Player Discussion Evander Kane - What's the verdict?

[MessierII]

Still can’t see a 7M-8M pay day for Kane. There’s lot of things holding that back. Some teams just won’t want the bad PR of signing Kane. Some teams wouldn’t want to risk building around Kane and his cap given his locker room history. And contending teams won’t have the cap space.

This whole strange arbitrator situation is horrible for him too. Just adds more uncertainty.

 

[Oilhawks]

Still can’t see a 7M-8M pay day for Kane. There’s lot of things holding that back. Some teams just won’t want the bad PR of signing Kane. Some teams wouldn’t want to risk building around Kane and his cap given his locker room history. And contending teams won’t have the cap space.

Brian Lawton was on OilersNow today and figures it will be in the 5s for AAV. He thinks that a lot of GMs will still be wary about Kane’s past history despite being a model citizen here. He did say though that it “only takes one GM” to pay more and bet on him.

I wonder if $5.5M x 4 gets it done

 

[oilers'72]

Brian Lawton was on OilersNow today and figures it will be in the 5s for AAV. He thinks that a lot of GMs will still be wary about Kane’s past history despite being a model citizen here. He did say though that it “only takes one GM” to pay more and bet on him.

I wonder if $5.5M x 4 gets it done

San Jose still would owe him 21M over the next 3 seasons, so no matter how less he'd be paid here, the Sharks would be responsible for the rest,

 

[TheNumber4]

Brian Lawton was on OilersNow today and figures it will be in the 5s for AAV. He thinks that a lot of GMs will still be wary about Kane’s past history despite being a model citizen here. He did say though that it “only takes one GM” to pay more and bet on him.

I wonder if $5.5M x 4 gets it done

Interesting. That’s about what I would figure too. I like Lawton’s takes, he had us a dark house all year and we took out the “favourite” in Calgary.

 

[TopShelfGloveSide]

Did it go through the roof?

He always produced at that level throughout his entire career. How was what he did this year any less impressive than last year? More goals with less assists, same level of production.


He also has a history of behaving for the first 1-2 years.


View attachment 557764

 

[Oilhawks]

San Jose still would owe him 21M over the next 3 seasons, so no matter how less he'd be paid here, the Sharks would be responsible for the rest,

As long as the arbitrator rules in his favour (but doesn't reinstate the contract in full), which should hopefully be the case. I just don't see how they rule against him at this point, but you never know with the NHL.

Interesting. That’s about what I would figure too. I like Lawton’s takes, he had us a dark house all year and we took out the “favourite” in Calgary.

With Lawton also being the head of a prominent player agency, I think his speculation is pretty spot in the case of player salary and other considerations.

 

[LaGu]

Is Kane allowed to sign with a team anyway before his contract grievance is sorted?

Obviously he'd like to have a clear picture of what's going on but is anything stopping him from signing with a team like he did last year?

 

[Oilhawks]

That's likely true but it will likely change the outlook of offers he gets. Teams won't offer as high if they don't know whether they'd get any cap / salary relief.

 

[LaGu]

I've shut down a bit after the season ended, so I guess these things have been discussed already, but seeing these comments from McDavid, Draisaitl I'd guess they'll be moving mountains to get Kane signed...
Draisaitl: "Those are the guys you can go on runs with and those are types of guys you’re going to win with eventually."
McDavid: “You saw how he performed in the playoffs. Those are the types of guys you need.”

Would be awesome if it ended up as a $5Mx3years, but I have little problem in going longer term as well tbh.

 

[T-Funk]

Oil sign him for 5.45x4 and Kane wins grievance. Gary says Oil carry 7mill cap hit and give SJS 3rd rounder.

 

[Fourier]

Offer him one year at $3M with a 5 year extension at $5.5M on the table for later in the year. There is a risk to Kane which is somewhat mitigated by his chances in the arbitration.

Bettman stated that League revenues will be over $5.2B this year and that they expect a return to a more normal cap after 2 years. At $5.2B the cap should be in the $90M range. If Bettman's prediction is correct, with the new TV deal coming on I could see a $100M+ cap by the middle of that extension.

This also means that you can structure the deal to put more money in Kane's pocket.

3 ... 4, 7, 7, 5, 4.5

Low salary in the two years with high escrow followed by high salary with big signing bonuses in the years when their may be almost no escrow.

 

[North Cole]

Bit sus that they've had months to conduct "hearings" but have put crucial ones off until the summer such that the arbiter booked up with other things.

Id like to see which "hearings" they couldn't do earlier in the year, because its a bit strange that the this cant proceed until after UFA frenzy. Are they hoping that the only teams who want the guy spend all their cap by the time this is decided? Seems like a bit of a structural dismissal to me. Obviously can't prove that.

"Oh, sorry we are busy post trade deadline where nothing is happening. Now that we have all the salary arbitrations coming up and gearing up for UFA, we have all the time in the world."
"Oh the arbiter is busy? Unfortunate..."

 

[joestevens29]

Nothing ever remotely quick or easy with the NHL. Not even sure why they had to meet in person in the first place. All this could've been done over zoom like everything else was done for 2 years.

This is actually a perfect example of how meeting in person is a waste of time and money. Instead of having to fly and spend the night somewhere they could've extended their original meeting

 

[Dazed and Confused]

If you can get him for a RNH or Hyman-like cap hit for 2, 3, or even 4 years, I think you jump at that. Even if that does cost you one of Pulju or Yams this offseason.

Kane-McDavid-Yams/Pulju
RNH-Drai-Hyman

That's a top 6 you can build around for a long time. Plus you've still got Holloway and Bourgault on the cusp too, along with some other lottery tickets in Savoie, Lavoie, and Petrov.

 

[bone]

Offer him one year at $3M with a 5 year extension at $5.5M on the table for later in the year. There is a risk to Kane which is somewhat mitigated by his chances in the arbitration.

Bettman stated that League revenues will be over $5.2B this year and that they expect a return to a more normal cap after 2 years. At $5.2B the cap should be in the $90M range. If Bettman's prediction is correct, with the new TV deal coming on I could see a $100M+ cap by the middle of that extension.

This also means that you can structure the deal to put more money in Kane's pocket.

3 ... 4, 7, 7, 5, 4.5

Low salary in the two years with high escrow followed by high salary with big signing bonuses in the years when their may be almost no escrow.

If we have another season like this next year, I'd have to question the league judgement in thinking the right thing to do would be to continue holding the $1M cap increases. If this year's revenue would have yielded a $90M cap and we have two more full years of holding it back, we'll likely see a cap increase of $10-15M in 2025-26. This will result in GMs throwing up all over themselves overpaying plugs and will completely f*** up the entire pay structure of the league.

They need to start looking forward a bit and making a guess as to what the cap number will be when they are made whole, and split the difference. Three straight years of $4-5M increases would be way better for the league and the players as a whole than 2 years of 1M, then a $10-12M increase in year 3.

But you know the league, they won't do the logical thing here. If I was a player agent representing guys that are early-mid career, I'd 100% be pushing for their contracts to expire in summer 2025 when all of the sudden league wide teams will have an extra $300M-$400M to spend on players.

A more sane approach I'd think since they've already accepted full pay back by 2024-25 is reasonable, this is about figuring out what the cap will be in 2025-26. So if this year's revenue would normally yield $90M, just assume that number for now with no new revenue at all. 2022-23 is 82.5, so what should 2023-24 and 2024-25 be assuming $90M in 2025-26. Pretty easy math is $85 in 2023-24, $87.5 in 2024-25 and $90M in 2025-26. If next year's revenue goes higher again use that number to re-predict the cap in 2025-26 and adjust again thus smoothing the increases out.

 

[Canovin]

3M x 5 years would be awesome on top of his 7M x 3 years from San Jose

 

[Tobias Kahun]

3M x 5 years would be awesome on top of his 7M x 3 years from San Jose

He would still only be getting 7m a year during those first 3 years most likely.

San Jose would top him up to 7m a year so they would be paying 4m during the first 3 years

 

[Canovin]

He would still only be getting 7m a year during those first 3 years most likely.

San Jose would top him up to 7m a year so they would be paying 4m during the first 3 years

Is that how it works?

 

[bone]

If we have another season like this next year, I'd have to question the league judgement in thinking the right thing to do would be to continue holding the $1M cap increases. If this year's revenue would have yielded a $90M cap and we have two more full years of holding it back, we'll likely see a cap increase of $10-15M in 2025-26. This will result in GMs throwing up all over themselves overpaying plugs and will completely f*** up the entire pay structure of the league.

They need to start looking forward a bit and making a guess as to what the cap number will be when they are made whole, and split the difference. Three straight years of $4-5M increases would be way better for the league and the players as a whole than 2 years of 1M, then a $10-12M increase in year 3.

But you know the league, they won't do the logical thing here. If I was a player agent representing guys that are early-mid career, I'd 100% be pushing for their contracts to expire in summer 2025 when all of the sudden league wide teams will have an extra $300M-$400M to spend on players.

A more sane approach I'd think since they've already accepted full pay back by 2024-25 is reasonable, this is about figuring out what the cap will be in 2025-26. So if this year's revenue would normally yield $90M, just assume that number for now with no new revenue at all. 2022-23 is 82.5, so what should 2023-24 and 2024-25 be assuming $90M in 2025-26. Pretty easy math is $85 in 2023-24, $87.5 in 2024-25 and $90M in 2025-26. If next year's revenue goes higher again use that number to re-predict the cap in 2025-26 and adjust again thus smoothing the increases out.

Thinking even more on this, the league has been saying that the players owe $1B as a result of the lost revenue tied to Covid.

