The Columbus Dispatch: Umberger wants out (Dispatch link post #276)

Status
Not open for further replies.

EspenK

Registered User
Sep 25, 2011
15,842
4,446
I already gave it. Like it or not, the Jackets are a budget team. Buying Umberger out deepens the team's losses. Please if you disagree that it doesn't deepen the losses, you are welcome to provide proof that paying a player not to play saves money.

I'll even get you started...The Jackets can save money by buying Umberger out and running with a roster of 21 players....for SIX years.

As stated before, I don't give a damn whether he is bought out or not.

Why do you care whether he is bought out so much?

Channeling some of the great posters here, you got proof of that? Last I checked we spent pretty close to the cap last year and ate 1/2 of Gabby's salary to get rid of him. Don't see the evidence thye are a budget team.

And for the last time if you buy out Umberger you save 4.5 million that can be used elsewhere and probably, imo, better. At the end of 3 or six years will the Jackets have more $ in the bank because of buying him out? Most likely not. Will they get a better return on that extra 4.5? Again, imo, yes.

And for Pete's sake who cares how much money they spend as long as they develop a very strong team?
 
Nov 13, 2006
11,558
1,437
Ohio
Channeling some of the great posters here, you got proof of that? Last I checked we spent pretty close to the cap last year and ate 1/2 of Gabby's salary to get rid of him. Don't see the evidence thye are a budget team.

And for the last time if you buy out Umberger you save 4.5 million that can be used elsewhere and probably, imo, better. At the end of 3 or six years will the Jackets have more $ in the bank because of buying him out? Most likely not. Will they get a better return on that extra 4.5? Again, imo, yes.

And for Pete's sake who cares how much money they spend as long as they develop a very strong team?

Aye there's the rub. As fans we don't really care about the team's profits, but the actual ownership and front office care very much.

I am not sure you understand my point. Several posters are claiming its inevitable Umberger is bought out. I'm saying it's not inevitable, that it is expensive in actual dollars and effects the P&L.

I'm telling you for the very last time buying any player out costs money, it doesn't save money.

I will also suggest that having looked at the numbers, it's unlikely the Blue Jackets can make a profit. In fact, I doubt they can make a profit unless every regular season game is SRO and they make it to the conference finals, EVERY year.
 

jacketsgeek

Gimme some bread , man!
Sep 30, 2007
485
28
Pickerington, OH

EspenK

Registered User
Sep 25, 2011
15,842
4,446
Just to stir this pot again, if you look beyond next year to 2015-16 I project that not counting Umbie, we'll have 12 guys under contract assuming one million dollar 4th liner and that D-mac gets signed for 2 yrs and Letestu is re-signed.

That would leave 2 spots for Umbie, Wennberg, Rychel, Dano,2015 UFA signing (Bobby Ryan anyone?), 2014 UFA signing (Jokinen,Iggy, Vanek,???)

If Umbie stays there is only one spot and 4.5 less cap dollars.

To me it remains a no brainer.
 

Nordique

Add smoked meat, and we have a deal.
Aug 11, 2005
9,138
265
Ohio
Just to stir this pot again, if you look beyond next year to 2015-16 I project that not counting Umbie, we'll have 12 guys under contract assuming one million dollar 4th liner and that D-mac gets signed for 2 yrs and Letestu is re-signed.

That would leave 2 spots for Umbie, Wennberg, Rychel, Dano,2015 UFA signing (Bobby Ryan anyone?), 2014 UFA signing (Jokinen,Iggy, Vanek,???)

If Umbie stays there is only one spot and 4.5 less cap dollars.

To me it remains a no brainer.

I'm not sure we'll see Atkinson here past next season. He's gotta be better than he was this year thats for sure.
 

CBJRzeznik

Registered User
Mar 8, 2014
237
3
Just to stir this pot again, if you look beyond next year to 2015-16 I project that not counting Umbie, we'll have 12 guys under contract assuming one million dollar 4th liner and that D-mac gets signed for 2 yrs and Letestu is re-signed.

That would leave 2 spots for Umbie, Wennberg, Rychel, Dano,2015 UFA signing (Bobby Ryan anyone?), 2014 UFA signing (Jokinen,Iggy, Vanek,???)

If Umbie stays there is only one spot and 4.5 less cap dollars.

To me it remains a no brainer.

I completely agree. I admire the guts he showed in the playoffs and commitment he had by being the good soldier on (honestly) a bad team for a long time. However, the salary he has doesn't match his projected role on the team next year and beyond. Though I think he has some trade value it likely would require salary retention so the easiest path forward for Jarmo is probably a compliance buy out
 
Nov 13, 2006
11,558
1,437
Ohio
Just to stir this pot again, if you look beyond next year to 2015-16 I project that not counting Umbie, we'll have 12 guys under contract assuming one million dollar 4th liner and that D-mac gets signed for 2 yrs and Letestu is re-signed.

That would leave 2 spots for Umbie, Wennberg, Rychel, Dano,2015 UFA signing (Bobby Ryan anyone?), 2014 UFA signing (Jokinen,Iggy, Vanek,???)

If Umbie stays there is only one spot and 4.5 less cap dollars.

To me it remains a no brainer.

Props for the courage of your convictions.

I sincerely doubt the Jackets sign Ryan, Iginla or Vanek.

They might take a run at Ollie Jokinen, but I doubt that too.

Here's where the roster space comes from:

Comeau gone
Nikitin gone
Tropp gone
Frattin gone
Skille gone
Atkinson gone

My offer to bet on Iggy, Vanek and Stastny is still open. I am willing to make a wager, say two tickets to Opening Night that the CBJ do not sign any of the three this summer. If any sign, I buy. If none sign, you buy.

BTW- I've been watching Montreal closely. Vanek is not what I think the Jackets need. He is slow, and doesn't create opportunities. He can score by parking himself near the net and cleaning up loose pucks. He plays no defense at all. He also seems to disengage often.

He's a proven 30 garbage goal scorer and that's about all.
 

blahblah

Registered User
Nov 24, 2005
21,327
972
My offer to bet on Iggy, Vanek and Stastny is still open. I am willing to make a wager, say two tickets to Opening Night that the CBJ do not sign any of the three this summer. If any sign, I buy. If none sign, you buy.

lol, oh please. Almost zero chance with Iginla. I doubt we'll try for Vanek and Stastny could end up back with the Avs. The odds are way over 50/50 of you being right (more like 90%). You would have to raise your ante by a ton for me to remotely consider that bet.
 

EspenK

Registered User
Sep 25, 2011
15,842
4,446
Props for the courage of your convictions.

I sincerely doubt the Jackets sign Ryan, Iginla or Vanek.

Me too. Ryan might be a possibility

They might take a run at Ollie Jokinen, but I doubt that too.

Here's where the roster space comes from:

Comeau gone
Nikitin gone
Tropp gone
Frattin gone
Skille gone
Atkinson gone

Nikitin has to be replaced with a D-no gain,Atkinson isn't going away for nothing-no gain; we still need a million dollar man (DSL-no pics of Lee Majors please) -so no gain from one of 4th liners you listed. As for the others they are surplus now and one of them could be surplus then. What you are ignoring is the possibility that one or two of the prospects will need a space-hopefully. We have 12 guys (or their replacements) pretty well certain for 2015. carrying a further declining Umberger at 4.6 per makes no sense.

My offer to bet on Iggy, Vanek and Stastny is still open. I am willing to make a wager, say two tickets to Opening Night that the CBJ do not sign any of the three this summer. If any sign, I buy. If none sign, you buy.

Green seats? :laugh:

BTW- I've been watching Montreal closely. Vanek is not what I think the Jackets need. He is slow, and doesn't create opportunities. He can score by parking himself near the net and cleaning up loose pucks. He plays no defense at all. He also seems to disengage often.

He's a proven 30 garbage goal scorer and that's about all.

Uh, not that a 30 goal scorer wouldn't be useful by itself, you conveniently neglected his 30+ assists per year.

I think I win this round. :laugh:
 
Nov 13, 2006
11,558
1,437
Ohio
I think I win this round. :laugh:

Bet- Lower bowl between goal lines. Do you take the bet?

You lose this round unless one your listed dream players sign with CBJ. Somehow you only think offensive stats count. You and apparently the entire Edmonton front office. Lots of pretty offensive numbers and way way more talent than Vanek and....lottery again.
 

Nordique

Add smoked meat, and we have a deal.
Aug 11, 2005
9,138
265
Ohio
Bet- Lower bowl between goal lines. Do you take the bet?

You lose this round unless one your listed dream players sign with CBJ. Somehow you only think offensive stats count. You and apparently the entire Edmonton front office. Lots of pretty offensive numbers and way way more talent than Vanek and....lottery again.

It should be an offer, not a signing. :) I've taken worse bets, though I doubt I was sober.
 
Nov 13, 2006
11,558
1,437
Ohio
It should be an offer, not a signing. :) I've taken worse bets, though I doubt I was sober.

Unfortunately, there really is no way to validate an offer.

Besides, this thread is one of many that prove we as fans don't care.

Paying players millions not to play? It's not our money. Who cares, right Espen?

Points are all that matter, not the 200 foot game. That's why this thread is full of so and so is an x point player. Who cares that he doesn't play defense and can't create space for himself?

Making an offer and not getting the player? Who cares- you didn't bring home the prize.

I bet I can go on the main boards and get lots of people to agree that Taylor Hall is way more valuable to his team than Patrice Bergeron. Hall became a ppg player this year!

Look at the pretty points! These aren't the droids you're looking for.
 

Xoggz22

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
7,930
3,474
Columbus, Ohio
I'm not sure we'll see Atkinson here past next season. He's gotta be better than he was this year thats for sure.

I'm not convinced Atkinson is here even next year. I'm not wishing him gone but he is a valuable chip and I'm just not convinced he's a long term core player.
 

EspenK

Registered User
Sep 25, 2011
15,842
4,446
Bet- Lower bowl between goal lines. Do you take the bet?

No. First off its a suckers bet and secondly I'm over a thousand miles away.

You lose this round unless one your listed dream players sign with CBJ. Somehow you only think offensive stats count. You and apparently the entire Edmonton front office. Lots of pretty offensive numbers and way way more talent than Vanek and....lottery again.

No I appreciate the D too, but 70 points give or take make up for a lot of D flubs. BTW, when was Umbie last nominated for the Selke?

Plus I don't consider signing one of my dream guys to be a prerequisite for dumping Umberger. It would add to the team but its addition by subtraction in my mind if nothing else happens but the buyout.
 

EspenK

Registered User
Sep 25, 2011
15,842
4,446
I'm not convinced Atkinson is here even next year. I'm not wishing him gone but he is a valuable chip and I'm just not convinced he's a long term core player.

I think your feelings have a lot of merit.
 
Nov 13, 2006
11,558
1,437
Ohio
Plus I don't consider signing one of my dream guys to be a prerequisite for dumping Umberger. It would add to the team but its addition by subtraction in my mind if nothing else happens but the buyout.

I have stated many times I don't give a damn whether they keep Umberger or not. I'm saying the team isn't going to pay him not to play. Do I think he's overpaid? of course. Do I think there are better players playing for less money? of course. Do I think he can still play in the NHL? yes, he's an overpaid 3rd liner. Do I think he will be bought out? No. Why? It affects the bottom line in a big way. How big? To make up the difference the team has to sell 700 more average priced season tickets every year for 6 years.


If you think I'm claiming Umberger is a great player or a Selke calibre player, you totally misunderstand my points.

1. The Jackets are losing a lot of money. Buying Umberger out deepens the losses by 30%.

2. Separately, points alone do not determine a player's value to a team. Hell Jeff Carter is a multiple 40 goal scorer as is Rick Nash. Those two should have driven that point home, yet Vanek isn't in Carter or Rick Nash's neighborhood when it comes to talent or impact on a game.
 

EspenK

Registered User
Sep 25, 2011
15,842
4,446
I have stated many times I don't give a damn whether they keep Umberger or not. I'm saying the team isn't going to pay him not to play. Do I think he's overpaid? of course. Do I think there are better players playing for less money? of course. Do I think he can still play in the NHL? yes, he's an overpaid 3rd liner. Do I think he will be bought out? No. Why? It affects the bottom line in a big way. How big? To make up the difference the team has to sell 700 more average priced season tickets every year for 6 years.


If you think I'm claiming Umberger is a great player or a Selke calibre player, you totally misunderstand my points.

1. The Jackets are losing a lot of money. Buying Umberger out deepens the losses by 30%.

2. Separately, points alone do not determine a player's value to a team. Hell Jeff Carter is a multiple 40 goal scorer as is Rick Nash. Those two should have driven that point home, yet Vanek isn't in Carter or Rick Nash's neighborhood when it comes to talent or impact on a game.

Just to keep this inane debate going Vanek had a 68 pt season, Nash didn't. Given a choice between the two I think a majority of GM's would take Vanek over Nash. I know I would. And you probably wouldn't.

Vanek is as multiple a 40 goal scorer as is Nash-2 x's for each.


And I'm with Blah- how the heck did you come up with a 30% increase in losses. And a better team will more than sell an additional 700 season tickets per year plus bring in many more partials and walk-ups.

I think your argument that $ will be the key determinant in JD/JK's decision is way off base. Will it be A factor? Probably. Will it be the key? Not in my mind.

Assuming Umberger's place on the roster is taken by a 4th line guy making a million - 1.5 mill for each of the next six years the cost will be $9 million plus the 9 or so we pay Umbie for a total of about $18 mill . If we keep Umbie for 3 the cost is 13.8 plus three years at 1.5 for his spot or a total of 18.3 for that roster spot. I see it as a breakeven over 6 years but freeing up a roster space earlier than would otherwise be available. $ are not the main issue.
 

SuperGenius

For Duty & Humanity!
Mar 18, 2008
4,639
199
How exactly would the Jackets lose an additional 30%? How would the Jackets lose anything additional?

I assume he gets this from the idea that the CBJ would not only be paying the buyout, but also paying a player to replace him. How that comes to a specific percentage I have no idea.

I also think there's a lot being presented as fact when it comes to CBJ finances. I'd like to see some math to back up these assertions...perhaps in a more appropriate thread, but I'd still like to see it.
 
Nov 13, 2006
11,558
1,437
Ohio
How exactly would the Jackets lose an additional 30%? How would the Jackets lose anything additional?

According to Forbes, the team lost $5 million this past season. Paying $1.5 million to someone who doesn't play increases player expenses by $1.5 million, which is 30% of their loss.
 

SuperGenius

For Duty & Humanity!
Mar 18, 2008
4,639
199
According to Forbes, the team lost $5 million this past season. Paying $1.5 million to someone who doesn't play increases player expenses by $1.5 million, which is 30% of their loss.

Going to need a link. I do not think Forbes has released any information on the 2013-14 season. It seems way too early for that. If you were looking at 2012-13, then you misread. CBJ *made* 4.9 million last season.

http://www.forbes.com/nhl-valuations/list/
 

Xoggz22

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
7,930
3,474
Columbus, Ohio
How exactly would the Jackets lose an additional 30%? How would the Jackets lose anything additional?

I would assume it would be based on the fact if Umberger was bought out and the CBJ went and spent his cap space on another player. Bringing in a "better" player at the "same" price ($4.5MM or so) would equate to a deeper financial impact.

If he is replaced with a player at $1.5MM or less for the next few years the impact is break even (given no other changes). Again, I'm guess his meaning on this. It's the way I see it. I separate Cap from Salary which I'm sure the CBJ will do as well and evaluate what makes sense. It might make sense depending in their plan. It it's my money, I move him in a trade and retain as little as possible. Tough to do but that, to me, is the best option. He would also have to waive his NTC.
 

Nordique

Add smoked meat, and we have a deal.
Aug 11, 2005
9,138
265
Ohio
I have stated many times I don't give a damn whether they keep Umberger or not. I'm saying the team isn't going to pay him not to play. Do I think he's overpaid? of course. Do I think there are better players playing for less money? of course. Do I think he can still play in the NHL? yes, he's an overpaid 3rd liner. Do I think he will be bought out? No. Why? It affects the bottom line in a big way. How big? To make up the difference the team has to sell 700 more average priced season tickets every year for 6 years.


If you think I'm claiming Umberger is a great player or a Selke calibre player, you totally misunderstand my points.

1. The Jackets are losing a lot of money. Buying Umberger out deepens the losses by 30%.

2. Separately, points alone do not determine a player's value to a team. Hell Jeff Carter is a multiple 40 goal scorer as is Rick Nash. Those two should have driven that point home, yet Vanek isn't in Carter or Rick Nash's neighborhood when it comes to talent or impact on a game.

This is the way I see it. To make a bold financial move to replace Umberger would be the ownership group essentially saying "we are all in", and I don't think we are at that level yet as an organization. He'll be back is my guess, and I hope he gets back to his earlier form.
 

blahblah

Registered User
Nov 24, 2005
21,327
972
I would assume it would be based on the fact if Umberger was bought out and the CBJ went and spent his cap space on another player. Bringing in a "better" player at the "same" price ($4.5MM or so) would equate to a deeper financial impact.

That is always an assumption and not a good one.

Personally I think if they are looking to move him they'll try to trade and retain salary if they have to. Of course they have that pesky no-trade to work with, although it looks like it's a modified version now.
 
Nov 13, 2006
11,558
1,437
Ohio
Going to need a link. I do not think Forbes has released any information on the 2013-14 season. It seems way too early for that. If you were looking at 2012-13, then you misread. CBJ *made* 4.9 million last season.

http://www.forbes.com/nhl-valuations/list/

I did misread Forbes 2012-13

I used Forbes as an easy source for this. Since the 2005 lockout, team profit and loss has been an ongoing discussion on the BOHB, Tom Benjamin's blog, Mirtle's old blog and several others often driven by fugu, kdb209 and gsc2k2 among others.

We have all learned a lot about the costs to own and manage a team during this time. Lots of closely held data on costs and revenues have been gathered during these discussions from court filings, public record and various additional credible sources. To boil it down, in a normal 82 game season it costs $30-35 million above players actual payroll to operate an NHL franchise. If a team has a player payroll of $55 million, then break even becomes $85-90 million.

In 2012-13, the lockout shortened season greatly benefited the Blue Jackets. Since the team is no longer responsible for arena management and player payroll was reduced by some 40%, it created a short term favorable situation. Break even dropped from ~$85-90 million to ~$65-70 million. Revenues were inflated a bit because in many sponsorship and media contracts especially national and league-wide contracts a full year's revenues were realized. The settle up on these will come later.

If there is interest in a deep analysis, I will be happy to start a thread to allow anyone interested to participate in the discussion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad