Value of: Mackenzie Weegar

[Johnsie19]

Uh how is the suggestion that the Flames move one of the two (2) defensemen they have signed for next year a realistic premise or plausible in anyway? Is it realistic to think they're gonna go out and sign 4 or 5 UFA defensemen this summer?

Keep in mind, even you're saying retool, not a burn it to the ground rebuild. Retool usually means keeping at least some vets around.

It's an attempt to be gracious. It doesn't look like there is a lot there in Calgary and not much coming. Do they want Huberdeau and Weegar on the books in 7 yrs? Just depends what the outlook of the club is. They're a lot of question marks in Calgary right now. But realistically Weegar isn't going to be traded any time soon if that makes you feel better.

 

[Some Other Flame]

It's an attempt to be gracious. It doesn't look like there is a lot there in Calgary and not much coming. Do they want Huberdeau and Weegar on the books in 7 yrs? Just depends what the outlook of the club is. They're a lot of question marks in Calgary right now. But realistically Weegar isn't going to be traded any time soon if that makes you feel better.

lol hence the whole retool and looking for some high picks or high end assets. But contrary to HF lore, going full scorched earth is one of the single dumbest things a franchise thing. See the Sabres or the Sharks. You still need some quality vets to keep around and for the like the 9th time, there's still a cap floor to reach. And so the point remains, no the Flames aren't trading Weegar for scraps and quote unquote less just because. Pay up if you want the player or look elsewhere.

Regardless, the hand wringing over seven more years is quaint. Realistically, they'll be put on LTIR if they decline to the point of being a liability, much like how every single other team in the league does it.

 

[lawrence]

wait a sec.....

nothing against Weegar btw,

but people really think he's worth the same as Filip Hronek?

 

[ShootIt]

Love Weegs but his deal is brutal from a long term POV. Maybe a GM desperate for 2-4 years of #3+ play will bite the bullet but it's definitely a deal that has a chance of aging poorly.

 

[Johnsie19]

lol hence the whole retool and looking for some high picks or high end assets. But contrary to HF lore, going full scorched earth is one of the single dumbest things a franchise thing. See the Sabres or the Sharks. You still need some quality vets to keep around and for the like the 9th time, there's still a cap floor to reach. And so the point remains, no the Flames aren't trading Weegar for scraps and quote unquote less just because. Pay up if you want the player or look elsewhere.

Regardless, the hand wringing over seven more years is quaint. Realistically, they'll be put on LTIR if they decline to the point of being a liability, much like how every single other team in the league does it.

Yea it's not that simple. Ask the Canucks about the OEL buyout, Minnesota about Parise and Suter buyouts.

I'm not by any means suggesting Weegar must be traded. There is a world in a yr or two where he has declined and fans might look back at this as the point they should have traded him...given the contract length making each yr more of a liability.

 

[DJJones]

Guy took a discount to account for age. Hell Hanifin is going to get more and Weegar is better than him.

No reason at all to trade him for Calgary.

 

[Reinhart]

I think Weegar's deal is actually great. Maybe the very tail end there will be grumbles about it, but he is a smart defencemen who I think will age well, and as the cap rises, his contract will continue to be team-friendly.

When Hanifin is traded, Weegar is likely to take over his spot on the PP, his point production will start to surprise people. There is a lot of wrong in Calgary, but Weegar's deal isn't one of them IMO.

 

[Lunatik]

Love Weegs but his deal is brutal from a long term POV. Maybe a GM desperate for 2-4 years of #3+ play will bite the bullet but it's definitely a deal that has a chance of aging poorly.

People keep saying this, but 6.25m is not that high of a salary, and in 5-8 years, how much higher will the cap be? Also, I think Weegar pays a style that is more conducive to lasting long-term as he doesn't beat up his body too much. This all just reminds me of what people said when Giordano signed his contract.

 

[Bounces R Way]

Hahah my good man. You said it exasperated that that was the opinion of so many people on this thread. Thats why it was all caps. Did you forget you were being sarcastic?

It's been pretty good on this thread. That's why it was so odd that you seemed to come in from the top rope.

