Jump to content


Photo

How much should Kane' s extension be?


  • Please log in to reply
82 replies to this topic

Poll: How much should Kane' s extension be?

How long should the exension be for?

You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.

How much $ should the extension offer be?

You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.
Vote Guests cannot vote

#41 We've

We've

    Self-appointed Expert

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,914 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:in your head

Posted 04 July 2017 - 12:04 PM

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.

#42 WildCard

WildCard

    Gunner's Mate First Class: Philip A$$hole

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,703 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lost in a Supermarket

Posted 04 July 2017 - 12:28 PM

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

#43 We've

We've

    Self-appointed Expert

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,914 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:in your head

Posted 04 July 2017 - 12:31 PM

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.

#44 WildCard

WildCard

    Gunner's Mate First Class: Philip A$$hole

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,703 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lost in a Supermarket

Posted 04 July 2017 - 12:33 PM

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

#45 TrueBlueGED

TrueBlueGED

    #fancystats

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,973 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 04 July 2017 - 12:54 PM

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.

#46 Formerly Allan in MD

Formerly Allan in MD

    Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 233 posts

Posted 04 July 2017 - 01:25 PM

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. 



#47 Sabre fan

Sabre fan

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 564 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Coboconk, Ontario

Posted 04 July 2017 - 01:29 PM

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)  



#48 Randall Flagg

Randall Flagg

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,342 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:WNY

Posted 04 July 2017 - 03:25 PM

I definitely remember Kane looking like he packed it in as well.

#49 Tondas

Tondas

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,842 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lincoln, NE

Posted 04 July 2017 - 03:58 PM

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).



#50 BRAWNDO

BRAWNDO

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,439 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 July 2017 - 10:39 AM

The Sabres do not sign him. As mentioned he does not fit with with players in the Top 6.

#51 Saratoga Sabres Fan

Saratoga Sabres Fan

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 948 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Adirondacks

Posted 07 July 2017 - 10:41 AM

Obviously looking like were going to go into the season with him. Wonder what we'll get at the trade deadline next year for him?

#52 Drunkard

Drunkard

    Second Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,151 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 July 2017 - 11:15 AM

The Sabres do not sign him. As mentioned he does not fit with with players in the Top 6.

 

If he truly doesn't fit with O'Reilly or Eichel they should move Reinhart to 3rd line center and put Kane on his wing. Pittsburgh wins because of their depth and balance and by basically putting their 3 best forwards (Crosby, Malkin, and Kessel) on 3 separate lines. We should do the same with O'Reilly, Eichel, and Reinhart. We just need another good winger to pair with whichever one of O'Reilly or Eichel doesn't get Okposo until Nylander is ready.



#53 Doohickie

Doohickie

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,619 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth, Texas

Posted 07 July 2017 - 12:43 PM

I bet they keep him.



#54 TheCerebral1

TheCerebral1

    Lord and Master of Zero F***s Given

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,619 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Phoenix, AZ

Posted 07 July 2017 - 02:38 PM

6 x 6.5-6.75M per season.  If we were to retain him.



#55 IKnowPhysics

IKnowPhysics

    First Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,268 posts

Posted 07 July 2017 - 02:39 PM

Tatar and Pearson have similarish-stats for LW; they make less than Kane does now, but mostly because they're still on their post-ELC contracts. JVR is coming off a $4M x 6yr contract is due for a big raise. Saad might be the closest comparable player stats-wise and he signed a $6M x 6 deal in 2015.  Drouin just signed for $5.5M x 6; Gaudreau last year for $6.75M x 6; Steen (age 33) just signed for $5.75M x 4.

 

But this is all anecdotal.  It's not what we want to pay him, but what he's worth on an open market, and probably more accurately- what his agent believes being a UFA could net him.  Let's look at real data.

 

Money:

Here's the short list of LW contracts in the last 4 years that make $6M+.

Here's the list of LWs contracts in the last 4 years that make $5M-$6M (including Kane now).

 

Term:

Not many LWs get 7+ year contracts.

Lots of mid-range guys, some not as good as Kane, get 4-5 year contracts.

Kane's potential peers seem to get 6 years.

 

An aggressive signing to keep Kane would be $6.5M x 6 years.



#56 We've

We've

    Self-appointed Expert

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,914 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:in your head

Posted 07 July 2017 - 05:34 PM

The contracts to compare to are LW's that hit FA status most recently.  Steen might be closest to what Kane's contract might look like $-wise.



#57 Scottysabres

Scottysabres

    Top Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 490 posts

Posted 08 July 2017 - 07:00 AM

6x6 is what I'd prefer if we intend to re-sign him.
Torn between keep or let go however. I am no fan of his publicized off ice issues but it does appear he's played low since last summer. Wonder if those around him have explained he was hurting his own value. Then there is the Pegula's commitment to "character".

Is a redemption project in step with that? After all, it's not only the Pegula's looking at good character, but they've led by example in keeping that quality of character as one of their key expectations. It is based on this that I believe if Kane continues to lay low and produce, he will be re-signed.

Kane, like Buffalo itself, can become a redemption story, and if championships are involved in the process, a story that we will be telling our grandchildren.

#58 dudacek

dudacek

    ...browsing the internet

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,928 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Listening to offers — eyes and ears

Posted 08 July 2017 - 11:04 AM

Given what we've seen since the Murray firing, it appears the character, structure, etc. comments were not about the team so much as they were about Murray.

#59 Sabres Fan In NS

Sabres Fan In NS

    I'd rather be in Sarajevo, or Istanbul (not Constantinople)

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,393 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

Posted 08 July 2017 - 11:32 AM

Given what we've seen since the Murray firing, it appears the character, structure, etc. comments were not about the team so much as they were about Murray.


Murray was not good at instilling good structure, at least in the way the owner wants it.

Character is something else in my mind. Murray definitely was a character and in some ways that reflected on the team.

I think if Kane did not fit in with the owner's idea of a person with good character I think he would have been traded by now.

I expect a long-term contract extension for Kane, if not this summer than during next season.

#60 ShadowLiger

ShadowLiger

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,875 posts

Posted 10 July 2017 - 10:23 AM

I thought about this for a bit. I would expect Kane to get 5 years and 7.25mil if he has another solid season. I am not saying he is worth that but what I would expect him to get on the open market. 



#61 inkman

inkman

    Fledgling Member of TSC

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,779 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairport

Posted 10 July 2017 - 01:21 PM

I thought about this for a bit. I would expect Kane to get 5 years and 7.25mil if he has another solid season. I am not saying he is worth that but what I would expect him to get on the open market.


The dollars sound right but I would expect longer term

#62 nfreeman

nfreeman

    All I want is everything you got.

  • SS Mod Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,938 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brooklyn

Posted 10 July 2017 - 02:15 PM

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. 

 

I don't think the CBA allows for this -- so anyone signing him to a fat contract is taking a commensurate risk.



#63 MattPie

MattPie

    J-Bot, U-Bot, and We-Bot

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,263 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Strafing some corners

Posted 12 July 2017 - 09:59 AM

I don't think the CBA allows for this -- so anyone signing him to a fat contract is taking a commensurate risk.

 

Paging Mike Richards....



#64 sweetlou

sweetlou

    Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 33 posts

Posted 12 July 2017 - 12:37 PM

I'm still under the belief that Kane will sign an extension some time during the season as he proves he fits in Housley's system.  I think it needs to be noted that Jbot is not even talking about extension with Reinhart.  I firmly believe that Kane will be the one that signs a 5 year contract while Sam gets a two year bridge deal or may even get traded.

 

Looking around the league the two most comparables are Lucic and Foligno and they are both at 6 AAV.

 

I think a 5 year extension at 30 -32 million is about right.



#65 Thorny

Thorny

    Supreme Mugwump

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,962 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Buffalo, some day

Posted 17 July 2017 - 08:04 PM

https://twitter.com/...032129816674304

More, I dunno, unusual Twitter behaviour from Kane? What does this mean, if anything?

#66 d4rksabre

d4rksabre

    Playground King

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,933 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The big slide

Posted 17 July 2017 - 08:50 PM

https://twitter.com/...032129816674304

More, I dunno, unusual Twitter behaviour from Kane? What does this mean, if anything?


He's just playin

#67 Randall Flagg

Randall Flagg

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,342 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:WNY

Posted 17 July 2017 - 09:30 PM

That stuff is funny.



#68 FuhrFury

FuhrFury

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 681 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 17 July 2017 - 10:33 PM

For what it's worth, I recently did some back-of-the-envelope calculations on our salary cap situation next season (2017-18) to see if we could keep both Reinhart and Kane long-term.

 

The conclusion was that we absolutely could keep both, and I had Kane down at this poll's high number of $7 million per season.

 

I was also able to keep everyone else we like (Eichel, Lehner, Girgensons, Beaulieu, Baptiste, Bailey, Fasching) and still field a full-23 man roster for next year. The bad news, however, is that there wouldn't be any money for any other needed roster upgrades next year unless we trade or buy out Moulson, Pominville, and/or Bogosian.



#69 Thorny

Thorny

    Supreme Mugwump

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,962 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Buffalo, some day

Posted 17 July 2017 - 11:13 PM

He's just playin


Seems likely.

#70 WildCard

WildCard

    Gunner's Mate First Class: Philip A$$hole

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,703 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lost in a Supermarket

Posted 17 July 2017 - 11:25 PM

https://twitter.com/...032129816674304

More, I dunno, unusual Twitter behaviour from Kane? What does this mean, if anything?

Prolly just playing on Jack and Sam's bro-mance 



#71 inkman

inkman

    Fledgling Member of TSC

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,779 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fairport

Posted 18 July 2017 - 10:13 AM

That stuff is funny.


We have different senses of humor then because I can't figure out any of it

#72 kas23

kas23

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 725 posts

Posted 18 July 2017 - 05:12 PM

Obviously looking like were going to go into the season with him. Wonder what we'll get at the trade deadline next year for him?


I almost wonder if Kane has a higher value at next year's deadline than he does being traded now. Assuming he keeps score this coming season, any playoff bound team would bid on him. They'll be no downside and little risk, only the benefits of him point up points in the postseason. Only a few teams are willing to trade for him now because only a few (or maybe none) are willing to deal with a whole year of potential off-ice antics. Those antics are highly unlikely to surface from a 1-2 month long playoff run. Then the team can be done with him.

#73 North Buffalo

North Buffalo

    When hell freezes over, I’ll play hockey there too.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,539 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wherever Hockey is Being Played

Posted 18 July 2017 - 05:20 PM

I almost wonder if Kane has a higher value at next year's deadline than he does being traded now. Assuming he keeps score this coming season, any playoff bound team would bid on him. They'll be no downside and little risk, only the benefits of him point up points in the postseason. Only a few teams are willing to trade for him now because only a few (or maybe none) are willing to deal with a whole year of potential off-ice antics. Those antics are highly unlikely to surface from a 1-2 month long playoff run. Then the team can be done with him.


Nice scrnario unless Sabres make the playoffs, guess they'll have to assess that issue around the trade deadline. If Sabres are nowhere near probably a good idea and if they are keep he will be needed.

#74 Saratoga Sabres Fan

Saratoga Sabres Fan

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 948 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Adirondacks

Posted 18 July 2017 - 05:22 PM

I almost wonder if Kane has a higher value at next year's deadline than he does being traded now. Assuming he keeps score this coming season, any playoff bound team would bid on him. They'll be no downside and little risk, only the benefits of him point up points in the postseason. Only a few teams are willing to trade for him now because only a few (or maybe none) are willing to deal with a whole year of potential off-ice antics. Those antics are highly unlikely to surface from a 1-2 month long playoff run. Then the team can be done with him.


True, we could get the highest return for him at the trade deadline. The only rub is risking him being injured but other than that it could work great.

My blind guess is that JB didn't like what he was being offered so chose to roll the dice and wait.

#75 dudacek

dudacek

    ...browsing the internet

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,928 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Listening to offers — eyes and ears

Posted Yesterday, 01:05 AM

There's also the fact JBot traded two of our top five left wingers, lost a third to expansion and Moulson is the fourth.
And he upgraded the D without using the Kane chip.

