News Article: All-Purpose Evander Kane Discussion Pt III: Kane signs w/Oilers. Retroactive settlement no cap penalty

[The Nemesis]

****MOD WARNING****
Adapted from the previous thread:

Discussion in this thread is to remain on the topic of how the ongoing Evander Kane situation impacts the Sharks organization in a hockey capacity. Discussion of his personal issues, extrapolation/speculation about his home life, or presumptions and judgements that go beyond the scope of the San Jose Sharks team and their relationship with Kane as an employee/hockey player are out of bounds on the grounds of potential for libel or inappropriate/offensive content (and don't say it couldn't happen. Brian Burke once threatened multiple online discussion platforms including HF on the grounds that people anonymously made possibly libelous comments against him).

Please keep your posts confined to this range of discussion and within the boundaries of good taste and appropriate HFBoards decorum.

Thanks everyone.


From now on any posts that violate the above will be deleted and subject to possible infractions. Offending users will also be subject to threadbans.

Please don't let that become necessary. Just stay in bounds and we'll let you know when the range of discussion opens up (if it does)


ADDITIONAL NOTE: This thread may occasionally be locked by the mods if discussion wanders too far afield on a large scale, especially if that happens during a lull in new news/material worth discussing. If it is locked and you have new content you feel is worth noting, please PM a mod to have it appended to the thread. At that time the mods will also review the situation and decide if it warrants the thread being re-opened.

Click to read more...

 

[The Nemesis]

Most recent, pertinent news:







tl;dr

Sharks have Kane on waivers to terminate contract. Waiver process is expected to resolve on Sunday afternoon. If he is unclaimed (which will almost certainly be the case) the Sharks can then move to terminate his contract. Successful termination would wipe out all remaining financial commitments to Kane by voiding the remainder of his deal. If this is the final resolution Kane would forfeit all money owed to him for the remaining life of his deal and the Sharks would bear no cap hit for Kane from this day onward.

However, Kane's representation indicates they intend to file a grievance over the termination, arguing that the grounds on which it was sought (that Kane took an unapproved trip to Vancouver while still in AHL Covid protocols and failed to return to San Jose by an agreed on date) are inaccurate. If they were successful the Sharks would likely be charged a cap hit for whatever award Kane receives as a result of the process, possibly over several years (similar to what happened with Mike Richards and the Kings).

If Kane's contract is terminated he would be free to sign with any team that wished to take him on. However there are questions of what a successful grievance would mean for his contract status and signability elsewhere.

I think that's where we're at so far and is sufficient to get this new thread going. As the sticky 1st post says though, all the same ground rules as previous threads still apply.

 

[Karl Prime]

I have a hard time believing Bill Daly himself would say the Sharks have a good cause for termination if they didn't.

 

[The Nemesis]

I have a hard time believing Bill Daly himself would say the Sharks have a good cause for termination if they didn't.

I could see his people aruging that he misunderstood the Sharks' orders or if he tested negative within the isolation window believed that cleared him to travel. But then it becomes his word vs the Sharks' word and he's not in the best place right now in terms of his trustworthiness and reputation.

 

[Frosty415]

Let's just get passed this... so over the Kane drama

 

[Alwalys]

Boy this seems... Convenient

 

[TheBigDrunkPanda]

Hooray! That being said I’m a little shocked the PA and Kane want to grieve this, it greatly benefits Kane with all of his pending lawsuits and bankruptcy hearings. He’d probably be picked up by a euro league and start making money again.

im in a union so I get we gotta save this guys job nonsense but overall it seems like a net lose for Kane if it gets overturned

 

[The Nemesis]

Hooray! That being said I’m a little shocked the PA and Kane want to grieve this, it greatly benefits Kane with all of his pending lawsuits and bankruptcy hearings. He’d probably be picked up by a euro league and start making money again.

im in a union so I get we gotta save this guys job nonsense but overall it seems like a net lose for Kane if it gets overturned

Elliot Friedman reports there are NHL clubs that would be interested in him. Personally I'd be curious to see if the NHL might consider suspending him for the rest of the season given that he's now broken the covid protocols of the top two pro leagues on the continent within a span of a year while the league tries to stem the bleeding caused by Omicron and the wake of postponements and cancellations its been responsible for. Don't know that you can trust a guy who clearly has no regard for why the protocols exist keeping within the rules so that the league can make it to the point of awarding a Stanley Cup with minimal further interruption.

And like you said, the PA pretty much has to grieve this. Even if they recognize it's a hopeless fight they stand no chance of winning, they have to portray the optics of caring about the employment opportunities of their membership. Even if that member is a selfish yutz who's sabotaged himself at every turn and burned bridges with almost 10% of the league to this point.

 

[hotcabbagesoup]

Evander Kane should sign with Djurgården in Sweden. He can play with Sörensen and Eklund.

I don't think so. Kane doesn't like guys like Eklund and Sorensen. His best friends on the Cuda are Adam Raska and Ryan Merkley. What I think is that the Sharks purposely called Raska and Merkley up to the roving taxi squad (which is on the road) but most importantly away from the Cuda in order to spark Kane ("spark" could be interpreted as good or bad here, I couldn't find the right word for this). Well anyways, we know the Sharks organization has a precedence of doing this, they traded away Couture's best friend Jamie McGinn and Hertl's best friend Chris Tierney. And Randy Hahn's best friend Drew Remenda too. They allowed Drew to come back because announcing doesn't really affect the games that much, but they sent him to frozen Alberta in the meantime it was so mean.

So anyhoo, Kane was without his best friends, Timo won't return his calls anymore, so what logical thing can he do?He takes a flight to Vancouver with COVID around this same timeframe, he's bored, gotta find some friends eh, you can't play blackjack by yourself. Boom, playoffs, oh wait...not yet. Boom, we gotcha Kaner. Terminate the contract Joe Will, I need a couple more minutes in this tanning bed. The rest is history.

 

[LadyStanley]

Officially gone.



NHLPA's mission is to protect the player. So regardless of their personal feelings about Kane they HAVE to file a grievance. It may be a fool's mission, and they end up impaled on the sword, but it's what they have to do.

 

[Hodge]

Officially gone.



NHLPA's mission is to protect the player. So regardless of their personal feelings about Kane they HAVE to file a grievance. It may be a fool's mission, and they end up impaled on the sword, but it's what they have to do.

PA is not going to win the grievance to the extent that Kane's contract is restored but based on the Mike Richards precedent don't be surprised if the arbitrator assesses some sort of penalty against the Sharks (and it will likely affect their cap).

 

[timorous me]

I think the PA has to grieve it because there's so little precedent for this kind of contract termination, and they also don't want to set a precedent that teams can go and do this all willy-nilly. Granted, Kane is a special case, but just letting it go is a sort of dereliction of duty.

We also probably shouldn't just assume the Sharks will get off scot-free, but this feels like a stronger case in a way than what the Kings had with Mike Richards.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

I think the PA has to grieve it because there's so little precedent for this kind of contract termination, and they also don't want to set a precedent that teams can go and do this all willy-nilly. Granted, Kane is a special case, but just letting it go is a sort of dereliction of duty.

We also probably shouldn't just assume the Sharks will get off scot-free, but this feels like a stronger case in a way than what the Kings had with Mike Richards.

At worst, it's a buyout so I think since that was a likely outcome, any settlement here will be better than that.

 

[hockeywiz542]

 

[one2gamble]

PA is not going to win the grievance to the extent that Kane's contract is restored but based on the Mike Richards precedent don't be surprised if the arbitrator assesses some sort of penalty against the Sharks (and it will likely affect their cap).

Richards is not a precedent

 

[stator]

PA is not going to win the grievance to the extent that Kane's contract is restored but based on the Mike Richards precedent don't be surprised if the arbitrator assesses some sort of penalty against the Sharks (and it will likely affect their cap).

Doesn't seem like a comparison. Richards case revolved around the CBA agreement of drug rehab program which the Kings ignored. Is there a COVID rehab program in the CBA?

But another answer to the naysayers that Kane will be picked up cheap by another club, the Caps picked up Richards, a known international drug smuggler for the league's minimum salary. I expect another club will pick up Kane for a year at/near league minimum. The key is that Kane cannot drag this out to the TDL. He'll want resolution well prior to that date.

 

[The Nemesis]

Richards is not a precedent

He is insofar as it's a sitaution where a team terminated a contract for claimed violations relating to off-ice conduct. There are differences (Richards' was for potential criminal actions, was a first "offence" of that type, and ultimately mostly went nowhere which vindicates his position. Meanwhile Kane was for violating league protocols, is his second strike in that regard after the vax card suspension, and it seems like there's a stronger case for his guilt in that regard especially since they only have to meet the workplace threshold and not criminal court standards) but it's similar enough to be worthy of attention/consideration.

 

[tahoesharksfan]

Sounds like DW's finally gotten rid of what was stuck in his throat....

 

[Bizz]

People are legitimately mad that we're getting cap relief out of this and that makes me happy.

 

[one2gamble]

He is insofar as it's a sitaution where a team terminated a contract for claimed violations relating to off-ice conduct. There are differences (Richards' was for potential criminal actions, was a first "offence" of that type, and ultimately mostly went nowhere which vindicates his position. Meanwhile Kane was for violating league protocols, is his second strike in that regard after the vax card suspension, and it seems like there's a stronger case for his guilt in that regard especially since they only have to meet the workplace threshold and not criminal court standards) but it's similar enough to be worthy of attention/consideration.

The settlement was configured so as it didn't set precedent. As far as I am aware it can't be used unless I am thinking of a different one

 

[Lebanezer]

People are legitimately mad that we're getting cap relief out of this and that makes me happy.

They should be mad at Kane. The guy is unaware of the consequences of his actions. All the Sharks had to do was wait for him to once again do something he shouldn't.

 

[seroes]

People are legitimately mad that we're getting cap relief out of this and that makes me happy.

People are salty literally anytime our franchise does something good. It's delicious.

 

[matt trick]

They should be mad at Kane. The guy is unaware of the consequences of his actions. All the Sharks had to do was wait for him to once again do something he shouldn't.

This is why I don't want to buyout Kane, eventually he'll do something dumb that may negate his contract.

 

[Alwalys]

I think the PA has to grieve it because there's so little precedent for this kind of contract termination, and they also don't want to set a precedent that teams can go and do this all willy-nilly. Granted, Kane is a special case, but just letting it go is a sort of dereliction of duty.

We also probably shouldn't just assume the Sharks will get off scot-free, but this feels like a stronger case in a way than what the Kings had with Mike Richards.

Yeah this is honestly kind of bullshit by the Sharks, and they should get dinged for it. I guess they have made the decision a ding is better than eating the salary of a player you aren't going to play. So much for being player-friendly, let alone player-of-color friendly.

 

[STL Shark]

PA is not going to win the grievance to the extent that Kane's contract is restored but based on the Mike Richards precedent don't be surprised if the arbitrator assesses some sort of penalty against the Sharks (and it will likely affect their cap).

Richards never got to an arbitrator. It was settled without arbitration because the NHLPA thought there was a chance that LAK would be able to win the case and get away with not paying a dime. Similarly, LAK thought that while their case was good it wasn't a slam dunk either and the settlement was palatable.