Hypothetical: Would you take Evander Kane if it meant we also get Tomas Hertl?

[Darth Vladar]

Since Tre is essentially spent to the cap and still in need of at least one more top-six forward to ice a competitive team this year, I was curious as to whether Flames fans would be willing to give Evander Kane a fresh start in Calgary if it meant acquiring Hertl as well.

Salary would obviously have to go back the other way, but with the recent acquisitions, I wonder whether Tanev might be of interest to Wilson since SJ is looking pretty thin on D.

I'm not in the camp that wants to see Mony gone, but I am curious whether a package starting with Mony + Tanev would be enough to get Wilson on the phone for Hertl + Kane, and whether Flames fans would even entertain that proposition.

Gaudreau - Lindholm - Tkachuk
Kane - Hertl - Coleman
Mangiapane - Backlund - Dube
Lucic - Richardson - Pitlick
Ritchie

Hanifin - Andersson
Valimaki - Stone
Zadorov - Gudbranson
Mackey/Kylington

I honestly wouldn't feel too bad about that team going into camp, and who's to say whether a change of scenery might do Kane some good. Think/say what you want about the guy, he can still play hockey.

EDIT: Andersson could make a better trade piece than Tanev, and they make about the same salary.

Click to read more...

 

[TheHudlinator]

Sure why not? Going to have to dump a lot of salary tho

 

[CamPopplestone]

No

 

[Darth Vladar]

Sure why not? Going to have to dump a lot of salary tho

Well the difference in salary between their two players in that proposal and that of the two Flames players is "only" 1.75M. That's less than Gudbranson will be making lmao

I think it could work. The only risk imo is whether Calgary would be the sort of change in scenery that might benefit Kane. I don't know the extent to which his attitude has negatively affected any locker room he's been in, but the guy would've had 30+ goals last year in a full season. It could be worth is to take a flier on him, if no other GM is willing to. Playing for Sutter could be exactly what the man needs to finally get his ish together.

 

[TheHudlinator]

Well the difference in salary between their two players in that proposal and that of the two Flames players is "only" 1.75M. That's less than Gudbranson will be making lmao

I think it could work. The only risk imo is whether Calgary would be the sort of change in scenery that might benefit Kane. I don't know the extent to which his attitude has negatively affected any locker room he's been in, but the guy would've had 30+ goals last year in a full season. It could be worth is to take a flier on him, if no other GM is willing to. Playing for Sutter could be exactly what the man needs to finally get his shit together.

I'm going to be honest I doubt tanev has value to SJ they have enough over 30 d men I think it would have to be Andersson +, also not sure Monahan is willing to pay in SJ

 

[Darth Vladar]

I'm going to be honest I doubt tanev has value to SJ they have enough over 30 d men I think it would have to be Andersson +, also not sure Monahan is willing to pay in SJ

I agree in hindsight that Andersson would be a more attractive trade piece; I just knew salary would have to go back, and didn't realize that Ras was already making 4.5M.

As far as Mony, I don't even know what clauses are in his contract, but he would automatically slot in as the Sharks' #2 center and perhaps a change in scenery away from the pressure and scrutiny of hockey mad Calgary might appeal to him.

 

[TheHudlinator]

I agree in hindsight that Andersson would be a more attractive trade piece; I just knew salary would have to go back, and didn't realize that Ras was already making 4.5M.

As far as Mony, I don't even know what clauses his contract has, but he would automatically slot in as the Sharks' #2 center and perhaps a change in scenery away from the pressure and scrutiny of hockey mad Calgary might appeal to him.

Monahan has a 10 team no trade list no idea of sj is on it or not but I think the idea of hertl + Kane is smart target if we are going to keep trying to make the playoffs.

 

[DomBarr]

no, especially when you are insisting on REALLY overpaying for a 1 yr of Hertl and 4 yrs of locker room hell with Kane.
Tagging Kane onto a Hertl trade CRATERS his value especially with the gambling rumours surrounding Kane

 

[InfinityIggy]

No I would not.

