Rumor: Sharks working on Evander Kane trade, will eat 50%

[Dietpepsi]

To Buffalo 0% retained, we throw in a couple of steaks, 2 slapchops and a 36 piece metric socket set

 

[Number1RedWingsFan52]

Could see him on Vegas

Yeah with what cap space? Even with 50% retention Vegas can't afford Evander Kane not once Jack Eichel plays.

 

[Mrfenn92]

Yeah with what cap space? Even with 50% retention Vegas can't afford Evander Kane not once Jack Eichel plays.

They’ll create space if needed
Dadonov for Kane with retention

 

[CupInSIX]

They’ll create space if needed
Dadonov for Kane with retention

That would be the most Vegas thing ever.

But still not enough to take Kane or clear cap.

 

[Harvey Birdman]

I imagine Kane is just fine sitting in the AHL playing, since he doesn’t have to pay escrow, so I’d bet he makes that 3 team trade list as small as possible or even non existent.

1. Buffalo
2. Winnipeg
3. A team completely up against the cap that couldn’t trade for him? Vegas? Toronto?

 

[Pinkfloyd]

I imagine Kane is just fine sitting in the AHL playing, since he doesn’t have to pay escrow, so I’d bet he makes that 3 team trade list as small as possible.

1. Buffalo
2. Winnipeg
3. ?

Playing that type of game with the team will get him bought out then. If it's about money to such a degree that the escrow aspect of it is influencing his decision then making sure that he gets the full value out of his contract is equally as important. That means working with the team to move him when they get something put together. He has 19 million remaining on his contract after this season. He'll get four mil due to the signing bonuses but the remaining 15 million over three years can be cut to 10 million over six years. If escrow is as big of a factor in this as you think it is then so is that and risking a buyout is not in his best interest so he will work with the team under such circumstances rather than doing everything he can to restrict movement.

 

[Kcoyote3]

I wonder if escrow applies to buyout money. That's an interesting question

 

[Harvey Birdman]

Playing that type of game with the team will get him bought out then. If it's about money to such a degree that the escrow aspect of it is influencing his decision then making sure that he gets the full value out of his contract is equally as important. That means working with the team to move him when they get something put together. He has 19 million remaining on his contract after this season. He'll get four mil due to the signing bonuses but the remaining 15 million over three years can be cut to 10 million over six years. If escrow is as big of a factor in this as you think it is then so is that and risking a buyout is not in his best interest so he will work with the team under such circumstances rather than doing everything he can to restrict movement.

I won’t go back and listen to hours of podcasts to find it. But it was ether one of the SDPN or 32 Thoughts podcasts. Where they talked about his most desirable situations in all of this. Due to taxes, escrow, and his financial legal issues. Are to ether play in the AHL free of escrow or be bought out. Playing in the NHL on his current contract would be the least beneficial to him. I’m not sure of the ins and outs. But I do remember listening to that some time recently. Unless my memory is betraying me. Which it could.

 

[Bacon Artemi Bravo]

Playing that type of game with the team will get him bought out then. If it's about money to such a degree that the escrow aspect of it is influencing his decision then making sure that he gets the full value out of his contract is equally as important. That means working with the team to move him when they get something put together. He has 19 million remaining on his contract after this season. He'll get four mil due to the signing bonuses but the remaining 15 million over three years can be cut to 10 million over six years. If escrow is as big of a factor in this as you think it is then so is that and risking a buyout is not in his best interest so he will work with the team under such circumstances rather than doing everything he can to restrict movement.

But if he gets bought out, sure he'll get $5M less over the next 6 years from THAT contract, but is free to sign another. Covering and surpassing that $5M on his next deal shouldnt be an issue for him. Perhaps that's what he actually wants.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

But if he gets bought out, sure he'll get $5M less over the next 6 years from THAT contract, but is free to sign another. Covering and surpassing that $5M on his next deal shouldnt be an issue for him. Perhaps that's what he actually wants.

If after all this stuff that he's put himself into he refuses to work with the team on a resolution like that, he's not getting that 5 mil in the NHL. And I don't think he wants to go to Europe given his problems. There's also the option for the team to bring him up to the NHL and sit him for the rest of his contract if it's like that for him. I don't see anything from him that tells me he's going to hardline himself into the AHL for the rest of the season if a team wants to trade for him.

