TheMazz Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 Just a crazy hunch, but I don't really think Patrick Kane is a Lou kind of guy. So yeah. There's no chance this happens. Well to be fair I remember when the Kovy rumors broke and Manta was saying that Kovy wasn't a "Lou kind of guy" so I don't know if that holds any stock anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevs4978 Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 Aren't sign and trades specifically outlawed in the NHL? I'm pretty sure once you sign a contract you can't be traded for a few months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDog2020 Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 Well Kane is in hot water over in Chicago for being a party boy and being in a bad state over on the social media scene. I would think that's why Chicago is discussing a move like this but I don't consider an "outgoing" player such as Pat Kane to be Lou's type of player. Making this all the stranger. As for Semin? We'd need to make a splash if this move doesn't happen and if we lose Parise. Who is to say P.A. Parentau has as good of a season here as he's been having with the Isles? Semin seems to be the best forward consolation prize if this Kane thing doesn't happen and Zach bolts. Haha, once again, I'm beaten to the punch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevs4978 Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 Well to be fair I remember when the Kovy rumors broke and Manta was saying that Kovy wasn't a "Lou kind of guy" so I don't know if that holds any stock anymore. Except Kovy's never had off-ice issues, he just wasn't looked at as a fit style-wise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDog2020 Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 Well to be fair I remember when the Kovy rumors broke and Manta was saying that Kovy wasn't a "Lou kind of guy" so I don't know if that holds any stock anymore. True, but Kovy wasn't on a Bro Tour of college campuses across America acting like a drunk frat boy every chance he got. Kane has some growing up to do. Great player, don't get me wrong. But I don't think he and Lou would get along. I don't think he'd fit here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted June 26, 2012 Author Share Posted June 26, 2012 Aren't sign and trades specifically outlawed in the NHL? I'm pretty sure once you sign a contract you can't be traded for a few months. They happen very rarely with restricted free agents in kind of a round about way. However, it makes absolutely zero sense for a UFA and the supposed destination one week before free agency begins. First, Zach would have to somehow agree to be traded to the Hawks and approve the contract terms. The Hawks would have to have control ocer the contract terms while the Devils have exclusive negotiating rights and work out the trade terms. The Hawks could avoid this entire headache, and get a much better return for Zach by waiting until July 1 without providing a used puck to the Devils and get a kings' ransom for Kane if the plan is to get rid of him. From Zach's point of view he could wait until July 1 and drive up demand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devilsfan118 Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 Aren't sign and trades specifically outlawed in the NHL? I'm pretty sure once you sign a contract you can't be traded for a few months. Wasn't Setoguchi resigned by the SJ Sharks and then almost immediately shipped to the Wild in the Brent Burns deal, just last summer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMazz Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 (edited) They happen very rarely with restricted free agents in kind of a round about way. However, it makes absolutely zero sense for a UFA and the supposed destination one week before free agency begins. First, Zach would have to somehow agree to be traded to the Hawks and approve the contract terms. The Hawks would have to have control ocer the contract terms while the Devils have exclusive negotiating rights and work out the trade terms. The Hawks could avoid this entire headache, and get a much better return for Zach by waiting until July 1 without providing a used puck to the Devils and get a kings' ransom for Kane if the plan is to get rid of him. From Zach's point of view he could wait until July 1 and drive up demand. Well there have been rumors cycling for a while that Kane is a possible trade away however Chicago has denied that a couple times. The why though makes me scratch my head...but it did with Kovy as well. (as in why would Lou pursue Kane) Edited June 26, 2012 by TheMazz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devilsfan118 Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 Kane seems like the PERFECT kinda kid Lou could just put under his wing and straighten out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zubie#8 Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 Wasn't Setoguchi resigned by the SJ Sharks and then almost immediately shipped to the Wild in the Brent Burns deal, just last summer? That is correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevs4978 Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 Wasn't Setoguchi resigned by the SJ Sharks and then almost immediately shipped to the Wild in the Brent Burns deal, just last summer? Yeah but he was RFA, not UFA and he signed an extension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted June 26, 2012 Author Share Posted June 26, 2012 Well there have been rumors cycling for a while that Kane is a possible trade away however Chicago has denied that a couple times. The why though makes me scratch my head...but it did with Kovy as well. (as in why would Lou pursue Kane) Even if the Devils are interested in Kane, and even if the Hawks wanted to trade him, a sign and trade wth Parise makes no sense for the Hawks or Parise. Question, if you are the Hawks, would you rather have just Zach, or Zach along with Merrill, Josefson and a first? And if you're Zach, would you agree to a deal with the Hawks now, or wait until July 1 where you can join the Hawks (assuming there's some burning desire on his part to play there) for more money and alongside Patrick Kane, or other great assets the Hawks could get in return for Kane. Ergo, the report of the sign and trade is garbage, or the result of a