I was wrong. It seems pretty clear trading Kane is not Plan A.

#76 nfreeman

nfreeman

    All I want is everything you got.

  • SS Mod Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,938 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brooklyn

Posted Yesterday, 09:47 AM

Paging Mike Richards....

 

Well, I don't think Richards lost his $$ because of a behavior clause in his contract -- I think the Kings relied on a provision in the CBA that allowed them to terminate the contract under extreme circumstances.  So, if Kane were to be convicted for some kind of felony, the Sabres could probably do the same thing, but not for being late to practice, not stretching enough, being standoffish or self-absorbed, etc.

 

I almost wonder if Kane has a higher value at next year's deadline than he does being traded now. Assuming he keeps score this coming season, any playoff bound team would bid on him. They'll be no downside and little risk, only the benefits of him point up points in the postseason. Only a few teams are willing to trade for him now because only a few (or maybe none) are willing to deal with a whole year of potential off-ice antics. Those antics are highly unlikely to surface from a 1-2 month long playoff run. Then the team can be done with him.

True, we could get the highest return for him at the trade deadline. The only rub is risking him being injured but other than that it could work great.

My blind guess is that JB didn't like what he was being offered so chose to roll the dice and wait.

 

The problem with waiting until the deadline is that the return would almost certainly be limited to picks/prospects -- i.e. not a top-4 Dman or other assets that could help the Sabres immediately.

 

There's also the fact JBot traded two of our top five left wingers, lost a third to expansion and Moulson is the fourth.
And he upgraded the D without using the Kane chip.

I was wrong. It seems pretty clear trading Kane is not Plan A.

 

Manfully admitted.

 

We are still left with the pressing question of what JBott's plans are for Kaner.

 

I don't think JBott has decided yet.  I think he wants to see how Kane behaves over the summer, in training camp and perhaps the first month of the season before deciding whether to offer him a fat extension.



#77 Saratoga Sabres Fan

Saratoga Sabres Fan

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 948 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Adirondacks

Posted Yesterday, 10:18 AM

Well, I don't think Richards lost his $$ because of a behavior clause in his contract -- I think the Kings relied on a provision in the CBA that allowed them to terminate the contract under extreme circumstances. So, if Kane were to be convicted for some kind of felony, the Sabres could probably do the same thing, but not for being late to practice, not stretching enough, being standoffish or self-absorbed, etc.


The problem with waiting until the deadline is that the return would almost certainly be limited to picks/prospects -- i.e. not a top-4 Dman or other assets that could help the Sabres immediately.


Manfully admitted.

We are still left with the pressing question of what JBott's plans are for Kaner.

I don't think JBott has decided yet. I think he wants to see how Kane behaves over the summer, in training camp and perhaps the first month of the season before deciding whether to offer him a fat extension.


If we have to lose him at trade deadline I wouldn't mind picking twice in the first round next draft and maybe getting a solid d prospect.

Question is will JB discuss contract negotiation with Kane' s agent during the season? In this case I would certainly think so.

Edited by Saratoga Sabres Fan, Yesterday, 10:19 AM.


#78 TrueBlueGED

TrueBlueGED

    #fancystats

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,973 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted Yesterday, 10:42 AM

There's also the fact JBot traded two of our top five left wingers, lost a third to expansion and Moulson is the fourth.
And he upgraded the D without using the Kane chip.

I was wrong. It seems pretty clear trading Kane is not Plan A.


You weren't necessarily wrong. Maybe he wanted to trade Kane, but the trade value was as poopy as some have suspected, so he changed course.

I think the most likely explanation is that he's just undecided and wants to let things play out, unless his doors got blown off by an offer. See how he works with Housley, the new system, and stays clean off ice.

#79 Doohickie

Doohickie

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,619 posts
  • Location:Fort Worth, Texas

Posted Yesterday, 11:43 AM

Per WGR:  Kane's agent indicates he prefers a deal that will keep him in Buffalo.

 

Link



#80 ShadowLiger

ShadowLiger

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,875 posts

Posted Yesterday, 11:57 AM

Really interesting read thanks for posting. I enjoyed the extra lengths you went through to post it too. Great job!