Trading for Patrick Kane

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Huntingwhale

Does he have a NTC/NMC?

Every team in the league could use a player like Kane (allegation aside). But that contract looks horrible. Just entering the first of 8 years at a 10.5 mil cap hit. Wow.

Yeah, it's a weird contract in that it kind of works on the Hawks, only because they're so good at building around high priced superstars (although, it's now going to get ridiculous for them with both those contracts kicking in), but for most teams, adding even one star player at 10.5mil for 8 years is basically the end of their hopes of building a contender despite how good the player is.

I know Hawks fans think they'd likely get a ransom if he was traded, but I honestly don't see much of a market, when you figure;

The good playoff teams likely don't have the cap space, or desire to lose one or two of their own star players to fit him in, and the bad teams likely don't want to commit to that much salary for that long if they know they're not a cap spending/contender building team.

The field of potential homes gets narrowed down very quickly with those two factors, imo.

[saillias]

Originally Posted by handgroen

judging from conroy's recent comments and from the comments of rich winter gio's agent,
kane is overpaid and if he were to renegotiate his contract today, it would come in at a lower value. might take a few years before this contract makes sense to trade for.

also crap thread BTW

This. What Ritch Winter said was important. He talked about us how Stan Bowman gets questioned about those 10.5 mil/year contracts for Toews and Kane. Bowman would say, well at the time the economics of the NHL were projecting differently. It was looking like the cap was going to keep increasing exponentially. They were looking 4-5 years down the road at a much much higher cap. Now things have changed with the CDN$ and those deals don't look as good. And guys of that caliber (see: Kopitar) up for a raise are going to be disappointed.

Anyway, those contracts were almost like a "thank you" payout to Kane and Toews for the 2 cups (and 3rd they won with the extension already incoming) so a completely different org has much less incentive to pay those guys that money.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by saillias

This. What Ritch Winter said was important. He talked about us how Stan Bowman gets questioned about those 10.5 mil/year contracts for Toews and Kane. Bowman would say, well at the time the economics of the NHL were projecting differently. It was looking like the cap was going to keep increasing exponentially. They were looking 4-5 years down the road at a much much higher cap. Now things have changed with the CDN$ and those deals don't look as good. And guys of that caliber (see: Kopitar) up for a raise are going to be disappointed.

Anyway, those contracts were almost like a "thank you" payout to Kane and Toews for the 2 cups (and 3rd they won with the extension already incoming) so a completely different org has much less incentive to pay those guys that money.

I dunno.

I think if guys like Kopitar really want raises similar to Toews and Kane, they will get them. Someone will pay.

The players really have the hammer in between lockouts.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

I dunno.

I think if guys like Kopitar really want raises similar to Toews and Kane, they will get them. Someone will pay.

The players really have the hammer in between lockouts.

Someone will pay for sure. Nashville might have 7x11m waiting for Kopi, lord knows he would solve most of their problems. 8x9m from LA might sound better to him though, as California >>>> Tennessee for most people, especially rich people with roots already laid down.

[Hackey]

If we offered Gaudreau, 2016 1st, and Poirier, how much more would we need to add to land Kane?

[FireItUp]

Originally Posted by Hackey

If we offered Gaudreau, 2016 1st, and Poirier, how much more would we need to add to land Kane?

Leave now.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Hackey

If we offered Gaudreau, 2016 1st, and Poirier, how much more would we need to add to land Kane?

Honestly that is massive overpayment. With no assurances of the cap increasing that contract is crazy.

Gaudreau is as close to an untouchable on the Flames roster as they get. The Flames organization knows that the trio of Gaudreau, Monahan, and Bennett are the 3 key forwards we are going to build around going forward.

Hartley loves Johnny and in one year he has become one of if not the most popular player on the team.

I am guessing though you are being sarcastic?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Hackey

If we offered Gaudreau, 2016 1st, and Poirier, how much more would we need to add to land Kane?

Throw in Bennett and Gillies and I think Chicago listens

[Fire of the Phoenix]

That cap hit will really bring his trade value down. Only so many suitors with cap room AND the appetite to deal with his shenanigans. Chicago will be in a position of weakness if they trade Kane. I would say the Kessel trade would be a good comparable.

[Hackey]

If the Kessel trade is an indication of return I think A LOT of teams would be interested despite the cap hit which is insane. To get an elite player for scraps would be intriguing for a lot of teams out there I'd think.

[Greybeard]

Let Toronto have him. We want character guys not problem guys. And the contract $ and term would kill us.

[codynw]

Originally Posted by Hackey

If the Kessel trade is an indication of return I think A LOT of teams would be interested despite the cap hit which is insane. To get an elite player for scraps would be intriguing for a lot of teams out there I'd think.

Did you miss the part where Kane is being investigated for rape, or...?

Teams won't give up quality assets without knowing how this situation will play out.

[KipperFaNaTic]

I don't get all the uproar that happened on the first page. I think this is an absolutely valid thread. Blackhawks may be looking to trade Kane after warning him about his wild behaviour and thus OP is just wondering whether Treliving should bite if he indeed were in fact on the trading block.

IMO, I wouldn't trade for Kane as the Blackhawks would at least want one of our young core (ie gaudreau, Monahan, Bennet) which I would list as untouchable.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by KipperFaNaTic

I don't get all the uproar that happened on the first page. I think this is an absolutely valid thread. Blackhawks may be looking to trade Kane after warning him about his wild behaviour and thus OP is just wondering whether Treliving should bite if he indeed were in fact on the trading block.

You answered your own question... the uproar was at the ridiculous notion of Calgary trying to trade for him.

We are going to be tight to the cap moving forward as things sit now... never mind adding a 10 million dollar cap hit.

Then there's the matter of the assets we'd be stripping ourselves of to acquire him (were he indeed available and not charged with a felony).

Then, on top of all of that, there's the fact he's a loose cannon off the ice and clearly of poor character.

The topic of Kane being traded in general isn't ridiculous. The notion of Calgary trading for him is.

[T@T]

Originally Posted by Hackey

If we offered Gaudreau, 2016 1st, and Poirier, how much more would we need to add to land Kane?

Relation?

[DeluxeMoustache]

In short.. No thanks.

[Hugh Jahrmes]

Someone else mentioned .. Edmonton. Land of the selfish forward

What would it take?
Nurse + Reinhart + Matthews?

[dieHARDflameZ]

Flames management have said on numerous occasions that they want to bring in high character guys. I'm fairly certain Patrick Kane is absolutely not that guy.

[Poe969]

Reinhart doesn't really have much value other than to clueless GMs. I could see Nurse + RNH + Matthews +...

[Tacopuck]

Originally Posted by Hugh Jahrmes

Someone else mentioned .. Edmonton. Land of the selfish forward

What would it take?
Nurse + Reinhart + Matthews?

I see what you did there