David Clarkson

[losveratos]

Wow, that is pretty sobering.

Now I'm a fairly informed observer of the NHL when it comes to top players. But honestly there's probably 10-15 players on every team in the NHL besides ours and maybe Montreal/Ottawa due to hate and amount of games we play them every year, that I've never heard of. But I seriously thought when I first clicked on it that I wouldn't recognize half the names. I was truly surprised that I knew every player on the list.

And yes... sobering is the word.

 

[Bullfrog]

How many (or rather how few) of those contracts were signed in the last year and how many were for unrestricted free agents?

It's not really an accurate comparison.

 

[losveratos]

How many (or rather how few) of those contracts were signed in the last year and how many were for unrestricted free agents?

It's not really an accurate comparison.

Joffrey Lupul for the exact same caphit
Also Nathan Horton for just 50k more.

Assuming I didn't have both of those players, I'd rather Lupul and Horton to Clarkson.

 

[Highlander]

I think Clarkson is starting to fire up finally, you have to admit he has looked better in the last few games.

 

[losveratos]

I think Clarkson is starting to fire up finally, you have to admit he has looked better in the last few games.

I admit nothing!

;D

 

[Bullfrog]

How many (or rather how few) of those contracts were signed in the last year and how many were for unrestricted free agents?

It's not really an accurate comparison.

Joffrey Lupul for the exact same caphit
Also Nathan Horton for just 50k more.

Assuming I didn't have both of those players, I'd rather Lupul and Horton to Clarkson.

As would just about everyone I assume.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

There's 19 star players listed.


Horcoff
Plekanec
Hemsky
Gionta

I wouldn't call any of those players 'stars' either. I mean they're half decent but not stars. I mean even Kane has been a constant distraction to his team and Horton hasn't played a game yet this year.

It's tough to compare previously signed contracts on any given day. There are far too many factors that come into play when a contract is being negotiated. Who's available and what the team requires is a big factor.

I believed at the time that it was a bad contract and I continue to believe so. I just don't think you can point at any given players and compare one to one unless it can be shown they were signed for the same reasons, around the same time, by a team requiring very similar players.

 

[Highlander]

He single handedly tied the game (ok with Kadri) but without his effort no point in this game

 

[moon111]

He single handedly tied the game (ok with Kadri) but without his effort no point in this game

By any chance are you related? (to Clarkson)

 

[mr grieves]

There's 19 star players listed.


Horcoff
Plekanec
Hemsky
Gionta

I wouldn't call any of those players 'stars' either. I mean they're half decent but not stars. I mean even Kane has been a constant distraction to his team and Horton hasn't played a game yet this year.

I looked up comparables when he was signed, and I repurpose some of that below, since it's come up again:

At his position -- wing -- Clarkson has the 27th highest cap hit in the league, and 20th if you eliminate the RFA contracts, so he's paid as a 'top line' forward. In terms of total value of the contract (hit x years), which I think is a fairly good indication of how highly prized a player is by the team, there are only eight UFA wingers with richer contracts, and they are:

Corey Perry,
Marion Hossa,
Marion Gaborik,
Nathan Horton,
Zach Parise,
Danny Heatley,
Ilya Kovalchuk,
and Rick Nash.

Those who signed bigger contracts during their RFA years are Thomas Vanek, Taylor Hall, and Alex Ovechkin. And that's it. Pick a winger you like more than any of the above. Any winger at all... That guy's making less than Dave Clarkson. Maybe there are good reasons for that (time contract was signed, etc.), fine.

But while we can look at that list and debate whether this one or that is a start, what is clear and not really up for debate is that, star or not, every other team in the league only commits those dollars and years to a particular sort of player: one who can score regularly. Just about all of the above-listed had about 200 career goals when they signed their contract. All had about 400 career points (Clarkson had 170). They averaged .87 points per game (Clarkson .40). David Clarkson had 97 career goals, 170 career points, averaged .40 points a game, and has one 40+ point season in his career, all of which makes him more like -- who? -- Chris Neil, Steve Ott, or Nikolai Kulemin (?) than any of the above-listed players.

What Clarkson does might be valuable to winning games, and the increasing cap probably means his won't be a crippling contract, but the fact that a player like him is being paid like players so unlike him is worth noting. It speaks to how far outside the norm management is, and it speaks to their arrogant and mistaken faith in their core. The Leafs don't need Clarkson to get them over the top. They need better players to get them somewhere near the top.

It's tough to compare previously signed contracts on any given day. There are far too many factors that come into play when a contract is being negotiated. Who's available and what the team requires is a big factor.

