Brooks Rangers Will be in on Patrick Kane

[Shesty Cola]

On 3/10/2022 at 10:24 AM, RichieNextel305 said:

I’m not saying it’s impossible. I’m saying, for now, it’s improbable.

 

For starters, I think the Blackhawks respect Patrick Kane for everything he has done for the organization. The front office has already discussed the direction of the franchise with key veteran members like Kane, Toews, Jones and Fleury. Kane has a year left on his deal. He has a NMC. I think the organization respects him enough that come summer time, they will see where he stands. If, a giant if, he asks to be moved, I do believe they’ll grant him his wish and try and get him where he would like to be. But, the man has 3 Cups. He’s 33. He may feel one of 2 ways: either he would like to finish up there, or he’d tell the organization: “You're going in one direction, I’m going in another. As opposed to losing me for free in UFA next summer, try and deal me now so you can recoup assets to help your rebuild.” At some point, this conversation will no doubt take place. Which way Kane leans is anyone’s guess.

 

If it goes the way of Option B, then yes, I’m sure many teams would call to investigate the cost. But, similar to MSL, he holds all the cards. He could, in theory, force his way here or anywhere he so chooses. But again, that’s so far down the line. And even then, a package would need to be formulated, retention from not 1, but 2 organizations would be needed. I mean, that is an awful lot just thrown into a few sentences. And it’s a delicate situation because of what he means to that elite Original Six franchise.

 

Like Pete said, this wasn’t reported anywhere; it was more of a thought bubble. Have I seen and heard from the reputable guys on TSN that teams have called to check the temperature on what the ‘Hawks may do with Kane? Sure. But again, so, so much has to happen between now and then. Lots of thought and lots of questions need to be answered. At the very best, I’d say this is more a conversation for the summer.

 

Hes 33 and no spring chicken. This is around the age when production can start to drastically drop and/or players start physically breaking down. He may be asking to be moved now behind the scenes if in fact he wants another cup. Blackhawks look to be in fire sale mode.

[Shesty Cola]

On the airwaves: Pagnotta thinks Patrick Kane will be between the Avs and Rangers. Rangers have their 1st round pick which is big.

 

 Chicago needs to retain money on the contract for next season.

 

Tough for Colorado to compete with a package for Kane. Rangers have cap space remainder of this year. Colorado has it with Landeskog on IR right now but could return before season’s end, which be a problem with the cap. He says the NHL is watching COL closely and other teams with the cap stuff.

[RangersIn7]

2 minutes ago, Shesty Cola said:

On the airwaves: Pagnotta thinks Patrick Kane will be between the Avs and Rangers. Rangers have their 1st round pick which is big.

 

 Chicago needs to retain money on the contract for next season.

 

Tough for Colorado to compete with a package for Kane. Rangers have cap space remainder of this year. Colorado has it with Landeskog on IR right now but could return before season’s end, which be a problem with the cap. He says the NHL is watching COL closely and other teams with the cap stuff.

 

10 minutes ago, Shesty Cola said:

 

Hes 33 and no spring chicken. This is around the age when production can start to drastically drop and/or players start physically breaking down. He may be asking to be moved now behind the scenes if in fact he wants another cup. Blackhawks look to be in fire sale mode.

He’s not slowed down at all. He’s on a 90+ point pace this season on a bottom dwelling team that isn’t loaded with talent and is immersed in a rebuild. 
Im not sure it’s a deal that happens though. Chicago will probably want too much for him plus salary retention.

 

I honestly think a top prospect, a #1 pick, a roster player, plus another prospect of some value should do it. If they want more than that, I think it’s too much.

 

Chicago has to know and accept that in order to deal him, they’re retaining salary. Period. He is carrying a cap hit north of $10 million. You don’t just trade that contract, and with a hit that size, it’s ridiculous to be looking for some super-sized bounty just because you’re keeping salary.

 

Lundkvist

Kravtsov

2022 1st

Mid-range prospect. 
 

For

 

Kane at 50% retention

 

You can put Chytil in the deal if you have to. But I still think they should keep him around if they can. 
 

They also have an additional 2nd round pick as well.

 

Or maybe they give them a 1st in 2023 as it projects as the better draft class right now

[RJWantsTheCup]

Even at 50%  retention don't see how the Rangers can afford Kane past this season.

