HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Nashville Predators
Notices

Weber's value

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-15-2010, 03:52 PM
  #51
MarkMM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Delta, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 899
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by glenngineer View Post
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.
Yeah, we drool over Weber or Suter, but even if a trade is fair, it doesn't mean it works for both teams, so I don't think we work too well as trade partners. I'd expect Gillis to dump some salary in Bernier and no re-signing Mitchell, and then just try to fill our defensive holes with UFA signings, most talk in Vancouver is around Hamhuis, Seidenberg, Morrison and Volchenkov. If we can fill our defensive holes without losing our long-term assets, I gotta think that's the route we go.

The only thing I could think of would be swapping rights, maybe Wellwood's RFA rights for Hamhuis' UFA rights? My thoughts on Wellwood is that he's got sick skills with the puck, but he never got his chance because he's a high-skilled offensive forward who was put on the third-line between two pluggers most of the time. He's improved his defensive game and when he's motivated, he can really dangle and make the opposition sweat.

$1.2M this season so he'd need to be qualified for about $1.3M or a tad over that, I know you guys are full of centres but he's a cheap insurance policy if Wilson isn't ready, or maybe you could move him to the wing. This assumes of course that you won't be re-signing Hamhuis, so might as well get something (no idea what other teams might offer for him either).

MarkMM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2010, 04:02 PM
  #52
glenngineer
Registered User
 
glenngineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,763
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkMM View Post
Yeah, we drool over Weber or Suter, but even if a trade is fair, it doesn't mean it works for both teams, so I don't think we work too well as trade partners. I'd expect Gillis to dump some salary in Bernier and no re-signing Mitchell, and then just try to fill our defensive holes with UFA signings, most talk in Vancouver is around Hamhuis, Seidenberg, Morrison and Volchenkov. If we can fill our defensive holes without losing our long-term assets, I gotta think that's the route we go.

The only thing I could think of would be swapping rights, maybe Wellwood's RFA rights for Hamhuis' UFA rights? My thoughts on Wellwood is that he's got sick skills with the puck, but he never got his chance because he's a high-skilled offensive forward who was put on the third-line between two pluggers most of the time. He's improved his defensive game and when he's motivated, he can really dangle and make the opposition sweat.

$1.2M this season so he'd need to be qualified for about $1.3M or a tad over that, I know you guys are full of centres but he's a cheap insurance policy if Wilson isn't ready, or maybe you could move him to the wing. This assumes of course that you won't be re-signing Hamhuis, so might as well get something (no idea what other teams might offer for him either).
You guys have no chance at Hamhuis or Volchenkov. You don't have the cap space. Too many open roster spots and both those guys could command upwards of $5 million a season.

glenngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2010, 06:22 PM
  #53
MarkMM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Delta, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 899
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by glenngineer View Post
You guys have no chance at Hamhuis or Volchenkov. You don't have the cap space. Too many open roster spots and both those guys could command upwards of $5 million a season.
Not both of them, but one of them, Hamhuis being more likely. I think a long-term deal could get him at around $4M, and the Canucks have Demitra off the books this year ($4M), may trade or waive Bernier to make room ($2M), could pay Alberts to play in the minors ($1.1M), let go of Johnson ($1.1) and not re-sign Mitchell ($3.5M). Luongo's 13-year deal is going to reduce his cap hit by $1.3M (from $6.6 to $5.3) and if we replace Demitra with Grabner, Wellwood with Hodgson (deferring his bonuses), Johnson with a plugger (Bliznak?), Bernier with Hansen, Alberts with Rome, and Raycroft with Schneider (slightly more expensive), the Canucks come in with a roster of 21 players, 13 forwards, 6 defensemen and 2 goalies, with about $5.3M in cap space which should be plenty to sign Hamhuis. (And this actually makes us a stronger team as we're jettisoning some dead-weight!)

