Ryan Johansen Saga III

[KJ Dangler]

He just turned 22. He has THREE NHL seasons on his resume. You can't simply skim over two of them because you don't like them.

Oh but he can, have you read his logic in his post. Its much easier to cherrypick what benefits his stance.

 

[IHeartZherdev*]

He just turned 22. He has THREE NHL seasons on his resume. You can't simply skim over two of them because you don't like them.

I'm not skipping over them. He developed and progressed in each of them. If he didn't have a history of improvement, working hard, and getting better each year then I would have a concern. I don't expect a kid to peak at age 19 or 20. If HFBoards golden boy Wenny plays 30 games this year as a fourth line center I won't hold that against him in 3 years either. He's not even close to the same player he was his rookie season.

The point you keep ignoring is the team is willing to commit to 6 and 8 years terms with him, which shows they agree with his ability, progress, and potential.

 

[pete goegan]

...The point you keep ignoring is the team is willing to commit to 6 and 8 years terms with him, which shows they agree with his ability, progress, and potential.

So, what changed their minds about this? They were committed to two years, and only two years, just a few weeks ago, then Ryan shows up in a too-small t-shirt and they go all gaga? Some of what has gone on, from both sides, is impossible to understand.

 

[Socks]

I'm not skipping over them. He developed and progressed in each of them. If he didn't have a history of improvment, working hard, and getting better each year then I would have a concern.

The point you keep ignoring is the team is willing to commit to 6 and 8 years terms with him, which shows they agree.

But we don't want to reward mediocrity. Yes he had a good year last year. And he will get paid for that year. But that doesn't mean we should give him the moon. I recently was due for my annual raise. I'm probably one of the more consistent employees in the company but I've had a horrible year (health problems) which meant that my store suffered. As a result I had to settle for only a 1.5% raise as opposed to the normal 3%. That's business.

 

[TaketheCannoli]

Apparently you don't understand then when the FO receives a contract offer, it's not a "demand" from a someone trying to extort them. This isn't a hostage situation where Joey is quitting the Blue Jackets until his "demands" are met. It's a contract proposal and the front office can then offer a counter proposal. It's a business negotiation, both sides should be talking and trading proposals until a a contract is worked out.

And as far as your concern that Joey is really no good and only had one year and he doesn't have the heart of a real player like D-Mac, a 2 year term (which he has agreed to) protects the team if he does turn out to be a bust, since they aren't on the hook long term.

Very nice straw man. Still no facts.

Please provide a single post I made claiming,

"...Joey is really no good and only had one year and he doesn't have the heart of a real player like D-Mac,..."

Let me help you out a bit with negotiating terms. Demands are what an individual or a union makes of an entity when they are negotiating to provide their service.

Here are a few examples:

Ryan Callahan and his agent alter contract demands

"That's why his agent, Steve Bartlett, has altered contract demands for Callahan during ongoing negotiations with the Rangers."

Highland teachers threaten to strike if contract demands are not met

University Contract Details Hillary Clinton Speech Demands

The employer makes offers. Here are some examples:

Evans said Saturday afternoon that the proposal was “essentially unchanged from the board’s previous offer.â€

In British Columbia, "The government had initially offered a signing bonus of $1,200, which expired, while the teachers’ union later asked for a signing bonus of $5,000."

or hey here's one you might not have heard

Ryan Johansen turns down contract offer


Demand means to ask. Offer means to present.

 

[db2011]

I mean, I guess if you just skip over his barely-there production of the first two years....

Well the standard of assessing what a player has done by a certain age pretty much does disregard the particular details of specific seasons. And that's just how I'm viewing it. I'm sure we can all agree that rookie year numbers are not representative of any player's eventual level of production.

Maybe where we disagree is whether a sophomore season for a 19-20 year old kid should get a certain kind of consideration if that kid started his second year with a new coaching staff, one week of training camp, and less than half the normal amount of games in the regular season to develop. I think it does, which is why comparing Joey's 3-year career to players who didn't face 2nd year adversity like that isn't fair to Joey.

So we have to look at accomplishment by age.

 

[DarkandStormy]

I'm not skipping over them. He developed and progressed in each of them. If he didn't have a history of improvement, working hard, and getting better each year then I would have a concern. I don't expect a kid to peak at age 19 or 20. If HFBoards golden boy Wenny plays 30 games this year as a fourth line center I won't hold that against him in 3 years either. He's not even close to the same player he was his rookie season.

