Around the NHL 2019-20

[Legionnaire11]

I think there are too many penalties to look for at too fast of a pace, so the Refs are given a certain priority set of them to watch for each season, and it seems to change based on public outcry at times. If a lot of writers started talking about something like holding the stick, you'd probably see it called more next season, but at the expense of something else. Plus the refs aren't even told "go enforce the rulebook", they are told to manage the game, keep games close and entertaining, make sure teams have scoring opportunities (PP), and it's been admitted to recently.

Being an NHL ref has to be one of the more difficult and thankless jobs in the league. I do complain about them at times, probably too often, but they really do an incredible job given the circumstances.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

I don't think I can give the refs any credit... it's true that their actual job mandate is to manage games and not to truly call the rulebook, but... doesn't that make them look bad? I thought they didn't like it if players make them look bad so they call embellishment and hold grudges against players to salve their wounded pride? If the league front office is forcing them to not call the rulebook, that makes them look bad too, shouldn't they be mad at their bosses? And then in retribution, maybe actually call the rulebook instead to salve their wounded pride?

Anyway, the role is inherently conflicted the way the NHL runs things. So they're pretty much doomed to criticism. But I don't think the right answer is to praise them instead for doing a "tough job". No, the answer is to just keep slagging them, and then maybe the NHL will wake up one day and actually take a different approach.

Of course we all know the NHL won't change their approach, even then. It has been the same for decades. But I still don't believe in letting them off the hook for it. Not the league for its mandate, and not the individual tools that implement it. I want them to understand that I have no choice but to tolerate it, but that I think it's one of the things that's wrong with the game. No praise here.

 

[101st_fan]

 

[Deebs]

Very premature but Weber may have to retire or LTIR

@RealKyper

Sources say Shea Weber injury has his season likely over and his future in question. Told injury is related to foot that was surgically repaired in 2018. While waiting for swelling to alleviate and further confirmation, surgery seemed unavoidable going into this week. @Nhl #weber

 

[Predsanddead24]

Hope he can keep playing, but this would probably be positive for us since he'd presumably go on LTIR.

 

[Legionnaire11]

I believe if Weber retires this offseason, the Preds get hit with 6 seasons of recapture at just under $4.1M per season.

I feel like in that case, the league would probably go ahead and enforce it as it's not a crippling punishment and they can save face by not going soft and bailing out the Predators.

Either that, or Poile was right all along and the circumstances under which the contract was signed actually do exclude Weber's situation from the recapture clause.

In actuality, is he's being forced out due to injury, he will go on LTIR for the remainder of the deal and it's a non-issues anyway.

 

[Predsanddead24]

Well seems like Kyperios was wrong. Or Montreal is way underselling the severity of it.

 

[BigFatCat999]

I bet Montreal overselled to try and get at one of Nashville's picks.

 

[Predsanddead24]

I'm confused on where the angle of us needing to acquire Weber to help us with the recapture penalty is even coming from. If he's eligible for LTIR then it doesn't matter whether he's on our roster or not. It's then just a matter of who is paying him in the LTIR money so why would we give up a pick for the honor of doing that. If he's not unless we acquire him to talk him out of retiring early or try for some not injured LTIR thing there isn't any benefit to us. That scenario seems pretty unlikely too.

 

[Legionnaire11]

I'm confused on where the angle of us needing to acquire Weber to help us with the recapture penalty is even coming from. If he's eligible for LTIR then it doesn't matter whether he's on our roster or not. It's then just a matter of who is paying him in the LTIR money so why would we give up a pick for the honor of doing that. If he's not unless we acquire him to talk him out of retiring early or try for some not injured LTIR thing there isn't any benefit to us. That scenario seems pretty unlikely too.

Some Montreal fans think Weber is pissed at Poile and will retire instead of LTIR. So somehow they turn that into Nashville needs to own his rights so that he doesn't retire. They also think that they will get a 1st round pick at minimum from the Preds too.

None of it makes sense beyond wishful thinking.