That's tight to sign Volchenkov, but if we could get our hands on him I almost guarantee you we'd trade Bieksa to open up that $3.5M in cap space meaning $8.8M to sign Volchenkov and maybe we'll keep Alberts as our 7th guy for $1.1M.

MarkMM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2010, 03:12 PM
  #54
oceanchild
Registered User
 
oceanchild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,089
vCash: 500
i think we should lock our 2 gms in a room. you guys come out with affordable goal scoring and some forward depth and we get on of the many dmen you have.

oceanchild is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2010, 05:46 PM
  #55
glenngineer
Registered User
 
glenngineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,763
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkMM View Post
Not both of them, but one of them, Hamhuis being more likely. I think a long-term deal could get him at around $4M, and the Canucks have Demitra off the books this year ($4M), may trade or waive Bernier to make room ($2M), could pay Alberts to play in the minors ($1.1M), let go of Johnson ($1.1) and not re-sign Mitchell ($3.5M). Luongo's 13-year deal is going to reduce his cap hit by $1.3M (from $6.6 to $5.3) and if we replace Demitra with Grabner, Wellwood with Hodgson (deferring his bonuses), Johnson with a plugger (Bliznak?), Bernier with Hansen, Alberts with Rome, and Raycroft with Schneider (slightly more expensive), the Canucks come in with a roster of 21 players, 13 forwards, 6 defensemen and 2 goalies, with about $5.3M in cap space which should be plenty to sign Hamhuis. (And this actually makes us a stronger team as we're jettisoning some dead-weight!)

That's tight to sign Volchenkov, but if we could get our hands on him I almost guarantee you we'd trade Bieksa to open up that $3.5M in cap space meaning $8.8M to sign Volchenkov and maybe we'll keep Alberts as our 7th guy for $1.1M.
I read an article yesterday that stated there will be like 9-10 roster spots open with about $14 million in cap space. It wasn't that exact but in that ball park. Looking at your roster and cap you have 12 guys signed plus Luongo and spent $40 million already. So you have to fill 9-10 roster spots and have a little more than I suspected. That is not going to be easy to do. You've got 4 defensemen all making over $3 million next year. You're not gonna get Hamhuis for $4 million a season. We have a better shot at that than you do since he and his wife enjoy living here. If his salary demands get into the $5 million range, which they just may, neither of us have a shot at him.

glenngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-17-2010, 01:30 AM
  #56
triggrman
HFBoards Sponsor
 
triggrman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Nashville
Country: United States
Posts: 16,047
vCash: 500
Yeah, if 4m could get Hamhuis, he'd be signed by now...

triggrman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-17-2010, 04:27 AM
  #57
oceanchild
Registered User
 
oceanchild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,089
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by glenngineer View Post
I read an article yesterday that stated there will be like 9-10 roster spots open with about $14 million in cap space. It wasn't that exact but in that ball park. Looking at your roster and cap you have 12 guys signed plus Luongo and spent $40 million already. So you have to fill 9-10 roster spots and have a little more than I suspected. That is not going to be easy to do. You've got 4 defensemen all making over $3 million next year. You're not gonna get Hamhuis for $4 million a season. We have a better shot at that than you do since he and his wife enjoy living here. If his salary demands get into the $5 million range, which they just may, neither of us have a shot at him.
those roster spots you speak of are for 3rd and fourth line players and subs for injury
sedin sedin burrows
grabner kesler samulsson
*raymond hodgson bernier
rypen * glass

salo beiska
erhoff edler
*O'Brian Alberts

luongo
*schineder
* means need to be signed so not 9-10 roster spots but as you can see usually a team carries 24 players and we dont have that many signed. most will be plugs and beiska and bernier are almost assured to be moved IMHO

oceanchild is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-17-2010, 02:47 PM
  #58
MarkMM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Delta, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 899
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by triggrman View Post
Yeah, if 4m could get Hamhuis, he'd be signed by now...
That's my question, I guess. I'd previously posted on a Nashville thread here (remember, I'm a Preds fan, too) that I think it'd be a good idea for him to be re-signed for around $4M, which I think is fair value with a bit of a hometown discount, maybe something like a $3M, $4M, $4M, and $5M deal, the reason it's structured like this is so that he can be affordable next year before your big deals start expiring, but as contracts come off the books, there's a bit more room to balance it out.

