Kane To Be Traded? What Can We Get?

[Drunkard]

not worth that for me, he isn't a 30 goal scorer, he'll always be around 25 goals a year.

 

How many 30 goal scorers earn less than $6 million per season? I'd venture to say not many and the few that exist are either on ELCs or RFA type contracts and they'll be getting hefty raises by the time they approach UFA status the way Kane is.

[Mustache of God]

Most definitely. Then I remember the return for Taylor Hall and start to get nervous.

 

The expansion draft changes the situation entirely. If Anaheim does nothing then they will lose a great player. Their hand is somewhat forced. You have to wonder how Kane would fit in over there, lockerroom wise. Anaheim has a pretty established veteran leadership group in Getzlaf and Perry, where the Sabres leadership has been sorely lacking which I feel led to a lot of friction this year.

[LGR4GM]

If you're Anaheim, you look at Kane and like his heavy style. It allows you to trade the 4th odd man out defender. Anaheim also might be forced to protect Bieksa because of a nmc. Anaheim has to make a trade in the next 4 weeks.

[nfreeman]

I continue to feel that:

 

- Unless there are reasons the public doesn't know, the Sabres would be crazy to trade Kane. 

 

- There is a reasonable likelihood that those non-public reasons exist, e.g.:

 

     - he may have told the team that he wants to explore FA

     - he could be a huge problem in the locker room or at practice

     - he could have a pathological issue with assaulting women

 

- I wouldn't be surprised if the first possible reason were in fact true; I would be fairly surprised if either of the other 2 possible reasons were true.  Still, there is some possibility of truth in each of them.

 

- Anaheim isn't going to trade for Kane.  He doesn't fit their budget.

 

- Kane isn't going to sign here for less than what KO got.

 

- Assuming none of the disqualifying factors exists, I would gladly extend Kane for a KO-level contract.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

I continue to feel that:

 

- Unless there are reasons the public doesn't know, the Sabres would be crazy to trade Kane. 

 

- There is a reasonable likelihood that those non-public reasons exist, e.g.:

 

     - he may have told the team that he wants to explore FA

     - he could be a huge problem in the locker room or at practice

     - he could have a pathological issue with assaulting women

 

- I wouldn't be surprised if the first possible reason were in fact true; I would be fairly surprised if either of the other 2 possible reasons were true.  Still, there is some possibility of truth in each of them.

 

- Anaheim isn't going to trade for Kane.  He doesn't fit their budget.

 

- Kane isn't going to sign here for less than what KO got.

 

- Assuming none of the disqualifying factors exists, I would gladly extend Kane for a KO-level contract.

 

Very nice summary.  This is what I think and I think this is what the Sabres' management / owners think.

 

The Sabres have been missing a Kane type player since ... well it has been a very long time ... Peca, sort of was Kane like, Gare?  Although, Gare was a better goal scorer.

[ddaryl]

Only a fool would trade Evander for less than a huge over payment from another team

 

He has kept out of trouble and he shows up to play.

[Eleven]

I continue to feel that:

 

- Unless there are reasons the public doesn't know, the Sabres would be crazy to trade Kane. 

 

- There is a reasonable likelihood that those non-public reasons exist, e.g.:

 

     - he may have told the team that he wants to explore FA

     - he could be a huge problem in the locker room or at practice

     - he could have a pathological issue with assaulting women

 

- I wouldn't be surprised if the first possible reason were in fact true; I would be fairly surprised if either of the other 2 possible reasons were true.  Still, there is some possibility of truth in each of them.

 

- Anaheim isn't going to trade for Kane.  He doesn't fit their budget.

 

- Kane isn't going to sign here for less than what KO got.

 

- Assuming none of the disqualifying factors exists, I would gladly extend Kane for a KO-level contract.

 

Agreed.

[TrueBlueGED]

Only a fool would trade Evander for less than a huge over payment from another team

 

He has kept out of trouble and he shows up to play.

 

Only a fool would keep Kane for anything short of a huge underpayment.

 

:rolleyes:  :rolleyes:  :rolleyes:  :rolleyes:  :rolleyes:

[Eleven]

Let's not forget he's the leading goal scorer.

[sweetlou]

I agree to extend him now for another 4 years would be the best fit.  Moulson, Ennis, and Gorges will be off the books by then and Jack and Sam will still be on their bridge deals. Any longer than 4 years and you start to have cap trouble. That is unless JBot feels better about Kane and wants him long term and trades Sam for a defenseman. Which I can see happening.

 

LV takes Ennis or Moulson.

Sam traded to Anaheim for Vatanen.  Vatanen is RD 3 years left on contract at cap hit of $4.875mil

Sign Kane to 6 years at front loaded contract.  (7, 7, 7, 7, 6, 5=$39mil) cap hit of 6.5 million

 

UFA-

 

Sign RW player like Eaves or Oshi for 2nd line or Connolly for 3rd line

Sign LD player like Karl Alzner, or Brendan Smith for 2 or 3 years $3mil per year for 3rd pair LD.

 

Defense-

 

McCabe, Risto

(Antipin or Guhle), Vatanen

(Alzner or Smith), Bogo

 

Extras Faulk and Gorges

 

 

Forwards

 

Kane, ROR, Okposo

Ennis, Eichel, (UFA, Nylander or Baptiste)

Carrier, Larsson, (UFA or Bailey)

Foligno, Girgensons, (UFA, Bailey, or Baptiste)

Edited May 24, 2017 by sweetlou

[CallawaySabres]

I agree to extend him now for another 4 years would be the best fit.  Moulson, Ennis, and Gorges will be off the books by then and Jack and Sam will still be on their bridge deals. Any longer than 4 years and you start to have cap trouble. That is unless JBot feels better about Kane and wants him long term and trades Sam for a defenseman. Which I can see happening.

 

LV takes Ennis or Moulson.

Sam traded to Anaheim for Vatanen.  Vatanen is RD 3 years left on contract at cap hit of $4.875mil

Sign Kane to 6 years at front loaded contract.  (7, 7, 7, 7, 6, 5=$39mil) cap hit of 6.5 million

 

UFA-

 

Sign RW player like Eaves or Oshi for 2nd line or Connolly for 3rd line

Sign LD player like Karl Alzner, or Brendan Smith for 2 or 3 years $3mil per year for 3rd pair LD.

 

Defense-

 

McCabe, Risto

(Antipin or Guhle), Vatanen

(Alzner or Smith), Bogo

 

Extras Faulk and Gorges

 

 

Forwards

 

Kane, ROR, Okposo

Ennis, Eichel, (UFA, Nylander or Baptiste)

Carrier, Larsson, (UFA or Bailey)

Foligno, Girgensons, (UFA, Bailey, or Baptiste)

 

One thing is for sure, if that is the lineup, my playoff blazer stays in the closet for yet another year.....

[LTS]

Only a fool would trade Evander for less than a huge over payment from another team

 

He has kept out of trouble and he shows up to play.

 

Wrong!

 

Only a fool would keep Kane for anything short of a huge underpayment.

 

:rolleyes:  :rolleyes:  :rolleyes:  :rolleyes:  :rolleyes:

 

Also Wrong!

 

 

BTW: While slightly less well known.. Fools only go in against Sicilians.... and only when death is on the line.

[WildCard]

Is any of this coming from anyone credible or are we just circle jerking around Kane again?

Circle jerking. Guess I'll go get the cookie

[Tondas]

Very nice summary.  This is what I think and I think this is what the Sabres' management / owners think.

 

The Sabres have been missing a Kane type player since ... well it has been a very long time ... Peca, sort of was Kane like, Gare?  Although, Gare was a better goal scorer.

 

Agree with Peca but not Gare, more like Mike Foligno.

[LGR4GM]

If anyone thinks Eichel will get a bridge deal they are wrong or our gm is an idiot.

[GASabresIUFAN]

I continue to feel that:

 

- Unless there are reasons the public doesn't know, the Sabres would be crazy to trade Kane. 

 

- There is a reasonable likelihood that those non-public reasons exist, e.g.:

 

     - he may have told the team that he wants to explore FA

     - he could be a huge problem in the locker room or at practice

     - he could have a pathological issue with assaulting women

 

- I wouldn't be surprised if the first possible reason were in fact true; I would be fairly surprised if either of the other 2 possible reasons were true.  Still, there is some possibility of truth in each of them.

 

- Anaheim isn't going to trade for Kane.  He doesn't fit their budget.

 

- Kane isn't going to sign here for less than what KO got.

 

- Assuming none of the disqualifying factors exists, I would gladly extend Kane for a KO-level contract.

I'm going to respectfully disagree on Anaheim and their possible interest in Kane.  They are certainly a budget team, but they are currently a contender who needs to upgrade their offense while guys like Perry, Getzlaf and Kesler still have tread on the tires.  This scoring needs to come from younger vets in their prime.  Those don't come cheap.  They also can afford to acquire a big $ forward to help get them over the top. 

 

How?  They are going to get Bieksa to waive his NMC or buy him out in order to protect 7 forwards and 3 D.  Those 3 are likely to be Fowler, Lindholm and either Manson or Vatanen, likely Manson.  They have 3 top cheap prospects in Theodore,  Montour and Larsson all ready for NHL jobs, especially the first 2.  If they trade us Vatanen and probably Stoner, they clear $8 from their cap, plus buying out Bieksa saves another 2.7.  That over twice the money they need to take on Kane.  

 

The deal would look something like this.

Kane and Falk to Ana for Vatenan and Stoner.  Ana takes Falk so that they have a D to expose in expansion.

Edited May 24, 2017 by GASabresFan

[kas23]

Size always matters. The best way to get deep penetration on the forecheck is with good size. They can repeatedly pound the D until they turnover and continue to get pounded.

I'd be all in to package him in a swap with a team that can return the favor and give us a defenseman to take the load off Risto.

