HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Notices

Weber signed to offer sheet (TSN: 14 yrs, $110m, cap hit $7.8m per yr.) Part 2

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-20-2012, 08:22 AM
  #126
El Emperor
Registered User
 
El Emperor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Marlton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,218
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orange is better View Post
I just don't understand how they can afford to match it though. Yes, they'll lose money and probably support by letting weber walk, but the fact is that the money they'd need to sign him simply doesn't exist. How the **** would they pull that off? And how could they even justify putting 1/4 of their payroll into a player that doesnt want to play there?
They would have to take out loans or something. Colorado did it to keep Joe Sakic.

El Emperor is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 08:26 AM
  #127
Unstable
Registered User
 
Unstable's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Exiled in NoVA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,072
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Emperor View Post
They would have to take out loans or something. Colorado did it to keep Joe Sakic.
They could also liquidate other assets, which I think it was happened in the Sakic case.

And there's no evidence he doesn't want to be there other than some hot air from his agent - you don't sign an offer sheet if you don't want to stay, because the most common result of an offer sheet is you stay.

Unstable is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 08:28 AM
  #128
FreshPerspective
We don't need one!
 
FreshPerspective's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Italy
Posts: 9,671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orange is better View Post
I just don't understand how they can afford to match it though. Yes, they'll lose money and probably support by letting weber walk, but the fact is that the money they'd need to sign him simply doesn't exist. How the **** would they pull that off? And how could they even justify putting 1/4 of their payroll into a player that doesnt want to play there?
This made me feel a little better about our chances...it just seems too overwhelming from a business standpoint in real dollars for Nash to keep Weber. They are probably deciding upon a strategy to save face like Meltzer notes...however Holmgren should not feel any kind of remorse and offer up more than he has to...he is not the one operating from a position of weakness. Nash put themselves in this situation and they have very little leverage.

Quote:
Let's put it this way: If the Predators ownership group gives David Poile the go-ahead to match the offer, they will be on the hook for $80 million to Weber over the next six years. Add that to Pekka Rinne's $42 million over the same span, and the small market franchise would have to commit $122 million dollars --- 70.9 percent of their original purchase price of a debt-riddled franchise -- simply to keep TWO players on the roster over six seasons.

By the way, because so much of Weber's offer sheet is paid out in the front-loaded signing bonuses, the total value of his $110 million deal is not likely to go down very much in a new CBA.

Yes, Weber is a Norris Trophy caliber defenseman. Yes, he's the team captain. But as a business -- not a hockey -- decision, it's virtually a no-brainer that the organization should decline to match the Philadelphia offer. If there's a way to keep Weber and Rinne, put enough talent around them to remain a playoff team AND avoid sinking the franchise financially the process, well, it will be something of a miracle.

Nashville currently must spent nearly $14 million just to reach the temporary cap floor for the 2012-13 season. But the Weber conundrum is one of REAL dollars, not salary cap hits. While it could be argued that the spending requirement to reach the floor gives the Predators incentive to match the Weber offer sheet in real dollars -- knocking out $7.9 million of required cap spending in the process -- the team has yet another problem.

Currently, the Predators have only 18 NHL roster players under contract for next season, including just four NHL-level defensemen. In addition, they have nine forwards and two defensemen who are a year away from becoming RFAs (including Patric Hornqvist and promising young Roman Josi) or UFAs (Mike Fisher and Kevin Kline among them).

