Ryan Johansen II (contract etc)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mayor Bee

Registered User
Dec 29, 2008
18,087
535
Its negotiating.

I can't name a single player who walked because he got mad over negotiations. Ryan O'Reilly is still an Avalanche player. P.K. Subban is still a Canadien. Shea Weber even signed an offer sheet with Philly and he is committed to Nashville until the end of time.

Heck Scott Stevens was awarded to the New Jersey Devils and didn't want to go there, held out and had a couple of contentious contract negotiations and ended up spending the rest of his career as a Devil.

The Stevens award had a huge amount of fallout as well. He refused to report, and Kirk Muller (the Devils captain) walked out a couple days into training camp since he now wanted out as well. Stevens spent three weeks away from the Devils, saying something publicly almost every day about either not reporting, making threats to retire, or demanding a trade.

And yet he still played at a high level when he showed up after spending a lot of time pouting off the ice...unlike Jeff Carter.
 

EspenK

Registered User
Sep 25, 2011
15,842
4,446
Its negotiating.

I can't name a single player who walked because he got mad over negotiations. Ryan O'Reilly is still an Avalanche player. P.K. Subban is still a Canadien. Shea Weber even signed an offer sheet with Philly and he is committed to Nashville until the end of time.

Heck Scott Stevens was awarded to the New Jersey Devils and didn't want to go there, held out and had a couple of contentious contract negotiations and ended up spending the rest of his career as a Devil.

Couple of points:

Shea Weber had no choice except to stay-Nashville matched the offer sheet;

ROR did in fact walk- overseas if I recall and is only with Colorado because they matched an offer sheet.

Contentious negotiations can produce hard feelings and no one can tell what will happen

To me these negotiations should be over by now. Joey has a great future, he professes to love Columbus and the Jackets, the organization loves him. We have plenty of cap room. Apparently Joey has agreed to a lower term. It just has to come down to $ right now and one side or both are being too stubborn about this imo.
 

alphafox

Registered User
Jun 14, 2011
1,443
92
Couple of points:

Shea Weber had no choice except to stay-Nashville matched the offer sheet;

ROR did in fact walk- overseas if I recall and is only with Colorado because they matched an offer sheet.

Contentious negotiations can produce hard feelings and no one can tell what will happen

To me these negotiations should be over by now. Joey has a great future, he professes to love Columbus and the Jackets, the organization loves him. We have plenty of cap room. Apparently Joey has agreed to a lower term. It just has to come down to $ right now and one side or both are being too stubborn about this imo.

I agree with pretty much everything you said, but I think the key sticking point here is that Johansen "professes" to want to stay in Columbus. He has to say that because he's an RFA and is stuck here. Asking specifically for a 4 year deal, while by no means a sin, is an indicator that he may have a very mercenary approach to his career, and at worst that he has a destination in mind for when he hits UFA. If he really loves it here then the first offer would normally be a long term (6+yr) big $ deal, not one that takes him to FA as quickly as possible. While that doesn't mean he wants out its not a great sign either.
 

Iron Balls McGinty

Registered User
Aug 5, 2005
9,163
7,244
Couple of points:

Shea Weber had no choice except to stay-Nashville matched the offer sheet;

ROR did in fact walk- overseas if I recall and is only with Colorado because they matched an offer sheet.

Contentious negotiations can produce hard feelings and no one can tell what will happen

To me these negotiations should be over by now. Joey has a great future, he professes to love Columbus and the Jackets, the organization loves him. We have plenty of cap room. Apparently Joey has agreed to a lower term. It just has to come down to $ right now and one side or both are being too stubborn about this imo.

Shea Weber would have clearly known that Nashville matching was an option. He wouldn't have signed a 14 year offer sheet deal if he didn't have any interest in staying in Nashville.

O'Reilly played in the KHL during the lockout and clearly had an out clause so it was a negotiating threat. He has also since signed another contract to remain with the Avalanche so clearly that aren't that many hard feelings there. He didn't try to force his way out of town. He just wanted paid.

