Proposal: Horvat for Kane 50% and a 1st

[Nucklehead Supreme]

both Doug Wilson and Bob Boughner have confirmed it as such already. If you wanna lie to yourself to make yourself look good then you ain't fooling anyone but yourself.

 

[BoHorvat 53]

HF is so far from reality it's not even funny. Some people here believe that Kane @ 50% retained has value, yet LeBrun was saying that when Kane is dealt, one idea is that Kane is a part of a 3-team trade where his salary is retained twice to get it cut down to 1.75 million/year, and he thinks that this is the kind of scenario that the Sharks will be discussing over next few days and weeks.

 

[Cogburn]

HF is so far from reality it's not even funny. Some people here believe that Kane @ 50% retained has value, yet LeBrun was saying that when Kane is dealt, one idea is that Kane is a part of a 3-team trade where his salary is retained twice to get it cut down to 1.75 million/year, and he thinks that this is the kind of scenario that the Sharks will be discussing over next few days and weeks.

I mean....my problem is not with the cap hit. Half retained, three quarters retained ...I still don't want him on my team.

 

[notsocommonsense]

Lol, not even close . . Horvat is a good 2nd line C. . Kane is cancer

 

[Szechwan]

only on HF boards would a player who has consistently put up 65+ PPGe over the last 5 seasons have "negative value"

and you wonder why the people that matter call us "ass clowns"

Always wanted to talk to someone who's recently come out of a coma, it must be surreal. Has anyone told you about the pandemic yet?

 

[Paddys Pub]

If it costs a 1st even at 50%, there’s no deal to be had. Sharks won’t and shouldn’t do that. If a team wants to get something for this, they need to actually be reasonable in their ask and a 1st from a non-playoff team is unreasonable.

At 50% That’s a cap hit of 3.5 mill for 4 more years.
Considering the guy is a walking disaster who has gotten kicked off nearly every team he played for, as well as his mountain high pile of baggage, that’s a cap dump. He has a lot of work to do to prove he isn’t a cap dump.
The guy is close to being out of the league soon (he currently isn’t even in it).
That price tag, those years…. Lucky if they only pay a first to get rid of him.

It’s a really tough spot to be in for the sharks. That is a ton of stagnant money if he isn’t playing.
But having him on the team is barely an option.

 

[BenningHurtsMySoul]

Who's the one player that would 100% make the locker room worse?

 

[aresknights]

Habs and Canucks will make a trade.

I can only hope Montreal could grab Horvat in a deal

 

[BenningHurtsMySoul]

I can only hope Montreal could grab Horvat in a deal

Horvat for Caufield.

 

[Benstheman]

Horvat for Caufield.

hihihihi

That being said, i might do that if it was during offseason and Horvat would sign an extension with us.

 

[AngryMilkcrates]

Perhaps I am a tad out of touch with the goings on in Vancouver, but why is Horvat even available?

He has been arguably one of if not the best forward for them for years now.
Is he getting pushed out by the kids? Injuries?

He's only 26 and has decent production numbers outside of +/-.

I am loathed to believe it is just a locker room thing.

Please educate me.

 

[Hoglander]

Perhaps I am a tad out of touch with the goings on in Vancouver, but why is Horvat even available?

He has been arguably one of if not the best forward for them for years now.
Is he getting pushed out by the kids? Injuries?

He's only 26 and has decent production numbers outside of +/-.

I am loathed to believe it is just a locker room thing.

Please educate me.

Van isn't shopping him. The team is sucking, so other teams are inquiring. Of coarse Van should listen to offers, but they can't move him without creating a massive hole in the roster, and they don't want to rebuild. Doesn't leave many options. The obvious choice is to fire the coaching staff, but the front office is a mess.
Expect a lot of rumors, followed by a lot of sitting on their hands.

 

[AngryMilkcrates]

Van isn't shopping him. The team is sucking, so other teams are inquiring. Of coarse Van should listen to offers, but they can't move him without creating a massive hole in the roster, and they don't want to rebuild. Doesn't leave many options. The obvious choice is to fire the coaching staff, but the front office is a mess.
Expect a lot of rumors, followed by a lot of sitting on their hands.

Ok, thank you. Now THAT sounds like Vancouver.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

At 50% That’s a cap hit of 3.5 mill for 4 more years.
Considering the guy is a walking disaster who has gotten kicked off nearly every team he played for, as well as his mountain high pile of baggage, that’s a cap dump. He has a lot of work to do to prove he isn’t a cap dump.
The guy is close to being out of the league soon (he currently isn’t even in it).
That price tag, those years…. Lucky if they only pay a first to get rid of him.

It’s a really tough spot to be in for the sharks. That is a ton of stagnant money if he isn’t playing.
But having him on the team is barely an option.

Maybe but certain assets are just off the table when it comes to this. They're just not going to give up their 1st round pick to get rid of a guy. They're not a Cup contender where that pick and that cap space is all that important in the short term. Their focus has been on acquiring young talent. The team will probably be willing to move a 2nd round pick in 2023 to facilitate a deal in some manner which still likely includes retaining and taking back a contract in that 2-4 mil range but they're not moving 1st rounders or any young talent they have confidence in like Eklund or Wiesblatt or Bordeleau or probably even guys like Gushchin, Coe, and Robins. It just doesn't make sense for where the team is at right now.

Would expect a deal with Vancouver to be something like Kane@50% for Pearson or whoever the actual supposed cancer in Vancouver is if there even is any like Miller and adjust value accordingly since any cancer coming out of Vancouver would have varying levels of value compared to Kane.

 

[blankall]

only on HF boards would a player who has consistently put up 65+ PPGe over the last 5 seasons have "negative value"

and you wonder why the people that matter call us "ass clowns"

This must be trolling. He just passed through waivers. That means no team wants him for zero, and his value is less than zero. His value is indeed negative.

Lol. I'm also sure Kane will be that unifying force that the Vancouver locker room needs.

 

[kanucks25]

only on HF boards would a player who has consistently put up 65+ PPGe over the last 5 seasons have "negative value"

and you wonder why the people that matter call us "ass clowns"

You're right, if you ignore every shred of context

In other words, you're wrong.

 

[Bankerguy]

Wow... this is one of the worst ive seen on here in a long time.

 

[blankall]

Kane at 50% probably has around zero value, as opposed to Kane at 100%, which has lots of negative value.

So, this trade is basically Horvat for a fist in the 10-20 range. Not enough from San Jose.

You may actually find a taker for Kane at 50%, but it's probably not Vancouver. So better off just pulling Kane out of the deal. Then again, you may not even find a taker for Kane at a 50% reduction. No one would take TDA, and the Rangers had to buy him out. Carolina re-signed him but only at $1 million for 1 year. With that kind of a contract, Carolina could just bury TDA if he didn't work out. Kane, even at 50%, would still have a $3.5 million x 4 years contract. Much harder to dealt with that than a $1 million x 1 year contract.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

This must be trolling. He just passed through waivers. That means no team wants him for zero, and his value is less than zero. His value is indeed negative.

Lol. I'm also sure Kane will be that unifying force that the Vancouver locker room needs.

Not that I dispute his value being negative but clearing waivers isn’t a sign of that. There are lots of players who clear waivers that get traded for assets. The Sharks literally did this with Gambrell.

 

[Cogburn]

Not that I dispute his value being negative but clearing waivers isn’t a sign of that. There are lots of players who clear waivers that get traded for assets. The Sharks literally did this with Gambrell.

Gambrell isn't a 60-70 point power forward though.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Gambrell isn't a 60-70 point power forward though.

I’m not certain of the point you’re making. I’m just saying clearing waivers doesn’t make someone’s value less than zero or zero.

 

[mouser]

HF is so far from reality it's not even funny. Some people here believe that Kane @ 50% retained has value, yet LeBrun was saying that when Kane is dealt, one idea is that Kane is a part of a 3-team trade where his salary is retained twice to get it cut down to 1.75 million/year, and he thinks that this is the kind of scenario that the Sharks will be discussing over next few days and weeks.

It’s a silly idea. There’s no benefit to inserting a third team to retain on Kane. The overpayment required to that third team would be more then SJ simply retaining 50% and perhaps taking some negative contract in return.

Some team will take the risk on Kane at 50% for neutral value or expiring bad deal. Worst case the the new team can later move Kane at 50% or buy him out.

 

[blankall]

Not that I dispute his value being negative but clearing waivers isn’t a sign of that. There are lots of players who clear waivers that get traded for assets. The Sharks literally did this with Gambrell.

It happens with low value players, where having an actual contract is an issue. In those situations teams will send back other nhl contracts.

Gambrell cleared waivers right prior to the beginning of the season, when teams are already overloaded with contracts post preseason. For a team to pick up gambrell at that point, they would have to drop one off their own contracts.

Totally different than Kane, who is an established player, who just cleared part-way through the season, because no one wants him for free.

 

[Cogburn]

I’m not certain of the point you’re making. I’m just saying clearing waivers doesn’t make someone’s value less than zero or zero.

I don't disagree there obviously, and trades do happen after a player clears waivers, but there is a difference in the on ice product in these cases. And by extension a difference in the situations off ice.

I guess my point is that I don't think being in the minors already is a selling point, which is what I have always interpreted from post-waiver trades. I am also not asserting you said otherwise. I feel it is a non-factor, given circumstances.

 

[jMoneyBrah]

It happens with low value players, where having an actual contract is an issue. In those situations teams will send back other nhl contracts.

Gambrell cleared waivers right prior to the beginning of the season, when teams are already overloaded with contracts post preseason. For a team to pick up gambrell at that point, they would have to drop one off their own contracts.

Totally different than Kane, who is an established player, who just cleared part-way through the season, because no one wants him for free.

Like @Pinkfloyd I’m not gonna dispute whether or not Kane has negative value. What I would add to the conversation is that, at least according to capfriendly, there are only roughly 8-9 teams that are currently projected to have enough cap space to fit Kane’s full contract without sending money back - and that’s before you factor in which teams have a significant percentage of their cap in players that are currently injured and not accumulating on the cap.

I’d wager that at 50% retention, and with the ability to include, at minimum, a bottom 6/pairing player in the $1-2M range that many more teams at least could realistically fit Kane within their cap/budget.

Kane at a net cap cost of $2.5-1.5 will probably get more than a couple of GMs to pickup the phone.

*full disclosure: I’m no Kane stan. I plenty understand why any fan wouldn’t want him on their team. However, it seems to me that most of everything that has happened since last season likely won’t really effect whichever (if any) team aquires him. I personally suspect that his personality would grate on me if I had to interact with him on a daily, and that he probably has a shelf life of about 2-3 years in any one locker room before he’s gonna wear out his welcome. But, I’d guess that in a new locker room he probably puts his head down and manages to not ruffle any feathers for the next 2 seasons and be a 60 point power forward on the ice.