How much should Kane' s extension be?

[LGR4GM]

I keep Kane if he's willing to take 4 yrs @ 5.5

If not, move him.

You want to give him only a 250k raise? Lol that's laughable at this point.

We are already talking 6.5 mil minimum and probably closer to 7.5 mil

[Scottysabres]

You want to give him only a 250k raise? Lol that's laughable at this point. We are already talking 6.5 mil minimum and probably closer to 7.5 mil

Yea, I'm well aware. Hence why I stated, if he doesn't take it we move him and move on.

In other words, there is 0% chance Kane is a Sabres by the deadline.

[LGR4GM]

Seems silly to give up a 30g winger.

Yea, I'm well aware. Hence why I stated, if he doesn't take it we move him and move on.

In other words, there is 0% chance Kane is a Sabres by the deadline.

[Scottysabres]

Seems silly to give up a 30g winger.

Not really.

You need look no further than Pittsburgs last 9 years to see where Botts pedigree cap / talent analysis comes from.

Kane is not a core player. Or he'd already be re-signed. Okposo isn't going anywhere, neither is Jack a 10 mil or ROR's 7.5.

Its up in the air what happens with Moulson and Bogo's 5 mil aav.

 

The writing is on the walls here

[LGR4GM]

I think that Botterill is still considering options. Hard to convince me now we have to trade our best player. Unless I can trade him for Brock Boeser and something, then totally in.

Edited November 8, 2017 by LGR4GM

[Thorny]

Yea, I'm well aware. Hence why I stated, if he doesn't take it we move him and move on.

In other words, there is 0% chance Kane is a Sabres by the deadline.

Your opinion only counts as fact here if you are the GM.

[Scottysabres]

I think that Botterill is still considering options. Hard to convince me now we have to trade our best player.

This is where you and I view things differently. A majority of Kane's points this last year are overwhelmingly due to Jack's playing ability. Take Jack away from the equation and Kane's numbers drop, significantly.

And you can see this in Girgs and Reinharts production, also driven by Jack's play, and this is not disputable imo as the numbers bare this out.

Jack is our best player.

 

With that said, Kane is a very good player in multiple roles in his own right. And unless Bots can move a healthy portion of dead weight contracts, my doubts on a Kane re-signing are all but cemented.

 

What seals the deal for me as of now is organizational needs, and currently, there are a great deal of them.

[7+6=13]

Not really.

You need look no further than Pittsburgs last 9 years to see where Botts pedigree cap / talent analysis comes from.

Kane is not a core player. Or he'd already be re-signed. Okposo isn't going anywhere, neither is Jack a 10 mil or ROR's 7.5.

Its up in the air what happens with Moulson and Bogo's 5 mil aav.

 

The writing is on the walls here

 

How are you defining core player and why Kane isn't?

 

What's up in the air about Moulson and Bogo's contracts?

[Scottysabres]

Your opinion only counts as fact here if you are the GM.

Your opinion only counts as fact here if you are the GM.

Whoa

 

Lets put the breaks on here. Please point to where I have said its fact. Posting an opinion with strong data to go from isn't stating fact.

How are you defining core player and why Kane isn't?

 

What's up in the air about Moulson and Bogo's contracts?

Core players are those you can build around in my definition. While Kane has excelled at multi-facets of his game, imo without Jack's playing ability his production in offensive numbers decrease. Making him, imo, I complimentary piece.

 

The 10.14 aav between Bogo and Moulsons contracts hinder the numbers set forth by Liger. Especially any wiggle room to add components off season or in season next year if Bots finds the team in a position to entertain such.

[Thorny]

Please point to where I have said its fact.

In other words, there is 0% chance Kane is a Sabres by the deadline.

[LGR4GM]

I wonder if I can trade him for Brock Boeser...

[Scottysabres]

 

Please point to where I have said its fact.

In other words, there is 0% chance Kane is a Sabres by the deadline.

Ah, I see. You interpreted my comment on signing him or not as fact.

 

Well, all I can say is this is a hockey forum, one I've enjoyed reading the banter back and forth on for a couple years before I felt like partaking in.

 

If I speak unclearly, just ask for clarity. I'm just a Sabres fan remember, no reason to stomp on my balls because I express an opinion with some confidence.

 

For my part, I've started using imo in my posts so I hope that helps.

[LGR4GM]

Keep partaking. We are just a cantankerous lot. ;)

Edited November 9, 2017 by LGR4GM

[Scottysabres]

Keep partaking. We are just a cantankerous lot. ;)

I will, and thank you to Thorny and yourself and all the rest for the subject matter.

So, with that said, I'm interested to see if my thoughts on Kane kind of make sense, what do people think?

[LGR4GM]

They make a lot of sense. It makes sense to trade him if you can't or won't re sign him.

[Scottysabres]

I will admit, these last 5 games or so, I have been running scenarios through my mind on how bots can dump that Moulson contract. And while I realize its convenient to think such as a fan, I also have to bare in mind that these are people, with families. I don't know if Matt chose Buffalo because of that alone, but he has children, and the area is great for raising a family. I would want the Pegulas to honor that, if it was part of the reason. And that directly related to the potential to re-sign Kane.

So many variables I guess.

 

Would I keep Kane if a reasonable deal could be reached (a discount contract?), yea, of course.

But I believe your numbers are accurate Liger. I can't see it happening unless we unload 10 mil roughly, and for a 3 or 4 year term only. Imo.

[LGR4GM]

I think anything over 4 years is a risk because Kane takes chances, and gets injured. I would say you only need to clear Moulson. That said Moulson I do like as a person.

[Scottysabres]

 

 

Well, you know, how about a 1 yr 5.5/6 mil contract? Gives the team time to clear a couple of 5+ mil contracts and settle up on the back side of a 1 year deal. Not likely, still, if Kane loves it here, would he play ball?

Would it be worth it for him knowing a 5 year deal max on the back side of such a scenario?

Edited November 9, 2017 by Lucky E

[LGR4GM]

I think you'd have to do 6 mil, then sign him to a multi-year deal the next week.

 

What if we sign him to a 1 year deal June 30th. Then on July 1 sign him to a multi-year deal... technically after July 1 he'd be in the last year of his new deal, then give him like 8 mil year one of that 2nd contract

Edited November 9, 2017 by LGR4GM

[Thorny]

I will, and thank you to Thorny and yourself and all the rest for the subject matter.

So, with that said, I'm interested to see if my thoughts on Kane kind of make sense, what do people think?

I think you are correct that it's much more likely Kane is traded than signed. I am completely against it, but it's very likely what's going to happen.

 

Well, you know, how about a 1 yr 5.5/6 mil contract? Gives the team time to clear a couple of 5+ mil contracts and settle up on the back side of a 1 year deal. Not likely, still, if Kane loves it here, would he play ball?

Would it be worth it for him knowing a 5 year deal max on the back side of such a scenario?

Kane won't take a one year deal, but I'm hoping somehow he's open to a shorter term, say 5 years, if we up the AAV. It's not the cost I'm worried about with Kane, it's the term.

 

If Kane is looking to max out any potential term and $, in THAT scenario I'd guess there's basically 0 chance we keep him. And I wouldn't want to in that scenario.

[LGR4GM]

No but what if you aren't really signing him to a 1 year deal? It's 2 contracts. The first is 1 year, the second is full value.

[dudacek]

I'm not worried about Reinhart's contract or Moulson's. Sam hasn't earned big dollars and Matt's is something you can make go away if you want to badly enough.

 

But there is no way Kane takes a one-year deal based on a small raise. It would be economically stupid because he will never be in as good a position to earn a big payday as he will be now, given his age and the fact he is playing the best hockey of his life.

 

Based on last season and this, Kane is playing himself into a 6-7 year $40-50 million UFA contract.

Given what came before, is Botterill brave/foolish enough to give it to him?

And what assets is he leaving on the table if he decides not to trade him or if he get hurt before he can?

Does Kane like Buffalo enough to sign something more team-friendly?

 

So many unanswered questions. It will be the toughest decision of JBot's young career.

[Thorny]

I'm not worried about Reinhart's contract or Moulson's. Sam hasn't earned big dollars and Matt's is something you can make go away if you want to badly enough.

 

But there is no way Kane takes a one-year deal based on a small raise. It would be economically stupid because he will never be in as good a position to earn a big payday as he will be now, given his age and the fact he is playing the best hockey of his life.

 

Based on last season and this, Kane is playing himself into a 6-7 year $40-50 million UFA contract.

Given what came before, is Botterill brave/foolish enough to give it to him?

And what assets is he leaving on the table if he decides not to trade him or if he get hurt before he can?

Does Kane like Buffalo enough to sign something more team-friendly?

 

So many unanswered questions. It will be the toughest decision of JBot's young career.

My guess (and it's only that) is that there won't be much negotiating going on. Botterill (if anything) will have a term/AAV in mind he's willing to go up to, and if Kane won't take it, he'll be traded.

[GASabresIUFAN]

Food for thought;

 

2016-2017

 

Kane 260 shots over 70 games for 3.7 shots per game - Shooting % 10.8

Eichel 249 shots over 61 game for 4.1 shots per game - Shooting % 9.6

 

 

2017-18

Kane 73 shots over 15 games for 4.9 shots per game - shooting % 12.3

Eichel 46 shots over 15 games for 3.1 shots per game - shooting % 8.7

 

Jack is clearly making Kane better.  He is getting Kane more opportunities and in better position.  Although Kane is clearly enjoying Wowie's system and playing on both special teams.  I'll even admit he has been the best player on the team YTD. (FYI: Jack has assisted on 2 of Kane's 3 shorties).  On the other hand, I think Jack is over thinking his play in this system.  He has become pass first instead of best play (shot or pass first). We aren't paying him to be Adam Oates.  The over 1 shot a game drop (or about 20%) coupled with the drop in shooting % show me that Jack is forcing his shot and not in his best position.  To me that is because he is deferring to Kane.  I think Jack needs to be a little more selfish.  I don't think it will really hurt Kane much if at all.  The only difference for Kane is that he'll have to crash the net more for rebound goals.  

[nfreeman]

If you are going to say this, be consistent. Duchene has two years left and then Kane as one. Or Duchene has 1 year left after this year and Kane does not. The way you word this it sounds like you get Duchene for basically 3 full seasons and that isn't accurate. Duchene is signed through the end of 2019. Kane is signed through the end of 2018. 

​Ooooooooooohhhh.  GA busted again for #Hammymath.

 

He's a recidivist.