Just like the lockout, there is no deadline to force anyone to do anything. Clearly nobody is stupid enough to give him an offer sheet. The next deadline is the opening of camp. Until that gets close, there is not reason for anyone to budge on their demands. Its all down to who blinks first.

It will get done. It just won't get done until 1 or both sides are against the wall. I can almost guarantee that if he does a 2 year deal and produces, he'll get paid and the next negotiations will go much more quickly.
 

db2011

Registered User
Oct 10, 2011
3,565
474
Brooklyn
To me the issue is that the Jackets hold all the cards and inorder for the deal to get done Joey's camp has to give. If they still have a 4 year on the table to me that shows either they don't get it or they are just being obstinate for the sake of it. To me the negotiating should be pretty simple at this point.

Jackets: It's either 2 years or three

Joey's team : Okay then we want $X.

Jackets: Too much-we offer $Y

Joey's team: How about we split the difference and get this done.

I mean at this point what else is there to negotiate?

Hopefully it is not Joey who is dragging this out but rather his agent. The longer it takes it just has to have a negative impact, imo.

Jackets have sucked at the start of seasons; they don't need a late to or missed camp Joey.

sorry, been away.

I'm not in line with your take very much at all. Where we agree is that the leverage at this point favors the organization. By no means does that mean Joey should just get rolled. If anyone "doesn't get it", it's Jarmo and his insistence on ripping off RFAs.

I think a deal gets done but part of me says kudos to Joey for not swallowing the party line and taking this deep into the offseason. Jarmo has shown me nothing to make me think he isn't lowballing the kid except the Boll contract, which around here gets dismissed as a "thanks for breaking your wrist for us" deal or a "now fight every other night" deal.

Honestly, I prefer a player taking his value seriously and if there's any hard feelings about these negotiations I'm inclined to think they will manifest themselves in Joey playing very well and very hard once he signs Jarmo's bridge deal.
 
Last edited:

EspenK

Registered User
Sep 25, 2011
15,842
4,446
sorry, been away.

I'm not in line with your take very much at all. Where we agree is that the leverage at this point favors the organization. By no means does that mean Joey should just get rolled. If anyone "doesn't get it", it's Jarmo and his insistence on ripping off UFAs.

I think a deal gets done but part of me says kudos to Joey for not swallowing the party line and taking this deep into the offseason. Jarmo has shown me nothing to make me think he isn't lowballing the kid except the Boll contract, which around here gets dismissed as a "thanks for breaking your wrist for us" deal or a "now fight every other night" deal.

Honestly, I prefer a player taking his value seriously and if there's any hard feelings about these negotiations I'm inclined to think they will manifest themselves in Joey playing very well and very hard once he signs Jarmo's bridge deal.

I'm not sure I suggested that Joey should get rolled. What I suggested is that the term is a non-starter so take that off the table and agree somewhere in the middle on $. To me that is the negotiating everyone talks about.

Now as far as Jarmo appearing to low ball all of the young guys, I am in 100% agreement. Cam, Calvert, Savard, Prout, Erixon all bargains in my opinion. Bob had to go to the wall to get his 5.75.
 

EspenK

Registered User
Sep 25, 2011
15,842
4,446
Shea Weber would have clearly known that Nashville matching was an option. He wouldn't have signed a 14 year offer sheet deal if he didn't have any interest in staying in Nashville.

O'Reilly played in the KHL during the lockout and clearly had an out clause so it was a negotiating threat. He has also since signed another contract to remain with the Avalanche so clearly that aren't that many hard feelings there. He didn't try to force his way out of town. He just wanted paid.

Just like the lockout, there is no deadline to force anyone to do anything. Clearly nobody is stupid enough to give him an offer sheet. The next deadline is the opening of camp. Until that gets close, there is not reason for anyone to budge on their demands. Its all down to who blinks first.

It will get done. It just won't get done until 1 or both sides are against the wall. I can almost guarantee that if he does a 2 year deal and produces, he'll get paid and the next negotiations will go much more quickly.

I'm thinking the $114 million was the reason Weber signed not because he was sure Nashville would match and he had an interest in staying. If that was the case I think he probably would have signed before the offer sheet.

As to ROR, he wasn't in the driver's seat this time other than taking a one year deal in arbitration. My guess is he goes via trade or UFA next time around.

And as to the next round of negotiations I don't believe they will go smoothly if he produces. He will ask for Toews money and I don't think the Jackets will pay up, at least not without filing for arbitration and possibly an offer sheet.
 

db2011

Registered User
Oct 10, 2011
3,565
474
Brooklyn
I'm not sure I suggested that Joey should get rolled. What I suggested is that the term is a non-starter so take that off the table and agree somewhere in the middle on $. To me that is the negotiating everyone talks about.

Now as far as Jarmo appearing to low ball all of the young guys, I am in 100% agreement. Cam, Calvert, Savard, Prout, Erixon all bargains in my opinion. Bob had to go to the wall to get his 5.75.

Sorry. It's more the case that I feel Joey getting rolled was the implication of your scenario in which he has no power in this negotiation so "why the hold up, already?".
 

IHeartZherdev*

Guest
I agree with pretty much everything you said, but I think the key sticking point here is that Johansen "professes" to want to stay in Columbus. He has to say that because he's an RFA and is stuck here. Asking specifically for a 4 year deal, while by no means a sin, is an indicator that he may have a very mercenary approach to his career, and at worst that he has a destination in mind for when he hits UFA. If he really loves it here then the first offer would normally be a long term (6+yr) big $ deal, not one that takes him to FA as quickly as possible. While that doesn't mean he wants out its not a great sign either.

This is completely insane. His first choice was a long term deal and that's what he and his agent asked for. Agents use UFA/RFA years in every negotiation. As in, we'll take a short term deal but that will leave us UFA, or close to it, or we'll sign away what could be lucrative UFA years in exchange for long term security.

Calling him a "mercenary" who wants out based on this shows an embarrassing lack of basic hockey knowledge.
 

IHeartZherdev*

Guest
Reason is I don't want to go into the next negotiations in a few years with him wanting full market value and not a penny less. (which may happen regardless).

Seriously, what kind of Diva asks to be paid market value?

:facepalm:
 

EspenK

Registered User
Sep 25, 2011
15,842
4,446
"Full" market value no less. SMH That's the worst kind of market value.

Market value is determined by the buyer in this case. If Joey thinks Toews money is market then there could be a problem. If he performs to Toews' numbers and defensive abilities plus shows great leadership then he can ask for and probably get Toews' money; otherwise it will be a bone of contention.
 

CBJRzeznik

Registered User
Mar 8, 2014
237
3
Market value is determined by the buyer in this case. If Joey thinks Toews money is market then there could be a problem. If he performs to Toews' numbers and defensive abilities plus shows great leadership then he can ask for and probably get Toews' money; otherwise it will be a bone of contention.

Let's not forget Toews money also reflects, at least to some degree, him being a 2 time Stanley Cup and Canadian Gold medal winner (i.e., plays big on the biggest stage and is a leader on the biggest stage). If Joey has performed on his bridge contract in a way that has helped push CBJ to greater heights....he will deserve and get the monster contract he is seeking. I am a big fan of Joey's...feel he will be a legit 1C and will mature into a Toews like player for us.
 

Xoggz22

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
7,930
3,474
Columbus, Ohio
sorry, been away.

I'm not in line with your take very much at all. Where we agree is that the leverage at this point favors the organization. By no means does that mean Joey should just get rolled. If anyone "doesn't get it", it's Jarmo and his insistence on ripping off UFAs.

I think a deal gets done but part of me says kudos to Joey for not swallowing the party line and taking this deep into the offseason. Jarmo has shown me nothing to make me think he isn't lowballing the kid except the Boll contract, which around here gets dismissed as a "thanks for breaking your wrist for us" deal or a "now fight every other night" deal.

Honestly, I prefer a player taking his value seriously and if there's any hard feelings about these negotiations I'm inclined to think they will manifest themselves in Joey playing very well and very hard once he signs Jarmo's bridge deal.

