What a DAVID CLARKSON BUYOUT would actually look like (it's good news for Clarkson)

[p.l.f.]

Clarkson looks in the mirror and says to himself
"i'm the worst player in the league on the worst team in the league............
but I'm getting over 40 million dollars for it "

 

[bobber]

Clarkson looks in the mirror and says to himself
"i'm the worst player in the league on the worst team in the league............
but I'm getting over 40 million dollars for it "

Wait till the rest of the Leafs go in for renewal and use Clarkson as a bench mark.

 

[-DeMo-]

I really hope we don't make the same mistake we made with Tucker, he was bought out 2 soon, in a period where the roster will probably be overhauled and big changes made it will take a year or 2 to get this team back on track there's no reason to buy him out at this point wait at least 2 years then re-assess. It's not like he's considered a bad guy or unlikeable in the dressing room. There's no rush to do this, no need to be adding years to our cap

 

[GoodNewfieBoy]

I thought the contract was buy-out proof?

What happened?

 

[SmoggyTwinkles]

I thought the contract was buy-out proof?

What happened?

Capgeek went offline and it's possible these other sources don't have the correct info or method.

Or Capgeek was wrong?

I just know the buyout numbers looked very different (in a bad way) when using the Capgeek buyout calculator. Something to do with Clarkson's contract being almost entirely signing bonuses which I assume can't be removed from the cap hit or something?

 

[Caesium]

The previous numbers I saw had Clarkson's buyout costing about $4.7 million per year for 5 years, then about $500k for the next five years. I don't know if those are wrong or the numbers being used here are wrong. Either way, I wouldn't buy him out. Just let the contract run out.

 

[Tak7]

If you rebuild the Clarkson contract doesn't matter. You can keep him while you stockpile picks for the next 5 years. He's not going to keep is out of the top 3 or 5.

Yep.

Well said. There's actually no point buying out the Clarkson contract right now. The buyout savings don't make sense, and if you are a team that is prepared to bottom out for a few years, then it doesn't really matter if you have the cap space or not.

What does make more sense, is to buyout Clarkson later on in the deal - after year 3 or 4, where the cap savings make a little bit more sense, and when your team is potentially more prepared to be competitive and spend some money. (pay a Nylander or a Rielly, etc).

 

[Gary Batman]

Buying out Clarkson would be even dumber than the dumbness shown in signing him to the current contract.

Our best bet is to retain 50% of his salary and hopefully find a trade partner. Maybe, if he can score 20 goals this year, we can pitch a "20 goal scorer at just $2.675 million".

Also, Clarkson contract doesn't matter in case of rebuild, as said by user Trapper, and reiterated by user Tak7

 

[Tak7]

The previous numbers I saw had Clarkson's buyout costing about $4.7 million per year for 5 years, then about $500k for the next five years. I don't know if those are wrong or the numbers being used here are wrong. Either way, I wouldn't buy him out. Just let the contract run out.

This was my first reaction when I saw the buyout numbers.

These numbers aren't correct.

Clarkson's contract has a lot of it's money tied into bonuses, which means that you aren't saving all that much money by buying him out now. The cap savings just don't make sense for it to be a logical move, compared to say, buying him out after year 4 or 5 of his deal.

TL; DR version - the buyout numbers in this thread are wrong.

 

[SmoggyTwinkles]

http://spectorshockey.net/blog/fun-with-nhl-buyout-calculations-salary-cap-recapture/

Scroll down a bit and this is what I remember a Clarkson buyout looking like from Capgeek.

So if he were bought out after this season, the cap savings would be $0.5m to $1.5m followed by $0.5m on the cap for 5 years after his contract is done.

Dude makes over 5m a season but buying him out gives next to no cap relief. Mind boggling!

 

[Drew311]

Clarkson can't be bought out because of his bonuses guys. Put the pipe dream to bed already.

I say trade him ASAP and retain 50% salary. That's the best they can do.

 

[WestCoastLeafs]

I thought the contract was buy-out proof?

What happened?

You can't have a "no buyout clause", they aren't allowed under the CBA. By "buy-out proof", people mean that it was structured so it would be ridiculous to buy him out because of all the guaranteed salary. Basically, you're on the hook for 5.25 a season for 5 years, or roughly half that amount over twice as long a period. There wasn't really any "good news" in the original post, it's just some people think it looks smaller if you spread it out longer.

