(Edit)(Disscussion) Evander Kane UFA / Contract Termination Investigated

[NHL97OneTimer]

15 hours ago, SilentSam said:

Well I guess if our dressing room and roster players were weak , Jake would have effected them.

It’s not a weak room,.  
add Boudreau and Rutherford to that.. I see more strength than ever.

This is a low risk move yo get a high point player at a fraction of the cost of what he is worth.  

His game is undiminished.  

Roughly .88 pts per game last season.

and 8 points in 5 games in the AHL right now.

 

This club dearly needs a true power forward.

to acquire one other than Kane will cost you 7m + a high pick , minimum.

 

acquiring this player at 3.5 m  and giving up very little is a low risk move.

If it dosent work you share the buyout cost of the burden with SJ.

The Canucks are hopefully tired of the word buyout.

 

Unfortunately you can go backwards through addition.  If this was a hockey pool, you bet I pick him up.  But if I'm an owner handling millions of dollars and thinking that the fan base would be very angry if the team derails with him after this winning streak, there should be considerable pause.  Low risk you say, but others may disagree with you there.

[‹(•¿•)›]

20 hours ago, SilentSam said:

 

This is a low risk move yo get a high point player at a fraction of the cost of what he is worth.  

 

Bringing in a proven locker room cancer is the exact opposite of a low risk move.

[The Lock]

On 1/6/2022 at 2:19 AM, SilentSam said:

Well I guess if our dressing room and roster players were weak , Jake would have effected them.

It’s not a weak room,.  
add Boudreau and Rutherford to that.. I see more strength than ever.

This is a low risk move yo get a high point player at a fraction of the cost of what he is worth.  

His game is undiminished.  

Roughly .88 pts per game last season.

and 8 points in 5 games in the AHL right now.

 

This club dearly needs a true power forward.

to acquire one other than Kane will cost you 7m + a high pick , minimum.

 

acquiring this player at 3.5 m  and giving up very little is a low risk move.

If it dosent work you share the buyout cost of the burden with SJ.

To be honest, I don't know why you're so obsessed about this. I bowed out of the discussion a while ago because it just wasn't worth my time arguing with a Kane fanatic. If we were at the bar I'd be the one smiling and nodding at this point and hightailing it to the other corner as soon as I can. lol

Edited January 7, 2022 by The Lock

[King Heffy]

1 hour ago, The Lock said:

To be honest, I don't know why you're so obsessed about this. I bowed out of the discussion a while ago because it just wasn't worth my time arguing with a Kane fanatic. If we were at the bar I'd be the one smiling and nodding at this point and hightailing it to the other corner as soon as I can. lol

Same, but the guy naming himself after rotgut would give me concern in a bar.

[SilentSam]

11 hours ago, ‹(•¿•)› said:

Bringing in a proven locker room cancer is the exact opposite of a low risk move.

What rooms had he destroyed?

thats b s .

no team has gone down hill because of Kane,.

What players have actually been able to do that in any sport ,.  It’s a myth.

[VegasCanuck]

2 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

What rooms had he destroyed?

thats b s .

no team has gone down hill because of Kane,.

What players have actually been able to do that in any sport ,.  It’s a myth.

Everything is speculation around Kane and locker rooms.

 

The evidence that it's true though, would probably include:

 

1. Kane was leading scorer last year for San Jose and yet, they are burying more than 5.8 million of his cap hit in the minors as opposed to pulling him back up to the main team.

2. I firmly believe, based on #1, that San Jose would be willing to get rid of Kane and retain a significant portion of his contract.

3. Keeping #1 and 2 in mind, if there wasn't concerns around the NHL about his impact on team dynamics and dressing rooms, I think he would have been moved by now.

 

I think, at the end of the day, teams see too much drama around this player and whether there's open conflict with him in the dressing room, there's too much opportunity for it to back flow from his life, into the team's overall mood.

 

If he had one year left on his contract, there's probably some teams that would take a chance on him. Based on his having 3 years after this at 7 million, I don't think teams are willing to risk having to bury that much cap in the AHL. Only having 3 teams that he can be traded to as a condition of his NTC, he would have to be completely willing to waive that condition permanently as part of his trade, and his agent has said directly that they are currently sticking to that condition for San Jose to negotiate.

 

My personal thoughts are, there is too much risk with this guy to take a chance on.

[SilentSam]

1 hour ago, The Lock said:

To be honest, I don't know why you're so obsessed about this. I bowed out of the discussion a while ago because it just wasn't worth my time arguing with a Kane fanatic. If we were at the bar I'd be the one smiling and nodding at this point and hightailing it to the other corner as soon as I can. lol

To be clear,.  I’m not about the player , but I am about the player type that this team needs.

