[Discussion] Trading for Shea Weber

[smokes]

There has been talk about how trading Shae Weber might actually be a good move for Nashville. If by some stroke of chance Shea Weber was available, should the Canucks try to get him? If so, what would it take to get Weber out of Nashville?

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/id/40429/ramblings-should-the-predators-trade-shea-weber

an exerpt "A fanciful notion? Perhaps, but consider this: The Predators are in a unique situation with their most valuable asset. Because of the offer sheet Weber signed in 2012 with the Philadelphia Flyers, which the team subsequently matched, Weber does not have trade protection. Poile can do with Weber as he sees fit. Extend him, trade him or invite him to dinner. It is a singular dynamic in an NHL where no-trade and no-move clauses are handed out like candy on Halloween." 

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/why-trading-shea-weber-finally-makes-sense-for-nashville-175501590.html;_ylt=AwrSbgJ6EYRWCRUAz_pXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTEyaXZoOTRzBGNvbG8DZ3ExBHBvcwMyBHZ0aWQDQjEzNTBfMQRzZWMDc3I-

[Gstank29]

Nope it will cost to much. 

 

But Shea Weber is my favorite defenceman in the league

[Screw]

Dear god. I hope this guy never comes to Vancouver.

[Drive-By Body Pierce]

So essentially, the writer is saying because S.Weber is in the "unique" situation of having no NTC or NMC, that he could be traded. Genious!

Poile has repeatedly said Weber, Josi and Jones are going nowhere, even with the recent chances and chatter of them acquiring a 1st line center like Johansen. And I don't blame him, you build cup winners with elite top pairings.

[Sedintwinpowersactivate]

It depends on the cost.  He is already 30 years old, so maybe 5 solid seasons left.  Will our kids be hitting their prime in this window?  Tough to say.  Maybe if they develop quickly?  And who would you have to give up?  If S. Weber was 27 years old I would do it... but we are too far from being a contender... so I'd have to say No!

[smokes]

8 minutes ago, Drive-By Body Pierce said:

So essentially, the writer is saying because S.Weber is in the "unique" situation of having no NTC or NMC, that he could be traded. Genious!

Poile has repeatedly said Weber, Josi and Jones are going nowhere, even with the recent chances and chatter of them acquiring a 1st line center like Johansen. And I don't blame him, you build cup winners with elite top pairings.

That's why this topic is under proposals. GM's lie all the time. It's part of negotiation. I agree with Poile as well, there is no way a Johansen is worth a Weber.

[elvis15]

He's 30, with 10 years remaining on his back diving contract, and losing his cap hit would actually put the Preds below the salary floor. If it were a few years ago when we had a contending team, then I'd consider it, but not now with a few years of a re-tool and for the cost it'd take in good, young assets. This wouldn't ever be a Weber for Edler straight up trade remember.

I will say this though, if they ever wanted to do it, this summer would be a good time. Weber still has two more years at $12M in salary with an $8M signing bonus and he's not the only real draw for a player they have any more. They have young stars finally coming up, and they could use the pieces he'd bring back to improve other areas of the team.

Then again, if they haven't traded him after the last four years of $14M in salary and $13M in signing bonus each year then maybe they won't.

 

14 minutes ago, smokes said:

That's why this topic is under proposals. GM's lie all the time. It's part of negotiation. I agree with Poile as well, there is no way a Johansen is worth a Weber.

Well, you forgot to put any tags in the title, so you can forgive him if he wasn't sure which sub-forum it was in.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

41 minutes ago, Drive-By Body Pierce said:

So essentially, the writer is saying because S.Weber is in the "unique" situation of having no NTC or NMC, that he could be traded. Genious!

Poile has repeatedly said Weber, Josi and Jones are going nowhere, even with the recent chances and chatter of them acquiring a 1st line center like Johansen. And I don't blame him, you build cup winners with elite top pairings.

Elliot Freidman was saying that NSH is actually considering the options of a Johansen for Jones deal. But need to find out exactly why Johansen is on the market.  (attitude, work ethic, health concerns).  He's had 4 coaches in 5 years say his effort levels aren't good and he's been healthy scratched because of it.  But you can say a player will never be traded... that is until you get an offer you can't refuse.

[Lockhart]

He's too old for any rebuilding team and a contending team would have to give up too much.

[tyhee]

 

1.  I believe making or taking on a contract to pay a single player big money for a long term when the player is at an age where he's unlikely to improve is a very large risk.

Speaking for a moment in generalities, aside from the occasional rarity (Bourque, Lidstrom) players don't last until the age of 40 as elite players.  Some time in their 30's their play begins to regress.  In some cases it regresses slowly and a former top player is still a very good one.  In some cases it happens more quickly and players can become millstones.

The longer the term  and higher the cap hit, the heavier the millstone.

2.  Unless the Canucks got lucky and Weber turned out to be one of those rarities that maintains an elite level for a long while, I think Weber and the Canucks are a complete misfit as far as timing for the future is concerned.

There are a few optimists that think the Canucks could become contenders for the S.C. in the next season or two.  I'm not one of them. 

The Predators would ask a lot for Weber.  Weber's play is, unless he is one of those few who can hold off the effect of age for a long while, going to be regressing by the time the Canucks have any chance of being good enough to make a cup run.  To hope for him to still be elite in 5 years is optimism.  To hope for him to still be elite in 7 years is wild-eyed optimism.

Among the assets the Predators would want will be youth, players younger than Weber who will help in the future and draft picks.

