If Shea Weber and the Nashville Predators follow this summer’s pattern – a pattern that even maintained itself with similarly high wattage star Zach Parise – then they’re just going through the negotiating motions right now. The only case that actually went to arbitration was Chris Campoli’s, which really doesn’t count all that much since the Chicago Blackhawks were prepared to walk away from his award regardless of the amount.
That being said, today marked a rather important day in the process for Weber and the Predators. The Tennessean’s Josh Cooper reminds us that both sides are required to provide written briefs 48 hours before a scheduled arbitration hearing, which means that the Predators and Weber’s representatives must have done so this morning.
So, what does Weber’s side think and how much will the Predators argue for? Dirk Hoag of On the Forecheck provided a hearty analysis of the restricted free agent comparables* for Weber, pointing specifically to where Dion Phaneuf ranked in the minds of many hockey people way back before he became so expensive that the Calgary Flames had to trade him. (Predators fans must hope that the comparisons will stop there, though.) Hoag thinks that the Predators might offer Weber $6.5 million per year.
When balancing out this list of comparables, I could see the Predators coming in at a figure of $6.5 million annually. While there are some aspects of Phaneuf’s performance that were superior to Weber’s during the years leading up to his current contract, Weber does benefit from additional factors such as his being named team captain last summer, and his growing star power around the league due to his performance at the 2010 Olympics and at the World Championships.
On the other hand, the fact remains that while he has been among the top defensemen in a number of areas, he has yet to take the top spot, which argues for keeping him below what Stamkos just received.
Perhaps Weber’s side will fall on the higher side of many peoples’ estimates by asking for $7.5 million, then?
Buddy Oakes thinks that both parties will make a near-last minute deal with an average between $7 million and $7.25 million per year for four or five years, which seems like a reasonable compromise for both sides. Weber would get paid handsomely (but not outrageously) while still setting himself up for one more big in-his-prime deal when it would expire. The Predators would lock up the face of their franchise for a few of his unrestricted years.
It’s important to note a point we’ve been hammering on quite a bit lately: it’s not just about keeping Weber in the fold. The Predators are a budget team with three potential budget-busting players set for near-future paydays: Weber, fellow defensive stud Ryan Suter and Vezina Trophy finalist Pekka Rinne. Suter and Rinne would qualify for unrestricted free agency if the Predators don’t sign them before July 2012. Those two won’t be easy to sign if they keep Weber, but re-signing the team’s renowned defenseman would be a clear sign to the rest of the “Big Three” that they intend to be a genuine contender going forward. (Click here for a roundtable discussion regarding which of the “Big Three” might be most expendable.)
Now that you’ve read a few guesses on what Weber and the Predators think he might be worth, how do you feel? Should he just sign a one or two-year deal and make Nashville prove that they can compete? Should he take less money and more years to help the team build a stronger squad? Is he worth $6.5 million-$7.5 million or perhaps more? Let us know in the comments.
* – Want more comparisons that might put Weber’s value (and the tough negotiations) in further context? Jeremy Gover also provided his own breakdown at Section 303.
The Boston Bruins are going to be aggressive in their pursuit of a “transitional” defenseman this offseason.
GM Don Sweeney understands it won’t be easy, given all the other teams that will be looking for the exact same thing, but he plans to pursue a puck-mover “either through free agency or through acquisitions.”
“It’s a matter of finding a trading partner or finding a match in the marketplace,” Sweeney said today on a conference call. “But we’re going to be aggressive.”
The Bruins already have four defenseman under contract for next season: Zdeno Chara, Dennis Seidenberg, Adam McQuaid and Kevan Miller, the latter of whom just signed a four-year, $10 million extension.
In addition to those four, Sweeney said he expects to get restricted free agent Torey Krug signed. Like Krug, Colin Miller and Joe Morrow are also RFAs.
That makes seven defensemen under club control. Given his desire to add at least one more, Sweeney was asked about trading either Seidenberg or McQuaid, to which he responded, “I’ll explore whatever I have to, in every way, shape and form to improve our club and find the balance we need.”
So expect another busy offseason in Boston. The Bruins have made no secret their intention to upgrade the blue line. As we wrote a month ago, expect the likes of Jacob Trouba, Matt Dumba, Sami Vatanen, Kevin Shattenkirk, and Tyson Barrie to be targeted, should any of those players become available via trade.
