Rumor: LA Kings interested in Evander Kane

[Thorny]

The balance of those reports seemed to indicate that McKenzie thought Lehner was the other player who would likely be traded.

Quite possibly. I still have an inkling that Sam is traded. I'm not in favour of it at all, very much the opposite. But I think JBot is looking to go in a different direction.

[TheAud]

The Ovechkin thing isn't going to happen (I mean, he isn't going to get traded at all, let alone to Buffalo). I just posted it as it's fun to talk about in the off-season prior to actual transactions occurring, hopefully soon. 

My reason for supporting such a theoretical trade was captured in several of the posts above in that:

a) It's not a 'trade away current assets for future assets' deal that we've had enough of ...

b) Aren't giving away any really high end young assets (Risto or even McCabe, Sam, Nylander, #1 pick this year, etc) 

c) I think getting Ovechkin in his early-mid 30's  is an significant upgrade. vs. Kane with an extension (assuming he would re-sign) in any set of consecutive year's in Kane's career.  

The whole 'getting into his 30's, waiting for the performance drop-off' thing is very true for 95%+ of players in the NHL. Ovechkin is not one of those players however. He's really like Jagr, Hossa, Thornton, or Iginla (to give recent examples) except that he is actually better than any of them. 

 

The only thing I'd take out of this in the real world is if the Sabres could make a 'hockey trade' for Kane (as opposed to selling him off) that they get more value back in terms of on ice contribution in the next few years than they think they'll get with Kane even with an extension, then why not do so? 

Edited June 5, 2017 by Sakman

[North Buffalo]

Hey thinking the same thing, lack of speculative b.s., was getting boring. [quote name="Sakman" post="952422" timestamp="1496691796"

The Ovechkin thing isn't going to happen (I mean, he isn't going to get traded at all, let alone to Buffalo). I just posted it as it's fun to talk about in the off-season prior to actual transactions occurring, hopefully soon.

My reason for supporting such a theoretical trade was captured in several of the posts above in that:

a) It's not a 'trade away current assets for future assets' deal that we've had enough of ...

b) Aren't giving away any really high end young assets (Risto or even McCabe, Sam, Nylander, #1 pick this year, etc)

c) I think getting Ovechkin in his early-mid 30's is an significant upgrade. vs. Kane with an extension (assuming he would re-sign) in any set of consecutive year's in Kane's career.

The whole 'getting into his 30's, waiting for the performance drop-off' thing is very true for 95%+ of players in the NHL. Ovechkin is not one of those players however. He's really like Jagr, Hossa, Thornton, or Iginla (to give recent examples) except that he is actually better than any of them.

 

The only thing I'd take out of this in the real world is if the Sabres could make a 'hockey trade' for Kane (as opposed to selling him off) that they get more value back in terms of on ice contribution in the next few years than they think they'll get with Kane even with an extension, then why not do so?

Edited June 5, 2017 by North Buffalo

[pi2000]

The Sabres have more than enough time to work on a contract with Kane. I doubt, at this point, that Kane has come out and said he isn't going to stay here. 

 

Kane is everything fans cry about the team not having. Even strength scoring, physical, sticks up for teammates, never takes a day off and is most likely the kind of player to excel in the playoffs. If you need a D-man, trade Nylander or Reinhart. This team is as close to being short of offensive talent as it is defensive, especially if Okposo is questionable. 

 

Even if Kane has said he doesn't want to stay, players have changed their minds before. Winning can go a long ways. If they trade Kane now, it's apparent this team still isn't moving forward. And my patience is waning with loser Buffalo sports teams. If Botterill wants to make his mark, he takes his time and finds a way to add defense while working with Kane. Trading Kane now without letting things play out is a bad move. 

 

Those Panthers season tickets are starting to look better, day by day. 

 

exactly

[GASabresIUFAN]

I have zero problem with moving Kane, but why LA and why now?

 

LA is an aging former contender with a mess of bad contracts. Kane would definitely help them next season, but they need to shed money to bring Kane in. That probably means they have to move either Muzzin and Martinez to us as part of the deal. I like both players, but they are already 28 and 29 respectively. Martinez has 4 years left at $4 per, while Muzzin has 3 at $4 per season.

 

I'm not sure this is the way to go. I don't want to get older. I don't want to take on another crappy contract, especially on D. Muzzin might produce fair value for his remaining deal, but I doubt we'll get full value from Martinez. That said, they are young enough to keep us competitive while the fixed pipeline develops.

 

I'm wondering if the the better deal is to wait until the deadline to move Kane, when desperate teams need scoring to make a run and most of Kane cap hit is already gone?

[TheAud]

Hey thinking the same thing, lack of speculative b.s., was getting boring.

 

Exactly!  :w00t:

[Drunkard]

I have zero problem with moving Kane, but why LA and why now?

