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

[Tak7]

You fail to realize that Richards is broken. His body has aged with all the miles and he is not that big to start with. That being said, the Kings need another d-man so something has to give.

While Clarkson's contract is not great, he is still producing. He was never going to be a 35 goal scorer. He was supposed to be a 20-25 goal scorer, a character guy, a guy with grit and someone that wanted to be a Leaf. He still is all those things. I would hazard to guess, if he stays healthy that his contract will be the last thing on fans minds 3 years down the road.

Clarkson isn't broken?

He's 30, can't keep up with the game like Richards.

There's absolutely nothing correct about your description of Clarkson either.

20-25 goals? How long ago was that?

Grit / determination? He doesn't show it.

Character guy? Completely irrelevant when it comes to placing a valuation on a player.

 

[FerrisRox]

While Clarkson's contract is not great, he is still producing. He was never going to be a 35 goal scorer. He was supposed to be a 20-25 goal scorer, a character guy, a guy with grit and someone that wanted to be a Leaf. He still is all those things.

David Clarkson is not a 20-25 goal scorer with the Maple Leafs.

 

[Murphy Blue]

Clarkson is a tradeable asset. He has some value... maybe more at the 3.5 mil/yr range. It would be much more economical for the Leafs to trade for a young asset, retain 2m of his salary for the next 5 years than to pay 1.83 for the next 10.

 

[Diatomic]

There might not be a reason to buy him out.

If we go into a full rebuild, his contract could come in handy to keep us over the cap floor.

Plus, maybe if the team gets worse, he may look good and start to score, (the "someone has too" theory) and some sucker of a team will take him.

Don't forget we will need his leadership and grit. How could a young team of players and prospects develop into successful NHL players without someone of Clarkson's Calibre guiding them through the ranks?

 

[King85Kong]

you forgot the 1.83mill from 2020-2025

Don`t worry guys, just wait to you see all the character and intangibles he brings to the team.

 

[HamiltonNHL]

#fireNonis

 

[HoweHullOrr]

For the 100th time. Best chance of ditching Clarkson is a seemingly inevitable Expansion Draft.

Why would they have to take Clarkson and his awful contract? They'd have other alternatives without gobbling that horrid contract.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

Clarkson is a tradeable asset. He has some value... maybe more at the 3.5 mil/yr range. It would be much more economical for the Leafs to trade for a young asset, retain 2m of his salary for the next 5 years than to pay 1.83 for the next 10.

Remember when we were going to get a 2nd rounder for JML?

 

[daveleaf]

Richards produces more than Clarkson. And can actually kill penalties.

You make a very good point and I do agree with you. MR may have a broken body though, so do you take 60-70% of the same production over the full contract or all of it over three years and have to deal with cap recapture? Not sure MR is where this team is headed. I think Shanahan and the group is seriously considering doing a rebuild and building this franchise properly. Burke left this franchise flawed and Nonis has been plugging holes since he was put in charge.

 

[Guy Boucher]

You make a very good point and I do agree with you. MR may have a broken body though, so do you take 60-70% of the same production over the full contract or all of it over three years and have to deal with cap recapture? Not sure MR is where this team is headed. I think Shanahan and the group is seriously considering doing a rebuild and building this franchise properly. Burke left this franchise flawed and Nonis has been plugging holes since he was put in charge.

No, Burke put this franchise in a situation where most of the contracts expired coming out of the lockout.

Nonis used all said cap space on Clarkson and other over payments.

And yes, I would take Richards over Clarkson 100% even though they both have negative value. Richards can play center, does not deflate the offense of his linemates to the extent that Clarkson does, and can contribute to special teams (somewhat).

They're both terrible hockey players but Clarkson is slightly more terrible.

 

[Mess]

Nonis really got schooled on the Clarkson contract by his agent.

This is not a contract that many/most GMs wouldn't touch with a 10-foot pole and because of its NMC he can't be waived and because of it mainly signing bonus structure it can't be bought-out without major cap hit consequences.

 

[daveleaf]

Nonis really got schooled on the Clarkson contract by his agent.

