Thread: Weber's value
View Single Post
Old
05-15-2010, 12:20 PM
  #50
glenngineer
Registered User
 
glenngineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,924
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkMM View Post
Haha, I've got a conflict of interest in that I want Weber but I'll bite my tongue and agree with you. I think this could be a good trade for both sides, but if it goes badly, it goes badly for Nashville.

The upside for losing Weber for Nashville is that you'd be getting a lot of scoring, Raymond is IMO blue-chip and Schroeder is looking to be very special, but not a sure bet.

Weber is Weber, it's a sure bet for Vancouver, but there's too many things that have to go right for this deal to work with Nashville.

We have Bernier if you want someone that has shown flashes of power-forward ability, but his inconsistency is making him not worth the $2M he's at right now. When Vancouver complains about a guy's salary and we're willing to bury million-dollar one-way deals in the minors just to have playoff depth we can recall, you know there's issues with Bernier.
No interest in Bernier...lol. While I like the possibilities of Raymond and Schroeder, I'd probably want Hodgson in the deal too. Sorry if I misspelled that one. Too stubborn to look it up right now...lol. That's a lot to give up if I'm Vancouver but we are giving up one of the best defensemen in the league. There is no guarantee those three will succeed in the NHL. Raymond has proven himself and I like his game but the other two are prospects at this point, even though they're high level ones, there is no guarantee and it's not like if they don't work out we can get Weber back at that point.

I don't know that Vancouver would be an ideal trading partner with Nashville. Now since Gillis went on record as wanting more a veteran playoff presence, we might be able to make a multi player deal going both ways that might make more sense. Not sure what it would be but that may be more feasible.

glenngineer is online now   Reply With Quote