More like "How dare you rich sons of b|tches find loopholes in the soon-to-expire CBA we agreed on to poach the best players from the poorer teams."
- jmatchett383

Same rule applies in new CBA if I'm not mistaken?

GM's should lock up their own RFA's if they're worried about offer sheets. It's that simple.

If Weber was underperforming .....yeah, holding on is poor strategy.

Getting rid of the guy after 1 year (ONE YEAR!) is simply wasting money. And for what, exactly? Rich people like something to show for their money...

Using your stock analogy, the Preds look to have "gone long" with Weber.
- johndewar

The only way anything making sense around moving Weber after absorbing the salary bonuses would be if Nashville decided it was worth $26M to get the trade they really wanted rather than lose him for 4 1st round picks.

So if they actually got Philly to do Couturier + Schenn + Ghost + 1st (or whatever) for Weber, they can could view it as costing $26M to get that deal. They could have saved $26M and taken the 4 1sts, but maybe that wasn't worth as much to them in the end.

Note: I don't really think anything above is actually close to reality, but is a way to explain why Nashville would maybe still move Weber even though they paid those bonuses. I don't think he's going anywhere in the next few years at least.

It's not a waste though... You did something to save the franchise and show the fans you're committed. But, look at their season. Weber didn't make a difference, and it became even more aparent Suter was equally as important to the equation.

I think the general point trying to be conveyed here is that Nashville will do what's in their best interest to try and win. If that means trading Weber for more assets to put into the team, then so be it. I fail to see ANY logic in keeping a player simply because you HAD NO CHOICE but to match the offer sheet the Flyers STRUCTURED FOR THEIR TEAM AND PLANS, not Nashville's. How many people wanna bet that Nashville had ABSOLUTELY NO INTENTION of signing Weber to that money and term. Their hands were forced.
- Flyers_V88

Unless Homer had a gun at Nashville ownership's head (let's be honest....no way Poile matches unless he's got Nashville ownership green light), I think Nashville had the option of not matching.

Nashville could have missed the playoffs this year just as easily without Weber and saved the $27 million dollars they are paying him this year.

Do you think Nashville's owners think of that as a sunk cost? If they do, they are sandbagging how much money they have.

Hard to argue w/ homer trading Bob at that juncture. if a mistake was made, it was running after bryz to begin w/...
- isaiah520

Agree. I'm not a Bryz hater, but I'm far from a lover. It was a desperate, emotional move driven by the owner. Probably one of the reasons Snider has given Homer and Lavi some slack.

Take it for what it's worth. But really, why would Nashville be willing to spend $25M for 48 games and then trade him when they have to pay significantly less than that each successive year?
- jmatchett383

Exactly.

FTFY
- isaiah520

You've obviously never been to a game in Nashville.

The only way anything making sense around moving Weber after absorbing the salary bonuses would be if Nashville decided it was worth $26M to get the trade they really wanted rather than lose him for 4 1st round picks.

So if they actually got Philly to do Couturier + Schenn + Ghost + 1st (or whatever) for Weber, they can could view it as costing $26M to get that deal. They could have saved $26M and taken the 4 1sts, but maybe that wasn't worth as much to them in the end.

Note: I don't really think anything above is actually close to reality, but is a way to explain why Nashville would maybe still move Weber even though they paid those bonuses. I don't think he's going anywhere in the next few years at least.
- eayost

I disagree a bit. Nashville can't compare it today to what they could've had last summer. They have to look at what the landscape is today, the "game" has changed. They must look forward not backwards.

This is coming to me second-hand from someone who was told, matter-of-factly, the following 2 things:

1) Weber is not for sale, no matter what. He is the face of the franchise, and they are not moving him.

2) The Flyers are essentially blacklisted as far as they're concerned.

Take it for what it's worth. But really, why would Nashville be willing to spend $25M for 48 games and then trade him when they have to pay significantly less than that each successive year?
- jmatchett383

Sometimes hockey moves are grossly miscalculated. I personally think Nashville felt they had to match it, not that they wanted to, had to.

Like I said, their hand was forced. They obviously didn't want the picks, as that means more growing pains for a franchise that could fold soon, depending on their success, and Holmgren wasn't going to trade any of our young players, so their only alternative was to match it. Business decisions can be re-evaluated at any time. I agree he probably won't get moved, but not for the reasons people are saying here. Do you really think Nashville cares they they spent this money this season? No. They're about winning, like every other team. Feelings of obligation and commitment towards a player, even though it's financial suicide, aren't a reason to keep him if a good trade is offered that meets the needs of your organization.

As for what was said about the Flyers being black-listed, I can believe it.



*when I said Nashville doesn't care about spending the money they did this season, I don't mean they literally don't care, but that it's not going to dictate their motives going forward with respect to Weber, they'll do what's best for the team, with Weber or without*

From Frank Seravalli's article on philly.com:

"If everyone was healthy, how menacing would a third pairing of Grossmann and Coburn or Schenn and Meszaros look?"

So, if everyone was healthy, Schenn would turn into a 3rd pairing d-man?

From Frank Seravalli's article on philly.com:

"If everyone was healthy, how menacing would a third pairing of Grossmann and Coburn or Schenn and Meszaros look?"

So, if everyone was healthy, Schenn would turn into a 3rd pairing d-man?
- funmaster18

Frank's post mortem articles have played a little fast and loose with player evaluation.

