Trades and Potential Trades

Rare for a sign and trade in the NHL. What's in it for the player?

 

There is nothing in a sign and trade that helps the player, it only helps the selling club. This doesn't happen often.

 

You could only ask, the player could rest easy knowing he doesn't have to go through all the uncertainty of free agency in july.

He could also focus on a playoff run with his legitimate team

 

Are there any restrictions in Kane’s contract in terms of where he could be traded? Not sure whether the money would work but Kane to LA would be a really nice fit roster-wise. LA doesn’t have much in terms of prospects though.

Seems like less and less future 1sts are getting moved over the past few seasons, excluding Vegas last year.

 

Are there any contractual benefits for the team receiving the player after a sign and trade? For example could team A sign a player and pay him a big bonus immediately and then flip the player to team B. Team B would have the same cap hit for the player but end up paying less in real money to that player.

 

This would be the same as a team eating part of the salary when they make the deal, like the leafs with kessel. A sign and trade would be part of a conditional trade with another team, where a team will make a trade on condition that he's signed on for a certain amount of years. You have Kane right now making $5.35M, it's not that easy to fit him into the cap on a contending team.

It's a tough deal to make for the sabres to benefit too, a roster player coming back has to make sense. The team getting Kane has to know that they're getting a player that has no playoff experience for a playoff run. Coming in with a long-term deal automatically raises his trade value. The sabres can ask for more, and a team will do it and be more willing to make a move for the greater good.

A roster player that will benefit the sabres would also be benefitting the other team that's getting ready for a playoff run. Teams usually do these deals by trading picks and prospects, this limits the teams you could deal with.
I'm not sure if Kane has a NTC list.

 

Have to assume that anyone coming back to Buffalo would either have term left or be restricted.

 

Uhmm, skinny, I think every single GM is more aware of the pros & cons as well as the ramifications of trading for E. Kane than anyone reading this.

A trade is going to happen. And, who ever gets him will be accused of paying too much. Buffalo finds themselves as a seller in a sellers' market. It's a little too soon to say this since he's never been through a trade deadline as a GM, but GM Bots is a smart guy with 10 years in PIT. I have confidence that he knows what he's doing.

As for a sign & trade; that's never going to happen. When was the last one in the NHL.

Kane will not throw away the leverage he's worked years to earn. It's not like being a rental is a negative; in fact for many teams it's a positive.

I will add that IMHO you put EK in a spoked B (I'm becoming dottering in my old age), they become a SC fav.

 

It's complicated, the guy coming back has term left, and the team trading him has to be willing to cut bait with him. The salary cap makes trading so much more complicated, especially at the deadline. Most moves are made weeks before, because of the complications involved in doing it at the last minute.

Sabres have a high asking price right now, they're playing with the time they have, they still have 26 days. Teams willing to do a deal realize that if the sabres don't make a deal, they could lose Kane for nothing on July.1st. This plays into the leverage of the opposing teams willing to make the deal.

As everyday goes by without action, kanes value will continue to dip, if this deal gets done within a couple of days, it might just end up being a late first.

 

This is like commodity trading, Kane is like a put stock right now.

 

Is it a sellers market though?

 

A lot of teams have end up with buyers remorse from giving up too much for a rental. When was the last time a team that acquired a rental win a cup? The Avs with Bourque maybe? GMs are now studying the history of these moves and weighing in the pros and cons and how it worked out for that team (vanek, gretzky,) and passing.

 

Gaborik is probably the best recent example where he even ended up signing for $5M a year for the kings.

 

Yes

 

The fact that there's a lot of teams with buyer's remorse IS THE PROOF that many teams are willing to pay too much for a chance at the Cup.

 

Kane's salary is a tough fit for a team to take in, the sabres could make it easier by eating up some salary. A playoff contender to give up a valuable roster player for a rental, this is where I have a problem. A player that's of no use to one team, but worth it to the sabres? This has to be a rare case where the player can't stand the team anymore (coach,gm,players,city), also has to benefit the long-term plan for the buffalo, tough one.

 

I think every Cup winner makes a move or 2 at the deadline. The Hawks picked up...... what’s his name- old C that scored a couple huge goals, acquired from Arizona. Bruins acquired Peverley and Kaberle (bleh).

Dan you’re getting closer to saying Bruins! Spiked B counts for something in my book.

 

Spoked B not spiked!!!

 

Cup winners make moves, I was just taking a look at the big deals where the seller was given a big winfall in return. Sure, many deals involving 3rd and 4th rounders for a 2nd or 3rd line veteren.

 

I'm not there yet, Matty. I got several swirls down the descent into dementia before that'll ever come outta my mouth. Just ... can't ... do ... it

I don't hate the team anymore, but I don't want to take the risk of having my tongue fall out.