 

[Bringer of Jollity]

I'm confused on where the angle of us needing to acquire Weber to help us with the recapture penalty is even coming from. If he's eligible for LTIR then it doesn't matter whether he's on our roster or not. It's then just a matter of who is paying him in the LTIR money so why would we give up a pick for the honor of doing that. If he's not unless we acquire him to talk him out of retiring early or try for some not injured LTIR thing there isn't any benefit to us. That scenario seems pretty unlikely too.

Roberto Luongo retired when he probably would have had sufficient injury history to go on LTIR instead. The scenarios most fans are proposing are ludicrous though. A team is not going to force a player to retire when LTIR is appropriate and the player is unlikely to give up a few million more dollars to retire instead of LTIR. Weber is also not going to change his eventual decision just because the Preds re-acquire him. The only case where the Preds can actively avoid some of the recapture is by acquiring him now (or soon) and then benefiting from the negative cap advantage of his contract (obviously if he goes on LTIR anywhere it's all moot).

 

[PredsV82]

Some Montreal fans think Weber is pissed at Poile and will retire instead of LTIR. So somehow they turn that into Nashville needs to own his rights so that he doesn't retire. They also think that they will get a 1st round pick at minimum from the Preds too.

None of it makes sense beyond wishful thinking.

Shea is still owed 18 million cash. I cant imagine anyone being pissed enough to willingly forego 18 million dollars, even if he has already made a substantial fortune

 

[Bringer of Jollity]

Shea is still owed 18 million cash. I cant imagine anyone being pissed enough to willingly forego 18 million dollars, even if he has already made a substantial fortune

People speculate he'd do it for the last 3 years when he's "only" making $1 million per. Tough for me to fathom even hundred-millionaires foregoing that for doing nothing, but I'm just a pleb.

 

[LCPreds]

The problem with this Montreal fan theory is that if this is really about Poile then Shea better retire sooner rather than later.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

I have no doubt that Weber would have no qualms about retiring with 3 years and $3M left on the table. The dude signed a $110M deal. He better be getting more than 3% ROI by now so that $3M is chicken feed to him, less than the interest he should be making. Luongo retired and let the money go too. That part of it wouldn't surprise me. He doesn't strike me as a guy who wants or needs to have his name kicking around the league in cap-dump LTIR trades for 3 years after he's gone. He doesn't owe anybody any favors.

So yeah, I think by the terms of the existing recapture deal, it's easy to imagine the Predators would technically be on the hook for something. $8.19M per if that 3-years early retirement was the case.

But I still firmly believe the extenuating circumstances surrounding his contract are exceptional enough that the league WILL make an exception. The Preds did not design this contract, did not benefit from any cap advantage from it; it is wholly different from all the other cases. There is no precedent to compare it to. Poile probably already has assurances from the league that he won't be on the hook for anything significant here. They'll be granted an exception. Poile isn't running things by the seat of his pants. He will have already sorted this all out. If we've been thinking about it for years and spilling electrons about it just for our own personal entertainment, then you can be sure that as the executive in charge of a hundreds-of-millions-of-dollars business he has done a lot more than just think about it.

 

[Byrddog]

I have no doubt that Weber would have no qualms about retiring with 3 years and $3M left on the table. The dude signed a $110M deal. He better be getting more than 3% ROI by now so that $3M is chicken feed to him, less than the interest he should be making. Luongo retired and let the money go too. That part of it wouldn't surprise me. He doesn't strike me as a guy who wants or needs to have his name kicking around the league in cap-dump LTIR trades for 3 years after he's gone. He doesn't owe anybody any favors.

So yeah, I think by the terms of the existing recapture deal, it's easy to imagine the Predators would technically be on the hook for something. $8.19M per if that 3-years early retirement was the case.

But I still firmly believe the extenuating circumstances surrounding his contract are exceptional enough that the league WILL make an exception. The Preds did not design this contract, did not benefit from any cap advantage from it; it is wholly different from all the other cases. There is no precedent to compare it to. Poile probably already has assurances from the league that he won't be on the hook for anything significant here. They'll be granted an exception. Poile isn't running things by the seat of his pants. He will have already sorted this all out. If we've been thinking about it for years and spilling electrons about it just for our own personal entertainment, then you can be sure that as the executive in charge of a hundreds-of-millions-of-dollars business he has done a lot more than just think about it.

