Eklund: You’re the GM Winner….Patrick Kane to..+major ripple…. Buzz@1

I thought it meant he would be dealt within 48 hours???

Teams have already gotten ahead of the cap rise. TB signed several key players to long term contracts already.

Teams have already gotten ahead of the cap rise. TB signed several key players to long term contracts already.
- Minnyhock

Yup. Doesn’t matter how much the cap goes up. Teams will continue giving out ridiculous contracts and will always have most of the league in cap constraints.

Personally i don’t think a low 1st, a 3rd, and Maltsez will do it for a Superstar, it’ll be a bidding war and im sure Kane will accept New York as well who has the youth to entertain a much better offer, im not high on Maltsev probably will be a bottom 6 forward

Ummm I just quickly looked at the deal…

1) kane ends up in col

2) somehow every team retains 50% of Kanes 10 mil original salary or whatever it is

3) I don’t think that’s allowed.

4) no way kane could get to avs at less than 3 mil againgst cap.

5) for that reason alone this should not be a trade to consider

6) or am I missing something

So Kane approves a trade to Colorado because they are a "dynasty in the making"? We're just talking about a rental here Ek. How is Colorado going to sign Kane long-term? MacKinnon will likely go from $6.3M to $11M+. Not much cap space left. He might accept going to Colorado, but knowing there is no room to stay.

Also, your second proposal included Alex Texier. I dunno. Might be worth noting that he just walked away from the NHL to head back to Europe and deal with some personal problems. He may never return to the NHL. Maybe you didn't know that. But might have been worth mentioning that this trade no longer makes much sense for Chicago.

So you've listed Colorado, Nashville, Florida and Ottawa. Great. Will look forward to Kane signing in New York or LA or Dallas for 2023-24...

Ummm I just quickly looked at the deal…

1) kane ends up in col

2) somehow every team retains 50% of Kanes 10 mil original salary or whatever it is

3) I don’t think that’s allowed.

4) no way kane could get to avs at less than 3 mil againgst cap.

5) for that reason alone this should not be a trade to consider

6) or am I missing something
- Stayin alive

Hawks retain 1/2 of $10.5M = $5.25M

Using an intermediate team (here it would be AZ) they could then retain 50% of that remaining money ($2.625M) which then leaves COL to pay the same.

So Kane approves a trade to Colorado because they are a "dynasty in the making"? We're just talking about a rental here Ek. How is Colorado going to sign Kane long-term? MacKinnon will likely go from $6.3M to $11M+. Not much cap space left. He might accept going to Colorado, but knowing there is no room to stay.

Also, your second proposal included Alex Texier. I dunno. Might be worth noting that he just walked away from the NHL to head back to Europe and deal with some personal problems. He may never return to the NHL. Maybe you didn't know that. But might have been worth mentioning that this trade no longer makes much sense for Chicago.

So you've listed Colorado, Nashville, Florida and Ottawa. Great. Will look forward to Kane signing in New York or LA or Dallas for 2023-24...
- Cooleus

Never mind the details. Can you image how cool it would be??

Never mind the details. Can you image how cool it would be??

- Chunk

That's basically the mission statement for this website...

Ummm I just quickly looked at the deal…

1) kane ends up in col

2) somehow every team retains 50% of Kanes 10 mil original salary or whatever it is

3) I don’t think that’s allowed.

4) no way kane could get to avs at less than 3 mil againgst cap.

5) for that reason alone this should not be a trade to consider

6) or am I missing something
- Stayin alive

Instead of thinking that it's not allowed. Why not find out if it actually is? According to the CBA, Players’ contracts are limited to 2 retained salary transactions per contract. So as usual, yes you are missing something

Instead of thinking that it's not allowed. Why not find out if it actually is? According to the CBA, Players’ contracts are limited to 2 retained salary transactions per contract. So as usual, yes you are missing something
- MJL

Nice try. No nhl contract can be retained below %50 of its original amount

Kane will be traded to Calgary, Edmonton,Tampa or Boston

Rangers would be Awsome but the money is harder to make up compared to the 4 teams above.

That's basically the mission statement for this website...
- Cooleus

We are still waiting on Malkin coming to the Hawks.

And my personal fav... Kopitar and Doughty for Keith and Toews.

Nice try. No nhl contract can be retained below %50 of its original amount
- BrainSap

Wrong. 50% per team. Multiple teams can and have in the past retained salary on the same player.

Nice try. No nhl contract can be retained below %50 of its original amount
- BrainSap

The language is

"The percentage retained cannot exceed 50 percent of the player’s salary (including all bonuses) and Salary Cap Hit."

Once the first trade is made. Kane's salary and cap hit will be cut in half. It has happened multiple times in the NHL. Nothing about the original amount.

Nice try. No nhl contract can be retained below %50 of its original amount
- BrainSap

Nice try. No nhl contract can be retained below %50 of its original amount
- BrainSap

lol

Ummm I just quickly looked at the deal…

1) kane ends up in col

2) somehow every team retains 50% of Kanes 10 mil original salary or whatever it is

3) I don’t think that’s allowed.

4) no way kane could get to avs at less than 3 mil againgst cap.

