HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Umberger

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-15-2004, 07:11 PM
  #1
Park #2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 667
vCash: 500
Umberger

I've been talking to some folks trying to pry out some Umberger info, especially considering what I was hearing on Deadline day.

I didn't get very far, but one longtime associate had a "theory" that Slats and Burke made an "aggrement" that the Rangers would not sign Umberger immediately (within the 1st week) so that VAN and more specifically Canadian Hockey does not look back. The big picture was not to set a precedent that would have draftees sitting out ala Umberger so that big market or big spending teams could suck them away from small market AKA Canadian teams. Considering Sather's past with Canadian hockey, this seems to be a believeable theory if not a true one.

Another associate said that Sather's arrogance led him to believe that the Rangers would try to resign him after the deadline in order to pick up the compensatory pick. I do not put credence here for two reasons: 1) The risk of losing him to other teams. 2) The NHL legal office and possible penalties.

The suspicious thing here is that Umberger and his agent aren't talking to ANYONE which gives credence to the first theory. It's an interesting one, just thought I'd share it.

Park #2 is offline  
Old
03-15-2004, 07:23 PM
  #2
in the hall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 5,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Park #2
I've been talking to some folks trying to pry out some Umberger info, especially considering what I was hearing on Deadline day.

I didn't get very far, but one longtime associate had a "theory" that Slats and Burke made an "aggrement" that the Rangers would not sign Umberger immediately (within the 1st week) so that VAN and more specifically Canadian Hockey does not look back. The big picture was not to set a precedent that would have draftees sitting out ala Umberger so that big market or big spending teams could suck them away from small market AKA Canadian teams. Considering Sather's past with Canadian hockey, this seems to be a believeable theory if not a true one.

Another associate said that Sather's arrogance led him to believe that the Rangers would try to resign him after the deadline in order to pick up the compensatory pick. I do not put credence here for two reasons: 1) The risk of losing him to other teams. 2) The NHL legal office and possible penalties.

The suspicious thing here is that Umberger and his agent aren't talking to ANYONE which gives credence to the first theory. It's an interesting one, just thought I'd share it.
it bothers me sather would do this, it leads me to believe that it wasn't a coincidence he made 7 of his 9 deals with canadian teams..

in the hall is offline  
Old
03-15-2004, 07:26 PM
  #3
Park #2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 667
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by in the hall
it bothers me sather would do this, it leads me to believe that it wasn't a coincidence he made 7 of his 9 deals with canadian teams..
Sather is a huge proponent of Canadian Hockey. WHile I don't believe that he rejected better offers to trade with Canadian teams, he likely has an inclinaton to do so.

It is NO coincidence that Petr Nedved and Markanen ended up in Edmonton. Ask David Poile and the Preds.

Park #2 is offline  
Old
03-15-2004, 07:34 PM
  #4
in the hall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 5,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Park #2
Sather is a huge proponent of Canadian Hockey. WHile I don't believe that he rejected better offers to trade with Canadian teams, he likely has an inclinaton to do so.

It is NO coincidence that Petr Nedved and Markanen ended up in Edmonton. Ask David Poile and the Preds.
sather is a dirt bag.. it may have not hurt us now but one day his little agenda will hurt this team and i could only imagine how his future trade talks with nashville, dallas and other teams he seemingly blew off will turn out


what were the preds offering for nedved anyway?

in the hall is offline  
Old
03-15-2004, 07:39 PM
  #5
Park #2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 667
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by in the hall
sather is a dirt bag.. it may have not hurt us now but one day his little agenda will hurt this team and i could only imagine how his future trade talks with nashville, dallas and other teams he seemingly blew off will turn out


what were the preds offering for nedved anyway?
Similar deals, prospect and a pick. (Since the picks are virtually equal, the prospect is up to analysis). Nashville and several other people in the league feel that they offered a better prospect for less (Markanen wasn't in the deal). They thought of filing a grievance and spoke to the league in disgust. Since there's no way of saying, "Our deal was better" since both prospects are not sure things by any means, no way of analyzing the deal.

Park #2 is offline  
Old
03-15-2004, 07:47 PM
  #6
in the hall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 5,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Park #2
Similar deals, prospect and a pick. (Since the picks are virtually equal, the prospect is up to analysis). Nashville and several other people in the league feel that they offered a better prospect for less (Markanen wasn't in the deal). They thought of filing a grievance and spoke to the league in disgust. Since there's no way of saying, "Our deal was better" since both prospects are not sure things by any means, no way of analyzing the deal.
do you know the name of the prospect?
i wish they would have filed the grievance in spite of sather, the league wide floggin he would endure would be enough of a penalty to satisfy me atleast... do you know how the league and general managers even know about his agenda.. i wonder how they would feel about this

in the hall is offline  
Old
03-15-2004, 07:56 PM
  #7
Park #2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 667
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by in the hall
do you know the name of the prospect?
i wish they would have filed the grievance in spite of sather, the league wide floggin he would endure would be enough of a penalty to satisfy me atleast... do you know how the league and general managers even know about his agenda.. i wonder how they would feel about this
Nearly every GM has a bit of an agenda, some less obvious then others.....

My point was that I don't think he screwed the Rangers - I just think his inclination is to help out a Canadian team if the deal is equal (or equal in his mind).

Park #2 is offline  
Old
03-15-2004, 08:00 PM
  #8
in the hall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 5,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Park #2
Nearly every GM has a bit of an agenda, some less obvious then others.....

My point was that I don't think he screwed the Rangers - I just think his inclination is to help out a Canadian team if the deal is equal (or equal in his mind).
hmm fair enough i just think this could become a problem later on with the gm's he snubs.. it is probably my own paranoia that believes he is out to destroy this team

thank you once again for your insight

in the hall is offline  
Old
03-15-2004, 08:24 PM
  #9
Janerixon
Registered User
 
Janerixon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,730
vCash: 500
i hope your first theory is right park, it sounds very plausible, as oppossed to the 2nd one which is quite risky and could lead to some problems with the nhl, i just hope we sign umberger and as soon as possible, it should get done

Janerixon is offline  
Old
03-15-2004, 08:27 PM
  #10
Park #2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 667
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Janerixon
i hope your first theory is right park, it sounds very plausible, as oppossed to the 2nd one which is quite risky and could lead to some problems with the nhl, i just hope we sign umberger and as soon as possible, it should get done
Not my theories - others - but I agree that the first is VERY possible. The second, in my opinion, is assinine.

Park #2 is offline  
Old
03-15-2004, 08:40 PM
  #11
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,481
vCash: 500
i thought david poile main problem with the nedved trade was the rangers paid nedveds contract for the remainder of the season?

Son of Steinbrenner is offline  
Old
03-15-2004, 08:44 PM
  #12
Park #2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 667
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner
i thought david poile main problem with the nedved trade was the rangers paid nedveds contract for the remainder of the season?
That was indeed one of his gripes - especially in the public forum. Nashville was not given that "luxury" in the proposed deals.

Park #2 is offline  
Old
03-15-2004, 08:47 PM
  #13
Park #2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 667
vCash: 500
Back to Umberger:

Look at his comments:

When asked about his feelings of leaving Vancouver, "As itís settling in, it is a little strange Iím not part of their organization. Since I was drafted, I was ready to play there and have followed them. I really feel its unfortunate what happened with the contract negotiations and think it really could have been dealt differently on Vancouverís part and mine."

"The waiting still continues [on joining the Rangers] as we need to workout a contract first. I don't think it will take long since they already know what I am asking for in a contract. I suspect it should be done in the next day or so. From what I know, I think I will then join their AHL team in Hartford for the rest of the year."

The strange thing is that up until WED/THURS of last week, he and his agent were saying this. They are now silent, leading me to believe something has been worked out or there is a bigger issue in play.