I mean I even qualified it as responding to typical HF idiocy. What more do you want lol
This forum has zero real life relevance. It's just mental masturbation for hockey nerds.

Don't need to say anything about the player. Everyone knows hes a stud. Again it comes down to the direction of the club.

I think there is some validity to your point about shorter term thinking GMs. And thats why my vote would be a 1st +. But not a lot more. And i can totally understand how to some he wouldn't be worth giving up futures for because of the long term liability.

Ekholm went for a 1st and a recent 1st round pick in Schaefer as well as a performing roster player just last year, Weegar is younger and better than Ekholm.

I wanna do an exercise with you though because you might have a bit too much skin in the game being hes on your team and a great player. JT Miller is a great comparable for age and level of play. Albeit Weegar's strength is defensive play and Miller's is offensive. They're both top top players. Both are signed till theyre nearly 38 yrs old. Last yr when the Canucks were struggling Miller's value was literally nothing despite coming off a 99 point season. And consistently being good for 3-4 yrs in a row. Now the Canucks have the young guns (Petey, Hughes) that Calgary doesn't, and seem to have turned it around so Miller isn't in trade discussions. But how much do you think teams would pay for Miller in a trade? First of all you have to be able to take on the 8 mil. And 7 more yrs of it. Half of which you can almost guarantee he'll underperform simply given his age. No one offered a 1st ++.

Well for one, one is a forward and the other is a defenseman. One also makes 8 million per as a mostly offense LHS fwd, something that this league is never short on, while the other is a RHD that can play both sides, plays both special teams, has some of the best underlying analytics in the league.

I don't see them as being all that comparable other than they're both good at hockey. Most teams aren't looking to add a big ticket forward with a lot of term left. Especially one with a history of locker room drama. I don't know how you say with any certainty Miller's value was zero either? Just because a HF thread said so? Who cares? If the Canucks were to trade him tomorrow I think his value in a vacuum is a 1st, prospect or 2nd, and a good young roster player with pedigree and potential to get better.

 

[Unbiased Fan]

Weegar?

If your aim is to say 8 year deals are good for the team, you’re going to lose

Jack Hughes

 

[Strangle]

Jack Hughes

Need a few years to be sure that’s a good contract, champ. Of course those deals look good a year or two after signing them. They don’t hurt until later in the contract. Can you imagine if they looked as bad as they do in years 7-8 in years 1 and 2?

Do you think I’ll run out of names before you do?

Huberdeau

 

[Unbiased Fan]

Need a few years to be sure that’s a good contract, champ. Of course those deals look good a year or two after signing them. They don’t hurt until later in the contract. Can you imagine if they looked as bad as they do in years 7-8 in years 1 and 2?

Do you think I’ll run out of names before you do?

Huberdeau

Cozens, Dahlin, McDavid, Thompson, Fiala, Barkov, Aho, Nuge, Drais, Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Kane, Hedman, Stamkos, Kucherov, Vais, Rantanen, Makar, Fox,

Locking up a player before their prime almost always turns out good because the longer the contract goes on the more the cap rises. Players 30+ now that’s a different story.

 

[Johnsie19]

I mean I even qualified it as responding to typical HF idiocy. What more do you want lol
This forum has zero real life relevance. It's just mental masturbation for hockey nerds.

Exactly and somehow you seem to think your opinion is so much more valid. You've been the most unreasonable person on here from a discussion perspective. Not to say you're that bad we are have a decently productive convo now but you came in guns blazing.

Ekholm went for a 1st and a recent 1st round pick in Schaefer as well as a performing roster player just last year, Weegar is younger and better than Ekholm.

That's a decent shout actually. That was a lot to give up.

Well for one, one is a forward and the other is a defenseman. One also makes 8 million per as a mostly offense LHS fwd, something that this league is never short on, while the other is a RHD that can play both sides, plays both special teams, has some of the best underlying analytics in the league.

Hahah I knew you would nitpick this. I even tried to mitigate it by saying one is defensive and one is offensive. It's pretty reasonable to say they're right in the same category of player. Miller can play Center or Wing so that is pretty effective. He could even me a no. 1 center on a lot of teams. Weegar is a 2/3 dman.