I believed at the time that it was a bad contract and I continue to believe so. I just don't think you can point at any given players and compare one to one unless it can be shown they were signed for the same reasons, around the same time, by a team requiring very similar players.

I agree with the time being a variable that complicates these things, but I suppose you could look at cap percentage to iron that out a bit. But I'd push back on "reasons," availability, and what a team "requires" -- those are all fair explanations of why the contract exists, but they don't justify it. If every other team (many of them much better than the Leafs) requires third line grinders to the tune of $3.5-4m, what does that tell us? That the Leafs are really unique requirements? Maybe, those I think last 25 games have shown how poorly they identified their requirements. And that's probably the nicest thing to be said for the contract.

 

[losveratos]

I mean even Kane has been a constant distraction to his team.

When you say distracting, you mean constantly looking at the point race with Crosby because he's second in the league in scoring?

I just don't think you can point at any given players and compare one to one unless it can be shown they were signed for the same reasons, around the same time, by a team requiring very similar players.

So here you're saying that you can never ever ever compare players ever based on contract because trying to find any two players that meet every one of those criteria on the same day is basically impossible.

I stated in another post that Horton and Lupul both have the same contract, both contracts started this year and both (even though one is currently not playing) are better suited to the caphit than he is.

 

[Jalili]

I mean even Kane has been a constant distraction to his team.

When you say distracting, you mean constantly looking at the point race with Crosby because he's second in the league in scoring?

I think that was about Evander, not Pat Kane.

 

[Kin]

At his position -- wing -- Clarkson has the 27th highest cap hit in the league, and 20th if you eliminate the RFA contracts, so he's paid as a 'top line' forward. In terms of total value of the contract (hit x years), which I think is a fairly good indication of how highly prized a player is by the team

Really? You think that a team that signs a player to a 4 year, 30 million dollar deal values him less than someone they signed to an 8 year 32 million dollar deal? Signing a long term deal is a tradeoff for both the player and the team.

Corey Perry,
Marion Hossa,
Marion Gaborik,
Nathan Horton,
Zach Parise,
Danny Heatley,
Ilya Kovalchuk,
and Rick Nash.

Which is a little misleading because it omits guys like Kessel and Daniel Sedin and other guys whose extensions haven't kicked in yet but whose salaries pretty clearly establish them as being on a separate level from a guy like Clarkson. It's pretty clear that Kessel's contract is the sort that an elite player will get in this market place and given that its value is nearly double what Clarkson's is that's probably a better statement on Clarkson's value throughout the league than, say, comparing his contract to those of RFA's and backdiving deals from the previous CBA.

What Clarkson does might be valuable to winning games, and the increasing cap probably means his won't be a crippling contract, but the fact that a player like him is being paid like players so unlike him is worth noting. It speaks to how far outside the norm management is, and it speaks to their arrogant and mistaken faith in their core. The Leafs don't need Clarkson to get them over the top. They need better players to get them somewhere near the top.

Except that doesn't really line up with the facts. Clarkson was rated as the most valuable free agent on the market this year by both TSN and Sportsnet who, issues you may have with individual personalities aside, do have some pretty well respected and plugged in media members. Likewise, those same networks reported that the Leafs' offer to Clarkson was not an outlier and, in fact, didn't even represent the largest offer made to him.

There's a valid criticism of the contract given to Clarkson. It lies in his type of player being overvalued in general and as a UFA in a weak class more so. It's absolutely reasonable to want the Leafs to establish themselves as a team that doesn't make the sorts of mistakes that basically every team in the league makes.

It's not, however, reasonable to say that the Leafs deviated greatly from popular perception when it came to their signing of Clarkson. The facts just aren't with you. 

 

[Kin]

So here you're saying that you can never ever ever compare players ever based on contract because trying to find any two players that meet every one of those criteria on the same day is basically impossible.

I think it's more a statement that any comparison is meaningless without proper context. Clarkson is probably making 20 times this year what Mike Bossy did when he was coming off 10 straight 50 goal seasons, out of context, that number looks pretty bad too.

The UFA market is different from the RFA market. That's just a fact. The new CBA will lead to different kinds of contracts than the old one. Again, that's just a reality. Finding the proper context for all of these deals is difficult because the CBA is new and the way the cap will rise seems significant but uncertain but I don't think that means we can just ignore it.

Clarkson has the 27th highest cap hit at his position. Ok, but factor in all of the RFA's who'd make significantly more than him on the open market and he's probably bumped back somewhere to 50th or lower. That's the context his deal needs to be seen in. He didn't get paid as though he were an elite player.