If it’s unrestricted free agency that Sweeney opts for, the list of potential targets includes Keith Yandle, Brian Campbell, Alex Goligoski, Dan Hamhuis, Jason Demers, and Kris Russell.
Related: Seidenberg doesn’t want to think about waiving no-trade
Add another list to Flames GM Brad Treliving’s coaching search list:
Gulutzan, the former Dallas bench boss that’s been an assistant in Vancouver for the last three seasons, was permitted to speak with Treliving about the club’s vacant head coaching gig, per The Province.
“They asked for permission and have talked to [Gulutzan],” Canucks GM Jim Benning confirmed. “If he doesn’t get the job, we like Glen and he’s going to be back with our group.”
Gulutzan and Treliving do have a connection. Earlier this month, Sportsnet’s Elliotte Friedman pointed out that both played their junior hockey in WHL Brandon, and was “told not to be surprised” if Gulutzan received an interview.
Treliving is searching hard for a replacement for Bob Hartley. Yesterday, the Calgary Sun wrote he kept busy with the coaching search while leading Canada to gold at the recently completed World Hockey Championship.
Earlier reports claimed Treliving spoke to ex-Wild bench boss Mike Yeo about the gig.
From a Vancouver perspective, the Gulutzan interview could have a domino effect. The Province also points out that Calgary didn’t ask permission to speak with Travis Green, the Canucks’ well-respect bench boss in AHL Utica.
Green has said he thinks he’s ready to take an NHL job, and earlier reports claimed he was in the running for Anaheim’s vacant head coaching gig.
Is it all Vladimir Tarasenko‘s fault that the St. Louis Blues are on the brink of elimination?
No, of course it’s not.
It seems we have to clarify this every time a star player comes under fire for not producing. Hockey is a team game, and the Blues — as a team — have not been as good as the San Jose Sharks in the Western Conference Final.
Still, it was interesting to hear St. Louis coach Ken Hitchcock talk about Tarasenko yesterday, because the criticism was pointed, even if it was delivered in an empathetic manner.
“What happens with goal-scorers when they get frustrated is they look to hit home runs. We need him just to act like a worker,” said Hitchcock.
“What he’s doing is he’s looking to try to catch fast breaks, he’s looking to catch the other team napping. But when you play against guys like [Marc-Edouard Vlasic], you’re not going to catch him napping. He’s just got to feel comfortable playing within the system, playing within the framework.”
Hitchcock added, “I think it’s a natural tendency with younger players who have this heightened sense of urgency to do what they do well, which for him is score goals. He’s gotten too far away from the play. He’s got himself too stretched out. We just need him to come back to the puck a little bit more.”
As we noted yesterday, Tarasenko has been held pointless in five games against the Sharks. In his last three games combined, he’s managed just four shots total. This from a guy who scored 40 of the Blues’ 224 goals during the regular season, then put up 13 points (7G, 6A) in the first two rounds of the playoffs.
We’ll see tonight if the “hard lessons” continue for the 24-year-old, or if he can find a way to help get his team back to St. Louis for Game 7.
It’s been another successful spring for Tyler Johnson.
Johnson, the most diminutive member of Tampa Bay’s vaunted “Triplets” line, is racking up the playoff points yet again. He has 17 through 16 games — tied with Joe Thornton for sixth-most in the postseason — and, depending on how far the Bolts go this year, could best last year’s total, when he had 23 in 24.
Not bad, considering the physical pounding Johnson has taken.
At just 5-foot-9 and 182 pounds, the playoff grind has certainly taken its toll over the last two years. Johnson was rendered all but ineffective in last year’s Cup Final versus Chicago due to a broken right wrist and, this year, dealt with an upper-body injury in the opening round and a puck to the face just prior to Game 4 of the Eastern Conference Final.
Not that it slowed him down any.
Johnson scored the game-winning OT tally in Game 4, getting his body in front of a Jason Garrison shot to deflect home past Marc-Andre Fleury. That earned high praise from Lightning head coach Jon Cooper, who heaped superlatives on his undersized star.
“He’s a winner — that’s what winners do,” coach Jon Cooper said of Johnson, per the Tampa Bay Times. “They don’t back down. And when there’s a challenge ahead of you, you’ve got to find a way to meet the challenge. There’s a lot of coaches that had a front row seat to see how this kid plays and how he competes.
“And it’s not always the size of the player, it’s the size of the heart, and that’s Tyler Johnson.”