 

LA is an aging former contender with a mess of bad contracts. Kane would definitely help them next season, but they need to shed money to bring Kane in. That probably means they have to move either Muzzin and Martinez to us as part of the deal. I like both players, but they are already 28 and 29 respectively. Martinez has 4 years left at $4 per, while Muzzin has 3 at $4 per season.

 

I'm not sure this is the way to go. I don't want to get older. I don't want to take on another crappy contract, especially on D. Muzzin might produce fair value for his remaining deal, but I doubt we'll get full value from Martinez. That said, they are young enough to keep us competitive while the fixed pipeline develops.

 

I'm wondering if the the better deal is to wait until the deadline to move Kane, when desperate teams need scoring to make a run and most of Kane cap hit is already gone?

 

That's a hell of a gamble to take given Kane's injury history. Nobody is going to trade for an injured Kane on an expiring contract. A bird in hand is worth 2 in the bush as they say. I'd prefer to extend Kane before the season starts but I'd rather have Muzzin or Martinez than have Kane play for us this season as a pending UFA.

[I-90 W]

I have zero problem with moving Kane, but why LA and why now?

 

LA is an aging former contender with a mess of bad contracts. Kane would definitely help them next season, but they need to shed money to bring Kane in. That probably means they have to move either Muzzin and Martinez to us as part of the deal. I like both players, but they are already 28 and 29 respectively. Martinez has 4 years left at $4 per, while Muzzin has 3 at $4 per season.

 

I'm not sure this is the way to go. I don't want to get older. I don't want to take on another crappy contract, especially on D. Muzzin might produce fair value for his remaining deal, but I doubt we'll get full value from Martinez. That said, they are young enough to keep us competitive while the fixed pipeline develops.

 

I'm wondering if the the better deal is to wait until the deadline to move Kane, when desperate teams need scoring to make a run and most of Kane cap hit is already gone?

 

That is a calculated risk though, he could be injured next year by the trade dead line. I think his value is at it's highest this summer.

[Drunkard]

That is a calculated risk though, he could be injured next year by the trade dead line. I think his value is at it's highest this summer.

 

Exactly. I have no desire to take that gamble. I want to keep Kane but they need to have an extension agreed to in principle that is just sitting and waiting to be signed on July 1st. Otherwise they should move him at the draft.

[dudacek]

I am really interested in seeing the return on Kane - both in trade and on his contract.

There are many out there who say they wouldn't want them on their team at any price - injury history, character, "third-liner"

But pretty much everyone expects him to sign an Okposo-level deal.

[Brawndo]

From Derek Jedamski

 

SH% over last 5 yrs for a certain player (from oldest to most recent): 8.9%, 7.6%, 7.9%, 7.4%, 10.8%. One of these is not like the others.

[WildCard]

From Derek Jedamski

 

SH% over last 5 yrs for a certain player (from oldest to most recent): 8.9%, 7.6%, 7.9%, 7.4%, 10.8%. One of these is not like the others.

Feel like he was particularly healthy this year as well. 

 

But it, obviously if we trade him it's a rebuild.

@SabresBuzz

Kane for Muzzin says local radio. I wrote  that story 5 months ago.

[LGR4GM]

From Derek Jedamski

 

SH% over last 5 yrs for a certain player (from oldest to most recent): 8.9%, 7.6%, 7.9%, 7.4%, 10.8%. One of these is not like the others.

What's that lassie? SH% 2% above normal is not sustainable? And little timmy fell down the well... well girl show me!

[TrueBlueGED]

Am I really one of two (?) people here who thinks Muzzin is a better player than Kane? If the deal is Kane-Muzzin straight up I'd be thrilled.

[darksabre]

Am I really one of two (?) people here who thinks Muzzin is a better player than Kane? If the deal is Kane-Muzzin straight up I'd be thrilled.

I'd be fine with that. 

[WildCard]

To go along with that

 

Total Shot Attempts:  350, 477, 244, 472, 440

 

Total Games Played: 48, 63, 37, 65, 70

 

The first season is the lockout

Am I really one of two (?) people here who thinks Muzzin is a better player than Kane? If the deal is Kane-Muzzin straight up I'd be thrilled.

Same here. Muzzin just isn't the sexy option here. But he's the smarter one IMO

[Brawndo]

I would be laughing all the way to the bank if that trade went down for Muzzin.

 

And Garth throws so much sh!t at the wall, he isn't allowed to take credit for the one time it sticks

[LGR4GM]

Am I really one of two (?) people here who thinks Muzzin is a better player than Kane? If the deal is Kane-Muzzin straight up I'd be thrilled.

I love Muzzin. I might try to pry more from LA then just him though... like Kempe ;) 

[pi2000]

Am I really one of two (?) people here who thinks Muzzin is a better player than Kane? If the deal is Kane-Muzzin straight up I'd be thrilled.