I don't see them as being all that comparable other than they're both good at hockey. Most teams aren't looking to add a big ticket forward with a lot of term left. Especially one with a history of locker room drama. I don't know how you say with any certainty Miller's value was zero either? Just because a HF thread said so? Who cares? If the Canucks were to trade him tomorrow I think his value in a vacuum is a 1st, prospect or 2nd, and a good young roster player with pedigree and potential to get better.

It could very well be. But I think in the throws of how dire it was in Vancouver they explored those options and likely would have taken a trade if that much was coming back.

The irony is that once a player signs their contract their trade value diminishes. Then it also diminishes if theyre a rental. Think of Bo Horvat. We a 1st, prospect, youngish middle 6 winger. Now that he's signed for a 8 x 8 I don't know whod give up much for it.

Anyway should the flames look to move Weegar I do think there would be a number of teams interested. And I wonder how sweet a package would have to get, in conjunction with it getting bad in Calgary before theyd be tempted. 1st and Podkolzin you'd have to start thinking. In my opinion.

 

[oceanchild]

Some proper HF idiocy on display in this thread.

BUT HE'S GOING TO BE 30!
THIRTY YEARS OLD!!!!!!
AHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Karlsson just won a Norris last year and is 33. Giordano won it at 35. Pietrangelo looked pretty damn good playing #1D on the VGK and he's 33. Doughty, Letang, Josi, Hedman? These guys are all just chewed up meat or what?

Yeah some players drop off a cliff in their mid 30s. Does not mean they all do. Weegar is not as good as those guys but he is a damn solid top pairing player. 'Attach a 1st to get rid of that contract' lmao get a clue

Are any of them playing well at 38 ?

 

[oceanchild]

And Devon Toews will be 31 when he starts his 7 year contract next year yet somehow that contract is considered fantastic.

Give it a year

 

[Bounces R Way]

Are any of them playing well at 38 ?

Is Mackenzie Weegar 38? He's not even going to be 38 at any point during this deal. He hasn't even turned 30 yet and he might as well be dead

Pavelski seems to be doing just fine and get this, he's even older

Exactly and somehow you seem to think your opinion is so much more valid. You've been the most unreasonable person on here from a discussion perspective. Not to say you're that bad we are have a decently productive convo now but you came in guns blazing.

Only way I know how
I really don't know why you seem so intent on calling me out for a 8 line post 4 pages ago. I happen to think that the opinion that any player that has a contract that extends into their mid-30s sucks and they have negative value is a dumb opinion. If that's unreasonable then I guess I'm unreasonable.

That's a decent shout actually. That was a lot to give up.

Hahah I knew you would nitpick this. I even tried to mitigate it by saying one is defensive and one is offensive. It's pretty reasonable to say they're right in the same category of player. Miller can play Center or Wing so that is pretty effective. He could even me a no. 1 center on a lot of teams. Weegar is a 2/3 dman.

They play completely different positions my dude. Ekholm makes more sense as a comparable because he plays defense.

It could very well be. But I think in the throws of how dire it was in Vancouver they explored those options and likely would have taken a trade if that much was coming back.

Just because they explored it and likely would have taken that kind of deal does not mean anyone offered it. If you haven't noticed the vast majority of teams in this league are up against the cap ATM.

The irony is that once a player signs their contract their trade value diminishes. Then it also diminishes if theyre a rental. Think of Bo Horvat. We a 1st, prospect, youngish middle 6 winger. Now that he's signed for a 8 x 8 I don't know whod give up much for it.

Anyway should the flames look to move Weegar I do think there would be a number of teams interested. And I wonder how sweet a package would have to get, in conjunction with it getting bad in Calgary before theyd be tempted. 1st and Podkolzin you'd have to start thinking. In my opinion.

Well yes that's kind of true. But also we just don't see players fresh off a signed contract traded very often. A 1st and Pod is probably enough to get a conversation started sure, but again the Flames really don't have any huge motivation to trade Weegar right now.

Lindholm, Tanev, Zadorov, Vladar, and Hanifin? Different story.