Edited May 24, 2017 by kas23

[OhMyDahlin]

Who does Boston have on their roster or system that we'd want?

McAvoy, Carlo, Zboril, Pastrnak, Forsbacka-Karlsson, Frederic, Senyshyn, Debrusk...therefore, it's not going to happen because they won't be trading any of those kids. (Or Krug, I guess.)

 

 

 

But, I'll be pissed if they trade Evander Kane...this team will get worse without him, not better.

 

He's said he wants to be here. In an interview with Barstool, Eichel said he and Kane are very good friends and that Kane is liked in the locker room. Kane's father has said that he feels like a part of the team for the first time, and really likes the way he's treated by the Pegulas. Anything I've ever read about Kane and the Sabres, I haven't seen or heard anything to suggest he's unhappy in Buffalo and wouldn't want to stay here.

 

Will he really find a better center to play with than Jack Eichel, whom he already has chemistry and a friendship with?

 

He's no fool, he knows he's in a great position, with a very good center, in an organization with great ownership. We need to re-sign him.

Edited May 24, 2017 by Dank Dangleson

[WildCard]

Anyone care to name a player on the Penguins roster that remotely resembles Kane?

[OhMyDahlin]

Anyone care to name a player on the Penguins roster that remotely resembles Kane?

Malkin? Size, speed, skill.

 

 

The deal would look something like this.

Kane and Falk to Ana for Vatenan and Stoner.  Ana takes Falk so that they have a D to expose in expansion.

That deal is not making the Sabres any better...and Vatanen is probably the 4th-5th defenseman I'd want from them, behind Fowler, Lindholm, Theadore and Montour. (And maybe Larsson.)

Edited May 24, 2017 by Dank Dangleson

[Scottysabres]

Kane, if traded, will garner a 13 to 21 1st round pick, or, a 22 to 26 yr old top 4 defender.

 

25-30 goal power forwards in their prime don't exactly grow on trees.

[WildCard]

Malkin? Size, speed, skill.

 

That deal is not making the Sabres any better...and Vatanen is probably the 4th-5th defenseman I'd want from them, behind Fowler, Lindholm, Theadore and Montour. (And maybe Larsson.)

Really don't think Malkin and Kane are comparable in any other way than the fact that they play hockey

Kane, if traded, will garner a 13 to 21 1st round pick, or, a 22 to 26 yr old top 4 defender.

 

25-30 goal power forwards in their prime don't exactly grow on trees.

They're not as rare as you think they are. And they usually don't have his baggage or injury issues Edited May 25, 2017 by WildCard

[WildCard]

Not sure if this was posted yet or not, but here are Dreger's thoughts on the issue 

 

https://www.fanragsports.com/nhl/dreger-evaluates-possibility-evander-kane-trade/

[nfreeman]

I'm going to respectfully disagree on Anaheim and their possible interest in Kane.  They are certainly a budget team, but they are currently a contender who needs to upgrade their offense while guys like Perry, Getzlaf and Kesler still have tread on the tires.  This scoring needs to come from younger vets in their prime.  Those don't come cheap.  They also can afford to acquire a big $ forward to help get them over the top. 

 

How?  They are going to get Bieksa to waive his NMC or buy him out in order to protect 7 forwards and 3 D.  Those 3 are likely to be Fowler, Lindholm and either Manson or Vatanen, likely Manson.  They have 3 top cheap prospects in Theodore,  Montour and Larsson all ready for NHL jobs, especially the first 2.  If they trade us Vatanen and probably Stoner, they clear $8 from their cap, plus buying out Bieksa saves another 2.7.  That over twice the money they need to take on Kane.  

 

The deal would look something like this.

Kane and Falk to Ana for Vatenan and Stoner.  Ana takes Falk so that they have a D to expose in expansion.

 

Respectfully, there is NFW that Anaheim would do this, and your presentation is filled with #Hammymath.

 

Stoner is entering the last year of his deal, while Vatanen has 2 more years after this coming year.

 

Kaner will command a 6- or 7-year deal -- which will start after this coming year -- so the commitment will be 4 or 5 years more than what Anaheim has now with Stoner and Vatanen.

 

Also, Anaheim is a budget team -- so although a Bieksa buyout saves them some cap space, it doesn't save them actual cash, which is their real concern.

 

Anaheim isn't trading for Kane.

[thewookie1]

I'd trade Kane, end of story. I just don't trust him as a person. He is likely a problem child in the locker room and I'm unwilling to give a guy with his persona a large long term contract. The sad part to me is he's the player I've always wanted in terms of on ice style. Fast, hard hitting, eats nails and can score goals. 

 

 

Also I can't see us keeping him and Reinhart and I'll vote for Reinhart every time over Kane's questionable off ice stuff.

 

 

 

I read on capfriendly that someone heard on the radio in Chicago the idea of Kane(50%) retained for Anisimov. And while we are desperate for D, I'd take that trade since I think he'd be a great LW for Eichel since he knows how to play with puck possessing speedsters and play D.