Evander Kane

[Hodge]

I have a hard time believing that. Kane has managed to drag the team into things that make them look bad one way or another which impacts their bottom line. If the on ice stuff is all that matters, why is it taking so long to get rid of Vlasic? Why did it take three consecutive sub 90% save percentage to move on from Jones? There’s more nuance to his decisions than that.

With Jones and Vlasic it was impossible to get out of those contracts without a buyout which he eventually relented to. He has an opportunity now (maybe) to make a clean break from Kane. We'll see what happens but I seriously doubt he even considers terminating Kane's contract unless the NHL steps in and does it for him.

 

[Nighthock]

I want to believe Kane. It keeps his trade value up.

 

[Jargon]

I think blaming DW is silly. I think blaming anyone but Kane is silly. Gambling addiction sucks and ruins people’s lives and I hope he gets help, but in the meantime, I’d like to terminate his contract. For a team that’s hoping to have a youth moment in the near future, I don’t particularly want Kane influencing Eklund, Bordeleau, etc.

It’s possible that in previous years Joe and Pavs kept Kane in check and could call him out and he’d listen - I don’t think anyone else on the team can do that.

EDIT: I will say though if DW knew things and didn’t take actions to fix them, that’s a big problem.

 

[Hodge]

EDIT: I will say though if DW knew things and didn’t take actions to fix them, that’s a big problem.

It sounds like that is exactly what happened. From David Pagnotta's article this morning:

Speaking with multiple sources inside the Sharks organization, I’m told players on the team made GM Doug Wilson and management aware of Kane’s indiscretions, including gambling on sports as recent as this past season. Nobody I spoke with knew if he ever gambled on hockey. While some feel those warning signs fell “on deaf ears,” according to one Sharks source, the events of the past 24 hours will surely force the team to act in some fashion.

 

[Levie]

It sounds like that is exactly what happened. From David Pagnotta's article this morning:

No one came to help Kane it seems. It is really weird that the NHL seems to treat gambling addiction much differently than substance abuse.

 

[StanleyCup2035]

I bet DW is mad at the situation, especially because Kane didn’t take Jones and Vlasic along for the ride.

 

[one2gamble]

Why do people on the team care whether or not he's gambling that's such a weird thing to tell an employer.

 

[Doctor Soraluce]

When did that report come out about the Sharks locker room being upset with Kane?

Seravalli had it as a rumor and then said he was being shopped. No one else legitimately confirmed the locker room issues between Kane and his teammates.

 

[Doctor Soraluce]

I guess we need to give it time to determine if he’s a criminal vs just a plain a-hole. Either way, I don’t want him on the team.

I'm going to try and reserve judgment until the investigation finishes but all the drama can't be good for the team in general and all I want is for the team to do well. If that involves getting rid of a guy I enjoy watching then so be it. If they do get rid of him, this butter soft team will be even softer. Teams will run them over every game. The really needed Ritchie if this was going to happen.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

With Jones and Vlasic it was impossible to get out of those contracts without a buyout which he eventually relented to. He has an opportunity now (maybe) to make a clean break from Kane. We'll see what happens but I seriously doubt he even considers terminating Kane's contract unless the NHL steps in and does it for him.

Except it wasn’t impossible. They chose a different path like they did with Pavelski, Marleau, and a host of other decisions. It’s not always a matter of results. There are other factors involved and Kane would be no different. He’s dragging them through this stuff while also being a locker room problem. They have real justification to move on and they should. It’s probably in Kane’s best interest anyway.

 

[Cas]

Why do people on the team care whether or not he's gambling that's such a weird thing to tell an employer.

It's not that unusual. I'm required to report to management if I thought a coworker was gambling to an unusual degree (because that person could be a security risk). The same is no doubt true for pro athletes, for a very similar reason.

 

[sjsharks92]

Why do people on the team care whether or not he's gambling that's such a weird thing to tell an employer.

I think because it's illegal for him to be doing and is cause for termination of his contract if true.

 

[timorous me]

Why do people on the team care whether or not he's gambling that's such a weird thing to tell an employer.

User name checks out.

 

[NWSharkie]

I think because it's illegal for him to be doing and is cause for termination of his contract if true.

Except neither of those things are true, based on what's publicly known and confirmed about Kane. He's spoken (or revealed through BK court filings) that he's sought treatment for a gambling addiction, yes, but as far as I'm aware that was limited to table gambling. Nothing illegal there, and even if he was gambling on non-NHL games, that's allowed both legally and by the CBA. If he was gambling on NHL games, the penalty for a first offense is a $250 fine, not contract termination.

The big "bombshell" here is his wife's allegation of him betting on and manipulating the outcome of Sharks games, which would certainly rise to the level of a termination/bannable offense *if and only if borne out by an investigation.* Otherwise, his gambling is an unfortunate distraction, but neither illegal nor grounds for termination.

As far as @one2gamble's question, though, I can see his teammates having concerns either for his well-being or for "conduct unbecoming the team/league." In their positions, I'd want the organization to know and be able to either direct him to available support/resources or hopefully put the brakes on his questionable conduct.

 

[timorous me]

Except neither of those things are true, based on what's publicly known and confirmed about Kane. He's spoken (or revealed through BK court filings) that he's sought treatment for a gambling addiction, yes, but as far as I'm aware that was limited to table gambling. Nothing illegal there, and even if he was gambling on non-NHL games, that's allowed both legally and by the CBA. If he was gambling on NHL games, the penalty for a first offense is a $250 fine, not contract termination.

The big "bombshell" here is his wife's allegation of him betting on and manipulating the outcome of Sharks games, which would certainly rise to the level of a termination/bannable offense *if and only if borne out by an investigation.* Otherwise, his gambling is an unfortunate distraction, but neither illegal nor grounds for termination.

As far as @one2gamble's question, though, I can see his teammates having concerns either for his well-being or for "conduct unbecoming the team/league." In their positions, I'd want the organization to know and be able to either direct him to available support/resources or hopefully put the brakes on his questionable conduct.

According to one of Anna's latest posts about him, he "refuse[d] any kind of therapy and continue[d] to lie to the therapist the Sharks force[d] [him] to talk to."

 

[tealzamboni]

It's not that unusual. I'm required to report to management if I thought a coworker was gambling to an unusual degree (because that person could be a security risk). The same is no doubt true for pro athletes, for a very similar reason.

Though, I think it then becomes a matter of whether HR/legal does the "right" thing that follows the rules to the letter or the "right" thing that protects the company.

 

[DeadGhost]

Why do people on the team care whether or not he's gambling that's such a weird thing to tell an employer.

They may care about him and want to get him help? All signs point to a nasty addiction.

 

[PacificOceanPotion]

I was thinking about this last night and the one thing that doesn't make sense about what she's claiming is hes allegedly throwing games. He just had arguably his most impressive seasons as a shark so in my opinion he was doing everything he could to HELP the sharks win.

 

[slocal]

"Dissecting the nature of the Kane family's home life, either party's culpability in whatever issues they're having, or moral arguments about this situation are out of bounds for the scope that HF has to address and far too likely to start edging into the territory where comments start getting libelous. So please don't go there.

Speculating about Kane betting on or throwing games and the like is probably out of bounds too for libel reasons. Let those accusations play out to the point of actual evidence to discuss before we start wading into that pit of massive trouble."

Alright. The Sharks, NHL, and both parties have released their statements. As we wait for something official to happen regarding Kane's position with the team/league, this thread no longer needs to be left open for dissection of hearsay.

Discussion about possible roster changes can take place in the roster thread. If necessary, this thread will re-open when/if new facts come to light.

 

[slocal]

@LadyStanley brought this to my attention:



"The NHL expects to conclude its investigation into Sharks forward Evander Kane by the start of training camp next month, league deputy commissioner Bill Daly said Monday in an email to this news organization."

We will know soon enough.

 

[The Nemesis]

There's new material to discuss in terms of Kurz' report this morning that members of the Sharks want Kane off the team and wanted him out even before the latest news broke, as well as the fact that the team has allegedly tried to move him this off-season:



With that in mind we're going to open up this thread again BUT all the previous warnings remain in place. There will be no potentially libelous value-judging of either party with regards to any incidents that remain unproven or ongoing, no dissecting of their personal lives away from the team, and no discussion that falls outside the scope of the Sharks, the NHL, other hockey-related bodies/organizations and how this situation affects any of them moving forward, or Kane's career as a hockey player for this or any other team in this or any other league.

If things go off the rails again the thread will be locked up once more until the next major news breaks and we restart the process. Anyone found to be ignoring or flagrantly skirting the rules will be subject to mod discipline. There will be no further public warnings prior to any discipline or thread closure.

 

[The Nemesis]

Also of note, Kurz discusses how the team might look in Kane's absence (permanent or temporary)



and a tweet by the Hockey Diversity Alliance that notes Kane has taken leave of his duties as a board member while this situation is being investigated:

 

[OrrNumber4]

This might have been the worst acquisition in the franchise's history.

Granted, Kane was excellent this season; a meaningless one. When the chips were on the table, Kane had some very forgettable playoff performances. In exchange, the Sharks lost a first-round pick that arguably ended up being Stutzle, 7 million in cap space, and took on an apparent locker-room cancer who might have been subtraction by addition.

I'm sure DW is happy. If this season ends in disappointment, he has a convenient scapegoat!

 

[Pavelski2112]

This might have been the worst acquisition in the franchise's history.

Granted, Kane was excellent this season; a meaningless one. When the chips were on the table, Kane had some very forgettable playoff performances. In exchange, the Sharks lost a first-round pick that arguably ended up being Stutzle, 7 million in cap space, and took on an apparent locker-room cancer who might have been subtraction by addition.

I'm sure DW is happy. If this season ends in disappointment, he has a convenient scapegoat!

That's...quite a stretch, considering this team has a history of guys like Campbell and Belfour just not even giving a shit while being here. Hell, he's not even the worst acquisition currently on the team.

The Stutzle pick was from the Karlsson trade, not Kane.

 

[Juxtaposer]

That's...quite a stretch, considering this team has a history of guys like Campbell and Belfour just not even giving a shit while being here. Hell, he's not even the worst acquisition currently on the team.

The Stutzle pick was from the Karlsson trade, not Kane.

The argument is that if we hadn’t had to give up the 2019 1st for re-signing Kane, we would have used it in the Karlsson trade instead of having to give up the 2020 1st. Personally I think it’s a fair point that I have made several times.