 

[CanadienShark]

Its been heavily reported SJS is willing to trade him at 50% retention to move him. SJS is just dumping him and have publicly stated as much. Foolish of course but also understood under the circumstances.

As much as his off ice antics suck he is a great player that would help any team and at 50% retention... I dont see how he isn't traded sooner than later.

I hope you are not expecting any kind of return, you are almost guaranteed to be disappointed.

As mentioned above I'll second Kassian and toss in for Kane at 50% retention is a solid deal for both under the circumstances.

No, not expecting much if anything. But we're not paying you a 1st and retaining 50%. Not going to happen. It's that fans so desperately want him on their team, but they're ashamed to say it, so they keep asking for the guy with huge assets and full retention. We're better off buying him out.

 

[themelkman]

I am glad to see Edm has a scout there because Kane is exactly what we need on our team. We need some snarl and bad attitude to take attention away from Mcdavid and Draisatl. I know he has a douche bag reputations and all that but we need some junk yard dog on our team and guys like that always have baggage. Take a look at the history of some good players with issue like Claude Lemieux( in game), Craig McTavish(out of game), Heatley(out of game), Patrick Kane(out of game) and they all outlasted their problems and had success. This is a buy low opportunity and Holland needs to get this player.

Kassian, Choice of Lavoie/Tullio/Savoie, 3rd-2023

For

Kane at 50%

Its a no go because of Kassian. Sharks goal is the smallest cap punishment possible, so the goal is trade at 50% for literally anything, if a deal cant be found without a huge cap dump like Kassian, the sharks are better off buying Kane out unless you can offer something worth an extra 3.2x3, and B prospects arent really gonna cut it.

 

[Chayos]

Its a no go because of Kassian. Sharks goal is the smallest cap punishment possible, so the goal is trade at 50% for literally anything, if a deal cant be found without a huge cap dump like Kassian, the sharks are better off buying Kane out unless you can offer something worth an extra 3.2x3, and B prospects arent really gonna cut it.

I am not sure this is the stance that is going to work very well in season as most teams are capped out.

 

[CanadienShark]

I am not sure this is the stance that is going to work very well in season as most teams are capped out.

Then... Oh no... We just don't trade him. Not the worst situation to keep him (for now), imo. We will not hurt ourselves to move the guy. We can buy him out for reasonable cost. Or bury him. We're fine, so I don't know why fans of other teams think they have us over the barrel. They don't have any leverage. We have options.

Not specifically going after you, my comments are more general.

 

[cyris]

It's amazing how many fans who bitch and complain about what a terrible person Kane is, want him. They keep coming up with insane ideas where they get paid to take him on at 50% (or even 75%) retained. Safe to say that won't happen. We're better off keeping him. People can stop making proposals that have no benefit to the Sharks - were not in the business of shooting ourselves in the foot to make another team better.

I don’t want him at any cost but obviously I have zero control over what my team does.

But in no way are you better keeping him then you are trading him at 50% retention unless there are bad contracts coming back.
You save cap space over buying him out or leaving him in the minors.

 

[Sysreq]

I am not sure this is the stance that is going to work very well in season as most teams are capped out.

Someone will bite at the deadline. Kane is a good enough player.

 

[cyris]

Then... Oh no... We just don't trade him. Not the worst situation to keep him (for now), imo. We will not hurt ourselves to move the guy. We can buy him out for reasonable cost. Or bury him. We're fine, so I don't know why fans of other teams think they have us over the barrel. They don't have any leverage. We have options.

Not specifically going after you, my comments are more general.

It cost the Sharks more cap space to buy him out in 2 of the next 3 years than it does to trade him at 50% because of the bonuses in his contract.
Then you still have him on the books for 3 more seasons after that.

 

[CanadienShark]

I don’t want him at any cost but obviously I have zero control over what my team does.

But in no way are you better keeping him then you are trading him at 50% retention unless there are bad contracts coming back.
You save cap space over buying him out or leaving him in the minors.

Better off keeping him as opposed to retaining full and paying assets on top. Sorry if my post wasn't clear. I thought it was.

 

[CanadienShark]

It cost the Sharks more cap space to buy him out in 2 of the next 3 years than it does to trade him at 50% because of the bonuses in his contract.
Then you still have him on the books for 3 more seasons after that.

Right, and do we need that cap space in 2 years? No. Will we need it long term? Yes. A buyout could screw us up when we want to compete and need new contracts for young guys. We don't care for 2 years. A trade at 50% for nothing is fine. It's attaching more assets that's the problem. We're not in a great situation, but I'd rather deal with buyout complications than giving up a 1st or something absurd while retaining.

 

[cyris]

Better off keeping him as opposed to retaining full and paying assets on top. Sorry if my post wasn't clear.

Yeah I get the basic idea of what you are saying. I’m just trying to illustrate the cap situation with him and a buyout.
I don’t think the sharks will have to pay a prohibitive cost to get rid of Kane. Someone will take him even if it takes another team to drop the cap hit even farther.
He may be a complete disaster off the ice but he is a good player on it.

The reality though with most teams cap situations this season you may need to take back a player you don’t want all that much just so the new team can fit him. As long as that is a player that is on the last year of their deal or has maybe 1 year left it may be for the best just to have this whole situation over with.

 

[CanadienShark]

Yeah I get the basic idea of what you are saying. I’m just trying to illustrate the cap situation with him and a buyout.
I don’t think the sharks will have to pay a prohibitive cost to get rid of Kane. Someone will take him even if it takes another team to drop the cap hit even farther.
He may be a complete disaster off the ice but he is a good player on it.

The reality though with most teams cap situations this season you may need to take back a player you don’t want all that much just so the new team can fit him. As long as that is a player that is on the last year of their deal or has maybe 1 year left it may be for the best just to have this whole situation over with.

I mean if it's an expiring contract, fine. I don't care. If we're taking on another teams headache + retaining 50% + adding assets.... That team can go f*** themselves. We won't solve their problems and improve them all at the cost of nothing to them and massive cost to us. It's nonsensical. Most Kane proposals here are totally one sided where fans think they can get a star winger for a stupidly cheap cap hit, zero assets, and get themselves out of a hole. It won't happen like that. The Sharks are better off keeping him or buying him out in that situation.

 

[cyris]

I mean if it's an expiring contract, fine. I don't care. If we're taking on another teams headache + retaining 50% + adding assets.... That team can go f*** themselves. We won't solve their problems and improve them all at the cost of nothing to them and massive cost to us. It's nonsensical. Most Kane proposals here are totally one sided where fans think they can get a star winger for a stupidly cheap cap hit, zero assets, and get themselves out of a hole. It won't happen like that. The Sharks are better off keeping him or buying him out in that situation.

I think if it happens it will be like most HF trades vs real world scenarios. Neither side will be happy with the trade at first.
Then fans of the team that trade for him with make fun of you when he plays well because they will have a 7M player for 1.75-3.5M. Then they will go quiet when he f***s up again in some way because he is Kane and can’t help himself. And other teams fans will start making fun of them.

 

[themelkman]

I don’t want him at any cost but obviously I have zero control over what my team does.

But in no way are you better keeping him then you are trading him at 50% retention unless there are bad contracts coming back.
You save cap space over buying him out or leaving him in the minors.

Then he wont be dealt, easy enough.

 

[cyris]

Then he wont be dealt, easy enough.

Okay….
Enjoy either using nearly 6M in cap space to keep him in the AHL or using more cap space for twice and for twice as long to buy him out vs a trade with full retention.

 

[themelkman]

Okay….
Enjoy either using nearly 6M in cap space to keep him in the AHL or using more cap space for twice and for twice as long to buy him out vs a trade with full retention.

Trading him for 3.5 and then taking Kassian at 3.2 actually equals 6.7 x 3 and then 3.5 x 1. The buyout is 3.6, 2.6,4.6,1.6,1.6,1.6. I know which poision pill id rather swallow considering the cap is rising next year and going to seriously rise in the years after.

If you think we havent done the math on this your wrong, we know exactly what makes sense and what doesnt, and trading Kane at 50% for a huge cap dump is plain bad.