The point you keep ignoring is the team is willing to commit to 6 and 8 years terms with him, which shows they agree with his ability, progress, and potential.

And what the rest of us are saying is that Stamkos/Toews/Kane all produced for MORE than one year when they got their next deals. Even guys who were pretty consistent (or more than one-year producers) 50-60 point players signed two-year bridges for 5-7% of the cap.

He's not a vet. He's not a UFA. He doesn't have arbitration rights. And he doesn't have an offer sheet. He can sit out (which will then hinder his progress, and likely hurt his potential career earnings) or he can take this two-year offer and make the Jackets pay him an 8x8 in 2016. He will earn nothing by holding out. And if he sits out well into the regular season this year, he probably won't have the stats to point to on the next deal.

This is just how the CBA is set up. You get paid based on past performance quite a bit. And if you're a UFA you obviously have the threat of leaving. Guys have dealt with this before and signed bridges they didn't agree with. It's not that hard. Get an offer sheet, play for your current team for $3-4 million, or sit out and get nothing AND hurt yourself in the long run to make more.

 

[Fro]

since everyone wants to throw my name around when i wasn't...

no...no i don't want Patrick Kane anywhere near this team...he'd be rick nash 2.0...

all the talent in the world, but w/o Toews...no thanks...

 

[db2011]

since everyone wants to throw my name around when i wasn't...

no...no i don't want Patrick Kane anywhere near this team...he'd be rick nash 2.0...

all the talent in the world, but w/o Toews...no thanks...

it's not just your name we want to throw around

no to P. Kane based on his character?

 

[TaketheCannoli]

Well the standard of assessing what a player has done by a certain age pretty much does disregard the particular details of specific seasons. And that's just how I'm viewing it. I'm sure we can all agree that rookie year numbers are not representative of any player's eventual level of production.

Maybe where we disagree is whether a sophomore season for a 19-20 year old kid should get a certain kind of consideration if that kid started his second year with a new coaching staff, one week of training camp, and less than half the normal amount of games in the regular season to develop. I think it does, which is why comparing Joey's 3-year career to players who didn't face 2nd year adversity like that isn't fair to Joey.

So we have to look at accomplishment by age.

As I stated earlier, I think almost every poster on this site wants the same things:

The Blue Jackets to ice the best possible team

Become a consistent Stanley Cup contender

Win the Cup

Do it again


Can we agree to that?

And what the rest of us are saying is that Stamkos/Toews/Kane all produced for MORE than one year when they got their next deals. Even guys who were pretty consistent (or more than one-year producers) 50-60 point players signed two-year bridges for 5-7% of the cap.

He's not a vet. He's not a UFA. He doesn't have arbitration rights. And he doesn't have an offer sheet. He can sit out (which will then hinder his progress, and likely hurt his potential career earnings) or he can take this two-year offer and make the Jackets pay him an 8x8 in 2016. He will earn nothing by holding out. And if he sits out well into the regular season this year, he probably won't have the stats to point to on the next deal.

This is just how the CBA is set up. You get paid based on past performance quite a bit. And if you're a UFA you obviously have the threat of leaving. Guys have dealt with this before and signed bridges they didn't agree with. It's not that hard. Get an offer sheet, play for your current team for $3-4 million, or sit out and get nothing AND hurt yourself in the long run to make more.

I for one am not really saying that. I believe the players and the teams each made some very serious concessions in order to have a CBA.

The NHL agreed that all contracts are guaranteed and are not open for renegotiation.

The players agreed to restrict player movement under free agency.

Both of these concessions are opposite sides of the same coin.

If contracts were not guaranteed and open for re-negotiation, then the Blue Jackets could make an offer the way NFL teams do...

Ryan, we believe you are going to be the cornerstone of our franchise. We think you will become a guy worth $10 million annually and we want to keep you long term. We are pleased to offer you 8 years at $10 million."

Of course, if he doesn't live up to their belief his agent gets a call, "Kurt, you know we expected Ryan to be a ppg player and frankly we're disappointed. We really like the kid so we're going to give you two choices: 1. Renegotiate his salary down to $ 800 thousand per year for the rest of the contract. 2. If that isn't comfortable we will put you on the waiver wire and the kid gets nothing from us."

Risk for the team is eliminated.

On the other hand, the reverse happens "Ryan we really like you and we think you will be a fine 4th line center. We like your work ethic and you are good in the dressing room. We are pleased to offer you 8 years at $1.5 million.

Ryan becomes a ppg player, now the agent calls "JD, you know we have a problem. We agreed Ryan was a solid depth guy and he has worked hard and become a star. Ryan isn't going to play anymore until he gets paid according to his accomplishments." Of course like in the No Fun League he gets his money.

By negotiating the agreement the did, teams won't pay RFAs for what they believe they will achieve. It's way too risky. That's why short term deals are so popular.

It seems to me the only way this can work out well for both parties is the aforementioned offer sheet, OR

a 1 year deal for $3.5 - 4 million. If Ryan becomes a superstar he should insist on another 1 year deal at Toews money. Then re-assess in a year and decide if he wants to be a Blue Jacket and the team can decide if they want him to be a Blue Jacket. If so, he will have earned a really big deal.

 

[db2011]

That's why I've used % of cap at the time on the Duchene, Couture, and Stepan deals. Give him 5-7% of the current cap. That's a 2 year / $8-$9 million bridge.

Sure, the cap has gone up. That's why many here have stuck with the percentage of the cap similar to the last few bridge deals.

While I think Joey is worth around 5-5.5 million right now, I think $4.5 is reasonable. As do, apparently, Dispatch beat writers and columnists- and at one point anyway many of us involved in this discussion.

Again, Davidson says he won't budge above $3 million.

That, along with the players who he's referring to who make 10% of their respective team's cap currently are likely in their UFA years vs. their RFA years (if not, I'd like to know who they are).

You are right, the list is primarily heavy hitting veterans. Which, you know, would be great news for our favorite team if the guys running it would come up from their demands er, offers (this isn't my work, these are numbers provided by the poster oilerbear- and he has provided numbers pertaining to their RFA contracts. See post #433 for his original post):

the players with 1 season 30G 30A by 21yr.
johansen,
Skinner,
E. staal,
Eberle,
Bergeron,
Horton,
Toews,
P. Kane,
Kopitar,
Tavares,
Seguin,
Hossa,
Heatley,
Gagne,
Thorton
Kovalchuk.

Their post 05-06 lockout RFA contracts average 10.4% of the cap.

10.4% of a 69M cap is 7.2M.

IF his agent does not get 7.2M the young man is getting paid less than average for a 21year old 30G 30A player.

Columbus Mgmt can talk all they want.

History of past contracts says Johansen's Agent is correct!

Again I believe Joey is clearly undeserving of even attaining the minimum here of 7.2. But it's encouraging to see his name on this list and even a hit well below the average is higher than CBJ's paltry $3

 

[db2011]

As I stated earlier, I think almost every poster on this site wants the same things:

The Blue Jackets to ice the best possible team

Become a consistent Stanley Cup contender

Win the Cup

Do it again


Can we agree to that?

I don't like how you only wrote "Do it again" once

Otherwise you will get no resistance from me on this score, sir.

 

[We Want Ten]

What is your concern? That we would be paying a kid with bad character who doesn't deserve it/he's a rotten person that we want to distance ourselves from? Or, the pieces of the puzzle that add up to a portrait of his character indicate he will not perform well as a 1C?

That's a sincere question. If it's the first thing, then so be it, you don't like the kid and think he's headed down a bad path and don't want him in the locker room. I mean, I don't see that at all, I'd think you're crazy but we all have different standards of decorum I guess.

The comments show me that Joey is a prideful, cocky kid. Which are qualities that I think are conditions of being a top line center in the NHL. I wouldn't have it any other way.

If the cause for concern is that he said these things out loud during negotiations, he still sounds more mature than JD did when crying that he was being extorted and admitting to taking the negotiation personally. Do you have cause for concern about the content of JD's character?

1. Can he repeat last year.
2. Will he be able to take the pressure of being the guy.
3. If things go poorly, how will he react?

I've said all along i'd sign him at 4- 4.5 bridge deal and if he walks the walk,then the club needs to talk the talk on his extension.

I think he will be fine, but yes the Springfield incident and some of his comments make me wonder how well he actually would handle adversity. He had it easy last year, going forward will be a different story.


And I really hope he is here longer than JD. I'd like to have a productive #1C since this club has been waiting for one forever.

 

[Jackets16]

So, what changed their minds about this? They were committed to two years, and only two years, just a few weeks ago, then Ryan shows up in a too-small t-shirt and they go all gaga? Some of what has gone on, from both sides, is impossible to understand.

