With Kane retained is that Cap neutral for Vegas? Assuming so. I don't know if that's enough for Kane, considering CHI is retaining 3 mil... if it were straight up might be more fair but still don't think it's enough IMO

Vegas does not have the cap space even after retaining salary. Especially after signing Pietrangelo.

They should have the cap there giving away 8,750,000 million but adding 7,500,000 in Kane

I think moving out Tuch and Martinez and having 3 mil retained on Kane it makes it a cap neutral trade doesn't it? Not sure what Matinez cap hit is.. somewhere around 4 I believe. So Vegas would technically be gaining cap space in this trade I believe.

4 million

Hard NO from the rangers..

I think its a fair deal, there improving in there centers and LD, Hawks are taking back a dump, and the ranger's team will be a very serious contender and we could retain alittle .

Fair on paper or in theory sure... Taking on 14.5M and losing less than 10M in salary doesn’t come close to working for us... Georgiev won’t be traded till Shesty has his roots firmly planted in #1 and can play 65+ games.

Georgiev can be taken out, I only added him for money reasons

lol wut. Toews is a net negative with his contract. Sure he is an ok player at this point in his career, probably still considered good and above replacement, but he has the 8th highest cap hit in the league for 3 more years of flat cap seasons. The Rangers would be idiots to trade a 1 st or K'Andre for him straight up, let alone both + additional assets. You have a completely broken valuation of the player in the current economic reality that is the NHL today.

Kane isn't going anywhere but if he did and did want to go to Vegas. The deal would have to be cap neutral (which it is), but I think we can get more for Kane. The hawks would be stupid to trade Kane without getting Glass back first of all. I would propose Kane+Subban for MAF+Martinez+Glass+Tuch+1st