HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Columbus Blue Jackets
Notices

Umberger

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-05-2013, 08:52 AM
  #101
blahblah
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 15,949
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post
I have never understood "trade him for the sake of trading him" deals. It's counterproductive.
Well you could trade him for the sake of 23 million reasons I suppose.

What is RJ worth? He is worth more than Cyclones thinks he is to be sure. His analysis ranks right up there with the Zherdev dude and his analysis of Tyutin.

However, we have a lot of redundancy, I mean a TON of redundancy with that "I play hard, play pretty good in two of the zones, and if someone gets me the puck close to the goalie I might be able to pull out a garbage goal" kind of guy.

So the question is, are we going to try and continue to run with Brassard and RJ in the top six? At 4.6 million, I really don't want to see him on the 3rd line and, at 25, Brassard really isn't developing into the type of second line player that I was hoping for.

We probably need to figure out how to fill either or both of their roster spots with a creative type of play maker. Not sure how we go about doing that, beyond waiting for Johansen to Atkinson to develop. But if you have Johansen and Atkinson on the top line, you have 4 spots left with AA, Foligno, and Dubinsky. You can probably safely move Brassard or RJ without much of an overall impact.

Not sure what the right move is here, but almost 8 million combined with those two just seems like a waste of money. Probably time to find the right player help out those top six players. I'll look at see what is coming up in FA, but maybe we can find a workable trade.

blahblah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 01:23 PM
  #102
Roadman
Moving On
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London OH
Country: United States
Posts: 2,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blahblah View Post
Well you could trade him for the sake of 23 million reasons I suppose.

What is RJ worth? He is worth more than Cyclones thinks he is to be sure. His analysis ranks right up there with the Zherdev dude and his analysis of Tyutin.

However, we have a lot of redundancy, I mean a TON of redundancy with that "I play hard, play pretty good in two of the zones, and if someone gets me the puck close to the goalie I might be able to pull out a garbage goal" kind of guy.

So the question is, are we going to try and continue to run with Brassard and RJ in the top six? At 4.6 million, I really don't want to see him on the 3rd line and, at 25, Brassard really isn't developing into the type of second line player that I was hoping for.

We probably need to figure out how to fill either or both of their roster spots with a creative type of play maker. Not sure how we go about doing that, beyond waiting for Johansen to Atkinson to develop. But if you have Johansen and Atkinson on the top line, you have 4 spots left with AA, Foligno, and Dubinsky. You can probably safely move Brassard or RJ without much of an overall impact.

Not sure what the right move is here, but almost 8 million combined with those two just seems like a waste of money. Probably time to find the right player help out those top six players. I'll look at see what is coming up in FA, but maybe we can find a workable trade.
I would think there are several roster players that we will not see in the CBJ Blue next year.

Prospal & Aucoin come to mind from retirement point of view. Welcome to the front office/bench/?? Vinnie.

Johnson, Johansen, Atkinson, Anisimov, Tyutin, Nikitin, Moore, & Wizniewski are almost certain locks to stay.

The rest are all under a 48 game evaluation (39 and counting); subject to analysis not only on performance but also effort, contract cost, contract term, attitude, and locker room presence.

That would mean there are some 15 jobs up for the taking. Most will be filled by from the roster but figure Murray is probably going to get one, 3 1st round draft picks are going to get a pretty good look, and the Springfield gang is definitely going to show up, Kubalik, Drazenovic, Jenner are very very close.

So as expected this a transition year, there are going to be some favorites that will not be here next year. There is not a lot of time for the guys to determine who's going to be an asset and who's going to be a Jacket.

The trade deadline is going to be very interesting.

__________________
__________________

I post, therefore I am.
Roadman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 01:31 PM
  #103
blahblah
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 15,949
vCash: 500
I doubt guys like Boll, MacKenzie, Dorse, Dubinsky, and Foligno are going anywhere. Letestu is probably going to earn another contract.

This is why I am starting to wonder if the walls are starting to close in around Brass and/or RJ. If push came to shove between RJ and Dubinsky, I would go with Dubinsky. After a really slow start, Dubinsky's game is really starting to come around.

The other option is that they could continue to go status quo, however we aren't exactly playing the way JD is promising. I still think Brassard is on the shorter list.

blahblah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 01:43 PM
  #104
Viqsi
"They're back."
 
Viqsi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Scary Internet
Country: United States
Posts: 20,049
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Viqsi
Quote:
Originally Posted by blahblah View Post
Well you could trade him for the sake of 23 million reasons I suppose.

