Should Preds be worried about Weber?
Throughout the NHL season and offseason, I will take your Predators questions. To have yours answered, send them via Twitter to @AdamVingan or email avingan@tennessean.com.
I’ve seen comments about Shea Weber that, if he were to retire before the end of his contract, the Predators would carry on their cap a lot of the outstanding contract. Is this true or can you explain what that means? — @RuediRustico
You’re referring to “cap recapture,” which is meant to punish teams that circumvented the salary cap under the previous collective bargaining agreement with front-loaded contracts.
Weber’s 14-year, $110 million deal, constructed by the Philadelphia Flyers and matched by the Predators in 2012, certainly qualifies. He made $80 million in the first six years of the contract, and his salary plummets to $1 million in each of the final three years.
To put it simply, the Predators paid Weber $56 million before trading him to the Montreal Canadiens in June 2016, but his total cap hit over that span was $31,428,572. The Predators would be on the hook for the difference ($24,571,428) if Weber retires before his contract expires in 2026.
That amount would be spread over the remaining years. For example, if Weber were to retire in 2022, then the Predators’ cap would be charged around $6.1 million for four years. If he retires in 2025, then they’d have the entire $24,571,428 to deal with.
The best-case scenario is for Weber, who has battled numerous injuries since the trade and underwent knee surgery last month, to play until it runs out when he’ll be 40.
The Canadiens also could place Weber on long-term injured reserve for cap relief if his health declines to careerthreatening levels.
A recent example is Marian Hossa, whose career ended last summer because of a skin disorder with four years left on a 12-year, front-loaded contract. The NHL permitted the Chicago Blackhawks, who traded Hossa and his remaining salary to the Arizona Coyotes on Thursday, to put him on LTIR.
Do you think the Predators’ unwillingness to give out no-movement clauses hurts their cap/signing situations? — @imraiv
The Predators, according to CapFriendly, have one player (Pekka Rinne) with either a no-movement or no-trade clause in his contract. That’s the fewest in the league. By comparison, the Detroit Red Wings and Tampa Bay Lightning each have 10 players with such clauses next season.
As this possibly relates to negotiations with defenseman Ryan Ellis, Sportsnet analyst Elliotte Friedman recently brought this up on his “31 Thoughts” podcast:
“I think he’s going to be willing, like some Nashville guys have done, to take a little bit less, no state tax. But this is what another player who used to play in Nashville told me. He said that if you’re going to do that, you want a no-move clause so that Nashville can’t trade you to somewhere else where you don’t get the state tax benefit. And Nashville doesn’t do that.”
It’s uncertain if that’s holding up an extension for Ellis, but it’s worth wondering if the Predators’ apparent dislike for those clauses has prevented them from luring marquee free agents to Nashville.
What’s the most realistic free agent signing the Predators should have made of those who have already been signed? — @joshislegendary
There really wasn’t a free agent that made total sense for the Predators. Sorry, John Tavares wasn’t a realistic option.
If we’re basing it on actual contracts signed, I would’ve taken a flier on forward Patrick Maroon, who signed a oneyear contract worth $1.75 million with the St. Louis Blues on Tuesday.
Maroon, who had 43 points last season, is a burly winger who has complemented his more skilled linemates in the past. He also provides consistent net-front presence.
Reach Adam Vingan at avingan@tennessean.com and on Twitter @AdamVingan.