The $81.5M cap number was established based on a $4.6B revenue with 31 teams. So to generate that $81.5M cap number again with 32 team, you'd need about $4.75B in revenue (simply went 4.6 times 32/31). If they got $5.2 this year, that's already $450M of the $1B.

Adjusting the same $82.5M for this coming years cap would require a revenue of $4.8B to support it, so a revenue amount of $5.35 (a 3% increase in revenue next year), would make whole on the players debt if my calculations are correct.

 

[Jimmi McJenkins]

NHL says Evander Kane’s next contract could be voided by arbitrator

If the arbitrator rules that the Sharks terminated him without cause, Kane – and his contract – will be reinstated with...

www.dailyfaceoff.com

Not much new, but if it was reinstated (his original contract), then a trade with the Sharks seems pretty doable.

 

[Fourier]

If we have another season like this next year, I'd have to question the league judgement in thinking the right thing to do would be to continue holding the $1M cap increases. If this year's revenue would have yielded a $90M cap and we have two more full years of holding it back, we'll likely see a cap increase of $10-15M in 2025-26. This will result in GMs throwing up all over themselves overpaying plugs and will completely f*** up the entire pay structure of the league.

They need to start looking forward a bit and making a guess as to what the cap number will be when they are made whole, and split the difference. Three straight years of $4-5M increases would be way better for the league and the players as a whole than 2 years of 1M, then a $10-12M increase in year 3.

But you know the league, they won't do the logical thing here. If I was a player agent representing guys that are early-mid career, I'd 100% be pushing for their contracts to expire in summer 2025 when all of the sudden league wide teams will have an extra $300M-$400M to spend on players.

A more sane approach I'd think since they've already accepted full pay back by 2024-25 is reasonable, this is about figuring out what the cap will be in 2025-26. So if this year's revenue would normally yield $90M, just assume that number for now with no new revenue at all. 2022-23 is 82.5, so what should 2023-24 and 2024-25 be assuming $90M in 2025-26. Pretty easy math is $85 in 2023-24, $87.5 in 2024-25 and $90M in 2025-26. If next year's revenue goes higher again use that number to re-predict the cap in 2025-26 and adjust again thus smoothing the increases out.

I suspect that the plan was not to have the cap jump all the way to $90M in 2024-2025 but rather to return to "more normal increases" as Bettman says. What that means is anyone's guess but I could see.

2022-2023 $82.5M
2023-2024 $83.5M
2024-2025 $89M
2025-2026 $95M

The Oilers could really use a plan like you lay out. That would allow them to manage their cap much better than the continued flat cap.

 

[Trafalgar Sadge Law]

NHL says Evander Kane’s next contract could be voided by arbitrator

If the arbitrator rules that the Sharks terminated him without cause, Kane – and his contract – will be reinstated with...

www.dailyfaceoff.com

Not much new, but if it was reinstated (his original contract), then a trade with the Sharks seems pretty doable.

I wonder if Kane could do something like list Edmonton/Winnipeg/Buffalo as his 3 team NTC which would pretty much force them to trade Kane to us 50% retained at a low price with no leverage much like what Hall did with Buffalo/Boston. But then again considering we have the worst general manager in hockey who somehow not only didn't get a 1st round pick with the Keith cap dump but actually gave up assets, I fully expect him to trade Broberg+1st for Kane with no retention b/c "it's hard to squeeze people in this league".

 

[Canovin]

NHL says Evander Kane’s next contract could be voided by arbitrator

If the arbitrator rules that the Sharks terminated him without cause, Kane – and his contract – will be reinstated with...

www.dailyfaceoff.com

Not much new, but if it was reinstated (his original contract), then a trade with the Sharks seems pretty doable.

Trading with San Jose and them honoring the 7M x 3 years and retaining 50% is a very good option. 3 years is perfect for the Oilers and Kane as both sides don't want to commit long term.

Kane 3.5M(50% of 7M)

for

Barrie 4.5M

 

[bone]

I suspect that the plan was not to have the cap jump all the way to $90M in 2024-2025 but rather to return to "more normal increases" as Bettman says. What that means is anyone's guess but I could see.

2022-2023 $82.5M
2023-2024 $83.5M
2024-2025 $89M
2025-2026 $95M

The Oilers could really use a plan like you lay out. That would allow them to manage their cap much better than the continued flat cap.

I'm sure all the teams would prefer this as it's a much more effective way to plan

 

[Jimmi McJenkins]

I wonder if Kane could do something like list Edmonton/Winnipeg/Buffalo as his 3 team NTC which would pretty much force them to trade Kane to us 50% retained at a low price with no leverage much like what Hall did with Buffalo/Boston. But then again considering we have the worst general manager in hockey who somehow not only didn't get a 1st round pick with the Keith cap dump but actually gave up assets, I fully expect him to trade Broberg+1st for Kane with no retention b/c "it's hard to squeeze people in this league".

I get the bleak view of the team/management, but don't be silly, even if the contract is reinstated he's not going back to the Sharks, and the deal won't be hard to make, imo.