I stated in another post that Horton and Lupul both have the same contract, both contracts started this year and both (even though one is currently not playing) are better suited to the caphit than he is.

That's easy to say though considering that both players in question probably had their negotiating power significantly hampered by their issues with injuries in the past. I agree that Horton is a better player than Clarkson but am I confident at all that he's going to be contributing in three or four years time? No. Heck, do I know how he'll look when he comes back from his surgery? Not really. Again, that's the context his deal needs to be seen in.

I know it's tempting to look at the early returns on a long term deal and just assume that Clarkson will always look as bad as he does now or that because Lupul is healthy and producing right now that he's the better bet but I think that basically ignores the very real factors that go into these deals and that determine how and why players get paid what they do.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

I mean even Kane has been a constant distraction to his team.

When you say distracting, you mean constantly looking at the point race with Crosby because he's second in the league in scoring?

Your list isn't Patrick Kane, it's Evander Kane with that cap hit. Patrick Kane carries a 6.3 million cap hit and will get a big raise when it's up after next year.

I just don't think you can point at any given players and compare one to one unless it can be shown they were signed for the same reasons, around the same time, by a team requiring very similar players.

So here you're saying that you can never ever ever compare players ever based on contract because trying to find any two players that meet every one of those criteria on the same day is basically impossible.

I stated in another post that Horton and Lupul both have the same contract, both contracts started this year and both (even though one is currently not playing) are better suited to the caphit than he is.

I didn't say you can never ever...I said "unless"....

Listen, I'm not arguing as to whether or not Clarkson's salary is an overpayment.

I just take issue with throwing names out there when they don't really mean much. I believe that if Lupul was a healthier player that consistently put up performances of which we've seen glimpses of, he's in the 6.5 - 7 million a year range.

Benn - Damn good hockey player. Dallas got him young for a good price.

Krejci - I'll admit that he's a bargain. A huge one compared to Clarkson

E.Kane - Comes off like Prima Donna but will get paid big if he ever zips it and performs consistently. Only 22 years old.

Lupul - Injury prone. Has never put up consistent numbers. Probably slightly underpaid but the injuries contribute to that.

Carter - Signed an 11 year contract 3 years ago hence the lower cap hit.

Hossa - Is coming off a 7.5 million Cap hit previous to his current contract. Still a great player at his price.

Doan - A machine.

Horton - A good player at a good price if he can get healthy. IIRC, Clarkson outscored him last year.

Ryan - 2nd contract. Significant raise will be paid by Ottawa or someone after next year

Kessel - Raise has arrived.

Tavares - A steal for the next 5 years. Will be one of the top paid after this contract if he continues to get better and better.

Kesler - A good price but he signed the contract 4 years ago.

Neal - A very good price for what he brings.

Horcoff - Signed the contract 5 years ago. He was extremely overpaid then and continues to be. Kudos to Edmonton for getting someone to take on his contract.

Plekanec - Pretty good price for Plekanec. Good player, turtleneck and all!

Hemsky - The oilers have been trying to move him apparently for years.

Gionta - Age and experience certainly factor into his contract

Bergeron - A steal

O'Reilly - A bridge contract due to go up after this year.

As you can see, some players are a good value, some are overpaid, some are just right. Clarkson would certainly fall into the overpaid category if you just look at the names on the list but Toronto certainly isn't the only team with some  contracts that look off on their roster.

To say that someone is better suited to a certain cap hit is a tough task to take on considering that when looking at this small cap range, there's such a variance of skills and players that are either overpaid or underpaid.

 

[mr grieves]

What Clarkson does might be valuable to winning games, and the increasing cap probably means his won't be a crippling contract, but the fact that a player like him is being paid like players so unlike him is worth noting. It speaks to how far outside the norm management is, and it speaks to their arrogant and mistaken faith in their core. The Leafs don't need Clarkson to get them over the top. They need better players to get them somewhere near the top.

Except that doesn't really line up with the facts. Clarkson was rated as the most valuable free agent on the market this year by both TSN and Sportsnet who, issues you may have with individual personalities aside, do have some pretty well respected and plugged in media members. Likewise, those same networks reported that the Leafs' offer to Clarkson was not an outlier and, in fact, didn't even represent the largest offer made to him.

There's a valid criticism of the contract given to Clarkson. It lies in his type of player being overvalued in general and as a UFA in a weak class more so. It's absolutely reasonable to want the Leafs to establish themselves as a team that doesn't make the sorts of mistakes that basically every team in the league makes.

It's not, however, reasonable to say that the Leafs deviated greatly from popular perception when it came to their signing of Clarkson. The facts just aren't with you.