 

[oceanchild]

Is Mackenzie Weegar 38? He's not even going to be 38 at any point during this deal. He hasn't even turned 30 yet and he might as well be dead

Pavelski seems to be doing just fine and get this, he's even older


Only way I know how
I really don't know why you seem so intent on calling me out for a 8 line post 4 pages ago. I happen to think that the opinion that any player that has a contract that extends into their mid-30s sucks and they have negative value is a dumb opinion. If that's unreasonable then I guess I'm unreasonable.



They play completely different positions my dude. Ekholm makes more sense as a comparable because he plays defense.


Just because they explored it and likely would have taken that kind of deal does not mean anyone offered it. If you haven't noticed the vast majority of teams in this league are up against the cap ATM.



Well yes that's kind of true. But also we just don't see players fresh off a signed contract traded very often. A 1st and Pod is probably enough to get a conversation started sure, but again the Flames really don't have any huge motivation to trade Weegar right now.

Lindholm, Tanev, Zadorov, Vladar, and Hanifin? Different story.

One player is doing fine and that’s your analysis. Hahahahhahah

 

[McSuper]

The irony of your comment is none of that was even said, so we have exasperated outrage (by you) because of your own misunderstanding.

Weegar is 30 and in yr 1 of an 8 yr contract. I don't think anyone expects him to fall off a cliff in the next couple yrs but certainly when you consider that only 11 NHL defensemen over the age of 34 have played games this yr, acquiring a contract of that length represents a huge liability and greatly diminishes his trade value.

I am not a Flame fan so you can not claim I am a homer. Weegar is on a great contract considering his play. He also can play both sides and we know RHD are always in demand . Every person is built different so we only are guessing about his play in 4 or 5 years, He may get better. Not likely but we don't know. Also in 5 years bottom pairing D may be paid 5 million meaning he is slightly over paid. All guess work but hey let bash a player and a fan base like it is fact and the fan base is out of touch.

I am please to say the mob mentality is a live and well on HF boards.

 

[McSuper]

Weegar to the Oilers would actually make the Oilers defence much more respectable.

Nurse-Weegar
Ekholm-Bouchard

Cap would be tough to figure out. Ceci and Foegle going back?

I would like that trade but we are always playing short because of cap moving 2 players while adding a couple hundred K makes the Oilers weaker. Value wise this deal would be a great get for the Oilers

 

[Bounces R Way]

One player is doing fine and that’s your analysis. Hahahahhahah

Can't even do basic math and that's your reply
Hahahahahah

 

[oceanchild]

Can't even do basic math and that's your reply
Hahahahahah

You’re right, I didn’t even bother to look up his age, I took everyone calling him 30 and projected 8 years out. It changes nothing, he will be 37 years, 4 months and change depending on which day Calgarys season ends in 2031. The difference between what I am saying and what your are saying is that I just didn’t bother to look up his birthday (8 months being the difference) and your being intellectually dishonest. The list of players is 12 deep and of that a couple have been on LTIR and not expected to come back. Others on the list are hall of fame players and they have seen their contributions diminish. The amount of player’s that even play in their 37 year old season or later is 12 out of 1526 which is .786% of less than 1%. Take away the guys on LTIR or are cooked and it’s about half of that .39% or less than one half of one percent. I would say that is hard evidence that this contract won’t age well, no matter how loud you get or brash your arguments. It’s a dumb contract and his value is reduced because of it.

 

[Johnsie19]

Only way I know how
I really don't know why you seem so intent on calling me out for a 8 line post 4 pages ago. I happen to think that the opinion that any player that has a contract that extends into their mid-30s sucks and they have negative value is a dumb opinion. If that's unreasonable then I guess I'm unreasonable.

I called it out once and you defended it so here we are back and forth. And there you go again with the strawman. No one said isn't good right now. Or even that he won't be good for the next few yrs.

Certainly to some teams/people he does have negative value.

Just because they explored it and likely would have taken that kind of deal does not mean anyone offered it. If you haven't noticed the vast majority of teams in this league are up against the cap ATM.

This is the 2nd time you seem to get confused and end up making my point. I literally said no one offered that. And yes the cap is a big part of that.