Offseason Amnesty buyout for Umberger?

[major major]

In all fairness, he probably isn't. Also, your claim just piqued my interest, so I crunched the numbers for the heck of it. It's an interesting stat to me and I think it puts player point production into a good context.

There is a site (which I can't recall) which breaks down scoring per 60 minutes of play. Gotta find it for future reference.

I was also looking for that. Behind The Net has a p/60 stat, but when I looked it up it had RJ tied with Erik Cole and Ilya Kovalchuk at 1.13 p/60. That doesn't seem right, I don't think Kovy can be that low.

 

[Cyclones Rock]

I was also looking for that. Behind The Net has a p/60 stat, but when I looked it up it had RJ tied with Erik Cole and Ilya Kovalchuk at 1.13 p/60. That doesn't seem right, I don't think Kovy can be that low.

Just for anyone who might be interested, I've linked that site up:

http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_stat..._s&f2=5v5&f5=CBJ&f7=20-&c=0+1+3+5+17+18+19+20

 

[JacketFanInFL]

The reason he hasn't had as high of a point total a recent years is that we are not mathematically eliminated from the playoffs. This is usually when he pads his stats.

He is likely the last of the country clubbers on the roster.

Im not questioning his drive, but I wish he had more speed or better hands or could just set up in front of the net. He doesn't really have a huge strength. Just mediocre at everything.

 

[JackieMoon]

Not correct, sir.

Umberger has an average of 14:41 minutes of Even Strength Ice Time per game (42 games) and has 11 even strength points.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/player.htm?id=8469469&view=splits

This equates to 1.08 points per 60 minutes of ESIT.

Derek MacKenzie has an average of 8:54 minutes of ESIT/game (37 games) and has generated 7 points in this time.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/player.htm?id=8468001&view=splits

This equates to 1.28 points per 60 minutes of ESIT. MacKenzie is your typical CBJ 4rth liner.

RJU is producing even strength points at rate of 16% less than Derek MacKenzie

This.

Chant it with me people. Buyout! Buyout!

People keep on saying that the Blue Jackets aren't up against the cap. That isn't relevant as it relates to the Jackets. We all know the Jackets lose money hand over fist. They can't and shouldn't spend up to the cap ceiling. Also don't forget that the cap limit will be coming down. Anyone really think that in his current incarnation that RJ can really last five more seasons in the NHL? The Jackets will have dead money attached to the Umberger contract; it's a certainty. With it being only a matter of when why not do it now? The money and cap space from Umberger's contract could be better used on two 30-40 point wingers as opposed to one. It makes more business sense and more sense on the ice. If you're a GM you're looking to purchase points. Do you want 60-80 points at the cost of 4.6 million or should you go ahead and settle for the 30-40 at 4.6 per year. And just because there are other bad contracts out there in the NHL is a ridiculous argument to keep Umberger. Just because there are other train wreck contracts out there doesn't make RJ's any less of a rubbernecker or any less illogical.

Also, Wiz hasn't been unproductive. He's been injured, there's a world of difference. Wiz is known to be a good teammate and plays with an edge, the Jackets need that. And with each passing off season, when the madness that is NHL free agency begins Wiz's contract will look more and more palatable. The price for top four NHL defensemen will only continue to sky rocket. I also see no compelling reason to buyout Wisniewski in a NHL world where Bouwmeester's contract can be moved for a pretty decent return. Unlike Umberger, James can still play and has trade value. Buyout? No thank you.

 

[major major]

This.

Chant it with me people. Buyout! Buyout!

People keep on saying that the Blue Jackets aren't up against the cap. That isn't relevant as it relates to the Jackets. We all know the Jackets lose money hand over fist. They can't and shouldn't spend up to the cap ceiling. Also don't forget that the cap limit will be coming down. Anyone really think that in his current incarnation that RJ can really last five more seasons in the NHL? The Jackets will have dead money attached to the Umberger contract; it's a certainty. With it being only a matter of when why not do it now? The money and cap space from Umberger's contract could be better used on two 30-40 point wingers as opposed to one. It makes more business sense and more sense on the ice. If you're a GM you're looking to purchase points. Do you want 60-80 points at the cost of 4.6 million or should you go ahead and settle for the 30-40 at 4.6 per year. And just because there are other bad contracts out there in the NHL is a ridiculous argument to keep Umberger. Just because there are other train wreck contracts out there doesn't make RJ's any less of a rubbernecker or any less illogical.

You're all over the place here. So what you're saying is that the Jackets aren't going to be a cap team, but we should use RJ's cap space for other players? And that we can buy him out and get two 30-40 pt wingers with the leftover $? You do realize that a buyout means that you pay Umberger 2/3 of the $, meaning there would only be $1.5 million per leftover?

To my mind there are only two viable arguments in favor of a buyout, both of which might be false:
1) Ownership wants a player payroll higher than the cap.
2) Umberger is so bad, he isn't worth having on the roster even for $1.5 million per, and we should take that $1.5 and spend it on someone else.

I'll believe (1) when I hear it from ownership. And I'm slowly coming to think that (2) might be the new reality, but I'd give him another year to see if he can turn it around.

 

[Viqsi]

 

[Cash for Nash]

lol....I knew this was coming!

 

[Viqsi]

lol....I knew this was coming!

Didn't want to disappoint.

 

[blahblah]

Didn't want to disappoint.

Glad to know he can still score big goals in big games.

 

[pete goegan]

Didn't want to disappoint.

The subtlety is what makes it, Viq!

 

[Fro]

OMG 1 goal erases ALLLLLLLLLLLL the turnovers...he is amazing ZOMGELEVENTYBBQWTF!!!11!!!!111!!!!

sigh

 

[Viqsi]

OMG 1 goal erases ALLLLLLLLLLLL the turnovers...he is amazing ZOMGELEVENTYBBQWTF!!!11!!!!111!!!!

sigh

I try to avoid mirroring the arguments of his detractors like that, personally. It's kind of disingenuous.

Does one extremely timely goal make him suddenly worth his contract? Sadly, no. (Give it at least two or three. ) But it does help to refute accusations of worthlessness.

Seriously, there's already at least one person in the GDT insisting (paraphrased) "THIS CHANGES NOTHING, YOU HEAR? NOTHING! UMGARBAGE IS STILL WORTHLESS AND STILL SUCKS!" This before anyone said anything at all beyond admiration for the goal.

That's the mentality that has to be exorcised.

 

[ThisIsMyAlibi]

All the players know is that X amount of people show up and get X excited/loud. Spewing whatever on a message board doesn't affect what goes on on the ice, so why get so bent out of shape about it?

 

[Dr. Fire]

I am just hoping that since we are in a play-off race that the play-off Umby is starting to show up.

 

[grindline]

I noticed in the excellent 30 Thoughts column on the CBC website that rumours of Edmonton mpving Ryan Nugent-Hopkins and are starting. If we retained some salary on Umby could that be part of a package to swap Umby for a top 6 forward?

 

[major major]

I noticed in the excellent 30 Thoughts column on the CBC website that rumours of Edmonton mpving Ryan Nugent-Hopkins and are starting. If we retained some salary on Umby could that be part of a package to swap Umby for a top 6 forward?

I didn't find that Friedman mentioned that, I just read Yakupov, though I think they'll be listening closely to others for both. Umberger could be a minor portion of the deal- assuming we retain a million plus in salary he would be the kind of player they need to add. First and second year star pro's don't often get traded- but Edmonton has to be bold now, and we have what they need.

I'd be a bit nervous about acquiring either one. Both players would downgrade your two way play given the ice-time they'd take away from other players, and that would be a significant factor if we were to replace one of our centers with Nuge. But he's a great power play player already, and maybe an elite center someday. And Yakupov could score 40 without ever learning to play the game right, his shot is so good.

Edit: Friedman explicitly cites Howson's Nash trade as the "blueprint" for what Edmonton needs to do.

 

[EspenK]

Having traded Moore I think we spent a chip that could have been important in a deal with Edmonton. I don't see them giving up one of their young guns unless they get some substantial help on D and a good two way forward in return.

 

[Arch City Zach]

Having traded Moore I think we spent a chip that could have been important in a deal with Edmonton. I don't see them giving up one of their young guns unless they get some substantial help on D and a good two way forward in return.

David Savard? heheh...

 

[major major]

David Savard? heheh...

What about "substantial help on D" led you to think of David Savard?

I think Edmonton would want something like Tyutin, Dubinsky and two firsts for either Nuge or Yakupov. We might bargain them down from two to one first rounder, considering we have what they want and they must be bold by all accounts.

 

[Viqsi]

What about "substantial help on D" led you to think of David Savard?

I think Edmonton would want something like Tyutin, Dubinsky and two firsts for either Nuge or Yakupov. We might bargain them down from two to one first rounder, considering we have what they want and they must be bold by all accounts.

Honestly, I think we'd get outbid by other teams in a race for one of Edmonton's Big Four forwards. And frankly that doesn't bother me one bit. The blueline depth when it comes to defensive guys is not so great that we can afford to trade top guys IMO.

 

[grindline]

I didn't find that Friedman mentioned that, I just read Yakupov, though I think they'll be listening closely to others for both. Edit: Friedman explicitly cites Howson's Nash trade as the "blueprint" for what Edmonton needs to do.

You are entirely right I mistook it with something else that talked about Yakupov & RN-H.

Following on from that and reading threads on other boards I'm going imagine myself as the new Oilers GM. Which of the following do you have interest in and what would you offer to me?

Nugent-Hopkins
Eberle
Yakupov
Paarjarvi
Gagne

 

[major major]

You are entirely right I mistook it with something else that talked about Yakupov & RN-H.

Following on from that and reading threads on other boards I'm going imagine myself as the new Oilers GM. Which of the following do you have interest in and what would you offer to me?

Nugent-Hopkins
Eberle
Yakupov
Paarjarvi
Gagne

First offer.
to Columbus:

Nail Yakupov
Horcoff (really don't want, but salary has to come back to equalize. Really Katz should do a compliance buyout)

to Edmonton:

Umberger (half salary retained)
Dubinsky
Nikitin
Savard
Late 1st rounder (so EDM can take Curtis Lazar)

 

[Arch City Zach]

What about "substantial help on D" led you to think of David Savard?

I think Edmonton would want something like Tyutin, Dubinsky and two firsts for either Nuge or Yakupov. We might bargain them down from two to one first rounder, considering we have what they want and they must be bold by all accounts.

He's not a substantial help on D, hence the "heheh". It was a joke, they say!

 

[Dr. Fire]

I didn't find that Friedman mentioned that, I just read Yakupov, though I think they'll be listening closely to others for both. Umberger could be a minor portion of the deal- assuming we retain a million plus in salary he would be the kind of player they need to add. First and second year star pro's don't often get traded- but Edmonton has to be bold now, and we have what they need.

I'd be a bit nervous about acquiring either one. Both players would downgrade your two way play given the ice-time they'd take away from other players, and that would be a significant factor if we were to replace one of our centers with Nuge. But he's a great power play player already, and maybe an elite center someday. And Yakupov could score 40 without ever learning to play the game right, his shot is so good.

Edit: Friedman explicitly cites Howson's Nash trade as the "blueprint" for what Edmonton needs to do.

I had not heard any names mentioned, only that Edmonton is finally realizing that to get better they are going to have to part with one of their young guns. They do not have enough other assets that will get them what they need.

Will be interesting to watch, and even more interesting to see if the CBJ try and get something done with them.

 

[IHeartZherdev*]

We aren't exactly hurting for cap space so I don't see a reason to amnesty him.

I'd rather pay him and have him be a productive energy guy than pay him to play somewhere else.