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

Whats the story w/ RJ Umberger?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-28-2004, 01:59 PM
  #26
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR#9
All I can say about this whole matter is these guys making these calls had better be right because if there is one thing we need above all else for the future it's a center with size that has top 2 line upside potential so to potentially let one of these guys slip through your fingers when you own his rights over a couple of hundred grand then they better damn well be sure that this kid won't cut it otherwise it can be a disaster in the making.

To me I'd probrably give the kid the benefit of the doubt as I think his contract negotiating got him raked over the coals character wise when it may not be an accurate description.

I'd sign the kid and if things don't work out you move him or fail to qualify him next time around.What would be lost besides some $$$$ and why not take the chance on a kid as oppossed to a 31 yr old UFA???
RJ Umberger is reportedly asking for the maximum figure of $1.13 million

Cam Ward,the 25th pick in the 2002,who is a better prospect than Umberger signed a three year deal for less than max money

3 years-$2.575 million

$775,000 signing bonus

$500,000
$600,000
$700,000

Ward could have re-entered the draft and been selected higher in next month's draft to get more money than Carolina was offering

Would Umberger sign for that money?

Vancouver offered him a little more money than Carolina gave Ward.He should have taken the Canucks offer

It will be interesting see if Buffalo signs Daniel Paille and what they give him

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Edmont...27/474845.html

Ward, drafted 25th by Carolina from the Red Deer Rebels of the WHL in 2002, signed a three-year pact with the Hurricanes two weeks ago worth $2.575 million.

Named MVP and WHL goaltender of the year with a 31-16-8 record, a 2.05 goals-against average and .921 saves percentage, Ward got $775,000 as a signing bonus. The salary breakdown of his contract is $500,000, $600,000 and $700,000.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 02:32 PM
  #27
JR#9*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,733
vCash: 500
Again, with the NYR's resources and the way we've blown money it always kills me when guys start worrying about nickel and diming prospects over a couple of hundred grand.

I've never seen the kid play so I'm not going to say he is a lock to do anything BUT the kid has all the tools including size and skill and he plays the position we are by far thinnest at for the future--a 1st-2nd line center w/size--- and all the knocks seem to be about character all linking back to his contract holdout and as we all should know guys get unfairly painted in such situations and this may very well be the case here.

The NYR's brass wants to pass on them--fine, all I'm saying is you had better be right because to let a kid with this package go at the stage of the game that we are at it would be a debacle if they let him walk and he becomes that 1st-2nd line center with size and skill that we so desperately need.

JR#9* is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 02:45 PM
  #28
Firefly
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Mohawk Valley
Country: Poland
Posts: 3,464
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Firefly Send a message via Skype™ to Firefly
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR#9
Again, with the NYR's resources and the way we've blown money it always kills me when guys start worrying about nickel and diming prospects over a couple of hundred grand.
i guess we can all just hope to god this is a sign of the rangers turning over a new leaf? maybe the years of throwing money at people and expecting greatness is over? we can only hope

Firefly is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 05:41 PM
  #29
Brooklyn Ranger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn, of course
Posts: 8,040
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blu3shirt
i guess we can all just hope to god this is a sign of the rangers turning over a new leaf? maybe the years of throwing money at people and expecting greatness is over? we can only hope
Sather has always nickel and dimed the younger players. He only believes in throwing globs of money at players over 30.

Brooklyn Ranger is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 06:07 PM
  #30
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brooklyn Ranger
Sather has always nickel and dimed the younger players. He only believes in throwing globs of money at players over 30.
come on if somebody isn't worth the money why sign him? if the rangers aren't high on him why sign him? if the kid has no heart why sign him? you have zero argument.

Son of Steinbrenner is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 06:55 PM
  #31
Brooklyn Ranger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn, of course
Posts: 8,040
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner
come on if somebody isn't worth the money why sign him? if the rangers aren't high on him why sign him? if the kid has no heart why sign him? you have zero argument.
I was talking in general, not specifically about any one particular player. It has been Sather's method to squeeze the players who have no leverage (other than to hold out or play somewhere else), while throwing money at "proven" veterans. Or are you suggesting otherwise?

Brooklyn Ranger is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 06:59 PM
  #32
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brooklyn Ranger
I was talking in general, not specifically about any one particular player. It has been Sather's method to squeeze the players who have no leverage (other than to hold out or play somewhere else), while throwing money at "proven" veterans. Or are you suggesting otherwise?
i'm talking about umberger. it is every gms method to "squeeze" the players with no leverage. who has held out? what young guy has left here to bite sather in the ass?

