475 replies to this topic

[hillbillywingsfan]

Because forking over $27-million to one player in a calendar year before you could trade him is a huge stumbling block for a small market club that Forbes valued at $168 million in 2011. Almost 1/3 of the value of the franchise will be doled out to one player ($56-million) during the first four years of the contract. It's a big pill to swallow for a small-market franchise. It's sole purpose is to put the screws to Nashville's ability to match the offer. If the money was spread out over the term evenly Nashville would have matched it the second it was submitted to the league office.

But how would it work if nashville matches..They can turn around and trade him correct? And in these offers like this can they put in no-trade clause/no-movement clause

Edited by hillbillywingsfan, 19 July 2012 - 01:09 PM.

[vladdy16]

But how would it work if nashville matches..They can turn around and trade him correct? And in these offers like this can they put in no-trade clause/no-movement clause

They cannot trade him for a year. The "signing bonus" pretty effectively hamstrung Nashville.

[Shaman464]

That is an old Hindu saying. You have conveniently left out the rest of the passage, so I'll give it to you in context: "Action is better than inaction. Without action no one can survive," but "Act in such a way that it does not bind but frees one from ignorance." In other words, action is better than inaction, but your actions should be guarded and well-conceived.

Your argument seems to be that Holland making a big splash in the stupidest way imaginable would be preferable to him taking more prudent measures that might not succeed. If so, then the saying you've quoted absolutely disagrees with you.

Well that'd be a strawman. His moves have not been prudent at all, as they are in a position currently where their only options are to:

A. Overpay in FA
or
B. Overpay in a trade.


These are not the options that are left to the prudent GMs.

[turbowhistle86]

In what universe was Jagr a big free-agent splash?

In the universe where multiple contenders, us included, were going batsh*t crazy hoping to sign him. The question was posed about the Flyers' FA signings ending horribly. I think it's safe to say there was nothing horrible about Jagr's play last season.

[FlashyG]

Well that'd be a strawman. His moves have not been prudent at all, as they are in a position currently where their only options are to:

A. Overpay in FA
or
B. Overpay in a trade.


These are not the options that are left to the prudent GMs.

But overpaying in the form of an offer-sheet is what he should have done?

[Crymson]

This one?

Obviously it wasn't like Suter and Parise, but don't you remember all the giddy speculation last year about who would sign him? There were something like 5 Cup contending teams that were in the mix for him.

To me, a superstar of Jagr's caliber returning from the KHL is a pretty big free agent splash, even at his age.

He was paid $3.3m for one year. That is not at all the type of big free-agent splash that was being made reference to.

In the universe where multiple contenders, us included, were going batsh*t crazy hoping to sign him. The question was posed about the Flyers' FA signings ending horribly. I think it's safe to say there was nothing horrible about Jagr's play last season.

Bats*** crazy, eh? That's a tremendous exaggeration. The highest bid for Jagr was $3.3m. The Wings offered something in the realm of $2.5m, as did the Penguins. In what universe do those sorts of offers constitute bats***-crazy attempts to sign a player?

Edited by Crymson, 19 July 2012 - 01:47 PM.

[Shaman464]

But overpaying in the form of an offer-sheet is what he should have done?

That's not an overpayment.

[FlashyG]

You can't possibly pay a player more than Weber will be making for the next few years. On top of that if he gets him, it also costs him 4 first round draft picks.

Weber is a great defenceman but he isn't the best player in the NHL

[haroldsnepsts]

He was paid $3.3m for one year. That is not at all the type of big free-agent splash that was being made reference to.

Bats*** crazy, eh? That's a tremendous exaggeration. The highest bid for Jagr was $3.3m. The Wings offered something in the realm of $2.5m, as did the Penguins. In what universe do those sorts of offers constitute bats***-crazy attempts to sign a player?

Oh, now we're just using salary as a measure?

The original phrase was a "big free agent splash". I don't think I need to go over Jagr's resume, but his return to the NHL was a pretty big free agent signing. There were multiple teams trying to sign him, and there was also pretty significant risk given his age and the question mark of transitioning from the KHL. Both those factors kept his salary down.

