• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

Leaf Rumours

number17 said:
You can, because Clarkson is already signed, and unless you find a way to trade him his contract is on your cap so it's a totally moot point.

To compare hockey player to hockey player though, Clarkson is definitely the better hockey player of the 2.
Click to expand...

Sure, Clarkson is better. But money is a huge factor so I don't see why we are pretending like it isn't.
 
There were when they signed Clarkson. Hell there were in September when the Leafs and Panthers signed guys like Raymond and Boyes for nothing.

Thats what this whole debate is. Would you have rather signed Clarkson for $5.25 and 7 years or Komarov for way less.
 
I would just like to see the Clarkson we paid for.

Leo was fun for a shift here and there - but hardly a core piece.

Nonis wanted a nasty winger - of which there was Clarkson and Clowe. He picked Clarkson.
 
Komarov scored at a 18 point pace last year. Clarkson is scoring at a 21 point pace this year. If they're gonna score at basically the same rate then I know who I'd take on pest skills...
 
So everyone is willing to put money on Clarkson being a 20-pt player for the rest of his career.. who's taking the bets?
 
BG said:
So everyone is willing to put money on Clarkson being a 20-pt player for the rest of his career.. who's taking the bets?
Click to expand...

No. He should be a 30+ point guy. But its the contract that is the problem. Not the player. I don't get why we are supposed to ignore the contract in a cap world. You can't.

He's just not worth it. Wouldn't have been worth it the last couple years in Jersey either.
 
BG said:
Nonis believes he is.
Click to expand...

Nonis made a mistake. Remember when Komisarek was brought in to be a core piece?

I think he can be, but hasn't shown it.
Click to expand...

Zeke has pointed this out already, but Clarkson isn't that far off of his 5 on 5 scoring pace of the last few seasons. The reason he put up those numbers in Jersey was that they were shit, so he got a ton of 1st unit PP time.

Always beware of forwards with minuscule assist totals. Usually suggests a lack of awareness and hockey IQ.
 
BG said:
So everyone is willing to put money on Clarkson being a 20-pt player for the rest of his career.. who's taking the bets?
Click to expand...

I'm willing to bet that between now (or the beginning of next season if you want a proper Mulligan) and whenever the Leafs get rid of him, he averages less than 30 pts a season
 
BG said:
I would just like to see the Clarkson we paid for.

Leo was fun for a shift here and there - but hardly a core piece.

Nonis wanted a nasty winger - of which there was Clarkson and Clowe. He picked Clarkson.
Click to expand...
You have as much chance of seeing "the Clarkson we paid for" as you do of seeing Bigfoot, a unicorn or the elusive Snipe. Al of them are mythical creatures with no basis in fact or reality.
 
13/14: ES: 39gms, 3gls, 8pts, 14:50 (82gms, 6gls, 17pts) ----- PP: 39gms, 1gls, 2pts, 1:20 (82gms, 2gls, 4pts)
12/13: ES: 48gms, 9gls, 18pts, 14:01 (82gms, 15gls, 31pts) --- PP: 48gms, 6gls, 8pts, 3:33 (82gms, 10gls, 14pts)
11/12: ES: 80gms, 22gls, 30pts, 13:17 (82gms, 22gls, 31pts) -- PP: 80gms, 8gls, 16pts, 3:03 (82gms, 8gls, 16pts)
10/11: ES: 82gms, 11gls, 16pts, 11:56 (82gms, 11gls, 16pts) -- PP: 82gms, 1gls, 2pts, 1:39 (82gms, 1gls, 2pts)
09/10: ES: 46gms, 8gls, 18pts, 12:04 (82gms, 14gls, 32pts) --- PP: 46gms, 3gls, 6pts, 2:22 (82gms, 5gls, 11pts)
08/09: ES: 82gms, 13gls, 24pts, 10:30 (82gms, 13gls, 24pts) -- PP: 82gms, 4gls, 6pts, 1:31 (82gms, 4gls, 6pts)
07/08: ES: 81gms, 9gls, 20pts, 11:27 (82gms, 9gls, 20pts) ---- PP: 81gms, 0gls, 2pts, 0:33 (82gms, 0gls, 2pts)

I was wrong, actually.

Clarkson's lack of PP production with few PP minutes is expected, of course.

But his even strength offense is actually at career low levels, even though he's getting the most ES icetime of his career.
 
Yes, and that is actually good news. It means there is plenty of room for improvement.

I get why the board is down on Clarkson, but his style of play, his board-plays, his willingness to go to the front of the net and score an ugly goal, his physical plays. These are all things this team lacks on our roster, and in our system. He hasn't nearly played up to expectation yet, and it's a combination of injury, his suspensions, his big contract, new team ... etc etc. It's up to Clarkson to figure it all out, and he may or he may not. But I don't think you can say he has no chance of becoming the player Nonis signed for.
 
Colby Armstrong, 6'2", 195lbs

Pre-Toronto

23: 47gms, 16gls, 40pts (82gms, 28gls, 70pts)
24: 80gms, 12gls, 34pts (82gms, 12gls, 34pts)
25: 72gms, 13gls, 35pts (82gms, 15gls, 40pts)
26: 82gms, 22gls, 40pts (82gms, 22gls, 40pts)
27: 79gms, 15gls, 29pts (82gms, 16gls, 30pts)

With Toronto:

28: 50gms, 8gls, 23pts (82gms, 13gls, 38pts)
29: 29gms, 1gls, 3pts (82gms, 3gls, 9pts)


David Clarkson, 6'1", 200lbs

Pre-Toronto

23: 81gms, 9gls, 22pts (82gms, 9gls, 22pts)
24: 82gms, 17gls, 32pts (82gms, 17gls, 32pts)
25: 46gms, 11gls, 24pts (82gms, 20gls, 43pts)
26: 82gms, 12gls, 18pts (82gms, 12gls, 18pts)
27: 80gms, 30gls, 46pts (82gms, 31gls, 47pts)
28: 48gms, 15gls, 24pts (82gms, 26gls, 41pts)

With Toronto

29: 39gms, 4gls, 10pts (82gms, 8gls, 21pts)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top