Son of Steinbrenner is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 07:23 PM
  #33
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,086
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR#9
Again, with the NYR's resources and the way we've blown money it always kills me when guys start worrying about nickel and diming prospects over a couple of hundred grand.

I've never seen the kid play so I'm not going to say he is a lock to do anything BUT the kid has all the tools including size and skill and he plays the position we are by far thinnest at for the future--a 1st-2nd line center w/size--- and all the knocks seem to be about character all linking back to his contract holdout and as we all should know guys get unfairly painted in such situations and this may very well be the case here.
That has been my point all along. Sign the kid. So what if you make a mistake and are wrong about him? It's not like making a mistake with a 33 year old player signed to a $7m salary. You make a mistake with a player whose salary would be around $1m (or is it less?). This is not a huge risk. This would be a well-worthwhle risk. Not like the org is stocked with playes who have top 2 line potential.

True Blue is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 07:30 PM
  #34
Bure9*
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY
Posts: 1,097
vCash: 500
Anybody think that maybe Umberger isn't being signed because he's included in a deal to the Pens for the number 2 pick? He's willing to give them a hometown discount so it wouldn't make sense for the Rangers to sign him at a higher price and then for the Pens to make the trade for him.

Bure9* is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 07:37 PM
  #35
Prucha73
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,879
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bure9
Anybody think that maybe Umberger isn't being signed because he's included in a deal to the Pens for the number 2 pick? He's willing to give them a hometown discount so it wouldn't make sense for the Rangers to sign him at a higher price and then for the Pens to make the trade for him.
maybe

Prucha73 is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 08:31 PM
  #36
Potted Plant
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tuscaloosa, AL
Posts: 858
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Potted Plant
I'm pretty sure that we can't do the give-him-up-for-a-second-then-sign-him-as-free-agent trick. I think it would be considered bad-faith and we'd probably be sanctioned for it. I think one team did something like that once, but it was only after all the other teams passed on his asking price and he signed for bottom dollar. In other words, you need good faith. You can't game the system like that.

Anyway, I disagree with the notion that we should just give him what he wants and forget about it because we have the money. For one thing, salary affects trade value down the road. For another thing, we want to reverse the trend of the Rangers being seen as a place where someone can get paid more than market value and then semi-retire. For a third thing, salaries are starting to decline, and I think we will see a precipitous decline in what players are worth across the board in the next few years. We may even see a hard or soft cap. Having overpaid people in the system will then hurt us severely.

I think if Umberger insists on the rookie maximum, and if we're not positive that he's a bluechipper, we're better off with the second round pick.

Potted Plant is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 08:37 PM
  #37
Prucha73
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,879
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HighlyRegardedRookie
I'm pretty sure that we can't do the give-him-up-for-a-second-then-sign-him-as-free-agent trick. I think it would be considered bad-faith and we'd probably be sanctioned for it. I think one team did something like that once, but it was only after all the other teams passed on his asking price and he signed for bottom dollar. In other words, you need good faith. You can't game the system like that.

Anyway, I disagree with the notion that we should just give him what he wants and forget about it because we have the money. For one thing, salary affects trade value down the road. For another thing, we want to reverse the trend of the Rangers being seen as a place where someone can get paid more than market value and then semi-retire. For a third thing, salaries are starting to decline, and I think we will see a precipitous decline in what players are worth across the board in the next few years. We may even see a hard or soft cap. Having overpaid people in the system will then hurt us severely.

I think if Umberger insists on the rookie maximum, and if we're not positive that he's a bluechipper, we're better off with the second round pick.
it is legal as long as there was no prior agreement between the 2 parties.

Prucha73 is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 08:50 PM
  #38
Potted Plant
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tuscaloosa, AL
Posts: 858
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Potted Plant
Do you have a source on that?

Potted Plant is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 09:17 PM
  #39
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
That has been my point all along. Sign the kid. So what if you make a mistake and are wrong about him? It's not like making a mistake with a 33 year old player signed to a $7m salary. You make a mistake with a player whose salary would be around $1m (or is it less?). This is not a huge risk. This would be a well-worthwhle risk. Not like the org is stocked with playes who have top 2 line potential.
a bad seed is a bad seed. having someone with an additude in a young lockerroom cant be viewed as a good thing. i know the rangers waste money so that makes it ok... blah blah blah blah

Son of Steinbrenner is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 09:20 PM
  #40
Prucha73
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,879
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HighlyRegardedRookie
Do you have a source on that?
no it was a long time ago, maybe someone else has the link.

