Has anyone looked at our 2019-2020 season and thought about the potential cap implications of adding Kane? Does it honestly make sense considering the type of players we’ll need to re-sign (Tkachuk, Ferland, Jankowski, Bennett and etc) and the fact that we won’t have a goaltender either? Seems like irresponsible cap management to me.
The Following User Says Thank You to Classic_Sniper For This Useful Post:
A 29 year old right shooting forward with career averages of 56 points per 82 games at 6 million / 4 years makes no sense? Who, despite being labelled as a product of Tavares, has 81 points in 125 games since leaving Tavares' team...
right... no universe does that make sense.
At $6M he's a disaster.
The Following User Says Thank You to cannon7 For This Useful Post:
He has been asked multiple times and never answers, just doubles down with another 'book it' claim.
If there is a deal involving Kane and Bennett (which I highly doubt), the Sabres are adding.
Kane + 2nd is maybe a more realistic return for the Flames. But does that even make sense for the Sabres?
The return for Kane, if there is a deal, will not include Bennett.
Getting warmer with the Kane +2nd. I cannot say for certain but I think you best forget about Bennett. But anything is possible. Brad has proven me wrong before.
I’m going to take a shot at this one. It might be too big though...
To Calgary:
Kane (with extension 5.5/5years)
ROR retained 25%
Lehner
To Buffalo:
Bennett
Fox
Gilles
Breaking it down, Fox easily gets you UFA Kane, the little extra gets you Lehner for Gilles, Bennett for ROR and retained $ a wash.
Lehner, because Smith is out for the year. Only thing I can’t place is Jankowski in this unless he’s part of the package or replaces Stajan at 4L center once Stajan hits 1000 games
I think the Flames need to add Jankowski to that package and maybe Buffalo kicks in a draft pick?
If that deal went down it would be pretty exciting as that is a blockbuster.
Monahan
Backlund
O’Rielly
With the Flames D Corp should push this team to Cup contenders.
A shorter, 2-3 year "prove it" deal is likely the ideal scenario for both parties if the Flames and Kane's agent are indeed in discussions.
Why isn’t it in Kane’s best interest to sign a 5-6 year deal? Sure 2-3 yrs works real well for us the Flames. But UFAs have leverage and some other team will offer those additional years and his agent knows it.
A 29 year old right shooting forward with career averages of 56 points per 82 games at 6 million / 4 years makes no sense? Who, despite being labelled as a product of Tavares, has 81 points in 125 games since leaving Tavares' team...
right... no universe does that make sense.
Yea, 45 points last year, on pace for 13 goals this year and maybe 50 points, all for 6 Million as he enters his 30s for four more years.
You and I have very different ideas of what makes sense.
In a few years we're going to be spreading some big money around to younger players and that contract has the potential to be Brouwer level bad.
Why isn’t it in Kane’s best interest to sign a 5-6 year deal? Sure 2-3 yrs works real well for us the Flames. But UFAs have leverage and some other team will offer those additional years and his agent knows it.
Yeah, I'm sure a team like the Sabres would sign him for... oh wait.
Getting warmer with the Kane +2nd. I cannot say for certain but I think you best forget about Bennett. But anything is possible. Brad has proven me wrong before.
And there it is again. Sources, or admit you don't have any and you're talking out your ass.
You have been asked multiple times and you just keep ignoring everyone.
