HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Nashville Predators
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Weber's value

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-13-2010, 03:39 AM
  #26
dulzhok
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,528
vCash: 500
Malkin for Weber or Suter +(which ever one is least like to resign in Nashville). Get it done!

If there ever was a chance, it's now.

dulzhok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-13-2010, 08:25 AM
  #27
token grinder
formerly sirryan189
 
token grinder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Franklin
Country: United States
Posts: 4,158
vCash: 500
nashville keeps getting good news on the contract front. backstrom, who may be comparable at forward as weber is a d-man is rumored to make 6.9 million over 10 years. i still think both are studs get the 10 year 60 million offer and i hhope they accept it

token grinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-13-2010, 08:44 AM
  #28
PredsV82
Puckaroni and cheese
 
PredsV82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Outside
Country: Scotland
Posts: 13,233
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by token grinder View Post
nashville keeps getting good news on the contract front. backstrom, who may be comparable at forward as weber is a d-man is rumored to make 6.9 million over 10 years. i still think both are studs get the 10 year 60 million offer and i hhope they accept it
I agree. I think weber isnt going to try to gouge the preds and would take 6 million for multiple years.

the question will be since Weber will get a contract first, will Suter take less than Weber?

PredsV82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-13-2010, 08:51 AM
  #29
SmokeyClause
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Miami, FL
Country: Cuba
Posts: 9,999
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SmokeyClause
Quote:
Originally Posted by dulzhok View Post
Malkin for Weber or Suter +(which ever one is least like to resign in Nashville). Get it done!

If there ever was a chance, it's now.
Malkin's contract scares me. He makes a ton of money and was terribly inconsistent this season. And you wonder, was it a fluke season or is there a natural and understandable decline in effort that is associated with signing a deal that sets you for life?

I do think the Pens should move him. And they desparately need quality defensemen after playing an entire season without a single top 3 defenseman.

And the Preds desperately need a player of the quality of Malkin. I'm just worried that tying up 25% of our budget in a player who floated a lot this season is a huge gamble.

Of course, if he played to his ability, he wouldn't even be available. So there in lays the intrigue.

SmokeyClause is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-13-2010, 09:57 AM
  #30
Enoch
This is my boomstick
 
Enoch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cookeville TN
Country: United States
Posts: 12,525
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PredsV82 View Post
I agree. I think weber isnt going to try to gouge the preds and would take 6 million for multiple years.

the question will be since Weber will get a contract first, will Suter take less than Weber?
I think they get almost identical deals.

__________________
- Enoch -
Enoch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-13-2010, 10:17 AM
  #31
token grinder
formerly sirryan189
 
token grinder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Franklin
Country: United States
Posts: 4,158
vCash: 500
why is it so hard to make people understand weber's value is equal to 4 first rounders because of his contract, not what he is actually worth?

token grinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-13-2010, 10:24 AM
  #32
glenngineer
Registered User
 
glenngineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 4,028
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PredsV82 View Post
I agree. I think weber isnt going to try to gouge the preds and would take 6 million for multiple years.

the question will be since Weber will get a contract first, will Suter take less than Weber?
Here's the thing, if Weber gets to be a RFA, Poile can negotiate both Suter and Weber's deals at the same time. Suter would be getting an extension while Weber would be getting a new deal. If I'm Poile, I go to both of them and say, we want to continue to build this team around the two of you, what would it take to keep you here for the next 8-10 years. Would they go for $5.5 a year or $6 or more? Who knows? Duncan Keith is gonna get a hair over $5.5 a year. If they can sign both for that sort of money, I think everyone will be happy. The other possibility is giving Weber an extension once July 1 hits and then doing the same with Suter next year.

Let me ask you this, why do you think Suter should or would take less than Weber? Obviously they both bring different things to the table but I still think Suter is the better all around player of the two. You take Suter off of that pairing and all of a sudden Weber is being asked to puck handle more and that is one of Suter's greatest strengths. Not sure I want Weber skating the puck up ice. Then again, is a guy like Blum or any other prospect ready to step in and play alongside Weber and fill that roll?

glenngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-13-2010, 10:37 AM
  #33
token grinder
formerly sirryan189
 
token grinder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Franklin
Country: United States
Posts: 4,158
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by glenngineer View Post
Here's the thing, if Weber gets to be a RFA, Poile can negotiate both Suter and Weber's deals at the same time. Suter would be getting an extension while Weber would be getting a new deal. If I'm Poile, I go to both of them and say, we want to continue to build this team around the two of you, what would it take to keep you here for the next 8-10 years. Would they go for $5.5 a year or $6 or more? Who knows? Duncan Keith is gonna get a hair over $5.5 a year. If they can sign both for that sort of money, I think everyone will be happy. The other possibility is giving Weber an extension once July 1 hits and then doing the same with Suter next year.

