Patel Bure Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 (edited) Disclaimer - I’ve changed Virtanen to 9OA. [proposal] Canucks and Sharks: Eriksson + 9thOA for Evander Kane? Why the Sharks do it: -Get rid of a player that is rumored to be causing problems in the dressing room. -Get rid of a long term liability and will have dead salary off their books in one year. Why the Canucks do it: -Add a physical scoring presence to their line-up (more scoring prowess and physicality are two things that we need) -Playing in front of his hometown + playing for a team that will be trending upwards over these next few years = a motivated Evander Kane. Miller-Pettersson-Boeser Hoglander-Horvat-E.Kane Pearson-####-Podkolzin Ps - Virtanen and Eriksson for E.Kane is hilariously lob sided in our favor and so I’ve upgraded Virtanen to 9OA. Yes - 9OA involved to get E.Kane is another level of crazy but if there was a superstar player out there that could be had by getting rid of Eriksson, then it’s likely E.Kane. Edited June 28, 2021 by Patel Bure 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 Kane was the Sharks best player. Kevin Kurz who covers the Shark for the Athletic doesn't have him going anywhere. The Sharks apparently still hope to get back in the post-season next season and will need him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Shekky Posted June 28, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted June 28, 2021 No way Kane has been a cancer in the locker room don't need that in there hell Winnipeg got rid of him for the exact same thing. 2 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 Wouldn't want this troublesome punk at 50% full-retention, thanks 1 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YEGCanuck Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 Perhaps the question becomes how do we value character and scoring for the long term success of our team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 Kane was on pace for over 70 points this past year. Why in the heck would San Jose trade him for two salary dumps? 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 prima donna with serious off ice issues. No thanks. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 (edited) For our 9OA! Edited June 28, 2021 by Alflives 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chickenspear Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 (edited) 7 hours ago, Patel Bure said: [proposal] Canucks and Sharks: Eriksson + Virtanen for Evander Kane? Why the Sharks do it: -Get rid of a player that is rumored to be causing problems in the dressing room. -Get rid of a long term liability and will have dead salary off their books in one year. Why the Canucks don't do it: -Get a player that is rumored to be causing problems in the dressing room. -Get a long term liability and will have dead salary off their books in one year. There ya go, that's better. Edited June 28, 2021 by Chickenspear 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbadcanucks Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 57 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said: Kane was on pace for over 70 points this past year. Why in the heck would San Jose trade him for two salary dumps? 'Coz it's the genius armchair GM Patel Bure making yet another ridiculous trade proposal. 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcam Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 7 hours ago, Patel Bure said: [proposal] Canucks and Sharks: Eriksson + Virtanen for Evander Kane? Why the Sharks do it: -Get rid of a player that is rumored to be causing problems in the dressing room. -Get rid of a long term liability and will have dead salary off their books in one year. Why the Canucks do it: -Add a physical scoring presence to their line-up (more scoring prowess and physicality are two things that we need) -Playing in front of his hometown + playing for a team that will be trending upwards over these next few years = a motivated Evander Kane. Miller-Pettersson-Boeser Hoglander-Horvat-E.Kane Pearson-####-Podkolzin Kane is a great player but he has lots of baggage and big personality and new problems???? I would stay away.. BIG NO. Kane 30, August - 3 X 7 million -- HARD PASS...... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcam Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 1 hour ago, Elias Pettersson said: Kane was on pace for over 70 points this past year. Why in the heck would San Jose trade him for two salary dumps? Because of all the problems he has....BIG BIG .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcam Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 8 hours ago, Patel Bure said: [proposal] Canucks and Sharks: Eriksson + Virtanen for Evander Kane? Why the Sharks do it: -Get rid of a player that is rumored to be causing problems in the dressing room. -Get rid of a long term liability and will have dead salary off their books in one year. Why the Canucks do it: -Add a physical scoring presence to their line-up (more scoring prowess and physicality are two things that we need) -Playing in front of his hometown + playing for a team that will be trending upwards over these next few years = a motivated Evander Kane. Miller-Pettersson-Boeser Hoglander-Horvat-E.Kane Pearson-####-Podkolzin HARD NO........ 30 - --3 X 7 MILLION... LOTS OF ISSUES... STAY AWAY......... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patel Bure Posted June 28, 2021 Author Share Posted June 28, 2021 1 hour ago, Elias Pettersson said: Kane was on pace for over 70 points this past year. Why in the heck would San Jose trade him for two salary dumps? Rumored head case and lockerroom issues that will be on the books for a number of years. With Eriksson and Virtanen however, they’d be clear of dead cap after one year. While taking on Evander Kane would come with its set of risks, I’m of the belief that 1) Playing in his hometown 2) Playing for a team that will be trending upwards sharply over the coming years Will help Evander be a positive influence in the lockerroom. To be honest, San Jose wouldn’t accept Eriksson and Virtanen as a package but if there was a player that we could get by shipping off Eriksson, it’s Evander Kane. We would probably have to switch Virtanen with 9th OA (ie 9OA + Eriksson for Kane). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patel Bure Posted June 28, 2021 Author Share Posted June 28, 2021 2 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said: Kane was on pace for over 70 points this past year. Why in the heck would San Jose trade him for two salary dumps? Agreed. I’ve edited the original proposal. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil B From The Pack Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 chill bro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 1 hour ago, wildcam said: Because of all the problems he has....BIG BIG .. He declared bankruptcy. What does that have to do with his on ice production? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 29 minutes ago, Patel Bure said: Rumored head case and lockerroom issues that will be on the books for a number of years. With Eriksson and Virtanen however, they’d be clear of dead cap after one year. While taking on Evander Kane would come with its set of risks, I’m of the belief that 1) Playing in his hometown 2) Playing for a team that will be trending upwards sharply over the coming years Will help Evander be a positive influence in the lockerroom. To be honest, San Jose wouldn’t accept Eriksson and Virtanen as a package but if there was a player that we could get by shipping off Eriksson, it’s Evander Kane. We would probably have to switch Virtanen with 9th OA (ie 9OA + Eriksson for Kane). I wouldn't do that deal. I'd rather keep the pick rather then adding $7 million on the books for another 4 years. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awalk Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#Canucks Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 No skill outweighs negative character. (just look at messier) Maybe Kane has matured but its an easy No from me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.png.88f381253446a277a291a0da199aecd0.png)
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now