[Shesty Cola]

5 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

 

He’s not slowed down at all. He’s on a 90+ point pace this season on a bottom dwelling team that isn’t loaded with talent and is immersed in a rebuild. 
Im not sure it’s a deal that happens though. Chicago will probably want too much for him plus salary retention.

 

I honestly think a top prospect, a #1 pick, a roster player, plus another prospect of some value should do it. If they want more than that, I think it’s too much.

 

Chicago has to know and accept that in order to deal him, they’re retaining salary. Period. He is carrying a cap hit north of $10 million. You don’t just trade that contract, and with a hit that size, it’s ridiculous to be looking for some super-sized bounty just because you’re keeping salary.

 

Lundkvist

Kravtsov

2022 1st

Mid-range prospect. 
 

For

 

Kane at 50% retention

 

You can put Chytil in the deal if you have to. But I still think they should keep him around if they can. 
 

They also have an additional 2nd round pick as well.

 

Or maybe they give them a 1st in 2023 as it projects as the better draft class right now

 

I know this is not the NBA but these big players who have the NMCs if they push for a particular team the teams sometimes find a way to make it happen. If he is truly asking to be moved to us behind the scenes I could see Chicago trying to make it happen. Yes the retention piece will be key... lets see what they pull off.

[RichieNextel305]

I have an honest hypothetical question because I don’t know the answer to it.

 

Hypothetically, say the Rangers and Chicago came to an agreement by Monday on a Kane deal in which the Blackhawks retained 50% of his salary, which the Rangers can obviously handle for this year. In the summer, can they theoretically offer prospects/picks/players, whatever mix, to a team like Arizona to retain 50% of Kane’s cap hit for next season? Is that allowed? I’m not even sure.

[RangersIn7]

14 minutes ago, Shesty Cola said:

 

I know this is not the NBA but these big players who have the NMCs if they push for a particular team the teams sometimes find a way to make it happen. If he is truly asking to be moved to us behind the scenes I could see Chicago trying to make it happen. Yes the retention piece will be key... lets see what they pull off.

Any player with a full NMC has the complete ability to do that, and rest assured, if he gets moved, he’s picking his destination. Maybe not 1 team per se, but a very short list of 2-3 teams were he’d accept a trade. 

I don’t think he’s asking to be moved. He loves Chicago and that organization has been great to him. Chances are that if that happened it would’ve come out as it always does. Or he’d have moved already. 
 

Though I do think if they approached him and said, “Patrick, the Rangers called, they’re interested in having you. We believe we can get a deal we like from them. Are you willing to go there?”, I believe he’d say yes. And I think there’s a few other places he would go.

 

But I think it’s a deal that can be made.

 

 

[Shesty Cola]

4 minutes ago, RichieNextel305 said:

I have an honest hypothetical question because I don’t know the answer to it.

 

Hypothetically, say the Rangers and Chicago came to an agreement by Monday on a Kane deal in which the Blackhawks retained 50% of his salary, which the Rangers can obviously handle for this year. In the summer, can they theoretically offer prospects/picks/players, whatever mix, to a team like Arizona to retain 50% of Kane’s cap hit for next season? Is that allowed? I’m not even sure.

 

Not sure but Lindgren at 2.5 and Goodrow at 3.5 are both moveable pieces (6M savings vs cap). Also much lesser chance but maybe with Troubas strong play this year he would be moveable too.

Edited March 19, 2022 by Shesty Cola

[Shesty Cola]

Drury was an intangibles guy. Kane is an intangibles guy. He is clutch, he is a winner. He raises play around him. This team would immediately be a 'win now' team this year and next if we got him.

[ThirtyONE]

25 minutes ago, RichieNextel305 said:

I have an honest hypothetical question because I don’t know the answer to it.

 

Hypothetically, say the Rangers and Chicago came to an agreement by Monday on a Kane deal in which the Blackhawks retained 50% of his salary, which the Rangers can obviously handle for this year. In the summer, can they theoretically offer prospects/picks/players, whatever mix, to a team like Arizona to retain 50% of Kane’s cap hit for next season? Is that allowed? I’m not even sure.

 

I can't imagine a guy can play for one team while someone else pays his entire salary. This feels like clear and obvious cap circumvention. 

