It's odd reading on this board that the Horton debacle is a "no harm no foul" situation.
More than a few on this board were extremely concerned about the financial ramifications of a long term deal for Johansen due to possible "regression" and being stuck with a bad long term deal. There was also great concern about the cost to the CBJ of an amnesty buyout for the (fortunately) departed RJ Umberger.
Umberger would have cost $10.34 million to buyout (2/3 of his $4.5 million./year 3 year deal). There would have been no cap hit due to the amnesty buyout provisions which were available at that time.
Johansen would have been very moveable at no cap hit either assuming he didn't "regress" to a 35 point scorer-which stood essentially a zero percent chance of happening.
The financial implication of the Horton deal is approximately this:
Last year, Horton was paid $5.7 million. His productivity could have matched by a $1.7 million player and I'm being generous. Cost of the mistake last year can be reasonably placed at about $4 million.
For the next 6 years, the Jackets will have to pay approximately 25% of his salary. **This is the percentage I have heard and seems to be a reasonable co pay, if you will** While there is no cap hit, it's cash out the door.
This comes to $1.425 million per year which totals $8.55 million over the next six years.
Total cost of the blunder $12.55 million. More than an RJ Umberger buyout would have cost. Hardly no harm.
While it would be unfair to state that it was predictable that Horton would be a 100% disaster and done before year 2 of his 7 year $5.7 million per year deal kicked in, it's perfectly fair to state that he was known to have a bum shoulder, concussion issues, and now it appears, that it was known that his back wasn't 100%.
Jarmo Kekalainen and John Davidson rolled the dice on an injury riddled player and they came up snake eyes. Big Time. It comes at enormous cost to the team-$12.5 million or so-assuming that Horton is finished. If he's not done, he will probably be a greatly diminished player and the cost will be greater. It can't be dismissed and forgotten. It's a valid black mark on their resumes and shouldn't be casually swept under the rug. It doesn't mean "fire them" but it does mean remember.
You can bet that the next big dollar UFA who comes to Columbus will have a medical history that is almost pristine. The pendulum will probably swing way too far to the other side as the current management will be suffering from a severe case of the "once bitten; twice shy" syndrome. This could potentially also harm the franchise in addition to the financial costs of the Horton blunder.
Thanks for the well-thought response. I have a couple of counters.
First, thank you for putting some figures to a possible insurance pay out. I don't know how it works other than knowing it takes a big chunk of the pay. I'll trust your figures are close and/or right.
Using your figures, they're looking at $8.55 million due from the CBJ to Horton over the next six years or $1.42 million a year. That also doesn't count toward the cap, which is not an insignificant point versus a traditional buyout or having Horton continuing to try to play and not stay healthy.
But, you are right, that is real money. It isn't nothing, but at the same time, it isn't an amount that should handcuff ownership in any significant way. Frankly, if it is, then this organization has much bigger concerns long term than Nathan Horton.
As for the time Horton has put in -- he has been disappointing, but honestly how has he really harmed the CBJ? Say Horton was at 100 percent and played all or most of last year, what was the ceiling for that team?
Maybe they get a little higher seed and maybe they make the 2nd round?
Maybe.
But I'm not confident in that. It isn't implausible that the Jackets would've wound up bounced from the 1st round all the same.
I think a healthy Horton makes this team better, but not by much. I think an unhealthy Horton hasn't really hurt the on-ice product.
So while maybe "no harm" is an oversimplification on my part, surely reasonable people can agree that the scenario in play now is at the very least significantly less harm?
If this comes to pass, the Horton signing, while definitely a mistake, isn't going to be NEARLY as big a mistake as many want it to be.