They know he is good. They think he will get better. The reason they will go 6 or 8 years is because it allows them to pay him less now. Nothing changed. They thought since he wouldn't go off his crazy demands for 2 years they would try to give him some security of a longer term deal while giving them something they want (less money now). That is what negotiating is. Something he and his agent apparently aren't interest in doing.

 

[TaketheCannoli]

I don't like how you only wrote "Do it again" once

Otherwise you will get no resistance from me on this score, sir.

Great we pretty much agree.

From my perspective, since I want a GREAT team I want the team to have the flexibility to build the very best roster they possibly can.

This means I want the players to do well, make as much as possible and I want the team to reduce or eliminate as much risk as it possibly can. Signing a player for a long term high dollar guaranteed contract can be a really good thing. Can you imagine how happy the Kings are that Philly signed a really long term low cost contract with Jeff Carter? As much as we Jacket fans despise Jeff Carter, he's a helluva player and they get him for $5.2 million for the next 8 seasons. Frankly, I think Jeff lost on that deal.

Now, think about Vancouver and the deal they made with Roberto Luongo. It damn near killed that team. It's just my opinion but I think the way they bungled the whole deal there caused the Kesler fiasco, the Schneider fiasco and the fact that we have their fans coming here to beg for Johansen.

It seems to me the only way this can work out well for both parties is a 1 year deal for $3.5 - 4 million. If Ryan becomes a superstar he should insist on another 1 year deal at Toews money. Then re-assess in a year and decide if he wants to be a Blue Jacket and the team can decide if they want him to be a Blue Jacket. If so, he will have earned a really big deal.

 

[Fro]

it's not just your name we want to throw around

no to P. Kane based on his character?

actually...that does play into it...but I never said I didn't want Joey on this team...he has some growing up to do...and that's why i'm in favor of a bridge contract...I went on record saying 2 at $11m very early...but after the facts were posted about his peers and what they received...i think the CBJ are close on what they're offering... 2/$8m is probably a good mark...you and IHZ disagree...which is fine...

but kane didn't show up in big games for the US in the olympics, he does a lot of immature things off the ice over the last few years, and I personally don't feel he can be "the man" when needed to be...

but by all means...keep coming at me and threatening me all you want if that's not a good enough explanation...

 

[IHeartZherdev*]

actually...that does play into it...but I never said I didn't want Joey on this team...he has some growing up to do...and that's why i'm in favor of a bridge contract...I went on record saying 2 at $11m very early...but after the facts were posted about his peers and what they received...i think the CBJ are close on what they're offering... 2/$8m is probably a good mark...you and IHZ disagree...which is fine...

but kane didn't show up in big games for the US in the olympics, he does a lot of immature things off the ice over the last few years, and I personally don't feel he can be "the man" when needed to be...

but by all means...keep coming at me and threatening me all you want if that's not a good enough explanation...

Patrick Kane won a Conn Smyth trophy. That means the most valuable player in the playoffs. Those are pretty big games, and if being the best player in the playoffs isn't a good indication he can be the man...

 

[db2011]

actually...that does play into it...but I never said I didn't want Joey on this team...he has some growing up to do...and that's why i'm in favor of a bridge contract...I went on record saying 2 at $11m very early...but after the facts were posted about his peers and what they received...i think the CBJ are close on what they're offering... 2/$8m is probably a good mark...you and IHZ disagree...which is fine...

but kane didn't show up in big games for the US in the olympics, he does a lot of immature things off the ice over the last few years, and I personally don't feel he can be "the man" when needed to be...

but by all means...keep coming at me and threatening me all you want if that's not a good enough explanation...

oh come on the threat was sarcastic and meant to be good natured. I'm sorry if it didn't seem like that or if it seems like I'm "coming at you".

To the points, I think 2/$8m is still low, but I would be ok with 2/$9, which is lower than what I started at, which was the same as you. If it were up to me at this point I'd go 2/$10 but I don't think that will happen.

Still we are faced with JD insisting we uninformed fans and writers don't understand why $3 million is a fair offer. We don't yet know what yesterday's demand was from KO but I imagine we just need to wait until JD's next press appearance to learn the numbers.

 

[db2011]

Great we pretty much agree.

From my perspective, since I want a GREAT team I want the team to have the flexibility to build the very best roster they possibly can.

This means I want the players to do well, make as much as possible and I want the team to reduce or eliminate as much risk as it possibly can. Signing a player for a long term high dollar guaranteed contract can be a really good thing. Can you imagine how happy the Kings are that Philly signed a really long term low cost contract with Jeff Carter? As much as we Jacket fans despise Jeff Carter, he's a helluva player and they get him for $5.2 million for the next 8 seasons. Frankly, I think Jeff lost on that deal.