What is RJ worth? He is worth more than Cyclones thinks he is to be sure. His analysis ranks right up there with the Zherdev dude and his analysis of Tyutin.

However, we have a lot of redundancy, I mean a TON of redundancy with that "I play hard, play pretty good in two of the zones, and if someone gets me the puck close to the goalie I might be able to pull out a garbage goal" kind of guy.

So the question is, are we going to try and continue to run with Brassard and RJ in the top six? At 4.6 million, I really don't want to see him on the 3rd line and, at 25, Brassard really isn't developing into the type of second line player that I was hoping for.

We probably need to figure out how to fill either or both of their roster spots with a creative type of play maker. Not sure how we go about doing that, beyond waiting for Johansen to Atkinson to develop. But if you have Johansen and Atkinson on the top line, you have 4 spots left with AA, Foligno, and Dubinsky. You can probably safely move Brassard or RJ without much of an overall impact.

Not sure what the right move is here, but almost 8 million combined with those two just seems like a waste of money. Probably time to find the right player help out those top six players. I'll look at see what is coming up in FA, but maybe we can find a workable trade.
I get those concerns, but right now moving them seems lateral at best to me. I have no interest in crippling the top-6 (any more than it already is, at any rate) for the sake of draft picks.

__________________
Remember - when you're a hockey fan, it's not "reckless driving", it's "good forechecking".
"Viqsi, you are our sweet humanist..." --mt-svk on the CBJ boards

Thanks, Howson, for cleaning up MacLean's toxic waste. Welcome, Kekalainen; let's get good things built!
Viqsi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 01:47 PM
  #105
Fro
Yes Cbus has hockey
 
Fro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Drinking With Carts
Country: United States
Posts: 12,701
vCash: 500
crippling the top 6? he has what, 2 points? so far this year he's been the crippler...now he may pull out of it...but he's been more of a hindrance than a positive ON the ice...his leadership may be worth it off the ice...

Fro is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 01:52 PM
  #106
blahblah
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 15,949
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post
I get those concerns, but right now moving them seems lateral at best to me. I have no interest in crippling the top-6 (any more than it already is, at any rate) for the sake of draft picks.
I think that would be a tactical decision made by the front office based on production, team identity, and finance. If you don't think RJ is part of your future and you get a chance to move him, maybe you look at it.

I would argue that it is far less than certain that moving RJ or Brassard is going to have a noticeable impact to the top six. To be honest, putting Dubinsky in the middle of the ice has had a positive impact and that adding Foligno to his wing as opposed to Brassard probably isn't going to be noticeable in a negative way.

We are now in the evaluate the player mode. If they don't fit what you are looking to do, there is no better time to look at where you want to move them. Leaving those individuals in key roles isn't going to have a positive impact to the team. Also at some point JD is going to have to prove he is serious, if the team doesn't start to play the way that he is demanding.

blahblah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 01:54 PM
  #107
Roadman
Moving On
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London OH
Country: United States
Posts: 2,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blahblah View Post
I doubt guys like Boll, MacKenzie, Dorse, Dubinsky, and Foligno are going anywhere. Letestu is probably going to earn another contract.

This is why I am starting to wonder if the walls are starting to close in around Brass and/or RJ. If push came to shove between RJ and Dubinsky, I would go with Dubinsky. After a really slow start, Dubinsky's game is really starting to come around.

The other option is that they could continue to go status quo, however we aren't exactly playing the way JD is promising. I still think Brassard is on the shorter list.
I agree.

Probably "the going to stay list" is about right but the right offer could pry any of them loose. Not untouchable.

The hottest seats really do belong to Brassard and RJ. This is a performance business and right now they are not, especially vs salary. But there are 23 games between now and the deadline (4/3).

Roadman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 03:13 PM
  #108
alphafox
Registered User
 
alphafox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 815
vCash: 500
It will be interesting to see what moves we make. When davidson took over in st. Louis he shipped out Guerin and another veteran player to stockpile assets. I anticipate something similar here though the extent of the moves and the assets we get back will likely be less than what happened in st. Louis

alphafox is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 03:51 PM
  #109
Viqsi
"They're back."
 
Viqsi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Scary Internet
Country: United States
Posts: 20,049
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Viqsi
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fro View Post
crippling the top 6? he has what, 2 points? so far this year he's been the crippler...now he may pull out of it...but he's been more of a hindrance than a positive ON the ice...his leadership may be worth it off the ice...
I just happen to disagree with that evaluation. I really do think folks are accentuating the negative and paying more attention to errors than to the overall state of his game.

