Value of: Wolverine er....Shea Weber at 50% to NSH

[Qwijibo]

There will be a new CBA at that point, so it doesn't really matter what the current rules are. Plus David Poile already has assurances from the league that nothing like that maximum recapture will ever be applied to the Predators. Those two things make it rather moot to try dissecting interpretations right now. They'll deal with the details if and when the time comes, but don't need to spend time on it or publicize anything now when Weber's retirement is just a hypothetical.

Source?

 

[TheWhiskeyThief]

also, i didnt see anyone discuss options in terms of a recapture. Is it possible to make trades in order to have other teams swallow up some of that penalty? It means possibly that you wont hve many picks in the next few years, but it may be preferable to having to sell your core.

Nashville takes the hit on recapture as the amounts paid out above AAV were during his years with the Preds.

The only way they duck out(beyond Weber playing until he’s 60) is for a team on a tear down rebuild needing a cap hit on a discount in 2-3 seasons when the salary paid goes down to $3mm, then $1mm. If you’re playing a bunch of kids on ELCs, it’s awful hard to get to the floor without overpaying some scrubs. You get 4 years of cap hit at ¢20 on the dollar followed by a dead cap hit of $500k. Wait until 2023 and it’s ¢12 on the dollar for 3 years and $300k dead space.

Could be Ottawa(again,) could be Winnipeg. Heck, could even be Nashville the way they’re trending.

 

[Crazy8oooo]

Complain to the commissioner because a rule is being enforced upon your team? That's ridiculous. Nashville didn't have to trade him away and knew at that time that the recapture rule could haunt them down the road. If they were worried about it, they should've kept him. You don't get to take advantage by trading him for an asset and then crying about it later when the rule is enforced.

That is petty, unbusiness like, and at that point 'tit for tat' occurs. You may not believe it but GMs follow rules, unwritten ones. If I'm a GM for Nashville and Montreal does that I'm complaining to the commish. Saying 'We didn't form the contract! We had our hands tied by Philly! It was an offer sheet!' It would be similar to a 'constitutional crisis' with the CBA. If complaining to the NHL central office does not work and the Preds have to chuck salary, I'm sending as much as I can... ALL to Atlantic rivals.

"Say! Boston! You need a Defenseman? Tampa Bay! I have a forward that would be perfect for hurting Montreal, I mean, filling out your lineup.' and so on. and so on.

[MOD]

You see, the above actions would cost the NHL in valuation, money one team falls, the league falls. ALL teams would lose valuation. The teams are in league with each other. Nashville sucks for a couple of years till FA money is spent and draft picks move up the system. The Atlantic become hell for the Habs and they never will get a sniff of the playoffs with Quebec's tax structure and every other team in the Atlantic strong. Nashville is hurt for 3 years maybe 5, Montreal, a half decade or more? It would be Mutually Assured Destruction in hockey. Who else is hurt? The metro. So many Atlantic clubs hogging the WC spots.

That's petty and Bettman has been weeding that out for his entire tenure. The NHL boys club used to be child-like. Fist fights in board rooms, gambling, other child like crap. For the Habs, to do that would be a loss of it's carefully crafted image of class. EVERY GM learns they can't do business with Montreal. EVERY player learns that the Habs will not fulfill their contracts, their promises.

The only winners would be lawyers. But that is me rambling using my college classes in business law, sports law, sports medicine, ETC.

Now, back to the question at hand. What is the value of Shea Weber at 50%?

 

[tony d]

I think Montreal will hold onto Weber. Looks like he's going to be back from injury way sooner than expected.

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

Fair assessment, i guess, but I think the assets he could bring in now would have more impact than his leadership would. There are plenty of grizzled veterans we could tag onto the team that wouldnt cost nearly as much. I am thinking Thompson is doing great work with Evans and Suzuki, for example.

also, i didnt see anyone discuss options in terms of a recapture. Is it possible to make trades in order to have other teams swallow up some of that penalty? It means possibly that you wont hve many picks in the next few years, but it may be preferable to having to sell your core.

recapture is a pretty simple process

if you have a guy that you are paying more real salary than cap hit... you accrue a cap benefit. every year you pay more salary than cap hit that benefit increases. its a running tab. if the player eventually retires when more salary was earnt than cap hit was charged theres a recapture and it gets assigned to whatever team benefited

the ONLY way to reduce this benefit is the reversal. you have that same player on your team when his cap hit is HIGHER than his salary. and this will reduce the recapture.