So essentially, Canucks would be probably hurting their future (in my view seriously as the asking price will be high) for a guy who might be able to help them become a good but less than elite team at present.

Imo it would be a horrible, ridiculous gamble. 

 

[mll]

The Predators are not trading Weber.  They are so many hockey reasons to not trade him but there is also the recapture penalty.

The NHL thinks that the structure of certain contracts was a way to circumvent the cap so they've implemented a penalty that counts against the cap in case of early retirement.  The underlying idea is that negotiations to such contracts went something like this - exaggerating to make my point:
Player: "I want 100M over 10 years."   Meaning a cap hit of 10M over 10 years.
Team: "Sure we'll pay you 100M by year 10 but let's add 5M over an additional 5 years to make it 105M over 15 years although we expect you to retire after 10 years."  Which now makes it a cap hit of 7M where after 10 years the player is paid the 100M he asked for.

Here are some of the numbers for Weber for a trade this summer.

Cap penalty for his new team by allowing Weber to retire 3 years early: None - meaning they have all the reasons to have him retire early if he is no longer worth his 7.8M cap hit.

All the opposite for Nashville who needs him to play his contract in full - a trade is allowing another team to decide on their fate.

• 3 years before - 3 x 1M given up with 107M salary paid.  Additional cap hit for Nashville: 3 x 8.2M
• 2 years before - 2 x 1M given up with 108M salary paid.  Additional cap hit for Nashville: 2 x 12.3M
• 1 year before - 1M given up with 109M salary paid.  Additional cap hit for Nashville: 1 x 24.6M

If Weber is not traded the cap penalty is more manageable (6.9M per year for each of the 3 years before, 5.5M for 5 years before) and Nashville can actually get a say on his retirement date.

 

 

 

 

[Canucks Prophet]

No thank you. Great defenceman, but at his age and contract, he's a short term solution and it'll empty our prospect pool just to acquire him. 

[luckylager]

10 hours ago, Lockhart said:

He's too old for any rebuilding team and a contending team would have to give up too much.

Yup, when teams throw that kind of term and cash at players, both parties end up pigeon holed.

At what point does Shea go: frack, looks like I'm stuck here, maybe MY AGENT should have got me a 5yr $60m... 

[PhillipBlunt]

Weber won't be in Nashville in two seasons. Mark my words.  

If Poile was so intent on keeping Shea in Nashville for the rest of his career, he would have signed the NTC and NMC that Weber and his agent requested. He didn't. 

[Lockhart]

^ Why not trade Seth Jones? Seth Jones could still get them the top forward they lack.

[mll]

4 hours ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Weber won't be in Nashville in two seasons. Mark my words.  

If Poile was so intent on keeping Shea in Nashville for the rest of his career, he would have signed the NTC and NMC that Weber and his agent requested. He didn't. 

And you'd be wrong.  Do you really think that Nashville would give another team the power to significantly set-back their franchise?

The numbers I posted above are even more dramatic for a trade in 2017 or 2018.  It reaches well beyond the 30M cap penalty against Nashville for a retirement in the final year.  The whole idea of the penalty is that it was the team and the player's mindset that he would retire early when he signed.  So I would certainly not bet on players with such contracts wanting to play out their contracts in full.

Making an exception for Nashville would set a precedent and allow cap strapped teams like the Blackhawks, the Wild etc to possibly rid themselves easy of such contracts down the road.  The Blackhawks would not have the same look for their Cups if they didn't have Hossa or Keith on such contracts. 

Even the Canucks used it with Luongo for the 2011 run and now have roughly an aggregate 8M cap penalty looming over their heads if he retires before he is 43 (- could become reality as the impact for the Panthers is negligible - between 0 and 1M).  

[PhillipBlunt]

9 hours ago, mll said:

And you'd be wrong.  Do you really think that Nashville would give another team the power to significantly set-back their franchise?

The numbers I posted above are even more dramatic for a trade in 2017 or 2018.  It reaches well beyond the 30M cap penalty against Nashville for a retirement in the final year.  The whole idea of the penalty is that it was the team and the player's mindset that he would retire early when he signed.  So I would certainly not bet on players with such contracts wanting to play out their contracts in full.

Making an exception for Nashville would set a precedent and allow cap strapped teams like the Blackhawks, the Wild etc to possibly rid themselves easy of such contracts down the road.  The Blackhawks would not have the same look for their Cups if they didn't have Hossa or Keith on such contracts. 

Even the Canucks used it with Luongo for the 2011 run and now have roughly an aggregate 8M cap penalty looming over their heads if he retires before he is 43 (- could become reality as the impact for the Panthers is negligible - between 0 and 1M).  

That doesn't answer why Weber wasn't granted a NTC or NMC. 

Any other player of his ilk has clauses in their contract. Poile never signed the two requested by Weber because, when the time comes, he won't want to be hampered by a whittled down list of destinations. 

[mll]

28 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

That doesn't answer why Weber wasn't granted a NTC or NMC. 

Any other player of his ilk has clauses in their contract. Poile never signed the two requested by Weber because, when the time comes, he won't want to be hampered by a whittled down list of destinations. 

The recapture penalty was introduced retroactively.  At the time not having an NTC or NMC allowed Nashville to keep flexibility but now that the cap recapture penalty on such contract is part of the CBA there is no chance that he will ever be traded.

[smokes]

14 hours ago, Lockhart said:

^ Why not trade Seth Jones? Seth Jones could still get them the top forward they lack.

Seth Jones is also young enough to grow with a new core in Nashville. 

[Fanuck]

I Don't want Shae Weber.  

I want the next Shae Weber!