Nathan Horton ("Career could be over")

EspenK

Registered User
Sep 25, 2011
15,842
4,445
I dont think we'll be seeing any big ticket FA's coming here in a couple years because Joey was be taking any available money once his contracts up

There will be room if need be. That is why guys like Foligno & Anisimov will be tough decisions. Throw 4- 5 mill at each of them along with all the other guys to sign and cap space, as well as roster space will be a problem. I really believe one of them will be gone a year or two down the road. Not now;not wanting them to be; just looking at things objectively and drawing my conclusion.
 

Nordique

Add smoked meat, and we have a deal.
Aug 11, 2005
9,138
265
Ohio
Anyone who thinks this deal was obviously terrible at the time of the signing should go back and read the thread. Nobody was concerned about his back. People were concerned about his shoulder and the potential fallout of another concussion. NOBODY was worried about his back.

I say that only to say that it's easy to look at it now and question the wisdom of the deal at the time. Hindsight being 20/20 and all that jazz...

Injuries come in bunches. Yeah no one predicted the back, but several posters brought up his overall durability at that point in his career. The front office knew the risk, they rolled the dice, and I know sometimes you have to do that. But you are also accountable for those decisions.
 

Nanabijou

Booooooooooone
Dec 22, 2009
2,993
659
Columbus, Ohio
I dont think we'll be seeing any big ticket FA's coming here in a couple years because Joey was be taking any available money once his contracts up

Honestly, it doesn't bother me. I know there's going to be some bumps in the road and we may need to add that missing piece if we are going to contend for a championship. But, I'd like to see how the guys we are developing from within can grow together.
 

Double-Shift Lasse

Just post better
Dec 22, 2004
34,651
15,880
Exurban Cbus
Injuries come in bunches. Yeah no one predicted the back, but several posters brought up his overall durability at that point in his career. The front office knew the risk, they rolled the dice, and I know sometimes you have to do that. But you are also accountable for those decisions.

'Accountable for those decisions' isn't the same as 'should have seen this coming.'
 

Nordique

Add smoked meat, and we have a deal.
Aug 11, 2005
9,138
265
Ohio
True, this is where bridge contracts kill you. Both are going to end up proving theyre worth it, and its going to cost us big time, and thats not good for a small market team and a team losing money. I cant say im overly impressed by JK player assessments

I lean this way as well.

His draft picks look promising, and that was his reputed strength coming into the position. Hartnell is looking better every game as well, I was critical of his early play but I have to say he was one of our most consistent competitors on that 3 game Cali trip.
 

KallioWeHardlyKnewYe

Hey! We won!
May 30, 2003
15,771
3,808
True, this is where bridge contracts kill you. Both are going to end up proving theyre worth it, and its going to cost us big time, and thats not good for a small market team and a team losing money. I cant say im overly impressed by JK player assessments

That's the risk you take.
I'd rather use bridge deals and wind up dishing out big bucks to players that have proven their worth versus locking down a long-term big money deal for a player with only one year of production.

The latter may cost you less if you make a good bet, but if it's bad one, it'll kill you.

You can live with overpaying good and great players.
 

pete goegan

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jun 6, 2006
13,020
350
Washington, DC
That's the risk you take.
I'd rather use bridge deals and wind up dishing out big bucks to players that have proven their worth versus locking down a long-term big money deal for a player with only one year of production.

The latter may cost you less if you make a good bet, but if it's bad one, it'll kill you.

You can live with overpaying good and great players.

That's exactly the way I feel, too, Kallio.
 

We Want Ten

Johnny Gaudreau
Apr 5, 2013
6,751
2,067
Columbus
That's the risk you take.
I'd rather use bridge deals and wind up dishing out big bucks to players that have proven their worth versus locking down a long-term big money deal for a player with only one year of production.

The latter may cost you less if you make a good bet, but if it's bad one, it'll kill you.

You can live with overpaying good and great players.

I agree. You also get more time with said player. In 5 years who knows if it will be considered an overpayment, look back at contracts from 4 or 5 years ago to see how they compare to today's world.
 

Viqsi

"that chick from Ohio"
Oct 5, 2007
55,767
35,404
40N 83W (approx)
That's the risk you take.
I'd rather use bridge deals and wind up dishing out big bucks to players that have proven their worth versus locking down a long-term big money deal for a player with only one year of production.

The latter may cost you less if you make a good bet, but if it's bad one, it'll kill you.

You can live with overpaying good and great players.
Given the gambles we've been burned by of late... yeah, this is the direction I'm leaning towards as well. I'd rather pressure our young guys to perform well (and thus get into better habits) by forcing them onto bridge contracts rather than rewarding them early and thereby potentially convincing them that They've Arrived And It's All Okay Now.

