Confirmed Trade: [VGK/CBJ] David Clarkson, '17 1st (#24) & '19 2nd to select William Karlsson

Crede777

Deputized
Dec 16, 2009
14,636
4,159
Totally ok with this. Karlsson is good but a late 1st and 2019 2nd is very fair for them taking Clarkson and staying away from our top guys.
 

Jackets16

Registered User
Jan 7, 2005
12,018
619
This was a great trade for Columbus. Got rid of Clarkson's contract and didn't have to trade any prospects.
 

Jackets16

Registered User
Jan 7, 2005
12,018
619
I dislike this deal....too much just to rid ourselves of a LTIR contract...

And keep Anderson, Johnson, Korpisalo, etc....

I'm starting to think you would complain no matter what would happen.
 

Fro

Cheatin on CBJ w TBL
Mar 11, 2009
24,889
4,696
The Beach, FL
And keep Anderson, Johnson, Korpisalo, etc....

I'm starting to think you would complain no matter what would happen.

we lose 1 player...a role player...giving up 2 future picks just to rid ourselves of a LTIR contract is just bad business IMO...

or for that price, the pick should have been TJ Tynan or Kukan...not a roster player
 

Crede777

Deputized
Dec 16, 2009
14,636
4,159
we lose 1 player...a role player...giving up 2 future picks just to rid ourselves of a LTIR contract is just bad business IMO...

or for that price, the pick should have been TJ Tynan or Kukan...not a roster player

Depends on what they do with the space. If they turn around and use it on a good forward, then it's smart.
 

Xoggz22

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
7,470
2,724
Columbus, Ohio
I dislike this deal....too much just to rid ourselves of a LTIR contract...
This wasn't just to rid us of Clarkson's contract. This meant not losing Anderson or Korpisalo as well. I suspect JJ was included in that group too. Late 1st in a weak draft and a 2nd in 2019 which will likely be recovered by Jarmo. No issue with this to free up Cap space for the young guys.

Now we have all our prospects to consider deals to improve the youngest team in the NHL. Who by the way is already good.
 

Viqsi

"that chick from Ohio"
Oct 5, 2007
53,757
31,155
40N 83W (approx)
If there was a year when it would make sense to move a 1st for Clarkson's contract, it was this year - latest 1st ever in our history, in a draft not exactly known for its depth and breadth of talent.

Still. Ouch.
 

MoeBartoli

Checkers-to-Jackets
Jan 12, 2011
14,049
10,230
we lose 1 player...a role player...giving up 2 future picks just to rid ourselves of a LTIR contract is just bad business IMO...

or for that price, the pick should have been TJ Tynan or Kukan...not a roster player

Yes, recent mid to late mid picks have yielded Rychel, Dano and Milano. :sarcasm: Two gone, one still with a ton to prove. And this draft is even weaker......Fair deal in my book.
 

CBJWerenski8

Formerly CBJWennberg10 (RIP Kivi)
Jun 13, 2009
42,291
24,197
Stings a little, but with cap space we can help our team now, and we kept our prospects. But we better make well on our picks next year, since we have no high picks this year.
 

Leafs87

Mr. Steal Your Job
Aug 10, 2010
14,720
4,806
Toronto
Funny cause i thought long term injury players couldn't be picked and were except regardless....
 

3074326

Registered User
Apr 9, 2009
11,608
11,038
USA
Columbus has enough young guys that the picks aren't going to be felt much. They will definitely feel the weight of that Clarkson contract being gone, however, even if he's on LTIR. It helps the club in a couple ways.

Still a lot to give. Good for Vegas. Taking advantage of the situation for sure.
 

Hello Johnny

Registered User
Apr 13, 2007
13,208
1,142
we lose 1 player...a role player...giving up 2 future picks just to rid ourselves of a LTIR contract is just bad business IMO...

or for that price, the pick should have been TJ Tynan or Kukan...not a roster player

Just because he was on LTIR doesn't mean he was free. What's bad business is to pay someone who is more or less collecting dust. Sometimes you just gotta take your lumps.
 

CBJx614

Registered User
May 25, 2012
14,875
6,482
C-137
Just because he was on LTIR doesn't mean he was free. What's bad business is to pay someone who is more or less collecting dust. Sometimes you just gotta take your lumps.

Exactly, I'm just glad Jarmo had the foresight to trade Horton for Clarkson. If we still had Horton we'd be stuck paying the rest of his uninsured contract and this would have cost WAY more if it happens at all.
 

Uncle Scrooge

Hockey Bettor
Nov 14, 2011
13,503
8,048
Helsinki
we lose 1 player...a role player...giving up 2 future picks just to rid ourselves of a LTIR contract is just bad business IMO...

or for that price, the pick should have been TJ Tynan or Kukan...not a roster player

That's not what the trade was about though.

You lose 1 player no matter what, Karlsson ended up being that player. You can't really include his full value to the trade.

Then you give up a 1st + a 2nd for keeping Anderson/JJ and getting rid of Clarkson.

It's a significant price to pay sure, but i think the Jackets are at the point where you start valuing important roster players more than picks.

We also haven't seen what plans for the off-season Kekalainen has. If he brings in a big dog like Duchene, Clarkson's contract would've been a huge problem because you don't have enough waiver exempt guys making enough money to fit the team under the cap at the season opening deadline.

And with Duchene, Dubinsky drops down to 3C and Sedlak 4C, Karlsson becomes expendable.

Just to throw it out there what could happen and everybody would say this was a great move at that point.

I think we just have to see what happens in the summer with all of the teams giving up something significant to see the big picture.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad