Shea Weber

[PredsV82]

And you're blinded by your Poile fanboy glasses.

I'm trying to find the quote from Poile now but one of his original excuses for filing for arbitration was to keep offer sheets from coming in. Give me a bit though.

You go ahead and find that. That will exactly prove my point. Poile took him to arbitration because he didnt have the owners permission to match any offer sheet so he had to avoid that at all costs. That is precisely what I have been saying all along.

 

[Enoch]

You go ahead and find that. That will exactly prove my point. Poile took him to arbitration because he didnt have the owners permission to match any offer sheet so he had to avoid that at all costs. That is precisely what I have been saying all along.

This is complete conjecture based upon nothing. In fact, most comments point against these statements as does the way Poile approached resigning Rinne and Suter at the beginning of the season.

I'm not saying that it isn't possible. I am dying that it is complete conjecture.

 

[David Singleton]

Weber was not seeking a short term deal in the summer of 2011. He knew that the next CBA was probably going to have limits on contract terms. He knew he was an RFA until after the new CBA, so he needed to get his "max" deal done before the new CBA. He wanted a maximum deal and he felt the only way he could assure that he was getting the max was to go the offer sheet route (essentially thats the only way to see what the true "market" value for him was, because going offer sheet allowed him to negotiate as if he was a UFA)

Yes, Weber felt he could not get the deal he was seeking in Nashville.

Poile took him to arbitration to avoid that, even though he risked the possibility that Weber could choose a two year deal and we would be screwed. the only reason to take that risk is if you dont have the money to cover a big offer sheet.

Filing for arbitration is one thing as that doesn't prevent you from signing a contract. However, you do not actually go through the arbitration process with your captain and/or a star. Choosing to do that can cause massive hurt feelings. Look at the situation with Colorado and ROR. This was a massive mistake on the part of Poile.

And it still seems to me that Weber hasn't forgotten it either.

Between the summer of 2011 and the summer of 2012, we added Brett Wilsons deep pockets, and I believe one of the owners sold their business and made a huge profit. So by summer of 2012, we not only had the money to cover a Weber offer sheet, we had the money to try to keep Suter and sign Parise. Weber still wanted to see what his full value was on the market, which is why he went the offer sheet route rather than just signing Poiles blank check, which was apparently offered.

so in summary, it WAS the owners who drove the decision to take Weber to arbitration in 2011. There is no other logical explanation.

Looking at Poile's history, and knowing his personality, taking Weber to arbitration seems to smack entirely of a David Poile decision. Poile is a good GM, but he displays some quirks/history pretty consistently.

He tends to stick to his belief of what a player's worth- to a fault. He tends to overvalue average talent and undervalue elite talent. He also clearly gets miffed at players and can take that public. He handled the situation with Weber as poorly as one could. The aftermath with Suter was poorly handled. The Spezza situation was poorly handled.

Consider these two situations:
Nashville's negotiations with Weber and Suter next to Chicago's re-signing of Toews and Kane.

Nashville was a team on the rise, but had never spent anywhere close to the cap. They couldn't/wouldn't lock up Suter and let him get all the way to UFA. They took their captain to arbitration after boasting that they could pay Weber "fair market value".

Chicago is a team with Cup wins, and still in their window. One year before Toews and Kane will reach UFA, they sign both to the highest AAV contracts in the league. They do that knowing that they might lose a talent they would prefer to keep like a Sharp or Seabrook.

Both teams very successful at the respective times, although one with actual skins on the wall. One team with a history of using every resource at their disposal to build their roster. When the time came to pay their stars, they raised the bar in terms of AAV at the earliest opportunity and avoided a year of will they/or won't they re-sign.

The other team having never spent to the cap, spouting promises on local radio stations, but not willing to make that same commitment until forced to do so.

 

[glenngineer]

David, Suter agreed to a contract in November of his free agent year. Term and compensation were agreed upon. He never signed it. Poile took Suter at his word and then Suter walked. Poile then asked Suter to give him a chance to match any offer he received in free agency, once again Suter agreed and then never have Poile the opportunity to match. Suter wanted out and strung Poile along. How was Poile supposed to react?

Honestly, if this team had let Trotz go sooner I don't think this is a discussion as Weber and Suter are both here. Suter and Trotz never saw eye to eye and it cost us.

Here's something to ponder, if Weber was truly hurt by all of this why hasn't he asked for a trade? He's gonna get paid one way or the other and if he's so unhappy why is he still here? Why did Rinne put in a good word about Nashville to Jokinen? If Poile and the franchise were so bad why do guys stay for the most part? Why do guys come back or keep houses here?

I'm sorry but if Weber is still butt hurt by all of this he needs to leave. IMO, he knows it's business and he's here to win and be the centerpiece of the team. If he truly wants to win he needs to take the lead and help Poile fix the so called "reputation" of what happened. If they all don't work together on this the team will fail until something changes, either Poile being fired or Weber being traded.

 

[PredsV82]

This is complete conjecture based upon nothing. In fact, most comments point against these statements as does the way Poile approached resigning Rinne and Suter at the beginning of the season.

I'm not saying that it isn't possible. I am dying that it is complete conjecture.

It may be conjecture but its the only line of reasoning that makes any sense. Im sorry but Dave Singleton you are suggesting that Poile took Weber to arbitration out of some quirk in his personality. That is just ludicrous. Hes been a freaking GM in major professional sports for over 30 years. If you think he took Weber to arbitration out of some kind of pique or out of spite just defies logic. And as far as "not actually going to arbitration" well once Poile filed the rest was up to Weber. He wouldnt sign anything Poile had to offer at the time and so there wasnt much Poile could do.

And anyone who brings up Suter is just being disingenuous. Suter was leaving and there was absolutely nothing Poile could do about it. Suter lied to Poile and lied in the media when he said he wanted to stay.


If Weber wanted out he had it fully in his power to ask for a two year arbitration award. That would have forced Poile to trade him or let him leave as a UFA. The fact that he chose a one year award is just further implication that all he wanted was a maximum deal via offer sheet.

 

[Enoch]

Suter definitely lied and I agree with your point. I was indicating the willingness to spend. That said, I think David Poile was naive, and he was had.

Weber did change agents around the time all the crap hit the fan. I think that played a large role as well.

Forgive me for all of the cellphone autocorrects!

 

[David Singleton]

The fact that he chose a one year award is just further implication that all he wanted was a maximum deal via offer sheet.

That makes no sense.

The only reasoning one can rationally take from the Weber offer sheet situation is that he was willing on some level to stay in Nashville if they matched and that the best offer he was ever presented (term, total money, and structure) was from Philadelphia. That's it.

Here's something to ponder, if Weber was truly hurt by all of this why hasn't he asked for a trade? He's gonna get paid one way or the other and if he's so unhappy why is he still here? Why did Rinne put in a good word about Nashville to Jokinen? If Poile and the franchise were so bad why do guys stay for the most part? Why do guys come back or keep houses here?

I'm sorry but if Weber is still butt hurt by all of this he needs to leave. IMO, he knows it's business and he's here to win and be the centerpiece of the team. If he truly wants to win he needs to take the lead and help Poile fix the so called "reputation" of what happened. If they all don't work together on this the team will fail until something changes, either Poile being fired or Weber being traded.

Those are all great questions. Is Weber "butt hurt"? I think he remembers what Poile and the management team said during arbitration. That's why you do not see that happen very often as the chances of inflicting real damage is high. Yes, it's "just business" and they are all "professionals" and all. Horse hockey. They are also human beings, and when someone says something disparaging about you, you will remember it even if you can suppress it on the surface under the guise of "just business" or "professionalism".

Now, does it rise to level of wanting to get out? The only evidence Weber was willing to leave Nashville was signing the offer sheet, but willing to leave is different that "wanting to get out". There's no way for any of us to know for sure where Weber is at in his deepest thoughts. We can only look on from the side and speculate- similar to the other players across the league even though they can likely pick up the phone and talk to Weber directly.

So, let's speculate since it's fun, lol.

I think Weber is in "wait-and-see" mode for another year or two. He's 28, so his window is still fairly wide open. There's a coaching change to play out and see the effects. There's the Neal trade this season. There are some young players with a lot of skill, both offensively and defensively, on this team. Having said all that, I feel that if there's not clear signs in one, or more likely two, years that this team is on the cusp of several years of legitimate Cup contention, I think he will request a trade, perhaps even reluctantly.

Why do I feel that way? You get the media reports that Rinne talked with Jokinen. Have you heard any reports that Weber is pitching the Predators? Have you ever been in a work situation where you're not yet sure that you have a long future with your current organization and then have a friend in a worse situation ask about your organization? I have. And I generally give them both the pros and the cons, but I don't necessarily go pitching the organization. It's weird. And that's where I think Weber currently is.

Again, that's pure speculation on my part.

 

[gopreds19]

Poile choose arbitration because he saw it as a way to control cost for one more year and it pissed Weber off. If you don't believe me, go read Weber's comments on it or listen to his tone in interviews.

That wasn't forced by Weber, that's the last thing Weber wanted. Weber wanted a long term max deal, which he eventually got with terms that were way tougher on the Predators than they could have been had he been offered it the year before. Poile was offering Weber another bridge type contract, Weber thought he deserved more and did. It was just another one of Poile cost controlling efforts that he's done throughout his career.

Now, you can try to shoot holes in this all you want but first please tell me what other team has taken their franchise player and captain to club elected arbitration in the past?

Ryan O'Reilly is the only other star type player I remember having club elect arbitration.

I think we're in agreement on this. It was a bad play, it pissed Weber off, who knows the lingering effects on Weber's desire to be here (I don't really care, he's here so he needs to deal with it), and who knows what effect it has on future players wanting to play here. So far, it hasn't looked too good.

If I remember correctly weber would of picked to have the deal a year long as well bringing him to a ufa. But he picked the shorter one to stay a rfa if he wanted to leave he would not of done that.

Not so fast. A 2-year arbitrated deal would have made his next contract under the new CBA with a lower salary cap. He chose the shorter route in order to get his deal under the old CBA.

 

[ThirdManIn]

With regard to whether or not Weber wanted a shorter deal, I seem to recall that he did. I also seem to recall that right around the time he switched agents is when going for the home run contract because of the upcoming CBA became a thing with him. Perhaps Weber thought for a couple of seasons prior to the lock out that there was great potential for contract limitations and the lock out itself, then decided to change agents when the one he had was telling him to go for a shorter deal while another one was pitching him to switch sides and go for the longest, most lucrative deal he could. Just a theory, though.

With regard to why Poile took Weber to arbitration, he said himself it was to protect against offer sheets. Doc's theory may have some legs, but I'm a bit skeptical like gopreds. Did that much really change in a year, financially speaking? It's possible, but I have no idea what, if anything, took place to change the financial environment.

 

[Armourboy]

With regard to whether or not Weber wanted a shorter deal, I seem to recall that he did. I also seem to recall that right around the time he switched agents is when going for the home run contract because of the upcoming CBA became a thing with him. Perhaps Weber thought for a couple of seasons prior to the lock out that there was great potential for contract limitations and the lock out itself, then decided to change agents when the one he had was telling him to go for a shorter deal while another one was pitching him to switch sides and go for the longest, most lucrative deal he could. Just a theory, though.

With regard to why Poile took Weber to arbitration, he said himself it was to protect against offer sheets. Doc's theory may have some legs, but I'm a bit skeptical like gopreds. Did that much really change in a year, financially speaking? It's possible, but I have no idea what, if anything, took place to change the financial environment.

Did the new deep pockets owner come in between those years? I know it was close but not exactly sure on timing. I'm pretty sure that would change things pretty drastically from a financial stand point. That and just general time could have played a part. The owners could have ( I don't know just thinking out loud) still been uneasy about just what they could do, and a year later maybe they feel much more " safe ".

Odds are the whole thing has several factors feeding into it, rather than any one thing. Owners being nervous, Weber wanting to get in under the old CBA, switching agents, Poile not wanting him to get offered all fed into the mess.

 

[Enoch]

We were barely a cap FLOOR team with Weber at 7 million in arbitration. I think we had the money. We definitely were saying we had the money in 2011 to sign all three ...

 

[token grinder]

I don't remember where I read, or maybe I am imagining it, but I thought the Preds basically sucked up to Weber in his arb meeting. All they did was give comps to other players his age. And then talked about how good he was.

Weber knew this was his way to cashing in and I would have done the same thing. Was the last of the MAX contracts and he knew it. We are naïve if we think something similar was given to Poile by his camp and I am positive patient Poile emerged. Holmgren destroyed that. And I am glad he did. Everyone got what they wanted. Captain signed long term, he got his stability. Owners have to give up big bucks on the front in, but those chickens will come home to roost one day.

 

[Montross]

We were barely a cap FLOOR team with Weber at 7 million in arbitration. I think we had the money. We definitely were saying we had the money in 2011 to sign all three ...

Agree to disagree. Until I see these owners with these supposed deep pockets spending to the cap I will be skeptical.

 

[triggrman]

I've heard through really reliable sources, Poile has yet to spend his budget. Take it however.

 

[pekkaslap]

I've heard through really reliable sources, Poile has yet to spend his budget. Take it however.

Well, there's nothing left to spend it on player-wise at this point, so i don't guess he's taking full advantage.

 

[PredsV82]

The fact that he chose a one year award is just further implication that all he wanted was a maximum deal via offer sheet.

That makes no sense.

The only reasoning one can rationally take from the Weber offer sheet situation is that he was willing on some level to stay in Nashville if they matched and that the best offer he was ever presented (term, total money, and structure) was from Philadelphia. That's it.

it makes no sense because Im talking about the arbitration summer, not the summer he actually signed an offer sheet.

if Weber was so deeply offended by being taken to arbitration and he wanted out, all he had to do was ask the arbiter for a two year contract, and he would have been gone, in two years if not sooner.

But if he did that, he would have to get his UFA deal under the new CBA, and he was obviously worried that the new CBA would limit contract lengths/amounts. As it turns out, if he had decided to say "screw it, I just gotta get out of this place" it would have cost him at least $50 million.

so he took his one year deal in order to remain an RFA,knowing that the team couldn't take him to arbitration again. That meant the next summer there would be nothing to stop him from his ultimate goal, which was to get a maximum contract via offer sheet.



I will again say that I believe the reason this happened in 2011 is Poile knew we would be loaded on 2011-12, and he knew he couldn't afford to match a Weber offer sheet that summer, so he rolled the dice and hoped Weber was wanting to stay an RFA.

 

[Enoch]

We paid weber 7.5 million on the arbitration award and were still a cap floor team tho. I don't follow. The poison pill signing bonuses did not come in vogue until the Suter and parise contracts.

 

[bdub24]

The whole saga is definitely a factor in agents advising their players against Nashville though. It's got to be. "Look how they managed their captain, imagine what they would do to you". Huge minus on Poile and the org. Terrible strategy and the effects, while not related to Weber any longer, are still being felt.

 

[PredsV82]

We paid weber 7.5 million on the arbitration award and were still a cap floor team tho. I don't follow. The poison pill signing bonuses did not come in vogue until the Suter and parise contracts.

what don't you follow? The decision had to involve much more than just what Webers salary was going to be in 11-12. If Weber had gone out and signed a 12 year contract at 8 million a year, Poile could not have matched it in the summer of 2011. And other players were already getting large signing bonuses, so there is no guarantee that Weber wouldn't have got them in 2011, or that the contract wouldn't have been front loaded even if it wasn't done via signing bonus.

