Shea Weber, CBA talks, and Some Thoughts on both situations - Blogs - Fantasy Hockey Coach - Hockey Pool and Keeper Hockey Advice - Forum

View RSS Feed

Hot off the Presses

Shea Weber, CBA talks, and Some Thoughts on both situations

Rate this Entry
Name:  sweber.jpg
Views: 259
Size:  40.6 KBReports are in saying that the Philadelphia Flyers have agreed to terms with D Shea Weber on a 14 year, $110M deal which averages $7.85M per season. I have a couple of thoughts on this news.

Which are:

1. Will Nashville match the offer? Another could be, can they afford not to? I mean lets look at it this way, if they don't they'd be down two defensemen this off-season without anyone nearly the skill level coming back. However on the flip side if Nashville wanted to just say "screw it" and try rebuilding those 4 first round draft picks would be a good way to do it. However is that fair to Pekka Rinne who had just signed a long term agreement to say in Nashville? Absolutely not. So Nashville has to make a choice and do so within a week.

2. What does this move mean for the CBA talks? One of the owner proposals the owners presented last Friday has a clause in it that states max contract length would five years. Isn't this kind of a middle finger by the Flyers to this proposal? I kind of like this move if this is a way for the Flyers to say "we don't like the max contract being that short" however should the Flyers get Weber in this case they would be locking up a potential hall of fame caliber player.

In other news, last Friday the NHL owners presented the players with an offer for a new CBA and it was a very low ball offer from the league. Below are some details reported by media outlets:

  • Players take of hockey related income would fall down from 57% to 46%
  • Players would need to wait 10 years to become unrestricted free agents
  • There would be no such thing as salary arbitration
  • Salary Bonus' would be eliminated
  • All years on a contract would be required to be for the same amount of money for the length of the entire contract

The players have not accepted the offer, and it appears highly unlikely that they will. With that said, why should they? The NHL is trying its best to put as much money in their pockets while screwing over the players to do so. Here is my problem with this, the NHLPA was unhappy about the last deal they signed, so there is no way this first offer was going to be accepted. It worries me however because the NHL said this is a serious offer. Are you kidding me NHL? You call that a serious offer? Come on now. If the NHL doesn't give in on their stance we in all honesty could be looking at a lock out for the second time in 8 years.

I don't think it will come to that though, I want to believe the NHL is more sensible than that. I didn't think the league would survive the first one, I have even more doubt that it can survive a second lock out.

Updated 07-19-2012 at 17:09 by Blogger Gesterling



  1. Aaron Brouwer's Avatar
    Why don't the owners just govern themselves? If they don't want long term contracts then police yourselves, band together and don't let your management teams sign those contracts.
  2. Blogger Gesterling's Avatar
    Brouwer I agree with this. I also wondered why owners didn't stop their own teams from doing this if this is such a big issue to them. I would have to assume that they know about the long term deals (or any deal for that matter) before it gets signed just so the GM's don't lose their jobs. But not having inside knowledge of how a deal goes down I don't know when the owner finds out when a deal is agreed upon.