But $3.3 million for a 40 year old who's been away from the NHL for 3 years isn't exactly chump change. In terms of a big free agent splash that could've gone bad but didn't, I'd say Jagr definitely qualifies, which was the original point of the post that started all this.

[kylee]

Nashville is getting hosed this off season

[Matt]

You can't possibly pay a player more than Weber will be making for the next few years. On top of that if he gets him, it also costs him 4 first round draft picks.

Weber is a great defenceman but he isn't the best player in the NHL

No one is saying he's the best player in the NHL, he's just one of the top three -- if not the best -- player at his position and he's now compensated as such. Regardless, the cost of successfully prying a player away via offer sheet -- and offer sheets for *any* players, for that matter -- is done via two ways: vast overpayment or handcuffing a franchise via poison pill(s).

I don't believe Weber is overpaid in this case over the term of the contract, but in order for the Flyers to even pry him from Nashville they had to put in a monster of a poison pill to the tune of $52 million in bonus money alone over the first four years that cannot be reduced by a new CBA-forced salary rollback.

That's $52 million over the first four years no matter what. Period. No way to get around that, have it reduced by 24% Rollback Part 2, etc., etc..

[FlashyG]

I agree that Weber is one of the top 3 at his position, but I don't necessarily think that justifies a max deal.

You said it yourself, it was a poison pill to prevent Nashville from matching. If they offered him his market value Nashville would definitely match.

You will never land a player via offer sheet without overpaying. I'm not saying Philly made a mistake, I'm just rejecting the notion that signing someone to an offer-sheet is somehow a more prudent strategy than overpaying via trade or signing. Its all overpaying, what difference does it make which way you do it?

[toby91_ca]

No one is saying he's the best player in the NHL, he's just one of the top three -- if not the best -- player at his position and he's now compensated as such. Regardless, the cost of successfully prying a player away via offer sheet -- and offer sheets for *any* players, for that matter -- is done via two ways: vast overpayment or handcuffing a franchise via poison pill(s).

I don't believe Weber is overpaid in this case over the term of the contract, but in order for the Flyers to even pry him from Nashville they had to put in a monster of a poison pill to the tune of $52 million in bonus money alone over the first four years that cannot be reduced by a new CBA-forced salary rollback.

That's $52 million over the first four years no matter what. Period. No way to get around that, have it reduced by 24% Rollback Part 2, etc., etc..

I think the general consensus is that he's getting the $52M or 56M, whatever the bonus money is regardless (i.e. no way it could be reduced via rollback, etc.), but I'm guessing it is theoretically possible that something is negotiated in the new CBA such that those bonus amounts could be reduced. Anything is possible of both sides agree to it I would assume.

[GoWings1905]

You can't possibly pay a player more than Weber will be making for the next few years. On top of that if he gets him, it also costs him 4 first round draft picks.

Weber is a great defenceman but he isn't the best player in the NHL

You could easily make a case Weber is the best d-man in the NHL. The likelihood of any of the first round picks being as good as Weber is very slim. Especially since the Flyers will probably be picking lower in the first round.

Given other contracts in the league right now, this is a very reasonable deal for an elite player. The 14 years is insane, but Weber may not even play out the entire contract and he's in his prime right now.

This was a really shrewd move by Holmgren and the Flyers. Taking advantage of the system before it changes drastically. I'm starting to think today that Nashville won't match either.

[predmonkee]

Poile will match this. I said in another thread last week that Weber would ink a long term deal before the CBA expires. The idea that Nashville can't afford to pay its players is ignorant. This is a different ownership group. Poile had equal offers on the table for Suter and Parise. Saying Philly "hamstrung" Nashville with a front loaded deal is ignorant as well. They did Nashville a favor here.

Also, the idea that Weber wants out of Nashville is not true. Really think he was gonna gamble 14 yrs of his career if he wanted out? Weber will be happy as hell in Nashville, even more so when that direct deposit hits his bank account every month. And since there isn't a state income tax in Tennessee, that check is gonna look a lot nicer than it would in Philly.

[Matt]

The Flyers did sign Weber to a market value deal -- they just front-loaded it, and that's the key difference here. His AAV is right in line with other comparable elite players for their positions. I don't think the Red Wings would have any qualms throwing an offer out there like this: they have the financial wherewithal and the desperate need to improve at that position. I just wish Holland would throw the "pointless" or "not our modus operandi" that St. James mentions out the window.... You have to change with the times, and if Philadelphia lands a franchise defenseman that roams their blueline for the next 10 years, it was worth it.

That players of the caliber of Suter and Weber were both even available is shocking (less so since they're from the same team, however) and increasingly frustrating that the Red Wings didn't grab one or the other with such a glaring need (despite the salary requirements -- they needed one).

The four 1st-rounders don't concern me when it's a franchise defenseman.

[Crymson]

The Flyers did sign Weber to a market value deal -- they just front-loaded it, and that's the key difference here. His AAV is right in line with other comparable elite players for their positions. I don't think the Red Wings would have any qualms throwing an offer out there like this: they have the financial wherewithal and the desperate need to improve at that position. I just wish Holland would throw the "pointless" or "not our modus operandi" that St. James mentions out the window.... You have to change with the times, and if Philadelphia lands a franchise defenseman that roams their blueline for the next 10 years, it was worth it.

That players of the caliber of Suter and Weber were both even available is shocking (less so since they're from the same team, however) and increasingly frustrating that the Red Wings didn't grab one or the other with such a glaring need (despite the salary requirements -- they needed one).

The four 1st-rounders don't concern me when it's a franchise defenseman.

I think the concern was less about the four first-rounders and more about the fact that throwing an offer sheet at Weber might have guaranteed that he'd be a Predator for the length of the contract offered.

Based on what the Predators end up doing, we'll see if you were correct or not. That said, I think that the Predators would have been even more likely to match an equivalent offer sheet from a rival within their division.

Edited by Crymson, 19 July 2012 - 02:27 PM.

[Matt]

I think the general consensus is that he's getting the $52M or 56M, whatever the bonus money is regardless (i.e. no way it could be reduced via rollback, etc.), but I'm guessing it is theoretically possible that something is negotiated in the new CBA such that those bonus amounts could be reduced. Anything is possible of both sides agree to it I would assume.

I would be shocked if that's not adjusted in some way. It's really only taken such huge precedence this summer -- and to a lesser degree, last summer, too -- because of the impact on a potential salary rollback with the CBA. A nice little "offshore" account for players with the bonus money this year, protected from Bettman's grubby little hands.

Just to throw a number out there for shiggles: If there was a 25% salary rollback starting next season, Shea Weber would only earn $55 of his $56 million. Oh, the horror!

[GoWings1905]

I don't think Nashville would be any more likely to match a Red Wings offer sheet than the Flyers. Trading with Detroit is a different story.

The front-loaded part of the deal is something the Red Wings have done before and was an incredibly smart move by Holmgren. That's the catch that will determine if Nashville can match or not.

I think an offer sheet for Weber would have been worth it for the Red Wings even if it meant the risk of keeping Weber in the Central. They are desperate for a top pairing d-man and there are very few options available. It isn't in Holland's nature to do so, but you make an exception for a player like Weber.

[FlashyG]

The Flyers did sign Weber to a market value deal -- they just front-loaded it, and that's the key difference here. His AAV is right in line with other comparable elite players for their positions. I don't think the Red Wings would have any qualms throwing an offer out there like this: they have the financial wherewithal and the desperate need to improve at that position. I just wish Holland would throw the "pointless" or "not our modus operandi" that St. James mentions out the window.... You have to change with the times, and if Philadelphia lands a franchise defenseman that roams their blueline for the next 10 years, it was worth it.

That players of the caliber of Suter and Weber were both even available is shocking (less so since they're from the same team, however) and increasingly frustrating that the Red Wings didn't grab one or the other with such a glaring need (despite the salary requirements -- they needed one).

The four 1st-rounders don't concern me when it's a franchise defenseman.

I'd be pretty surprised if the Wings signed someone to a cap hit over 8 mil.

I agree he's one of the best, if not the best defenceman out there, but 8.38 is an awfully big cap hit to carry for 13 years, especially with a cap rollback being almost a certainty.