 

 

To go along with that

 

Total Shot Attempts:  350, 477, 244, 472, 440

 

Total Games Played: 48, 63, 37, 65, 70

 

The first season is the lockout

Same here. Muzzin just isn't the sexy option here. But he's the smarter one IMO

 

Buyer beware... Muzzin was one of the reasons the Kings failed to make the playoffs this eason... he was a -21, and put up only 28 points... vs 40 points and a +7 the previous season.   He also was fined by the NHL for embellishment.   That's not what you want for $4mil/yr... let alone trade away your top scoring winger.

[LGR4GM]

Every time you use the +/- stat as a major example of what a player is, as opposed to the situations he plays in, Lord Voldemort wins. 

Buyer beware... Muzzin was one of the reasons the Kings failed to make the playoffs this eason... he was a -21, and put up only 28 points... vs 40 points and a +7 the previous season.   He also was fined by the NHL for embellishment.   That's not what you want for $4mil/yr... let alone trade away your top scoring winger.

 

Now on to this. Why are you willing to toss Muzzin to the curb for his one year of crappy play but at the same time do not also toss out the outlier that is Kane's SH%. 

[Randall Flagg]

Buyer beware... Muzzin was one of the reasons the Kings failed to make the playoffs this eason... he was a -21, and put up only 28 points... vs 40 points and a +7 the previous season.   He also was fined by the NHL for embellishment.   That's not what you want for $4mil/yr... let alone trade away your top scoring winger.

Don't worry. Kane's minuses-accrued-per-minute-played is 0.0126, while Muzzin's is .0114. It took Muzzin 87 minutes of hockey to acquire a minus while it only took Kane 79 minutes. Muzzin is a better plus minus player than Kane, therefore you should be all over this. 

Am I really one of two (?) people here who thinks Muzzin is a better player than Kane? If the deal is Kane-Muzzin straight up I'd be thrilled.

There is not a chance in hell LA does this straight up. Unless they are idiotic. 

[pi2000]

Every time you use the +/- stat as a major example of what a player is, as opposed to the situations he plays in, Lord Voldemort wins. 

 

I live in the LA area, my kid is a huge Kings fan, I watch plenty of their games.   Muzzin was terrible last season, no matter how you slice it... and he'd be the first to admit he struggled mightily.   That's a major concern if you're entertaining thoughts of acquiring him via trade.

[LGR4GM]

I live in the LA area, my kid is a huge Kings fan, I watch plenty of their games.   Muzzin was terrible last season, no matter how you slice it... and he'd be the first to admit he struggled mightily.   That's a major concern if you're entertaining thoughts of acquiring him via trade.

And this is a much better response than saying LOOK AT HIS +/-!!!! 

 

Ristolainen was a -21 2 years ago and -9 this year, so is he a bad player? 

[pi2000]

Don't worry. Kane's minuses-accrued-per-minute-played is 0.0126, while Muzzin's is .0114. It took Muzzin 87 minutes of hockey to acquire a minus while it only took Kane 79 minutes. Muzzin is a better plus minus player than Kane, therefore you should be all over this. 

There is not a chance in hell LA does this straight up. Unless they are idiotic. 

 

Muzzin's plus/minus dropped a net -30 from the previous season to a -21, on a team with  a -4 goal differential.    That's a -17 Pi/Minus®.   He's a top 3 defender who should be sound defensively,but when you log a -21 on a team with just a -4 goal differential, you're an outlier for the wrong reason.     

 

Kane on the other hand was a -17 on a team with a -36 goal differential.    That's a +19 Pi/Minus®. 

And this is a much better response than saying LOOK AT HIS +/-!!!! 

 

Ristolainen was a -21 2 years ago and -9 this year, so is he a bad player? 

 

Risto improved his defensive game over that time span, which is what you want from your young players.  

 

Muzzin took a nosedive, he was bad last year...  now, was that an expection?  or is he just not that good and it's finally catching up to him.  

 

http://www.ocregister.com/2017/02/20/kings-struggling-jake-muzzin-trying-to-get-back-to-basics/

[Randall Flagg]

Muzzin's plus/minus dropped a net -30 from the previous season to a -21, on a team with  a -4 goal differential.    That's a -17 Pi/Minus®.   He's a top 3 defender who should be sound defensively,but when you log a -21 on a team with just a -4 goal differential, you're an outlier for the wrong reason.     

 

Kane on the other hand was a -17 on a team with a -36 goal differential.    That's a +19 Pi/Minus®. 

Unless your usage is tougher than that of other defensemen that get the cushy minutes which contribute to the team's pluses in large part. If that sort of context could only be quantified in some way, and then incorporated into the numerical analysis. Of course, there is no context in pi land, and I truly believe that you see no issues with the statistical evidence you just presented. 

 

(I'm just messing around, I don't give a f*ck about Muzzin's plus minus) 

 

Putting on my serious face, do you think there is reason to believe that this is the new norm for Muzzin, as someone who watched him frequently? Did he lose a step skating? He's 28, an age where the beginning of a defenseman's decline normally doesn't happen but isn't unheard of. 

Edited June 5, 2017 by Randall Flagg