 

As of right now, I'm not sure what to make of the cap situation next year. I thought Strome would be locked up by now, but I'm starting to wonder if they might be looking at a 3C that could fill that role if Strome walks. 

[The Dude]

On 3/10/2022 at 11:54 AM, Phil said:

 

Double retention. It's the only way.

 

[The Dude]

1 hour ago, RangersIn7 said:

 

He’s not slowed down at all. He’s on a 90+ point pace this season on a bottom dwelling team that isn’t loaded with talent and is immersed in a rebuild. 
Im not sure it’s a deal that happens though. Chicago will probably want too much for him plus salary retention.

 

I honestly think a top prospect, a #1 pick, a roster player, plus another prospect of some value should do it. If they want more than that, I think it’s too much.

 

Chicago has to know and accept that in order to deal him, they’re retaining salary. Period. He is carrying a cap hit north of $10 million. You don’t just trade that contract, and with a hit that size, it’s ridiculous to be looking for some super-sized bounty just because you’re keeping salary.

 

Lundkvist

Kravtsov

2022 1st

Mid-range prospect. 
 

For

 

Kane at 50% retention

 

You can put Chytil in the deal if you have to. But I still think they should keep him around if they can. 
 

They also have an additional 2nd round pick as well.

 

Or maybe they give them a 1st in 2023 as it projects as the better draft class right now

You have to give Chytil or one of the other player/prospects to the 3rd team involved for more salary retention. Maybe getting something miniscule back, but they need more cap space for next season.  

 

So it would be something like:

Kane to Arizona with 50% retention. 

Future considerations from Arizona to Chicago 

Kravstov, Lundkvist, 1st to Chicago 

Chytil+ to Arizona 

Kane to the Rangers at 50% retention of what Chicago took off his salary to trade him to Arizona..

 

 

I think I'd do that. It definitely puts this team right up in there. 3rd line center is still a need though. Now and next year. Maybe even a Strome replacement will be needed. 

 

If they are going to give up all that, Keiriks Gourde idea is probably the smarter move. We are hearing nothing about Gourde being available though.  If he was talked about I'd be there with you, because it fills a current need and is a potential safety net moving forward. Just haven't seen anything about his availability. 

Edited March 19, 2022 by The Dude

[Scott]

Imo which is nothing more than that any scenario of double retention is pure fantasy, prove me wrong by making it happen.

 

That's before you even begin to factor in the cost of the overpayment to make that fantasy come true.

[RangersIn7]

11 minutes ago, The Dude said:

You have to give Chytil or one of the other player/prospects to the 3rd team involved for more salary retention. Maybe getting something miniscule back, but they need more cap space for next season.  

 

I think I'd do that. It definitely puts this team right up in there. 3rd line center is still a need though. Now and next year. Maybe even a Strome replacement will be needed. 

 

If they are going to give up all that, Keiriks Gourde idea is probably the smarter move. We are hearing nothing about Gourde being available though.  If he was talked about I'd be there with you, because it fills a current need and is a potential safety net moving forward. Just haven't seen anything about his availability. 

I would do that too if it makes the money work.

 

But they don’t have to worry about his next season money until the summer

 

Plenty of time to figure that out. 

[The Dude]

21 minutes ago, jsrangers said:

Imo which is nothing more than that any scenario of double retention is pure fantasy, prove me wrong by making it happen.

 

That's before you even begin to factor in the cost of the overpayment to make that fantasy come true.

I'm totally with you. But everyone has been talking about it for months. 

 

My question is. If the Rangers got Kane at full retention only from Chicago (50% right?) and went into next season signing Strome and whoever...... Go over the cap.. What happens if they don't get under it? Is there just some sort of fine? The league isn't going to stop them from playing. Would they have shorten the lineup per game? 

 

The league can't really stop a trade or signing due to it putting a team over. If a team doesn't circumvent the rules and do the LTIR nonsense, what actually happens? 

Edited March 19, 2022 by The Dude

[jsm7302]

If this team gets Pat Kane; this core will have a legit opportunity to hoist the cup. 

 

Vatrano-Chytil-Kakko

Goodrow-Rooney-Reaves

^Solid bottom 6! (But please upgrade on Chytil too)

[RangersIn7]

1 hour ago, The Dude said:

I'm totally with you. But everyone has been talking about it for months. 

