DarthEbriate Posted July 2, 2017 Report Share Posted July 2, 2017 Any of the three centers he'll play with this season could be among the best center he's ever been matched with (O'Reilly, Eichel, Reinhart). Add in a new attacking system that plays to Kane's strengths... Barring injury, he's going to have a good season, if not his best yet. After such a season on the open market he could break 7M/year. But when he leaves, does he get to play with O'R, E, or R on the new team, and do they have that player or our upcoming roster? 5 seasons gives him another big payday opportunity before people see "30+" and his wheels slow (think Oshie or Okposo). I'd offer 6.25 over 5, knowing that our cash is going to divert to Eichel and Reinhart shortly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted July 3, 2017 Report Share Posted July 3, 2017 Well, with Patrick Marleau signing $6.35Mx3 at 38 years old, I have a hard time seeing Kane take fewer dollars or years than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthEbriate Posted July 3, 2017 Report Share Posted July 3, 2017 Well, with Patrick Marleau signing $6.35Mx3 at 38 years old, I have a hard time seeing Kane take fewer dollars or years than that. Marleau got 6.35? I need to pay closer attention. So then "better season" Kane is easily over 7. Perhaps we'd best trade him while we can (or Okposo...if Kane is better for the JBot system). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted July 4, 2017 Report Share Posted July 4, 2017 Nineteen wingers make $6 million or more. Ten wingers make $7 million. Every one of them has put up better numbers than Kane. I would give Kane Marleau's contract because the term protects us. Kane will want that money but probably more term. Doubt I'd go beyond five years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norcal Posted July 4, 2017 Report Share Posted July 4, 2017 4×6.5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winston Posted July 4, 2017 Report Share Posted July 4, 2017 (edited) Here's a quick chart I put together (sorry for the gap, going Excel to PDF). Maybe it'll lend some insight into what Kane is worth relative to his peers. It shows all LW that scored more than half a point per game during the 2016-2017 season. Each player's contract information is to the right, including years, average annual value, and the year it was signed. At the bottom are some averages. This is no fancy math, but it also isn't Hammy-math. When I have a bit more time, maybe I'll add what age these contracts were signed at. Also would be valuable to see what their season immediately before looked like. Of note, four deals were struck this offseason. Drouin signed for 5x6.5 in Montreal. I think he's better and has more upside than Kane. Then again, Marleau got $6.25M per year from Toronto. Pearson got 4x3.75 from LA. Teravainen got 2x2.86 from Carolina. Right now, Kane makes $5.25M per year. I would be in favor of extending him, but I don't think he has earned a big raise. 5X5.5M is probably where I would aim. Take it with a grain of salt, but the averages say 5x5. Of painful note- our 5x5 LW didn't make the 0.5 PPG list :P Edited July 4, 2017 by EichSnipe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted July 4, 2017 Report Share Posted July 4, 2017 You cant look at averages around the league. You have to look at the most recent contracts for comparable players. The Marleau deal is probably close, but Kane is young enough to justify term. I dont get the agina over paying Kane. If he compliments this roster well, and nothing to date has shown otherwise, why wouldnt we want to pay the kid market price? Im betting he has a real good year in a more attacking system and justifies keeping him around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
French Collection Posted July 4, 2017 Report Share Posted July 4, 2017 There needs to be a willingness from his side to remain in Buffalo. I was in the trade him camp but now would explore keeping him at market value. Hopefully he fits into this dressing room and in Howie's plans. The loss of Foligno heightens the need for his "nuclear option". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted July 4, 2017 Report Share Posted July 4, 2017 (edited) There needs to be a willingness from his side to remain in Buffalo. The loss of Foligno heightens the need for his "nuclear option". Of course. And there has been 0 information from Kane's side that he is not willing to sign here, just a bunch of speculation by forum posters who think they know what he is thinking. Your second point is also important. Not so much for the "nuclear option", but because he is one of the now very few on this team capable of playing a physically intimidating game. That can only be helpful in a playoff run. Edited July 4, 2017 by We've Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GASabresIUFAN Posted July 4, 2017 Report Share Posted July 4, 2017 This thread assumes the Sabres will want Kane back and because of our lack of depth at LW this season, that we will have no choice but to retain him. I don't think that's true. Of course he might not want to return even if we want him, but even if he does, I don't think Jbot will want him back. I believe both Nylander and the left shooting Middelstadt will contend for roster spaces next season. If that happens, I think Jbot saves the money and given to top 2 LW spots to the kids. Of course, the kids' development and Kane's attitude and play as well as the Sabres ability to contend as is will be huge factors in the ultimate decision, but we shouldn't just assume Kane will be offered an extention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabre fan Posted July 4, 2017 Report Share Posted July 4, 2017 I guess the question is really can we afford to pay Kane say 5 to 7 years at even $6.5mil per? We obviously have some big contracts coming up that need to be addressed (like Jack's) and when all is said and done do we have enough cap space? Of course the good news is Moulson, Gorges come off the books next year but we now have Pominville at $5.6 for two more seasons. This is probably one of those "damn if you do and damn if you don't" scenarios but we absolutely have to either re-sign long term or trade NOW... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GASabresIUFAN Posted July 4, 2017 Report Share Posted July 4, 2017 You can't trade him now because we can't replace him. Signing Vanek isn't a replacement. We need to find out if he replicate last season and if we can contend with him in the lineup. If he does and we contend then the likelihood of re-signing him increases. If we still don't contend then you hope he is healthy and you can trade him at the deadline. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry Posted July 4, 2017 Report Share Posted July 4, 2017 I would pay him 6x 5.5 mill. would never go over 6 mill aav. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted July 4, 2017 Report Share Posted July 4, 2017 You cant look at averages around the league. You have to look at the most recent contracts for comparable players. The Marleau deal is probably close, but Kane is young enough to justify term. I dont get the agina over paying Kane. If he compliments this roster well, and nothing to date has shown otherwise, why wouldnt we want to pay the kid market price? Im betting he has a real good year in a more attacking system and justifies keeping him around. Well, I don't think he complements the roster very well because I don't like his fit with Eichel or O'Reilly. If I'm shelling out term and dollars, I want more versatility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted July 4, 2017 Report Share Posted July 4, 2017 I would pay him 6x 5.5 mill. would never go over 6 mill aav. Well then you ain't signing him Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted July 4, 2017 Report Share Posted July 4, 2017 Well, I don't think he complements the roster very well because I don't like his fit with Eichel or O'Reilly. If I'm shelling out term and dollars, I want more versatility. I dont think we've seen a representative sample of him and Eichel. Jack packed up his skates and quit the season about the time Kanes ribs healed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted July 4, 2017 Report Share Posted July 4, 2017 I dont think we've seen a representative sample of him and Eichel. Jack packed up his skates and quit the season about the time Kanes ribs healed.What? He was statistically, literally, the best player in the league from mid January to mid March Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted July 4, 2017 Report Share Posted July 4, 2017 What? He was statistically, literally, the best player in the league from mid January to mid March And when he didnt make his bonus he pretty much admitted he had given up on the season and regretted it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted July 4, 2017 Report Share Posted July 4, 2017 And when he didnt make his bonus he pretty much admitted he had given up on the season and regretted it.Where? He didn't make his bonus in like the last 2 games Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted July 4, 2017 Report Share Posted July 4, 2017 I dont think we've seen a representative sample of him and Eichel. Jack packed up his skates and quit the season about the time Kanes ribs healed. They've played 677 even strength minutes together over the last two seasons. He's been Eichel's 2nd most frequent linemate (behind only Reinhart). This is not a small sample, and the results have been unspectacular. It looked better this season than last, but Kane was so chugging along at twice his career shooting percentage. And your time line is off--Kane started to go on his tear in December, while Jack didn't mail it in until the last handful of games of the season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Formerly Allan in MD Posted July 4, 2017 Report Share Posted July 4, 2017 Pay him to keep him (or possibly trade him down the road) but make sure the contract includes a stringent behavior clause. Any team that signs him should insist on it. If the clause is a problem for Kane, he won't get the money he wants anywhere unless, of course, someone's truly adverse to risk or just plain dumb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabre fan Posted July 4, 2017 Report Share Posted July 4, 2017 I have no doubt he will want BIG BUCKS...like maybe as high as 7mil per year. I hate to say it but far too rich for the Sabres. There is no way he signs for anything less then 6.5 and he absolutely does not hold any sort of "home-town" discount thing for us...he'll be gone in a heartbeat next season when Anaheim for whoever comes knocking with a big offer then we lose him for nothing like Briere and Drury (which I still resent) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted July 4, 2017 Report Share Posted July 4, 2017 I definitely remember Kane looking like he packed it in as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tondas Posted July 4, 2017 Report Share Posted July 4, 2017 I have no doubt he will want BIG BUCKS...like maybe as high as 7mil per year. I hate to say it but far too rich for the Sabres. There is no way he signs for anything less then 6.5 and he absolutely does not hold any sort of "home-town" discount thing for us...he'll be gone in a heartbeat next season when Anaheim for whoever comes knocking with a big offer then we lose him for nothing like Briere and Drury (which I still resent) Exactly. I wanted to trade Kane gone by now for a top 4 D-man. But seeing what we have now at LW, there's no way we trade him. If we're out of it at the deadline, get what you can, elsewise, I think he's gone and we get nothing (maybe a conditional 7th for his rights). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted July 7, 2017 Report Share Posted July 7, 2017 The Sabres do not sign him. As mentioned he does not fit with with players in the Top 6. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.