MikeBossy Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 LMAO - I tip my hat to those who have said over and over and over that Weber wouldn't be a Canuck. There's no way he fits into our Cap. And Gillis is a big believer in Moneyball - watch the movie to get a basic idea of how it works - no way was Gillis going to offer that type of contract again after the Luongo fiasco. Weber is screwed if Nashville matches in the sense he is a Pred for life lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Canuck Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 First, it's been said 100 times that the compensation is 4 firsts. Keep up. Second, that is such BS logic. Bernier has/had little to zero value at all, and Grabner was a prospect that we didn't have a spot for and didn't fit the team philosophy. And he obviously had zero trade value to Florida since they put him on waivers months later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustJokinen! Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Somehow I think this type of deal we are seeing tonight is going to make a lot of fans side with the owners in a new CBA, because this is just ridiculous, Allowed, but still it needs to be addressed soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jai604 Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 I'm pretty stunned, but I knew Weber wasn't coming here. It makes sense for him to sign with Philly. Looking more than 2-3 years down the road, the Canucks' future doesn't look particularly bright. Philly, on the other hand, is loaded with talented youngsters who will only get better with time. Weber has to do this in order the secure the money before the next CBA, which is set to put a 5-year limit on contracts. If the contract is as front-loaded as some have claimed, Nashville will have a hard time matching even though the compensation is not worth what Weber is worth. Thinking of Weber in an orange jersey makes me want to puke a bit, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Canuck Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Now this is what you call a 'BOLD MOVE' MG! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Champions of Nothing Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 I agree. These types of contracts have been circumventing the cap for years. I totally side with the owners on their proposals. I don't see them getting everything they asked for but I believe at least these rediculous contracts will be a thing of the past in the new CBA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I R Baboon Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 lp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucksh Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Well I suppose the guy I worked with was correct....here's a post I made about Weber before... "This is not a reliable source as it was just passed on by word of mouth... but up north I was working with a guy from the Kelowna area, and his wife was friends with Shea Webers girlfriend or sister(cant remember which he said)... anyways the person said that Shea Weber told them that he will never play for the Canucks. The guy I worked with said he didn't understand why Shea would say that, but he said Shea said it in a way that he wouldn't want to play for the Canucks. It wasn't said in a way as if it would just be a salary cap issue, or lineup issue... it was just that he didn't want to play with the Canucks. Like I said this isn't reliable, but the guy that told me this is a big Canuck fan, and he is level headed. He wasn't the type of person to ramble off random stuff just to feel important. Keep in mind, Weber obviously wouldn't say this publicly, he has to keep it classy. For all we know, he doesn't like the big market atmosphere. Even if this isn't true, it still makes me realize that there is lots of stuff that NO ONE knows, except for Weber and his close group of friends/family." I'm not shocked that he will never play for the Canucks, he doesn't seem like the type of player to play here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacare Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 if poile isnt in on this holmgren is an idiot. half his core are RFA's in the next 3 years. this year its voracek. next year its simmonds. then the next year its schenn, giroux, and coutourier. unless the new CBA drastically cuts young players salaries(unlikely) NSH could convievably checkmate PHI into overpaying for simmonds and voracek, then offer sheet the big 3 in a way that they are forced to part with 1 or even 2 of them. most likely schenn and coutourier. at which point it would be schenn, coutourier, 2 1st, 2nd, 3rd(or 4 1st.) for weber or if poile matches then they don't even get weber and he does it just to spite them lol. retaliation aint fun we had to pay like 2.5m for steve bernier because of it lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockey21383 Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 26 million?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunningWild Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 First, it's been said 100 times that the compensation is 4 firsts. Keep up. Second, that is such BS logic. Bernier has/had little to zero value at all, and Grabner was a prospect that we didn't have a spot for and didn't fit the team philosophy. And he obviously had zero trade value to Florida since they put him on waivers months later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17's heart&hustle Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Nashville will match because they probably want to get something more for weber than 4 picks. 4 picks aren't going to help them win now, they will have just lost the best defenceman in the nhl without getting an impact player back. So if Weber wants out he gives a list of teams and nashville makes a deal happen that would better suit their needs. Here's to hoping Vancouver is on that list Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Common sense Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 it's not 4 1st rounders bud. Depending per year salary, it could be 2 1st rds, 2nd and a 3rd. It's you who needs to keep up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Champions of Nothing Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 it's not 4 1st rounders bud. Depending per year salary, it could be 2 1st rds, 2nd and a 3rd. It's you who needs to keep up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeBossy Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 I agree. These types of contracts have been circumventing the cap for years. I totally side with the owners on their proposals. I don't see them getting everything they asked for but I believe at least these rediculous contracts will be a thing of the past in the new CBA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIBdaQUIB Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Somehow I think this type of deal we are seeing tonight is going to make a lot of fans side with the owners in a new CBA, because this is just ridiculous, Allowed, but still it needs to be addressed soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Now this is what you call a 'BOLD MOVE' MG! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Standing_Tall#37 Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Do you want a Stanley Cup Gillis??? Clearly not.....Changes need to be made to this team but he just doesnt get it. He doesnt understand that if u want a STAR player in this league you have to PAY for it, and not try to get people at discounts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rey Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Every team has unproven prospects. Outside Granlund, not a huge impact within 3 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Holmgren and Poile have a long relationship through various deals. Wouldn't surprise me if this was just done as a favour to Poile. The only way the Canucks could've gotten Weber was through unrestricted free agency. But everyone knew he wasn't even going to make free agency, right? I suppose we could still dream that Weber will 'demand to be be traded to Vancouver', but jeez, let it go already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.