Let me ask you this, why do you think Suter should or would take less than Weber? Obviously they both bring different things to the table but I still think Suter is the better all around player of the two. You take Suter off of that pairing and all of a sudden Weber is being asked to puck handle more and that is one of Suter's greatest strengths. Not sure I want Weber skating the puck up ice. Then again, is a guy like Blum or any other prospect ready to step in and play alongside Weber and fill that roll?

part of me wonders if weber becomes dion phaneuf without suter.

i think most will say because weber gets all the hype, he will make more.

token grinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-13-2010, 11:07 AM
  #34
glenngineer
Registered User
 
glenngineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 4,028
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by token grinder View Post
part of me wonders if weber becomes dion phaneuf without suter.

i think most will say because weber gets all the hype, he will make more.
Weber does get all the hype and his skill set is unique but does that mean he's better?

No way Weber becomes Phaneuf. He played without Suter at the Olympics and did just fine without him. Granted, he was playing with Neidermayer who is Suter with 10 years more experience. He also played with Doughty a bunch. I think the difference between Shea and Dion is Shea is smarter and picks his spots better with bone crushing hits.

glenngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-13-2010, 11:30 AM
  #35
Que Sera Sera
Registered User
 
Que Sera Sera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Ontario, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,404
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Que Sera Sera
Weber will not become Phaneuf. He's a better player with a higher hockey IQ.

Que Sera Sera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-13-2010, 11:32 AM
  #36
ItsAllPartOfThePlan
Registered User
 
ItsAllPartOfThePlan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,153
vCash: 500
Hey guys, do you think your GM matches a $6mill offersheet for Weber? At the compensatory rate right now, if you don't match, you get our 1st, 2nd and 3rd in the 2011 draft.

ItsAllPartOfThePlan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-13-2010, 11:42 AM
  #37
Joe T Choker
Roll Wide Roll
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Melrose
Country: Italy
Posts: 23,461
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsAllPartOfThePlan View Post
Hey guys, do you think your GM matches a $6mill offersheet for Weber? At the compensatory rate right now, if you don't match, you get our 1st, 2nd and 3rd in the 2011 draft.
yes, he will match ... just remember whose contracts will be coming off the books when Shea is an RFA

Joe T Choker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-13-2010, 11:44 AM
  #38
deanwormer
Registered User
 
deanwormer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Nashville
Country: United States
Posts: 972
vCash: 500
Obviously different skills and strengths, but if there is a reason to say Weber would be worth more or whatever, it'd be because he brings a size/strength combination that is harder to get in a player with his overall skillset. that said, I don't know how you really say one is "better" than the other.

and I also believe they are complementary and while we have several players in the pipeline who have similar style as Suter, we have yet to see them develop those skills into the player Suter has. not sure you take that chance if you can sign the pair for 8 years at $5.5mil a piece, you sign them. If Blum or someone comes along and they really develop, we have a solid top 3 and/or a true chip to deal when the time comes.

deanwormer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-13-2010, 12:27 PM
  #39
MarkMM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Delta, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 943
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by token grinder View Post
why is it so hard to make people understand weber's value is equal to 4 first rounders because of his contract, not what he is actually worth?
I'm not sure I follow...if Weber was available for 4 1st round picks I'd offer that in a heartbeat, but I'd be more hesitant to trade all of Raymond (a 2nd round pick), Burrows (undrafted), Schroeder (a 1st round pick) plus a 1st round pick because in draft picks, you never know what you get.

4 1st round picks could lead to a bomb who never gets a professional contract (see Vancouver Canucks - Patrick White, though we traded him as part of San Jose's salary dump and got Erhoff, LUCKY!), a player with promising potential (Schroeder), a guy who looks like after several years of development MIGHT make it on to the roster as a top-six guy (Grabner) and someone who is in a position where you have no use for him (Schneider).

I personally feel Weber is worth a lot more than 4 1st round picks, but I get a bit queasy about two proven 30-goal scorers who are so young that they're not even in their prime years, a prospect who might be a 1st liner some day, plus a 1st round pick.

I'd also point out that the value of Weber's contract being so cheap isn't all that great given that he's only got one year left at this discounted price, so while I would love to have him, I don't consider his contract a bargain for more than one year. His next contract will be a doosie, and rightly so.

MarkMM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-14-2010, 04:58 PM
  #40
dulzhok
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,528
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeyClause View Post
Malkin's contract scares me. He makes a ton of money and was terribly inconsistent this season. And you wonder, was it a fluke season or is there a natural and understandable decline in effort that is associated with signing a deal that sets you for life?
I didn't see him play a lot this year, but 77 points in 66 games would be the best scoring clip we've ever had. He also had several injuries, and usually plays with make-shift wingers (except on the PP with Crosby). So if that's his down year....

Also, he signed his contract in summer 08. He won the Conn Smythe in 09. So, I wouldn't necessarily say he's coasted since signing the contract.

I'd trade either Suter+ or Weber+ for Malkin. Not sure which one I would prefer. I think we can sign Suter for cheaper, but Malkin and Weber together would be a lot of goals, and have the makings of a dominant PP.

Not that it's realistic, but if this trade had the potential to happen, it'd be interesting to know the Radulov dynamic. If he and Malkin are "pals", it could add a lot of incentive for Radulov to come back. If they don't like each other, well we'd use him as trade bait for something else.

dulzhok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-14-2010, 05:16 PM
  #41
glenngineer
Registered User
 
glenngineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 4,028
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dulzhok View Post
I didn't see him play a lot this year, but 77 points in 66 games would be the best scoring clip we've ever had. He also had several injuries, and usually plays with make-shift wingers (except on the PP with Crosby). So if that's his down year....

Also, he signed his contract in summer 08. He won the Conn Smythe in 09. So, I wouldn't necessarily say he's coasted since signing the contract.

I'd trade either Suter+ or Weber+ for Malkin. Not sure which one I would prefer. I think we can sign Suter for cheaper, but Malkin and Weber together would be a lot of goals, and have the makings of a dominant PP.

Not that it's realistic, but if this trade had the potential to happen, it'd be interesting to know the Radulov dynamic. If he and Malkin are "pals", it could add a lot of incentive for Radulov to come back. If they don't like each other, well we'd use him as trade bait for something else.
Yeah, cause the Penguins and their PP have been SO dominant with Malkin on it.

glenngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-14-2010, 07:09 PM
  #42
dulzhok
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,528
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by glenngineer View Post
Yeah, cause the Penguins and their PP have been SO dominant with Malkin on it.
Malkin led playoffs last year with 7 PPG. He had 14PPG this season, despite missing 15 games. He had 4 PPG this playoffs (2nd in the league). You're right, he sucks on the PP

On the right side of the PP, Malkin's shot is one of the deadliest in the league.

Add in Weber, who probably has the best point shot in the league. And Hornquist, who's one of the better net presence guys in the league.

Yes, I do think we'd have the makings of a dominant PP.


Last edited by dulzhok: 05-14-2010 at 07:16 PM.
dulzhok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-14-2010, 07:16 PM
  #43
glenngineer
Registered User
 
glenngineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 4,028
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dulzhok View Post
Malkin led playoffs last year with 7 PPG. He had 14PPG this season, despite missing 15 games. He had 4 PPG this playoffs (2nd in the league). You're right, he sucks on the PP play

On the right side of the PP, Malkin's shot is one of the deadliest in the league.

Add in Weber, who probably has the best point shot in the league. And Hornquist, who's one of the better net presence guys in the league.

Yes, I do think we'd have the makings of a dominant PP.
His numbers may be good but the Penguins PP with him on it ranked mid to lower for the entire league. My point is, you may have the right pieces, Crosby, Malkin and Gonchar, but if they don't work together, it's pointless. Sometimes it's about chemistry that makes the PP work, sometimes talent and more often than not, a mixture of both.