* * *
Quote:
Originally Posted by blahblah View Post
I think that would be a tactical decision made by the front office based on production, team identity, and finance. If you don't think RJ is part of your future and you get a chance to move him, maybe you look at it.
Makes sense, but I kind of have the impression that RJ is still being seen as part of the near future. And I still think that's ultimately a good idea, even if it's not necessarily significantly paying off right now.

Brassard, though, is a different story.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blahblah View Post
I would argue that it is far less than certain that moving RJ or Brassard is going to have a noticeable impact to the top six. To be honest, putting Dubinsky in the middle of the ice has had a positive impact and that adding Foligno to his wing as opposed to Brassard probably isn't going to be noticeable in a negative way.

We are now in the evaluate the player mode. If they don't fit what you are looking to do, there is no better time to look at where you want to move them. Leaving those individuals in key roles isn't going to have a positive impact to the team. Also at some point JD is going to have to prove he is serious, if the team doesn't start to play the way that he is demanding.
Again, I think this argument applies well to Brassard's situation, but not necessarily Umberger's. Mostly because I think Umberger has a better established track record than Brassard, and does more off the ice as well.

I won't be scandalized or outraged if Umby does end up moved as a result of said evaluations. It happens, and he does have his limitations. I just object to this rabid frothing "he sucks, he sucks so bad, omfg trade him trade him RIGHT NOW" mishegaas.

Viqsi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 04:07 PM
  #110
EspenK
Registered User
 
EspenK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,984
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post
I just happen to disagree with that evaluation. I really do think folks are accentuating the negative and paying more attention to errors than to the overall state of his game.
If the overall state of his game had a name it would be Mississippi or North Dakota, with no offense, (get it?) to those states.

EspenK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2013, 12:43 AM
  #111
slightlystewpid420
Registered User
 
slightlystewpid420's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,158
vCash: 500
Give Umberger until the deadline if things don't change by then, move him for a pick.

slightlystewpid420 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2013, 06:36 AM
  #112
EDM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,759
vCash: 500
Brass had a good game last nite against the Kings. RJ was what has become the "usual".

EDM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2013, 08:40 AM
  #113
blahblah
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 15,949
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post
I won't be scandalized or outraged if Umby does end up moved as a result of said evaluations. It happens, and he does have his limitations. I just object to this rabid frothing "he sucks, he sucks so bad, omfg trade him trade him RIGHT NOW" mishegaas.
Perfect reasonable. That is were I am. I guess my point is, we have 23 million left on that contract and even though it is only 10 games in this season he had a down year last year as well.

The front office better be evaluating this hard. The last thing we need is to left holding the bag if this decline doesn't correct itself. A poor year this year and a slow start next year and you suddenly shift from a, potentially, hard to trade asset to a difficult to trade liability. We aren't the Rangers or the Canadians that would just use the amnesty buy out. Cap space doesn't mean much to us at this point, but salary does. We won't add salary to compensate for a non productive top six player making 4.5 million a year.

I appreciate the back and forth. I agree on Brassard. Having said that, RJ is potentially a bigger risk if he really is on the decline.

blahblah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2013, 08:42 AM
  #114
candyman82
Registered User
 
candyman82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
Posts: 2,344
vCash: 500
I say don't trade him until he starts scoring, which I think we all know eventually will come. No point in trading him yet.

candyman82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2013, 08:47 AM
  #115
blahblah
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 15,949
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EDM View Post
Brass had a good game last nite against the Kings. RJ was what has become the "usual".
I would say that our bar is so low with some of these player average play has morphed into good play. While Brassard has improved he is no where near "playing good" or even "had a good game". His game last night is what we should see as the floor for every game. Not scoring the goal, but the level of play and number of chances.

I did see at least a couple of shifts in which RJ was far more engaged and had chances. The big difference was that Brassard converted and he was a decent experiment on the point on the PP.

Brassard has improved over the last few games to the point that if he plays that way for 82 game a season he is almost worth keeping around. What I am waiting for is the guy from the rookie season that took over games and was, truly, a dynamic player. He is not that now. He just looks more dynamic because we don't have much in the way of dynamic players. If things keep up the way they are Johansen is going to pass him like he is standing still, despite his game last night.


Last edited by blahblah: 02-06-2013 at 08:52 AM.
blahblah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2013, 08:51 AM
  #116
blahblah
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 15,949
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by candyman82 View Post
I say don't trade him until he starts scoring, which I think we all know eventually will come. No point in trading him yet.
Yeah, that is pretty much what everyone thinks/says before they lose their shorts in the stock market. It is a $9 a share, it couldn't possibly go down anymore!

You are assuming that RJ will return to a 20 goal scorer. He barely did that last season and hasn't done anything this season to suggest that was a fluke. What you are asking for may never come. While I don't find it likely, we could very well be looking at the new 12-15 goal RJ grinder.

The front office better be looking at this situation very closely and not using the "I have faith" method we have used in the past.

blahblah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2013, 09:48 AM
  #117
Nordique
Registered User
 
Nordique's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 6,839
vCash: 500
I think he looks much better the last 3 games. If he doesn't hit the post vs Stl, and the goal goes in, that could have been the turning point in the game. I think he's going to be fine now, the goals will come, his shifts look much better.

Trading him just doesn't make sense to me either. I think the return would be low, and its not like we have to free up salary due to the cap. Worse case scenario, RJ is a solid 3rd liner that can be used in front of the net on the PP. Best case, he's a top 6 forward that will get you 20+ goals a season. Either way I think in the long run we're a better team with him than without.

Nordique is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2013, 10:10 AM
  #118
candyman82
Registered User
 
candyman82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
Posts: 2,344
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blahblah View Post
Yeah, that is pretty much what everyone thinks/says before they lose their shorts in the stock market. It is a $9 a share, it couldn't possibly go down anymore!

You are assuming that RJ will return to a 20 goal scorer. He barely did that last season and hasn't done anything this season to suggest that was a fluke. What you are asking for may never come. While I don't find it likely, we could very well be looking at the new 12-15 goal RJ grinder.

The front office better be looking at this situation very closely and not using the "I have faith" method we have used in the past.
I recognize that he may never be that player again. However, I would wait until he actually breaks out of his slump before trading him. He may not return to his previous level of play, but at the very least we should wait to see his play improve somewhat before moving him.

candyman82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2013, 11:03 AM
  #119
Doug19
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Columbus, OH
Country: Aland Islands
Posts: 6,004
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post
I just happen to disagree with that evaluation. I really do think folks are accentuating the negative and paying more attention to errors than to the overall state of his game.
hahhahahahhahahahhhahhahahahaahahahha thanks for the laugh, you almost got me fired.

Doug19 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2013, 11:54 AM
  #120
EspenK
Registered User
 
EspenK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,984
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blahblah View Post
Yeah, that is pretty much what everyone thinks/says before they lose their shorts in the stock market. It is a $9 a share, it couldn't possibly go down anymore!

You are assuming that RJ will return to a 20 goal scorer. He barely did that last season and hasn't done anything this season to suggest that was a fluke. What you are asking for may never come. While I don't find it likely, we could very well be looking at the new 12-15 goal RJ grinder.

The front office better be looking at this situation very closely and not using the "I have faith" method we have used in the past.
This about sums it up very nicely.

EspenK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2013, 12:12 PM
  #121
blahblah
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 15,949
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by candyman82 View Post
I recognize that he may never be that player again. However, I would wait until he actually breaks out of his slump before trading him. He may not return to his previous level of play, but at the very least we should wait to see his play improve somewhat before moving him.
I am not sure it makes any difference at all. If he "breaks out" it will succeed in making you second guess yourself. I suspect that nothing is going to happen till around the deadline, so I am not sure why you are worried about it. It is not like we are actively shopping him now. You would still have to have the talk with him because of the NTC as well.

Ultimately I don't think it would impact potential deals all that much if he suddenly had 3 goals in 7 games.

blahblah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2013, 12:49 PM
  #122
Cyclones Rock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,240
vCash: 500
Who actually believes that this guy can be traded? Why would any team possibly want him?

Do some people not understand a salary cap? $4.5 million/yr. for 4 more years after this season for a guy whose production went down 30% last year-despite playing a lot with Rick Nash and getting loads of PP time-and whose "production" this year is laughable. His trend line is downright scary. It's Scott Gomez-like.

http://www.didgomezscore.com/

He plays soft as a baby's bottom. He does not play the game one would expect of a 6'2" 220 lbs. "power forward". He avoids contact and often times makes a very weak presence in front of the net. His only checking is done at the bank.

He's not particularly fast and his shot isn't effective from much past the slot. His passing is nothing more than pedestrian.