Did you mean RFA's? What would UFA's have to do with Joey's contract negotiation and who got ripped off? Sorry NY, I'm not following you here. I'm probably missing something. If so, my bad.
 

alphafox

Registered User
Jun 14, 2011
1,443
92
This is completely insane. His first choice was a long term deal and that's what he and his agent asked for. Agents use UFA/RFA years in every negotiation. As in, we'll take a short term deal but that will leave us UFA, or close to it, or we'll sign away what could be lucrative UFA years in exchange for long term security.

Calling him a "mercenary" who wants out based on this shows an embarrassing lack of basic hockey knowledge.

His first choice was not a long term deal, I have yet hear any solid information of a contract offer longer than 4 years. 4 years is not a long term offer it is a contract offer designed to take him to UFA. The UFA/RFA years are a basic negotiation tactic in these types of negotiations because that is the only real bargaining that can be done, short of the player sitting out. The Jackets put themselves in a smart position by leaving open as much cap room as they did because they don't have to fear an offer sheet and thus can stand strong on term or money, and use the other against Johansen. Standard carrot and stick negotiation.

Additionally, my calling him a "mercenary" is a complete mischaracterization of my post. I said it could indicate a mercenary mindset. A statement that is entirely accurate given that the only information I have seen throughout this negotiation is the Johansen camp pushing a contract term which will take him to UFA as soon as possible, thereby ensuring he gets paid, which is the very definition of mercenary. (According to portzline and a few other sources there is currently a 2 year and 4 year contact on the table) Regardless of the accuracy of my statement mercenary doesn't mean bad it just means that Johansen's objective is to make as much $ in his career as possible. There are players that take discounts (Crosby, Bergeron) and there are others that don't. I was simply stating that Johansen could fall into that latter category given what we have heard during this negotiation.

Finally, quit baiting posters by twisting their posts and questioning their hockey knowledge. No one here is an NHL executive. I'm a contract lawyer who's never played more than a few pickup games of hockey and never done serious scouting. That lack of experience doesn't make my or anyone else's opinion invalid just because it doesn't match with yours.
 

IHeartZherdev*

Guest
Market value is determined by the buyer in this case. If Joey thinks Toews money is market then there could be a problem. If he performs to Toews' numbers and defensive abilities plus shows great leadership then he can ask for and probably get Toews' money; otherwise it will be a bone of contention.

If Joey thinks the priesthood is is calling then there could also be a problem.

Where on earth are you getting this "Toews money" thing from? No indication from him or his agent, or from any reports that Toews is a comparable. Even after say, a two-year deal, it would be tough for him to reach that comp.
 

db2011

Registered User
Oct 10, 2011
3,565
474
Brooklyn
Did you mean RFA's? What would UFA's have to do with Joey's contract negotiation and who got ripped off? Sorry NY, I'm not following you here. I'm probably missing something. If so, my bad.

I meant RFAs, yes. I'll go fix that now. :)
 

IHeartZherdev*

Guest
His first choice was not a long term deal, I have yet hear any solid information of a contract offer longer than 4 years. 4 years is not a long term offer it is a contract offer designed to take him to UFA. The UFA/RFA years are a basic negotiation tactic in these types of negotiations because that is the only real bargaining that can be done, short of the player sitting out. The Jackets put themselves in a smart position by leaving open as much cap room as they did because they don't have to fear an offer sheet and thus can stand strong on term or money, and use the other against Johansen. Standard carrot and stick negotiation.

Additionally, my calling him a "mercenary" is a complete mischaracterization of my post. I said it could indicate a mercenary mindset. A statement that is entirely accurate given that the only information I have seen throughout this negotiation is the Johansen camp pushing a contract term which will take him to UFA as soon as possible, thereby ensuring he gets paid, which is the very definition of mercenary. (According to portzline and a few other sources there is currently a 2 year and 4 year contact on the table) Regardless of the accuracy of my statement mercenary doesn't mean bad it just means that Johansen's objective is to make as much $ in his career as possible. There are players that take discounts (Crosby, Bergeron) and there are others that don't. I was simply stating that Johansen could fall into that latter category given what we have heard during this negotiation.

Finally, quit baiting posters by twisting their posts and questioning their hockey knowledge. No one here is an NHL executive. I'm a contract lawyer who's never played more than a few pickup games of hockey and never done serious scouting. That lack of experience doesn't make my or anyone else's opinion invalid just because it doesn't match with yours.

"ensuring one gets paid" is the very definition of a mercenary? what?
 

BF3

Boom Roasted.
Dec 30, 2011
1,595
117
Cbus
Would anyone have a problem with 3 years, $16.5 mil (5.5 mil AAV)? They can back load the salary for motivation ($4.1 mil/$5.5 mil/$6.9 mil), makes him the highest paid center (salary) on the team those three years combined, and he is still an RFA at the end of the deal.
 

EspenK

Registered User
Sep 25, 2011
15,842
4,446
Would anyone have a problem with 3 years, $16.5 mil (5.5 mil AAV)? They can back load the salary for motivation ($4.1 mil/$5.5 mil/$6.9 mil), makes him the highest paid center (salary) on the team those three years combined, and he is still an RFA at the end of the deal.

Seems good to me. Although the motivation factor is a non-factor. Once the contract is signed, he is getting that money short of being bought out which isn't going to happen. I'm not sure if a qualifying offer is based on AAV or actual salary but to me I think 3 @ 5.5 per is the way to go.
 

BF3

Boom Roasted.
Dec 30, 2011
1,595
117
Cbus
Seems good to me. Although the motivation factor is a non-factor. Once the contract is signed, he is getting that money short of being bought out which isn't going to happen. I'm not sure if a qualifying offer is based on AAV or actual salary but to me I think 3 @ 5.5 per is the way to go.

True, I've been reading about football contracts too much lately, so my brain sometimes forgets that every other sport (more or less) has guaranteed contracts. Still, it seems to be a deal that both sides should agree to.
 

EspenK

Registered User
Sep 25, 2011
15,842
4,446
Thinking about this a bit more I think if I were Joey, I'd want the 2 year deal so that I can hopefully get the 8 year big buck contract a year sooner. But 5.5 seems like the right $ amount to me.
 

Crede777

Deputized
Dec 16, 2009
14,844
4,560
Thinking about this a bit more I think if I were Joey, I'd want the 2 year deal so that I can hopefully get the 8 year big buck contract a year sooner. But 5.5 seems like the right $ amount to me.

That's why I think he has the 2 and 4 year contracts on the table.

2 years gets his bridge over sooner so he gets the big contract.
4 years takes him right up to his UFA and so he gets the big contract.

3 years doesn't do much for him as it's longer than the 2 years but he doesn't reach free agency (and thus doesn't have a ton of leverage that he would have if he did).

I think what Johansen should get is similar to Bobrovsky's deal. 2 years, the first at $5 million and then the second at $6.25 million. Yeah they're $3 million apart, but whereas many on here seem to think the CBJ could be lowballing Johansen, I think they offered $5 million and Johansen wants around $8 million (which if true seems way too high). If the offers had been lower (think $3 mill vs. $6 mill) I think a deal would have been made already.
 
Last edited:

EspenK

Registered User
Sep 25, 2011
15,842
4,446
Just for fun I read up on Stepan's holdhout with the Rangers last year.

In the shortened season he had 44 pts in 48 games.

He allegedly was asking for $7 mill (saw that somewhere in a post on the Rangers board).

He missed training camp and signed for 2 years aav for 3.075

This past year he had 57 pts in 82 games,

I understand the differences between the two players and the situations but I think it illustrates the reasons why teams are hesitant to go all in on that second deal. Not that .7 pts a game is terrible but its not the point a game average he put up the year before.

In retrospect I think Stepan should have been paid more but not $7 mill. Another .7 ppg season and look for fireworks in next year's negotiations where the Rangers have about 30 mill to sign 12 guys including some of their better players. Illustrates another point that teams that overpay a select few players run into salary cap issues.
So far Jarmo seems to be managing that fairly well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Ad

Ad