How many other teams have devoted over 8% of their cap to a player like Clarkson?

 

[OldTimeHockey]

What Clarkson does might be valuable to winning games, and the increasing cap probably means his won't be a crippling contract, but the fact that a player like him is being paid like players so unlike him is worth noting. It speaks to how far outside the norm management is, and it speaks to their arrogant and mistaken faith in their core. The Leafs don't need Clarkson to get them over the top. They need better players to get them somewhere near the top.

Except that doesn't really line up with the facts. Clarkson was rated as the most valuable free agent on the market this year by both TSN and Sportsnet who, issues you may have with individual personalities aside, do have some pretty well respected and plugged in media members. Likewise, those same networks reported that the Leafs' offer to Clarkson was not an outlier and, in fact, didn't even represent the largest offer made to him.

There's a valid criticism of the contract given to Clarkson. It lies in his type of player being overvalued in general and as a UFA in a weak class more so. It's absolutely reasonable to want the Leafs to establish themselves as a team that doesn't make the sorts of mistakes that basically every team in the league makes.

It's not, however, reasonable to say that the Leafs deviated greatly from popular perception when it came to their signing of Clarkson. The facts just aren't with you.

How many other teams have devoted over 8% of their cap to a player like Clarkson?

Horcoff eats up 9.68% of Dallas' salary.

Travis Zajac eats up 8.94%

 

[Kin]

How many other teams have devoted over 8% of their cap to a player like Clarkson?

A player like Clarkson in terms of scoring numbers or a player like Clarkson in terms of an overvalued free agent? Because if the issue is where the Leafs were in regards to the mainstream on a player like Clarkson don't you think that how many teams have devoted 8% of their cap to a player like him is maybe less revealing than how many teams wanted to devote 8% of their cap this summer to Clarkson himself?

 

[Champ Kind]

What Clarkson does might be valuable to winning games, and the increasing cap probably means his won't be a crippling contract, but the fact that a player like him is being paid like players so unlike him is worth noting. It speaks to how far outside the norm management is, and it speaks to their arrogant and mistaken faith in their core. The Leafs don't need Clarkson to get them over the top. They need better players to get them somewhere near the top.

Except that doesn't really line up with the facts. Clarkson was rated as the most valuable free agent on the market this year by both TSN and Sportsnet who, issues you may have with individual personalities aside, do have some pretty well respected and plugged in media members. Likewise, those same networks reported that the Leafs' offer to Clarkson was not an outlier and, in fact, didn't even represent the largest offer made to him.

There's a valid criticism of the contract given to Clarkson. It lies in his type of player being overvalued in general and as a UFA in a weak class more so. It's absolutely reasonable to want the Leafs to establish themselves as a team that doesn't make the sorts of mistakes that basically every team in the league makes.

It's not, however, reasonable to say that the Leafs deviated greatly from popular perception when it came to their signing of Clarkson. The facts just aren't with you.

How many other teams have devoted over 8% of their cap to a player like Clarkson?

I think you need to get off this notion that Nonis, Poulin, Loiselle, et all are idiots and incapable of running an NHL franchise.  Nik is abolsutely right, the market was dictating this kind of salary for this kind of player.  Blame the perception of most general managers if you want, in that premiums are assigned to 'tough' players with even a modicum of scoring touch.  And, sure, if we want to play retrospective analysis we'll see that Grabovski is completely obliterating Clarkson in terms of performance.  But that is a different kettle of fish.

All you need to do is look at the salaries awarded to unrestricted 'power forwards' over the last little while and you'll see that they're charging Lexus prices for Kia performance. 

Ryane Clowe - $4.85M / 5 years
Nathan Horton - $5.3 / 7 years

Heck, I'd even through Milan Lucic into this conversation.  A few years ago, he had signed a three year, roughly $12M deal (coming off his entry-level deal).  He played most of the year hurt, scored less than 10 goals, and was playing third line and occassional 4'rth line minutes.  Now, history tells us that Chiarelli lucked out and Lucic has turned into a uniquely dynamic player.  But his last two contracts, $4M and $6M cap hits, are probably out of line with his pure offensive performance.  But this market places premiums on this type of player.

 

[princedpw]

And, sure, if we want to play retrospective analysis we'll see that Grabovski is completely obliterating Clarkson in terms of performance.  But that is a different kettle of fish.

Please dont call this "retrospective analysis."  Many posters were immediately and strongly against the grabbo buyout.  Most posters were even more dismayed the moment Clarkson was signed, especially when a guy like Maccarthur was apparently available on a cheaper, shorter deal.