David Clarkson
- Thread starter mjmgrand
- Start date
Britishbulldog
Active member
princedpw said:
I was dismayed 2 years ago when Chris Stewart was stumbling along but looked to have better hockey sense and skill than $6 Million Man Lucic and the Leafs didn't trade for him. I then had another nail put in the coffin of the Leafs ever getting him in a trade when he was awarded 1st star in the NHL this week, even ahead of Crosby.
I have realized that Clarkson isn't even a poor man's Stewart and I will seeing him in a Leaf's uniform for 6 more years.
Kin
New member
princedpw said:
And those people are free to print a bunch of T-Shirts that say "WE WERE RIGHT" in great big neon letters as they fall over themselves posting in the ex-Leafs board every time Grabo scratches his nose. It doesn't change that, as smart as those people are and as good as they think they've gotten at predicting the future, those deals are only ultimately going to be judged retrospectively. Some people thought Clarkson was the better buy than Grabo, others(a group that legitimately includes basically every single NHL GM) didn't. That the smart money won doesn't mean that it was never a question.
Champ Kind
New member
princedpw said:
No, but it is. I'm not saying the majority of posters didn't object to the length and total value of the Clarkson deal, or that many didn't agree with the Grobovski buy-out. What I'm saying is that it is Monday morning quarterbacking to look at Grabovski's performance against Clarkson's this year and say, "See, I told you so!". Look, there were those that predicted this outcome, and they are obviously way smarter than me. But, in July, I don't think there was any way to have determined that Clarkson would stumble as badly as he has and Grabovski would not only return to but actually exceed his past performance.
Champ Kind
New member
Erndog said:
Well, sure, that's why observing sports is fun, right? But really, it doesn't mean that, at the time, your guess was any better than mine was. Or management's for that matter. If outcomes were known, Nick Foles would have started the year as the Eagles' #1, Cam Talbot wouldn't have started the year in the AHL, and the Kings would never have dealt for Ben Scrivens what with Martin Jones primed and ready.
Kin
New member
Erndog said:
No, but obviously there are some that are bigger questions than others. For all of the "Boy, how stupid were the Leafs for buying out Grabo" talk there isn't a single NHL GM who looked at that situation and said "Boy, the Leafs are nuts, if they don't want to pay Grabovski 5.5 million a season I'm going to be all over that like flies on flypaper" and even offer up a 7th round pick or future considerations for the privilege, conversely, the bidding on Clarkson was pretty intense by all reports.
Erndog said:
Sure, if that floats your boat. I, for instance, said I didn't like the money or length of the Clarkson contract the day it went down and kept saying it when the topic came up during the summer. Looking back, 40+ games into a 7 year deal, it sure looks like I was right but I don't see the point in saying that not only was I right but that the possibility of me being wrong didn't exist.
mr grieves
New member
Nik the Trik said:
A .40 point/game player is what I meant.
Nik the Trik said:
You're using rumors of other offers, sourced to Nonis and Clarkson's agent, as evidence of this, which is a bit hinky. But I'll take the report that he left the something like $5.5-6m from Edmonton on the table as true. First, we never heard the term offered; Nonis ended up saying Clarkson's agent said "we'd have to go to 7," so I wonder. Second, we have no idea what the fringe benefits offered by the Oilers were: was there a NTC? a NMC? a bonus structure that pid out even in the event of a buyout? Third, in what world do we look to the Oilers as the measure of prudent management? Fourth, even if Edmonton wanted to act more stupidly than the Leafs, that doesn't mean the Leafs didn't act stupidly, and there's little solace in knowing the Oilers wanted to behave more stupidly when we're the ones who won the dubious prize.
mr grieves
New member
OldTimeHockey said:
Neither's a good contract, but at least Horcoff's had a 70 point season and three 50-point seasons, Zajac a 60-point one.
Kin
New member
mr grieves said:
Which is a fairly disingenuous way to describe him. He was coming off seasons of 30 and a pace of 26 goals. I don't think a fair reading of the market would hold that what a player did five or six years prior to his UFA year is just as important in determining his value as what he's done recently.
mr grieves said:
But the issue was never whether or not you are smarter than the people who run the Maple Leafs. It's whether or not the Maple Leafs thinking on Clarkson reflected the general point of view. The reason I'm putting faith in the rumours that lots of teams, including but not limited to the Oilers, were in on Clarkson is that is a reflection of the fact that just about everyone and his grandmother who can be legitimately said to represent an official viewpoint was calling Clarkson the top free agent on the market.
Like I said, there is a very good argument to make that trying to team build via Unrestricted Free Agency is a bad course of action. That is not the same thing as saying that Nonis and co. were alone on an island somewhere, trading a cow for magic beans.
GhostofPotvin29
New member
brb falling over myself.
Highlander
Active member
If Clarkson can play like the player we have seen he is capable of being then we can all relax and find a new whipping boy. He has shown flashes in the past 3 games of regaining the form that made him desirable in the first place, as a hard working winger, good in the corners and not afraid to go to the net and take the abuse and pop in some hard earned goals, hell we saw that last night whether it was a good call or not.
And oh we have several other whipping boys we can keep on with, Orr over Brodie, Frazer and Frazer, my least favorite dance team. Let have a fourth line with McClement, Brodie and D'Amigo please.
And oh we have several other whipping boys we can keep on with, Orr over Brodie, Frazer and Frazer, my least favorite dance team. Let have a fourth line with McClement, Brodie and D'Amigo please.
OldTimeHockey
Active member
mr grieves said:
I don't get what you're getting at? I can come back to you and say the 70 point season was 9 years ago and Horcoff has never scored more than 22 goals(9 years ago)...Clarkson has a 30 goal season(2 years ago) and was on pace for 25 last year. Zajac had two 60 point seasons 5 years ago but hasn't been 45 in the last 5 with some pretty serious injuries.
I don't think anyone is arguing that Clarkson's contract is a 'good' contract..not yet anyways. The point is, there's several contracts out there that are similar that suck just as much.
A Weekend at Bernier's said:
That makes sense (I misinterpreted your comment). It does seems very likely that Clarkson will improve in the short term --- score a little more, stay in the line up, etc. It's the back-end years that are scariest (and the potential opportunity cost: being unable to upgrade at center and defense where they need it more). And on the other side, we don't generally expect Grabbo to keep up the current scoring pace. Most would probably expect him to ease back to the pace of the last few years before this one: 50-60 points with 20-25 goals and good possession stats.
And it's not really Grabbo vs Clarkson anyway. They could certainly have had both if they had wanted to.
dappleganger
Active member
When is a good time to bring up the "Model Franchise" Detroit signing Stephen Weiss?
Looks like a worse signing than Clarkson.
Looks like a worse signing than Clarkson.
dappleganger said:
Well, the contract is 2 years shorter, costs less per year, for a player at a more valuable position, with a better offensive record, and, I believe (though I don't know from watching him myself), a fairly solid defensive game.
... but I'm sure they aren't happy about him having back surgery at the moment!
GhostofPotvin29
New member
Weiss has been brought up, and as princedpw points out, there are a number of reasons why it doesn't look worse than the Clarkson signing. Doesn't make it a good signing by any stretch right now, but still not worse.
mr grieves
New member
OldTimeHockey said:
All I'm getting at, bad as those contracts are, even Horcoff and Zajac at least have some good years on their resumes. Clarkson topped out at 46 points and is getting over 8% of the team's cap -- who else has turned that sort of resume into this sort of contract?
I don't disagree that there are contracts that 'suck just [about] as much,' but this one is on the extreme end of that spectrum -- it looks absurd -- and it's one that, had anyone looked at the numbers closely, was obviously going to suck, as far as it being justified by some sort of numbers goes. On a team that has no shortage of scoring wingers, that doesn't put Clarkson on the power play for over 3 minutes a night, he's a 25-30 point guy.
bustaheims
Active member
dappleganger said:
It's been a less productive signing than Clarkson, but, on top of the differences others have pointed out, Weiss does at least have the injury excuse to fall back on. He was coming off a major injury when the Wings signed him and he's struggled though another one this season. Obviously, year one of the contract is a write-off for him, and, considering the major injury he had last season, I'm sure that's something the Wings considered as a possibility. The thing is, between Clarkson and Weiss, if they both can stay relatively healthy, Weiss has the greater chance of rebounding and becoming the player the Wings thought they signed, and by a fairly wide margin, at that. Before last season's injured plagued shortened season, Weiss had 3 straight 20+ goal seasons and 6 straight 40+ point seasons - plateaus Clarkson has reached exactly once in his career. Even with the extremely disappointing season Weiss has had, I'd take him and his contract over Clarkson and his 10 times out of 10.