[Dingo44]

I dont have to play a game to understand it

It sure as heck helps.

 

[joshjull]

Ryan O'Reilly is awesome, but he's still a hockey player and like every hockey player, he's better when he plays with Samson Reinhart.

You need to stop using these stats as absolutely proof of something and then making grand assertions based it. They are a small part of the picture when breaking things down and making evaluations.


1) The samples sizes of the time ROR and Sam played away from each other are roughly 5x larger than the sample of them together. To stated the obvious that means you're comparing apples to oranges.

2) You're also portraying this, whether you realize it or not, as if the only difference between the 880mins ROR played w/out Sam and the 167mins with Sam was just Sam. That's a big oversimplification. Obviously they both played with a myriad of other line mates throughout that time. Plus they have another line mate on their line when together.

3) You're also arguing Sam makes everyone better just look at ROR with and without him. Well look at Sam with and without ROR. He quite obviously had some better number with ROR than without. Not sure how you determined Sam was pulling up ROR and not the other way around. Or the more likely explanation that they played well together during that stretch.

4) Another factor left out is usage and role. What roles/usage did they have together? What were they apart? Did they fluctuate at all when apart? Etc

My point is there are a multitude of factors that could be impacting the differences in those numbers. Those numbers are telling us that last season Sam and ROR had better numbers together than they did apart. Those numbers don't tell us all of the why. Nor do those numbers tell us if its sustainable for a sample as large as their time apart. It just tells us what happened in that sample size.

I happen to be a big Reinhart fan and this is not an attack or critiscim of him but of how you use these numbers. You read WAY too much into them.

 

[Rasmus CacOlainen]

ROR lines have been most consistently good considering their usage - heavy minutes vs top competition and more often than not in D zone starts vs Sam who tends to start in the O zone more often and vs easier competition. But lets ignore all this and pretend a couple of stats prove Sam is the greatest player in the NHL today. Thats your logic... anyway I dont particularly like Kane with ROR due to the heavier defensive lifting ROR lines take and Kane is not good at defensive hockey. Terrible fit with Jack for obvious reasons. With Sam - yes please.

 

[Aladyyn]

ROR lines have been most consistently good considering their usage - heavy minutes vs top competition and more often than not in D zone starts vs Sam who tends to start in the O zone more often and vs easier competition. But lets ignore all this and pretend a couple of stats prove Sam is the greatest player in the NHL today. Thats your logic... anyway I dont particularly like Kane with ROR due to the heavier defensive lifting ROR lines take and Kane is not good at defensive hockey. Terrible fit with Jack for obvious reasons. With Sam - yes please.

Stop using "competition" as some magic word when there are perfectly reasonable explanations from within. Competition changes, but factors related to the team and the player affect every game. ROR's numbers dipped because of health and fatigue reasons. He played way below his level for like a month and consistently won his matchups the rest of the year.

And FWIW, according to PuckIQ Sam had slightly better numbers against "Elite" competition last season.

To get back on-topic, we shouldn't be looking to maximize Evander Kane at the expense of better players. There is really no way to do that with the way the team is constructed currently, therefore he can't be a long-term part of the team.

 

[Rasmus CacOlainen]

Stop using "competition" as some magic word when there are perfectly reasonable explanations from within. Competition changes, but factors related to the team and the player affect every game. ROR's numbers dipped because of health and fatigue reasons. He played way below his level for like a month and consistently won his matchups the rest of the year.

And FWIW, according to PuckIQ Sam had slightly better numbers against "Elite" competition last season.

ROR was consistently playing heavy minutes versus better competition and with worse zone starts and still outplayed Sam. Stop twisting facts with selective stats. You cannot change the truth.

To get back on-topic, we shouldn't be looking to maximize Evander Kane at the expense of better players. There is really no way to do that with the way the team is constructed currently, therefore he can't be a long-term part of the team.

Kane was not traded, so Kane will be integrated into the team. This is a decision our staff takes, not you. And their decision so far is not to trade Kane. If they also re-sign him are you still advocating we should ignore he is on our roster so that your beloved Sam looks better? Botts said he needs Kane or a player like him for now and thus a player like him will have to be integrated in the roster core, deal with it.