Park #2 is offline  
Old
03-15-2004, 09:30 PM
  #14
n8
WAAAAAAA!!!
 
n8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: san francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 7,399
vCash: 500
should we lose umberger for nothing, i don't care what agenda jackass has, he's screwing us out of a player. even if we just get a compensatory draft pick, i'm ticked because he has a lot of potential. additionally, if he had a better deal from nashville but snubbed him for a canadian team, i don't care, he's screwing us over. something like maarkanen for helmenin and then nedved for prospect + 2nd should be better than just helmenin and a 2nd for those two. that sort of smug arrogance and disregard for the team is why we hate him so. seems like he is working for himself and canada and not for us fans and new york. it's no wonder we want him fired :mad:

n8 is offline  
Old
03-15-2004, 09:36 PM
  #15
n8
WAAAAAAA!!!
 
n8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: san francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 7,399
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Park #2
I didn't get very far, but one longtime associate had a "theory" that Slats and Burke made an "aggrement" that the Rangers would not sign Umberger immediately (within the 1st week) so that VAN and more specifically Canadian Hockey does not look back. The big picture was not to set a precedent that would have draftees sitting out ala Umberger so that big market or big spending teams could suck them away from small market AKA Canadian teams. Considering Sather's past with Canadian hockey, this seems to be a believeable theory if not a true one.
park,

i don't get what you mean. what is the result of not signing him immediately? who is benefiting? what does this prove? if the rangers don't sign umberger and he walks, some other big market big spending team will just come up and give him a contract. result, sather is still a jackass and we ended up sending a marketable rucinsky for just grenier. what's the idea?

n8 is offline  
Old
03-15-2004, 09:44 PM
  #16
Park #2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 667
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by n8
park,

i don't get what you mean. what is the result of not signing him immediately? who is benefiting? what does this prove? if the rangers don't sign umberger and he walks, some other big market big spending team will just come up and give him a contract. result, sather is still a jackass and we ended up sending a marketable rucinsky for just grenier. what's the idea?

Well, by this theory - Burke basically makes a gentleman's agreement with Sather that - "We'll give you Umberger, but you need to wait 10-15 days to sign him so I/We (Burke/Canucks) don't look horrible here." It means nothing to Sather/Umberger to have him sit out 4 additional games in the end. Not saying it's the case, a theory told to me by someone who might know.

Park #2 is offline  
Old
03-15-2004, 10:04 PM
  #17
n8
WAAAAAAA!!!
 
n8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: san francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 7,399
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Park #2
Well, by this theory - Burke basically makes a gentleman's agreement with Sather that - "We'll give you Umberger, but you need to wait 10-15 days to sign him so I/We (Burke/Canucks) don't look horrible here." It means nothing to Sather/Umberger to have him sit out 4 additional games in the end. Not saying it's the case, a theory told to me by someone who might know.
oh, i see. just not sure it makes all that much of a difference. umberger should look like the "bad guy" in all cases here for demanding so much $$$ out of the financially burdened teams of canada. too bad the canadian dollar didn't stay strong from a few months ago.

n8 is offline  
Old
03-15-2004, 10:05 PM
  #18
nyr7andcounting
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,919
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Park #2
Well, by this theory - Burke basically makes a gentleman's agreement with Sather that - "We'll give you Umberger, but you need to wait 10-15 days to sign him so I/We (Burke/Canucks) don't look horrible here." It means nothing to Sather/Umberger to have him sit out 4 additional games in the end. Not saying it's the case, a theory told to me by someone who might know.
Why would Sather signing him right away make Burke/Canucks look bad? And if Sather waited 2 weeks, how would that help?

It doesn't make much sense that waiting to sign Umberger would prevent this from becoming a precedent for prospects who hold out and then get signed by a bigger market. If the Rangers do sign Umberger people aren't going to remember when they signed him or how long it took, rather that it happened. Future prospects holding out will still see being traded to a big market an option, wether or not Umberger is signed quickly.

I honestly think that if Umberger did say in the middle of last week that he expects a deal to be done in the next few days, which obviously it hasn't, that Sather might not sign him at all. Everything points to Sather loading up picks in order to trade up in the draft this year, as 4 or 5 2nd rounders this year doesn't do a team much good in a weak draft. Sather might actually be stupid enough to want the 46th overall pick(which we would get as compensation for not signing Umberger) instead of Umberger because the pick may have more value to a team like Pitt who wouldn't be able to sign Umberger if they traded for him in a deal where the Rangers moved up to the 1st overall spot.

