It means his value is. Asset management includes accounting for trade value and knowing when to move a piece... they've been trying to move kane already, with no luck, and his own team mates said they dont want him on the team. Where is his value?
Rumor: San Jose trying to trade Evander Kane
- Thread starter ThreeOfAPerfectPair
- Start date
- Status
I still disagree with that because Kane's value was already shit regardless because of his reputation. If his value was already nil, which can be argued, how is it declining if nobody will still trade for him?
Atoyot
Registered User
- Jul 19, 2013
- 13,859
- 25,274
You can have more negative value. I.e I'll pay you a 1st to take him off our hands vs I'll pay you a 2nd
You can but does it actually apply to this situation? Chances are that's a no and I don't know how anyone can actually show Kane's value is declining in any tangible way.
Because negative value on a contract is possible. Teams pay to get rid of guys all the time...
He already had negative value for all intents and purposes. He already had a cancerous reputation and this doesn't change that is the point and the Sharks aren't paying to get rid of him.
You need to distinguish types of value in this situation.
On ice value - Kane has a ton, and even if he slips a bit, he will still be worth more than his contract.
Off-ice distractions and negative value - Kane has a lot of this as well, but to different GMs and different teams and locker rooms, Kane is going to have greatly varied value.
A team with great leadership and structure might feel they could take on Kane and easily overcome his distractions, whereas a team with a ton of turnover and a questionable identity would be smart to steer well clear of taking on this kind of risk.
Ultimately, *if* he is cleared of gambling on games, then his positive value should outweigh his negative value. If he is found guilty of betting on games, well then.... he is probably done in the NHL anyhow.
- Oct 9, 2012
- 32,541
- 31,481
Kane's on ice production is easily worth that contract. The issue is his attitude and off ice behaviours
Watch Montreal trade Drouin for Kane.
I could also see Carolina trade Gardiner with futures for Kane.
I could also see Carolina trade Gardiner with futures for Kane.
Seras
Dubas supporter
Ignore the off ice issues for a second, and you still have one of the worst teams in the league wanting to trade him, that alone shows his value is dropping.
No it doesn't because you're not comparing it to any previous value. When the Sharks got Kane four years ago, they were the only ones with any level of interest.
Maybe they'll counteract each other LOL two negatives make a positive.
They want to move him and get some value before they lose him for nothing.
They also want to move him because he makes them better.
The Sharks are a team that are in cap hell and not good enough to make the playoffs, but not bad enough to get a top pick. Losing Kane arguably drops them into top 5 pick territory, and gives them some cap flexibility to actually have 23 players without having to play shenanigans with recalls to stay cap compliant.
one2gamble
Registered User
- Dec 24, 2007
- 17,509
- 8,814
Reggae Shark
Registered User
- Sep 30, 2018
- 416
- 517
If enough current sharks players want him gone then that may change
Until someone can coherently convey what value he is hypothetically declining from, I’m not going to see how that would change. Again, you haven’t even established what his value was to be declining from.
What are you looking for? I don't see him as having any value, so I'm not sure why you're asking about what it's declining from...?
Bloated contract
Long term
30+ already
Kind of the bad contract trifecta lol... every day he gets older it will only get worse, unless he turns back the clock 5+ years and develops some consistency...
Voight
#winning
Not too sure about this. Hes had problems with his team mates at every stop in his career.
Even if hes clear of gambling on games. His bankruptcy case and general negative press will probably scare off most teams.
His contract is not bloated based on production so again you’re not really helping your case here and he has been consistent so you’re clearly only basing your opinion on reputation rather than what he’s actually done as a Shark.
antiqueslivers
Registered User
- Apr 16, 2015
- 2,398
- 2,258
he also consistently has ruined team cohesion and morale. Both I think should be highly valued. I mean he did it with the jets, buffalo and now SJ. Any thought to the contrary is complete horseshit.
- Status