game of telephone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devilsfan118 Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 Yeah but he was RFA, not UFA and he signed an extension. Ah okay, wasn't aware he was an RFA at the time. Totally different scenario then, I suppose Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghdi Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 Even if the Devils are interested in Kane, and even if the Hawks wanted to trade him, a sign and trade wth Parise makes no sense for the Hawks or Parise. Question, if you are the Hawks, would you rather have just Zach, or Zach along with Merrill, Josefson and a first? And if you're Zach, would you agree to a deal with the Hawks now, or wait until July 1 where you can join the Hawks (assuming there's some burning desire on his part to play there) for more money and alongside Patrick Kane, or other great assets the Hawks could get in return for Kane. Ergo, the report of the sign and trade is garbage, or the result of a game of telephone. I generally agree that this rumor is likely garbage and the result of two hockey guys talking on a radio show, but I can think of a possible counter to this. The Hawks will likely not be able to pay Parise 7-8 with Kane on the roster and its highly likely that someone will offer him this. They'd almost have to unload Kane (or someone at least) as they're sitting at 8 million in space right now and theres been rumors about Kane for the last year. If they want Zach, is it not out of the question that they do this deal just to ensure that he doesn't go to market? Yes, the Hawks could wait until the 1st to "drive up the price", but they also may not want to compete with the likes of the Wild, Detroit, the Rags, and all the other teams that are likely to inquire about Zach's interest to play there, espc the teams like the Wild and Detroit who have the money to pay Zach extremely well. They kill two birds with one stone if this is true. They offload Kane who has been rumored to be on the move at various levels, and they sign Zach and dont bleed all their cap room adding Zach + more. The part that gets me in this rumor is why are we trading Zach if he wants to stay? He made 6 million last year and replacing him with Kane is 6.3, so unless Lou has a cap and cant offer the money Zach can get on the market or Zach was bullsh!tting and has decided he doesnt want to stay, I don't see why we do this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted June 26, 2012 Author Share Posted June 26, 2012 I generally agree that this rumor is likely garbage and the result of two hockey guys talking on a radio show, but I can think of a possible counter to this. The Hawks will likely not be able to pay Parise 7-8 with Kane on the roster and its highly likely that someone will offer him this. They'd almost have to unload Kane (or someone at least) as they're sitting at 8 million in space right now and theres been rumors about Kane for the last year. If they want Zach, is it not out of the question that they do this deal just to ensure that he doesn't go to market? Yes, the Hawks could wait until the 1st to "drive up the price", but they also may not want to compete with the likes of the Wild, Detroit, the Rags, and all the other teams that are likely to inquire about Zach's interest to play there, espc the teams like the Wild and Detroit who have the money to pay Zach extremely well. They kill two birds with one stone if this is true. They offload Kane who has been rumored to be on the move at various levels, and they sign Zach and dont bleed all their cap room adding Zach + more. The part that gets me in this rumor is why are we trading Zach if he wants to stay? He made 6 million last year and replacing him with Kane is 6.3, so unless Lou has a cap and cant offer the money Zach can get on the market or Zach was bullsh!tting and has decided he doesnt want to stay, I don't see why we do this. Even if the CBA allows for sign and trades (which I'm not sure if it does) it's a self-defeating proposition for a UFA in this scenario. In order for it to work even in theory Chicago would have to negotiate the terms of a deal with Zach. At some point in the game, Zach knows what Chicago wants and Chicago knows what Zach wants. At that point, Zach simply refuses to sign with the Devils, and come July 1 he signs with Chicago. The only risk to Chicago is that Zach somehow double-crosses them and ends up signing with Pittsburgh. Of course, if that were the plan all along, he wouldn't waste his time with the kabuki theater with Chicago unless he just wanted to be spiteful for some bizarre reason. And if they were so determined to do so, the Hawks could easily trade Kane, Parise or no Parise. The whole idea of a sign and trade makes zero sense even if Zach is hell-bent on signing elsewhere. Basically the underlying premise is that Chicago and Zach want to be "nice guys" and give the Devils something useful for their troubles. Puhlease. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squishyx Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 Even if the CBA allows for sign and trades (which I'm not sure if it does) it's a self-defeating proposition for a UFA in this scenario. In order for it to work even in theory Chicago would have to negotiate the terms of a deal with Zach. At some point in the game, Zach knows what Chicago wants and Chicago knows what Zach wants. At that point, Zach simply refuses to sign with the Devils, and come July 1 he signs with Chicago. The only risk to Chicago is that Zach somehow double-crosses them and ends up signing with Pittsburgh. Of course, if that were the plan all along, he wouldn't waste his time with the kabuki theater with Chicago unless he just wanted to be spiteful for some bizarre reason. And if they were so determined to do so, the Hawks could easily trade Kane, Parise or no Parise. The whole idea of a sign and trade makes zero sense even if Zach is hell-bent on signing elsewhere. Basically the underlying premise is that Chicago and Zach want to be "nice guys" and give the Devils something useful for their troubles. Puhlease. I don't think we are going to see a sign and trade here but it could make sense from the Blackhawks perspective if their was some kind of package involved. Say Zach and a 2nd for a 1st rounder + dead weight cap player. Hawks get their guy before having to worry about anyone else, We secure a 1st round pick when we know we need to drop one of ours over the next pair of years and Zach could get a max contract and play with an established team. Again, I don't think it's likely, I don't think Lou really operates that way but I could see the mechanics and how all parties benefit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zubie#8 Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 (edited) If they replace Parise with Kane, again I know how much of a long-shot it would be, but it would completely put me at ease. The problem with Parise, though it's a small one, is that he seems to be more of an unbelievably talented hardworking role player... I rarely see him generate or score the way someone like Kane can.. and on nights when Kovy is off, Zach seems almost invisible.. I don't know, I mean, obviously Parise is a better player - the face of the franchise to boot, but Parise/Kane swap wouldn't upset me. I agree. Many elite players have off nights and still find ways to score with a wicked shot or a tremendous play. Zach rarely scores when he is not on his game. Edited June 26, 2012 by Zubie#8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayday Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 The only two ways the Pittsburgh Penguins can be successful: Tanking for #1 and #2 picks in drafts & free agency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted June 26, 2012 Author Share Posted June 26, 2012 I don't think we are going to see a sign and trade here but it could make sense from the Blackhawks perspective if their was some kind of package involved. Say Zach and a 2nd for a 1st rounder + dead weight cap player. Hawks get their guy before having to worry about anyone else, We secure a 1st round pick when we know we need to drop one of ours over the next pair of years and Zach could get a max contract and play with an established team. Again, I don't think it's likely, I don't think Lou really operates that way but I could see the mechanics and how all parties benefit. How does Zach benefit from this scenario? And from Chicago's standpoint, they'd necessarily have to be negotiating with Zach before the swap took place. Basically, this sign and trade scenario is a roundabout way of trading for his rights. They would simply cut out the middleman, so to speak, and in the process, have to give up a lot less to do that rather than the sign and trade scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HellOnICE Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 This whole Patrick Kane stuff is nonsense. I'll add some more nonsense. I wish ownership was settled, because it's the only thing standing in between us and #9. But, if ZP and Ryan Suter are friends - why wouldn't/couldn't we get Suter to come here (if the money is right). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squishyx Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 How does Zach benefit from this scenario? And from Chicago's standpoint, they'd necessarily have to be negotiating with Zach before the swap took place. Basically, this sign and trade scenario is a roundabout way of trading for his rights. They would simply cut out the middleman, so to speak, and in the process, have to give up a lot less to do that rather than the sign and trade scenario. He goes to a contender that makes cap room for him from a team that otherwise might not have dropped cap space. For arguments sake lets say the Hawks consider Hossa or Hjalmarsson expendable if and only if they were to get Parise. They could wait until July 1st, try to sign Parise and then try to shop whomever to get under cap, but they might end up paying a lot more as other teams drive up the price. Zach benefits because he is still going to get "roughly the salary he wants" but gets to go to a contending team and not settle for the Wild or Av's. Yes, Zach could do this anyway but maybe the Hawks don't even bother knowing they have more work to do, or maybe the Hawks sign someone else right away and then have no room for Parise. All of this is based on the precondition that Zach doesn't want to play here for "roughly the salary he wants" for whatever reason, which I don't buy into. Also as you note; this would be more or less equivalent to trading his rights for conditions yes, but I don't think you can send players back on conditional trades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Microwavepizza Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 i've come to grips with this whole situation... whatever happens, happens, as fans, all we can do is speculate and wait for something to happen. i know its frustrating (cuz we all want him a Devil for life) but i've just given up on reading into rumors or whatever he said to the media (and all the stupid fans of other teams giving lame reasons why Zach will be a *insert favorite team here* The Devils will be The Devils Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted June 26, 2012 Author Share Posted June 26, 2012 This whole Patrick Kane stuff is nonsense. I'll add some more nonsense. I wish ownership was settled, because it's the only thing standing in between us and #9. But, if ZP and Ryan Suter are friends - why wouldn't/couldn't we get Suter to come here (if the money is right). This whole idea that the two are friends and will go somewhere together is overblown. Sure they might, but Zach and Suter have tons of friends playing for other teams who they would enjoy playing with. From the Devils standpoint, one thing at a time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 This whole Patrick Kane stuff is nonsense. I'll add some more nonsense. I wish ownership was settled, because it's the only thing standing in between us and #9. But, if ZP and Ryan Suter are friends - why wouldn't/couldn't we get Suter to come here (if the money is right). Because the money won't be right. Even if ownership is settled, the Devils have the Kovalchuk contract which is eating up tons of available money. Ownership being settled doesn't move this into being a cap team unless they get Vanderbeek to sell his share and the new owners hate money as much as Vanderbeek apparently does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted June 26, 2012 Author Share Posted June 26, 2012 If we whiff on Parise, is Suter even a remotely viable option? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts