“In the long run men hit only what they aim at.” – Henry David Thoreau
Given the recent play of RJ Umberger and Scott Hartnell I know this isn’t the greatest juncture to bring up such a ludicrous claim, but I’ve also never been great with timing. So, tough luck.
Fact of the matter is the Umberger/Hartnell trade wasn’t about the performance of both players. It never was. It never will be. Scott Hartnell is the better offensive player. His numbers speak for themselves. It was about being able to build for the future. Hextall is aiming to ice a Stanley Cup contender over the coming years and it started with the Umberger trade.
Hextall on Hartnell trade: "It's not my job to judge popularity contests. I made a trade that I thought would help our team, and still do."
— Bill Meltzer (@billmeltzer) November 12, 2014
While many fans were hoping for some modicum of scoring from RJ Umberger, he has barely been able to alter the scoresheet for the better. He has three points in 16 games and is a -6. Still, he’s better for the Flyers than Scott Hartnell. Thinking otherwise just proves that you’re looking at the trade superficially and with the wrong mindset.
If you’re wondering why the Flyers aren’t doing as well as they’d hope, look no further than the implementation of the salary cap brought on by the NHL after the 2004-05 lockout. GMs have been trying to ice competitive teams while complying to salary cap limits for a decade now.
The Flyers have never been even remotely successful at cap management and their team now is Exhibit A of the problems you can run into without wiggle room. With the albatross contracts given to Ilya Bryzgalov, Scott Hartnell, and now Vinny Lecavalier and Andrew MacDonald, the Flyers have found themselves between a rock and a hard place.
While the rest of the Metropolitan Division improved during the offseason, Ron Hextall was forced to remain stagnant. Now the after effects are beginning to show.
The difference between RJ Umberger’s contract and Scott Hartnell’s (monetarily speaking) isn’t much different. Umberger is a modest $175k less than Hartnell’s, but the major difference is Umberger’s ends two year’s earlier.
![Scott Hartnell (#43) and RJ Umberger (#18) faceoff against each other. [photo: Amy Irvin]](https://s3951.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/HartnellUmberger.jpg)
This team is – and was always – a longshot to make the playoffs. That was self-evident on July 1st, during training camp, during preseason, and at present. I know that. You know that. Ron Hextall knows that. Still, he made the correct move, whether you want to believe it or not.
I understand the whole salary cap issue, but then why commit to an Umberger at 4.5 mil instead of trading Hartnell for decent pick(s) and fill in with home-grown players? Then you are under the cap by Hartnell’s full salary and young players are gaining valuable experience. Paying Umberger almost the same as Hartnell for 3 points doesn’t make any sense!
You’re assuming Hextall had opportunities to move Hartnell for “decent picks.” If he did, given his intended goal of clearing cap space, don’t you think he’d have done that instead? It seems logical to surmise that the only options Hextall had for moving Hartnell were Umberger or players with even worse contracts (David Clarkson, anyone?)
Hartnells contract is an albatross that no team wanted. He is an aging power forward with questionable skating ability and has a penchant for taking bad penalties. He gets his points but has way too many years left on a contract. Taking Umberger is the only way Columbus would take Hartnell. This is the same reason we are finding it hard to move Vinny. Teams aren’t gonna take our problem contracts for nothing. In Hartnells case we had to take a corpse to buy two years less of a bad contract.
Agreed. Btw, the post title needs fixing.
Thanks Walter – fixed it.
I don’t think many people take issue with the Flyers wanting to get rid of Hartnell’s contract but I don’t understand why they’d want Umberger. If they wanted to just drop Hartnell to save salary, would Columbus not have been interested in getting him for a conditional 7th round pick (effectively for free) after they used a compliance buyout on Umberger, which they were planning on doing if they couldn’t trade him? Seems like Philly could have dropped Hartnell’s contract just as easily and if they actually wanted Umberger on the team, could have got him for probably less than half of what he’s making now after he was bought out instead of being stuck with another big contract and running into cap issues next season.
I can’t imagine Columbus wanted to pay Umberger’s contract off, and assume the entirety of Hartnell’s, which is what would have happened if they didn’t trade him. The only reason they took on Hartnell (I imagine) was because he’s only costing them about $175k more this year and next. Doing it the other way would be akin to paying Hartnell $6,283,334 until the end of his contract, and putting out an extra $1,533,334 after he’s no longer paying for them (I’ll spare you the math, but they’d have owed Umberger $1,533,334 per year for the next 6 years, on top of owing Hartnell $4,750,000 over each of the next 5. Adding that up would be their total outlay.)