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

Monahan and Looch would need to go the other way, that’s the only thing that makes sense.

 

[Darth Vladar]

no, especially when you are insisting on REALLY overpaying for a 1 yr of Hertl and 4 yrs of locker room hell with Kane.
Tagging Kane onto a Hertl trade CRATERS his value especially with the gambling rumours surrounding Kane

Well as I touched upon in my previous post, I'm sure there rumours about Kane are not entirely unfounded (I can't say I'm a huge fan of him as a person just from his social media presence), but I can't tell the extent to which they've been exaggerated or not, since media is generally scum and sensationalizes stuff like that to sell ad space, push social narratives, etc. I just think it's one move Tre could do right now that would instantly upgrade the Flames from what looks like another season on the fringe to imo a legit contender. It's not like Kane hasn't produced consistently for a decade in the NHL or anything, he has to have been doing something right. If Wilson indeed deems him to be that big of a cancer, and no other team will give him a shot, perhaps there would be no other option but to sweeten the deal by making TMNHertl available. Unless, of course, there is some kind of mutual agreement among GMs not to touch Kane with a 10 ft. pole due to the allegations.

 

[Anglesmith]

No.

I have no issues defending Tkachuk, who everyone hates for his on ice antics. Tkachuk does what he does to help his team, and that's what matters.

It would be another matter with Kane. It would be hard to cheer for the guy.

 

[DomBarr]

Well as I touched upon in my previous post, I'm sure there rumours about Kane are not entirely unfounded (I can't say I'm a huge fan of him as a person just from his social media presence), but I can't tell the extent to which they've been exaggerated or not, since media is generally scum and sensationalizes stuff like that to sell ad space, push social narratives, etc. I just think it's one move Tre could do right now that would instantly upgrade the Flames from what looks like another season on the fringe to imo a legit contender. It's not like Kane hasn't produced consistently for a decade in the NHL or anything, he has to have been doing something right. If Wilson indeed deems him to be that big of a cancer, and no other team will give him a shot, perhaps there would be no other option but to sweeten the deal by making TMNHertl available. Unless, of course, there is some kind of mutual agreement among GMs not to touch Kane with a 10 ft. pole due to the allegations.

True but Kane has 4 yrs at $7M per still to go, and his style of game does not age well that plus the allegations make him a discounted asset and Hertl is a pending UFA which means a Monahan/ Tanev or Andersson trade a huge overpay by the Flames and thats not including the fact that Monahan has scored 60 goals less with 180 less games played

 

[Darth Vladar]

No.

I have no issues defending Tkachuk, who everyone hates for his on ice antics. Tkachuk does what he does to help his team, and that's what matters.

It would be another matter with Kane. It would be hard to cheer for the guy.

I guess the question is, would it be any harder to cheer for the guy not even really knowing the truth about what he's being accused of than it is cheering for a team that has only made it to the second round once since Kipper still played for them? I'm not here to defend the guy, I've just been a Flames fan for almost 20 years, and I'm desperate for a reason to bother watching them anymore. Calgary is a great city, for all anyone knows, Kane would make the most of the opportunity for a fresh start and perhaps even thrive here for the remainder of his current contract. I'm all for giving him one last strike, especially if it means Hertl comes with him. TMNH is a fun player to watch, and having him aboard might make having Kane more palatable, like an ambassador of sorts.

Of course, it would put Tre over the cap by a Gudbranson, so certain adjustments would have to be made, but imo it's still the basis for the best trade he could possibly make if the Flames are to be taken seriously (hockey wise, that is) this year.

 

[Anglesmith]

I guess the question is, would it be any harder to cheer for the guy not even really knowing the truth about what he's being accused of than it is cheering for a team that has only made it to the second round once since Kipper still played for them?

Yes, by a long way. My opinion isn't based on events from this year alone. They are just one more thing to add to the lengthy file.