He seems to have all of the enthusiasm of an embalmer to boot. It's hard to believe he'd bring much to a locker room in terms of spirit.

Umberger needs to play a grinding, tough and energetic game to be effective. He doesn't do that anymore. Why would anyone have any realistic expectation for him to regain form?

He's untradeable. It's fantasy to believe otherwise. The only scenario would be to "trade" him for another declining underperformer with a huge contract. So, that's really not trading. It's exchanging problems.

He's tailor made for the amnesty buyout. That is the CBJs most reasoned option with this disaster. Suck it up and move on.

Cyclones Rock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2013, 01:00 PM
  #123
leesmith
"We're NEVER Done!"
 
leesmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 14,899
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclones Rock View Post
Who actually believes that this guy can be traded? Why would any team possibly want him?

Do some people not understand a salary cap? $4.5 million/yr. for 4 more years after this season for a guy whose production went down 30% last year-despite playing a lot with Rick Nash and getting loads of PP time-and whose "production" this year is laughable. His trend line is downright scary. It's Scott Gomez-like.

http://www.didgomezscore.com/

He plays soft as a baby's bottom. He does not play the game one would expect of a 6'2" 220 lbs. "power forward". He avoids contact and often times makes a very weak presence in front of the net. His only checking is done at the bank.

He's not particularly fast and his shot isn't effective from much past the slot. His passing is nothing more than pedestrian.

He seems to have all of the enthusiasm of an embalmer to boot. It's hard to believe he'd bring much to a locker room in terms of spirit.

Umberger needs to play a grinding, tough and energetic game to be effective. He doesn't do that anymore. Why would anyone have any realistic expectation for him to regain form?

He's untradeable. It's fantasy to believe otherwise. The only scenario would be to "trade" him for another declining underperformer with a huge contract. So, that's really not trading. It's exchanging problems.

He's tailor made for the amnesty buyout. That is the CBJs most reasoned option with this disaster. Suck it up and move on.
Hmmm, amnesty buyout. Interesting. (rubbing chin)

leesmith is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2013, 01:03 PM
  #124
EspenK
Registered User
 
EspenK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,984
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclones Rock View Post
only checking is done at the bank.


He's tailor made for the amnesty buyout. That is the CBJs most reasoned option with this disaster. Suck it up and move on.
I was thinking the other day if we traded him and took back half his salary, it would be cheaper than the amnesty buyout by about 3 mill over the 4 years. Probably isn't going to happen but its an interesting thought.

EspenK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2013, 01:18 PM
  #125
blahblah
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 15,949
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclones Rock View Post
Who actually believes that this guy can be traded? Why would any team possibly want him?

Do some people not understand a salary cap? $4.5 million/yr. for 4 more years after this season for a guy whose production went down 30% last year-despite playing a lot with Rick Nash and getting loads of PP time-and whose "production" this year is laughable. His trend line is downright scary. It's Scott Gomez-like.

http://www.didgomezscore.com/

He plays soft as a baby's bottom. He does not play the game one would expect of a 6'2" 220 lbs. "power forward". He avoids contact and often times makes a very weak presence in front of the net. His only checking is done at the bank.

He's not particularly fast and his shot isn't effective from much past the slot. His passing is nothing more than pedestrian.

He seems to have all of the enthusiasm of an embalmer to boot. It's hard to believe he'd bring much to a locker room in terms of spirit.

Umberger needs to play a grinding, tough and energetic game to be effective. He doesn't do that anymore. Why would anyone have any realistic expectation for him to regain form?

He's untradeable. It's fantasy to believe otherwise. The only scenario would be to "trade" him for another declining underperformer with a huge contract. So, that's really not trading. It's exchanging problems.

He's tailor made for the amnesty buyout. That is the CBJs most reasoned option with this disaster. Suck it up and move on.
Regardless if whether you think he can be traded or not, your overall analysis from top to bottom is severely lacking. First off, we aren't going to amnesty buy out this guy, but thank you for wanting to blow the owners money like that. You do have a couple of decent points but it's almost impossible to notice with the hyperbole and melodrama.

A trade is far more likely than an amnesty buy out. I'm not saying the former is likely, just more likely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EspenK View Post
I was thinking the other day if we traded him and took back half his salary, it would be cheaper than the amnesty buyout by about 3 mill over the 4 years. Probably isn't going to happen but its an interesting thought.
That wasn't allowed in the old CBA, almost certain it's not allowed in the new CBA.

blahblah is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:40 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.