Don't get me wrong, I'd like Malkin here but with his cap hit and what we will have to pay Weber, that's a lot of money tied up in two guys for a long time.

glenngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-14-2010, 08:10 PM
  #44
dulzhok
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,528
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by glenngineer View Post
His numbers may be good but the Penguins PP with him on it ranked mid to lower for the entire league. My point is, you may have the right pieces, Crosby, Malkin and Gonchar, but if they don't work together, it's pointless. Sometimes it's about chemistry that makes the PP work, sometimes talent and more often than not, a mixture of both.

Don't get me wrong, I'd like Malkin here but with his cap hit and what we will have to pay Weber, that's a lot of money tied up in two guys for a long time.
At some point, we're going to have to get real 1st line talent in here to have a chance of making playoff noise. And 1st line talent is probably going to cost money, unless we get a couple Ovechkins on entry level deals. We do have the money to spend, but we'll have to shed some of the big money we're paying to 2nd-3rd tier guys.

The problem with Pittsburgh PP is they have 3 quarterbacks. Too many Chiefs and not enough Indians. The problem with us is we have NO PP quaterback. I think Malkin-Weber-Hornquist would have the making of a great PP. Quarterback-Best Point Shot in League-Amazing Net presence. But yeah, you don't know until you see it.

But, the point is probably moot. #1) Pittsburgh is still unlikely to trade Malkin. #2) Poile makes a good trade every 1 in 8 years. #3) Pittsburgh would probably want Weber back in the deal.

dulzhok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-14-2010, 10:26 PM
  #45
pavelbure604
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 574
vCash: 500
Hey couple questions first of all

1. Will Weber want to re-sign in Nashville? Does he like the organization overall?

2. Can your owner afford TWO d-men making 6.5-7 mil a year.

3. Will your team want to tie all that money into defense instead of offense?

4. Would you trade Weber for this package:
Raymond - 30 goals potential, speedy winger, cheap contract
Hansen - 15-20 goals if plays on 3rd line on a consistent basis
Bieska - 40+ point d-men, physical
Schroeder -top prospect, 2009 1st, Wilson's USA teammate
2010 1st
2011 2nd

pavelbure604 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-14-2010, 10:38 PM
  #46
glenngineer
Registered User
 
glenngineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 4,028
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pavelbure604 View Post
Hey couple questions first of all

1. Will Weber want to re-sign in Nashville? Does he like the organization overall?

2. Can your owner afford TWO d-men making 6.5-7 mil a year.

3. Will your team want to tie all that money into defense instead of offense?

4. Would you trade Weber for this package:
Raymond - 30 goals potential, speedy winger, cheap contract
Hansen - 15-20 goals if plays on 3rd line on a consistent basis
Bieska - 40+ point d-men, physical
Schroeder -top prospect, 2009 1st, Wilson's USA teammate
2010 1st
2011 2nd
1. Yes and Yes.

2. I don't think Weber and Suter will get that much. Depending on who's contract Poile and the agents use as a basis, I think they can both be signed for $5.5-6 million apiece. I think we can afford it if we have some playoff success and start putting some more people in the barn during the regular season.

3. Tying money up in two defensemen like Suter and Weber is worth it. They are the Pronger and Niedermayer of this generation. I believe they are the best young pair in the NHL no disrespect to Keith and Seabrook. Keith is on par with both of them but I think Seabrook is a notch below all three which makes our two a little bit better of a pair. Our team is always going to be built on goaltending and defense with Trotz as coach so to have two studs on the blue line with a pipeline of good talent in the farm system, I think we can fill the other holes from within rather cheaply.

4. On the package you mentioned, it's tempting but honestly, this years draft isn't that deep so the number 1 isn't of that great value, especially since it's late because of your record. The 2 next year is going to be a late pick as well since you guys are pretty good. I like Raymond and think he'd be a good fit here but Bieksa seems to be injury riddled, Hansen I'm not sold on and Schroeder is a wild card. He was rated higher than he went in the draft two years ago so something made him stay on the board longer than he should've which is a concern. If we ever have to trade Weber or Suter I'd have to say we get a top 3 forward, not a top 6, it just isn't worth it no matter how many players we get in return.

glenngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2010, 01:35 AM
  #47
MarkMM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Delta, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 943
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by glenngineer View Post
1. Yes and Yes.