This is not a contract that many/most GMs wouldn't touch with a 10-foot pole and because of its NMC he can't be waived and because of it mainly signing bonus structure it can't be bought-out without major cap hit consequences.

I agree but the Bernier deal was sweet. Can't win them all and the consensus on this board was most people were on board with this deal. If he came in here last year and scored 25 goals, fought and played hard would anyone be complaining?

I think right now he is on pace for a 20-25 goal season. Problem in Toronto is where guys are placed and we have too much of one thing. We have 3 2nd line centres, Kadri, Bozak and Holland. Bozak is not first line material. We have a lot of 3rd and 4th d-men but no true number 1 to so Dion can compliment him. I don't David's signing was bad, I believe his signing was bad for the structure of this team. That being said, if we get younger, we need character vets to keep young guys inline. The last thing I want to do is see a issue like Edm has to deal with.

 

[Purity*]

Nonis really got schooled on the Clarkson contract by his agent.

This is not a contract that many/most GMs wouldn't touch with a 10-foot pole and because of its NMC he can't be waived and because of it mainly signing bonus structure it can't be bought-out without major cap hit consequences.

This is why you never EVER pay for vague, abstract and unquantifiable traits like "character, intensity, heart." What's hilarious is that we already had a player who could do what Clarkson does, and his name was Nikolai Kulemin, who is bigger, faster, stronger, smarter, younger and better defensively and all-around than Clarkson. But apparantly Clarkson, being good ole' Canadian boy from Mimico, had that "character heart and intensity!" factor over Kulemin! See how easy it is to get caught up in those nonsense traits? Dave Nonis is a complete sucker for them. The more I think about it the more I think how the hell this numb-nuts still has his job.

Like seriously, Kulemin even had an anomalous 30-goal season extremely similar to Clarkson. Our management didn't "fall for" that season and pay him premium dollar. HOW did they end up getting fooled by David Clarkson's 30-goal season even though the outliers were far easier to see in his season, such as ample PP-time, linemates, and even a lot of dumb luck?

 

[Guy Boucher]

I agree but the Bernier deal was sweet. Can't win them all and the consensus on this board was most people were on board with this deal. If he came in here last year and scored 25 goals, fought and played hard would anyone be complaining?

I think right now he is on pace for a 20-25 goal season. Problem in Toronto is where guys are placed and we have too much of one thing. We have 3 2nd line centres, Kadri, Bozak and Holland. Bozak is not first line material. We have a lot of 3rd and 4th d-men but no true number 1 to so Dion can compliment him. I don't David's signing was bad, I believe his signing was bad for the structure of this team. That being said, if we get younger, we need character vets to keep young guys inline. The last thing I want to do is see a issue like Edm has to deal with.

He's on pace for 17 goals. And 24 points.

And that's with playing on the PP the WHOLE season.

And he has 2 goals in his last 22 games.

And he's one of the worst defensive forwards on this team.

But please, tell us how his signing wasn't bad.

Is he still recovering from that 10 game suspension?

The way you write your posts...I would totally believe you if you said you were Dave Nonis.

 

[Purity*]

He's on pace for 17 goals. And 24 points.

And that's with playing on the PP the WHOLE season.

And he has 2 goals in his last 22 games.

And he's one of the worst defensive forwards on this team.

But please, tell us how his signing wasn't bad.

Is he still recovering from that 10 game suspension?

The way you write your posts...I would totally believe you if you said you were Dave Nonis.

He's even got "Dave" in his name!!

 

[Jacquestrapless]

I'm surprised Kadri's numbers are between $4.25m - 5m. With Clarkson's contract as an anchor, Kadri's agent could point to it and say, "I should be worth more than that guy." And so could any player in negotiation. Wasn't that one of the reasons we bought out grabovski?

 

[daveleaf]

He's on pace for 17 goals. And 24 points.

And that's with playing on the PP the WHOLE season.

And he has 2 goals in his last 22 games.

And he's one of the worst defensive forwards on this team.

But please, tell us how his signing wasn't bad.

Is he still recovering from that 10 game suspension?

The way you write your posts...I would totally believe you if you said you were Dave Nonis.

Lol

Hey man. I am trying to find some positive in all of this instead of just dumping on guys. He was a fairly valuable player in NJ and I am hoping going forward he will be somewhere in between where he is now and where he was. I think that level is attainable for him but the franchise needs to put him in a position to succeed. I think you will find with a lot of these players once they leave this circus they will have wonderful careers. In TO, going back to the early 70's, this team has written the book on how to get the least out of players and put them in wrong spots.

We need a true centre, we need real structure, we have parts but we don't have the main cog to turn this machine and than we need some quality d-men.

I am personally in the mindset this team needs to do whatever it takes to secure some top pics this year and if that means packaging a few players to get it done then they must but writing for pages on here what a **** job a player is doing is not really helping anything. I believe everyone knows the team is in a bad spot right now.

 

[cupcrazyman]

The question is, are we still paying Darcy Tucker?

what about Domi ?

 

[bobber]

No, Burke put this franchise in a situation where most of the contracts expired coming out of the lockout.

Nonis used all said cap space on Clarkson and other over payments.

And yes, I would take Richards over Clarkson 100% even though they both have negative value. Richards can play center, does not deflate the offense of his linemates to the extent that Clarkson does, and can contribute to special teams (somewhat).

They're both terrible hockey players but Clarkson is slightly more terrible.

Guy after reading all you post I think you are trying to tell us you don't like Clarkson. Sounds like he keeps you awake at night. Richards has won every championship in hockey and wore himself out doing it. Forget Clarkson. You can't even compare him to Kessel who has won zip and likely never will. His closest chance is this year in the McDavid sweeps.

 

[Tyler Biggs*]

Buying out Clarkson this early in his deal would give the less maybe a million of cap space or something like that. It's simply not worth it.

Buying out Clarkson will not help the cap space, as they will keep paying him till the end of his contract.

 

[Guy Boucher]

Buying out Clarkson this early in his deal would give the less maybe a million of cap space or something like that. It's simply not worth it.

Buying out Clarkson will not help the cap space, as they will keep paying him till the end of his contract.

Buying out Clarkson = 5 years of very little cap relief, then 5 years of very little cap penalty.

However, buying out Clarkson also = the coaches can't keep playing him to try to justify his contract.

 

[Leafidelity]

Buying out Clarkson = 5 years of very little cap relief, then 5 years of very little cap penalty.

However, buying out Clarkson also = the coaches can't keep playing him to try to justify his contract.

If this team is going to be as abysmal as they seem like the next couple years, we can afford to have him be an albatross on the 4th line for a little while longer. The longer they can stomach him, the less damage his contract does long term.

 

[Guy Boucher]

If this team is going to be as abysmal as they seem like the next couple years, we can afford to have him be an albatross on the 4th line for a little while longer. The longer they can stomach him, the less damage his contract does long term.

Are they going to bury him on the 4th line?

They haven't taken him off the PP all year. They're giving him plenty of shifts to take stupid offensive zone penalties or flamingo in front of point shots.

Sometimes you just gotta cut your losses...

 

[Leafidelity]

Are they going to bury him on the 4th line?

They haven't taken him off the PP all year. They're giving him plenty of shifts to take stupid offensive zone penalties or flamingo in front of point shots.

Sometimes you just gotta cut your losses...

He's had spells on the 4th line, but not very long. The problem with putting him there is that they're essentially giving up on millions at that point. I don't blame them for trying to get something out of him, the only problem is that he's awful.

Really it's only a matter of time

 

[Mess]

Buying out Clarkson = 5 years of very little cap relief, then 5 years of very little cap penalty.

However, buying out Clarkson also = the coaches can't keep playing him to try to justify his contract.

Depends what you consider very little cap penalty.

Leafs would be taking a $28.8 mil cap hit over the next 12 years with the average annual hit of $2.4 mil per. (It actually fluctuates due to its structure) but one or another that is the cap hit.

Here is a good article that breaks it down. http://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2...ksons-contract-is-maybe-probably-buyout-proof