" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;penscup wrote:That was a total dirtbag move. Why would you applaud such an action?Jasmine wrote:I seriously want this guy . . .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... 9vYuFaS-1k
Time to take no prisoners!
You want someone doing that to Crosby???
This is EXACTLY the type of move I was expecting...Idoit40fans wrote:He will be gone by the end of day one of next year's draft, but he's not in control. He's a restricted Free Agent, if Nashville wants to keep him around this year, he's gonna be a Pred.
A lot of people are blaming the Flyers here for something completely legal by NHL by-laws but I wouldn't be surprised if it was more Weber's agent finding a way to communicate with a few teams to force the issue. Like I said, this is the most important financial decision of Weber's life and given the possibilities on the future, there is no way he wouldn't allow something like this not to happen. I view this less as Philly poaching talent from a small market team and more of Weber and his agent forcing the issue on Nashville in order to get what they want.interstorm wrote: he and his agent know that something must be done before the season starts. There is simply too much at risk for him.
Exactly, Jasmine. That is why Weber playing for the Flyers bothers me so much. This guy has a little bit of crazy in him and he could be playing for an organization that breeds it.penscup wrote:That was a total dirtbag move. Why would you applaud such an action?Jasmine wrote:I seriously want this guy . . .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... 9vYuFaS-1k
Time to take no prisoners!
You want someone doing that to Crosby???
Yeah I don't want Martin on the Penguins, but I certainly don't want him moved right now unless something is in place to bring in another top 4 guy.JoseCuervo wrote:What? I don't think anyone is comfortable with despres on the first d-pair to start the season. There is already a large hole in the top 4 of the defense, and I don't think trading one of the 3 actual top-4 dmen on the team helps anything.
If Nashville lets Weber walk for a 7.1 hit and then they trade for Martin with a 5 hit whatever fans the Preds still have would def jump shipcrush_lives_723 wrote:If/when the Weber is a member of the Philadelphia Filthbags, would NSH want to trade for Paul Martin, it has been noted that they expressed interest. Would we want to do that? A chance to move Martin would be a true blessing. Then we could comfortably sign Kubina or Coliocovo. BUT are we comfortable with this as our D core?...
Letang-Despres
Orpik-Niskanen
Dumoulin-Engelland (Strait/Bortuzzo/Morrow etc.)
That's the problem, theres no UFA improvement over Martin. Expect Martin to start season here unless Shero can work something with multiple players to somehow replace him AND fill the hole at wing...Idoit40fans wrote:Yeah I don't want Martin on the Penguins, but I certainly don't want him moved right now unless something is in place to bring in another top 4 guy.JoseCuervo wrote:What? I don't think anyone is comfortable with despres on the first d-pair to start the season. There is already a large hole in the top 4 of the defense, and I don't think trading one of the 3 actual top-4 dmen on the team helps anything.
are you boycotting punctuation?Sabres_Fan wrote:If Nashville lets Weber walk for a 7.1 hit and then they trade for Martin with a 5 hit whatever fans the Preds still have would def jump shipcrush_lives_723 wrote:If/when the Weber is a member of the Philadelphia Filthbags, would NSH want to trade for Paul Martin, it has been noted that they expressed interest. Would we want to do that? A chance to move Martin would be a true blessing. Then we could comfortably sign Kubina or Coliocovo. BUT are we comfortable with this as our D core?...
Letang-Despres
Orpik-Niskanen
Dumoulin-Engelland (Strait/Bortuzzo/Morrow etc.)
So we're going to replace a hole in our top 4 by trading away another top 4 d-man for nothing?no name wrote:Nashville will have to find ways to get to the cap floor if they lose Weber, taking on inflated contracts will help them, enter in Martin, you can trade him for someone of very little salary, but who still might be able to help us.
MRandall25 wrote:So we're going to replace a hole in our top 4 by trading away another top 4 d-man for nothing?no name wrote:Nashville will have to find ways to get to the cap floor if they lose Weber, taking on inflated contracts will help them, enter in Martin, you can trade him for someone of very little salary, but who still might be able to help us.
Yes, indeed!Pitts wrote:I'm really surprised no one has brought up the incredible prophetic nature of interstorm's original post.
Well done sir!
i think what i find the most disturbing, however, is on this page - http://www.tennessean.com/section/SPORTS. Anyone notice it?Jarrett Bousquet, Weber’s agent, told AM-1050 in Toronto. “He would like to play with the Philadelphia Flyers because we all feel he’s just another piece in the puzzle to take them to the next level, and he doesn’t want to go through a rebuilding process again.”
"Few fans?" They averaged 16,690 a game this year which is 97% capacity and 20th in the NHL.interstorm wrote: i think what i find the most disturbing, however, is on this page - http://www.tennessean.com/section/SPORTS. Anyone notice it?The Nashville Preds are listed below high school football. They lose Weber, they lose what few fans they have left for sure!Spoiler:
Just this year the market share started getting respectable - before that it was pitiful (and yes, I know hockey in general isn't good and the Penguins TV ratings are atypical). Lose Weber and you lose many of these fans. More important, however, is the lack of growth to get more people interested.brwi wrote:"Few fans?" They averaged 16,690 a game this year which is 97% capacity and 20th in the NHL.interstorm wrote: i think what i find the most disturbing, however, is on this page - http://www.tennessean.com/section/SPORTS. Anyone notice it?The Nashville Preds are listed below high school football. They lose Weber, they lose what few fans they have left for sure!Spoiler:
With attendance increasing, how is that a "lack of growth?" Their building holds about 17,000 and were at 97.5% capacity the past season. corporate sponsorships are growing also according to ownership.interstorm wrote:Just this year the market share started getting respectable - before that it was pitiful (and yes, I know hockey in general isn't good and the Penguins TV ratings are atypical). Lose Weber and you lose many of these fans. More important, however, is the lack of growth to get more people interested.brwi wrote:"Few fans?" They averaged 16,690 a game this year which is 97% capacity and 20th in the NHL.interstorm wrote: i think what i find the most disturbing, however, is on this page - http://www.tennessean.com/section/SPORTS. Anyone notice it?The Nashville Preds are listed below high school football. They lose Weber, they lose what few fans they have left for sure!Spoiler:
http://predators.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=629247
Ok - just making sure I understand what you are defending? You are saying a team that has only been above 90% seating capacity twice since the 2001-2002 season AND last year drew a whopping 1.2 rating (equates to just under 30,000 people) in game 1 of the playoffs doesn't have (relatively speaking) only a "few" fans? Oh - and lets not forget the fact that high school football is listed prior to this professional team on their local newspaper website's sports section. Is that what you are saying?brwi wrote: With attendance increasing, how is that a "lack of growth?" Their building holds about 17,000 and were at 97.5% capacity the past season. corporate sponsorships are growing also according to ownership.
2009 14,975
2010 16,142
2011 16,690
I am saying that a team that is growing in attendance and corporate sponsorships by 25% the last three years and plays at 97% capacity has more than a "few fans." I have no idea what TV ratings have to do with how many fans a team has or how that matters besides when it is time to negotiate a new TV deal. Whether the national/international market of hockey fans watches or not is really not indicative of how a franchise will do in its own city and is rather meaningless.interstorm wrote:Ok - just making sure I understand what you are defending? You are saying a team that has only been above 90% seating capacity twice since the 2001-2002 season AND last year drew a whopping 1.2 rating (equates to just under 30,000 people) in game 1 of the playoffs doesn't have (relatively speaking) only a "few" fans? Oh - and lets not forget the fact that high school football is listed prior to this professional team on their local newspaper website's sports section. Is that what you are saying?brwi wrote: With attendance increasing, how is that a "lack of growth?" Their building holds about 17,000 and were at 97.5% capacity the past season. corporate sponsorships are growing also according to ownership.
2009 14,975
2010 16,142
2011 16,690
C'mon - that 1.2 (playoff game) rating would have only beaten the average regular season ratings (from 2010) for the below teams:
San Jose - 1.11
New York (Rangers) - 0.89
Dallas - 0.74
Phoenix - 0.62
Tampa - 0.6
New Jersey - 0.58
Los Angeles - 0.48
New York (Islanders) - 0.36
Atlanta - 0.33
Miami - 0.25
Is that REALLY what you are saying?
Don't think you can trade a player that is on injured reserve.interstorm wrote:...just reading into more of this. looks like there are 2 items out there regarding if this deal goes through:
1) flyers need to shed cap space
2) preds need to take on cap space
i almost wonder if the preds, while not really wanting to help philly out, take chris pronger's contract in exchange for yet another pick/player (basically philly saying, "i'll give you X (player/pick) if you take pronger -- you don't have to really give me anything (although it may take a 6th round pick or something to make it legit)". this then accomplishes both goals, especially if nashville DOESN'T put pronger on LTIR. he won't be playing a single game but his contract cap hit brings the team up some.