Everyone else who dosent see that is opposed to a so called personality trait, they are the fanatical ones obsessed with judgmental negative ways of demeaning a human being,. With no personal or direct relationship to that person.

Reading up garbage hyped words, with out direct context from other named players who quote that negativity.

Paul Maurice spoke highly of Kane before he went to SJ..

and in SJ Kane was involved with 2 or 3 charities that he would go out of his way to support.

Think about your sources before you buy into their words.

Boughgner was quoted as saying the following after receiving Kane in the trade to SJ,. Little was made of it because it dosent give much to write about..

There’s no “boots and fur” appeal to good..

but “bad” is damn sexy to those who want to feel good about themselves, and feel better than others.

[The Lock]

3 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

To be clear,.  I’m not about the player , but I am about the player type that this team needs.

Everyone else who dosent see that is opposed to a so called personality trait, they are the fanatical ones obsessed with judgmental negative ways of demeaning a human being,. With no personal or direct relationship to that person.

Reading up garbage hyped words, with out direct context from other named players who quote that negativity.

Paul Maurice spoke highly of Kane before he went to SJ..

and in SJ Kane was involved with 2 or 3 charities that he would go out of his way to support.

Think about your sources before you buy into their words.

Boughgner was quoted as saying the following after receiving Kane in the trade to SJ,. Little was made of it because it dosent give much to write about..

There’s no “boots and fur” appeal to good..

but “bad” is damn sexy to those who want to feel good about themselves, and feel better than others.

If you're about the player type, then why not support a player of a similar player type instead of all of this? It's pretty clear that bringing him over here is still a risk no matter what you bring up. It's still pretty clear that this is a controversial player. Do you not at least agree with that?

Edited January 7, 2022 by The Lock

[SilentSam]

2 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said:

Everything is speculation around Kane and locker rooms.

 

The evidence that it's true though, would probably include:

 

1. Kane was leading scorer last year for San Jose and yet, they are burying more than 5.8 million of his cap hit in the minors as opposed to pulling him back up to the main team.

2. I firmly believe, based on #1, that San Jose would be willing to get rid of Kane and retain a significant portion of his contract.

3. Keeping #1 and 2 in mind, if there wasn't concerns around the NHL about his impact on team dynamics and dressing rooms, I think he would have been moved by now.

 

I think, at the end of the day, teams see too much drama around this player and whether there's open conflict with him in the dressing room, there's too much opportunity for it to back flow from his life, into the team's overall mood.

 

If he had one year left on his contract, there's probably some teams that would take a chance on him. Based on his having 3 years after this at 7 million, I don't think teams are willing to risk having to bury that much cap in the AHL. Only having 3 teams that he can be traded to as a condition of his NTC, he would have to be completely willing to waive that condition permanently as part of his trade, and his agent has said directly that they are currently sticking to that condition for San Jose to negotiate.

 

My personal thoughts are, there is too much risk with this guy to take a chance on.

To be clear,.  I’m not about the player , but I am about the player type that this team needs.

 

Everyone else who dosent see that is opposed to a so called personality trait, they are the fanatical ones obsessed with judgmental negative ways of demeaning a human being,. With no personal or direct relationship to that person.

Reading up garbage hyped words, with out direct context from other named players who quote that negativity.

Paul Maurice spoke highly of Kane before he went to SJ..

and in SJ Kane was involved with 2 or 3 charities that he would go out of his way to support.

Think about your sources before you buy into their words.

Boughgner was quoted as saying the following after receiving Kane in the trade to SJ,. Little was made of it because it dosent give much to write about..

There’s no “boots and fur” appeal to good..

but “bad” is damn sexy to those who want to feel good about themselves, and feel better than others.

 

[SilentSam]

1 minute ago, The Lock said:

If you're about the player type, then why not support a player of a similar player type instead of all of this? It's pretty clear that bringing him over here is still a risk no matter what you bring up. It's still pretty clear that this is a controversial player. Do you not at least agree with that?

Because it will cost us far more than a 7-8 million dollar cap hit.…  add a very high draft pick to that dollar as well.

 

Kane at 3.5 or less,.  Giving up less or even moving away more cap space to get him is bonus.

for 3 years, a .88 points per game true power forward .   It fits.

The risk?  we buy out if we can’t move him, and Dan Jose still retains 50% of the buyout.

 

Kane did well in SJ,.  Management there has handled this incredibly wrong.

There are fans there that are outraged that he is not playing and helping his team, he was there leading points getter last season.

[VegasCanuck]

1 minute ago, SilentSam said:

 

To be clear,.  I’m not about the player , but I am about the player type that this team needs.

 

Everyone else who dosent see that is opposed to a so called personality trait, they are the fanatical ones obsessed with judgmental negative ways of demeaning a human being,. With no personal or direct relationship to that person.

Reading up garbage hyped words, with out direct context from other named players who quote that negativity.

Paul Maurice spoke highly of Kane before he went to SJ..

and in SJ Kane was involved with 2 or 3 charities that he would go out of his way to support.

Think about your sources before you buy into their words.

Boughgner was quoted as saying the following after receiving Kane in the trade to SJ,. Little was made of it because it dosent give much to write about..

There’s no “boots and fur” appeal to good..

but “bad” is damn sexy to those who want to feel good about themselves, and feel better than others.

 

I respect your opinion.

 

I just think he'd be in the NHL right now, in San Jose, if there wasn't issues around him within their dressing room. Right, wrong or otherwise, you don't keep a guy who's doing better than a point per game and a proven 25 - 30 goal per season scorer who can skate like the wind and play a physical game, you don't keep him in the minors.

 

Even if you're trying to trade him, you want him playing in the NHL and putting up points to make him more attractive for trade.

 

Something is off here. All the math that I do, equals that there at the very least, has been past problems with the other players on the team.

[The Lock]

4 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

Because it will cost us far more than a 7-8 million dollar cap hit.…  add a very high draft pick to that dollar as well.

 

Kane at 3.5 or less,.  Giving up less or even moving away more cap space to get him is bonus.

for 3 years, a .88 points per game true power forward .   It fits.

The risk?  we buy out if we can’t move him, and Dan Jose still retains 50% of the buyout.

 

Kane did well in SJ,.  Management there has handled this incredibly wrong.

There are fans there that are outraged that he is not playing and helping his team, he was there leading points getter last season.

It just isn't that simple though. Buying him out would make us pay for it until the year 2028. Even if SJ retains some of the cap, that's almost 900K until 2028. That's not a no risk situation. San Jose right now is having trouble moving him if they're willing to keep some of the caphit so this is actually the most likely scenario.

 

There are fans outraged that he's not playing because SJ is having trouble at the moment. It doesn't necessarily mean it's because of him.

[SilentSam]

Just now, VegasCanuck said:

I respect your opinion.

 

I just think he'd be in the NHL right now, in San Jose, if there wasn't issues around him within their dressing room. Right, wrong or otherwise, you don't keep a guy who's doing better than a point per game and a proven 25 - 30 goal per season scorer who can skate like the wind and play a physical game, you don't keep him in the minors.

 

Even if you're trying to trade him, you want him playing in the NHL and putting up points to make him more attractive for trade.

 

Something is off here. All the math that I do, equals that there at the very least, has been past problems with the other players on the team.

The reason he is not playing is because he broke Covid Protocols.

He finished serving an NHL suspension of 21 games (a bit much compared to other sports)

He went to the AHL for conditioning and because Wilson and the Sharks decided to disown him because of that.

Back to playing on Nov 30th?  8 points in 5 games after a couple of get up to speed games.  He now sits in Covid protocol , after testing positive with 2 other players.

by all accounts had a rough go of it, but should be back soon.

Wilson had said he is trading him,.  For face value and ego, he is not going to change his mind in that decision,. Meanwhile his team needs him.

Kane has a 3 team list clause in his contract,.

he is not going to go where he does not want to go.

we know Vancouver is high on his list, his agent has been open to moving him here.

 

I get how all of this seems like I’m in love with the player..  lol.

im just trying to state the facts that I know vs the the hear say others get paid to spread.

 

we need a power forward, we have not had one since Bertuzzi.

it’s a game changer having one.

 

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, SilentSam said:

The reason he is not playing is because he broke Covid Protocols.

He finished serving an NHL suspension of 21 games (a bit much compared to other sports)

He went to the AHL for conditioning and because Wilson and the Sharks decided to disown him because of that.

Back to playing on Nov 30th?  8 points in 5 games after a couple of get up to speed games.  He now sits in Covid protocol , after testing positive with 2 other players.

by all accounts had a rough go of it, but should be back soon.

Wilson had said he is trading him,.  For face value and ego, he is not going to change his mind in that decision,. Meanwhile his team needs him.

Kane has a 3 team list clause in his contract,.

he is not going to go where he does not want to go.

we know Vancouver is high on his list, his agent has been open to moving him here.

 

I get how all of this seems like I’m in love with the player..  lol.

im just trying to state the facts that I know vs the the hear say others get paid to spread.

 

we need a power forward, we have not had one since Bertuzzi.

it’s a game changer having one.

 

The reason Kane is in the minors is his teammates in SJ don't want him on their club.  And that came well before Evander got suspended for yet another stupid decision, faking his vaccination.

https://theathletic.com/news/several-sharks-teammates-dont-want-evander-kane-back-on-the-team-sources/1ffGCFrGpnx3/

[SilentSam]

3 minutes ago, The Lock said:

It just isn't that simple though. Buying him out would make us pay for it until the year 2028. Even if SJ retains some of the cap, that's almost 900K until 2028. That's not a no risk situation. San Jose right now is having trouble moving him if they're willing to keep some of the caphit so this is actually the most likely scenario.

 

There are fans outraged that he's not playing because SJ is having trouble at the moment. It doesn't necessarily mean it's because of him.

Because he is not playing they are missing his points output, grit,  and how he compliments and balances their lines.

a single player out, is a loss to the team more dynamically than just his points.

Fans know that.

 

I have to disagree with you on 900k being a huge loss or risk.

Sutter has done more harm to this team holding a contract and roster spot from a better player in his entire time here.. 

as did LE. .. and others.

[SilentSam]

2 minutes ago, Alflives said:

The reason Kane is in the minors is his teammates in SJ don't want him on their club.  And that came well before Evander got suspended for yet another stupid decision, faking his vaccination.

https://theathletic.com/news/several-sharks-teammates-dont-want-evander-kane-back-on-the-team-sources/1ffGCFrGpnx3/

It happened at the time of gambling accusations,.  “Betting against his team”..

 

all proved to be lies by the NHL ,.  stemming from his wife.

[The Lock]

Just now, SilentSam said:

Because he is not playing they are missing his points output, grit,  and how he compliments and balances their lines.

a single player out, is a loss to the team more dynamically than just his points.

Fans know that.

 

I have to disagree with you on 900k being a huge loss or risk.

Sutter has done more harm to this team holding a contract and roster spot from a better player in his entire time here.. 

as did LE. .. and others.

And yet, those contracts also prevented us from getting other deals done. I remember a press conference with Benning sayings the Luongo contract messed things up for him. While that's obviously more than 900K, it adds up. Also, those contracts you mentioned and our current cap situation is also part of the reason why this doesn't make sense for us in my opinion.

 

Like I said before, it's pretty clear you aren't going to change your opinion and nothing you've said has convinced me this is a good idea. If this trade does happen, I'll support the player but to say I'll be extremely hesitant on this wouild be a massive understatement.

[Alflives]

Just now, SilentSam said:

It happened at the time of gambling accusations,.  “Betting against his team”..

 

all proved to be lies by the NHL ,.  stemming from his wife.

Kane, as pointed out here, has a history of troubles with his teammates, and in the community.  I'd wait (the Sharks will buy him out at season's end) and see if he will sign for league minimum in July.  

[‹(•¿•)›]

1 hour ago, SilentSam said:

What rooms had he destroyed?

thats b s .

no team has gone down hill because of Kane,.

What players have actually been able to do that in any sport ,.  It’s a myth.

I can only assume you are being deliberately obtuse if you can't see the red flags at this point. You have team that would rather have their leading scorer from last year buried in the minors than around their group. And, yes, they are having a better year this year than last. It's not always about point production, team chemistry does play a factor in team success.

[VegasCanuck]

1 hour ago, SilentSam said:

The reason he is not playing is because he broke Covid Protocols.

He finished serving an NHL suspension of 21 games (a bit much compared to other sports)

He went to the AHL for conditioning and because Wilson and the Sharks decided to disown him because of that.

Back to playing on Nov 30th?  8 points in 5 games after a couple of get up to speed games.  He now sits in Covid protocol , after testing positive with 2 other players.

by all accounts had a rough go of it, but should be back soon.

Wilson had said he is trading him,.  For face value and ego, he is not going to change his mind in that decision,. Meanwhile his team needs him.

Kane has a 3 team list clause in his contract,.

he is not going to go where he does not want to go.

we know Vancouver is high on his list, his agent has been open to moving him here.

 

I get how all of this seems like I’m in love with the player..  lol.

im just trying to state the facts that I know vs the the hear say others get paid to spread.

 

we need a power forward, we have not had one since Bertuzzi.

it’s a game changer having one.

 

8 points in 5 games in AHL and he's not back with the team? Sorry, but to me, him not being recalled by now means there's more than just "Broke Covid Protocol" going on.

 

I'm not saying that he doesn't have a skill set that would be awesome for us right now, somewhere, there's a reason why he's not already back in the NHL. San Jose has the space to pull him in immediately.