(That last is a total conspiracy theory, but, hey, we're talking about vague opinions anyways, so it's perfectly valid. SO THERE. ;) )
 

BluejacketNut

Registered User
Sep 23, 2006
6,275
211
www.erazzphoto.com
Im just not overly excited about JK's assessments. 7 years for Horton looks real bad when it may end up only getting 30 games out of him. :laugh: And I get trying to protect yourself, but a lot of what you heard from the rest of the hockey world was to sign him long term (Joey). If we could have gotten him for 6+ years at say $7m, thats going to be a steal since im sure the next contract is going to arbitration. And if it does, i've got to think he's going to break the bank because I honestly feel if he stays healthy that he'll break 80 points THIS year. Again, probably fine for the Bruins, LA, Chicago, NY, Det, and the other top spenders, but we're not that team, and we need as much as we can get for cheap, and now our 2 most important pieces are going to make top dollar which is going to handcuff the rest of the roster. And say Joey goes 80,90,90, you think he wanted a lot on this contract, wait till you see his demands in 3 years :laugh:

PS-Sorry, didnt mean to turn this into a Joey thread
 
Last edited:

Crede777

Deputized
Dec 16, 2009
14,842
4,558
True, this is where bridge contracts kill you. Both are going to end up proving theyre worth it, and its going to cost us big time, and thats not good for a small market team and a team losing money. I cant say im overly impressed by JK player assessments

I disagree with your conclusion. If our #1 center and our starting goaltender don't pan out, that is not good either. Under those circumstances, the only way for Jarmo to win is to sign them to long-term contracts and then for them to pan out. So why not just sign all promising players to long-term contracts? The alternate of a bridge is a lose-lose situation. Either you lose on money or you lose the player.

The answer is risk and asset management. Yes we end up paying a lot more for later years, but the important thing is that the players develop. Having a player worth $8-10 million per year, itself, is a win. Long-term contracts themselves, as we are seeing around the league and here with Horton (and Commodore) are much bigger threats.

It's a big win if you sign them to a long-term contract and they pan out.

It's a moderate win if you sign them to a bridge and they pan out.

It's a moderate loss if you sign them to a bridge and they flop.

It's a big loss if you sign them to a long-term contract and they flop.
 
Last edited:

Cyclones Rock

Registered User
Jun 12, 2008
10,913
7,076
True, this is where bridge contracts kill you. Both are going to end up proving theyre worth it, and its going to cost us big time, and thats not good for a small market team and a team losing money. I cant say im overly impressed by JK player assessments

Bridge contracts fit most players who are coming off of their entry contracts who are run-of-the-mill to even significantly above average players. There's nothing wrong with using them to sign most players. Atkinson and Calvert contracts are expiring this season and they are both good fits for bridge deals. Neither is the type to sign to a long term deal.

However, forcing bridge deals upon Vezina winners and exceptionally-performing players isn't a very sound strategy. Most organizations would have gladly inked both Bob and Joey to long term deals. Anyone who really doubted Johansen's abilities and honestly thought that he stood more than a slight chance of regression simply can't evaluate hockey talent. Yes, it was that obvious with Johansen. NOTE: I think JK knew damn well what he had in Joey and was just being cheap. Also, going long term with a 24 year old Vezina winner could hardly be considered going out on a ledge in the risk department.

Bob will run at least a million and a half more per season starting next season than had he been signed long term. Johansen will cost a fortune in year 4 via arbitration. His years 5 & 6 of what should have been a long term deal stand a very good chance of not being played in Columbus. He'll go UFA and if anyone thinks he'll be signing for a hometown discount (unless you use Vancouver as that home).......... JK will have "saved" the CBJ $6 million on the first two years of Joey's deal and all of the other financial ramifications are CBJ negative.

Jarmo's North American background was in amateur scouting. He was bypassed for the Blues GM position when it opened up. He wasn't viewed either as GM-ready or GM-caliber material or the Blues current GM was just a better candidate. In any case, he was a very well known quantity who wasn't chosen for a position he wanted.

To this point, he has done little to show that he's a very sound evaluator of established talent. Bob and Joey....mistakes. Horton....a huge mistake. Horton was on the downside of his productivity and his concussion issues and back issues weren't completely unknown.

Trading a high end scorer (Gaborik) at the deadline when his team stood a good chance of going to the playoffs for a worthless plug (Frattin) doesn't ring of very sound judgement. 3rd and 2nd round picks are fun to romanticize about, but most of them are washouts. Gaborik had a Conn Smythe level performance in last season's playoffs. LA does not win the Cup without him. Do the Jackets get by Pittsburgh with him? Who knows? It would have been nice to at least see.

Letting DMAC go over peanuts can't be categorized as a positive for JK either.

