How can David Clarkson earn his contract?

[Kane One]

The only way he could earn his contract is wait until the cap goes up drastically and every third line player makes that much.

 

[Maccer]

To add more fuel to the fire, the Leafs may have soured relations with Franson because of this

More like we avoided another disastrous signing with Franson, his 12-13 season really looks like it was just a hot streak.

 

[KingsFan7824]

Few players can actually live up to their contracts, especially UFA's. If every player was a free agent every summer, you might get a more accurate picture. But free agency as it exists is a limited supply, and seemingly decreasing each season, with a demand that grows for multiple reasons.

A guy like Clarkson was in the right place at the right time. A 30 goal year in 11-12, 15 goals in 48 games last year(about a 25 goal pace), one of the better UFA's available last summer, and born in Toronto. A hometown guy, the summer after a lockout, with a team coming off a bad playoff loss, but at the same time a team that finally made it back to the playoffs and has some positive momentum going for it. All it takes is one owner willing to spend money.

Real estate is all about location. Free agency is all about timing.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

That's a good point - ultimately, it's the limited supply that creates artificial demand.

In the 1970s, one of baseball's maverick owners (Charlie Finley) offered the proposal that every player become a free agent every year. The other owners turned it down, but Charlie was right (and ahead of his time) - if there's one David Clarkson on the market, then everyone needs him. If there are 20 David Clarksons on the market? Then you can move on to the next one - if the products are (largely) interchangeable, then the scarcity doesn't exist.

Players such as Crosby and Ovechkin would still get paid in such a system, but the vast majority of players would lose out big time. The players' lawyers (namely Marvin Miller) realized that this would be bad, but also that the owners would never let it happen.

 

[Analyzer*]

IMO with the cap going up, getting 20-25 goals, good two-way game and continues to fight to stand up for himself/teammates and to create energy would be worth it.

Right now he's far from that.

 

[Maupin Fan]

All he needs to do is keep up the great job he's already doing of protecting Bernier's water bottle. You cant put a price on that security.

 

[MarkGio]

That's a good point - ultimately, it's the limited supply that creates artificial demand.

In the 1970s, one of baseball's maverick owners (Charlie Finley) offered the proposal that every player become a free agent every year. The other owners turned it down, but Charlie was right (and ahead of his time) - if there's one David Clarkson on the market, then everyone needs him. If there are 20 David Clarksons on the market? Then you can move on to the next one - if the products are (largely) interchangeable, then the scarcity doesn't exist.

Players such as Crosby and Ovechkin would still get paid in such a system, but the vast majority of players would lose out big time. The players' lawyers (namely Marvin Miller) realized that this would be bad, but also that the owners would never let it happen.

That would be a bizarre system. Its like a fantasy draft every year. How do you make your team better when all the good parts are lost to free agency. There would be no repeat champions. No consistent playoff contenders. Just a whole new year every year.

 

[MarkGio]

Few players can actually live up to their contracts, especially UFA's. If every player was a free agent every summer, you might get a more accurate picture. But free agency as it exists is a limited supply, and seemingly decreasing each season, with a demand that grows for multiple reasons.

A guy like Clarkson was in the right place at the right time. A 30 goal year in 11-12, 15 goals in 48 games last year(about a 25 goal pace), one of the better UFA's available last summer, and born in Toronto. A hometown guy, the summer after a lockout, with a team coming off a bad playoff loss, but at the same time a team that finally made it back to the playoffs and has some positive momentum going for it. All it takes is one owner willing to spend money.

Real estate is all about location. Free agency is all about timing.

Very true. The author compared some salaries to contracts signed long ago on long term deals. Maybe its better to compare dollars per points from those who just cashed out from free agency. Maybe there really is a phenomenon in which a player performs better before his pay day and then mails it in after getting his.

 

[Knave]

If the NHL earns a lot more money.

 

[aleshemsky83]

Wait 5 years for the cap to go up 25-30 million

Then score 30 goals

 

[zidell*]

That's a good point - ultimately, it's the limited supply that creates artificial demand.

In the 1970s, one of baseball's maverick owners (Charlie Finley) offered the proposal that every player become a free agent every year. The other owners turned it down, but Charlie was right (and ahead of his time) - if there's one David Clarkson on the market, then everyone needs him. If there are 20 David Clarksons on the market? Then you can move on to the next one - if the products are (largely) interchangeable, then the scarcity doesn't exist.

Players such as Crosby and Ovechkin would still get paid in such a system, but the vast majority of players would lose out big time. The players' lawyers (namely Marvin Miller) realized that this would be bad, but also that the owners would never let it happen.

This would never work. The teams would never go for it. The NHL and all other sports leagues depend on fans identifying with the team. If the players turned over en masse every year, that would be lost. Bye bye fans.

Also, he players would never go for it. It would be a much bigger boon to teams than to players. No team is getting stuck with a ridiculous long term contrast that overpays players by huge amounts. No more player security. One injury an your career is down the tubes.

 

[hatterson]

This would never work. The teams would never go for it. The NHL and all other sports leagues depend on fans identifying with the team. If the players turned over en masse every year, that would be lost. Bye bye fans.

Also, he players would never go for it. It would be a much bigger boon to teams than to players. No team is getting stuck with a ridiculous long term contrast that overpays players by huge amounts. No more player security. One injury an your career is down the tubes.

NCAA seems to do fine with players being on teams a maximum of 4 years, usually only a couple. I'd think fans would adjust to rapid turnover and end up cheering more for teams than players.

Granted, turnover every 2-4 years is different than every year, but it would be interesting to see how the league would turn out if contracts were capped at 3 years instead of 7-8 and there was no just thing as an extension, players just became full free agents and could sign wherever they wanted (including the same team, but they'd have to wait to the summer to sign) Although that's more a discussion for another topic as opposed to a thread regarding Clarkson

 

[NarcoPolo]

If the cap went upwards to 90 Million+ every solid third liner could earn that much