Cheering for a team that doesn't win it all isn't difficult. Even when we were rebuilding, there was plenty of entertainment as a fan. If a Cup was necessary for being a hockey fan to be enjoyable, then statistically you're banking on enjoying being a fan less than once every three decades.

Cheering for someone to succeed who is a bad person on a personal level is much worse IMO. It sours the experience.

 

[Ace Rimmer]

Only if the Sharks trade him at 50% then the Coyotes (or Wings?) are used as an intermediary to retain additional salary, then the Flames buy him out before he crosses the border.

If that's not possible (and it may not be) then no.

 

[Darth Vladar]

True but Kane has 4 yrs at $7M per still to go, and his style of game does not age well that plus the allegations make him a discounted asset and Hertl is a pending UFA which means a Monahan/ Tanev or Andersson trade a huge overpay by the Flames and thats not including the fact that Monahan has scored 60 goals less with 180 less games played

Kane will "only" be 34 by the end of that contract, and enters the season the same age as Iggy (whom I'd consider a somewhat comparable style of game) was when he scored 50 and won the Hart. The next three years after that, Iggy scored 35, 32, and 43 goals respectively. I'm not saying that Kane is worthy of even sniffing Iggy's jock, but if you could get a similar production out of him for the remainder of that contract, you'd actually be getting Kane now for the exact same price Iggy cost during those years (7M per), and that was over a decade ago. I'm sure more players (and perhaps even GMs and coaches) than just Kane are as guilty of what he is being accused of, which by no means makes it right, but I don't think Kane necessarily deserves to be the poster boy of league gambling when much worse has surely been going on in the league since way before he ever got there. I think Sutter would be the perfect coach to get him back in line and focused on hockey. Being embroiled in this scandal could be a boon for any team willing to give him a chance if his days in SJ are indeed over.

 

[Darth Vladar]

Yes, by a long way. My opinion isn't based on events from this year alone. They are just one more thing to add to the lengthy file.

Cheering for a team that doesn't win it all isn't difficult. Even when we were rebuilding, there was plenty of entertainment as a fan. If a Cup was necessary for being a hockey fan to be enjoyable, then statistically you're banking on enjoying being a fan less than once every three decades.

Cheering for someone to succeed who is a bad person on a personal level is much worse IMO. It sours the experience.

Well I don't know the guy on a personal level. I just know he can play, and that his present team is unsatisfied with him. He would've had to murder someone for me to consider him as bad a person as some seem wont to make him out to be. For Christ sakes, even the Great One himself was once linked to a gambling ring, and it hasn't seem to tarnish his image or legacy. Sometimes people just see what they want.

Sure, you might not expect your favourite team to win each time out, but part of the enjoyment of cheering for a team is knowing they've made an effort, otherwise, what are these people getting paid so much to do? Fans spend good money and deserve to see competitive hockey.

 

[Corpus X]

No because Hertl wants to leave because of Kane. Kane is the problem and I wouldn't give them Tanev, I'd give them a lower teir D at 50% retention on Kane. Kane is going to be a basket case with the mountain of nonsense, he created, coming his way. That dude will need a psychologist to follow him 24/7 because he can't stop thinking about himself. Scratch that, Kane needs Jesus.

 

[Darth Vladar]

No because Hertl wants to leave because of Kane. Kane is the problem and I wouldn't give them Tanev, I'd give them a lower teir D at 50% retention on Kane. Kane is going to be a basket case with the mountain of nonsense, he created, coming his way. That dude will need a psychologist to follow him 24/7 because he can't stop thinking about himself. Scratch that, Kane needs Jesus.

You actually brought up a good point that I hadn't considered in that Hertl might be trying to break free from the situation in SJ altogether. If that's the case, he might not be inclined to join Kane here (if he has any say in the matter), but lets not forget that these are supposed to be professional athletes. You play wherever you are under contract to play, you play your best, become rich doing it and be grateful, or choose a different line of work.

I'd also never considered the fact that SJ would also likely have to retain salary on Kane for any team to take a flier on him. That would eat up the cap difference it would take to bring those two players here as per my proposal, but now you got me wondering what it would take to bring just Kane here. Andersson alone might do it, and SJ would probably still have to retain salary on Kane.

 

[Anglesmith]

Well I don't know the guy on a personal level. I just know he can play, and that his present team is unsatisfied with him. He would've had to murder someone for me to consider him as bad a person as some seem wont to make him out to be. For Christ sakes, even the Great One himself was once linked to a gambling ring, and it hasn't seem to tarnish his image or legacy. Sometimes people just see what they want.

Sure, you might not expect your favourite team to win each time out, but part of the enjoyment of cheering for a team is knowing they've made an effort, otherwise, what are these people getting paid so much to do? Fans spend good money and deserve to see competitive hockey.

Yeah, but I don't associate losing with a lack of effort. They are separate points.

I think you're setting up a false dichotomy if you're making it out to be either we're cheering for people who don't try or we want Evander Kane.

 

[Darth Vladar]

Yeah, but I don't associate losing with a lack of effort. They are separate points.

I think you're setting up a false dichotomy if you're making it out to be either we're cheering for people who don't try or we want Evander Kane.

Of course there are myraid factors as to why any team wins or loses. I never meant to imply that losing is always due to a lack of on-ice effort. A team can play it's ass off every night and still end up on the wrong side of the score. The "effort" to win extends to (and one might even argue, hinges upon) ownership, management and coaches putting together the best team possible with the resources they have at their disposal. Any failure to achieve that can most certainly be construed as a decided lack of effort, as the pitchfork mob calling for Treliving's head right now would attest to.

If the plan is to stay the course and continue trying to win despite not improving as a team, on paper or on the ice, then expecting a different result from previous losing seasons is nonsensical. It's one thing cheering for a team to win when you know they won't despite their best efforts, and it's another thing altogether cheering for a team that takes their fanbase for granted year in and year out.


If a star player like Kane is available and we don't pursue him on the basis of some perceived moral high ground, that's not much different to me than saying "we don't want to be a better team", in which case, what are the fans paying to see? If the plan is to rebuild to get a better crack at winning it all later, the fans deserve to be a part of that conversation, since they are the lifeblood of the industry.

 

[Anglesmith]

Of course there are myraid factors as to why any team wins or loses. I never meant to imply that losing is always due to a lack of on-ice effort. A team can play it's ass off every night and still end up on the wrong side of the score. The "effort" to win extends to (and one might even argue, hinges upon) ownership, management and coaches putting together the best team possible with the resources they have at their disposal. Any failure to achieve that can most certainly be construed as a decided lack of effort, as the pitchfork mob calling for Treliving's head right now would attest to.

If the plan is to stay the course and continue trying to win despite not improving as a team, on paper or on the ice, then expecting a different result from previous losing seasons is nonsensical. It's one thing cheering for a team to win when you know they won't despite their best efforts, and it's another thing altogether cheering for a team that takes their fanbase for granted year in and year out.


If a star player like Kane is available and we don't pursue him on the basis of some perceived moral high ground, that's not much different to me than saying "we don't want to be a better team", in which case, what are the fans paying to see? If the plan is to rebuild to get a better crack at winning it all later, the fans deserve to be a part of that conversation, since they are the lifeblood of the industry.

Why can't it be a statement of "we don't think Evander Kane will make us a better team?" It sure hasn't made San Jose a better team, has it?

It could also mean "we think there are much better ways to become a better team."

Anyway, I see this line of thinking all the time. Teams can change no parts and have extremely different results from one season to the next. This happens in both directions. I would rather a GM make no moves than make a move for the sake of making a move if the analysis suggests that it won't actually help the team.

 

[Bounces R Way]

Don't want anything to do with Evander Kane. And neither should anyone else. The boy is poison

 

[DFF]

That’s a real bad defense, does it really matter?