On the positive side of the ledger, JK did get Gaborik and almost finished the necessary housecleaning of the franchise by ridding it of Brassard and Dorsette. Getting rid of Umberger for Hartnell was also a positive. He took advantage of Ron Hextall's incompetence. He also was wise enough to re up HCTR. Other than these decisions, it's hard to see where JK has distinguished himself in the non amateur player category. And it's way too early to start singing any praises for his drafting.

Overall, I would doubt that even his most ardent supporters could make a strong case that JK has been a very effective GM with respect to non scouting matters.
 
Last edited:

NotWendell

Has also never won the lottery.
Sponsor
Oct 31, 2005
27,451
7,957
Columbus, Ohio
Bridge contracts fit most players who are coming off of their entry contracts who are run-of-the-mill to even significantly above average players. There's nothing wrong with using them to sign most players. Atkinson and Calvert contracts are expiring this season and they are both good fits for bridge deals. Neither is the type to sign to a long term deal.

However, forcing bridge deals upon Vezina winners and exceptionally-performing players isn't a very sound strategy. Most organizations would have gladly inked both Bob and Joey to long term deals. Anyone who really doubted Johansen's abilities and honestly thought that he stood more than a slight chance of regression simply can't evaluate hockey talent. Yes, it was that obvious with Johansen. NOTE: I think JK knew damn well what he had in Joey and was just being cheap. Also, going long term with a 24 year old Vezina winner could hardly be considered going out on a ledge in the risk department.

Bob will run at least a million and a half more per season starting next season than had he been signed long term. Johansen will cost a fortune in year 4 via arbitration. His years 5 & 6 of what should have been a long term deal stand a very good chance of not being played in Columbus. He'll go UFA and if anyone thinks he'll be signing for a hometown discount (unless you use Vancouver as that home).......... JK will have "saved" the CBJ $6 million on the first two years of Joey's deal and all of the other financial ramifications are CBJ negative.

Jarmo's North American background was in amateur scouting. He was bypassed for the Blues GM position when it opened up. He wasn't viewed either as GM-ready or GM-caliber material or the Blues current GM was just a better candidate. In any case, he was a very well known quantity who wasn't chosen for a position he wanted.

To this point, he has done little to show that he's a very sound evaluator of established talent. Bob and Joey....mistakes. Horton....a huge mistake. Horton was on the downside of his productivity and his concussion issues and back issues weren't completely unknown.

Trading a high end scorer (Gaborik) at the deadline when his team stood a good chance of going to the playoffs for a worthless plug (Frattin) doesn't ring of very sound judgement. 3rd and 2nd round picks are fun to romanticize about, but most of them are washouts. Gaborik had a Conn Smythe level performance in last season's playoffs. LA does not win the Cup without him. Do the Jackets get by Pittsburgh with him? Who knows? It would have been nice to at least see.

Letting DMAC go over peanuts can't be categorized as a positive for JK either.

On the positive side of the ledger, JK did get Gaborik and almost finished the necessary housecleaning of the franchise by ridding it of Brassard and Dorsette. Getting rid of Umberger for Hartnell was also a positive. He took advantage of Ron Hextall's incompetence. He also was wise enough to re up HCTR. Other than these decisions, it's hard to see where JK has distinguished himself in the non amateur player category. And it's way too early to start singing any praises for his drafting.

Overall, I would doubt that even his most ardent supporters could make a strong case that JK has been a very effective GM with respect to non scouting matters.

The issue that I have with this assessment is that you have the benefit of hindsight, where Jarmo, nor any of the other GMs did at the time. I don't recall a lot of talk about Horton's back when he was a free agent. We were more concerned about the concussions. As is stands, this "mistake" is mostly covered by the insurance company - a fact probably considered during the pre-acquisition risk assessment.

I don't believe the bridge contracts for Bob and Joey were mistakes. I was glad to see he didn't repeat the mistakes Howson made before him.

That said, as an ardent Jarmo supporter myself, the best grade I can give him is average so far. My hope is that he can learn from some of his initial dealings.
 

Wendy Clear

Generic Statement of Happiness
Jun 20, 2010
3,894
145
Europe. Somewhere.
I was watching 'Behind The B' yesterday (great documentary for any hockey fan); their management was completely gutted when Horton's agent told them he's done in Boston. For all of the bickering in this thread, it's just a damn shame that the situation is what it is and we haven't got to see Horton at his best in a Jackets jersey.

I'll cling to some faint hope that time and the magic of the human body can help Horton's pain and maybe, some day, he'll be able to play for us.
 

Fazkovsky

Registered User
Sep 4, 2013
7,248
1,309
Sorry to ask again i guess Horton injury is a herniated disc cuz I got low back pain but it's mostly nerves and muscles related
 

pete goegan

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jun 6, 2006
13,020
350
Washington, DC

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad