[News] NHL investigating whether Oilers used Kane LTIR cap relief in compliance with CBA

[shadowlord]

For a start, I think if you don't play a single regular season game, your name shouldn't go on the Cup.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Not particularly Kane, but delaying surgery on injuries which cause players pain or otherwise affect their lives seems to me something the PA should be concerned about.

Originally Posted by dino7c

Also keeping players from being able to play, career stats, future contracts ect.

Originally Posted by Itse

Others already covered this, but I'll just add that unions kn general tend to be more concerned about overall principles than individuals.

Kind of their job to do exactly that.

So in Kane’s specific set of circumstances (which is the topic of discussion), what do they stand to gain by filing a grievance?

They can’t undo what happened, they can’t realistically sue for damages over earnings that they can’t prove would be lost(especially since he performed at his usual level once he did return) and again filing the grievance probably makes other GMs less likely to want to sign him.

Just seems like something that would be better addressed during the next CBA negotiations if the PA were concerned about it since there is literally nothing to be gained by them or Kane from them taking this route.

I think the most likely explanation for this investigation is that another team or teams were pissed that the oilers were basically gifted Kane being allowed out of his San Jose deal and were further frustrated them taking it a step further and playing the LTIR cap circumvention game.

[AC]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Elliotte is saying right now on 960 that the NHL is questioning the knee surgery and why it was performed because they believe it was not required.

They just took a trip to Itchy and Scratchy Land:

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

So in Kane’s specific set of circumstances (which is the topic of discussion), what do they stand to gain by filing a grievance?

Maybe they feel that players are being pressured, or could be pressured in the future into doing it even if they don't want to sit out all year by pushing the idea that they are letting their team mates down if they don't. The PA might just want to make it impossible to do that by taking away the option.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by AC

They just took a trip to Itchy and Scratchy Land:

I'll see your Itchy and Scratchy Land and raise you a bathtub full of ice...

[Ba'alzamon]

Originally Posted by TrentCrimmIndependent

If any one thought Kane's f####ery was left behind in San Jose they were kidding themselves.

Sure, we didn't know how Kane's shady/rule-breaking/law-breaking behaviour would rear its ugly head but you knew it would.

Technically, wouldn't this be the Oilers' (or perhaps Bowman's) shady behavior rearing its head?

[Reggie Dunlop]

Pretty messed up situation if Evander Kane appears to be the good guy in all this.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

Pretty messed up situation if Evander Kane appears to be the good guy in all this.

I hope he throws the Oilers in the shower like a track suit.

[Andrew]

Did Kane get brain surgery?

[PaperBagger'14]

Originally Posted by Andrew

Did Kane get brain surgery?

[Iggy599]

It’s been discussed before, but why shouldn’t teams just be required to be cap compliant for playoffs like the regular season? Seems like an easy fix.

Obviously there are circumstances where legit injuries make teams add at the deadline for a playoff push but still.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Would the Oilers pull a dick move and terminate Kane’s contract on a ginned-up charge, with Evander spilling the tea in retaliation?

Maybe we should stock up on popcorn.

[browna]

Of course he did.

He had all last summer to have abdominal surgery, but instead golfed and did all sorts of summer things that seemingly should require abdominal surgery to enjoy, and only days before camp did he have that surgery, which was to take him out for 3-4 months.

Then in late 2024, suddenly another knee surgery that would take his recovery then further up to just past the trade deadline. It was the plan all along if the Oilers were in a good spot early in the new year, that he has some elective surgery and they can add a player in the meantime.

Fully orchestrated timeline by Kane and the organization, last summer, and the second part of the plan in January, to basically have him paid all season, not play, and use LTIR on other players until the trade deadline.

It's amazing how blatant this was given the timing of both. Kane just needs the cash, which he got, and doesn't dare rock any boat, even if he cared about playing.

Spector of all people (though he was never a fan of the Kane signing) brings it up here from back in Jan.
https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article...-than-answers/

[ReinhartonD]

I think one other benefit for the Oilers was keeping Kane away from the team for most of the season--based on his popularity in previous dressing rooms that would make sense. Perhaps after the playoffs they had a chat and brought up the topic of trading him and now he's pissed enough to expose the fraud. He's never parted ways on good terms with any other team, so why would this time be different? (Of course it is different if somehow he can come out as the "good guy" who blew the whistle on a corrupt team.)