 

[Aladyyn]

ROR was consistently playing heavy minutes versus better competition and with worse zone starts and still outplayed Sam. Stop twisting facts with selective stats. You cannot change the truth.

Care to back that up outside of "I said so"?

And before you twist my words, I'm only asking you to back up your points.

 

[Rasmus CacOlainen]

Care to back that up outside of "I said so"?

Its sufficient in this case as no one else around here is mad enough to argue against it. You go watch some more stats until you figure it out.

 

[Beerz]

Care to back that up outside of "I said so"?

And before you twist my words, I'm only asking you to back up your points.

I'd love to hear anyone without a Reinhart fetish to tell me that Sam outplayed ROR last year.

I bet there isn't one.

 

[ihadtochangethename]

i wish people would keep their dislike of Kane the person out of deciding who he should be line mates with, hard to take posts seriously that way

 

[old kummelweck]

Regarding Kane, they really seem to be promoting him in the core of marketable players; Eichel, ROR, Pommer and Kane seem to have been in a lot of social media and interviews. They seem to be doubling down on him.

On the instigators, he mentioned right after his testing that he is the "heaviest I've ever been" when they asked about body fat, and expects to drop the weight in training camp. That seems concerning to me as someone who expects to have a career year. There are players that can play with that weight, but that has never seemed to have been Kane's makeup.

 

[Rasmus CacOlainen]

Regarding Kane, they really seem to be promoting him in the core of marketable players; Eichel, ROR, Pommer and Kane seem to have been in a lot of social media and interviews. They seem to be doubling down on him.

On the instigators, he mentioned right after his testing that he is the "heaviest I've ever been" when they asked about body fat, and expects to drop the weight in training camp. That seems concerning to me as someone who expects to have a career year. There are players that can play with that weight, but that has never seemed to have been Kane's makeup.

I'm sure that these 4 pounds make a massive difference to how he plays in 2 weeks. Give ma a break

 

[Sabre Dance]

Regarding Kane, they really seem to be promoting him in the core of marketable players; Eichel, ROR, Pommer and Kane seem to have been in a lot of social media and interviews. They seem to be doubling down on him.

On the instigators, he mentioned right after his testing that he is the "heaviest I've ever been" when they asked about body fat, and expects to drop the weight in training camp. That seems concerning to me as someone who expects to have a career year. There are players that can play with that weight, but that has never seemed to have been Kane's makeup.

If there is one thing I'll never worry about it's Kane's physical condition.

 

[26CornerBlitz]

 

[dasaybz]

You need to stop using these stats as absolutely proof of something and then making grand assertions based it. They are a small part of the picture when breaking things down and making evaluations.


1) The samples sizes of the time ROR and Sam played away from each other are roughly 5x larger than the sample of them together. To stated the obvious that means you're comparing apples to oranges.

2) You're also portraying this, whether you realize it or not, as if the only difference between the 880mins ROR played w/out Sam and the 167mins with Sam was just Sam. That's a big oversimplification. Obviously they both played with a myriad of other line mates throughout that time. Plus they have another line mate on their line when together.

3) You're also arguing Sam makes everyone better just look at ROR with and without him. Well look at Sam with and without ROR. He quite obviously had some better number with ROR than without. Not sure how you determined Sam was pulling up ROR and not the other way around. Or the more likely explanation that they played well together during that stretch.

4) Another factor left out is usage and role. What roles/usage did they have together? What were they apart? Did they fluctuate at all when apart? Etc

My point is there are a multitude of factors that could be impacting the differences in those numbers. Those numbers are telling us that last season Sam and ROR had better numbers together than they did apart. Those numbers don't tell us all of the why. Nor do those numbers tell us if its sustainable for a sample as large as their time apart. It just tells us what happened in that sample size.

I happen to be a big Reinhart fan and this is not an attack or critiscim of him but of how you use these numbers. You read WAY too much into them.

Agreed, also it's a very different system. Players respond differently when put in different situations ...

 

[Dubi Doo]

It does seem like Kane has grown up a lot, or at the very least he's learned how to portray himself positively on social media. His instagram is full of charitable deeds he's done, practicing at hockey, and playing golf.

