Prospects to Avoid Comments for Prospects to Avoid at , comment 1 to 31 out of 20 comments Sun, 16 Mar 2014 09:52:36 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 ... I have no problem with someone saying there's a good chance Weber won't be on the 2012/13 roster. Heck I may even say I agree with it. That isn't what I was getting at, though. My beef was that it sounded like your main point was Weber will be moved midseason, which I find extremely unlikely. So for me, we'll know who was right by the trade deadline ;) I do agree that something fishy went on with the whole agent switch, so we have common ground there. Seems like we just misunderstood each other's main points. - davemoosehead Thu, 01 Sep 2011 19:32:10 +0100 ... Hey Dave. Quite frankly I don't recall two sides ever being so far apart in negotiations, however I could be wrong (I doubt it though). I understand the need to lowball, highball etc. but like the rest of the media, I felt the two sides were just so far apart that it seemed absurd. I'd like to know why Weber didn't simply negotiate a longer deal with Poile. I think 7M for 7 years is a darn good starting point and if Weber wanted to stay why didn't he opt for a long-term deal. My belief is that Nashville can't afford to give Weber what he wants long term, so they went to arbitration instead. "Rhetoric about him staying in Nashville quieted considerably after the change" was simply me paraphrasing an article from a major newspaper. I didn't just pull that out of my behind. I was part of the research that I did for the article. It might not be a big deal but then again it might, especially after he just changed agents. I suspect Weber felt he wanted to go for big money and he could do it better with a new agent. I'll admit there is nothing concrete here but I think there is smoke and where there is smoke there is always fire. Whether they trade him mid-season or next summer isn't my main argument. If he gets traded in the summer then it's even more likely that Ellis isn't breaking through this season which was the reason I put him on the list of guys to stay away from this year. Ultimately I believe this is his last season in Nashville and I believe it because Nashville can't afford him. I agree Nashville has a fine replacement for Rinne and I discussed him in my underrated prospect review. Yes they have produced a number of excellent goalies, however, you could say the same thing about their depth on the blue line. They are flush with good blueliners and good blueline prospects. No, none of them are like Weber simply because Weber is an elite Norris Trophy type defenceman who can demand top dollars that Nashville doesn't have. I'm going to give you the last word on this because I've seen these types of debates last forever. I'm not trying to be mean by ending the debate because you seem informed and you've been civil, it's just that I don't think we're going to find common ground. Ultimately, we'll know who is right at the beginning of next season. If Weber is still in Nashville then I tip my hat to you, but I just don't happen to agree with your assessment. Cheers. Stu. - Stuart McDonald Thu, 01 Sep 2011 18:11:27 +0100 ... @Stuart "3.25M apart" Where did you get that information? Or are you referring to the numbers that each party presented to arbitrator? Because if so, that is a standard negotiation tactic used in every single arbitration case, ever. One side low balls, the other side high-balls, and they meet somewhere in the middle. That is how these things have always worked. When Weber, his agent, and Poile were asked about those numbers, they were all surprised at how the media was making such a big deal out of it. The rumors from Nashville are saying Poile's offer was around $7M for 7 years. So they weren't that far apart. "Changing agents" No one knows why Weber changed agents. The only info we have on that is that the change set back negotiations considerable since they essentially had to start from scratch. His new agency has never had a client this big, so it was a new thing for them. Assistant Coach Peterson did say they believe Weber got "poor advice" from his agent. "rhetoric about him staying in Nashville quieted considerably after the change" Not only is this false, but I don't see why you would view this as a big deal. Maybe his new agent didn't want Weber talking to the media anymore because they were in the middle of the biggest negotiation of their company's existence? Not sure why you would think this is abnormal. Furthermore, after the hearing Weber went out of his way several times to tell the media how much he loves Nashville, understands the whole process of just business, and that he hopes to get a longer deal done. Weber asking for a 1 year deal only supports the evidence that Weber wants to be in Nashville. If Weber truly wanted out, he would have requested a 2 year deal which would have brought him to UFA status so he could leave on his own terms. Yes, like I said, it may make sense to let a big ticket item go in order to improve other areas of the team. But again I ask, why would they trade Weber [u]midseason[/u]? He'll be RFA, so they won't lose him to free agency without first getting the chance to match the offer sheet (which management has gone on record stating they would match any offer). If Weber is going to be traded, it's going to happen next summer. Of the big 3 in Nashville, my money is on them letting Rinne go, and re-signing Weber and Suter. Nashville is a goalie factory so Rinne is probably the easiest to replace. Moreover, Nashville has no dmen prospects who are similar to Weber. Suter, on the other hand, could be replaced by Blum or Ekholm. They play a very similar game. - davemoosehead Thu, 01 Sep 2011 15:21:50 +0100 ... @Davemoosehead. Weber and Nashville were 3.25 million dollars apart going into arbitration. That's a HUGE difference