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

[Nordique]

I don't see this team spending the money to pay Umberger not to play, just to go out and pay someone else to fill the spot, we are not the Flyer's. What I could see is the FO asking Umberger during his exit interview for a list of teams he would be willing to play for in a trade. This FO has no ties to him and has allowed him to be scratched multiple times, with the change in his NTC Jarmo could trade him at the draft for whatever he could get.

I agree, its not like he's Gomez bad. He had a few bad stretches this season (also leads the team PP goals), but unless you can move him in a beneficial trade, you have to bring him back.

 

[blahblah]

I agree, its not like he's Gomez bad. He had a few bad stretches this season (also leads the team PP goals), but unless you can move him in a beneficial trade, you have to bring him back.

There are no absolutes. In this case only speculation and opinions. I've given some examples of what some of the conversations might be.

I don't see an absolute reason why he couldn't be bought out. Not financially and I don't see where we would need to fill the hole he left. One could argue he isn't filling the role with the team that's he's supposed to be; thus is a liability. One could argue he's not filling the role he was supposed to fill when he signed that contract.

We may have opinions on why we might want him to stay or leave - but this isn't a black and white topic.

 

[TaketheCannoli]

Okay, here's a new theory as to why this asinine mishegaas somehow continues to be a thing.

Premises:

• We have compliance buyouts. But they're a "use 'em or lose 'em" asset.
• We do not like to lose assets "for nothing". It is axiomatic that this is bad. (How bad varies according to the asset.)
• Of all the players on the roster, if you absolutely had to identify someone overpaid by a contract signed pre-lockout and thus able to be bought out, the strongest candidate would be Umberger.

Therefore:

• OMG MUST BUY OUT UMBERGER

I'd put that particular strawman on the same level as last year's "we absolutely have to trade Johansen before he inevitably busts". So if this actually reflects legit opinions and motivations of anyone here... we've got problems, folks.

There is some truth to your second bullet and these are valuable assets. I think a more likely scenarion might be a trade with a team that has already used their compliance buyouts, or needs more than two of them. Perhaps a low value CBJ player/prospect for buy out candidate plus a 1st or 2nd round pick.

This makes more sense to me than using a compliance buy out for a serviceable 3rd line player who provides secondary scoring and can play up in the lineup as needed.

 

[EspenK]

There is some truth to your second bullet and these are valuable assets. I think a more likely scenarion might be a trade with a team that has already used their compliance buyouts, or needs more than two of them. Perhaps a low value CBJ player/prospect for buy out candidate plus a 1st or 2nd round pick.

This makes more sense to me than using a compliance buy out for a serviceable 3rd line player who provides secondary scoring and can play up in the lineup as needed.

So if I read this right we could trade Boll or Letestu for Brad Richards and the Rangers 1st or 2nd? I'd go for that.

 

[TaketheCannoli]

So if I read this right we could trade Boll or Letestu for Brad Richards and the Rangers 1st or 2nd? I'd go for that.

No more like Seth Ambroz for a compliance buyout candidate plus a 1st or 2nd.

 

[Viqsi]

http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_stat...+RW&f7=60-&c=0+1+3+5+4+6+7+17+18+19+20#snip=f

Umberger ranked 171st (1.39 pts/60 min) among NHL forwards who played 60 games in ES 5 vs. 5 production this season. That's with a lot of first line minutes with Foligno and Johansen. Foligno ranked 52nd (2.10) and Johansen ranked 22nd (2.38). That's an amazing differential given the amount of shared minutes.

Without first line opportunities, Umberger would have been dead last among Jackets forwards (50 GP min.)-and by a significant margin:

http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_stat...+RW&f5=CBJ&f7=50-&c=0+1+3+5+4+6+7+17+18+19+20

His PP stats were an obvious statistical outlier and are extraordinarily unlikely to repeat.

HINT: Money notwithstanding, the even strength production of RJ Umberger could be easily replaced by any forward on the CBJ roster who played 54 or more games this past season if he were given the same opportunities. His PP luck this past season is irrelevant to a serious discussion.

The notion that if Umberger's cap space could not be applied toward a better option is patently absurd.

I skimmed your post looking for names and didn't see any. Therefore this is almost certainly more pointless Umby-bashing.

I insist upon names or else you're not making a coherent argument. It doesn't matter what Umby's doing - it's what his hypothetical replacement would do, and for how much.

 

[EspenK]

I wonder who voted for Umbie in the poll? At least you are going to go down swingin'.

 

[Viqsi]

I wonder who voted for Umbie in the poll? At least you are going to go down swingin'.

To be fair, he had one of the better chances to do so (dat pass by Letestu); he just got stymied by Fleury.

Of course, the same could also be said for Calvert's chance; it's just that in that case the Pens D was sleeping on the job and so Cal got a second try.

 

[Fro]

No more like Seth Ambroz for a compliance buyout candidate plus a 1st or 2nd.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! not baby nash

 

[Viqsi]

There is some truth to your second bullet and these are valuable assets. I think a more likely scenarion might be a trade with a team that has already used their compliance buyouts, or needs more than two of them. Perhaps a low value CBJ player/prospect for buy out candidate plus a 1st or 2nd round pick.

This makes more sense to me than using a compliance buy out for a serviceable 3rd line player who provides secondary scoring and can play up in the lineup as needed.

I'm not 100% certain, but I'm pretty sure you can't compliance buyout someone you just traded for. I seem to recall certain teams really badly wanting to do that, either to take advantage of actual cash revenues, or be able to re-sign someone with a bad contract (see: Lecavalier), and the League shut it down.

Frankly, I think it's a lot more reasonable to just accept that the "compliance buyouts" are a special one-time thing for other teams that we just don't need.

 

[DougKnowsBest]

He's a 20 goal scorer with potential for more and leadership thrown in. Plus he fits with this team. Keep him. You will get ripped off in a trade and buying him out is just throwing money out the window.

this and if we did part ways with him we would then be turning around and looking for a player to fill the same roll as umberger for a 1million dollars less a year being the only difference


he gets another year then look at it again when there is only 2 years left on the deal

 

[Viqsi]

this and if we did part ways with him we would then be turning around and looking for a player to fill the same roll as umberger for a 1million dollars less a year being the only difference


he gets another year then look at it again when there is only 2 years left on the deal

I dunno. We have guys who can fill the role per se. My concern is that with the market being in the state it is, we'd be looking for someone who we can pay less to do the same thing and won't get it. Or we'll go for an upgrade, and get a slight upgrade, but we'll be paying $6-7m/year for it and thus have lost even more cap space to overpayment.

Hypothetically, Umby is replaceable. In practice, there's no replacements available - at least, none that we wouldn't promptly have to overpay even more thanks to market demand.

 

[Hockeyplayer99]

Since the Rangers and Jackets make lots of trades and you say Umberger is soft, he would be a perfect fit for the Rangers. Would Umberger for Mcdonough do it for you or should the Rangers add some more pieces. We can add the first round pick this year to since we don't like those anyway.

 

[EspenK]

Since the Rangers and Jackets make lots of trades and you say Umberger is soft, he would be a perfect fit for the Rangers. Would Umberger for Mcdonough do it for you or should the Rangers add some more pieces. We can add the first round pick this year to since we don't like those anyway.

You're kidding right? No way that deal ever happens and if it did we would be the ones throwing in the extras, like Umbie for starters.

 

[Viqsi]

Since the Rangers and Jackets make lots of trades and you say Umberger is soft, he would be a perfect fit for the Rangers. Would Umberger for Mcdonough do it for you or should the Rangers add some more pieces. We can add the first round pick this year to since we don't like those anyway.

Finally, someone who appreciates Umby's value!

Yeah, not gonna happen. He's not Gomez 2.0 in that regard either.

 

[Hockeyplayer99]

We'll it was a joke. But who knows with sather. We are looking for small or large players but they have to be soft.

 

[CarolinaBlueJacket]

This is a young team. They need guys like Umberger right now. Yes he might be overpaid but there is nothing they can do about that now. Work with him and let him know that they expect him to be a leader on this team. I think he will respond well.

 

[Doug19]

He hasn't responded yet, and he only has a few playoff games to do so. If he sucks in the playoffs he's as good as gone. I don't think it's a coincidence that his ice time has been cut big time and he has been scratched.

 

[EDM]

Having watched Callahan during Tampa's playoff run, I can understand why they Jackets may want a Callahan on the line with Boone and Joey. And bringing Callahan in means sending RJ out.

 

[Viqsi]

He hasn't responded yet, and he only has a few playoff games to do so. If he sucks in the playoffs he's as good as gone. I don't think it's a coincidence that his ice time has been cut big time and he has been scratched.

This is kind of an awkward thing to respond to, because there's a mistaken presumption at the core of the statement. Is it a coincidence? Of course not; it's a planned action by Richards, who's trying to motivate Umberger to do better because he (and we) know he has done better and so can do better. However, does that imply anything at all w/r/t actions that may or may not be made by Kekalainen? Not at all.

The sorts of GMs that tell their coaches who they should be playing and who they should be scratching are guys like Doug MacLean. I would be extremely hesitant to characterize JK thusly on so little evidence.

* * *​

Having watched Callahan during Tampa's playoff run, I can understand why they Jackets may want a Callahan on the line with Boone and Joey. And bringing Callahan in means sending RJ out.

I confess I do not see how the one necessarily follows the other. Umberger's contract does not prevent us from signing Callahan.

That said, I'd much rather we go after someone like Jagr, from whom I suspect we would get much more for much less. (Also, see previous statements by myself re: Callahan would be vastly more overpaid than Umby.)

 

[Cyclones Rock]

He hasn't responded yet, and he only has a few playoff games to do so. If he sucks in the playoffs he's as good as gone. I don't think it's a coincidence that his ice time has been cut big time and he has been scratched.

Like any management who has a player who isn't producing and is signed to a big deal, the Jackets decided to give RJU every opportunity to make it work. He didn't and the team scratched him during many of the important stretch games. Umberger just doesn't have it. Had he received the proper slotting he deserved this season-3rd line-he would have been lucky to have scored 13-15 goals even with the statistical outlier PP production. He brings precious little to the table.

His flukish PP performance this season and the small samples of adequate playoff production from five and six years ago aren't going to move management's meter on him. As you said, if he doesn't do something special in this playoff season, he's gone. I think he's gone even if he does produce adequately during this post season.

He'll be very lucky to get more than a two year deal once he's amnestied. Most likely he'll get a one year deal for less than $2 million.

 

[EDM]

I guess the correlation between Umbie and Callahan is that the money they save by buying out Umbie could be used for Callahan. Callahan seems very smart and tough(although like the rest of Bolts has not done much against Montreal). I could see him playing off of Joey and Boone very well and being willing to take on anybody who cheap shots Joey. Umbie? Good guy. But the train seems to have left the station.

 

[EDM]

By teh way, Viqsi, I agree Callahan would be more overpaid that RJ. But as noted by Lee previously, there seems to be something going on in regard to Callahan and JD that will come to fruition in the off season. Callahan does play "CBJ style" hockey.

 

[Sore Loser]

Ryan Callahan is a similar player to RJ Umberger, just a little bit younger. Both came into the league as two-way forwards with some scoring upside, and both guys at their peak are second line forwards. Buying out RJ Umberger to get Ryan Callahan is just robbing Peter to pay Paul ... I think Callahan is just a younger version of a similar player.

24 year old Umberger: 13 goals, 37 assists, even rating.
24 year old Callahan: 17 goals, 19 assists, +1 rating.

If we're bringing in Callahan, my hope is that it would be for about what we're paying Dubinsky. Anything else is vast overpayment, and in 4 years everyone on this board will be saying the same thing. Even when you factor in the shot blocking and other intangibles, I just don't see Ryan Callahan being worth $30+ million.

 

[EDM]

SL, I don't disagree.