Question: If you're the owner of the NYR, do you call Nashville and offer to help pay part of Webbers first year of his contract? This would help the Rangers hockey club immensely..
The Weber situation is a once in a generation opportunity
That has nothing to do with my post? We aren't getting Weber, for at least a year but most likely never now, but DW is definitely actively looking for a number 1 Dman. It will be interesting to see if Boyle is traded and if so who he intends to target as a replacement.
That has nothing to do with my post? We aren't getting Weber, for at least a year but most likely never now, but DW is definitely actively looking for a number 1 Dman. It will be interesting to see if Boyle is traded and if so who he intends to target as a replacement.
Yes it does... Think about it the time to get Weber was now. A player like Weber probably isn't going to be available anytime soon.
Now that Weber is off the Market Wilson could just as easily sit on his hands
Yes it does... Think about it the time to get Weber was now. A player like Weber probably isn't going to be available anytime soon.
Now that Weber is off the Market Wilson could just as easily sit on his hands
My point being that DW has a plan to deal with getting Boyle replacement and is exploring options, this could come sooner or much later. You really like to antagonize don't ya.
My point being that DW has a plan to deal with getting Boyle replacement and is exploring options, this could come sooner or much later. You really like to antagonize don't ya.
I don't think he has a plan to specifically replace Boyle. He's already got Burns, Braun, and Demers. Weber was an RFA and available to discuss his future and whether it was feasible for San Jose to be involved. There's no reason not to explore that option but it doesn't mean that he's actively looking to replace anyone.
I really don't know how much of these contracts work, but if there is one thing I wish get's fixed in the CBA it's the double digit number of years a team can sign a player for. 14 years, 12 years, 10 years, just seem way too much. I'd say 5 should be the maximum. Granted I've heard you don't look at it based on number of years but how much cap hit is done, yet I see these long term deals and I think a person is going to be past his prime at the end of the deal. Heck, the best example on why I hate all these long term deals is the whole Rick Dipietro contract that the Islanders are still paying. It just seems ridiculous that the NHL allows all this.
I don't think he has a plan to specifically replace Boyle. He's already got Burns, Braun, and Demers. Weber was an RFA and available to discuss his future and whether it was feasible for San Jose to be involved. There's no reason not to explore that option but it doesn't mean that he's actively looking to replace anyone.
Maybe I'm just hopeful that those crazy Yandle rumors go somewhere? That and I've always wanted Gabokik, then maybe Hemsky, then we can go for the glass Czech/Slovak trifecta!
SJ wouldn't have given Weber the work stoppage security in the form of a large signing bonus in year one. I think that's the big one moreso than anything.
Btw, signing bonuses are exempt from salary rollbacks. Absolutely 100% guaranteed.
Last edited by Franchise13: 07-19-2012 at 10:25 AM.
I woke up this morning, went on Twitter, and was wondering why Shea Weber was trending. What I saw next almost nearly made me snort my coffee. Anyways, here's the structure for anyone unaware:
I don't see the NHL rejecting though, since it's not unreasonable to think he won't be playing at 41, considering the longevity of today's players and how much improvement will be made in that area 14 years from now. It's obviously an 11 year deal with fake years tacked on though.
I woke up this morning, went on Twitter, and was wondering why Shea Weber was trending. What I saw next almost nearly made me snort my coffee. Anyways, here's the structure for anyone unaware:
I don't see the NHL rejecting though, since it's not unreasonable to think he won't be playing at 41, considering the longevity of today's players and how much improvement will be made in that area 14 years from now. It's obviously an 11 year deal with fake years tacked on though.
Wow, the best part about this is that the Flyers would have to dump cap and or not be able to sign RFA Voracek and maybe we can pick him up :-)
For someone like Pronger who is on a 35+ contract and is on LTIR does the team still needs to keep paying them? Does it still count against the cap?
If he is on LTIR he does not count against the cap although someone is paying him (insurance or team). Technically right now he counts against the cap because he can't be put on LTIR until the start of the year. However teams can go 10% over the cap till then so this is not an issue for the Flyers.
Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I believe if he were to retire his cap hit would then count against the cap.
Wow, the best part about this is that the Flyers would have to dump cap and or not be able to sign RFA Voracek and maybe we can pick him up :-)
not really, the flyers have 8 defensemen signed and 22 players total with 7.8 million cap left. obviously weber would take 7.1 of that, but then again prongers 4.9 million comes off the books once the season starts because of long term injury.
not really, the flyers have 8 defensemen signed and 22 players total with 7.8 million cap left. obviously weber would take 7.1 of that, but then again prongers 4.9 million comes off the books once the season starts because of long term injury.
Yeah they won't have any cap issues this upcoming season. Even next season they have Kimmo Timonen's 6.33mil coming off the books and the only player they have to worry about re-signing are Simmonds (making 1.75mil right now, probably goes to 3.5mil) and Hartnell (already making 4.2mil, should stay around there).
This Flyers team is gonna be deadly. With Weber leading the blueline and all those young forwards...just wow.
Anyone else get the impression that there are a whole lot of logical fallacies out in the media regarding the owners? Everyone is saying the actions of two owners somehow prove...well what exactly? That there is a problem?
I'd say it is very possible that the majority of owners in the league watched in horror as the Preds, who were on the verge of being an upper mid tier franchise, literally got pillaged.
Whats the NHLs sales pitch now? Come invest in the NHL and proudly invest in ten teams farm teams.
