Johansen2Foligno
CBJ Realest
- Jan 2, 2015
- 9,253
- 4,174
Confirmed with Link: Jenner signs 2 year extension
- Thread starter The Jones Zone
- Start date
Its called perennial losers, most are sick of it. Boone is part of the core, why would you not lock him up long term? Good management know who their core is going to be and can recognize when they have the talent. All this will do is cost us more in 2 years
CBJWerenski8
Formerly CBJWennberg10 (RIP Kivi)
- Jun 13, 2009
- 42,370
- 24,285
Because this is already his best offensive season, who knows if he can replicate it? this is his first season without an injury (so far, knock on wood). And his injury last year was pretty damn serious (back injury). It's a smart move, IMO.
But I agree they're not going short on Jones
But Korpi's cap hit comparable to (even slightly less than C-Mac) cap hit. I took that as a wash.
You are right, I missed Rychel (someone will have to take Bourque's place on the roster, and with no other moves, presumably Rychel). Even if it is not him, someone else will be with CBJ at comparable cap hit ($863K), so you are absolutely correct on that one. If CBJ does not buyout or trade someone, they will have $5.5-5.6M, not $6.4, to play with in dealing with Jones, Karlson and Prout's spot (Prout or someone else). That makes significantly tighter to get a term deal on Jones - it was very tight already.
Tyutin buyout would save $3M on cap hit and in cash (without factoring in his replacement- a Tyutin trade that retains 30% (without adding contracts) would accomplish about the same thing. If you replace Tyutin with a player either on an ELC or with a cap hit comparable to ELC, then the net savings would be around $2M on the cap - either way that like frees enough cap space to make the Jones term deal possible.
Boll buyout would net $1.134K in cap savings next year (the cap hit would be $566K, but that hit also follows into the following year even though Boll not on the roster). Probably not enough to make a difference on the Jones contract front, certainly not by itself, as CBJ would have to bring in someone to take his place on the roster, at a minimum of $700K on ELC, so the net cap savings would only be $400K. CBJ would save $556K in actual cash paid to Boll under the contract, but the salary paid to the replacement roster player next year would exceed the actual cash savings. Thus I don't see a Boll buyout happening unless needed to close a $400K difference between CBJ and Jones on AAV on a term contract.
Campbell - similar numbers to Boll. Cap hit at $1.5M, with one year remaining. If bought out, cap hit is $500K each year for 2 years, but we have to replace him with another player whose hit will approach the gross cap savings. Maybe $300K in cap space created in year 1, but additional $500K cap hit for year 2 in which there would be NO HIT if we simply let him ride out his contract. Trade with no contract coming back would be better, but a market? I'd take a 7th rounder...
Hartnell - beaten this one to death. It would NOT be a buyout. A trade possible if needed, even with some retention would be better than taking on another bad contract, because at least we would have the roster spot available. Who CBJ gets in the draft will determine strategy here.
I agree on Jones. That is also why bridge on Boone - they don't currently have enough cap space to do a term on both, may not have enough cap space yet to do a term on Jones alone, and may not have enough chess moves available to do a term for both even later this summer. And building from the back end out, makes sense to lock up Jones long-term before Boone. Jones has made a HUGE difference in the back end. Not dissing Boone, he is having a great year, and he has additional upside. But Jones' upside off the chart from what we've seen, at a position we desperately needed help. Not only is Jones stellar, but it moved other D into the right slots. JJ has been much better until injury; Murray making big steps; Savard not back long enough, but seems solid with JJ at 2nd pairing; Golo looked fine in 3rd pairing (sometimes 2nd); Tyutin/Prout even look a bit better. Jones effect is not just his own play. He makes those on the ice with him better, and maybe more importantly makes others on the roster who are not on the ice with him better as well. When have we ever said that?
EspenK
Registered User
- Sep 25, 2011
- 15,626
- 4,190
I thought I posted something about this earlier but I can't find it. Short of buying out people or trading away bad contracts they have 4 mill left to sign Jones. Not going more than 2 years for that. Assumes a 3% increase in the cap.
I think you did also. The firming up of the number on Boone's bridge clarifies the picture even further for me. I think there is $5.5 left on the table for Jones' and Karlson's combined cap hit next year (after factoring in Rychel being in Columbus "in place" of Bourque and all else staying the same, including the cap at $71.4M). There just won't be enough available to term Jones without another move(s). Jones might agree to a salary in the first 2 years that would fit, but the higher salary in later years will take the AAV beyond what CBJ can spend after factoring in Karlson. Even if they don't keep Karlson, they would still have to fill a roster spot with someone for at least $700K, so $4.8M AAV would be max available for Jones if CBJ dumped Karlson and filled it with a low end ELC. I don't see dumping Karlson, and even if they did, I don't see Jones accepting term contract with AAV of $4.8M (probably not way off, but after Matta's contract, not enough by a decent margin).
CBJ goalie
Registered User
Best move of the day, and there were a lot of moves.
Jenner is one of those players any team would love to have. And we've got him.
Jenner is one of those players any team would love to have. And we've got him.
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
Looks about right to me.
Heh. My presumption all along has been that we don't need to go for cap space, but that it would be nice because it enables the option of locking in Jones. That presumed getting both Murray and Jenner at $3m/year bridges... and they're both just slightly under that.
Feeling a little better now.
Good signing. I like that they didn't go long term with Boone, because I don't see him getting a huge pay day in two years anyways. Might as well string together a few short rfa deals and keep the injury risk low.
Jones on the other hand, that $ could kill us in a couple years if we bridge him.
Jones on the other hand, that $ could kill us in a couple years if we bridge him.
vertigo1061
Registered User
- Jan 10, 2016
- 308
- 1
It's a risk signing these bridge deals if they have monster years leading up to it, but financially it makes sense. It's low risk for the immediate future and you aren't putting yourself into the position of having created the bad contracts yourself (Clarkson). I think 95% of the people out there believe Jenner is a guy we want long term and is likely our next captain. This is a good deal for him, too, to get a bump in $$$ and prove he's worth even more in two years.
Cyclones Rock
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2008
- 10,601
- 6,526
Jenner was contracted appropriately. He isn't worthy of a 6 year commitment.
This team has far too many long term deals in place now. The FO should bridge Jones as well. No reason to go long with him. He's got 4 more years after this till he goes UFA. If he really steps it up next season, then he can be signed early the next season to a long term deal at a reasonable salary.
A team which is bumping up against the cap and has a ton of unmoveable deals needs to retain some flexibility. The front office which replaces this one will need it.
This team has far too many long term deals in place now. The FO should bridge Jones as well. No reason to go long with him. He's got 4 more years after this till he goes UFA. If he really steps it up next season, then he can be signed early the next season to a long term deal at a reasonable salary.
A team which is bumping up against the cap and has a ton of unmoveable deals needs to retain some flexibility. The front office which replaces this one will need it.
Johansen2Foligno
CBJ Realest
- Jan 2, 2015
- 9,253
- 4,174
At most he'll be worth what Foligno is making on his current contract. The real worry of mine is that they will bridge Jones and he will command a Subban-type of contract once that is up.
Anyone who reads these boards know more than the guy who wrote the article. The answers to his questions are obvious.
Doggy
Registered User
- Oct 11, 2011
- 3,307
- 2,342
The cap is a wash but the salaries are not. Don't get me wrong...don't see how the team puts Korpi back down in the AHL after this season but the question of money could come up. C-Mac has a one way deal that pays him 800K regardless of where he is. Korpi has a two way deal that pays him almost 800K in the NHL but just 70K in the AHL.
Money has to be playing some factor. Otherwise Boll should have been earning his 1.7 Million in Cleveland while Andy would have been making 700K skating alongside Rychs in Columbus.
Light the Lamp
Registered User
- Apr 21, 2015
- 204
- 7
Young players need to play. Having Joonas sitting on the bench will not help his development. You can keep CMac on the roster as the backup and let Joonas play in Clev. When there are scheduled rest days for Bob, you can have Joonas called up to play and then send him back the next day. Based on the history of goalie injuries w CBJ, more than two goalies are needed.
Hipster Letestu
Registered User
If that's the case that would mean he's putting up Subban-type numbers. Not sure how that would be a problem.
CBJfan4evr
Registered User
Because it throws away the savings you'd get from an Erik Karlsson / Roman Josi kind of deal. Not a bad situation, I agree, but its a waste.
The Jones Zone
Registered User
Cowumbus
Registered User
If Jenner has another year similar to this he's gonna get a big payday. Never did I think Jens could be a 30 goal scorer but I think he could do it next year. Same with Saader and Cam if everything goes right
