Sharks making mistake by banking on Kane to take a stride forward

The San Jose Sharks took a gargantuan risk when they inked forward Evander Kane to a seven-year contract extension worth a reported $49 million on Thursday.

There's no denying Kane is a quality player. He's a rugged, physical winger with annual 30-goal potential. Power forwards like him are rare, but that doesn't mean paying him $7 million per year through his age-33 season is a good decision.

Kane hasn't performed at a $7-million level yet in his career. In nine NHL seasons, he's averaged 26 goals and 51 points (calculated over an 82-game average). That's OK, but he's also missed an average of 14 games per year.

His lack of durability should've been a red flag for the Sharks. Players that have an intensely physical style and dish out roughly 150 hits per year, as Kane does, often don't age well.

Not every skater who plays with an edge is set for a shorter prime. Alex Ovechkin is one of the game's most physical forwards, but he rarely gets injured. Some can handle the added toll on the body, while others break down.

Even if Kane avoids further injury pitfalls and doesn't decline quicker, paying a winger top dollar isn't always a smart idea. Unless of course it's a franchise player, and that label doesn't apply to Kane.

Here's a look at every winger in the NHL with a cap hit of $7 million-plus for the 2018-19 season:

Every player on the list had much more success than Kane prior to signing long-term contracts, and now some of those signings (Perry, Parise, Ryan) haven't quite panned out as their teams had hoped.

With a $7-million cap hit, Kane is now paid more than fellow wingers Johnny Gaudreau ($6.75M), David Pastrnak ($6.6M), Brad Marchand ($6.125M), and Filip Forsberg ($6M). All those players signed long-term contracts within the past couple years, were coming off a season better than Kane has ever had, and with the exception of Marchand, were all younger when they signed.

Unless a winger is putting up near point-per-game numbers, a team's $7 million-plus is probably better spent on a center or defenseman - positions that have a greater impact on the 200-foot game.

This contract could go south because of Kane's individual performance, and worse, it might handcuff the Sharks moving forward.

With Kane's $7 million on the books, the Sharks only have $7.43 million left in cap space. Buying out Paul Martin would save them another $2.85 million. But that's still not a lot considering Tomas Hertl and Chris Tierney are restricted free agents and will need new contracts. Also, San Jose surely wants to bring back Joe Thornton on a one-year deal.

Assuming Hertl and Tierney require a combined $7 million to sign (that's being very conservative, and it could easily be more), the Sharks would be left with a little over $3 million to bring Thornton back, and not much money for anything else.

Looking beyond this summer, both Logan Couture and Joe Pavelski are scheduled to be UFAs after next season. They each currently carry cap hits of $6 million. Couture will likely require a raise, while Pavelski could come back for around the same price, or even slightly less if he has a poor year.

Had the Sharks not locked up Kane, they could've taken a serious run at John Tavares this offseason. San Jose checks off all the boxes to attract a top free agent:

• No. 1 center vacancy
• Enough cap room to outbid other teams
• A roster ready to win now
• Minimal media attention
• Beautiful California weather

Now the Sharks are going all in this year before their core of Couture (29 years old), Pavelski (33), Brent Burns (33), and Marc-Edouard Vlasic (31) start to decline, and doing that while expecting Kane to play better than he has previously in his career.

Including the playoffs, Kane scored 13 goals in 26 games with the Sharks in 2017-18. It's an extremely small sample size, but that's a 41-goal pace over an 82-game season, providing optimism he can flourish on a playoff-caliber team.

However, the Sharks are banking on Kane being that type of player for full seasons to make this contract justifiable - a risk they certainly didn't need to take.

(Photos courtesy: Getty Images)

Copyright (C) 2018 Score Media Ventures Inc. All rights reserved. Certain content reproduced under license.