If Sather ends up taking compensation instead of signing Umberger, and uses the pick in a deal to Pitt then I don't blame him. This would be a smart move ONLY if Sather is already sure that he can make a deal with Pitt. Otherwise we are going to lose a solid player and get nothing but **** back with a mid 2nd rounder.

nyr7andcounting is offline  
Old
03-15-2004, 10:14 PM
  #19
in the hall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 5,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by n8
oh, i see. just not sure it makes all that much of a difference. umberger should look like the "bad guy" in all cases here for demanding so much $$$ out of the financially burdened teams of canada. too bad the canadian dollar didn't stay strong from a few months ago.
im not sure if you are being sarcastic but that is not accurate... he was being offered the lowest amount of money of any first rounder in that draft year and this is coming off a year where he was considered one of the best prospects and been named a hobey baker award finalist...

in the hall is offline  
Old
03-15-2004, 10:32 PM
  #20
n8
WAAAAAAA!!!
 
n8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: san francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 7,399
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by in the hall
im not sure if you are being sarcastic but that is not accurate... he was being offered the lowest amount of money of any first rounder in that draft year and this is coming off a year where he was considered one of the best prospects and been named a hobey baker award finalist...
not sarcastic. just uninformed. how low was it? was it reasonable still? i mean the rookie cap is about 1,075,000 i think but if he was offered 900,000 while all the other rookies were getting cap that's still a sizeable contract and umberger has less of a case. i remember reading that he wanted a similar deal to keslar but what if the canucks flat out say, "you get less because keslar is better and you sat out on us." but that would be the attitude from the canucks POV. a bit OT, but i think the new CBA needs reassess rookie rules, CHL -> AHL regulations, salary, etc.

n8 is offline  
Old
03-15-2004, 10:37 PM
  #21
Kodiak
Registered User
 
Kodiak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ranger fan in Philly
Posts: 2,185
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Kodiak Send a message via AIM to Kodiak Send a message via Yahoo to Kodiak
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyr7andcounting
Why would Sather signing him right away make Burke/Canucks look bad? And if Sather waited 2 weeks, how would that help?

It doesn't make much sense that waiting to sign Umberger would prevent this from becoming a precedent for prospects who hold out and then get signed by a bigger market. If the Rangers do sign Umberger people aren't going to remember when they signed him or how long it took, rather that it happened. Future prospects holding out will still see being traded to a big market an option, wether or not Umberger is signed quickly.

I honestly think that if Umberger did say in the middle of last week that he expects a deal to be done in the next few days, which obviously it hasn't, that Sather might not sign him at all. Everything points to Sather loading up picks in order to trade up in the draft this year, as 4 or 5 2nd rounders this year doesn't do a team much good in a weak draft. Sather might actually be stupid enough to want the 46th overall pick(which we would get as compensation for not signing Umberger) instead of Umberger because the pick may have more value to a team like Pitt who wouldn't be able to sign Umberger if they traded for him in a deal where the Rangers moved up to the 1st overall spot.

If Sather ends up taking compensation instead of signing Umberger, and uses the pick in a deal to Pitt then I don't blame him. This would be a smart move ONLY if Sather is already sure that he can make a deal with Pitt. Otherwise we are going to lose a solid player and get nothing but **** back with a mid 2nd rounder.
Why would we need the Umberger pick to make a deal with Pittsburgh? We already have 4 2nd round picks (FLA's from COL, Leetch's comp pick from EDM, MON's, and our own). Three of those picks look like they'll be better than the 46th overall pick. And I can damn near guarantee you that Umberger is a better prospect than anyone available at the 46th spot. No matter how you look at it, losing Umberger for the 2nd would be just a dumb move on Sather's part.

Kodiak is offline  
Old
03-15-2004, 10:41 PM
  #22
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Park #2
I've been talking to some folks trying to pry out some Umberger info, especially considering what I was hearing on Deadline day.

I didn't get very far, but one longtime associate had a "theory" that Slats and Burke made an "aggrement" that the Rangers would not sign Umberger immediately (within the 1st week) so that VAN and more specifically Canadian Hockey does not look back. The big picture was not to set a precedent that would have draftees sitting out ala Umberger so that big market or big spending teams could suck them away from small market AKA Canadian teams. Considering Sather's past with Canadian hockey, this seems to be a believeable theory if not a true one.

Another associate said that Sather's arrogance led him to believe that the Rangers would try to resign him after the deadline in order to pick up the compensatory pick. I do not put credence here for two reasons: 1) The risk of losing him to other teams. 2) The NHL legal office and possible penalties.

The suspicious thing here is that Umberger and his agent aren't talking to ANYONE which gives credence to the first theory. It's an interesting one, just thought I'd share it.
http://www.newsday.com/sports/hockey...orts-headlines

Umberger arrives. R.J. Umberger, the 21-year-old center acquired from the Canucks in the Martin Rucinsky deal, joined the team and will practice with the Rangers this week. Umberger, the 16th pick in the 2001 draft, will become an unrestricted free agent if the Rangers do not sign him before June 1. His agent, Brian Lawton, said discussions on a contract with the Rangers have not progressed, but Umberger said after Monday night's game that he is hopeful to sign.

This is probably one of the best places in the NHL right now where young guys can come and play," said the 6-2, 210-pound Pittsburgh native, who may join Hartford on a tryout contract next week.


Didn't your sources inform you Umberger has joined the Rangers?

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
03-15-2004, 11:00 PM
  #23
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Park #2
Similar deals, prospect and a pick. (Since the picks are virtually equal, the prospect is up to analysis). Nashville and several other people in the league feel that they offered a better prospect for less (Markanen wasn't in the deal). They thought of filing a grievance and spoke to the league in disgust. Since there's no way of saying, "Our deal was better" since both prospects are not sure things by any means, no way of analyzing the deal.
Nashville does not have a second round pick in 2004 or in 2005.Both second round picks were traded to Chicago for Steve Sullivan.

Another west coast team was interested in Petr Nedved besides Edmonton.That team was offering a low second round pick while Edmonton was dangling a high second round pick which is the compensatory pick Edmonton will receive for losing Brian Leetch in free agency.That second round pick is 20 plus picks higher than the other second round pick they were offered for Nedved.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
03-15-2004, 11:33 PM
  #24
in the hall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 5,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy
http://www.newsday.com/sports/hockey...orts-headlines

Umberger arrives. R.J. Umberger, the 21-year-old center acquired from the Canucks in the Martin Rucinsky deal, joined the team and will practice with the Rangers this week. Umberger, the 16th pick in the 2001 draft, will become an unrestricted free agent if the Rangers do not sign him before June 1. His agent, Brian Lawton, said discussions on a contract with the Rangers have not progressed, but Umberger said after Monday night's game that he is hopeful to sign.

This is probably one of the best places in the NHL right now where young guys can come and play," said the 6-2, 210-pound Pittsburgh native, who may join Hartford on a tryout contract next week.


Didn't your sources inform you Umberger has joined the Rangers?
it says Umberger is yet to sign with them and is expected to sign a try out contract next week... if anything this pretty much supports the theory his source had told him since that is a good 2 weeks after the deadline..... also it is a little unfair to question it since it appears that the article talked to Umberger after the game.. about an hour after his post....

in the hall is offline  
Old
03-15-2004, 11:56 PM
  #25
Marchy79
Registered User
 
Marchy79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Barrie
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,915
vCash: 500
Well, Umberger was a very solid pick up... He has the makings of a very solid top 2 line center... IMO he'll be signed for sure... June 1st is a long ways away... And it sounds from the interview that Unberger is kinda anxious to be donning Ranger colours ASAP...
He'll probably start in Hartford, but who knows? He's a pretty talented center, and has the size and skill to at least make a debut right now... His NCAA career is almost over, so I can't see the Rangers waiting on the signing...

Marchy79 is offline  
Closed Thread

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 12:23 AM.

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.