and made this particular arbitration more acrimonious than others. Weber changed agents in late June and the rhetoric about him staying in Nashville quieted considerably after the change. Weber asked for a one year deal which means he'll be an RFA next year and they'll have to go through this again. Nashville is a small market team and it would make more sense to let one big ticket player go rather than lose the rest of their D. They have a lot of depth back there and a lot of good young d-men (Josi, Ellis and Blum). I'd be really surprised if he wasn't traded. - Stuart McDonald Wed, 31 Aug 2011 09:32:21 +0100 ... @Larry There is some truth to what you say, but what does that have to do with this season? There is probably a good chance that 1 or more will be gone by 2012/13, but I do not see a mid season trade happening. Even if there were, Weber would be the least likely of the 3 to be traded. They are a playoff team and will likely be in the thick of things so selling off their assets doesn't make sense. - davemoosehead Tue, 30 Aug 2011 11:33:15 +0100 Nashvilles screwed... davemoosehead: Weber makes $7mil this year- next year he is an UFA- what will he command/expect then? Nashville has shown no interest in spending what it most likely takes to ice a winner- so something has to give. Given that both Suter and Rinne are also UFA after this year... Nashville is dumping someone,luckily they do have some up and comers on defense (Josi,Ellis) but regardless- theyre gonna lose atleast 1 top player at some point this season. - Larry Mon, 29 Aug 2011 20:24:46 +0100 ... I think this article gives good advice, even though you gave bold and unpopular predictions. One thing I disagree about, and this isn't really related to the article, is your comments about Weber. The arbitration process of Weber was in no way acrimonious (unless you simply believe that all arbitrations are), and I doubt Weber will be traded. Sure there is a chance, but it is FAR from likely. - davemoosehead Mon, 29 Aug 2011 18:18:19 +0100 20 + comments... On this article and counting..... were all starving for real hockey news ;D All this talk about kool-aid is making me thirsty. As for the players mentioned- the only one Id even consider is Filatov- but thats an extreme longshot. A change of scenery has got to be a good thing (if he cant get consistant minutes on that roster...hello Russia!) Schroeder's stock has fallen quite a bit,not sure how much injuries played into his poor season, but even if he had put up point/game numbers- where does he fit on the Canucks roster? Granted there is a temporary spot open with Raymonds injury- but AV hasnt shown the greatest trust in rookies. Hodgson,Grabner,Shirokov have all had more to offer than Schroeder-and werent able to get any kind of regular shifts. (hopefully Hodgson breaks that trend this year). Schroeders size/style isnt what the Canucks lack either, so unless he shows amazing chemistry with either the Sedins or Hodgson(Kesler might not be ready at the start of the season)- he wont make the team this year. - Larry Mon, 29 Aug 2011 08:14:42 +0100 ... a tough assignment to pick out prospects to avoid when most readers will most likely already own one of the players and already have a biased and outlook on their player(s). it would be much easier to pump up prospects or pick on the Gudbranson stay-at-home types in points only leagues... the underated lindback didn't really flow when i read it either, maybe a different font for the header or something so it doesn't just blend in with the rest of the article... - heater Sun, 28 Aug 2011 17:44:42 +0100 ... I got the information on Huberdeau from Donny Rivette, a Florida blogger otherwise known as Litter Box Cats and I swear I wasn't wanking at the time :) Rivette is one of the best bloggers out there and I consider him an excellent source. I appreciate that so many people have read the column and as a former print journalist I can totally handle the criticism. I can't wait for Filatov to play this season. I had him in my keeper pool for two seasons and was a huge fan. I've seen him play many times in person at the AHL level and a few times on TV. He has been a major disappointment so far and knowing that his competitiveness has been questioned by two coaches I wouldn't draft him in a keeper league. Good luck to him in Ottawa and good luck to those that draft him. Cheers and thanks for reading. - Stuart McDonald Sun, 28 Aug 2011 09:25:14 +0100 Forgot... Forgot to mention that, ironically, I'm a fan of (most of) sentium's posts lol - lcbtd Sun, 28 Aug 2011 08:26:10 +0100 Solid Nice work Stu. Well written and I must say I agree with you on most, if not all counts. The ridiculous criticism is, well, ridiculous. But it's not shocking. I see this stuff on Yahoo boards all the time and it's from guys who want to stir the pot and who have nothing really valid or "constructive" to add. - lcbtd Sun, 28 Aug 2011 08:19:39 +0100 Hek's list Your list is mostly comprised of players who weren't on competitive teams and that makes a HUGE difference. It also doesn't mean much to include consensus number one picks like Hall or Tavares because it becomes an apples to oranges argument. The only guys you've listed who should be discussed in the same argument as Filatov are: Skinner, Ennis and Stepan if we want to keep this an apples to apples argument. OK, so those three players proved they could crack the roster of a competing team and thrive. How does this pertain to Filatov again? He obviously hasn't experienced the success that they had but that in and of itself means very little. - Kris Sun, 28 Aug 2011 07:28:12 +0100 you said it Hek I agree with your comments regarding sentium, does that mean I'm drinking your kool-aid now? :-) Seriously sentium you make some valid points in countering Stu's opinions, but saying he's stupid and 'a whole lot of stat wanking backed