While keeping Weber is still officially and understandably the top concern right now, what sort of established talent can be put around him and Rinne? The Predators would have to spend -- again, in real dollars -- like they are a big-market, big-budget team for years to come if they keep Weber. That may please ticket-buying fans, but would it please the investers who care first and foremost about maintaining the bottom line?

http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Bill-...Watch/45/45695

FreshPerspective is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 08:29 AM
  #129
StevensCakeBakerBacker
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Country:
Posts: 1,228
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RespectTheMajor View Post
If Nashville matches, to me that's a lose-lose for them, Shea doesn't want to play there then Nash is going to break the bank for him? Makes no sense to me, essentially you're going to put your franchise in a horrible situation with this gigantic contract that a small market team can't afford, saving face isn't worth putting out a bad product for the next couple season, and if I'm not mistaken Weber said himself he didn't want to be part of a rebuild, BUT I could be wrong it could all work out for the Preds and #6 stays in the West and doesn't hurt us like he would ending up in the East, kudos to Homer for having big balls like AC/DC, that being said Weber is my favorite non-Flyer, he was born to wear Orange and Black, and I would love him to come to Philly
I agree..

Working Against Nashville:
1) Real money being paid to the player over the next 365 days.
2) Weber seems to not want to play in Nashville, and his agent has stated he wants to play for Philly.
3) Already known that Nashville was willing to trade him.
4) Term of contract for a fiscally challenged franchise.
5) Total amount of real money due in the first 6 years.
6) Total amount of bonuses owed in the first 6 years is not insurable, which is a problem for a financially challenged franchise.
7) Weber will still be owed all money, since it is almost 100% paid as a bonus, in the event of a lockout.
8) Suter left via UFA even though Nashville offered him a competitive deal.

Working For Nashville:
1) they have the right to match the offer.


Considering the above, I don't see the positives in Nashville matching the offer. Predator fans would be pissed if Weber left, but Weber leaving is just a symptom of the disease; Polie not locking these guys up before an OS or UFA becomes a possibility. The lack of long term signings may either be due to management's ability, or it may be due to the teams finances.

Real fans would understand that the problem is not Weber or the Flyers, it is their ownership, management and how profitable the franchise is (or is not). They should also understand that it takes a lot of commitment, for a prolonged period of time, to become a team financially capable of 1) keeping its talent and 2) attracting high end FAs. All this talk about Nashville fans deserving to keep Weber, model franchise, etc... is all BS, IMO.

The Flyers can be painted as a predatory franchise; however, teams like Nashville would not exist if it were not for the financially successful franchises like the Flyers.


Last edited by StevensCakeBakerBacker: 07-20-2012 at 08:37 AM.
StevensCakeBakerBacker is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 08:32 AM
  #130
FreshPerspective
We don't need one!
 
FreshPerspective's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Italy
Posts: 9,671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Emperor View Post
They would have to take out loans or something. Colorado did it to keep Joe Sakic.
Given their net position good luck getting any favorable finance terms and these days the big "banks" or casinos as I like to call them are tight with the gambling money they get printed and handed to them for basically 0%. They will gladly extort Nashville though at a usurious rate of interest...

FreshPerspective is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 08:37 AM
  #131
sa cyred
Yea....the Flyers...
 
sa cyred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Traveling...
Country: Cuba
Posts: 14,857
vCash: 500
Thankfully Homer seemed to agree with what some of us were saying on these boards. I (among others) have been constantly saying that we needed a true #1 defender. The lineup defensively that we have/had wont cut it. Timonen is a solid 2 at this point. Coburn, Meszaros, and Grossmann are 3, maybe 2 defenseman, and Schenn is an unknown at this point. Adding a true #1 defender helps this team out tremendously. For the past Stanley Cups, all the teams had a defender that was a true #1. Us going in with a bunch of 2-4s wasnt going to cut it. One of the major holes on this team will be filled.

sa cyred is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 08:43 AM
  #132
JMatt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 19
vCash: 500
Just brainstorming here... I wonder if Voracek could be traded for one of the 1st round picks to "sweeten" the deal.

If Doan agreed to come here at around $4M per, it would certainly make trading Voracek away more palatable... and it would represent an excellent chance for Doan to win a championship.

JMatt is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 08:45 AM
  #133
NitHeel
Mucker/Grinder
 
NitHeel's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Reading, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,987
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMatt View Post
Just brainstorming here... I wonder if Voracek could be traded for one of the 1st round picks to "sweeten" the deal.

If Doan agreed to come here at around $4M per, it would certainly make trading Voracek away more palatable... and it would represent an excellent chance for Doan to win a championship.
Why sweeten? If they can pay, they will. If they can't, they won't and he's ours for the equivalent of 4 1st rounders - we don't have to add to that.

NitHeel is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 08:57 AM
  #134
Damaged Goods
Registered User
 
Damaged Goods's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,026
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NitHeel View Post
Why sweeten? If they can pay, they will. If they can't, they won't and he's ours for the equivalent of 4 1st rounders - we don't have to add to that.
Because it's in our interest for them to do the "smart" thing. So why not prod them in the right direction to make sure it happens?

Damaged Goods is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 08:58 AM
  #135
dawkins121
Registered User
 
dawkins121's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,401
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NitHeel View Post
Why sweeten? If they can pay, they will. If they can't, they won't and he's ours for the equivalent of 4 1st rounders - we don't have to add to that.
Actually, (and I think Meltzer or someone else might have alluded to this too), I think it would make sense to move something like Voracek and Meszaros in place of a couple of 1sts to sweeten the deal. It allows the Predators to save a little face so that maybe they don't match just out of pride, it gives them some NHL players to help keep them afloat in the short term, it helps with the relationship between the Flyers and Predators for the future, and it sheds some salary and gives us some breathing room cap-wise.

I would still rather just give the 4 1sts and keep Voracek but if that's what it takes to get the deal done then it's worth it.

dawkins121 is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 09:02 AM
  #136
dingbathero
No Jam? How about PB
 
dingbathero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. John's, NL
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantokrator View Post
This is exactly how I feel. Getting Weber would fix our #1 problem. Without Weber, I don't know how the Flyers' defense can make us a Cup contender once Kimmo retires.

However, it will be nice knowing that no other team in the league can just sign him in the offseason.
Enstrom
Smid

All young and play VERY solid D are UFA's next year - if this Weber thing doesn't go our way, we can go after other options next year - are they Weber? No. But they certainly aren't anything to sneeze at.

dingbathero is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 09:05 AM
  #137
NitHeel
Mucker/Grinder
 
NitHeel's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Reading, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,987
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damaged Goods View Post
Because it's in our interest for them to do the "smart" thing. So why not prod them in the right direction to make sure it happens?
No, that's my point. This is 100% a money decision for them. If they have the money, then they keep Weber - we can't prod them out of that decision. If they can't make the payment, then he's ours with no need to sweeten.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dawkins121 View Post
Actually, (and I think Meltzer or someone else might have alluded to this too), I think it would make sense to move something like Voracek and Meszaros in place of a couple of 1sts to sweeten the deal. It allows the Predators to save a little face so that maybe they don't match just out of pride, it gives them some NHL players to help keep them afloat in the short term, it helps with the relationship between the Flyers and Predators for the future, and it sheds some salary and gives us some breathing room cap-wise.

I would still rather just give the 4 1sts and keep Voracek but if that's what it takes to get the deal done then it's worth it.
Oh, I fully expect for some of those #1s to end up being replaced with roster players, with Voracek and Meszaros likely names to hear, I'm not disputing that. I just don't think the equivalent value has any reason to be more then that of 4 1st rounders.

NitHeel is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 09:12 AM
  #138
sauce9397
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 56
vCash: 500
Can someone clarify: if the flyers were to swing voracek and mesz for two first round picks would they have to be Nashville's first round picks? Obviously that would be a huge difference considering they would likely have a top 10 pick

sauce9397 is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 09:19 AM
  #139
El Emperor
Registered User
 
El Emperor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Marlton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,218
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sauce9397 View Post
Can someone clarify: if the flyers were to swing voracek and mesz for two first round picks would they have to be Nashville's first round picks? Obviously that would be a huge difference considering they would likely have a top 10 pick
It would be the Flyers' picks coming back.

El Emperor is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 09:22 AM
  #140
Damaged Goods
Registered User
 
Damaged Goods's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,026
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NitHeel View Post
No, that's my point. This is 100% a money decision for them. If they have the money, then they keep Weber - we can't prod them out of that decision. If they can't make the payment, then he's ours with no need to sweeten.
It's not a question of having the money or not. It's a question of whether or not it is smart/realistic to pay that money for just Weber. The Preds could get rid of other salary if they were dead set on Weber, for instance. But it wouldn't be a smart plan for their hockey team competitively.

Damaged Goods is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 09:22 AM
  #141
Joey Mac
Registered User
 
Joey Mac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,007
vCash: 500
if the flyers were to trade voracek and already having lost jagr and jvr, who steps in at winger? the winger depth has taken a nice hit during this offseason, if that's to happen... also, there's no guarantee doan signs here

Joey Mac is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 09:27 AM
  #142
JLHockeyKnight
IMA Real American
 
JLHockeyKnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: North Central Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 19,439
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damaged Goods View Post
Because it's in our interest for them to do the "smart" thing. So why not prod them in the right direction to make sure it happens?
Actually, now that I think of it, offering that deal on the side to coax them into not matching isn't a bad idea at all. If Holmgren absolutely needs a number 1 defenseman, to where he's willing to offer that kind of money to Weber, doing a deal like that on the side can only benefit us. Of course it would have to be an "assuming you don't match, then we'll offer this deal too" stipulation.

JLHockeyKnight is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 09:27 AM
  #143
orange is better
than other colors...
 
orange is better's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 7,251
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damaged Goods View Post
It's not a question of having the money or not. It's a question of whether or not it is smart/realistic to pay that money for just Weber. The Preds could get rid of other salary if they were dead set on Weber, for instance. But it wouldn't be a smart plan for their hockey team competitively.
I think it's a question of both...

They're below the cap floor and already over their internal limit, how are they going to give weber 26 million over 11 months only to still have to reach the cap floor?

This is a detrimental route for the press future of they match, but it also remains to be seen where the money would actually come from. It's not there right now, that's for sure.

And this is all still contrary to the fact that Shea is said to not even want to play in Nashville anymore. I just don't see how they can take that risk for a player who wants to be somewhere else. All this mending bridges talk, taking the professional high road is crap. The man doesn't want to be in Nashville any longer.

orange is better is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 09:28 AM
  #144
chimrichalds18
the key
 
chimrichalds18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,759
vCash: 500
Think about the press conference Weber has when Nashville matches our offer sheet. From a PR standpoint, it's a mess for Nashville. It's essentially been confirmed that he doesn't want to be there, and now you have him for 14 years? It's gonna be very awkward, and I'm sure the franchise is very aware of that. Anytime you have an athlete who doesn't want to be in his city, it has the potential to get really ugly.

Decline the deal, Nashville.

chimrichalds18 is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 09:28 AM
  #145
jd2210
Registered Non User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Great White North
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,461
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
Just don't think it's gonna happen, boys. Too much at stake for Nashville. I was stoked yesterday, but the truth is that Nashville simply cannot let him walk. They are either going to lose money and fans by letting him walk, or just lose money by signing him. Wouldn't make sense to let him and the fans leave. Hopefully I'm wrong, but I think he's staying put.
I concur. The more I think of it the more I believe they will match. Sucks for us.

Strange thing though is that they let Suter walk with zero return and here they could have a return and yet will (likely) overpay to keep him. The last 2 years have been a disaster for them and yet he retains a job somehow. Weber should have been locked up last year instead of coming to this. He created this problem himself and now he'll pay dearly for the mistake.

jd2210 is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 09:30 AM
  #146
RespectTheCouts
He Eats Souls
 
RespectTheCouts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 4,691
vCash: 500
The more I think about the whole OS situation, how much money needs to be put out for Weber is crazy, but the finacial implecations are borderline crippling to Nashville if they do match, which obviously is why Homer cooked up said deal, but not just as a greedy Flyers fan do I want Weber here, if Nashville does match it's going to do finacial damage to that franchise I don't think can be fixed, what I mean is that it might be to far gone, way too much money for little coming in through sales and whatnot, and as a hockey fan all around I don't want to see that happen to any franchise (ok I lied if it happened to Pitt I wouldn't mind) they might be running numbers, trying to work out a trade, or just making it look like they have tried everything so they save face that way, as pure business I think you walk away from this type of contract 9/10, sorry I'm just typing outloud

RespectTheCouts is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 09:34 AM
  #147
NitHeel
Mucker/Grinder
 
NitHeel's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Reading, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,987
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damaged Goods View Post
It's not a question of having the money or not. It's a question of whether or not it is smart/realistic to pay that money for just Weber. The Preds could get rid of other salary if they were dead set on Weber, for instance. But it wouldn't be a smart plan for their hockey team competitively.
Even if they sign Weber, they still have a ways to go to get to the cap floor - getting rid of other salary won't help them. They need to figure out if they can hand Weber a big pile of cash - separate from just cap expenditures - and still cover the payroll needed to get to the floor. That's why this is a "yes or no" cash flow question.

NitHeel is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 09:39 AM
  #148
Damaged Goods
Registered User
 
Damaged Goods's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,026
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orange is better View Post
I think it's a question of both...

They're below the cap floor and already over their internal limit, how are they going to give weber 26 million over 11 months only to still have to reach the cap floor?

This is a detrimental route for the press future of they match, but it also remains to be seen where the money would actually come from. It's not there right now, that's for sure.

And this is all still contrary to the fact that Shea is said to not even want to play in Nashville anymore. I just don't see how they can take that risk for a player who wants to be somewhere else. All this mending bridges talk, taking the professional high road is crap. The man doesn't want to be in Nashville any longer.
They could do it by losing money as a franchise. It's not like they have $20 in life savings in their pocket and they want to buy something that costs $30 dollars. It's more like they are a poor factory worker and they have to decide if it makes sense to buy a big expensive steak on their meagre wages and then live with an empty cupboard for the rest of the week.

Well it doesn't make sense, but then sometimes your mouth waters and you will buy the steak anyway (only to regret it later).


Quote:
Originally Posted by NitHeel View Post
Even if they sign Weber, they still have a ways to go to get to the cap floor - getting rid of other salary won't help them. They need to figure out if they can hand Weber a big pile of cash - separate from just cap expenditures - and still cover the payroll needed to get to the floor. That's why this is a "yes or no" cash flow question.

A yes or no question that's entirely based on willingness to spend. It's not that matching this offer sheet is going to make Nashville to go bankrupt by the end of the year. But it would be bad business nonetheless.


Last edited by Damaged Goods: 07-20-2012 at 09:44 AM.
Damaged Goods is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 09:39 AM
  #149
jd2210
Registered Non User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Great White North
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,461
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chimrichalds18 View Post
Think about the press conference Weber has when Nashville matches our offer sheet. From a PR standpoint, it's a mess for Nashville. It's essentially been confirmed that he doesn't want to be there, and now you have him for 14 years? It's gonna be very awkward, and I'm sure the franchise is very aware of that. Anytime you have an athlete who doesn't want to be in his city, it has the potential to get really ugly.

Decline the deal, Nashville.
"We're here to announce that our captain who clearly wants out is now signed to a 14 year deal that was constructed by another team. He is stuck here whether he wants to be or not."

jd2210 is offline  
Old
07-20-2012, 09:43 AM
  #150
flyerfanish
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 126
vCash: 500
People also seem to forget that Weber had a concussion last year. Giving out that kind of contract (where they cant insure the money) would be a HUGE risk, even if they want to keep him.

flyerfanish is offline  
Closed Thread

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 08:54 PM.

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.