Now, think about Vancouver and the deal they made with Roberto Luongo. It damn near killed that team. It's just my opinion but I think the way they bungled the whole deal there caused the Kesler fiasco, the Schneider fiasco and the fact that we have their fans coming here to beg for Johansen.

It seems to me the only way this can work out well for both parties is a 1 year deal for $3.5 - 4 million. If Ryan becomes a superstar he should insist on another 1 year deal at Toews money. Then re-assess in a year and decide if he wants to be a Blue Jacket and the team can decide if they want him to be a Blue Jacket. If so, he will have earned a really big deal.

oh, your question was a trick!

The Luongo deal was awful and not at all what anyone's talking about (except possibly KO but I don't support that at all). We're talking at this point about a bridge deal, so unless the salary numbers are sky high (which they won't be) the risk is nothing like the Luongo deal and the consequences are not as dire as the ones you laid out (which don't seem like you're being unreasonable in your understanding of them).

But if you can admit that Carter lost on the deal he signed then we are agreeing even more, and that's why the long term deals offered by the Jackets were rightly refused for Joey. Possibly Carter's deal and Tavares's deal and to a lesser extent Seguin's deal could be viewed as cautionary tales by players and their agents.

I think your numbers for this working out well are low, as I'd go 2/$5m or grudgingly 2/$4.5m, but we aren't that far off so a deal could be struck. But again, almost everyone here at least is around $4m/year and that's still over 25% more than JD will accept. And he's spitting mad even talking about it.

We agree we want to be a dynasty and win lots of cups. My concern is that with all the talent coming our way (unproven), what's to say this management group isn't going to be just as inflexible with those guys?

 

[TaketheCannoli]

oh, your question was a trick!

I didn't mean it to be a trick question at all. I am truly sorry if it came off that way.

The Luongo deal was awful and not at all what anyone's talking about (except possibly KO but I don't support that at all). We're talking at this point about a bridge deal, so unless the salary numbers are sky high (which they won't be) the risk is nothing like the Luongo deal and the consequences are not as dire as the ones you laid out (which don't seem like you're being unreasonable in your understanding of them).

But at the time, the conventional wisdom was that Luongo was going to be a dominant goaltender as the next in line after Hasek and Brodeur, and Brodeur's heir as Team Canada's goalie. A guy who could carry the Canucks on his back to Stanley Cups. Dave Nonis believed this and bet on it.

But if you can admit that Carter lost on the deal he signed then we are agreeing even more, and that's why the long term deals offered by the Jackets were rightly refused for Joey. Possibly Carter's deal and Tavares's deal and to a lesser extent Seguin's deal could be viewed as cautionary tales by players and their agents.

Carter believed he and his best buddy Mike Richards would retire as Flyers together. He was already a 40 goal scorer and a #1 Center. He banked on something that was also false, just like Nonis did. Tavares must really want to play on the Island.

I think your numbers for this working out well are low, as I'd go 2/$5m or grudgingly 2/$4.5m, but we aren't that far off so a deal could be struck. But again, almost everyone here at least is around $4m/year and that's still over 25% more than JD will accept. And he's spitting mad even talking about it.

We agree we want to be a dynasty and win lots of cups. My concern is that with all the talent coming our way (unproven), what's to say this management group isn't going to be just as inflexible with those guys?

It seems from the reports all summer, no one budged to speak of. I have no idea where Zito's offer started; I assume he hasn't moved very much. If what has been reported is accurate, Overhardt has dropped from 7 million x 2 to 6.5 million x 2 over a period of months. That isn't much movement for two negotiators who are that far apart.

I'm sure everyone is very frustrated. JD lashed out at Overhardt. Overhardt countered with some classic passive-aggressiveness and an insult to JD's mother.

I truly believe the only way out is a prove it ONE year deal. It has to be low enough that a qualifying offer would be reasonable if Johansen regresses and is also motivated to shove it up JD and JK's rear ends and high enough that Johansen feels ok.

 

[db2011]

I didn't mean it to be a trick question at all. I am truly sorry if it came off that way.

It's okay I was mainly joking

But at the time, the conventional wisdom was that Luongo was going to be a dominant goaltender as the next in line after Hasek and Brodeur, and Brodeur's heir as Team Canada's goalie. A guy who could carry the Canucks on his back to Stanley Cups. Dave Nonis believed this and bet on it.

Yes but still it's a misrepresentation to treat people who generally are siding with Joey as if they are expecting or desirous of a Luongo deal here. We probably won't ever see a deal like that again.

Further, if there is any conventional wisdom in the Joey negotiations, it's that he's only had "one good year." You aren't fighting conventional wisdom, you're on its side.

Which is fine, I just happen to think conventional wisdom in this instance is a hat that doesn't fit.

Carter believed he and his best buddy Mike Richards would retire as Flyers together. He was already a 40 goal scorer and a #1 Center. He banked on something that was also false, just like Nonis did. Tavares must really want to play on the Island.

So I take your point to be that it's not so much Carter lost on the deal but that he took a discount for security. Still, if he hadn't been traded and it all played out the way he thought it would, isn't it accurate to understand him having lost on that one (if we have to speak in zero-sum terms)? And isn't it still reasonable to think the long-term offers from CBJ to Joey weren't good offers, especially since he wasn't gambling on playing with a buddy?

As far as Tavares goes, that's one way to interpret it. Could also be his agent wasn't as tenacious as KO, and I don't mean that to sound as complimentary to Joey's agent as it does.

It seems from the reports all summer, no one budged to speak of. I have no idea where Zito's offer started; I assume he hasn't moved very much. If what has been reported is accurate, Overhardt has dropped from 7 million x 2 to 6.5 million x 2 over a period of months. That isn't much movement for two negotiators who are that far apart.

I'm sure everyone is very frustrated. JD lashed out at Overhardt. Overhardt countered with some classic passive-aggressiveness and an insult to JD's mother.

I truly believe the only way out is a prove it ONE year deal. It has to be low enough that a qualifying offer would be reasonable if Johansen regresses and is also motivated to shove it up JD and JK's rear ends and high enough that Johansen feels ok.

The first budge as I understand it was Joey acquiescing to a bridge. Beyond that we don't have a lot of information. But JD is still firm on $3m, so the Jackets haven't budged one. bit. Or else they've lowered their offer. You may want to say that offering 6 and 8 year deals is budging, but they're bad deals so it's more that they are PR gestures. And I don't think the belligerence in these negotiations is equal- JD started it by a long shot and it's an overstatement to say KO's response (which was classic passive-agressive, which is to say diplomatic and still in the realm of professional) was to insult JD's mom.

I don't know how it gets resolved, could be one year, could be a long term deal with a higher hit. But if you ask me the Jackets have got to up their offer. Again, they haven't moved since day 1.

 

[pete goegan]

...I truly believe the only way out is a prove it ONE year deal. It has to be low enough that a qualifying offer would be reasonable if Johansen regresses and is also motivated to shove it up JD and JK's rear ends and high enough that Johansen feels ok.

I believe it was said in the podcast that a one year contract gives Johansen arbitration rights at its end.

 

[EspenK]

I believe it was said in the podcast that a one year contract gives Johansen arbitration rights at its end.

Yes it did and there is no way the Jackets are going to go for that. Unless they let Joey be the one who picks arbitration then I think the Jackets can opt for another one year deal and he'd still be an RFA at the end. And if I remember correctly arbitration is only a one time deal? Too lazy to go read the CBA now-maybe tomorrow a.m with coffee.

 

[CBJ Tiffin]

Yes it did and there is no way the Jackets are going to go for that. Unless they let Joey be the one who picks arbitration then I think the Jackets can opt for another one year deal and he'd still be an RFA at the end. And if I remember correctly arbitration is only a one time deal? Too lazy to go read the CBA now-maybe tomorrow a.m with coffee.

I could be mistaken, but pretty sure JK said at one point that he wished Joey had arbitration rights so it could be proven to him just how fair the CBJ offers are...

Now, they seem to be shying away from arbitration.

 

[db2011]

If we could get Joey for $50 and a big mac I'd be all for it. More money to spend on other players.

The only way we end up losing Johansen is if he decides he doesn't want to play hockey anymore. I'm not even sure Jarmo would trade him at this point even if Johansen asked.

The "me me me" approach Johansen is taking is antithetical to Blue Jackets hockey. I can't wait to see what happens when Jenner gets his first contract.

Aha! $50 and a Big Mac. So we Jackets fans, in our upstanding, virtuous, team-first ways, are perfectly willing to exploit the best player we perhaps have ever had. got it.


"antithetical to Blue Jackets hockey"? Is Blue Jackets hockey only paying guys when you absolutely have to? Shame.