Frank's post mortem articles have played a little fast and loose with player evaluation.
- johndewar

At least there is some comedy for us to read over the offseason.

maybe the real mistake here was resigning leighton after the cup run, rather than looking for another legitimate option.
- hammarby31

This year's other Veznia Nominee was Niemi. Who was availible after the Cup run, but NOBODY in the Flyers Organization wanted him. I did, but nope.

Sometimes hockey moves are grossly miscalculated. I personally think Nashville felt they had to match it, not that they wanted to, had to.

Like I said, their hand was forced. They obviously didn't want the picks, as that means more growing pains for a franchise that could fold soon, depending on their success, and Holmgren wasn't going to trade any of our young players, so their only alternative was to match it. Business decisions can be re-evaluated at any time. I agree he probably won't get moved, but not for the reasons people are saying here. Do you really think Nashville cares they they spent this money this season? No. They're about winning, like every other team. Feelings of obligation and commitment towards a player, even though it's financial suicide, aren't a reason to keep him if a good trade is offered that meets the needs of your organization.

As for what was said about the Flyers being black-listed, I can believe it.



*when I said Nashville doesn't care about spending the money they did this season, I don't mean they literally don't care, but that it's not going to dictate their motives going forward with respect to Weber, they'll do what's best for the team, with Weber or without*
- Flyers_V88

Again, you've obviously never been to a game in Nashville.

Who is everyone pulling for in the playoffs? Anyone else catch any games? There has been some really entertaining hockey.

This year's other Veznia Nominee was Niemi. Who was availible after the Cup run, but NOBODY in the Flyers Organization wanted him. I did, but nope.
- flyler

As bad as the Flyers were defensively this year, it wouldn't have mattered if Bernie in his prime was back there.

Frank's post mortem articles have played a little fast and loose with player evaluation.
- johndewar

Understatement. Heh.

Homer is God in this blob, go Bob
- vejim

Um, no. When Homer is deserving of criticism in my opinion, I spell out where I think he was wrong.

As far as Bobrovsky goes, I don't blame Holmgren apart from making the decision to re-sign Leighton in the 2010 offseason and the initial plan to enter the following season with him as the starter.

Once that happened, everything else talked about the blog happened.

The GM does not set the lineup in the regular season or the playoffs. The coach does that. The three-headed goaltending monstrosity in the 2011 playoffs was 100 percent Peter Laviolette's doing.

The decision to acquire and sign Bryzgalov at all costs was driven by Ed Snider, with the GM (who had tried to go low-cost in goal in 2009-10 and 2010-11) basically being told "I did it your way the last two years, now we'll do it mine."

When Bryzgalov was signed, Bobrovsky's future in Philly was already over, although it lasted one more season as a backup. If anything, Holmgren should have traded Bobrovsky a year earlier than he did (which I did say in the blog).

Again, you've obviously never been to a game in Nashville.
- jmatchett383

Nope, can't say that I have, but what do the numbers say?

Are they making money? No.

Do they sell-out most of their games? No.

Are they in the top 15 or even 20 for attendance? No.

Is hockey a staple in Tennessee? No.

Does hockey in southern markets depend on success? Yes.



I don't need to have been to a game to know the Predators, despite their excellent coaching and surprising success most years, are not a lock so stay there, and could potentially be re-located... Not saying they are, but COULD be.

This year's other Veznia Nominee was Niemi. Who was availible after the Cup run, but NOBODY in the Flyers Organization wanted him. I did, but nope.
- flyler

Yeah, but the team that had just won the Cup with him cut him loose and it wasn't like there was a lot of clamoring for Niemi around the league when he suddenly became a UFA.

From Frank Seravalli's article on philly.com:

"If everyone was healthy, how menacing would a third pairing of Grossmann and Coburn or Schenn and Meszaros look?"

So, if everyone was healthy, Schenn would turn into a 3rd pairing d-man?
- funmaster18

Well, if "everybody" includes Chris Pronger, then maybe.

Who is everyone pulling for in the playoffs? Anyone else catch any games? There has been some really entertaining hockey.
- funmaster18

I'm pulling for the Sens (although according to Skip this isn't unprecedented ), but pretty much every series has been worth watching.

Who is everyone pulling for in the playoffs? Anyone else catch any games? There has been some really entertaining hockey.
- funmaster18

Pulling for the Sharks. Would love to see the Isles* face them in the Final so we can put the "Is it Nabby or is it the Sharks organization?" issue to bed, once and for all.

* = I highly doubt the Isles make it to the 4th round, let alone the 3rd. I do think they win the 1st, though.

Well, if "everybody" includes Chris Pronger, then maybe.
- bmeltzer

He and a healthy Dave Babych would rule.

Who is everyone pulling for in the playoffs? Anyone else catch any games? There has been some really entertaining hockey.
- funmaster18

Isles
Blues.

Same rule applies in new CBA if I'm not mistaken?

GM's should lock up their own RFA's if they're worried about offer sheets. It's that simple.
- flyguy12

It's about the spirit of the rule. The Offer Sheet in the CBA was never intended to be used as a weapon for the richer teams of the League, to target the poorer teams of the League, to in effect try and force them to give up a top player, due to financial reasons. It is bad for the League as a whole when it is used that way. That is where the hard feelings come from. It's akin to the big kid bullying the weak.