It was suggested that people didn't think Nashville could afford him at $4M.

So the only reason I'm thinking he might be available at $4M is because some have suggested that Nashville wouldn't pay that much, and therefore Plan B might be for Hamhuis to come to Vancouver (if being a BC boy helps) where he might be part of a championship run, if some other pieces can be put together, and if we can hire a sports psychologist for Luongo...sheesh.

MarkMM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-17-2010, 04:22 PM
  #59
ThirdManIn
Mod Supervisor
 
ThirdManIn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Posts: 42,150
vCash: 500
I don't know that Hamhuis would give a discount to Vancouver just because he grew up in BC. He and his wife love living in Nashville. I think he'd take a discounted contract here, but it has to be reasonable. He shouldn't make more than Weber or Suter. We still have to make sure we give Hornqvist a raise, though I'm not sold on giving him the $3mil+ that I've seen others predict. One season of production doesn't make a career, and a career year when you've only played one other partial season in the NHL isn't deserving of a huge raise.

I would love to keep Hamhuis around, but we have defensive prospects ready to make the leap. We have one of the best pairings in the league. A cheap veteran defenseman to play with Klein (and possibly someone who has the tools to pry KK's head from his rectum at a moment's notice) should really be enough. Weber/Suter/Klein/Vet can eat up a ton of minutes. This is one of those situations where we might not try to keep him simply because he won't create as much of a hole as losing Horny could potentially open. (Theoretically)

(A quick thought on Hamhuis and Vancouver: Hamhuis strikes me as a private guy. I'm not sure his personality would fit in well with a Canadian team or a team in a larger market with more pressure. However, I don't know him personally, and money can change minds quickly.)

ThirdManIn is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-17-2010, 04:33 PM
  #60
PredsV82
Snot Doc
 
PredsV82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Kentucky
Country: Scotland
Posts: 11,304
vCash: 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by triggrman View Post
Yeah, if 4m could get Hamhuis, he'd be signed by now...
I dont think so. I dont think poile has 4 mil to give him over multiple years and still have room for Hornqvist.

the only shot we have at re-signing hammer is if Dumont is traded and Hammer will take a relatively short deal. Because once Weber and Suter get their huge dollar deals we cant afford more than 2 mil a year on our #3 defenseman

PredsV82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-18-2010, 02:46 AM
  #61
triggrman
HFBoards Sponsor
 
triggrman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Nashville
Country: United States
Posts: 16,047
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PredsV82 View Post
I dont think so. I dont think poile has 4 mil to give him over multiple years and still have room for Hornqvist.

the only shot we have at re-signing hammer is if Dumont is traded and Hammer will take a relatively short deal. Because once Weber and Suter get their huge dollar deals we cant afford more than 2 mil a year on our #3 defenseman
I think they could afford a 2 year deal for 4m...

triggrman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-18-2010, 10:25 AM
  #62
PredsV82
Snot Doc
 
PredsV82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Kentucky
Country: Scotland
Posts: 11,304
vCash: 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by triggrman View Post
I think they could afford a 2 year deal for 4m...
only if they trade dumont. but why would hammer take a two year deal? he'd be a fool, since most quality UFAs get 4 or 5 year deals when they are first eligible

if he takes 2 yrs at 4 mil from us and then gets hurt he probably screws himself out of 12-15 million dollars.

now if he's dumb enough to take it, poile should certainly offer it..