 

[nomorekids]

I don't remember where I read, or maybe I am imagining it, but I thought the Preds basically sucked up to Weber in his arb meeting. All they did was give comps to other players his age. And then talked about how good he was.

Weber knew this was his way to cashing in and I would have done the same thing. Was the last of the MAX contracts and he knew it. We are naïve if we think something similar was given to Poile by his camp and I am positive patient Poile emerged. Holmgren destroyed that. And I am glad he did. Everyone got what they wanted. Captain signed long term, he got his stability. Owners have to give up big bucks on the front in, but those chickens will come home to roost one day.

That's half true. They didn't roast him the way some do, but they DID present their "offer" at 4.5 million, which reportedly insulted him and his agent.

 

[ThirdManIn]

The whole saga is definitely a factor in agents advising their players against Nashville though. It's got to be. "Look how they managed their captain, imagine what they would do to you". Huge minus on Poile and the org. Terrible strategy and the effects, while not related to Weber any longer, are still being felt.

I doubt it gives much fodder to agents unless the player is thinking about taking less money to come here, which likely doesn't happen often. The agent wants to take care of his or her player, sure, but they want to get paid, too. The more they get for their client, the more they get for themselves. If Nashville is offering an equal or larger amount I see no reason for them to start spouting off about Weber's arbitration (especially considering every situation is different, arbitration isn't exactly rare and star players nearing UFA status are often times difficult to sign. Look no further than two summers with ROR, the Subban saga, Johansen now in Columbus, etc. Those are just the negotiations on-going, and none of those players are Weber's level).

 

[Enoch]

what don't you follow? The decision had to involve much more than just what Webers salary was going to be in 11-12. If Weber had gone out and signed a 12 year contract at 8 million a year, Poile could not have matched it in the summer of 2011. And other players were already getting large signing bonuses, so there is no guarantee that Weber wouldn't have got them in 2011, or that the contract wouldn't have been front loaded even if it wasn't done via signing bonus.

Why couldn't we? Because of your conjectured spending limitations? The Predators were a cap floor team with Weber at his arbitration salary.

 

[Predsrule]

I think we're in agreement on this. It was a bad play, it pissed Weber off, who knows the lingering effects on Weber's desire to be here (I don't really care, he's here so he needs to deal with it), and who knows what effect it has on future players wanting to play here. So far, it hasn't looked too good.



Not so fast. A 2-year arbitrated deal would have made his next contract under the new CBA with a lower salary cap. He chose the shorter route in order to get his deal under the old CBA.

They had no way of knowing if there would even be a lock out let alone new contract rules at that point.. Got to remember this arb hearing was over a year b4 the lock out.

 

[predfan98]

I used to be a "trust Poile" fan...... now not so much. It's time for a change, and it was his job to ferret out the truth of Suter and he failed.

However, I do believe he tells the truth about the summer when the Preds took Weber to arbitration. Weber changed agents a month or so before the deadline, and they would not talk to DP. It was mentioned multiple times that they wouldn't talk to DP.

These are the same agents that acted so "professional" on the radio the next summer after we matched the offer sheet, spelled things wrong on their website, etc.

Frankly I think professional is the last adjective that I would apply.

And if those "professionals" failed to inform Webs about what the "business" of an arbitration meeting was like...........well, it doesn't surprise me.

 

[Enoch]

I used to be a "trust Poile" fan...... now not so much. It's time for a change, and it was his job to ferret out the truth of Suter and he failed.

However, I do believe he tells the truth about the summer when the Preds took Weber to arbitration. Weber changed agents a month or so before the deadline, and they would not talk to DP. It was mentioned multiple times that they wouldn't talk to DP.

These are the same agents that acted so "professional" on the radio the next summer after we matched the offer sheet, spelled things wrong on their website, etc.

Frankly I think professional is the last adjective that I would apply.

And if those "professionals" failed to inform Webs about what the "business" of an arbitration meeting was like...........well, it doesn't surprise me.

I agree with this take.