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

Offer Sheet Matched. Weber signed to Nashville for 14 years

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-22-2012, 03:54 AM
  #151
kypredsfan
Weber is OUR captain
 
kypredsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 4,717
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I Will Son View Post
Link aint working for me
Contents:

Philly troll on Brett Wilson's twitter: "Any interest in upping that 5% stake in the Preds? Ya, I didn't think so!"

Wilson's tweet back: "that's old new. I upped. We just haven't bothered to announce the details. Private and not material..."

Take it for what it's worth. It's definitely not negative news. Maybe a small glimmer of hope.

kypredsfan is offline  
Old
07-22-2012, 05:39 AM
  #152
I Will Son
An Army of One
 
I Will Son's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Nashville
Country: United States
Posts: 8,528
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kypredsfan View Post
Contents:

Philly troll on Brett Wilson's twitter: "Any interest in upping that 5% stake in the Preds? Ya, I didn't think so!"

Wilson's tweet back: "that's old new. I upped. We just haven't bothered to announce the details. Private and not material..."

Take it for what it's worth. It's definitely not negative news. Maybe a small glimmer of hope.
That is interesting. Thank you!

I Will Son is offline  
Old
07-22-2012, 07:15 AM
  #153
kypredsfan
Weber is OUR captain
 
kypredsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 4,717
vCash: 500
I will add this. If we do match this offersheet, I better not see or hear ANYONE *****ing about ticket prices going up because they will indeed go up. I'll happily pay more if I know that they are serious about being a contender.

kypredsfan is offline  
Old
07-22-2012, 07:51 AM
  #154
cleangene
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Beautiful Bellevue
Posts: 971
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kypredsfan View Post
i will add this. If we do match this offersheet, i better not see or hear anyone *****ing about ticket prices going up because they will indeed go up. I'll happily pay more if i know that they are serious about being a contender.
this!

cleangene is offline  
Old
07-22-2012, 08:57 AM
  #155
ILikeItILoveIt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 227
vCash: 500
If Bettman had any integrity, he'd void the offer. Philly sat down and said: "Lets misuse bonus money to create a contract that circumvents the spirit of the salary cap and bullies a small market team into giving up its best player because we want him and since we're a big market team who can afford to make such a huge percentage upfront, we're gonna do what we want."

It uses calendar years and contract years in an insidious manner to create this $27mm bubble in 12 months. Ingenius in it's manipulation of the current rules. I bet they patting themselves on the back coming up with this stink bomb.

The lawyers out there marvel at the slight of hand the way all dishonest selfish people appear to technically follow the rules when their intent is to break their spirit.

There is enough smoke here for Bettman to void the offer. He may not because it's Phlly and Comcast and the league wanting Philly to be a bigger draw and a Cup contender, versus Nashville. Bettman, however, has been a crusader for the small market teams and hockey in the South. If he allows this travesty to go thru, then he's a fraud.

PLEASE don't respond with posts justifying this offer as "within the technical rules". I read the comparison to Kovy and it's close enough to that travesty to void the contract. Nobody on this thread is denying what Philly is doing here. This offer is designed to make a joke of the salary cap. If the cap becomes $70mm, and Philly gets Weber, and they spend to the Cap, they'll be spending $97mm over the next 12 months in cash flow. STOP with the calendar/contract year argument. If this were your checkbook, after 12 months you'd look in it and see you've written out checks for $97mm roughly.

Philly is manipuling the rules to crush a small market team. The Cap was designed to protect small market teams so that this exact thing doesn't happen. It's happening because some Cap lawyers sat in a conference room in Philly and said, "hey, how about if we do this. This crushes them but technically may stay with the rules". Then they all went out for a drink and congratulated themselves because they're so damn smart.

Having a "spirit of the rule" provision for the league is there for this exact circumstance. There is no way of forecasting how devious people will try to bend the rules when you set up a rule. Everyone understands the spirit of the rule so if some smart guys dream up something like this, Bettman should read it for what it is, and kill it.

Don't say he doesn't have the authority. It's about "spirit". It's an opinion, not a fact. He can void it if he wants to.

Slap down the Big Market Bullies and hold to your spirit, Bettman.

ILikeItILoveIt is offline  
Old
07-22-2012, 09:06 AM
  #156
Snotbubbles
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ILikeItILoveIt View Post
If Bettman had any integrity, he'd void the offer. Philly sat down and said: "Lets misuse bonus money to create a contract that circumvents the spirit of the salary cap and bullies a small market team into giving up its best player because we want him and since we're a big market team who can afford to make such a huge percentage upfront, we're gonna do what we want."

It uses calendar years and contract years in an insidious manner to create this $27mm bubble in 12 months. Ingenius in it's manipulation of the current rules. I bet they patting themselves on the back coming up with this stink bomb.

The lawyers out there marvel at the slight of hand the way all dishonest selfish people appear to technically follow the rules when their intent is to break their spirit.

There is enough smoke here for Bettman to void the offer. He may not because it's Phlly and Comcast and the league wanting Philly to be a bigger draw and a Cup contender, versus Nashville. Bettman, however, has been a crusader for the small market teams and hockey in the South. If he allows this travesty to go thru, then he's a fraud.

PLEASE don't respond with posts justifying this offer as "within the technical rules". I read the comparison to Kovy and it's close enough to that travesty to void the contract. Nobody on this thread is denying what Philly is doing here. This offer is designed to make a joke of the salary cap. If the cap becomes $70mm, and Philly gets Weber, and they spend to the Cap, they'll be spending $97mm over the next 12 months in cash flow. STOP with the calendar/contract year argument. If this were your checkbook, after 12 months you'd look in it and see you've written out checks for $97mm roughly.

Philly is manipuling the rules to crush a small market team. The Cap was designed to protect small market teams so that this exact thing doesn't happen. It's happening because some Cap lawyers sat in a conference room in Philly and said, "hey, how about if we do this. This crushes them but technically may stay with the rules". Then they all went out for a drink and congratulated themselves because they're so damn smart.

Having a "spirit of the rule" provision for the league is there for this exact circumstance. There is no way of forecasting how devious people will try to bend the rules when you set up a rule. Everyone understands the spirit of the rule so if some smart guys dream up something like this, Bettman should read it for what it is, and kill it.

Don't say he doesn't have the authority. It's about "spirit". It's an opinion, not a fact. He can void it if he wants to.

Slap down the Big Market Bullies and hold to your spirit, Bettman.
So Bettman voids the contract, Weber signs a 1 year deal and he's gone next offseason. Does that really put Nashville in the position it wants to be in? Sure, maybe they can get a better offer for Weber in a trade, but Weber is gone. The 14 year contract is a blessing for Nashville if they are serious about being a cap ceiling team. Weber's contract after the initial calendar year isn't horrible financially and is actually a sweetheart deal about halfway through for Nashville.

Snotbubbles is offline  
Old
07-22-2012, 09:20 AM
  #157
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 29,611
vCash: 521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snotbubbles View Post
So Bettman voids the contract, Weber signs a 1 year deal and he's gone next offseason. Does that really put Nashville in the position it wants to be in? Sure, maybe they can get a better offer for Weber in a trade, but Weber is gone. The 14 year contract is a blessing for Nashville if they are serious about being a cap ceiling team. Weber's contract after the initial calendar year isn't horrible financially and is actually a sweetheart deal about halfway through for Nashville.
But, because the old cba is expiring, Weber does not want a 1 yr deal.

There have been calls for the new cba to shorten the length of contracts and limit bonus money.

Weber needs to sign his huge deal before the old cba expires on Sept. 15, 2012.
Before the new cba is in place.