 

[Der Jaeger]

I'm willing to entertain re-signing Kane if:

- He continues to show maturity.
- His play remains the same.
- He shows he can play on a line and gel with teammates (passing and stuff like that).
- His price isn't through the roof.

 

[dasaybz]

I'm willing to entertain re-signing Kane if:

- He continues to show maturity.
- His play remains the same.
- He shows he can play on a line and gel with teammates (passing and stuff like that).
- His price isn't through the roof.

Would you do 3 years 20 mil?

 

[Icicle]

I'm not, even if he looks good. All our money is tied up in ROR/Okposo/Eichel/Reinhart/Risto over the next few years. We're already looking to be paying a 3rd line center top line money; won't be able to afford an expensive 3rd line winger too. I'd rather spend his money on retaining the 2-3 complimentary players enough to keep them if they gel well. Larsson and company won't be cheap forever if they play well.

 

[Der Jaeger]

Would you do 3 years 20 mil?

I can't answer that without knowing the answer to the conditions I initially posted. If the first three conditions all are very positive, sure.

 

[Rasmus CacOlainen]

I can't answer that without knowing the answer to the conditions I initially posted. If the first three conditions all are very positive, sure.

Anything above 6 mil is no go from cap perspective both short term and long term. I think 5.5 is the max we can afford for Kane or similar replacement looking at the cap projections down the line. Clearing Moulson and Pomers will help but not ennough to retain evetyone else long term. If he plays and behaves OK, offer him 5.5@5 and if he doesnt like he can go find happuness elsewhere I guess.

 

[Der Jaeger]

Anything above 6 mil is no go from cap perspective both short term and long term. I think 5.5 is the max we can afford for Kane or similar replacement looking at the cap projections down the line. Clearing Moulson and Pomers will help but not ennough to retain evetyone else long term. If he plays and behaves OK, offer him 5.5@5 and if he doesnt like he can go find happuness elsewhere I guess.

From a purely cap perspective, maybe. But a lot else matters. If Kane continues to play effective hockey, but does so as the driver of his line who does not mesh with any of the team's three centers, then I pass even at a good price.

 

[SackTastic]

Regarding Kane, they really seem to be promoting him in the core of marketable players; Eichel, ROR, Pommer and Kane seem to have been in a lot of social media and interviews. They seem to be doubling down on him.

On the instigators, he mentioned right after his testing that he is the "heaviest I've ever been" when they asked about body fat, and expects to drop the weight in training camp. That seems concerning to me as someone who expects to have a career year. There are players that can play with that weight, but that has never seemed to have been Kane's makeup.

I'm 39, in the 2nd worst shape of my life, and I burned 4% body fat off in the last month. Kane is a professional athlete, I'm sure he was back to where he wanted to be the first week of camp.

 

[Icicle]

Anything above 6 mil is no go from cap perspective both short term and long term. I think 5.5 is the max we can afford for Kane or similar replacement looking at the cap projections down the line. Clearing Moulson and Pomers will help but not ennough to retain evetyone else long term. If he plays and behaves OK, offer him 5.5@5 and if he doesnt like he can go find happuness elsewhere I guess.

Cap is going to have to increase ~2 million or so, assuming we have two bargain bin goalies, if we're even going to fit 5.5 next year. The years after that is not a major problem though.

 

[Paxon]

I'm 39, in the 2nd worst shape of my life, and I burned 4% body fat off in the last month. Kane is a professional athlete, I'm sure he was back to where he wanted to be the first week of camp.

Not that I'm worried, but it's a lot easier to shave percentages of body fat when you have extra body fat. If you're a pro athlete in near-peak NHL shape, it's another story.

 

[Jame]

Anything above 6 mil is no go from cap perspective both short term and long term. I think 5.5 is the max we can afford for Kane or similar replacement looking at the cap projections down the line. Clearing Moulson and Pomers will help but not ennough to retain evetyone else long term. If he plays and behaves OK, offer him 5.5@5 and if he doesnt like he can go find happuness elsewhere I guess.

Impossible to say until we know how they plan to handle the goaltending (contract wise). But there are numerous ways to fit Kane in at 6 million (hypothetically... in no way do i support this).