Keep or Trade Evander Kane

[dudacek]

Let's take this in a different direction.

If GMTM is adamant about upgrading the D at ghe deadline with a top 4 defenseman, how can he reasonably get it done. What roster player can he package with what other assets to get the deal done?

Depends on your definition of top four, which I find that for most people means a top-50 defenceman or a prospect that could project to reach that level.

 

If that's what you mean, then I'd look for something like the Dougie Hamilton trade.

Flames got him for picks 15, 45 and 52. As it stands right now, we have picks 12, 42 and 59.

 

If you're OK with a semi-competent or competent veteran, they are often available at the draft for a 2nd-round pick or two, or equivalent prospect: Kulikov, Sekera, Regehr and Gorges are a few such deals the Sabres have been involved in.

 

Others to move recently in similar deals: Gudbranson, Kris Russell, Justin Schultz, Kevin Bieksa, Jeff Petry, Johnny Boychuk and Nick Leddy. Some of those deals obviously more successful than others, but they were all 2nd pairing or potential second pairing when traded.

 

Given a flat cap and expansion, there will be players available.

Edited February 19, 2017 by dudacek

[Weave]

I would not trade any of the following players; I consider them to be the core of the future:  O'Reilly, Okposo, Kane, Eichel, Reinhart, Ristolainen, McCabe,  This is what we waited for.

 

There are other players that I would hate to see go for personal reasons, like Bailey, but I wouldn't consider untouchable.

 

If a package of non-core players doesn't bring back a top-four defenseman, then GMTM can go get one in free agency.  And let's keep in mind that we're not going to see six Bobby Orrs on the blueline, either.

 

I agree with your core.  Let's move that forward,

 

My money is on Ennis being selected in the expansion draft.  We'll find a tank team to offload Moulson.  And every Spring there are D men on expiring contacts that we will be able to pick up for playoff pushes.  The bottom six will consist of a mix of older vets and kids working their way onto the roster.  I think we'll be fine.

[dudacek]

People always talk about Anaheim and Minnesota having too many defenceman going into expansion.

The Islanders have to protect Boychuk and they also have Leddy, Hamonic, Pulock, Dehaan and Hickey.

That's a team I would talk to.

[dudacek]

Let's take this in a different direction.

If GMTM is adamant about upgrading the D at ghe deadline with a top 4 defenseman, how can he reasonably get it done. What roster player can he package with what other assets to get the deal done?

Here is a list of defencemen, that could conceivably become available due to expansion/contract concerns:

 

Myers/Trouba, Orpik, Sbisa/Gudbranson/Edler, Koekkoek, Garrison, Coburn, Martin, Schlemko, Mueller, Daley, Schultz/Maatta/Doumoulin, Pouliot, Methot/Ceci, Klein, Holden, Hickey, Dehaan, Pulock, Ellis/Ekholm, Dumba, Scandella/Spurgeon/Brodin, McNabb/Forbort, Petrovic, Pysyk, Reinhart, Davidson, Hamhuis/Oleksiak, Jack Johnson, Tyutin, Weircoch, Wideman, Jokipakka, McQuaid, Morrow, Despres, Fowler/Vatanen, Manson.

 

Doesn't mean they will be available for trade, just that most will be exposed in the expansion draft and the others might be worth targeting because of cap and forward protection concerns.

 

I think there will be some creative deals made and it is definitely a buyers market.

Edited February 19, 2017 by dudacek

[JJFIVEOH]

I would not trade any of the following players; I consider them to be the core of the future:  O'Reilly, Okposo, Kane, Eichel, Reinhart, Ristolainen, McCabe,  This is what we waited for.

 

There are other players that I would hate to see go for personal reasons, like Bailey, but I wouldn't consider untouchable.

 

If a package of non-core players doesn't bring back a top-four defenseman, then GMTM can go get one in free agency.  And let's keep in mind that we're not going to see six Bobby Orrs on the blueline, either.

 

Yes! And Murray traded for Kane for a reason............. now he's finally playing the way Murray envisioned. 

 

I'm not waiting for four years to find out if Nylander  can or can't fill that hole, all while still missing the intangibles Kane brings to the team. 

[Scottysabres]

Yes, Murray traded for Kane.

He also tried to move him this past summer......

 

 

Is your point was again?

[Sabres Fan in NS]

Yes, Murray traded for Kane.

He also tried to move him this past summer......

 

 

Is your point was again?

 

Was it not just speculation about trading Kane last summer?

 

I don't recall Murray ever saying that he tried to trade him.

[Sabel79]

Was it not just speculation about trading Kane last summer?

 

I don't recall Murray ever saying that he tried to trade him.

It was reliably reported that Minny was in hard on a deal that went poof for some reason draft weekend...

[Weave]

It was reliably reported that Minny was in hard on a deal that went poof for some reason draft weekend...

 

It was also reliably reported that GMTM said that he would not trade Kane for less than his on ice value.  The context being that his off ice stuff had his trade value low.

 

Teams calling and making less than optimal offers is not the same as Kane being on the market.

[Sabel79]

It was also reliably reported that GMTM said that he would not trade Kane for less than his on ice value.  The context being that his off ice stuff had his trade value low.

 

Teams calling and making less than optimal offers is not the same as Kane being on the market.

In any event, my understanding is that he'd be gone had he behaved himself this summer.  Things change, he's here now whether I'm right about that or not, and should definitely stay barring some sort of bananas offer that would get the other GM involved fired. 

[nfreeman]

I would not trade any of the following players; I consider them to be the core of the future:  O'Reilly, Okposo, Kane, Eichel, Reinhart, Ristolainen, McCabe,  This is what we waited for.

 

There are other players that I would hate to see go for personal reasons, like Bailey, but I wouldn't consider untouchable.