so each year during webers winddown on his contract he will be getting paid less than his cap hit. if he was playing on Nashville this would burn off their previous advantage they got at the start of the career.

the other thing that Nashville could do... they could appeal to weber's heart. they could tell weber they dont mind giving him a leave of absence... pay out those last couple years of contract without forcing weber to play.

paying that small contract would be way better than suffering the recapture.

if Vancouver had louongo they could avoid the recapture by simply putting him in the ahl and giving him permission to stay home. the hit on their cap would have been less.

but if weber is in montreal… why would montreal pay weber to sit at home? for montreal, they would rather make weber retire. florida wanted louongo to retire. this is why I think there is a pretty powerful reason for teams to keep control of players with huge recapture risks

 

[Ignatius]

The answer can only be that Montreal has to hold onto him... there's no way we are paying what it would take to re-acquire him. Forget about it. He's too good AND too much of an injury risk at the same time.

This is the way I feel about Kris Letang as a Pens fan. We know about his health concerns but he has been able to not only come back from potentially career ending issues but also play arguably the best hockey of his career. I do hope the same for Shea Weber.

 

[McSuper]

Weber is still really good and is not slowing down for at least 3-4 years. A conditional 7th rounder? What?

Reading difficulties or is it tunnel vision ? HF at it finest . He said in 6 years .

 

[bobholly39]

Habs management team values Weber very highly. The return to get him would have to be really, really high - higher than Nashville likely pays, and certainly much higher than what fans on HF likely expect.

Weber is a #1D - and he has the type of skillset that ages well - so he may still have some good longevity in there moving forward. He may no longer be the best D in the league as he was some years ago - but he's still very good and among the best. Whether that's top 10, or top 15 or whatever

 

[Unbiased Fan]

That is petty, unbusiness like, and at that point 'tit for tat' occurs. You may not believe it but GMs follow rules, unwritten ones. If I'm a GM for Nashville and Montreal does that I'm complaining to the commish. Saying 'We didn't form the contract! We had our hands tied by Philly! It was an offer sheet!' It would be similar to a 'constitutional crisis' with the CBA. If complaining to the NHL central office does not work and the Preds have to chuck salary, I'm sending as much as I can... ALL to Atlantic rivals.

"Say! Boston! You need a Defenseman? Tampa Bay! I have a forward that would be perfect for hurting Montreal, I mean, filling out your lineup.' and so on. and so on.

[MOD]

You see, the above actions would cost the NHL in valuation, money one team falls, the league falls. ALL teams would lose valuation. The teams are in league with each other. Nashville sucks for a couple of years till FA money is spent and draft picks move up the system. The Atlantic become hell for the Habs and they never will get a sniff of the playoffs with Quebec's tax structure and every other team in the Atlantic strong. Nashville is hurt for 3 years maybe 5, Montreal, a half decade or more? It would be Mutually Assured Destruction in hockey. Who else is hurt? The metro. So many Atlantic clubs hogging the WC spots.

That's petty and Bettman has been weeding that out for his entire tenure. The NHL boys club used to be child-like. Fist fights in board rooms, gambling, other child like crap. For the Habs, to do that would be a loss of it's carefully crafted image of class. EVERY GM learns they can't do business with Montreal. EVERY player learns that the Habs will not fulfill their contracts, their promises.

The only winners would be lawyers. But that is me rambling using my college classes in business law, sports law, sports medicine, ETC.

Now, back to the question at hand. What is the value of Shea Weber at 50%?

A top pairing RHD with a cap hit of 3.9 mil? 1st of all Toronto would beat any offer. Kappanen, Sandin, Robertson and 1st 2021

From
Nashville

Fabbro, Tolvanen, Smith, 1st 2020 and 1st 2021

 

[DaPhazz]

What is with you and holding cards?

If you don't understand than trying to explain something so simple to you would be completely useless.

 

[Soundgarden]

First round pick 2020 (unprotected), Tolvanen, Tomasino

A top pairing RHD with a cap hit of 3.9 mil? 1st of all Toronto would beat any offer. Kappanen, Sandin, Robertson and 1st 2021

From
Nashville

Fabbro, Tolvanen, Smith, 1st 2020 and 1st 2021

These are awful. If we're giving away the equivalent of 4 first round picks and a 20 goal scorer wouldn't it make more sense to, you know, get a player under 34? Just stupid.

We aren't buyers this year, if anything we should be selling. We have absolutely no interest in acquiring a 34 year old defenseman for anything more than a 3rd. Weber's value, even if he weren't 34 and injured would not be 3-4 picks.

Maybe in 4-6 years I'd be interested, but again, we wouldn't be paying anything close to anything valuable for him.

 

[Archijerej]

As much as I love Shea, I'd be willing to move him for Seth Jones. Oh wait...

 

[triggrman]

Source?

Poile on the radioafter the Subban trade said something along the lines there were rules in place that protected Nashville from recapture, he referenced the rule that keeps teams of players that were traded before 2012 protected. Since Weber's contract wasn't written by Nashville, this is the rule that was assumed Poile was referring too.

As far as a source, I can tell you I heard the interview and if you can find the interview from 102.5 from back then, it's on there.

 

[Crazy8oooo]

Weber was traded long after 2012.

Poile on the radioafter the Subban trade said something along the lines there were rules in place that protected Nashville from recapture, he referenced the rule that keeps teams of players that were traded before 2012 protected. Since Weber's contract wasn't written by Nashville, this is the rule that was assumed Poile was referring too.

As far as a source, I can tell you I heard the interview and if you can find the interview from 102.5 from back then, it's on there.

 

[MXD]

Because if they retain salary, which they can afford to do, they can command a bigger return for him.

Retaining 500K for a +/-3.5M caphit, should Weber be still active, would possibly be the stupidest thing an NHL GM of a big budget team could possibly do (unless actual magical unicorns are sent back Montreal's way).

I get the reasoning, but I just don't think it actually applies here.

 

[triggrman]

Weber was traded long after 2012.

read my post again, then respond.

 

[Captain Mountain]

read my post again, then respond.

That isn't a source. A section of the CBA is a source. A NHL memo is a source. The actual interview is a source.

 

[Crazy8oooo]

Maybe make more sense with what you're writing?

read my post again, then respond.

 

[triggrman]

Maybe make more sense with what you're writing?

Since Weber's contract wasn't written by Nashville, this is the rule that was assumed Poile was referring too.

Do you understand that part? Is that not a clear statement?

Nowhere did I say, "since Weber was traded".

 

[triggrman]

That isn't a source. A section of the CBA is a source. A NHL memo is a source. The actual interview is a source.

I understand that, and Poile didn't actually reference the 2012 trade rule, that was speculation after the interview by whoever was in studio (it's been a few years, so I don't remember who). I was just letting you know why Nashville fans have that opinion or where the opinion originated.

 

[Crazy8oooo]

You need to re-read your post again because it clearly talks about trades prior to 2012.

"he referenced the rule that keeps teams of players that were traded before 2012 protected"

Since Weber's contract wasn't written by Nashville, this is the rule that was assumed Poile was referring too.

Do you understand that part? Is that not a clear statement?

Nowhere did I say, "since Weber was traded".

 

[triggrman]

You need to re-read your post again because it clearly talks about trades prior to 2012.

"he referenced the rule that keeps teams of players that were traded before 2012 protected"

Dude. Keep reading....

Since Weber's contract wasn't written by Nashville, this is the rule that was assumed Poile was referring too.

You do understand Philly wrote Weber's contract?

 

[ole ole]

Poile on the radioafter the Subban trade said something along the lines there were rules in place that protected Nashville from recapture, he referenced the rule that keeps teams of players that were traded before 2012 protected. Since Weber's contract wasn't written by Nashville, this is the rule that was assumed Poile was referring too.

As far as a source, I can tell you I heard the interview and if you can find the interview from 102.5 from back then, it's on there.

Poile was wrong because if he was right every hockey expert would have agreed with him but NONE has..

 

[Crazy8oooo]

I did read the second part. But you're the one who also wrote the first part, which makes no sense being that its referencing trades prior to 2012.

Dude. Keep reading....

Since Weber's contract wasn't written by Nashville, this is the rule that was assumed Poile was referring too.

You do understand Philly wrote Weber's contract?

 

[triggrman]

Poile was wrong because if he was right every hockey expert would have agreed with him but NONE has..

Okay.

I’m just relaying the message.

Also, Poile didn’t reference the 2012 rule. That was just speculation from the studio.