Why do you think the league would make an exception when the rule was put into the CBA mainly because of Weber's contract? Also when other teams are already paying recapture on other players.

 

[101st_fan]

I have no doubt that Weber would have no qualms about retiring with 3 years and $3M left on the table. The dude signed a $110M deal. He better be getting more than 3% ROI by now so that $3M is chicken feed to him, less than the interest he should be making. Luongo retired and let the money go too. That part of it wouldn't surprise me. He doesn't strike me as a guy who wants or needs to have his name kicking around the league in cap-dump LTIR trades for 3 years after he's gone. He doesn't owe anybody any favors.

So yeah, I think by the terms of the existing recapture deal, it's easy to imagine the Predators would technically be on the hook for something. $8.19M per if that 3-years early retirement was the case.

But I still firmly believe the extenuating circumstances surrounding his contract are exceptional enough that the league WILL make an exception. The Preds did not design this contract, did not benefit from any cap advantage from it; it is wholly different from all the other cases. There is no precedent to compare it to. Poile probably already has assurances from the league that he won't be on the hook for anything significant here. They'll be granted an exception. Poile isn't running things by the seat of his pants. He will have already sorted this all out. If we've been thinking about it for years and spilling electrons about it just for our own personal entertainment, then you can be sure that as the executive in charge of a hundreds-of-millions-of-dollars business he has done a lot more than just think about it.

The problem is that the Preds chose to match the heavily front loaded contract which created a CBA defined cap advantage. Precedent exists for contracts signed prior to the current CBA which doesn't bode well for the Preds ... see Luongo. The CBA addresses contracts signed prior to this current deal and was agreed upon by both the NHLPA and owners and the subchapter that addresses long term contracts signed prior to the effective date of this current CBA is the one that spells out the recapture process.

Best case is Weber plays out his deal. Second best is that he is on LTIR through contract expiry. Worst case is he retires and triggers the recapture which ... with the worst subset of that being an ugly court fight.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Why do you think the league would make an exception when the rule was put into the CBA mainly because of Weber's contract? Also when other teams are already paying recapture on other players.

There are many reasons I've already documented. What I have learned is that some people will agree that those reasons are sufficient grounds to make an exception, others will choose not to. None of us peasants will know for sure until the time comes.

But I am sure that no other team is paying recapture on a contract which they did not design themselves, and for which they received no significant actual salary cap advantage. The Weber situation is truly exceptional. Punishing the Predators for this exceptional case would be truly irrational. Cap recapture was designed as a penalty against teams circumventing the NHL salary cap. Since the Predators did not ultimately do this, they should have a very strong case in arguing against it being levied against them.

Not that the NHL hasn't acted in an arbitrary and irrational manner ever before, though. About the worst case for us if we did have an $8.19M cap penalty is that we drop the last 3 years of one of Ellis or Duchene, or 2 years of Johansen and don't replace them. By then, that might actually be a blessing to us! The Predators aren't a team that spends to the salary cap anyway, so it may well be that the team is not even interested in arguing against such a penalty, and would rather just use it as an excuse to save money when the time comes. If the amount is $8M or less anyway. But can anybody honestly say that the league would not make an exception to the worst case scenario of a $24M cap penalty? Their flawed recapture formula allows for that scenario. But in practice, it is clearly not reasonable for a team to operate with a roster that could otherwise be below the league's salary cap floor. Exceptions are always possible. Addendums and amendments are possible. The whole recapture program itself is an example of this. When they come up against a case that clearly makes no sense, they can and will make an exception.

 

[Viqsi]

Why do you think the league would make an exception when the rule was put into the CBA mainly because of Weber's contract?

Probably because that's not true in the slightest. The rule was put in primarily because of Ilya Kovalchuk - that's the contract that actually got smacked down by the League.

 

[Legionnaire11]

Probably because that's not true in the slightest. The rule was put in primarily because of Ilya Kovalchuk - that's the contract that actually got smacked down by the League.