2. I don't think Weber and Suter will get that much. Depending on who's contract Poile and the agents use as a basis, I think they can both be signed for $5.5-6 million apiece. I think we can afford it if we have some playoff success and start putting some more people in the barn during the regular season.

3. Tying money up in two defensemen like Suter and Weber is worth it. They are the Pronger and Niedermayer of this generation. I believe they are the best young pair in the NHL no disrespect to Keith and Seabrook. Keith is on par with both of them but I think Seabrook is a notch below all three which makes our two a little bit better of a pair. Our team is always going to be built on goaltending and defense with Trotz as coach so to have two studs on the blue line with a pipeline of good talent in the farm system, I think we can fill the other holes from within rather cheaply.

4. On the package you mentioned, it's tempting but honestly, this years draft isn't that deep so the number 1 isn't of that great value, especially since it's late because of your record. The 2 next year is going to be a late pick as well since you guys are pretty good. I like Raymond and think he'd be a good fit here but Bieksa seems to be injury riddled, Hansen I'm not sold on and Schroeder is a wild card. He was rated higher than he went in the draft two years ago so something made him stay on the board longer than he should've which is a concern. If we ever have to trade Weber or Suter I'd have to say we get a top 3 forward, not a top 6, it just isn't worth it no matter how many players we get in return.
As a Vancouver fan who has Nashville as my close #2, I think pavelbure604's offer is fair, but I agree with everything glenngineer says.

Everything I've heard about Weber says he likes it in Nashville and wants to stay.

I think with LONG term deals you could get the cap hits down.

If you're going to tie up money in one position aside from a goalie, it makes most sense to do it with dominant defensemen given the amount of time they spend on ice. And yes, Weber/Suter > Seabrook/Keith.

And while I think the offer is fair, I don't know if I'd put Hansen as a solid 15-20 goal guy yet. I think so, but I wouldn't base a trade on it. Vancouver's picks will be (hopefully) late, and Bieksa has not only shown injury issues, but also motivation/consistency issues (if you read Canucks discussion boards people have about had it with the guy).

I will say this about Schroeder, he is turning heads, and with Hodgson, is making Vancouver very deep at centre. I think the reason he slipped so far in the draft is easy to identify, the guy's a smurf, but a strong and tough smurf and I haven't heard one person who isn't giddy that we picked him up where we did.

MarkMM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2010, 06:14 AM
  #48
glenngineer
Registered User
 
glenngineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 4,028
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkMM View Post
As a Vancouver fan who has Nashville as my close #2, I think pavelbure604's offer is fair, but I agree with everything glenngineer says.

Everything I've heard about Weber says he likes it in Nashville and wants to stay.

I think with LONG term deals you could get the cap hits down.

If you're going to tie up money in one position aside from a goalie, it makes most sense to do it with dominant defensemen given the amount of time they spend on ice. And yes, Weber/Suter > Seabrook/Keith.

And while I think the offer is fair, I don't know if I'd put Hansen as a solid 15-20 goal guy yet. I think so, but I wouldn't base a trade on it. Vancouver's picks will be (hopefully) late, and Bieksa has not only shown injury issues, but also motivation/consistency issues (if you read Canucks discussion boards people have about had it with the guy).

I will say this about Schroeder, he is turning heads, and with Hodgson, is making Vancouver very deep at centre. I think the reason he slipped so far in the draft is easy to identify, the guy's a smurf, but a strong and tough smurf and I haven't heard one person who isn't giddy that we picked him up where we did.
Here's the thing, if we give up a defenseman with size, grit, toughness and a booming shot, it has to be replaced somewhat in the trade. None of the guys replacing Weber really do that. Bieksa with some toughness but not on the same level as Weber. If we got a power forward in return, which Vancouver really doesn't have per say on their roster I might consider it, but until then, I"d have to pass.

glenngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2010, 12:15 PM
  #49
MarkMM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Delta, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 943
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by glenngineer View Post
Here's the thing, if we give up a defenseman with size, grit, toughness and a booming shot, it has to be replaced somewhat in the trade. None of the guys replacing Weber really do that. Bieksa with some toughness but not on the same level as Weber. If we got a power forward in return, which Vancouver really doesn't have per say on their roster I might consider it, but until then, I"d have to pass.
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.

MarkMM is offline   Reply With Quote
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: 4,028
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 offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:26 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.