Value of: Shea Weber

[Randy Randerson]

There’s that to take into account too, you’re right. It really all comes down to how he perform once he’s back. Anyway, I don’t think he will be traded because if he does come back as good as he was before, we’ll need him and if he doesn’t, we will not get a return good enough to make us pull the trigger unless a GM desperate enough overpay (and has the right assets, not many team does) and that’s a long stretch.

agree on the stance - hold him until he's back and re-assess. I would deal him if he was worse at that point and there was a team that would take his cap hit, but that's a bridge you cross when you come to it

 

[Price is Wright]

New GM in the summer? He is as good as gone.

He has this season to prove he's healthy.

A team acquiring him will be like when the Kings got back Rob Blake in 2006.

 

[Hostile Offer]

agree on the stance - hold him until he's back and re-assess. I would deal him if he was worse at that point and there was a team that would take his cap hit, but that's a bridge you cross when you come to it

And how exactly would that benefit the Habs? Dumping contracts isn't what we should be doing when we are well below the cap.

 

[Randy Randerson]

And how exactly would that benefit the Habs? Dumping contracts isn't what we should be doing when we are well below the cap.

if the outlook on Weber is that he's a long albatross of a contract that doesn't perform to his cap hit (from the perspective of a point in the future where he's been back playing for long enough to make an informed decision), is it beneficial to keep that contract and the cap implications of it around rather than getting something for him and freeing yourself of the future cap implications, while also having that cap space to go shopping with?

in short, here's how it benefits the Habs:
- no cap implications from Webers long contract. 2 years ago the Leafs had no need for cap space, things change quickly if they go well
- whatever the return is, I'm not suggesting that he would be worth nothing, just less than the wanted return in this thread

 

[Hostile Offer]

if the outlook on Weber is that he's a long albatross of a contract that doesn't perform to his cap hit (from the perspective of a point in the future where he's been back playing for long enough to make an informed decision), is it beneficial to keep that contract and the cap implications of it around rather than getting something for him and freeing yourself of the future cap implications, while also having that cap space to go shopping with?

in short, here's how it benefits the Habs:
- no cap implications from Webers long contract. 2 years ago the Leafs had no need for cap space, things change quickly if they go well
- whatever the return is, I'm not suggesting that he would be worth nothing, just less than the wanted return in this thread

In two years, the Habs would be incredibly lucky to be in the position the Leafs are in. And if Weber comes back and is considerably worse than he was before the injury, will his value be positive? Phaneuf's return as a long term overpaid middle pairing dman wasn't positive and you could still say it was better than expected. I think Petry's on the trade block before Weber in any case.

 

[Randy Randerson]

In two years, the Habs would be incredibly lucky to be in the position the Leafs are in. And if Weber comes back and is considerably worse than he was before the injury, will his value be positive? Phaneuf's return as a long term overpaid middle pairing dman wasn't positive and you could still say it was better than expected. I think Petry's on the trade block before Weber in any case.

I agree on the two year timeframe, but Weber's under contract for another 8. If in 2 years the Habs are in the position that the Leafs were 2 years ago, Weber's contract could still hurt you

I'm not sure if Weber's value would be positive in that situation, but that's why I said "if there's a team willing". I think you would be hard pressed to find a Leaf fan who isn't happy that we got Phaneuf off the books, but I do think that Michalek+Greening+Cowan+Lindberg+2nd was a net positive package too and I think something like that (probably a better version of it) is what you'd be looking at for Weber if he came back as a diminished version of his old self - some short term cap in the form of roster pieces that will shield the kids during the bad times, and a couple of ok futures

 

[voyageur]

Knowing Bergevin it would be something like Weber, Pacioretty and some Montreal smoked meat for Seabrook, Beaudin, 1st and a lifetime supply of Chicago deep dish. Pizza and beer are a good combo. Especially when unemployed.

 

[Hostile Offer]

I agree on the two year timeframe, but Weber's under contract for another 8. If in 2 years the Habs are in the position that the Leafs were 2 years ago, Weber's contract could still hurt you

I'm not sure if Weber's value would be positive in that situation, but that's why I said "if there's a team willing". I think you would be hard pressed to find a Leaf fan who isn't happy that we got Phaneuf off the books, but I do think that Michalek+Greening+Cowan+Lindberg+2nd was a net positive package too and I think something like that (probably a better version of it) is what you'd be looking at for Weber if he came back as a diminished version of his old self - some short term cap in the form of roster pieces that will shield the kids during the bad times, and a couple of ok futures

When Weber's actual salary drops considerably in 2022, it should be easy to offload him. A $7.8M cap hit guy who is actually making $3M is a dream for any cap floor team. Of course, if we're somehow in cap trouble in two years, which seems quite unlikely to me, then it could be problematic.

As for the Phaneuf trade, I brought it up because in the scenario we're discussing I think too we could be looking at something like that in a Weber trade. But when I look at that package, I just see a whole lot of junk. Short term cap dumps, yes, but none of them really contributed more to the Leafs than their AHL team or IR list. And still that's considered as a surprisingly good haul for Phaneuf.

 

[Randy Randerson]

When Weber's actual salary drops considerably in 2022, it should be easy to offload him. A $7.8M cap hit guy who is actually making $3M is a dream for any cap floor team. Of course, if we're somehow in cap trouble in two years, which seems quite unlikely to me, then it could be problematic.

As for the Phaneuf trade, I brought it up because in the scenario we're discussing I think too we could be looking at something like that in a Weber trade. But when I look at that package, I just see a whole lot of junk. Short term cap dumps, yes, but none of them really contributed more to the Leafs than their AHL team or IR list. And still that's considered as a surprisingly good haul for Phaneuf.

If it were me, I would go with the plan that leaves you in good shape no matter if the Habs rebound quickly or not

There was nothing great in the Phaneuf trade for sure, Lindberg had a chance to be middle 6, and the pick that became Rasanen is still unknown. The roster pieces were nothing great, but they were something to ice to protect the kids and face the media when the team was terrible. I agree that it was a very good return at the time because we got out of the contract without retention. Phaneuf is probably a worst case scenario for what Weber could be when he's back, but he'll also be 5 years older than Phaneuf at the time of the trade so I would take something like that if I got a couple of lottery tickets like Lindberg and a pick out of it (in the case that Weber has regressed when he's back). I also never see the point of keeping a guy for the sake of eventually getting nothing back and watching that guy retire, I always like to manage assets

If I had the choice, the Leafs would have traded JVR & Bozak last summer, and we'd be trading Gardiner this year if we're not going to re-sign him. So maybe my outlook is biased on Weber, but I don't get the point of keeping him if eventually he just retires a Hab or gets dealt for nothing if he goes to a cap floor team when his salary reduces. I think there's a side benefit of him being gone too, the team will likely be worse and will likely draft higher

 

[Hostile Offer]

If it were me, I would go with the plan that leaves you in good shape no matter if the Habs rebound quickly or not

There was nothing great in the Phaneuf trade for sure, Lindberg had a chance to be middle 6, and the pick that became Rasanen is still unknown. The roster pieces were nothing great, but they were something to ice to protect the kids and face the media when the team was terrible. I agree that it was a very good return at the time because we got out of the contract without retention. Phaneuf is probably a worst case scenario for what Weber could be when he's back, but he'll also be 5 years older than Phaneuf at the time of the trade so I would take something like that if I got a couple of lottery tickets like Lindberg and a pick out of it (in the case that Weber has regressed when he's back). I also never see the point of keeping a guy for the sake of eventually getting nothing back and watching that guy retire, I always like to manage assets

If I had the choice, the Leafs would have traded JVR & Bozak last summer, and we'd be trading Gardiner this year if we're not going to re-sign him. So maybe my outlook is biased on Weber, but I don't get the point of keeping him if eventually he just retires a Hab or gets dealt for nothing if he goes to a cap floor team when his salary reduces. I think there's a side benefit of him being gone too, the team will likely be worse and will likely draft higher

I think whether Weber comes back looking great or has lost a big step, we're gonna keep him and look to trade Petry instead as he's both more inexperienced to "protect the kids" and more valuable in a trade due to his contract and age. Also I am still not a big advocate of trading players just to become worse as a team, cap hit could be a reason to trade him for a Phaneuf like return but him being a good player is not, it's just not what a healthy organization does, and how the lottery rules are changing support that too.

 

[Randy Randerson]

I think whether Weber comes back looking great or has lost a big step, we're gonna keep him and look to trade Petry instead as he's both more inexperienced to "protect the kids" and more valuable in a trade due to his contract and age. Also I am still not a big advocate of trading players just to become worse as a team, cap hit could be a reason to trade him for a Phaneuf like return but him being a good player is not, it's just not what a healthy organization does, and how the lottery rules are changing support that too.

I would trade both and ice a team like the 14/15 Leafs. For Weber, I think the primary benefit is getting free of the contract if he's bad or the return in the trade if he's good, being worse as a team during the rebuild would be a secondary benefit. I get the lottery odds stance, but being lower in the standings does have a drastic impact on how close to the top you draft, less so on the chances of drafting #1 but still has a big impact

And I think by the time that a team gets to "rebuild" stage, it's either coming off of an era where it contended for a decade and won some cups or it's "unhealthy" and has player personnel, hockey ops personnel and front office staff replaced to clear the way for a new era. So just like the Pre-Shanahan Leafs, I think the Habs need a top-down rebuild starting with the front office, and that's not an uncommon position to be in for an NHL club

 

[Hostile Offer]

I would trade both and ice a team like the 14/15 Leafs. For Weber, I think the primary benefit is getting free of the contract if he's bad or the return in the trade if he's good, being worse as a team during the rebuild would be a secondary benefit. I get the lottery odds stance, but being lower in the standings does have a drastic impact on how close to the top you draft, less so on the chances of drafting #1 but still has a big impact

And I think by the time that a team gets to "rebuild" stage, it's either coming off of an era where it contended for a decade and won some cups or it's "unhealthy" and has player personnel, hockey ops personnel and front office staff replaced to clear the way for a new era. So just like the Pre-Shanahan Leafs, I think the Habs need a top-down rebuild starting with the front office, and that's not an uncommon position to be in for an NHL club

That I can agree with. The rebuild can't be successful without a solid, determined management.

 

[yianik]

Is there any benefit to Nashville to have Weber back in a couple of years ?

 

[ThirdManIn]

Is there any benefit to Nashville to have Weber back in a couple of years ?

Doubtful. I'd expect them to make an argument that they shouldn't be on the hook for any cap recapture for two reasons: 1) Philly structured the contract, not Nashville; and 2) the Preds didn't get any actual cap relief from the contract since they never spent close enough to the cap for it to have mattered. If it looks like the league is going to hit them for it anyway despite the spirit of the rule not really applying in this case and if it looks like Weber might retire at a point in time when the recapture would effectively cripple the team then there would be a reason to make a move. Otherwise, no.

 

[yianik]

Doubtful. I'd expect them to make an argument that they shouldn't be on the hook for any cap recapture for two reasons: 1) Philly structured the contract, not Nashville; and 2) the Preds didn't get any actual cap relief from the contract since they never spent close enough to the cap for it to have mattered. If it looks like the league is going to hit them for it anyway despite the spirit of the rule not really applying in this case and if it looks like Weber might retire at a point in time when the recapture would effectively cripple the team then there would be a reason to make a move. Otherwise, no.

Well let's assume the Preds are going to get penalized if Weber retires early. And let's say Weber has completed his last year of $6M pay cheques so that his next years pay is $3M and after that it drops to a million a year for a few years. Realistically , given the age he will be, about 37, there would be a real good chance he would be prepared to retire and leave the million a year on the table.

Thing is, I guess I just really dont see what the Preds could do to avoid getting hit with recapture even if he is on their roster. If there was something they could do then Weber would have a trade value specifically for them.

 

[Frank Drebin]

Is there any benefit to Nashville to have Weber back in a couple of years ?

Simply to be in control of him and his contract I would guess.

 

[Liferleafer]

Is there any benefit to Nashville to have Weber back in a couple of years ?

If the NHL sticks them with the recapture? Ya, there is a benefit....unless they have an extra 24 mil in cap just laying around. That said, i'm not sure if the NHL will actually enforce that.

 

[Hostile Offer]

If the NHL sticks them with the recapture? Ya, there is a benefit....unless they have an extra 24 mil in cap just laying around. That said, i'm not sure if the NHL will actually enforce that.

Suddenly having $24M eating cap space is potentially franchise killing. I don't think the NHL wants that.

 

[Liferleafer]

Suddenly having $24M eating cap space is potentially franchise killing. I don't think the NHL wants that.

Ya, i agree...but it's a rule they enforced, makes me wonder how they justify letting it slide to 30 other GMs.

 

[TOGuy14]

Suddenly having $24M eating cap space is potentially franchise killing. I don't think the NHL wants that.

Seems silly to implement a rule and not enforce it in the future because it is too punitive on the offender

This is like saying murder is a 25 year minimum sentence but every time a murderer comes through the court you feel bad he will miss the rest of his life so let him off with no orna much smaller penalty

 

[Hostile Offer]

Seems silly to implement a rule and not enforce it in the future because it is too punitive on the offender

This is like saying murder is a 25 year minimum sentence but every time a murderer comes through the court you feel bad he will miss the rest of his life so let him off with no orna much smaller penalty

Well the difference is the contract was signed before the rule was implemented. It's obviously very spineless from the league if they don't enforce it but I think they'll find a way to go round it if needed.

 

[TOGuy14]

Well the difference is the contract was signed before the rule was implemented. It's obviously very spineless from the league if they don't enforce it but I think they'll find a way to go round it if needed.

I think at best they may allow for some sort of buyout like math, allowing Nashville to spread the hit over a few additional years

If the league doesn’t enforce this rule though it sets a precedent that every other league bylaw is a joke now

 

[CDN24]

Well let's assume the Preds are going to get penalized if Weber retires early. And let's say Weber has completed his last year of $6M pay cheques so that his next years pay is $3M and after that it drops to a million a year for a few years. Realistically , given the age he will be, about 37, there would be a real good chance he would be prepared to retire and leave the million a year on the table.

Thing is, I guess I just really dont see what the Preds could do to avoid getting hit with recapture even if he is on their roster. If there was something they could do then Weber would have a trade value specifically for them.

If I am Nashville those last 3 years concern me. If he is banged up enough to LTIR that is an option. In that case he probably gets traded to a cap Floor team that uses the 7.8M cap hit to get to the floor and Insurance pays most of the $1M actual salary.

The issue is what if he is healthy and still capable of playing although as a 5-6 or 7th D-man at this point. He is still with Montreal who has lots of $$ but don't want the cap hit of $7.8M. Mtl could say Shea you have been a great guy for the last 7 years, we would not have won those 2 cups without you and you have been a great help developing our young D-men. I know you are still owed $3M for the next 3 years so what we would like to do if you retire now is hire you as our assistant coach in charge of the D-men. Its a 5 year Contract at $1.5 M per year. You will make a bit more money and you will still be with the team, head coach Price would love to have you.

 

[Hostile Offer]

I think at best they may allow for some sort of buyout like math, allowing Nashville to spread the hit over a few additional years

If the league doesn’t enforce this rule though it sets a precedent that every other league bylaw is a joke now

Well I don't mean they would directly just not enforce it but it shouldn't be too hard to sneak Weber into LTIR or something.

 

[sansabri]

I doubt the NHL would punish Nashville for something that Flyers did in bad faith.

Anyway, dunno why we're worrying about Weber's retirement when he's still an NHLer. His cap hit won't be a detriment either if the cap keeps rising.