Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Report] Predators Match Offer Sheet To Captain Shea Weber


Recommended Posts

Just read today that when the Preds decided to match the offer sheet, Poile asked Trotz to drive to Weber's house to deliver the news in person.

So Weber has an off-season home in Nashville. That doesn't sound like the kind of player that really wanted out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly. By signing that offersheet he was basically saying that he would be happy playing in Philly or Nashville for the rest of his career. As long as he got a truckload of money.

Now that it's Nashville, he comes out and says that he wants to spend the rest of his career there like it was his first and only choice.

I just don't like the two-faced players like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, just thinking out loud here, but after you get past the 17-18 season the Preds have a superDman for cheap for the rest of his playing career. Weird, but even after the rollback this offseason, the preds may win this situation from 2018 to 2023 having an allstar Dman for dirt cheap, albeit, having paid up front for him, while still enjoying the high cap hit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, just thinking out loud here, but after you get past the 17-18 season the Preds have a superDman for cheap for the rest of his playing career. Weird, but even after the rollback this offseason, the preds may win this situation from 2018 to 2023 having an allstar Dman for dirt cheap, albeit, having paid up front for him, while still enjoying the high cap hit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand the anger. Weber never said he wanted out of Nashville. Clearly contract talks weren't going anywhere (just like last season) so the guy signs an offer sheet knowing full well that Nashville would likely match it.

It sounds like a win-win situation for Weber: if Nashville matches he gets to stay with the team and gets money and term, plus he gets his contract before the new CBA. If Nashville doesn't match then he gets to play for a SC contender.

Sounds like a smart business decision to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the main conclusion is that Weber's first priority was to get a long term deal with a crap load of money before new CBA. However, there really was ZERO loyalty on Weber's part towards Nashville. He shouldn't say his first choice was to stay in Nashville. 110m spread over 14 years is definitely a contract that Nasvhille can match but he signed a crippling one which was front loaded with heavy bonuses that would screw over Nashville.

If he really wanted to stay in Nashville AND wanted the 14yr 110m contract WITHOUT screwing Nashville over, he could have just went to Poile and said, Philly just gave me a crazy front loaded 14 yr 110m contract. I can't pass this up. My first preference is Nashville so I want you guys to match but if you are going to match, I don't want to cripple the franchise so we can work the numbers so that you don't have to pay me 27m in 1 calendar year. How does 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8,6,3,1. That way we can get some other guys signed to build a winner. That sounds like what a true captain would do...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally see your point. I guess I'm just thinking that it seems as if Weber was tired of waiting for Nashville to make an offer. It's possible that Weber was questioning Nashville's willingness to spend to win (which is valid after not being able to retain Suter) and so decided to force the issue.

I agree with you that it may not have been the most "noble" thing to do - even more so as he is the captain. But, at the end of the day, hockey players have to be businessmen also. You're 100% correct in that Weber's first priority was to get a long term contract before the new CBA kicks in, and the bonus gets paid regardless of if there is hockey next season.

I think where we disagree is on how we view his actions - I really don't have an issue with players taking care of themselves. They will get paid what the market will bear (i.e. - what GM's are willing to spend).

You also make a really good point in that this contract may cripple Nashville's ability to be competitive - it'll be interesting to see how this plays out over the next few years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Totally agree. Don't get me wrong. If i was in Weber's shoes, I would definitely have signed that contract. Front loaded 110m contract is worth much more than getting paid 7m per season for 14 years (due to inflation, etc)

Weber's decision was a personal business decision more than a hockey decision and I think that's what people are griping about. That being said, if another company offered me 110m right now to jump ship, I'd jump without looking back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the main conclusion is that Weber's first priority was to get a long term deal with a crap load of money before new CBA. However, there really was ZERO loyalty on Weber's part towards Nashville. He shouldn't say his first choice was to stay in Nashville. 110m spread over 14 years is definitely a contract that Nasvhille can match but he signed a crippling one which was front loaded with heavy bonuses that would screw over Nashville.

If he really wanted to stay in Nashville AND wanted the 14yr 110m contract WITHOUT screwing Nashville over, he could have just went to Poile and said, Philly just gave me a crazy front loaded 14 yr 110m contract. I can't pass this up. My first preference is Nashville so I want you guys to match but if you are going to match, I don't want to cripple the franchise so we can work the numbers so that you don't have to pay me 27m in 1 calendar year. How does 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8,6,3,1. That way we can get some other guys signed to build a winner. That sounds like what a true captain would do...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Good question by my opinon is minimum wage requirements trump contract wage. The NHL will only allow you to pay a minimum amount per year.

In other words, if you sign a contract to get 8 bucks an hour and then minimum wage goes to 10 bucks, your employer will have to raise your wage to $10 bucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...