PredsV82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-19-2010, 11:14 PM
  #63
oceanchild
Registered User
 
oceanchild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,089
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PredsV82 View Post
only if they trade dumont. but why would hammer take a two year deal? he'd be a fool, since most quality UFAs get 4 or 5 year deals when they are first eligible

if he takes 2 yrs at 4 mil from us and then gets hurt he probably screws himself out of 12-15 million dollars.

now if he's dumb enough to take it, poile should certainly offer it..
well i think the best wayt to avoid this problem is to trade weber to Vancouver

oceanchild is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 12:53 AM
  #64
glenngineer
Registered User
 
glenngineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,763
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oceanchild View Post
well i think the best wayt to avoid this problem is to trade weber to Vancouver
And I guess you guys can send us Burrows, Kesler and Raymond in return.

glenngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 10:43 AM
  #65
MarkMM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Delta, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 899
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by glenngineer View Post
And I guess you guys can send us Burrows, Kesler and Raymond in return.


Haha, nice.

The issue with a lot of Nashville's options is of course the legacy contracts handicapping who you can sign and who you can take back in a trade, I know this isn't an option with the NMC, but for your guys on a NTC, does anyone know if you can use a waiver as a way around the NTC?

Poile seems too classy a guy to pull a stunt like that and I don't recall this ever being done, but since a NTC doesn't preclude you from sending someone down to the minors, and according to the CBA people going down to the minors with the experience your NTC guys have would have to be opened up to other teams on waivers, is that a possibility? Let the season begin, and any guy you would like to trade but who hasn't agreed to waive his NTC is waived and picked up by other teams?

And no, you can't have Kesler, Raymond and Burrows, come on glengineer, BERNIER, I tell ya, you know you want to!

MarkMM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 10:59 AM
  #66
glenngineer
Registered User
 
glenngineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,763
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkMM View Post


Haha, nice.

The issue with a lot of Nashville's options is of course the legacy contracts handicapping who you can sign and who you can take back in a trade, I know this isn't an option with the NMC, but for your guys on a NTC, does anyone know if you can use a waiver as a way around the NTC?

Poile seems too classy a guy to pull a stunt like that and I don't recall this ever being done, but since a NTC doesn't preclude you from sending someone down to the minors, and according to the CBA people going down to the minors with the experience your NTC guys have would have to be opened up to other teams on waivers, is that a possibility? Let the season begin, and any guy you would like to trade but who hasn't agreed to waive his NTC is waived and picked up by other teams?

And no, you can't have Kesler, Raymond and Burrows, come on glengineer, BERNIER, I tell ya, you know you want to!
Mark, you know I was being totally sarcastic since other dude suggested we just give you Weber.

Problem with the waiver idea is if we did that, I think only Legwand has a NTC and if some team does pick him off of waivers, we are responsible for half of his salary under the duration of the contract. That is about $2.25 million a season that we could use towards someone else.

The only viable option is if one of our vets who has a NMC or NTC waives while going to a team of his choosing to keep everyone happy. As much as I'd like some of the younger talent Vancouver has, I just don't see us as good trade partners. Cap reasons are probably the biggest reason other than trying to figure out value of who would go for who. The guys we want to trade are too old for you and the guys we want from you are too young and your future. The other guys are untouchables to some degree.

glenngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 11:02 AM
  #67
BigFatCat999
I love GoOoOlD
 
BigFatCat999's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Campbell, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,697
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkMM View Post
And no, you can't have Kesler, Raymond and Burrows, come on glengineer, BERNIER, I tell ya, you know you want to!
You have to hurt to get and you have to hurt a lot for Weber. You WILL overpay to get him. And I hope you plan on giving a hell of a lot more than Bernier.

BigFatCat999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2010, 02:28 PM
  #68
MarkMM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Delta, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 899
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by glenngineer View Post
Mark, you know I was being totally sarcastic since other dude suggested we just give you Weber.

Problem with the waiver idea is if we did that, I think only Legwand has a NTC and if some team does pick him off of waivers, we are responsible for half of his salary under the duration of the contract. That is about $2.25 million a season that we could use towards someone else.

The only viable option is if one of our vets who has a NMC or NTC waives while going to a team of his choosing to keep everyone happy. As much as I'd like some of the younger talent Vancouver has, I just don't see us as good trade partners. Cap reasons are probably the biggest reason other than trying to figure out value of who would go for who. The guys we want to trade are too old for you and the guys we want from you are too young and your future. The other guys are untouchables to some degree.
Haha, I know you were just joking with the Kesler, Burrows and Raymond offer, as I was joking about the Bernier offer!

Also, regarding Legwand on the waiver, I believe you're only on the hook for half his salary if he's claimed on the way back up (on recall waivers) but the other teams eats 100% of the salary if he's on the way down.

So I guess that's the risk; if he doesn't get picked up, you eat his full salary playing in the minors or half his salary playing for other teams. Neither an option, and I like Legwand, whatever his production may be, I think he's been a good guy to the franchise and you don't sneak around a fairly negotiated NTC with a trick like this, I was just curious if it was possible.

No, don't see us as good trade partners either, our looking for defense and you're looking for offense is your typical "good from far, far from good" situation.

MarkMM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2010, 12:18 AM
  #69
OnTheFence
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 444
vCash: 500
Hopefully y'all can help me out. I'm a Sharks fan and proposed a trade for Weber which can be found at post #17 in this thread http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=778469

For those too lazy to check

Setoguchi, Vlasic, Petrecki, 1st for Weber.

Was told this was a massive overpayment. My questions to anyone:
1) What are the odds Weber becomes available soon or at all?
2) Would this trade get it done, too much/litte?

Unbiased opinions only please...

OnTheFence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2010, 12:24 AM
  #70
JPavs8Clutchy*
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Bye
Country: United States
Posts: 4,656
vCash: 500
Nashville needs offense on a defensive team, San Jose needs defense on an offensive team...

SJany Heatley/1st(most likely 27th overall)

NSH:Shea Weber

IDK how this works out please don't flame me lol but I see a star sniper going to a defensive team for a defensive superstar, and the 1st evens it up...

JPavs8Clutchy* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2010, 01:24 AM
  #71
Coach Parker
Stanley Cup Champion
 
Coach Parker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,301
vCash: 500
Boston fan walks into room and puts #2 Overall (Seguin) on the table with Wideman and the 32nd (Leafs) overall...

Does that count for overpayment for Weber?

Wideman is the same money as Weber (little cheaper) but not as skilled and Seguin is the 1A center of the future in Nashville who is also ELC and cost-effective for the next 9 years.

Coach Parker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2010, 01:35 AM
  #72
glenngineer
Registered User
 
glenngineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,763
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OnTheFence View Post
Hopefully y'all can help me out. I'm a Sharks fan and proposed a trade for Weber which can be found at post #17 in this thread http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=778469

For those too lazy to check

Setoguchi, Vlasic, Petrecki, 1st for Weber.

Was told this was a massive overpayment. My questions to anyone:
1) What are the odds Weber becomes available soon or at all?
2) Would this trade get it done, too much/litte?

Unbiased opinions only please...
If I knew more about Petrecki I could probably analyze a little better but with the 1st being so late in that round, it's a reach pick. I like Setoguchi and Vlasic as players but they are not difference makers to me. In Weber, he's a guy that can change the course of a game in a few different ways obviously. I don't think it's massive overpayment but I don't think Nashville gets an elite player for Weber in this deal. If it were Pavelski instead of Setoguchi I might be more inclined to say, ok but the way it stands now, I would say no.

