GDT: Trade Deadline Thread - Trades, Rumors, Speculation, etc.

AustonsNostrils

Registered User
Apr 5, 2016
7,409
2,533
Wawrow truly has no idea why guys like Tatar and Hartman brought back better returns than Kane. It's the term, stupid.



I know it's popular to beat up on our local beat reporters but his point was valid, the lack of interest in Kane wasn't because GMs think he's a low hockey IQ player it had most to do with a reputation for being a problem in the locker room and community, and it will follow him into free agency, no team is going to give him 5 years at $6M other than Vancouver possibly or San Jose if he is a big contributor for them the rest of this season. Take away past indiscretions and Kane would have returned minimum what Nash did.
 

hizzoner

Registered User
Sponsor
Jun 19, 2006
3,971
1,079
Kane will have trouble finding a deal with the term or money he has now. He brought it on himself but we suffer too.
 

Jame

Registered User
Sep 4, 2002
52,673
9,037
Florida
I know it's popular to beat up on our local beat reporters but his point was valid, the lack of interest in Kane wasn't because GMs think he's a low hockey IQ player it had most to do with a reputation for being a problem in the locker room and community, and it will follow him into free agency, no team is going to give him 5 years at $6M other than Vancouver possibly or San Jose if he is a big contributor for them the rest of this season. Take away past indiscretions and Kane would have returned minimum what Nash did.

or... more logically... both. He's a low IQ hockey player.... why would GMs not factor that in to their evaluation?

Team's want a deteriorating Nash or Ladd at the deadline, because they can trust that even with deteriorating skills, they aren't going to kill the team with stupidity in Game 7.
 

Vito_81

Registered User
Jul 23, 2006
9,952
1,219
Toronto
Kane will have trouble finding a deal with the term or money he has now. He brought it on himself but we suffer too.

I think Kane will be very lucky to get the same term her got before (6 years). Dollar wise he’ll beat his current AAV

Im thinking Kane will get a 4 yr/24 million type of deal at best.

Kane didn’t yield a big return at the deadline, but when all it costs is money in July, GM’s willing be interested in him. No more than 6 mil per season I would think and probably nothing longer than 4 years, but he’ll get 5.5+.

IF his value really is below what I’m saying, at what price would you guys be interested in bringing him back at? 2-3 years at 5 per?
 
Last edited:

brian_griffin

"Eric Cartman?"
May 10, 2007
16,596
7,798
In the Panderverse
I know it's popular to beat up on our local beat reporters but his point was valid, the lack of interest in Kane wasn't because GMs think he's a low hockey IQ player it had most to do with a reputation for being a problem in the locker room and community, and it will follow him into free agency, no team is going to give him 5 years at $6M other than Vancouver possibly or San Jose if he is a big contributor for them the rest of this season. Take away past indiscretions and Kane would have returned minimum what Nash did.
I disagree.

Let's separate interest from return. Greater interest does beget marginally greater return, but it wasn't the underlying factor which drove baseline return for Kane.

The others Wawrow cited returned more value because of their remaining term.

To me, your point above is contradictory. AS A SHORT TERM RENTAL, Kane will have minimal opportunity to be a problem in the locker room and community. ~20 regular season games remaining and whatever the playoff run amounts to be, where you play every other night and the only true layoff you get is if you sweep your series and your next (pending) opponent goes 7 games. From the trade deadline to conclusion of the season is 100 days, a very limited (but I will grant non-zero) time for Kane to misbehave off-ice. Especially if you figure ~75 of those days (or more) will be filled with hockey practice, hockey travel, and hockey games. I think potential for off-ice misbehaving is a non-factor in any rational consideration of his value AS A SHORT TERM RENTAL.

"Locker room cohesion" is a risk with any infusion of new people into any team. Happens with work teams, project teams, military units, sports teams, etc. To allow it to dominate a decision whether to assign a person to a team implies one or more of 3 factors exist:
1. The new person / new person's issues are greater than the sum total of the team's presence and dynamics.
2. The existing team structure lacks the leader / leadership skill to integrate the new person.
3. The existing team lacks a process to integrate the new person.
4. maybe some other factor, but I can't think of one.

To me, lack interest in Kane AS A SHORT TERM RENTAL derives solely from GM's assessment of his hockey play / IQ / style / hockey fit.

If you want to talk about a team extending him or another team signing him long term as a UFA, then I'll grant the other factors you cited may play a role.

By extension then, I further disagree that Kane would have garnered a Rick Nash ransom if he didn't have the off-ice history. Edit: Plus Nash is not near the defensive liability Kane is.
 
Last edited:

Jame

Registered User
Sep 4, 2002
52,673
9,037
Florida
I think Kane will be very lucky to get the same term her got before (6 years). Dollar wise he’ll beat his current AAV

Im thinking Kane will get a 4 yr/24 million type of deal at best.

I wouldn't be surprised if he took an even shorter term.
He could take a 2 year deal, go out and have two 30/60 type seasons, keep his nose clean, and maybe re-cash in as a 28/29 year old free agent
 

brian_griffin

"Eric Cartman?"
May 10, 2007
16,596
7,798
In the Panderverse
I wouldn't be surprised if he took an even shorter term.
He could take a 2 year deal, go out and have two 30/60 type seasons, keep his nose clean, and maybe re-cash in as a 28/29 year old free agent
Agree. Especially if he values playoff chases after finally getting a taste of one.

List the teams you think will assuredly make the playoffs each and every year from 2019-2022. Tampa and Nashville?

If you want a higher guarantee of a playoff chase, shorter term deals make sense.
 

Jame

Registered User
Sep 4, 2002
52,673
9,037
Florida
Agree. Especially if he values playoff chases after finally getting a taste of one.

List the teams you think will assuredly make the playoffs each and every year from 2019-2022. Tampa and Nashville?

If you want a higher guarantee of a playoff chase, shorter term deals make sense.

and... ugh... Toronto....

But yea, i agree....
 

Zip15

Registered User
Jun 3, 2009
28,120
5,400
Bodymore
I know it's popular to beat up on our local beat reporters but his point was valid, the lack of interest in Kane wasn't because GMs think he's a low hockey IQ player it had most to do with a reputation for being a problem in the locker room and community, and it will follow him into free agency, no team is going to give him 5 years at $6M other than Vancouver possibly or San Jose if he is a big contributor for them the rest of this season. Take away past indiscretions and Kane would have returned minimum what Nash did.

My point is that it is not an apples-to-apples comparison with Tatar and Hartman. In any event, I've said for the last several days that Kane's reputation would be problematic.
 

Chainshot

Give 'em Enough Rope
Sponsor
Feb 28, 2002
147,572
96,010
Tarnation
Watching San Jose again, still wondering if they will look for some help up front to make one last push with Joe when he gets back. Of any room, they might be the most laid back vet bunch for a destination for Kane if that sort of thing is still an outside concern.

Yep.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->