Yup, and Weber's deal was signed well after everyone knew that a new rule was coming, that's why he went the route he did because he knew he wouldn't be able to get that deal after the new CBA was in place. So the rule wasn't because of Weber's contract, Weber's contract was because of the imminent rule.

Not to mention that Poile has gone on radio to say that Bettman assured him that the Preds are safe from recapture in this case. But that's obviously up to the individual to believe or not.

 

[Byrddog]

Yup, and Weber's deal was signed well after everyone knew that a new rule was coming, that's why he went the route he did because he knew he wouldn't be able to get that deal after the new CBA was in place. So the rule wasn't because of Weber's contract, Weber's contract was because of the imminent rule.

Not to mention that Poile has gone on radio to say that Bettman assured him that the Preds are safe from recapture in this case. But that's obviously up to the individual to believe or not.

I agree with this especially the up to the individual but in this case it is going to be the BOG and not Bettman making this decision. With teams already paying recapture I do not know what the vote of the BOG would be. On one hand it is not reasonable to hit Nashville with a huge number like 12 or 24 mil for the last two years on the other hand if Weber should retire leaving the 4 to 8 mil hit in the 21 thru 24 contract years I doubt they would allow relief.

When I said the rule was put in place because of Weber as I recall league was working on this because of Kovi, Pronger, Louongo and others when Weber was offersheeted before the rule was reinstated. Correct my memory if necessary but I think that's why Holmgren structured the deal like that before the rule changed. In any case I was not a supporter of matching the offer and felt doom when Poile announced he would match any offer before the Philly offer. Shea has still produced well the since going to the Habs but has spent far too much time on the IR. Right now it is reported to be a high ankle sprain hes out for, not an injury that would qualify him for LTIR so I fully expect him to return next year maybe not in Montreal but still in the league.

I doubt Weber would consider returning to Nashville but that would be the best option for us. If Poile should make a trade for Webers return I Bet he would retire before reporting or force Poile to trade him again if he still wanted to play. I know it is all opinion but I think the Preds will pay recapture at some point for the fact that Detroit. Vancouver, Florida, Kings, Devils. Now to support the hope that the league would provide relief would be the Kovalchuk contract where they only hit Jersey with 250k which the league took HEAT for. So in the last couple years if Weber retires its hard for me to imagine they would relent the entire recapture. Maybe dropping it to 8 mil until the end??????????? I think that would be more fair than the 12 or 24 for sure but there will still be pushback by some teams to this. I have always though Weber would retire at 35 or 36 where most all defensemen retire.

 

[jumb0]

He's not going to make it that far, so it's really moot, but a $24m recapture penalty would cripple the franchise.

 

[kenfury]

Well seems like Kyperios was wrong. Or Montreal is way underselling the severity of it.

I missed what Kypper said. What's a quick recap?

 

[thecloser]

Didn't Shea play last night against the Bruins?

 

[Bringer of Jollity]

Yup, and Weber's deal was signed well after everyone knew that a new rule was coming, that's why he went the route he did because he knew he wouldn't be able to get that deal after the new CBA was in place. So the rule wasn't because of Weber's contract, Weber's contract was because of the imminent rule.

Not to mention that Poile has gone on radio to say that Bettman assured him that the Preds are safe from recapture in this case. But that's obviously up to the individual to believe or not.

I feel like there was a belief the league would not permit those front-loaded contracts for much longer but I don't know there was an assumption they were going to control that by imposing such a penalty on them retroactively. It seemed likely that contract rules would be changed and only everything going forward from there would have to fall in line. As mentioned previously, the Kovalchuk contract was a little different in that the league rejected it once, warned Jersey not to persist in using that structure (with some very unrealistic extra years) and the Devils made only the minimal changes necessary to push it through. Especially once they tried to turn around and terminate that contract, the league was not going to let them escape unscathed.

To counter one of the points above, the Kings were hit with a recapture penalty for Mike Richards even though they did not design his contract. Part of this, however, was due to the manner in which they attempted to terminate his contract.