[Itse]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

So in Kane’s specific set of circumstances (which is the topic of discussion), what do they stand to gain by filing a grievance?

They can’t undo what happened, they can’t realistically sue for damages over earnings that they can’t prove would be lost(especially since he performed at his usual level once he did return) and again filing the grievance probably makes other GMs less likely to want to sign him.

Just seems like something that would be better addressed during the next CBA negotiations if the PA were concerned about it since there is literally nothing to be gained by them or Kane from them taking this route.

I think the most likely explanation for this investigation is that another team or teams were pissed that the oilers were basically gifted Kane being allowed out of his San Jose deal and were further frustrated them taking it a step further and playing the LTIR cap circumvention game.

The original claim was that NHLPA would step in to protect Oilers against the NHL because more money to players is good.

I'm sceptial about that, because I think NHLPA' has interests that align with the NHL here, which are protecting players rights to play and protecting players from organizations turning players healthcare into shenanigans for cap reasons.

So no I don't see the NHLPA filing grievance here, but I'm guessing they have no interest in getting involved either. The NHL doesn't need their help in this either, except maybe some.behind the scenes stuff which we would never hear about.

Edit: if the NHLPA wants to get into this, I would see it more likely that their reasoning is not just that more money to players good, but because this makes players with health problems much more employable, probably extends some careers, and gives players better opportunities to get those big operations and take the time they need.to properly heal.
.
Which I think most would agree really is a good thing.

[browna]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

Would the Oilers pull a dick move and terminate Kane’s contract on a ginned-up charge, with Evander spilling the tea in retaliation?

Maybe we should stock up on popcorn.

Well, they forced an adamant and vocal Mike Smith to retire and never be heard from again, they'd easily do the same for Kane if they wanted. Those same under the table cash payments to retire and sign a NDA, like Smith probably did, certainly will work for Kane, if the Oilers want to do that.

Kane is familiar with legal documents. He also knows the Oilers already have shoved some of his issues under the rug from the SJ days so it's be wise for him to keep his mouth shut...but again, he will get paid to do so if they do terminate his contract.

All that said, as mentioned above, this was a orchestrated plan between Kane and the Oilers, together. Thick as thieves.
Kane gets paid, gets fixed up with probably mostly elective surgery on a very casual and elongated timeline and doesn't have to play until the playoffs. Oilers get an extra player all year thanks to the cap circumvention.

[MegaErtz]

Originally Posted by browna

Well, they forced an adamant and vocal Mike Smith to retire and never be heard from again, they'd easily do the same for Kane if they wanted. Those same under the table cash payments to retire and sign a NDA, like Smith probably did, certainly will work for Kane, if the Oilers want to do that.

Kane is familiar with legal documents. He also knows the Oilers already have shoved some of his issues under the rug from the SJ days so it's be wise for him to keep his mouth shut...but again, he will get paid to do so if they do terminate his contract.

All that said, as mentioned above, this was a orchestrated plan between Kane and the Oilers, together. Thick as thieves.
Kane gets paid, gets fixed up with probably mostly elective surgery on a very casual and elongated timeline and doesn't have to play until the playoffs. Oilers get an extra player all year thanks to the cap circumvention.

Kind of like the time Roman Turek retired out of the blue just to save the Flames money, right? Totally in character for aging NHL players.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by MegaErtz

Kind of like the time Roman Turek retired out of the blue just to save the Flames money, right? Totally in character for aging NHL players.

Murray Edwards loathes buying out players. I highly doubt he would pay a player under the table to retire if that's what you are insinuating as he's not that type of businessman. Turek was a different cat and certainly not the norm.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Elliotte is saying right now on 960 that the NHL is questioning the knee surgery and why it was performed because they believe it was not required.

That is weird. That would be medical malpractice, not just cap circumvention. Getting an unnecessary operation?

Knee surgery isn't cosmetic surgery, presumably it is always being done to fix something or make something stronger.

[fotze2]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

That is weird. That would be medical malpractice, not just cap circumvention. Getting an unnecessary operation?

Knee surgery isn't cosmetic surgery, presumably it is always being done to fix something or make something stronger.

I think there is always some grey in medical especially knees and backs. Like "you will need this surgery at some point in your life but it doesn't have to be right now if the pain is manageable". Sometimes outcomes aren't 100% guaranteed and could make things worse. My kids buddy had a broken collar bone and they had to choose between surgery or not and it was a 50/50 type decision. And his dad is a doctor and wasn't sure.