 

If a package of non-core players doesn't bring back a top-four defenseman, then GMTM can go get one in free agency.  And let's keep in mind that we're not going to see six Bobby Orrs on the blueline, either.

 

Yes.  5 good forwards -- one of whom I'm starting to believe will be a top-5 player in the NHL at some point -- plus 2 good defensemen, plus Lehner if they don't have to give him too much term on his contract, plus ideally one more high-end defenseman.  That's a core that I'd like to see the Sabres move forward with for at least a few seasons.

 

I agree with your core.  Let's move that forward,

 

My money is on Ennis being selected in the expansion draft.  We'll find a tank team to offload Moulson.  And every Spring there are D men on expiring contacts that we will be able to pick up for playoff pushes.  The bottom six will consist of a mix of older vets and kids working their way onto the roster.  I think we'll be fine.

 

Seconded/Thirded.

 

Yes! And Murray traded for Kane for a reason............. now he's finally playing the way Murray envisioned. 

 

I'm not waiting for four years to find out if Nylander  can or can't fill that hole, all while still missing the intangibles Kane brings to the team. 

 

Good post JJ and I'm glad you're back, btw.

 

It was also reliably reported that GMTM said that he would not trade Kane for less than his on ice value.  The context being that his off ice stuff had his trade value low.

 

Teams calling and making less than optimal offers is not the same as Kane being on the market.

 

True, but I wouldn't be surprised if there were several fairly specific conversations with Minny and they came pretty close.

[bunomatic]

I've waffled back and forth in my own mind on the question of whether to trade Kane or not but how often do guys like this come along through development by the team. I'd say rarely if ever with his blend of size, skill and work ethic. These guys are sought after by every team in the league and we have him. What would we have to give up now to get him ?  His trade value is at an all time high and the return could solve many of our problems but I'm now on the keep him side of the argument. The deal would have to be as others have said a knock your socks off kind of return to make it worth it imo. 

[Rasmus_]

Depends on your definition of top four, which I find that for most people means a top-50 defenceman or a prospect that could project to reach that level.

 

If that's what you mean, then I'd look for something like the Dougie Hamilton trade.

Flames got him for picks 15, 45 and 52. As it stands right now, we have picks 12, 42 and 59.

 

If you're OK with a semi-competent or competent veteran, they are often available at the draft for a 2nd-round pick or two, or equivalent prospect: Kulikov, Sekera, Regehr and Gorges are a few such deals the Sabres have been involved in.

 

Others to move recently in similar deals: Gudbranson, Kris Russell, Justin Schultz, Kevin Bieksa, Jeff Petry, Johnny Boychuk and Nick Leddy. Some of those deals obviously more successful than others, but they were all 2nd pairing or potential second pairing when traded.

 

Given a flat cap and expansion, there will be players available.

 

I just threw up in my mouth, outside of Leddy.  I wouldn't want to touch any of that outside of Leddy and perhaps Boychuk.  If Kane goes, I'm only accepting it under the condition that it's for a defensemen like Theodore.  Someone under team control, in his 20's that can be groomed to play that skates well.  Or we can straight swap him for Lindholm. 

[dudacek]

I just threw up in my mouth, outside of Leddy.  I wouldn't want to touch any of that outside of Leddy and perhaps Boychuk.  If Kane goes, I'm only accepting it under the condition that it's for a defensemen like Theodore.  Someone under team control, in his 20's that can be groomed to play that skates well.  Or we can straight swap him for Lindholm.

 

I certainly wasn't suggesting Kane for any of those players.

I was talking about second pairing defencemen who have recently been traded for the equivalent of one two second rounders

Like it or not, those guys are what passes for middle pair defenders in the NHL

[kas23]

I think we need to ask ourselves: why is Kane the leading scorer on our team? We have other offensive firepower on this team, but for some reason they are not bearing fruit. Why is this?

 

I don't know much about hockey as most on here, but I think it has something to do with DD's dump & chase system, which some say is a direct result of our subpar defense. So, if we improved our defense, like GMTM should've done during the offseason, will this lead to a more opened-up offense? Or, assuming we get a 1st-pair D, could the loss of Kane be offset by a more opened-up offense?

[bunomatic]

20   5 on 5 goals out of 21. Just sayin

[dudacek]

Trade him.

Sucks on the PP

[bunomatic]

Trade him.

Sucks on the PP

lol

[matter2003]

Kane strikes again 5 on 5...

 

Yeah let's get rid of him.

[qwksndmonster]

Yup trade him.

[Scottysabres]

I agree with everyone.

 

Trade Kane :)

 

By the way, pics of Tim Murray all over his phone this game.......

 

 

Is Kane available Tim?

Why yes, yes he is......

 

If he does get moved this deadline oh will this board explode faster than Clinton supporters on November 8th :D

[inkman]

By the way, pics of Tim Murray all over his phone this game.......

 

What does this mean

[Wyldnwoody44]

We would be stupid to trade him now.... Things open up for FA after the season, that's where we make our moves

[GoPre]

Right now Kane is on a tare. We all know that.  But what, in your opinion, is a legit contract for Kane?  I'm thinking a 5 for 5.75 is fair.  Kane is earning a pay raise.  He can simply compare his stats to teammates and players across the NHL.  Kane's pay is going up.  Believe 5 years, maybe a gamble for the Sabres, can benefit both sides.  Locks him up until he's 31.  That's the + for Buffalo. When the contract is up, he's sill young enough to pursue one more fat contract. So it's a win win. 

 

*Reason I said gamble for a 5 year deal can be summed up w/ one name.  Moulson. 

[inkman]

I like Evander but I think he's going to want the Sabres to show him the money. If he signs for less than $7 mill, I'll be shocked. Someone will pay him.