 

My question is. If the Rangers got Kane at full retention only from Chicago (50% right?) and went into next season signing Strome and whoever...... Go over the cap.. What happens if they don't get under it? Is there just some sort of fine? The league isn't going to stop them from playing. Would they have shorten the lineup per game? 

 

The league can't really stop a trade or signing due to it putting a team over. If a team doesn't circumvent the rules and do the LTIR nonsense, what actually happens? 

They will get under it though. That’s a certainty. They have to. Or you face hefty fines, loss of draft picks, voided contracts, forfeiture of games or points if affected by cap overage, and I believe they can force you to dress fewer players or have fewer on your roster to penalize you as well.

 

Translation: It’s really fucking bad.

 

If they found themselves in a spot over the summer, they’d get under it. They might have to part with a player they don’t want to. But they’d do it. 
 

[Shesty Cola]

1 hour ago, jsm7302 said:

If this team gets Pat Kane; this core will have a legit opportunity to hoist the cup. 

 

Vatrano-Chytil-Kakko

Goodrow-Rooney-Reaves

^Solid bottom 6! (But please upgrade on Chytil too)

And of course the top 6 would be ridiculous. And then they have strong offensive production from Trouba and Fox on the backend and PP.

[RangersIn7]

2 hours ago, jsm7302 said:

If this team gets Pat Kane; this core will have a legit opportunity to hoist the cup. 

 

Vatrano-Chytil-Kakko

Goodrow-Rooney-Reaves

^Solid bottom 6! (But please upgrade on Chytil too)

I know so many are down on Chytil and I get why.

i personally don’t want to see him go, but if they were to bring in Kane, assume Chytil is gone. 
 

And if he doesn’t go then, he goes in the summer.

Theyre likely to need his $2.3M in cap space 

[RangersIn7]

Personally, if they’re really swinging big, while I’d love Kane, I’d prefer Schiefele and I think that’s a deal that can be made too

[lefty9]

Lafreneire would have to be part of this trade

[Phil]

1 hour ago, lefty9 said:

Lafreneire would have to be part of this trade

 

Not if Kakko is.

[RangersIn7]

5 hours ago, lefty9 said:

Lafreneire would have to be part of this trade

 

3 hours ago, Phil said:

 

Not if Kakko is.

Yeah… but they aren’t trading either of them. Not for 2 seasons of a player.

Nor would they have to 

Edited March 20, 2022 by RangersIn7

[The Dude]

10 hours ago, RangersIn7 said:

I would do that too if it makes the money work.

 

But they don’t have to worry about his next season money until the summer

 

Plenty of time to figure that out. 

To figure that out they have to move a player or 2. I'd rather get another team in on this now, so the Rangers can head into the summer with no ramifications. Trading an asset or 2 to eat salary beyond their cap hit, is different than trading someone you don't want to or need to in order to comply by seasons start. 

 

I'd rather deal Chytil a pick and a prospect to a team like Arizona  ONTOP of the cost to get him out of Chicago, than the cost to get him out of Chicago and then before next season starts, deal a guy like Lindgren at a loss (because the league knows you have to dump someone good) before next season starts to comply with the cap. 

 

If it's at all doable. It must be done now. 

[RangersIn7]

8 minutes ago, The Dude said:

To figure that out they have to move a player or 2. I'd rather get another team in on this now, so the Rangers can head into the summer with no ramifications. Trading an asset or 2 to eat salary beyond their cap hit, is different than trading someone you don't want to or need to in order to comply by seasons start. 

 

I'd rather deal Chytil a pick and a prospect to a team like Arizona  ONTOP of the cost to get him out of Chicago, than the cost to get him out of Chicago and then before next season starts, deal a guy like Lindgren at a loss (because the league knows you have to dump someone good) before next season starts to comply with the cap. 

 

If it's at all doable. It must be done now. 

Yeah. I feel you on that and see your logic, but it’s easier to make deals in the summer. You get around the draft and into free agency and there’s a lot more times looking to shake things up, more cap space, more teams involved, etc.

 

Its part of the reason why teams don’t move guys with term as much at the deadline. If he’s not a straight rental, or you don’t have to move him, if you don’t like your available options to deal a guy at the deadline, you wait till summer and more teams can be involved.