As far as the odds of Weber becoming available soon, he has one year remaining on his current contract and then is a restricted free agent. He enjoys playing here and the hype that the Canadian media plays up about him going back to Canada once his contract is up is way overrated. If he wanted out of Nashville so badly he would've signed a 4 year deal so when it was up he could be unrestricted and go anywhere he wanted to. We have some big contracts coming off the books when he becomes a RFA and some of that money will go into re-signing him. My guess is Nashville offers him a deal in the $5.5.-6 million range for 8-10 years and they do the same type of deal to keep Suter. This is speculation on my part but I think Poile will open the wallet for these two as he realizes their worth to this team.

glenngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2010, 01:39 AM
  #73
glenngineer
Registered User
 
glenngineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,763
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach Parker View Post
Boston fan walks into room and puts #2 Overall (Seguin) on the table with Wideman and the 32nd (Leafs) overall...

Does that count for overpayment for Weber?

Wideman is the same money as Weber (little cheaper) but not as skilled and Seguin is the 1A center of the future in Nashville who is also ELC and cost-effective for the next 9 years.
Tempting but Nashville needs wingers at this point as opposed to centers. We have Wilson and Legwand once Arnott is off the books as the top two centers. Dumont and Sullivan are getting up there in age. There is no guarantee Seguin will be there at number 2 as Edmonton may have their eyes on him. If Hall is available that may be a great pick but Nashville has a habit of sending guys to Milwaukee first before getting a shot at the big club. The additional pick would be nice if it were a deeper draft. As far as Wideman goes, no thanks. He was a direct by product of playing with Chara and when put on a different pairing, had an awful year. So effectively it becomes a Seguin or Hall for Weber trade and still not sure that's enough for a big, nasty defenseman with a shot that's a cannon. Guys like Weber don't grow on trees at all and if he were to be traded, which I still think is highly unlikely, teams will have to pay thru the nose to get him.

glenngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2010, 04:36 AM
  #74
Enoch
This is my boomstick
 
Enoch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Chattanooga TN
Country: United States
Posts: 12,333
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPavs8Cluthcy View Post
Nashville needs offense on a defensive team, San Jose needs defense on an offensive team...

SJany Heatley/1st(most likely 27th overall)

NSH:Shea Weber

IDK how this works out please don't flame me lol but I see a star sniper going to a defensive team for a defensive superstar, and the 1st evens it up...
If we wanted Heatley, we could have easily acquired him last year. Poile made it clear that we would not be going after him. He did not like how Dany handled the situation.

__________________
- Enoch -
Enoch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2010, 09:53 AM
  #75
JPavs8Clutchy*
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Bye
Country: United States
Posts: 4,656
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by glenngineer View Post
If I knew more about Petrecki I could probably analyze a little better but with the 1st being so late in that round, it's a reach pick. I like Setoguchi and Vlasic as players but they are not difference makers to me. In Weber, he's a guy that can change the course of a game in a few different ways obviously. I don't think it's massive overpayment but I don't think Nashville gets an elite player for Weber in this deal. If it were Pavelski instead of Setoguchi I might be more inclined to say, ok but the way it stands now, I would say no.

As far as the odds of Weber becoming available soon, he has one year remaining on his current contract and then is a restricted free agent. He enjoys playing here and the hype that the Canadian media plays up about him going back to Canada once his contract is up is way overrated. If he wanted out of Nashville so badly he would've signed a 4 year deal so when it was up he could be unrestricted and go anywhere he wanted to. We have some big contracts coming off the books when he becomes a RFA and some of that money will go into re-signing him. My guess is Nashville offers him a deal in the $5.5.-6 million range for 8-10 years and they do the same type of deal to keep Suter. This is speculation on my part but I think Poile will open the wallet for these two as he realizes their worth to this team.
As a fan, I like Pavelski more than Setoguchi. But as a GM, I'd take Setoguchi over Pavelski. 23 years old (not turning 24 until Jan. 1 2011) and already has scored 30 goals, and with a little consistency boost, he might be able to score 50 with a playmaker beside him. He's a natural goal scorer, plain and simple. He will be an elite player one day.

JPavs8Clutchy* 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 12:01 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.