5) for that reason alone this should not be a trade to consider

6) or am I missing something
- Stayin alive

Go to Cap Friendly's retained salary transactions and you'll see 4 such transactions in the past two years - Max Domi, Mattias Janmark, Nick Foligno and David Savard.


https://www.capfriendly.c...ained-salary-transactions

Max Domi is at the bottom of this screen grab, he starts out at 5.3 and ends up at 1.325:

Personally i don’t think a low 1st, a 3rd, and Maltsez will do it for a Superstar, it’ll be a bidding war and im sure Kane will accept New York as well who has the youth to entertain a much better offer, im not high on Maltsev probably will be a bottom 6 forward
- NSco1996

You could be right and maybe the Avs offer something a little more like Kaut - I have no idea what Chicago wants or even if they want anything at all given they want to lose as many games as possible - but the Avs are not going to give up much more than that. Regardless, he's 33 (I realize he's still a very productive player), has a full NMC and is very likely going to a contender as a pure rental. That's not a combination conducive to getting a huge return and it really doesn't matter one bit whether there's a bidding war unless Kane is open to going wherever Chicago gets the best deal and I highly doubt that will be the case. I guess we'll see but every year we hear that this is the rental who'll get the huge return and every year people are surprised with how relatively little comes back.

You could be right and maybe the Avs offer something a little more like Kaut - I have no idea what Chicago wants or even if they want anything at all given they want to lose as many games as possible - but the Avs are not going to give up much more than that. Regardless, he's 33 (I realize he's still a very productive player), has a full NMC and is very likely going to a contender as a pure rental. That's not a combination conducive to getting a huge return and it really doesn't matter one bit whether there's a bidding war unless Kane is open to going wherever Chicago gets the best deal and I highly doubt that will be the case. I guess we'll see but every year we hear that this is the rental who'll get the huge return and every year people are surprised with how relatively little comes back.

Sure, except last year Giroux went for a 1st, 3rd and a prospect. Lindholm went for a 1st and two seconds. I'd argue Kane is a better rental piece than either of the aforementioned. Lindholm was resigned, but theoretically so could Kane. And that's just last year for players on expiring contracts.

Not going into the index, but essentially rentals are going for first round picks plus every year. In my opinion Kane (50 or 75% retained) is easily good for at least two firsts or the prospect equivalent

Sure, except last year Giroux went for a 1st, 3rd and a prospect. Lindholm went for a 1st and two seconds. I'd argue Kane is a better rental piece than either of the aforementioned. Lindholm was resigned, but theoretically so could Kane. And that's just last year for players on expiring contracts.

Not going into the index, but essentially rentals are going for first round picks plus every year. In my opinion Kane (50 or 75% retained) is easily good for at least two firsts or the prospect equivalent
- Hawkeynation

You could be right but Giroux is a good scoring center who PK's, is one of the best face-off guys in the league and plays 200 feet. Kane is a great scoring wing who's not particularly known for his D at all. Given that centers are generally valued higher than wings anyway and adding in the defensive abilities who is the GM of a contender who wants to make it deep into the playoffs going to value more?

We'll see what one season (or less) of an older elite scoring wing gets, especially when the player in question gets to decide exactly where he wants to go. I'm guessing it's going to be pretty damned close to what the older great scoring (he had 23 points in 18 games once he got out of Philly) 200 foot center who got to dictate where he went got. If you're thinking otherwise that's cool too.

I think a lot of the keyboard GM's on this site need to get a LIFE. Do something positive instead of living in a fantasy world of Dumb

In all seriousness, Kane’s NMC may limit his trade value. If he insists on one particular destination and leaks that info, then Chicago loses all leverage. Recall Taylor Hall wanting to go to Boston only. Cost to rent him was just a 2nd and Anders Bjork. If Kane stays quiet and is flexible, then Chicago has a pretty good chance of assets like a 1st, 2nd, B-level prospect. Maybe 1st, 2nd, 3rd. Maybe 1st and strong prospect. Etc…Remember that 2023 picks are highly coveted so that can also influence the cost. I’m curious whether Kane plays along to help the Hawks get max value, or does he screw them over by his agent leaking info that he only wants to go to A or B.

Most contenders adding him at the deadline won’t be able to extend him, but a few contenders could. Boston is a good example with Bergeron and Krejci expiring, which could open cap space to lock Kane up beyond this year. St. Louis could add him at the deadline, let Tarasenko walk and extend Kane instead. Sounds crazy, but Pittsburgh is losing Zucker and Dumoulin giving them almost $10M to play with. They’ll need to be creative since Jarry needs a new deal.

I still think he goes somewhere as a pure rental. But then signs as a UFA based on money and lifestyle. He has multiple Cups. He just wants cash and fun. Watch him end up in LA, New York, Florida or Dallas for low taxes, maybe Anaheim makes a splash.

WHAT THE EK...

1) Kane to AZ for future considerations, Chicago retains 50% (5.25 million, the max they can retain).
2) Avs 2024 1st, 2025 2nd and 2025 3rd plus Mikhail Maltsev (look up his AHL numbers for last season) to AZ for Kane. AZ retains another 50% (2.625 million)
3) AZ sends the 1st, 3rd and Maltsev to Chicago to complete the deal, keeps the 2nd for the salary retention.

Avs get Kane at 2.625, Hawks get 1st, 3rd and Maltsev, AZ gets a 2nd. Avs are still 1.3 million under the Cap so they can call someone up in case of an injury.

SO KANE TO ARIZONA FOR FUTURES AND THEY TRADE TO AVS FOR A 1ST+ 2ND+ 3RD AND A PLAYER? BUT IN THIS PROPOSAL YOU MENTIONED ARZ FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS.. WHAT THE EK