Here's the only really good news about his contract:

- Because of the huge signing bonuses each year, it would be possible for Leafs to pay the signing bonus (paid July 1 I believe) and then move him later in the summer to a team looking for a cheap way to get cap floor (they would get the full $5.25M cap hit but only be paying his much lower annual salary). Because of his middle-heavy contract, this doesn't really become an option until summer 2017, but if we go into rebuild/retool over the next couple years his cap hit shouldn't hurt.
- There's not really any such thing as an NMC. Yes - officially, he has one, but if he's not even 4th-line capable and spends a few months in the pressbox, pretty likely he's going to waive it. It wouldn't help the Leafs a whole lot, but they would get approx ~$1M in cap room back, and at least he wouldn't be on the powerplay anymore
- The last year of his contract is only for $2.5M in real dollars. Improbably but conceivably, if his NHL career is well and truly over, he might retire, shortening the headache by one year. Since it's not an Over-35 contract, there would be no cap implications for the Leafs. Hard to see someone foregoing $2.5M, but I guess maybe if you've earned about $2M of the $33M you've already been paid, you'd be willing to do something for the good of the team?? I've never been a millionaire though, so I don't really know how millionaires think.

 

[GrizzLeaf]

This is why front loaded contracts are better. After a few years those contracts have high cap hit, low actual payout, so you can trade him to a team that has trouble reaching the cap floor.

The problem is the way Clarkson's contract is set up. The sweet spot for what I'm talking about is at the very end of his contract. Only the last two years would a cap floor team even bother looking at him.

Buying him out makes zero financial sense, because of his bonus structure. We have to face the facts that he's gonna be here for a while longer or the Leaf's are gonna eat an equally bad contract in a trade.

 

[Tak7]

http://spectorshockey.net/blog/fun-with-nhl-buyout-calculations-salary-cap-recapture/

Scroll down a bit and this is what I remember a Clarkson buyout looking like from Capgeek.

So if he were bought out after this season, the cap savings would be $0.5m to $1.5m followed by $0.5m on the cap for 5 years after his contract is done.

Dude makes over 5m a season but buying him out gives next to no cap relief. Mind boggling!

There we go - these are the correct numbers. Thanks for the link. If he was bought out LAST SUMMER:

2015-16: $4,716,667

2016-17: $3,716,667

2017-18: $3,716,667

2018-19: $4,716,667

2019-20: $4,716,667

2020-21: $466,667

2021-22: $466,667

2022-23: $466,667

2023-24: $466,667

2024-25: $466,667


Would be similar numbers if you were to buy him out this coming summer.

That's why it makes sense to hold onto the contract and buy him out during the 4th or 5th year of the deal.

 

[Tak7]

you forgot the 1.83mill from 2020-2025

These numbers, and the ones mentioned in the OP's opening post, are wrong.

 

[Confucius]

The ****? This team isnt winning anytime soon.

ENOUGH OF THIS SHORT SIGHTED ********. WE WERE NEVER GONNA WIN ANYTHING THIS YEAR, AND WE AREN'T GOING TO FOR THE NEXT 5 YEARS, TANK OR NO TANK.

WE SHOULD NOT BE A CAP TEAM WHEN WE AREN'T EVEN CLOSE TO CONTENDING.

Save that cap down the line when we will actually need it. The Gleason buyout was idiotic. We have that guy on the hook for 3 more years instead of 1 for no reason.

If Nonis is still the GM in the summer and he buys out the Clarkson contract (looks like an option based on the OP), then I am officially done with the leafs. I will move on to another team or quit watching hockey.

Exactly just play it out, we'll be a bottom feeder for the next 5 or 6 years. Too bad we'll also be at the cap. Oh well MLSE just paying for its mistakes, so be it. Don't handicap us more by having a caphit for the next decade.

 

[Banic]

Wait till the rest of the Leafs go in for renewal and use Clarkson as a bench mark.

This is something that is GROSSLY exaggerated. EVERY team has contracts that are overvalues, and that is something that will continue you. Players, the league, management and arbitrators know that. The leagues contracts aren't spiraling out of control with evey 4th liner demanding 3 million because 1 player a team is over contracted.

 

[HockeyCA]

Exactly just play it out, we'll be a bottom feeder for the next 5 or 6 years. Too bad we'll also be at the cap. Oh well MLSE just paying for its mistakes, so be it. Don't handicap us more by having a caphit for the next decade.

But we have assets where we don't have to be.. Kessel, Phaneuf, Lupul, Kadri, Franson, Gardner!?... We could remake our team rather quickly. I just don't see Leafs management willing to be a bottom feeder for such a pro longed period of time. Maybe if we already had players in the system that could turn into franchise players in 3 or 4 seasons, but we don't.

 

[hockeyfanz*]

If you rebuild the Clarkson contract doesn't matter. You can keep him while you stockpile picks for the next 5 years. He's not going to keep is out of the top 3 or 5.

If anything he helps keep them there. Agreed a buyout is pointless but I can see trading him and retaining salary...best of both worlds IMO. Only on the hook for the remainder of his contract at a much lesser rate..even if its half.

 

[Tak7]

Wait till the rest of the Leafs go in for renewal and use Clarkson as a bench mark.

While it hasn't been used much lately, the Leafs have this really cool, exciting, and unique ability to say.... "no".... to players demanding stupidity.

It's going to be nice to see them use that option with Cody Franson soon. It's a shame they didn't use that sort of discretion more in the past.

Not that anyone is defending the CLarkson deal anymore, but initially when people were, the common defense was "it was the market rate, and others were prepared to pay it".

If that's the case, then you let others pay it happily and move on. Can say the same of the Phaneuf deal. If you don't believe Dion is $7 million worthy, but the rest of the league is willing to pay him that, then there's nothing wrong with letting the rest of the league pay him that.

 

[Suntouchable13]

Even if the Leafs are rebuilding, there is no way Clarkson should be a regular on this team next season under a new GM (hopefully) and a new full-time coach. Swallow the cap hit (since we won't need the cap space anyway, so who cares if we have 5.25 mil of dead cap space) and just tell him to go home

 

[Confucius]

But we have assets where we don't have to be.. Kessel, Phaneuf, Lupul, Kadri, Franson, Gardner!?... We could remake our team rather quickly. I just don't see Leafs management willing to be a bottom feeder for such a pro longed period of time. Maybe if we already had players in the system that could turn into franchise players in 3 or 4 seasons, but we don't.

Nylander, Riely maybe a couple of others surprise like Gautier. Anyway good job we don't have Stars wanting to Cashin, in the near future because we don't have the capspace. Kadri, Franson, JVR, Lupul, Will get us more 1sts and 2nd's than Phaneuf, Clarkson. Kessel could get quite a bit. I prefer the total gut of the team and in 5 or 6 years be ready to rise from the ashes with no handicap such as still paying for players long gone.

 

[Confucius]

Even if the Leafs are rebuilding, there is no way Clarkson should be a regular on this team next season under a new GM (hopefully) and a new full-time coach. Swallow the cap hit (since we won't need the cap space anyway, so who cares if we have 5.25 mil of dead cap space) and just tell him to go home

If we don't expect to go anywhere why not just keep him? He'll probably help us finish lower in tbe standings.

 

[Erdinger]

While it hasn't been used much lately, the Leafs have this really cool, exciting, and unique ability to say.... "no".... to players demanding stupidity.

It's going to be nice to see them use that option with Cody Franson soon. It's a shame they didn't use that sort of discretion more in the past.

Not that anyone is defending the CLarkson deal anymore, but initially when people were, the common defense was "it was the market rate, and others were prepared to pay it".

If that's the case, then you let others pay it happily and move on. Can say the same of the Phaneuf deal. If you don't believe Dion is $7 million worthy, but the rest of the league is willing to pay him that, then there's nothing wrong with letting the rest of the league pay him that.

Don't think Nonis can say no. I doubt even Dion nor his agent actually thought the Leafs would cave in mid season and give him that contract.

 

[Daisy Jane]

What possible bonuses can Clarkson be hitting to justify getting all that money every July? Is it for participation, because that's all about I can think of right about now.