CREW99AW is offline  
Old
07-22-2012, 09:25 AM
  #158
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 29,611
vCash: 521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osprey View Post
There's so much misunderstanding about "cap circumvention." People need to realize two things:

1. The only reason that Kovalchuk's initial contract was nullified was that it had him playing cheaply until age 44. It's highly unlikely that he'll play that long, yet the contract was able to use those years to lower the cap hit. After the arbitrator rejected the contract, the NHL and NHLPA agreed on amendments to the current CBA so that years past age 40 can't be used for cap calculation and years after age 35 count for a minimum of $1M against the cap. NJ made a few minor changes to comply with those amendments, mainly chopping off a few years, and the new contract was accepted by the NHL. It's still a heavily front-loaded contract. Being heavily front-loaded is not the problem. The problem is exploiting the likelihood of a player's retirement to get away with a lower cap hit. Weber's contract takes him to age 40. It fully complies with the amendments that the NHL and NHLPA agreed to and, on top of that, there's every expectation that he'll play until age 40, especially since he's a defenseman.

2. The CBA does not concern itself with "calendar years." It concerns itself with "contract years," which end on the last day of June. The fact that Weber will make $27M in the first calendar year and the fact that the CBA doesn't allow a player to be paid more than $14M per contract year are not in conflict. Calendar years and contract years are apples and oranges. All that the CBA cares about is that Weber isn't paid more than $14M between now and next June 30th, which he's not, and that he's not paid more than $14M between next July 1st and the following June 30th, which he's not. Again, there is no cap circumvention here. Blogs and posts which suggest that there is are wrong.

Neither of these points means that you can't personally dislike Weber's contract and want ones like it to be done away with. It's just that if you're expecting it to be rejected because the initial Kovalchuk contract was or the CBA says this and that, you need to realize that the comparisons are inaccurate. Now, this doesn't rule out the NHL stepping in and making another effective-immediately rule change, like they did with Kovalchuk, but Weber's contract complies with the existing rules.
Thanks for clearing that up.

Disappointing news. I'd hoped the league would step in, forcing Philly to push back some of that bonus $.

CREW99AW is offline  
Old
07-22-2012, 09:25 AM
  #159
Snotbubbles
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
But, because the old cba is expiring, Weber does not want a 1 yr deal.

There have been calls for the new cba to shorten the length of contracts and limit bonus money.

Weber needs to sign his huge deal before the old cba expires on Sept. 15, 2012.
Before the new cba is in place.
But the type he wants is the kind that has already been approved by the league (see Suter and Parise's deal). Suter got 10M in bonuses this year and next year, so they have to bite that bullet regardless.

Snotbubbles is offline  
Old
07-22-2012, 09:34 AM
  #160
ILikeItILoveIt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 227
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snotbubbles View Post
So Bettman voids the contract, Weber signs a 1 year deal and he's gone next offseason. Does that really put Nashville in the position it wants to be in? Sure, maybe they can get a better offer for Weber in a trade, but Weber is gone. The 14 year contract is a blessing for Nashville if they are serious about being a cap ceiling team. Weber's contract after the initial calendar year isn't horrible financially and is actually a sweetheart deal about halfway through for Nashville.
That's a false choice. This offer is a no-brainer in it's total value if not for the front loading. Void it, let Philly alter it by removing the front loading, and then let Nashville make it's choice. Nobody is talking about a 1 year contract, especially Weber. Normally, he'd want that so he could get to UFAville next year, however the CBA uncertainty has flipped that. Suter set the market price, Weber is worth more, the Preds and plenty of other teams will pay it, but not with enormous frontloading making a mockery of the Cap.

Remove the "predatory" nature of the front loading, and Philly loses because it's that very front loading that's wrong and causing Nashville to choose between losing it's franchising player or keeping him and having to pay an enormous, unfair percentage of the total contract in the first few years.

Philly knows what they're doing, and so does everyone around this issue. Normally in law, there is no provision for "the spirit of the law". That's how clever lawyers make their money: find technicalities. This rule has that provision.

If it walks and talks and acts like a duck, it's a f'ing duck.

Bettman, shoot the duck or move out of the South and the small markets and go back to 16 teams. I'm sure Philly fans are all for that anyway.

...... and another dang thing. This crap about "fixing" this in the next CBA. Fixing what? If this move does an end-around on the spirit of the rule so we need to specifically tighten up the rule in the next CBA, then it proves this is a perversion of the current rule.

So void the offer AND fix it in the next CBA so you don't have to waste time and attention going thru this waiting game in the future.

I'm going to church.

ILikeItILoveIt is offline  
Old
07-22-2012, 09:39 AM
  #161
Snotbubbles
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ILikeItILoveIt View Post
That's a false choice. This offer is a no-brainer in it's total value if not for the front loading. Void it, let Philly alter it by removing the front loading, and then let Nashville make it's choice. Nobody is talking about a 1 year contract, especially Weber. Normally, he'd want that so he could get to UFAville next year, however the CBA uncertainty has flipped that. Suter set the market price, Weber is worth more, the Preds and plenty of other teams will pay it, but not with enormous frontloading making a mockery of the Cap.

Remove the "predatory" nature of the front loading, and Philly loses because it's that very front loading that's wrong and causing Nashville to choose between losing it's franchising player or keeping him and having to pay an enormous, unfair percentage of the total contract in the first few years.

Philly knows what they're doing, and so does everyone around this issue. Normally in law, there is no provision for "the spirit of the law". That's how clever lawyers make their money: find technicalities. This rule has that provision.

If it walks and talks and acts like a duck, it's a f'ing duck.

Bettman, shoot the duck or move out of the South and the small markets and go back to 16 teams. I'm sure Philly fans are all for that anyway.

...... and another dang thing. This crap about "fixing" this in the next CBA. Fixing what? If this move does an end-around on the spirit of the rule so we need to specifically tighten up the rule in the next CBA, then it proves this is a perversion of the current rule.

So void the offer AND fix it in the next CBA so you don't have to waste time and attention going thru this waiting game in the future.

I'm going to church.
Philly sent an offersheet that was already approved by the league with other players. Somehow, this one should be voided?

Snotbubbles is offline  
Old
07-22-2012, 10:20 AM
  #162
Denny 204
Registered User
 
Denny 204's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Lac du Bonnet, MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 189
vCash: 500
I very much dislike the Flyers and this move gives me more fuel for Flyer hate. It was a low move and I feel for you fans in Nashville. Either way this is a crappy situation. Good luck.

Denny 204 is offline  
Old
07-22-2012, 10:29 AM
  #163
pekkaslap
Registered User
 
pekkaslap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 389
vCash: 500
Looks like they're going to be taking the entire 7 days...I'm going crazy here lol.

pekkaslap is offline  
Old
07-22-2012, 10:32 AM
  #164
luckofirish8
Registered User
 
luckofirish8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 148
vCash: 500
Quote:
...... and another dang thing. This crap about "fixing" this in the next CBA. Fixing what? If this move does an end-around on the spirit of the rule so we need to specifically tighten up the rule in the next CBA, then it proves this is a perversion of the current rule.
This is truly the best point in the entire rant. Well done, sir.

luckofirish8 is offline  
Old
07-22-2012, 10:37 AM
  #165
PredsV82
Puckaroni and cheese
 
PredsV82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Outside
Country: Scotland
Posts: 14,878
vCash: 300
If the rumors that weber wanted an offer sheet last summer but poile forestalled that with arbitration are true, then its probably just a shame that last summer ownership wasn't secure enouigh with the possibility of matching a huge contract to allow poile to go that route. I can't imagine an offer sheet last summer would have been as draconian as this one is...

PredsV82 is offline  
Old
07-22-2012, 10:51 AM
  #166
codeman00
Registered User
 
codeman00's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 99
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pekkaslap View Post
Looks like they're going to be taking the entire 7 days...I'm going crazy here lol.
We're all going crazy here....

codeman00 is offline  
Old
07-22-2012, 10:53 AM
  #167
CREW99AW
Registered User
 
CREW99AW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 29,611
vCash: 521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snotbubbles View Post
But the type he wants is the kind that has already been approved by the league (see Suter and Parise's deal). Suter got 10M in bonuses this year and next year, so they have to bite that bullet regardless.
I agree he wants a deal like Suter and Parise's. My point is, that he needs to sign it this summer, before the current cba expires in Sept. 2012. Weber is not looking to sign a 1 yr deal with anyone, then to become a ufa in July 2013. That's too late for him to cash in.

The new cba will likely limit term and bonus $.

It does not sound like Nashville would be against giving Weber's a big bonus. Paying roughly $26m in bonuses in the first 12 months, is rediculous though. It hampers the team, making it difficult for them to make other roster moves.

CREW99AW is offline  
Old
07-22-2012, 10:59 AM
  #168
INDhockeyfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,907
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I Will Son View Post
Link aint working for me
http://www.ontheforecheck.com/

The only hope the preds have for matching the Weber offer sheet is Brett Wilson. Maybe they can work out a deal that he pays the bonus money and gets a larger share or maybe it be just a loan that the rest have to pay back later.


Last edited by INDhockeyfan: 07-22-2012 at 11:13 AM.
INDhockeyfan is offline  
Old
07-22-2012, 11:21 AM
  #169
sighthndlady
Registered User
 
sighthndlady's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 352
vCash: 500
So. . .as of June 30, Poile was perfectly fine with offering big, long-term deals to both Suter and Weber. Both were going to have cap hits somewhere around $7.8 million. That was a given. Even if the $$ were laid out on a completely pro rated basis, this means that Poile was prepared to pay Weber+Suter in excess of $15 million in both the 2012/13 and 2013/14 seasons. That's $30 million spread over the September 2012 through April 2014 period.

Instead, he has to decide whether to pay Weber $28 million in two big installments - now and July 1, 2013 - and another $2 million in paycheck installments. Sounds to me like very short term financing.

Admittedly, this means that we have to ice a $500,000 guy instead of a legitimate #2 for a couple of years, but so what? The next 12 years are amazing.

What am I missing?

sighthndlady is offline  
Old
07-22-2012, 11:22 AM
  #170
predfan98
Registered User
 
predfan98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDhockeyfan View Post
http://www.ontheforecheck.com/

The only hope the preds have for matching the Weber offer sheet is Brett Wilson. Maybe they can work out a deal that he pays the bonus money and gets a larger share or maybe it be just a loan that the rest have to pay back later.
nope, this isn't a realistic way of running a business.

Do you have any idea how complicated an equity situation this would be and how long it would take to agree on who gives up what equity and how much someone gets?

And if it is not sustainable in a year to year situation---- you don't just "loan" a company that you are a partner in a certain million dollar sum each year, if you can see that the business can't sustain it. Unless if course you see that it can't be sustainable and you hope to gain a large enough share so you can move the business in 5 years or so, when it truly becomes a huge negative cash flow.

this is an unrealistic red herring from a twitter remark.

predfan98 is offline  
Old
07-22-2012, 11:22 AM
  #171
Snotbubbles
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
I agree he wants a deal like Suter and Parise's. My point is, that he needs to sign it this summer, before the current cba expires in Sept. 2012. Weber is not looking to sign a 1 yr deal with anyone, then to become a ufa in July 2013. That's too late for him to cash in.

The new cba will likely limit term and bonus $.

It does not sound like Nashville would be against giving Weber's a big bonus. Paying roughly $26m in bonuses in the first 12 months, is rediculous though. It hampers the team, making it difficult for them to make other roster moves.
I don't disagree with you, but I can't say that this contract should be voided and Suter/Parise/Richards contracts are ok.

Snotbubbles is offline  
Old
07-22-2012, 11:23 AM
  #172
predfan98
Registered User
 
predfan98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sighthndlady View Post
So. . .as of June 30, Poile was perfectly fine with offering big, long-term deals to both Suter and Weber. Both were going to have cap hits somewhere around $7.8 million. That was a given. Even if the $$ were laid out on a completely pro rated basis, this means that Poile was prepared to pay Weber+Suter in excess of $15 million in both the 2012/13 and 2013/14 seasons. That's $30 million spread over the September 2012 through April 2014 period.

Instead, he has to decide whether to pay Weber $28 million in two big installments - now and July 1, 2013 - and another $2 million in paycheck installments. Sounds to me like very short term financing.

Admittedly, this means that we have to ice a $500,000 guy instead of a legitimate #2 for a couple of years, but so what? The next 12 years are amazing.

What am I missing?
the "signing bonus money" of $13 million a year is uninsurable... if weber has another concussion we are up the creek.

predfan98 is offline  
Old
07-22-2012, 11:24 AM
  #173
Snotbubbles
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by predfan98 View Post
nope, this isn't a realistic way of running a business.

Do you have any idea how complicated an equity situation this would be and how long it would take to agree on who gives up what equity and how much someone gets?

And if it is not sustainable in a year to year situation---- you don't just "loan" a company that you are a partner in a certain million dollar sum each year, if you can see that the business can't sustain it. Unless if course you see that it can't be sustainable and you hope to gain a large enough share so you can move the business in 5 years or so, when it truly becomes a huge negative cash flow.

this is an unrealistic red herring from a twitter remark.
Pretty soon you'll be borrowing from Peter to pay Paul. Not a good way to run a business.

Snotbubbles is offline  
Old
07-22-2012, 11:30 AM
  #174
Roo Mad Bro
U havin a giggle m8?
 
Roo Mad Bro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,378
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by predfan98 View Post
the "signing bonus money" of $13 million a year is uninsurable... if weber has another concussion we are up the creek.
Are Preds fans worried about his concussion history?

I know of 2:

-One last year around December, no?
-Was reading older threads on this board and found a thread from like 2003 or 2004 (in junior) where Weber got hit and got a concussion. Sounded pretty serious

Roo Mad Bro is offline  
Old
07-22-2012, 11:31 AM
  #175
AEM6729
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Nashville
Posts: 1,024
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
Thanks for clearing that up.

Disappointing news. I'd hoped the league would step in, forcing Philly to push back some of that bonus $.
It seems like they still can. The Kovy rule wasn't a rule until the contract was submitted to the League. Who's to say that there can't be a Weber rule created? Seems like it would make more sense for the League to create it at the offer sheet stage, so we don't have to figure out where to find all this cash only to have the contract voided.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snotbubbles View Post
Philly sent an offersheet that was already approved by the league with other players. Somehow, this one should be voided?
Is there really any other contract in the league that's like this offer sheet? I can't think of any contract that's as ridiculously loaded with bonuses as this one, especially in the first two contract years/one calendar year. I know there have been some really front-loaded contracts out there, but none like this.

Suter and Parise got $10M bonuses with $2M salaries in the first two years, a $5M bonus with $6M salary in the third year and everything after that is real salary. Shea has a $13M bonus with $1M salary for FOUR years, then $8M bonus with $4M salary the next two years before we get to years that are just real salary. Shea's contract is obviously more ridiculous, and it came in the form of an offer sheet from a big market team to a small one...seems much more predatory to me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ILikeItILoveIt View Post
...... and another dang thing. This crap about "fixing" this in the next CBA. Fixing what? If this move does an end-around on the spirit of the rule so we need to specifically tighten up the rule in the next CBA, then it proves this is a perversion of the current rule.

So void the offer AND fix it in the next CBA so you don't have to waste time and attention going thru this waiting game in the future.

I'm going to church.
This. It's really gonna suck if/when the new CBA creates new rules that "fix" these types of contracts, but in the meantime we have to lose our best two players over contracts that probably won't be allowed a year from now.

AEM6729 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 07:11 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.