up by virtually no actual hockey know-how or watching any games' is far from constructive. You say the reason you write here is you want to know how you can get better. Then when we criticize your post you lash out LOL - Draft Dodger Sun, 28 Aug 2011 07:15:59 +0100 Defensive? It's got nothing to do with being defensive. My apologies if that's the way you think it came off. It's about respect and not being a dick. Constructive criticism is a great thing. It helps a person improve. Writing what you think is "constructive" though with words like "stupid" and "bad writing" when someone doesn't have any idea about what it's like to have your work criticized is just plain "stupid". When you want to help someone improve you say things like "hey this might not be the best way to do this" or "hey I didn't really agree with this so why don't you try this". Maybe it's just me but I can remember the early days when Sentium would provide constructive criticism and plenty of valid points and insight. Unfortunately though for the last while Sentium hasn't had a nice thing to say about anything it seems. I used to read his comments to glean something that many others would consider. Now all I read is harsh words and "constructive criticism". Interesting that all I seen out of any of those responses was about me being defensive. Why was it there was no reference to the list of kids I provided who have ALL made the NHL at 21 or under? Are you sure it's not you being defensive lmao. Again I ask. Why is it these kids have had no problem contributing in the NHL at the same or younger ages as Filatov who has been a prospect now for what, 3 years? Btw. Just so you're aware. It takes big balls to fly against the wind. Anyone can sail along with it. Stu has done just that and hopefully the readers who don't have their noses all bent out of shape will benefit from it. Great stuff. - Hek Sun, 28 Aug 2011 07:00:22 +0100 Fantastic article One of your best, Stu. Loved that you take a stand, unpopular or no. And I agree with you on pretty much all counts. - Dobber Sun, 28 Aug 2011 06:36:12 +0100 ... This shit is free. It's amazing. Thanks for the time and effort. It states is bold letters above the article that he believes these players won't produce THIS season. He's right, they shouldn't. Filatov has only proved he needs time. Drafting him is obviously a risk/reward situation. - shaun b Sun, 28 Aug 2011 05:23:15 +0100 Hmmmmm I couldn't disagree more on your Filatov 'Do Not Draft' label for Filatov. What is the context for this recommendation? If I were to draft a 12 team yahoo league I'd be very interested in Filatov during the later rounds because he's exactly the sort of player that can put a team over the top. While others are drafting the perenial 40-45 point guys I'll take my homerun swing on Filatov and if I miss....who cares? Saying not to draft him implies that he can't be useful asset and as Grabner showed us all last year that's just not sound advice. Now it doesn't really sound like you're article is geared at the one year league so this makes the comment even more perplexing. I understand if your position is to cool some peoples jets on Filatov and tell them not to reach for him when there are still blue-chip assets on the table but saying not to draft him is nuts. I'd take him inside of the top 10 picks in this years draft class in a hearbeat, my only question would be how high? Sure the bust label is hovering over him but as others have pointed out he floundered under a system that has a brutal track record for prospect development and to top it off the Jackets were a team focused on making the playoffs whereas the Sens are a rebuilding franchise and he couldn't have asked for a better environment to land in. If he busts, he busts but we'll all know within the next two years. My other comment is a much smaller nit pick but it's something that's nagged at me for years around here. The Penguins have shown beyond a shadow of a doubt that they do not intend to throw a prospect on a line with Malkin or Crosby, this is partly because they haven't had any blue-chippers to speak of and partly becaue they're a competitive franchise so they can't take the risk. Despite this, people persist in over-rating 2nd rate Pens prospects (eg, Caputi, Tangradi, Jeffrey, etc) but the fact of the matter is that people should have been happy to see a Caputi go to Toronto because he was entering an environment where he'd be givin a chance and that's the best thing he could have asked for. Well it's now become evident that he's not going to be a top six player in the NHL, as you rightly identified, but the move from Pittsburgh to Toronto was not a negative for him as many have concluded. - Kris Sun, 28 Aug 2011 03:11:43 +0100 Hey Stu We're all experts, you know. :P Tough crowd to write for. Keep doing it and keep us talking about this stuff - thanks. - Shoeless Sun, 28 Aug 2011 02:22:17 +0100 ... Hek and Draft Dodger: You two are part of a growing problem on this site. Dissent and constructive criticism are CLEARLY no longer welcome on this site. If you dare to disagree with the gospel, you're clearly have "nothing but rotten crap coming out of [your] mouth". I could've written something like "this article sucks" and not give one single shred of a reason as to why I think it does. What I wrote in my comment is called constructive criticism. I pointed out flaws so that Stu can correct them the next time. I'm sorry if I, by this time in the history of the site, expect articles that aren't just random drivel. Stu is a very good writer and this was just a rare case of a poor article. When I write stuff I want to know how I can get better, which is exactly why I chime in here. But you guys are obviously content with badly researched mediocrity and drinking whatever koolaid is being served. Awesome! Go you! - sentium Sun, 28 Aug 2011 00:47:29 +0100