Prucha73 is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 10:23 PM
  #41
Brooklyn Ranger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn, of course
Posts: 8,040
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner
i'm talking about umberger. it is every gms method to "squeeze" the players with no leverage. who has held out? what young guy has left here to bite sather in the ass?
And the players Sather gathered together played such inspiring hockey for the last 4 years :lol

I'd rather have taken a chance with some hasn't been kid than an over the hill or never been veteran. There are a number of players who Sather nickel and dimed who are contributing to other organizations. Some of them even helped their teams reach the playoffs and win a few games.

Brooklyn Ranger is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 10:30 PM
  #42
free0717
Registered User
 
free0717's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Old Bridge, NJ
Posts: 2,145
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HighlyRegardedRookie
I'm pretty sure that we can't do the give-him-up-for-a-second-then-sign-him-as-free-agent trick. I think it would be considered bad-faith and we'd probably be sanctioned for it. I think one team did something like that once, but it was only after all the other teams passed on his asking price and he signed for bottom dollar. In other words, you need good faith. You can't game the system like that.

Anyway, I disagree with the notion that we should just give him what he wants and forget about it because we have the money. For one thing, salary affects trade value down the road. For another thing, we want to reverse the trend of the Rangers being seen as a place where someone can get paid more than market value and then semi-retire. For a third thing, salaries are starting to decline, and I think we will see a precipitous decline in what players are worth across the board in the next few years. We may even see a hard or soft cap. Having overpaid people in the system will then hurt us severely.

Didnt the Blackhawks do that last year? i dont know the player but I think they signed there own draft pick after June 1 and recieved the compensatory pick. It is legal as long as a verbal agreement did not exist prior to June 1.

I think if Umberger insists on the rookie maximum, and if we're not positive that he's a bluechipper, we're better off with the second round pick.

free0717 is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 10:57 PM
  #43
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brooklyn Ranger
And the players Sather gathered together played such inspiring hockey for the last 4 years :lol

I'd rather have taken a chance with some hasn't been kid than an over the hill or never been veteran. There are a number of players who Sather nickel and dimed who are contributing to other organizations. Some of them even helped their teams reach the playoffs and win a few games.
hmm what young players?

Son of Steinbrenner is offline  
Old
05-28-2004, 11:55 PM
  #44
Brooklyn Ranger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn, of course
Posts: 8,040
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner
hmm what young players?
I think you've been around here long enough to know the list.

Brooklyn Ranger is offline  
Old
05-29-2004, 12:09 AM
  #45
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brooklyn Ranger
I think you've been around here long enough to know the list.
perhaps my memory isn't that good?

Son of Steinbrenner is offline  
Old
05-29-2004, 01:35 AM
  #46
Brooklyn Ranger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn, of course
Posts: 8,040
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner
perhaps my memory isn't that good?
I would never suggest that!

Brooklyn Ranger is offline  
Old
05-29-2004, 01:37 AM
  #47
Brooklyn Ranger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn, of course
Posts: 8,040
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prucha73
I'm not sure what this thread has to do with the current conversation, much less the price of tea in China.

Brooklyn Ranger is offline  
Old
05-29-2004, 03:40 AM
  #48
Radek27
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 5,173
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Radek27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner
perhaps my memory isn't that good?
Zidlicky
Ekman
Pisa
are the first to come to mind.

Radek27 is offline  
Old
05-29-2004, 12:22 PM
  #49
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radek27
Zidlicky
Ekman
Pisa
are the first to come to mind.
ekman we traded for wiseman who could be better in the long run. we didn't trade ekman for a 35 year old over the hill veteran.

zidlicky we traded for dunham. zidlicky didn't want to play with a two way contract. if the rangers had signed him to a one way contract and he sucked there would be threads about that. should we have traded him? no but he isn't exactly a future hall of famer.

pisa :lol :lol :lol

mr sather and the scouting staff have done a great job of restocking a system that had almost nobody when he got here.

Son of Steinbrenner is offline  
Old
05-29-2004, 01:07 PM
  #50
Barnaby
Registered User
 
Barnaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Port Jefferson, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,559
vCash: 500
One thing Sather has done is hold onto his better prospects. He may deal picks or Mike York, but he usually holds onto his better prospects.

Ekman - could have been a decent 2nd line winger
Zidlicky - We need another O D-man?
Pisa - 7th d-man anyway
Kloucek - has done nothing
Novak - has done nothing

He traded 2 decent players, and garbage. Not too bad from over here.

Barnaby 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 06:06 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.